New Chairman?

Mike Parker can not appoint a new chairman at the moment, because he is not on the board.

Quoted from marinernige

Mike Parker can not appoint a new chairman at the moment, because he is not on the board.

Does the board appoint a chairman or is it the shareholders?

According to Kate, only board members can appoint a chair.

lol....there's nothing like stating the obvious but it is a point most people seem to have missed!  The biggest shareholder doesn't appoint the Chairman, the board does.  Unless there is some agreement between MP and the board then this will need either an EGM or we will have to wait for the AGM in November!

Didn't someone say Parker could call an EGM any time he wanted and put his own people in ?
Anyone know if that's true ?

What Mike Parker needs to do is place somebody on the board as his rep and then become chair of the club that way!

There's only two ways to appoint a new director, one is a decision by the existing board which is no good to Parker. The other way is by special resolution at a EGM, this would require 75% of shareholders to agree to the appointment.

Quoted from Guttedgate

What Mike Parker needs to do is place somebody on the board as his rep and then become chair of the club that way!

It isn't quite as simple as that...first of all he would need to call an EGM (unless the current Board were agreeable which is highly unlikely) and then populate the Board with people to do his bidding.  At the end of the day, the board appoint the Chairman.  It's certainly doable but has implications including JFs loans to the Club.

Quoted from Guttedgate

What Mike Parker needs to do is place somebody on the board as his rep and then become chair of the club that way!

Can`t though can he? new member has to be proposed seconded and voted on to the board, its not a dictatorship----yet!

Quoted from MarinerKate

There's only two ways to appoint a new director, one is a decision by the existing board which is no good to Parker. The other way is by special resolution at a EGM, this would require 75% of shareholders to agree to the appointment.

So Fenty could scupper any attempt by Parker to get someone on the board as long as he holds 26% or more of the shares?

Bit of a pickle then really.

How many shares do you need to become a boardmember, I have 1 £100 share  

My understanding was it didn't matter how many shares you have but you did have to be able to act as a guarantor for a certain amount of cash but I cant remember how much that was.

Quoted from MarinerKate

The other way is by special resolution at a EGM, this would require 75% of shareholders to agree to the appointment.

So bascially, Parker can't clear the board out even if he wanted to unless he buys unissued/other people's shares to give him(or with minority shareholder support) the 75% he needs ?

By my calcs: (which I'm sure are innacurate but not too massively wrong)

Parker 883,375
Fenty  500,000
Other  252,505

assuming "Other" ALL vote with Parker that makes 61.3%.

Meaning Parker would need to find AT THE VERY MINIMUM another 13.7% (i.e. approx £240,000 assuming they weren't unissued shares which would increase the total no of shares).

First impression - if practically achievable to acquire those shares(is it ?), not impossible !

Fenty might have been concerned with Parker increasing his shareholding IF he was getting to a stage that the "balance of power" was being threatened.

Assume here Parker buys unissued shares ONLY (Would the club say "no you can't buy them" ?)

Let's say Parker buys another 500,000 - that means Fenty will be down to appox 21.25 % meaning that Fenty will need approx 3.75% to get him over the 25% line, which translates to 88,194 of 252,505 minority support, which is in effect is 35%  (note these minority figures are quite sensitive and not too reliable)

If Parker buys say an extra 1,000,000 shares then he's up to 71.45% needing 3.55% = 93573 out of 252505
i.e. needing 37% minority shareholder support.

If Parker buys 1,500,000 shares then he reaches the magic figure taking him to 76 % !

So basically Parker can buy the club for £1,500,000 ?

If he dosn't want to spend that much, it's still achievable ?
How much extra cash Parker needs to splash is dependant on the number of minority shareholders that support Fenty ?

I just wonder, is this the reason BigChris was telling fans to buy shares ?.......

Yes but if that happens which is unlikely. Fenty will want his loans back and if Parker can't or won't pay them then we go into Administration

But Fenty said his loans would never endanger the club ?

Do you believe he would walk away leaving his loans ? Do you believe anything Fenty says ? He talks in riddles and uses spin.

You mean would Fenty pull the rug from under GTFC making a fresh start with renewed investment and leadership after EVERYTHING he's ever said about wanting new investment, Parker to take the chair, his loans being "benign" and putting the best interests of GTFC first ?!!!  

I mean exactly that, and I think he would.

Sack the Board!

Quoted from KK_DOG

I mean exactly that, and I think he would.

Well many others don't...

What's the reason for your initial comment ? How do we know it's not just scare tactics ?

What are you saying:
"We should not seek fresh investment because of the possibility of Fenty doing the unthinkable in the future" ?

I'd rather let the fornicator go bust than be held to ransom !  

Quoted from KK_DOG

Do you believe he would walk away leaving his loans ? Do you believe anything Fenty says ? He talks in riddles and uses spin.

it called being a tory

Quoted from 1600

Well many others don't...

What's the reason for your initial comment ? How do we know it's not just scare tactics ?

What are you saying:
"We should not seek fresh investment because of the possibility of Fenty doing the unthinkable in the future" ?

I'd rather let the fornicator go bust than be held to ransom !  

1.Many others don't ? Perhaps we need a poll
2. The reason is because of what he has done I do not trust what he says.
3.I am not saying that at all you have made that bit up
4.That's a tough call, that's because Fenty is still holding th ace cards.

Fair enough then.

I wasn't saying you'd said anything, I was just asking if what I said was what you actually meant.

I agree it's a tough call.
Without wanting to sound negative, maybe it depends if you think the end is likely anyway if Fenty has to fund the club alone and won't meet the losses ?

