Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Classic Threads › E-Mail from the Trust
Moderators: Moderator
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 12 Guests

E-Mail from the Trust

  This thread currently has 72,311 views. Print
31 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... All Recommend Thread
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 9:06am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
I've received an e-mail this morning, as I'm sure other Trust members have, informing me that a postal ballot re the Trust has been sent to me. Does anybody know what the ballot is? I'm guessing at 'Should we give Honest John (Con) our shares, otherwise he won't fund the club any longer?'
Logged Offline
Private Message
STB
February 15, 2012, 9:21am

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,958
Posts Per Day: 0.70
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
I don't know what it is but I'll be happy to make something up.

The ballot: Is Scott=Sir Alex


Former lover of all things GTFC . . .
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 1 - 309
biggles9999
February 15, 2012, 9:26am
Main Stander
Posts: 2,809
Posts Per Day: 0.51
Reputation: 69.34%
Rep Score: +24 / -12
Approval: +367
Quoted from STB
I don't know what it is but I'll be happy to make something up.

The ballot: Is Scott=Sir Alex


Does this mean we have dropped the Scott love in to a lower and more realistic level  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 2 - 309
mariner91
February 15, 2012, 9:30am
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,431
Posts Per Day: 2.64
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +78 / -11
Location: Lincs
Approval: +19,244
Gold Stars: 253
Quoted from biggles9999


Does this mean we have dropped the Scott love in to a lower and more realistic level  


Controversial from the Liverpool fan .


Looking forward to a brighter future now Fenty has gone.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 3 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 15, 2012, 9:49am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
i thought it was to see if thanoj should play for albania.
either that or should we start another thread on darlington


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 4 - 309
davmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:26am
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,012
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 78.9%
Rep Score: +37 / -10
Approval: +4,860
Gold Stars: 75
An interesting idea IMHO would be if the trust offered Fenty the £500,000 worth of shares in exchange for 2 places on the board? Any thoughts?


Up The Mariners!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 5 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 10:32am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from davmariner
An interesting idea IMHO would be if the trust offered Fenty the £500,000 worth of shares in exchange for 2 places on the board? Any thoughts?


Not sure he'll want to give up 2 places but it seems like the sort of compromise that might be needed. It has to be a good thing for everybody, including John Fenty, to have the fans a more integral, connected, motivated and positive influence within the club doesn't it?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 6 - 309
OptimisticMariner
February 15, 2012, 10:44am
Coke Drinker
Posts: 48
Posts Per Day: 0.01
Reputation: 78.35%
Rep Score: +3 / -1
Fenty should BUY the shares from the Trust, IMO.  It would give the Trust a "war chest", and help them achieve their aims.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 7 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 10:45am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
I asked the same question on the Trust forum/board on here but as yet no reply - would be nice if the Trust could explain what the vote is about and then open up some kind of debate about it on here.

My fear is that it will be a give / sell the shares to Fenty vote and this will be passed.

If he wants control back in the boardroom then either convert his loans to shares or have a Trust member on the GTFC board.

Hopefully someone from the Trust will clarify what we are to vote on.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 8 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 10:51am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from OptimisticMariner
Fenty should BUY the shares from the Trust, IMO.  It would give the Trust a "war chest", and help them achieve their aims.



Disagree.

What would the Trust do with the money?

There wouldn't really be an option other than putting that cash into the club.

GTFC and hopefully the Trust will continue long after John Fenty. By keeping the current block of shares the Trust have a relatively strong hand in deciding how the club moves forward and could block any moves that are not in the best interests of the club.

They must continue to hold these shares in order to safeguard and protect the future of GTFC for future generations.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 9 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 15, 2012, 10:52am
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Your post was made at 6.44am - no response in 4 hours - disgraceful!  Sort it out Chris, Dave et al

Personally, I'm going to wait for the postman to arrive to find out what's going on.....
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 10 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 10:55am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from Grim_Exile
Your post was made at 6.44am - no response in 4 hours - disgraceful!  Sort it out Chris, Dave et al.

Personally, I'm going to wait for the postman to arrive to find out what's going on.....


Wasn't a dig at the Trust per se but whoever posts on behalf of the Trust posted a thread on there after mine and as such would more than likely have seen my post - don't think it would have taken too long to give a quick overview of what we are to vote on.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 11 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 15, 2012, 11:05am
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Quagmire - not everyone who helps the Trust out is a board member so may not know what the vote is about until they get their pack in the post (like all other members).  For example, I help to administer the memberships, but am not on the board and have no more idea than you what this vote is all about!  If it's the same as when I was involved, the person who posts on the messageboards in the same as me - a volunteer with no 'official' position.

