Fenty stepping down as Councillor.

Quoted from DB

Not to mention the £200K in free shares you've got from the supporters, which I'm sure given the responsible moral upstanding man you are will be returned to the supporters. On the other hand you could be holding onto them, profiteering out of good fans and proving how the vile comments about on this site may be true.

Is this a wind up or something? Those £200,000 of shares were not given to John by the supporters. They were given to him by the Mariners Trust and the members of the Trust decided to do that. They weren’t forced to do it, they could have held on to them if they wanted to. Why didn’t they?

Do you really think that the Mariners Trust was merely loaning John ownership of those shares? Don’t be daft. They gave those shares for a very good and valid reason and the bigger picture at that time.

Quoted from friskneymariner

Not to mention taking the club back to non league by appointing a succession of disastrous managers ,but hey ho the club is in the black so he has been a great success.Seriously this is the mark of the mentality of people who support him,the club is financially stable and that is  defined as success.

this is the one that boils my urine

Newell - accepted as positive at the time
Jolley - accepted as positive at the time
Holloway - unanimously accepted at the time

its not like Guardiola had put in an application is it?  If your argument is about financial support then you make have a case, but IM not privy to what sort of budgets the club have had, but he picked on more than one occasion managers that were welcomed.

As an aside at what point will you deem Hurst a disaster, and will you blame Fenty if and when we are relegated?

Quoted from Fillipe Noche

Is this a wind up or something? Those £200,000 of shares were not given to John by the supporters. They were given to him by the Mariners Trust and the members of the Trust decided to do that. They weren’t forced to do it, they could have held on to them if they wanted to. Why didn’t they?

Do you really think that the Mariners Trust was merely loaning John ownership of those shares? Don’t be daft. They gave those shares for a very good and valid reason and the bigger picture at that time.

I apologise, please replace supporters with Mariners Trust. The Bigger picture is now with the consortium so surely he would want to return the shares, this being a very good reason so they could add them to their existing share  holding.

Quoted from Fillipe Noche

Is this a wind up or something? Those £200,000 of shares were not given to John by the supporters. They were given to him by the Mariners Trust and the members of the Trust decided to do that. They weren’t forced to do it, they could have held on to them if they wanted to. Why didn’t they?

Do you really think that the Mariners Trust was merely loaning John ownership of those shares? Don’t be daft. They gave those shares for a very good and valid reason and the bigger picture at that time.

Are you genuinely serious? What exactly was the good and valid reason? They didn't hold onto the shares because Mr. Fenty used threats and bullying to gain control of those shares. The only gain made by anybody from the exchange was that John Fenty tightened his grip on the club.

The fact that you distinguish between the supporters and the Trust shows that you and your friend have never understood the Trust. Mr Fenty has always been excrement scared of the supporters actually getting organised and thats why he always viewed the Trust(s) as a threat to his kingdom.

I will never thank him for anything. He is the opposite of King Midas, everything he touches turns to excrement.

Good riddance to him.

The Trust is the voice of the supporters .

Quoted from Fillipe Noche

Is this a wind up or something? Those £200,000 of shares were not given to John by the supporters. They were given to him by the Mariners Trust and the members of the Trust decided to do that. They weren’t forced to do it, they could have held on to them if they wanted to. Why didn’t they?

Do you really think that the Mariners Trust was merely loaning John ownership of those shares? Don’t be daft. They gave those shares for a very good and valid reason and the bigger picture at that time.

I thought at the time he said he would only hold on to the 200k in shares whilst he needed them to remain the largest shareholder (thus protecting his investment as he saw it) and he would return them when this was no longer the case. I may be totally wrong on that but its my recollection. Therefore in the takeover scenario he should be returning them to the Trust.

Does anyone else remember that? I could be wrong.

I can assure you I did not view Newell as positive at the time,knowing several Luton fans his antics were well known and shows an appalling lack of due diligence in appointing him

Quoted from friskneymariner

I can assure you I did not view Newell as positive at the time,knowing several Luton fans his antics were well known and shows an appalling lack of due diligence in appointing him

Almost every manager he's appointed has been the popular choice except a couple of occasions.

Due diligence is hardly something that's easily done. Every set of supporters says bad things when somebody leaves, not least the fans of a club where he dobbed them in and set their downfall in motion.

Clubs can't go round saying all the bad things about managers to each other because the law doesn't allow it, much like I can't give somebody a bad reference if a new employer contacts me.

Quoted from Fillipe Noche

Like it has in its entire history, the football on the pitch and the relative football success and failure, will fluctuate and vary. Nothing will ever change that. There will always be ups and downs and that is just sport.

But you don’t get any of those sporting ups and downs if there isn’t financial stability on the table.

If people only ever expect forward momentum and success, then sadly they shouldn’t be pinning their hopes on a sport.  

Still waiting for the ups Phil. Guess they will never materialise under JF now, but with his track record, they never would have.

By far the least successful period on the pitch in our entire history. 20 years going nowhere but down.

Some legacy.

Quoted from pen penfras

Almost every manager he's appointed has been the popular choice except a couple of occasions.

Due diligence is hardly something that's easily done. Every set of supporters says bad things when somebody leaves, not least the fans of a club where he dobbed them in and set their downfall in motion.

Clubs can't go round saying all the bad things about managers to each other because the law doesn't allow it, much like I can't give somebody a bad reference if a new employer contacts me.

The ‘popular’ choice as manager isn’t always the best option. Look at Wenger, Pochettino at Soton, Buckley...

Look at what populism has done to politics in the US, UK, France and beyond.

It should be easy for a football club owner to do due diligence on a prospective new manager. That doesn’t involve asking biased fans of clubs. Most owners speak to one another.

I ‘know’ (as in, I very, very occasionally speak to) owners and directors of clubs, from the Championship downwards, and whenever I mention I support GTFC, their eyes glaze over and it invariably involves them telling me that JSF is a complete moron.

Other owners and people within the industry could have told Fenty that Newell liked the 5.2% libido reducer or that Holloway was a charlatan.

Most of our other managers, I haven’t minded. It was mostly a case of wrong place, wrong time, wrong club (i.e. wrong owner).