There was a similar poll (when Fenty resigned) relating to whether Fenty would "pull his money out" to which a large majority said no.

Quoted from 1600

So bascially, Parker can't clear the board out even if he wanted to unless he buys unissued/other people's shares to give him(or with minority shareholder support) the 75% he needs ?

By my calcs: (which I'm sure are innacurate but not too massively wrong)

Parker 883,375
Fenty  500,000
Other  252,505

Parker has 1,000,000 shares. That has been reported and confirmed several times. He had 500,000 and doubled his shareholding

If you listened to Mike Parker' s interview on RH he indicated that Fenty still had to put in £350,000, but of the money he has put in some was a loan, some was in shares.

Do your maths again with the following shares...

Parker 1,000,000
Fenty 600,000
Other 252,505 or there abouts

Sod it, I'll do it for you...

Parker 53.98%
Fenty 32.39%
Others 13.63%

And all these theories about EGMs are rubbish. Why would Parker force the issue by that route and be seen to have blood on his hands when he can sit tight for 2 months and have the whole board (all 3 that remain) resign en-masse at the AGM in November. Fenty has already promised to quit the board if it drags on to the AGM after all, so why on earth would Parker want to force him out himself and be made to look the bad guy?

And you have to consider that we are 3 days into this and Fenty has already released 2 long winded, rambling statements which only served to make him look foolish. Do you think Fenty can keep his mouth (keyboard) shut for 2 whole months? Unfortunately for himself, Fenty isn't media savvy and resorts to silly reactionary responses and statements. Parker on the other hand will keep his mouth shut and just let Fenty get on with it.

Fenty has also refused to be interviewed on Radio presumably because he doesn't want to answer any tough questions and be cross examined. Parker on the other hand gave a very good interview on RH and managed to dodge questions he couldn't/shouldn't answer without sounding like a petulant schoolkid- something Fenty has failed to do on previous occasions.

The fact of the matter is that both Fenty and Parker would both cover the club against losses, but not whilst the other is in situe. It's simply a power struggle until one or other is removed from the picture.

George Kerr actually said something very inciteful on Tuesday's sport report programme. He realised and pointed out that Mike Parker is a very shrewd operator. He (Parker) basically challenged Fenty to match his shareholding to sort out the issue of him owning more shares knowing full well that Fenty wouldn't do it because it wouldn't alter the real issue for Fenty- that he has no overall control of the club and no way of regaining it.

My prediction for what it's worth...

This will rumble on until the AGM. Fenty will either quit as a director at the AGM or just prior to it. Unless either Chapman or Elsom or both come out in support of Parker in the meantime both of them will quit too and Parker will be left with a free reign to appoint his own board of directors and chairman. And I would be amazed if he didn't rejoin the board himself once Fenty is gone from it, although maybe not immediately. I think Fenty's days of influence are over.

Very interesting analysis, Golly - nice post.

We're just seeing a good old-fashioned power struggle between two multi-millionaires both desperate to keep/gain control of a highly-prized possession - the jewel of English football - Grimsby Town Football Club!
(OK the jewel's a bit tarnished but I'm sure it could sparkle again if rubbed up in the right way. Couldn't we all...   )

I don't trust Tories full stop, and as I've posted here there's nothing to get enthusiastic about Fenty's reign as chairman. BUT JF has devoted years of his life, enormous amounts of effort/hard work and lots of money in the cause of GTFC. He could have spent his time on a tropical beach sipping Pina Coladas, let's not forget - he's wealthy enough! So to suggest he will now not act in the best interests of our club is not being fair to the guy IMO.

I'm not sufficiently insightful (Golly, please note) to know what will happen - but like Golly I can't see a quick fix happening. Might be best if we all view this as a series of Dallas, rather than an episode.

Most important thing for the club right now is three points off Wrexham tomorrow. UTM!!

Quoted from dapperz fun pub

it called being a tory

Yes, oh for a trustworthy Labour Chairman like Oxford had in Robert Maxwell. There's a reliable Labourite not far from Grimsby back on the job market this week; stand up all those who'd like Elliot Morley running GTFC!

I honestly think now this mess has gone this far Fenty going to be like a loose cannon meaning if he doesnt like what Parkers doing he'll do what ever he wants.Who thought Fenty would do this but he has so now hes got his loans as a barganing tool now to try and get what he wants because if he wants his loans back that forces Parkers hand more as the club will definately go into admin without Parker doing something.

Quoted from the Grimbarian

I honestly think now this mess has gone this far Fenty going to be like a loose cannon meaning if he doesnt like what Parkers doing he'll do what ever he wants.Who thought Fenty would do this but he has so now hes got his loans as a barganing tool now to try and get what he wants because if he wants his loans back that forces Parkers hand more as the club will definately go into admin without Parker doing something.

the loans are benign fenty (con) has allways said this,no reason not to belieive him

Quoted from dapperz fun pub

the loans are benign fenty (con) has allways said this,no reason not to belieive him

Trouble is it's not a cast iron guarantee, the vagueness of that 'benign' comment could be taken at face value (less likely in light of his recent comments and admissions) or seen as part of his grip on power, that they are benign only while he is Chairman.

I THINK Dapperz was being sarcastic.....

Quoted from GollyGTFC

Parker has 1,000,000 shares. That has been reported and confirmed several times. He had 500,000 and doubled his shareholding

If you listened to Mike Parker' s interview on RH he indicated that Fenty still had to put in £350,000, but of the money he has put in some was a loan, some was in shares.

Do your maths again with the following shares...

Parker 1,000,000
Fenty 600,000
Other 252,505 or there abouts

Sod it, I'll do it for you...