An email to enquiries@marinerstrust.co.uk is likely to receive a speedier response than a post on here.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 12 - 309
aaron rattray
February 15, 2012, 11:19am
allright viewers?
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,968
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 46.03%
Rep Score: +71 / -90
Approval: -4
might be 2 people intrested in buying the club and we get to  vote


i am a season ticket holder and i always will be one  


"aaron is the next michael barrymore, hes a comedinan"

it is official, i am a comedian

]
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 13 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 11:26am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from aaron rattray
might be 2 people intrested in buying the club and we get to  vote


Meryl Streep and Elton John - which one will you be voting for Aaron?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 14 - 309
Tinymariner
February 15, 2012, 11:32am

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,120
Posts Per Day: 0.74
Reputation: 90.63%
Rep Score: +30 / -2
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +1,456
Gold Stars: 12
TBF if you are not a member of the trust it has nothing to do with you! (Awaits backlash)


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 15 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 11:33am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
I am a member of the Trust - do I have your permission to comment on the thread?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 16 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 15, 2012, 11:35am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
Quoted from davmariner
An interesting idea IMHO would be if the trust offered Fenty the £500,000 worth of shares in exchange for 2 places on the board? Any thoughts?


Loan it to darlington???


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 17 - 309
Tinymariner
February 15, 2012, 11:36am

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,120
Posts Per Day: 0.74
Reputation: 90.63%
Rep Score: +30 / -2
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +1,456
Gold Stars: 12
Quoted from Rodley Mariner
I am a member of the Trust - do I have your permission to comment on the thread?


I gathered you were, it wasn't aimed at you Rodley. It was just a statement before everyone starts to speculate and demand to know things when they cant be bothered to join the trust.


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 18 - 309
891
February 15, 2012, 11:39am
Guest User
Quoted from Tinymariner
TBF if you are not a member of the trust it has nothing to do with you! (Awaits backlash)


Very true, although i am sure someone will post relevent information at some point !!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 19 - 309
Devonmatt
February 15, 2012, 11:42am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 776
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +18
Quoted from Tinymariner
TBF if you are not a member of the trust it has nothing to do with you! (Awaits backlash)


WHS.  If you haven't joined the trust then quite frankly you have no basis from which to comment on the actions there of.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 20 - 309
marinerjase
February 15, 2012, 11:49am
Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,117
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 93.06%
Rep Score: +31 / -1
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +2,608
Gold Stars: 146
Quoted from Quagmire


Disagree.

What would the Trust do with the money?

There wouldn't really be an option other than putting that cash into the club.

GTFC and hopefully the Trust will continue long after John Fenty. By keeping the current block of shares the Trust have a relatively strong hand in deciding how the club moves forward and could block any moves that are not in the best interests of the club.

They must continue to hold these shares in order to safeguard and protect the future of GTFC for future generations.



^agreed



‘I just f*cking threw myself at it’

Mani D 23 May 2022
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 21 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 11:49am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from Tinymariner


I gathered you were, it wasn't aimed at you Rodley. It was just a statement before everyone starts to speculate and demand to know things when they cant be bothered to join the trust.


I'm a Trust member - do you want my membership number???
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 22 - 309
Wrawby_Mariner
February 15, 2012, 11:58am
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.72
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
All the info you need to make a decision will be enclosed in the letter .. All the facts and that
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype Skype
Reply: 23 - 309
891
February 15, 2012, 11:59am
Guest User
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner
All the info you need to make a decision will be enclosed in the letter .. All the facts and that


Thank you Sir Wrawbys are you going Friday night ?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 24 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 15, 2012, 12:01pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner
All the info you need to make a decision will be enclosed in the letter .. All the facts and that


ok rafael benitez!


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 25 - 309
1106
February 15, 2012, 12:10pm
Guest User
Quoted from Rodley Mariner


Meryl Streep and Elton John - which one will you be voting for Aaron?


Just be careful, theres some fake Eltons out there.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 26 - 309
Wrawby_Mariner
February 15, 2012, 12:27pm
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.72
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 891


Thank you Sir Wrawbys are you going Friday night ?


