Couple of questions

Quoted from petethemariner

I could be wrong Tarka, because i freely admit i do not know the corporate way that Boards work, particularly GTFC's,
but my own take, rightly or wrongly from MP's departure  from the board was a grievance with the 1 man 1 vote of the board, irrespective of shareholdings and the  inference that Elsom and Chapman were there purely to support JF in such an arrangement.

Well if that was the case Pete (and frankly I don't think it was anything like the whole story) MP now has a sufficient shareholding to change the voting process at Board level.  He effectively owns the Club.

The rule is one man one vote with the chairman having a casting vote if it is tied. But anyone can call for a poll and then it is shares versus shares which means the controlling shareholder wins. Easy as that.

If anyone gains 75% of the shares, the other shareholders are surplus, and he can do whatever he likes without consulting them, which was what I hoped the Trust could have avoided by gaining 26% of shares. They did not do that and so that remains a problem.

Fent should start buying shares again and get back in control.

Quoted from billo

The rule is one man one vote with the chairman having a casting vote if it is tied. But anyone can call for a poll and then it is shares versus shares which means the controlling shareholder wins. Easy as that.

If anyone gains 75% of the shares, the other shareholders are surplus, and he can do whatever he likes without consulting them, which was what I hoped the Trust could have avoided by gaining 26% of shares. They did notm do that and so that remains a problem.

Fent should start buying shares again and get back in control.

Oh god please don't do  that john, unless he appoints someone who knows what they are doing.....oh wait  

Which one is it ?
Controlling shareholder or 75% ?

Parker has a controlling interest. No one has complete control with 75%.

I do agree that JF cannot continue as it is and it was inevitable that MP would return, now if the boardroom is being shaking up let's atleast get these cling on's out because they do not offer anything towards GTFC except that they are JF vote buddies.  Doesn't the board need atleast a min of 3 directors in order to run?

Quoted from Meza

I do agree that JF cannot continue as it is and it was inevitable that MP would return, now if the boardroom is being shaking up let's atleast get these cling ons out because they do not offer anything towards GTFC except that they are JF vote buddies.  Doesn't the board need at least a min of 3 directors in order to run?

good post thease are very interesting times and I do believe that Mike Parker is the right man.UTMM.

I am not sure who is "forcing the hand" of who here. Fenty could be playing the "put up" or shut up card, saying I am not putting more money in while you are on the sidelines. Or, Parker could be forcing Fenty to step down as chairman now he has a majority shareholding. Cannot be good to be a major shareholder and not have a say in the board. Either way it is to be hoped that they both put a high value in maintaining GTFC as a football club, rather than their own private interests. It is to be hoped that MP can come up with funds to support the club, as I can forsee JF saying thats it from me as far as bankrolling the club is concerned. In a power struggle there are always casualties, lets hope it is not the club itself,

Quoted from oldun

I am not sure who is "forcing the hand" of who here. Fenty could be playing the "put up" or shut up card, saying I am not putting more money in while you are on the sidelines. Or, Parker could be forcing Fenty to step down as chairman now he has a majority shareholding. Cannot be good to be a major shareholder and not have a say in the board. Either way it is to be hoped that they both put a high value in maintaining GTFC as a football club, rather than their own private interests. It is to be hoped that MP can come up with funds to support the club, as I can forsee JF saying thats it from me as far as bankrolling the club is concerned. In a power struggle there are always casualties, lets hope it is not the club itself,

fenty made a personal choice rather than employ the best man at the time(slade) when he gave woods the job.lets face it though hes been edging to get away for yonks he s accepted he cant get the big decisions right but in true tory style twisted it in his official statement

Quoted from oldun

I am not sure who is "forcing the hand" of who here. Fenty could be playing the "put up" or shut up card, saying I am not putting more money in while you are on the sidelines. Or, Parker could be forcing Fenty to step down as chairman now he has a majority shareholding. Cannot be good to be a major shareholder and not have a say in the board. Either way it is to be hoped that they both put a high value in maintaining GTFC as a football club, rather than their own private interests. It is to be hoped that MP can come up with funds to support the club, as I can forsee JF saying thats it from me as far as bankrolling the club is concerned. In a power struggle there are always casualties, lets hope it is not the club itself,

I certainly wouldn't argue with that...as the two major shareholders (by a country mile) it would make sense that they work together on this...somehow I don't get the impression that this is going to happen though.