Parker 53.98%
Fenty 32.39%
Others 13.63%

And all these theories about EGMs are rubbish. Why would Parker force the issue by that route and be seen to have blood on his hands when he can sit tight for 2 months and have the whole board (all 3 that remain) resign en-masse at the AGM in November. Fenty has already promised to quit the board if it drags on to the AGM after all, so why on earth would Parker want to force him out himself and be made to look the bad guy?

And you have to consider that we are 3 days into this and Fenty has already released 2 long winded, rambling statements which only served to make him look foolish. Do you think Fenty can keep his mouth (keyboard) shut for 2 whole months? Unfortunately for himself, Fenty isn't media savvy and resorts to silly reactionary responses and statements. Parker on the other hand will keep his mouth shut and just let Fenty get on with it.

Fenty has also refused to be interviewed on Radio presumably because he doesn't want to answer any tough questions and be cross examined. Parker on the other hand gave a very good interview on RH and managed to dodge questions he couldn't/shouldn't answer without sounding like a petulant schoolkid- something Fenty has failed to do on previous occasions.

The fact of the matter is that both Fenty and Parker would both cover the club against losses, but not whilst the other is in situe. It's simply a power struggle until one or other is removed from the picture.

George Kerr actually said something very inciteful on Tuesday's sport report programme. He realised and pointed out that Mike Parker is a very shrewd operator. He (Parker) basically challenged Fenty to match his shareholding to sort out the issue of him owning more shares knowing full well that Fenty wouldn't do it because it wouldn't alter the real issue for Fenty- that he has no overall control of the club and no way of regaining it.

My prediction for what it's worth...

This will rumble on until the AGM. Fenty will either quit as a director at the AGM or just prior to it. Unless either Chapman or Elsom or both come out in support of Parker in the meantime both of them will quit too and Parker will be left with a free reign to appoint his own board of directors and chairman. And I would be amazed if he didn't rejoin the board himself once Fenty is gone from it, although maybe not immediately. I think Fenty's days of influence are over.

very interesting analysis golly, although don't think your maths are quite right.both 80s glory and i have come up with basically the same figures, using the starting point of 500,000 shares each and then working out how the oft mentioned 54% figure could be made to work - think we differ on the miscellaneous share ownership figures.
apart from that seems pretty logical and i deffo agree with you on the personality traits involved

Oh I know, the smilie showed that. But the point is the major one that's getting to me, is it a full on no-quibble guarantee or is it applicable only while he is in power ? I'm finding myself more bemused and puzzled with every 'factual' statement that our (ex) Chairman makes. Has he been asked this, or will there be a chance for someone to put it to him ?

Quoted from RoboCod

Oh I know, the smilie showed that. But the point is the major one that's getting to me, is it a full on no-quibble guarantee or is it applicable only while he is in power ? I'm finding myself more bemused and puzzled with every 'factual' statement that our (ex) Chairman makes. Has he been asked this, or will there be a chance for someone to put it to him ?

i'm sure he's going to say that his loans are benign, but trouble with fenty if he 'goes off on one' then god knows what he'd decide to do!
golly (again) has made some excellent points on fenty's political considerations, which I think may be a fairly big factor in his present situation. the other point is that fenty does have to be alittle bit careful - certainly I'd be a bit more diplomatic in my utternaces and decisions in such a matter knowing that everybody knew who my family was and where I lived. it would be quite easy to imagine fenty's life being very uncomfortable if he were to decide to 'go nuclear' and that has to be some sort of brake on what he can do, as is the negative effect of media coverage viz a vis his political ambitions

I believe it was Fentys intention never to call in these loans,(whilst he was Chairman, or a board-member anyway)  but if this turns out to be the boardroom bloodbath it might, i really fear he may change his mind, in which case without Parker or another covering  the  reimbursement of these loans, GTFC will cease to exist.
Not a nice thought.

The impression I got from JF was that he would never put the club in jeapordy by instantly recalling his loans.  He is not, however, in a position to continue to pump funds in the club on his own, particularly if the controlling shareholder refuses to do so.  That seems to be the main reason for his resignation.

If he does recall the loans at some point I will be furious. He's had to loan us so much because of his poor management.

Quoted from forza ivano

very interesting analysis golly, although don't think your maths are quite right.both 80s glory and i have come up with basically the same figures, using the starting point of 500,000 shares each and then working out how the oft mentioned 54% figure could be made to work - think we differ on the miscellaneous share ownership figures.
apart from that seems pretty logical and i deffo agree with you on the personality traits involved

Parker stated just after he left the board that he would [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/g/grimsby_town/9421612.stm]double his shareholding[/url]. He confirmed he had done this to [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00k7qkp/Sports_Talk_20_09_2011/]BBC RH on Tuesday[/url]. Therefore he owns 1,000,000 shares.

Fenty has invested £150,000 or so of his £500,000. The fact that Parker has 1,000,000 shares and that equates to just under 54% indicates that a further 100,000 shares in GTFC have also been issued. I think it is safe to assume that Fenty has so far this season bought 100,000 shares and made a loan for the other £50,000.

I am sure Fenty will confirm this is one of the many statements he will churn out in the near future. After all he reads all the GTFC message boards and fan sites and responds to them doesn't he?

Hope your impression is right Tarka and Fenty is good to his word, i just worry if all this gets nasty, he will change his mind to cause Parker and any new board as much trouble as possible - was this never reclaiming his loans statement subject to him being at least on the board? Find it hard to believe that,  even if he sells  all his shares  he would  be prepared to leave probably a seven figure sum in the club, after severing all ties.