Narr, I was gonna go on the train but family circumstances have changed.
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype Skype
Reply: 27 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 15, 2012, 12:33pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Letter has arrived on my doormat in West Yorkshire today.  Some serious food for thought for all members of Mariners Trust.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 28 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 12:35pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from Grim_Exile
Letter has arrived on my doormat in West Yorkshire today.  Some serious food for thought for all members of Mariners Trust.


Can you share it with us please? Otherwise I'll be waiting til I get home at 6 tonight to have a look and the suspense is killing me*.

* This may be a slight exaggeration but I am curious to know.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 29 - 309
gaz57
February 15, 2012, 12:43pm

Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,378
Posts Per Day: 0.27
Reputation: 78.12%
Rep Score: +10 / -3
Approval: +993
Gold Stars: 3
Quoted from Grim_Exile
Your post was made at 6.44am - no response in 4 hours - disgraceful!  Sort it out Chris, Dave et al

Personally, I'm going to wait for the postman to arrive to find out what's going on.....


Must be good your postman, try and get him on the fishy.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 30 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 1:07pm
Guest User
Quoted from Tinymariner
TBF if you are not a member of the trust it has nothing to do with you! (Awaits backlash)


Calm down mate, you have chipped in a tenner and you think that gives you more of an interest in GTFC than me.  That type of sentiment is the problem with the trust and was the problem with the last trust.

Everyone wants their little bit of power and you know what?  You are gonna throw it all away by giving the shares to fenty!  It is decisons like that that made me hold off on becpoming a memeber of the trust and will continue to dissuade me in the future.

It is OUR club, not the trust's, not fenty's and (even though you have chucked a tenner on the table) not yours!!!  Awaits dull response. . .
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 31 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 1:12pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 1054


Calm down mate, you have chipped in a tenner and you think that gives you more of an interest in GTFC than me.  That type of sentiment is the problem with the trust and was the problem with the last trust.

Everyone wants their little bit of power and you know what?  You are gonna throw it all away by giving the shares to fenty!  It is decisons like that that made me hold off on becpoming a memeber of the trust and will continue to dissuade me in the future.

It is OUR club, not the trust's, not fenty's and (even though you have chucked a tenner on the table) not yours!!!  Awaits dull response. . .


#flawedlogic


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 32 - 309
crusty ole pie
February 15, 2012, 1:19pm

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,046
Posts Per Day: 0.53
Reputation: 89.09%
Rep Score: +16 / -1
Approval: +3,310
Gold Stars: 62
Quoted from 1054


Calm down mate, you have chipped in a tenner and you think that gives you more of an interest in GTFC than me.  That type of sentiment is the problem with the trust and was the problem with the last trust.

Everyone wants their little bit of power and you know what?  You are gonna throw it all away by giving the shares to fenty!  It is decisons like that that made me hold off on becpoming a memeber of the trust and will continue to dissuade me in the future.

It is OUR club, not the trust's, not fenty's and (even though you have chucked a tenner on the table) not yours!!!  Awaits dull response. . .


What a load of balderdash you talk anyone who gets involved in the trust is power mad and doing it for their own ego yet when they go to the members for a vote this displeases you also. perhaps you should throw your tenner on the table and let the trust benefit from your wisdom

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 33 - 309
Wrawby_Mariner
February 15, 2012, 1:19pm
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.72
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 1054


Calm down mate, you have chipped in a tenner and you think that gives you more of an interest in GTFC than me.  That type of sentiment is the problem with the trust and was the problem with the last trust.

Everyone wants their little bit of power and you know what?  You are gonna throw it all away by giving the shares to fenty!  It is decisons like that that made me hold off on becpoming a memeber of the trust and will continue to dissuade me in the future.

It is OUR club, not the trust's, not fenty's and (even though you have chucked a tenner on the table) not yours!!!  Awaits dull response. . .


I totally see what you're saying but without the knowledge of why there is a ballot its unfair to say it.
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype Skype
Reply: 34 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 1:20pm
Guest User
Quoted from Devonmatt


WHS.  If you haven't joined the trust then quite frankly you have no basis from which to comment on the actions there of.


And all because you have joined the trust, it does not give you the right to be spokesmen for every supporter. . . .