Whilst not wishing to call either Fenty or Parker liars, i feel both are being economical with the truth. For me, it's not what they are both saying, more what they are not saying. I doubt we will ever really know the real truth about what caused eithers resignations, and the reason behind the acrimony that has caused this sorry state of affairs. Unfortunately these days, and perhaps it's due to the fact that football is now all about business, we don't seem to have honourable chairmen anymore, and by that i mean people who care more for the reputation and good standing of the club rather than their own self interest. Unfortunately this latest farce, is all about Fenty and Parker rather than GTFC and is distracting from whats happening on the pitch. I don't profess to know about share issues or the constitution of the board, and i don't wish to, all i want is to be able to go along to Blundell Park and watch my team, win, lose or draw,(preferably win) and at the moment i am able to do so. But, unless the people supposedly running this club start acting honourably instead of childishly, i fear i'm not going to be able to do this for much longer.  

I think JF has simply had enough and this is compounded by the fact he is no longer the major shareholder and has no control.

The two seem at loggerheads and JF is known as a stubborn illegitimate, (i cannot speak of MP).

Unless MP or someone else (highly unlikely imo) buys out JF's shares or preferably repays his loans at an agreed level we are fooked. I just cant see JF easing quietly into the background.

As far as his political ambitions are concerned I wouldnt have thought he will be looking at a 'local seat'. Once he gets party approval a suitable seat will be found for him to seek election

Quoted from Perkins

Whilst not wishing to call either Fenty or Parker liars, i feel both are being economical with the truth. For me, it's not what they are both saying, more what they are not saying. I doubt we will ever really know the real truth about what caused eithers resignations, and the reason behind the acrimony that has caused this sorry state of affairs. Unfortunately these days, and perhaps it's due to the fact that football is now all about business, we don't seem to have honourable chairmen anymore, and by that i mean people who care more for the reputation and good standing of the club rather than their own self interest. Unfortunately this latest farce, is all about Fenty and Parker rather than GTFC and is distracting from whats happening on the pitch. I don't profess to know about share issues or the constitution of the board, and i don't wish to, all i want is to be able to go along to Blundell Park and watch my team, win, lose or draw,(preferably win) and at the moment i am able to do so. But, unless the people supposedly running this club start acting honourably instead of childishly, i fear i'm not going to be able to do this for much longer.  

The truth is Parker quit the board because he no longer wants to work with Fenty. He wants to go it alone and seek investment externally.

Parker very cleverly invested his £500,000 in shares knowing Fenty would be unwilling to match it and that it would leave him with overall control. Then last week Parker informed Fenty he wasn't willing to bankroll the club in the same way as this season- ie the club has to be run within it's means. Parker knew Fenty wouldn't bankroll the club on his own whilst there is a larger shareholder around. Suddenly the Takeover Panel are involved (most probably by Fenty himself) and Fenty uses it as a smoke screen for quitting as Chairman.

Parker holds all the aces as Fenty has no viable way of removing him from his position and rightly won't fund a club another person controls. Parker has very cleverly boxed Fenty into a corner from which there is no way out of which involves either staying as Chairman or even on the board.

Maybe Fenty isn't as naive as Parker has made him look and is infact looking to use this as a way out of the club? But based on his ridiculous, over the top, reactionary statements I tend to think this isn't the case and it is actually that Parker has been too clever for Fenty andout maneuvered him.

Quoted from GollyGTFC

The truth is Parker quit the board because he no longer wants to work with Fenty. He wants to go it alone and seek investment externally.

Parker very cleverly invested his £500,000 in shares knowing Fenty would be unwilling to match it and that it would leave him with overall control. Then last week Parker informed Fenty he wasn't willing to bankroll the club in the same way as this season- ie the club has to be run within it's means. Parker knew Fenty wouldn't bankroll the club on his own whilst there is a larger shareholder around. Suddenly the Takeover Panel are involved (most probably by Fenty himself) and Fenty uses it as a smoke screen for quitting as Chairman.

Parker holds all the aces as Fenty has no viable way of removing him from his position and rightly won't fund a club another person controls. Parker has very cleverly boxed Fenty into a corner from which there is no way out of which involves either staying as Chairman or even on the board.

Maybe Fenty isn't as naive as Parker has made him look and is infact looking to use this as a way out of the club? But based on his ridiculous, over the top, reactionary statements I tend to think this isn't the case and it is actually that Parker has been too clever for Fenty andout maneuvered him.

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

So what exactly does Fenty have that makes his position strong? How can we regain the club and get rid of Parker? How much money would that take?

Quoted from GollyGTFC

The truth is Parker quit the board because he no longer wants to work with Fenty. He wants to go it alone and seek investment externally.

Parker very cleverly invested his £500,000 in shares knowing Fenty would be unwilling to match it and that it would leave him with overall control. Then last week Parker informed Fenty he wasn't willing to bankroll the club in the same way as this season- ie the club has to be run within it's means. Parker knew Fenty wouldn't bankroll the club on his own whilst there is a larger shareholder around. Suddenly the Takeover Panel are involved (most probably by Fenty himself) and Fenty uses it as a smoke screen for quitting as Chairman.

Parker holds all the aces as Fenty has no viable way of removing him from his position and rightly won't fund a club another person controls. Parker has very cleverly boxed Fenty into a corner from which there is no way out of which involves either staying as Chairman or even on the board.

Maybe Fenty isn't as naive as Parker has made him look and is infact looking to use this as a way out of the club? But based on his ridiculous, over the top, reactionary statements I tend to think this isn't the case and it is actually that Parker has been too clever for Fenty andout maneuvered him.

Sorry, but how do we know that's the truth? none of us mere mortals were at the meeting when he resigned. We may THINK that's the truth but is it?. Sorry, i don't believe Parker any more than i believe Fenty. Parker may well want to go it alone, and seek external investment. I hope he does, but what if he can't get it? Like i said, all i care about is having a club to support.

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

I appreciate what your saying Sonik but with John wanting to progress in the political world, how would he find time to make an impact on both fronts?

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

interesting sonik.have to agree with the first half of your post.as i've said before i wouldn't have put up with what your brother has had to put up with. i'll give you 1 good example where i'd have told em to stuff it and walk away - home game where he'd done an admission offer, think it was afiver to get in. big crowd, jf is at the front of the Findus and there are people, not thanking him for the cheap offer, berating him because the bar wasn't open!!!
be interested to know what cards jf still has to play. think if he has any he should take the advice to calm down a bit before laying them!
i'll just play devil's advocate for a moment - don't take it personally
  'If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term' - christ, in 7 years of jf we've gone down from league 1 to the bottom end of the bsp so god knows where we'd be after another 7 years!

Quoted from mariner91

If he does recall the loans at some point I will be furious. He's had to loan us so much because of his poor management.

This is nothing new to this club - I seem to recall one of the Ramsdens wanting a loan back from the club when he stopped being chairman and he wanted it immediately.

Quoted from GollyGTFC

So what exactly does Fenty have that makes his position strong? How can we regain the club and get rid of Parker? How much money would that take?

His loans make his position fairly strong, as Parker will surely not want to pay them back nor does Fenty deserve them, but they are a massive stumbling block to any potential takeover, it means fenty can demand the money or the ground. It is just sick.

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

The fact that John is still involved in any kind of decisions regarding the club worries me as time and time again he has proved himself incompetent.

Who is going to look where we are and laugh, I despair at the damage done to the club by the ex chairman.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

His loans make his position fairly strong, as Parker will surely not want to pay them back nor does Fenty deserve them, but they are a massive stumbling block to any potential takeover, it means fenty can demand the money or the ground. It is just sick.

Oh dear! its a bit like bites the hand thats fed them

Quoted from Garth

Oh dear! its a bit like bites the hand thats fed them

Is someone gonna reimburse the fans ticket money for the last 7 years?

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Whatever reflects off Parker it will be very difficult for him to be held in a worse light than John and his disastrous reign of the last 7 years nothing but a catalouge of failure on and off the pitch that has culminated in this latest farcial stand off.Good riddance.

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

fenty (con) asked for investmentbut appears you cannot have a say if you do invest,ill be keeping my tenner

Quoted from GollyGTFC

Fenty has already promised to quit the board if it drags on to the AGM after all, so why on earth would Parker want to force him out himself and be made to look the bad guy?

Has he promised ?!!  

Fenty said:
"If this issue is not resolved prior to the AGM on the 24th of November, then shareholders will be asked how they would like the Board to proceed. If the matter is not resolved by this date, Mr Fenty will most likely stand down from being a director joining the ranks with other shareholders at the meeting."

Quoted from GollyGTFC

George Kerr actually said something very inciteful on Tuesday's sport report programme. He realised and pointed out that Mike Parker is a very shrewd operator. He (Parker) basically challenged Fenty to match his shareholding to sort out the issue of him owning more shares knowing full well that Fenty wouldn't do it because it wouldn't alter the real issue for Fenty- that he has no overall control of the club and no way of regaining it.

Is "no overall control" the issue ?
Parker isn't in the boardroom and can't affect anything unless he's on the board or gains 75% support ?
I guess this is why Fenty might be worried about any increase in shareholding - not that he wasn't making the decisions because he clearly was and may still be if he returns.

Given sonik's comments it doesn't sound like Fenty is going to roll over.
So I wouldn't be too sure all these theories about EGMs are rubbish ?

Wouldn't suprise me if Parker was trying to assemble a new board right now but it's only guesswork...

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Firstly thank you for joining the debate and giving a reasoned view.  It's obvious that either there has been a massive misunderstanding over the funding and how they would do it, ie shares / loans or one of them is lying.  I hope it's the misunderstanding option and it's quickly sorted.  

Allowing MP to have more shares is down to him and the board so how can he say the position is untenable when he allowed it in the first place.

The whole thing stinks and JF is the one who is losing face and credibility.  

He may have stopped the club going into administration when he first became Chairman but he could be one of the main reasons the club ceases to exist.  Some legacy.

Quoted from Marinerz93

Firstly thank you for joining the debate and giving a reasoned view.  It's obvious that either there has been a massive misunderstanding over the funding and how they would do it, ie shares / loans or one of them is lying.  I hope it's the misunderstanding option and it's quickly sorted.  

Allowing MP to have more shares is down to him and the board so how can he say the position is untenable when he allowed it in the first place.

The whole thing stinks and JF is the one who is losing face and credibility.  

He may have stopped the club going into administration when he first became Chairman but he could be one of the main reasons the club ceases to exist.  Some legacy.

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

Quoted from sonik

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

Sonik, I appreciate that you're going to defend your brother, I think most would... But i'm sure if he wasn't your brother, then you too would have some serious doubts about JF and how this has all happened...

I'm not saying MP is innocent in all of this but I certainly agree with M93, JF is coming out of this looking worse in my opinion... I mean what is the deal with releasing private e-mails, surely even you can't defend that course of action can you...???

sonik,

If John was so concerned over "majority shareholding laying outside the board", then why didn't he raise the issue when Parker left the board ?