You have chipped in a tenner and you think that will give you a seat next to Fenty.  The Trust has yet to convince me of their value, comments such as yours re-assure me that I am right about this.  Folk saying they are going to give the shares to fenty just about sums up the mentality of many on the trust and to be honest, I would rather have no part of it!!!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 35 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 1:25pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
I'm a member of the Trust but I don't think shrouding what is done in mystery is a positive thing. The Trust needs to be careful that it doesn't create an 'us and them' scenario - whilst non-members aren't entitled to vote, I do think they're entitled to know what's happening and to have an opinion. Alienating and excluding people completely won't persuade anybody to join up.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 36 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 1:28pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from 1054


And all because you have joined the trust, it does not give you the right to be spokesmen for every supporter. . . .

You have chipped in a tenner and you think that will give you a seat next to Fenty.  The Trust has yet to convince me of their value, comments such as yours re-assure me that I am right about this.  Folk saying they are going to give the shares to fenty just about sums up the mentality of many on the trust and to be honest, I would rather have no part of it!!!


But it's going to a vote. I may very well vote no. You have no say whatsoever....


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 37 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 1:35pm
Guest User
Quoted from Dan


But it's going to a vote. I may very well vote no. You have no say whatsoever....


You are correct when you say I have no say whatsoever in the trust.  The trust is an organisation which holds no sway over the board or fenty or the club. . . . they are pretty much Fenty's fundraising arm.  You hold no sway, I have no say in you holding no sway. . . what is the difference???
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 38 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 1:40pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from 1054


  The trust is an organisation which holds no sway over the board or fenty or the club. . . . they are pretty much Fenty's fundraising arm.


Why are you so bothered about them then?


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 39 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 1:42pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from 1054


You are correct when you say I have no say whatsoever in the trust.  The trust is an organisation which holds no sway over the board or fenty or the club. . . . they are pretty much Fenty's fundraising arm.  You hold no sway, I have no say in you holding no sway. . . what is the difference???


Well, to paraphrase then, you're saying it's nothing to do with you. So you can be quiet now.


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 40 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 1:43pm
Guest User
Quoted from psgmariner


Why are you so bothered about them then?


Because I am bothered about GTFC and many of the trust members on here seem to assume an air of superiority and indeed spokesmanship for the entire fan base. . . not in my name!  Hope this makes it clear
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 41 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 1:43pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 1054

The trust is an organisation which holds no sway over the board or fenty or the club


You may want to retract that statement in due course.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 42 - 309
wodewick
February 15, 2012, 1:45pm
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 229
Posts Per Day: 0.04
Reputation: 74.48%
Rep Score: +1 / -1
Approval: +24
Quoted from Rodley Mariner
I'm a member of the Trust but I don't think shrouding what is done in mystery is a positive thing. The Trust needs to be careful that it doesn't create an 'us and them' scenario - whilst non-members aren't entitled to vote, I do think they're entitled to know what's happening and to have an opinion. Alienating and excluding people completely won't persuade anybody to join up.


Good point.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 43 - 309
marinerjase
February 15, 2012, 1:46pm
Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,117
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 93.06%
Rep Score: +31 / -1
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +2,608
Gold Stars: 146
If the ex chairman wants to protect his interests etc then fair enough...but to bargain himself into getting trust shares and then purchasing more is surely just holding the trust to ransom?


‘I just f*cking threw myself at it’

Mani D 23 May 2022
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 44 - 309
crusty ole pie
February 15, 2012, 1:48pm

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,046
Posts Per Day: 0.53
Reputation: 89.09%
Rep Score: +16 / -1
Approval: +3,310
Gold Stars: 62
[
quote=708]

Well, to paraphrase then, you're saying it's nothing to do with you. So you can be quiet now.[/quote]

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 45 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 1:48pm
Guest User
Quoted from Dan


Well, to paraphrase then, you're saying it's nothing to do with you. So you can be quiet now.


It has something to do with me when people who are in the trust assume the spokesmanship for the entire fanbase.  You can do what you want with the trust, run a tombola, tell fenty the catering is sh1t, bankroll the youth team for all i care but realise you do not speak for every supporter.

I am a shareholder and have been for years, ok it is small shareholding (but a lot more money than you have chipped in to become a member of the Trust).  This is a fans' forum, not a trust one.  People get very confused when they get over excited and think they are going to test the skills gained on their PC playing at running a foottball club in the real world!!!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 46 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 15, 2012, 1:54pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
Quoted from crusty ole pie


What a load of balderdash you talk anyone who gets involved in the trust is power mad and doing it for their own ego yet when they go to the members for a vote this displeases you also. perhaps you should throw your tenner on the table and let the trust benefit from your wisdom



next meeting at the masonic hall?? lol


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 47 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 1:57pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from 1054


It has something to do with me when people who are in the trust assume the spokesmanship for the entire fanbase.