He admits himself:

"When Mr Parker left the board several things fundamentally changed. The concert party, he, and I working together (in Concert) had been broken. Share holder control did not sit within the board room. This was before any further shares had been issued."

Reading HIS OWN statement:

"Assuming I acquired the same number of shares which was never discussed, control would still remain outside of the board room. Mr Parker suggested in the interview that I could equate, this does not solve the problem."

Why has it taken 6 months ?!!

Quoted from sonik

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

The issue is that John's resignation and untenable situation rests on the shares that he and the board allowed Mike Parker to buy.  I am being as fair as the facts are laid bare, he allowed himself and continues to allow himself to have less shares than MP.  This whole affair could be put to bed once and for all if John was to convert his benign loans into shares.  John for all his hard work and love for the club is turning himself into the Sword of Damocles that hangs over this club.

If there was a meeting to discuss funding and the like were are the minutes to help solve this fiasco.

Quoted from 1600

sonik,

If John was so concerned over "majority shareholding laying outside the board", then why didn't he raise the issue when Parker left the board ?

He admits himself:

"When Mr Parker left the board several things fundamentally changed. The concert party, he, and I working together (in Concert) had been broken. Share holder control did not sit within the board room. This was before any further shares had been issued."

Reading HIS OWN statement:

"Assuming I acquired the same number of shares which was never discussed, control would still remain outside of the board room. Mr Parker suggested in the interview that I could equate, this does not solve the problem."

Why has it taken 6 months ?!!

Perhaps trust and in this together stood for something then. That's my guess and not fact!

Quoted from sonik

Perhaps trust and in this together stood for something then. That's my guess and not fact!

Does he want his loans back?

I am not sure what you are referring to.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the board approved his acquirement of those additional shares ?

Quoted from 1600

I am not sure what you are referring to.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the board approved his acquirement of those additional shares ?

They wouldn't have done if they had known MP's true plans. They were stitched up.

You mean this has happened since Parker reportedly sent John an e-mail saying:

"For your planning scenarios you should assume that my financial support will not continue beyond this season." ?

Quoted from GrimRob

They wouldn't have done if they had known MP's true plans. They were stitched up.

I don't buy it GrimRob, you don't allow another person to become a majority share holder by being stitched up.  MP asks for shares, they discuss it then sign it off.  If they have allowed MP to become a major share holder by either ignorance or naivety then none of them deserve to be in the boardroom.

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Not that you are biased of course!

And why the fuk do we want a new chairman in such a hurry anyway? We haven't had a good one since Paddy Hamilton (and he knew something about football unlike the outgoing idiot!)

Perhaps they ought to give the job to one of the other two muppets currently on the board, Honest John (Con) would still have less shares than Parker but I'm sure he could swallow his discomfort with one of the others in the chair. Fenty would be the largest shareholder actually on the board, Parker having childishly decided he doesn't want to return (allegedly) and could continue to run the show (into the ground) as his own personal fiefdom just as he has done for the past 10 years, pressurising the other two yes-men as necessary.

Quoted from Ipswin

Honest John (Con) would still have less shares than Parker but I'm sure he could swallow his discomfort with one of the others in the chair. Fenty would be the largest shareholder actually on the board, Parker having childishly decided he doesn't want to return (allegedly) and could continue to run the show (into the ground) as his own personal fiefdom just as he has done for the past 10 years, pressurising the other two yes-men as necessary.

Or is this issue that Parker won't return whilst JF is on the board ?

Easy to say Parker could pressurise the other 2 but what real influence could he have on them ?

Seems to me the problem is:

JF isn't willing to cover the losses by himself.
MP won't return until JF and/or the board have gone ?

sonik, is JF willing to let MP have his own way IF MP makes a guarantee of long term funding ?

Quoted from 1600

Easy to say Parker could pressurise the other 2 but what real influence could he have on them ?

Read it again please - Fenty is in a position to pressurise the other two nomarks

Fenty, sitting as an ordinary board member (with one of the other two as chairman) would quite simply be able to have his own way as usual (without being chairman) simply because of a) his shareholding (I have more shares than the other two board members FFS) and b) his stronger personality

The only man able to stand up to him and now out vote him based on shareholding (which is what Fenty is sh!t scared of) is not even on the board

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

You Fentys have got some nerve I will give you that.

Not a trace of irony in the rubbish you spout.

If John IS a part in our future then God help us.

He has loaned us a lot of money,which he may or may not want back,but has the blood sweat and tears produced ANYTHING of any note?

A new broom needed I am afraid.

On a personal note,I do admire your staunch support for your brother,which is a very admirable trait.  

Quoted from 1600

Or is this issue that Parker won't return whilst JF is on the board ?

Easy to say Parker could pressurise the other 2 but what real influence could he have on them ?

Seems to me the problem is:

JF isn't willing to cover the losses by himself.
MP won't return until JF and/or the board have gone ?

sonik, is JF willing to let MP have his own way IF MP makes a guarantee of long term funding ?

I don't know 80s. I think it'll all come out in the wash so to speak. lol. I and we only hope things will be done to hopefully guarantee the future for GTFC long after we've gone.  UTM!

Amen to that.
Thanks for your comments.

Hasn't JF always used loans rather than shares? I think JF was always under the impression that he could convince MP back onto the board and has been going about his business in the usual way.  In the meantime MP has been devising a plan to take control and has possibly been lying to JF to keep him off the scent.  Now for all we know MP could of told JF that he might rejoin the board and so didn't think anything of it when he increased his shares, once it went through he changed his mind. Now that would have changed things with JF not being major shareholder he is now in a position were he would plough his money into the club when it's no longer his especially when MP said he has no intention on joining the board meaning he had no option but to quit (and part of me say I don't blame him).  Is this a cunning plan by MP to force JF out ?  Is the reason why JF has acted like this because his emotions are effecting his judgement ?  Is it because he feels betrayed or lied to?

What does JF need to do to regain control ? If he says that equalling MP shares would make no difference could it be that JF has allowed someone to increase their shares now knowing they are not interested in the club anymore?

I could be worng Meza, but i d'ont think Fenty WANTS to regain control, he sees a club making huge losses
with no promise of anything else in the foreseable future and probably feels he has contributed enough.
Personally i d'ont think its Parker manipulating the situation, rather than Fenty - he has allowed Parker to
become major shareholder by not converting the money they apparently agreed to turn into shares ,rather than a loan which would maintain the 'status Quo.' share wise.
You wonder why he prefers to turn cash into loans rather than shares? Despite his promise loans can be called in if required, shares need to be sold and GTFC are not exactly investable at the moment, so not too mahy buyers!.
I find it incredulous  to believe that JF and the board were not aware Parker became major shareholder after approving his request for extra shares,(rather than a loan to the club)_, in the summer.
I really do believe this is a JF ploy for an exit, thats my opinion - time will tell if i am right or wrong.

If Fenty and Parker just sat round a table and talked to each other it would be a start. One or both are being very childish and for the good of the club it needs sorting out to stop all this speculation and uncertainty. What does each of them want and what do they want the other to do? Act like adults, stop playing with the future of our club.

On a slightly different tangent to this "spat", who is going to represent the Club at the forthcoming court cases with Boston? The Club will need to allow sufficient time to prepare a good defensive case.    

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

On a slightly different tangent to this "spat", who is going to represent the Club at the forthcoming court cases with Boston? The Club will need to allow sufficient time to prepare a good defensive case.    

Errrrr....and whose actions have put us in this position?

Quoted from sonik

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

Let's be fair (and I applaud your brother for his efforts over the years) if he was worried about putting funds into someone else's business he would have bought shares like Parker rather than making "benign" loans. Why won't he convert some of the loans to equity and remove both the ownership problem and the doubts about his true intentions?

He's his own worst enemy.

Whether Parker is genuine or not John's looking like a muppet. He looks either naive/stupid or he's like a  conniving barsteward holding the sword of Damocles over the club.

Yeah I'm started to sway a little away from JF.  I cannot forget the amount of hard work and money JF has dedicated to GTFC and things just didn't work out.  However there are 2 things that could potentially cause me some concern.

a) If MP cannot find someone to act in his stead then what ?  He has clearly stated he has no interest in GTFC, more like I have no interest whilst the board act like chimps.  So is he going to wait until November to clear the entire board and appoint his own team maybe.  But that does sound encouraging especially when the board (exc MP) had 3 members who never really contributed to anything and because JF was ploughing his money in these guys ultimately turned into yes men.

b) I don't like the fact JF is going to remain on the board as an ex chairman.  He has shown quite clearly might I add that his relationship with MP has deteriated otherwise this would have been resolved ages ago.  And secondly (for Racido) this is different to when PF stepped down why cos he was skint and had no animosity towards JF when he came on the board.  When you have people in a team regardless of the type of work is done if there is any unprofessionalism, bitching, etc the team may still operate but you would have one member poisoning others with his rather large knife.

The Boston case, if lost, would surely make JF's position untenable.

By the way, I admire your loyalty sonik if nothing else!

It's all down to Fenty's loans. Fenty is not going to go while he has loans in the club unless he gets them back. There are three, options, someone else can pay them (unlikely). Fenty asks for the money back. (Says he won't but means administration if he does) (Possible) or he says thanks very much I'm off now keep the loan for the good of the club. (Almost impossible to imagine). So he has got a strangle hold on the club, no one else can or will take over while he is around. Fenty will then say, if anyone else wants to come in and take over then they are more than welcome. What he won't say is that if they do I want all my money back or I will still be wanting power even though I'm not the chairman but I am still on the board with my two men that will make a decision but soon change it to yes Mr Fenty if I tell them too.

Quoted from sonik

I don't know 80s. I think it'll all come out in the wash so to speak. lol. I and we only hope things will be done to hopefully guarantee the future for GTFC long after we've gone.  UTM!

if you dont go there wont be a future anyway

Blood sweat and tears for the club my bottom, sorry sonik but you are talking shite, if you'd said blood sweat and tears for his pet project fenty dome! And by doing this the club gets a bit of success on the way, i might o given u more credit. It's  well known fenty has always been in this for himself and all this being a life long fan who loves the club is bollox, Don't know which brother you are but i do know there are 2 brothers who are and always have been massive fans. Fenty ambitious plans have fell to pieces and know he wants out and as I have always said he wants will want his money back. I would really love for him to  prove me wrong and make a statement cancel righting off his loans for the good of the club or at least convert to shares.. Saviour of the club my bottom. Some people need to open their eyes a bit.

Quoted from KK_DOG

It's all down to Fenty's loans. Fenty is not going to go while he has loans in the club unless he gets them back. There are three, options, someone else can pay them (unlikely). Fenty asks for the money back. (Says he won't but means administration if he does) (Possible) or he says thanks very much I'm off now keep the loan for the good of the club. (Almost impossible to imagine). So he has got a strangle hold on the club, no one else can or will take over while he is around. Fenty will then say, if anyone else wants to come in and take over then they are more than welcome. What he won't say is that if they do I want all my money back or I will still be wanting power even though I'm not the chairman but I am still on the board with my two men that will make a decision but soon change it to yes Mr Fenty if I tell them too.

If JF states he wants his money back in a tantrum and we end up going the admin route he will get a fraction to nothing of what he has in benign loans and his shares won't be worth the paper they are printed on.  Parker has put money into the club as shares, Fenty has done a quarter shares, three quarters as benign loans.  JF may not have full control but now it seems he is more like Morgana than a Knight in shining armour.  JF now has the club in a Boston crab hold.  I believe that Parker regardless of what he does next will see Fenty's reputation destroyed.

I like the bityou said about a Fenty statement cancelling his loans. That would help us all.

Quoted from Marinerz93

If JF states he wants his money back in a tantrum and we end up going the admin route he will get a fraction to nothing of what he has in benign loans and his shares won't be worth the paper they are printed on.  Parker has put money into the club as shares, Fenty has done a quarter shares, three quarters as benign loans.  JF may not have full control but now it seems he is more like Morgana than a Knight in shining armour.  JF now has the club in a Boston crab hold.  I believe that Parker regardless of what he does next will see Fenty's reputation destroyed.

i think the last bit is bang on the money

Sonik is spot on about financing the club as a minority shareholder while the majority shareholder refuses to commit funding beyond the current season. This has being going on for months though, from when Parker publicly announced he was buying more shares (quite why he did that is anyone's guess).

Why buy all these shares and then quit when he did (to sabotage the appointment of the next manager?). I asked Mr Fenty in May about this set up and to his credit he kept quiet about his real feelings but he did ask me what I would do in his shoes. It wasnt a request for advise, he was asking me to answer my own question I think. I know what I would have done back then and it's not a million miles away from what John has done now.

Fenty's critics should ask themselves what they would do in his position.

I don't like people who are underhand and Parker comes across that way. I might be doing him a disservice but his behaviour has left me very wary of him.

Quoted from Chris

Fenty's critics should ask themselves what they would do in his position.

I don't like people who are underhand and Parker comes across that way. I might be doing him a disservice but his behaviour has left me very wary of him.

Maybe Mike Parker has reasons to keep his cards close to his chest. I'll happily admit being a critic of Fenty, but that doesn't mean have to have the answers. For sure, there are things in the accounts which point to him looking after himself.

Quoted from Marinerz93

If JF states he wants his money back in a tantrum and we end up going the admin route he will get a fraction to nothing of what he has in benign loans and his shares won't be worth the paper they are printed on.  Parker has put money into the club as shares, Fenty has done a quarter shares, three quarters as benign loans.  JF may not have full control but now it seems he is more like Morgana than a Knight in shining armour.  JF now has the club in a Boston crab hold.  I believe that Parker regardless of what he does next will see Fenty's reputation destroyed.

The loans are secured on the ground, he has the club by its bollox.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

The loans are secured on the ground, he has the club by its bollox.

I firmly believe that MP has seen off better men than John Fenty!

Quoted from Chris

I asked Mr Fenty in May about this set up and to his credit he kept quiet about his real feelings but he did ask me what I would do in his shoes. It wasnt a request for advise, he was asking me to answer my own question I think. I know what I would have done back then and it's not a million miles away from what John has done now.

Fenty's critics should ask themselves what they would do in his position.

Well for a start you don't blow large amounts of money on a massive budget and then say no-one is prepared to meet the losses halfway through the season.
If Fenty assumed it wasn't a problem because Parker was in it for the long haul and would pick up the tab later, then in hindsight it looks like complete stupidity when he had already resigned from the board.

Quoted from sonik

Perhaps trust and in this together stood for something then. That's my guess and not fact!

Now just where have I heard this before......

Quoted from forza ivano

very interesting analysis golly, although don't think your maths are quite right.both 80s glory and i have come up with basically the same figures, using the starting point of 500,000 shares each and then working out how the oft mentioned 54% figure could be made to work - think we differ on the miscellaneous share ownership figures.
apart from that seems pretty logical and i deffo agree with you on the personality traits involved

Not that it matters now but the accounts indicate I was more right than you and 80sglory.

The shares at the time were...

Parker 1,000,000 (approx 54%)
Fenty 575,000 (approx 31%)
Elsom 25,500 (approx 1.4%)
Chapman 500 (approx 0.03%)

So, the extra £100,000 I estimated Fenty had bought were actually split £75k to Fenty and £25 to Elsom. I imagine Elsom's £25k was invested to repay Furneaux's director's loan.

The shares at the current time would appear to be...

Fenty 575,000 (approx 31%)
GTST 522,000 (approx 28%)
Parker 500,000 (approx 27%)
Elsom 25,500 (approx 1.4%)
Chapman 500 (approx 0.03%)

Now, unless something changes (GTST getting a seat or Parker rejoining the board) more than 50% of shares will still be outside the boardroom. As this was the stated reason for Fenty quitting, should he become Chairman again without this issue being sorted out he will be a hypocrit.

Thanks for posting, interesting.

I wonder, is it possible GTST could sell some of their shares to JF ?

I guess a seat on the board looks unlikely...

Or alternatively, maybe neither will matter.

I have edited my original statistics to include the 22,000 shares the GTST already owned.

Quoted from GollyGTFC

I have edited my original statistics to include the 22,000 shares the GTST already owned.

not arguing with you golly but aren't there thousands of shares owned by others?

Quoted from forza ivano

not arguing with you golly but aren't there thousands of shares owned by others?

The total issued shares is in the region of £1.85m, meaning there are approximately £225,000 (around 12%) belonging to A.N. Other.

I only put in figures for directors and significant others (in red text).

Cheers golly for your time and effort mate makes this very confusing situation a little less .

Cheers mate utm