I see no evidence of this in this thread. And since this thread is titled 'E-Mail from the Trust' you would be well aware that contents of said email do not involve you or need your input, because, well, people who aren't in the trust need to realise that they do not speak for the entire trust membership


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 48 - 309
Devonmatt
February 15, 2012, 1:58pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 776
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +18
Quoted from Dan


I see no evidence of this in this thread. And since this thread is titled 'E-Mail from the Trust' you would be well aware that contents of said email do not involve you or need your input, because, well, people who aren't in the trust need to realise that they do not speak for the entire trust membership


Boom!!  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 49 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 2:06pm
Guest User
Quoted from Dan


I see no evidence of this in this thread. And since this thread is titled 'E-Mail from the Trust' you would be well aware that contents of said email do not involve you or need your input, because, well, people who aren't in the trust need to realise that they do not speak for the entire trust membership


If you have the necessary I.T. skills to recieve Emails and communicate within the trust, why not keep it to the trust members and not spoiut it on a non-trust forum. . . The actual thread IS the evidence!!!

Wood for the trees anyone???
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 50 - 309
Bullitt
February 15, 2012, 2:06pm
Guest User
So the gist of it is, give Fenty 200,000 shares, he buys 200,000 new shares which are considered "new money", he then supports the club up until May 2013, with him holding 47% of the shares.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 51 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 2:12pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Rodley Mariner
I'm a member of the Trust but I don't think shrouding what is done in mystery is a positive thing. The Trust needs to be careful that it doesn't create an 'us and them' scenario - whilst non-members aren't entitled to vote, I do think they're entitled to know what's happening and to have an opinion. Alienating and excluding people completely won't persuade anybody to join up.


It is stated on the Mariners Trust website homepage that this an important postal ballot regarding our share ownership.

"shrouding what is done in mystery" may be an over statement.

Trust members get to vote postally - by 5th March 2012, a date in the correspondence.

So it would seem if non-members want a say then there's nothing to prevent them joining up prior to this date? There's plenty of time.

Shouldn't Trust members get sight of the specifics of what they are voting on prior to the rest of the GTFC community?


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 52 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 2:18pm
Guest User
Quoted from Trawler


It is stated on the Mariners Trust website homepage that this an important postal ballot regarding our share ownership.

"shrouding what is done in mystery" may be an over statement.

Trust members get to vote postally - by 5th March 2012, a date in the correspondence.

So it would seem if non-members want a say then there's nothing to prevent them joining up prior to this date? There's plenty of time.

Shouldn't Trust members get sight of the specifics of what they are voting on prior to the rest of the GTFC community?


I think the difficulty that I am having with some of the trust members who post on here is that they think that paying ten pounds to the trust gives them some kind of mandate as if they were elected.  I get the feeling that they think they have some kind of right when it comes to GTFC.  Have that right if you wish so long as you are able to shoulder the burden of responsibility when it all goes to sh1t and Fenty wants some money off you (soon)!!!

Logged
E-mail
Reply: 53 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 2:26pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Genuine question:

I believe Sonik is a Trust member, and maybe other Fenty family members are too (maybe even JF himself).

Obviously they have the right to vote on this issue BUT surely there is a conflict of interest here?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 54 - 309
Devonmatt
February 15, 2012, 2:28pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 776
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +18
Quoted from 1054


I think the difficulty that I am having with some of the trust members who post on here is that they think that paying ten pounds to the trust gives them some kind of mandate as if they were elected.  I get the feeling that they think they have some kind of right when it comes to GTFC.  Have that right if you wish so long as you are able to shoulder the burden of responsibility when it all goes to sh1t and Fenty wants some money off you (soon)!!!



Funny, I think the majority of trust members think that joining the trust advances the interests of the trust and ultimately assists in the running of GTFC, nothing more, nothing less.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 55 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 2:45pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 2075
So the gist of it is, give Fenty 200,000 shares, he buys 200,000 new shares which are considered "new money", he then supports the club up until May 2013, with him holding 47% of the shares.


Or not. It's a vote.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 56 - 309
Bullitt
February 15, 2012, 3:01pm
Guest User
It is, and I think I will vote yes!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 57 - 309
sam gy
February 15, 2012, 3:09pm
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,782
Posts Per Day: 0.33
Reputation: 83.91%
Rep Score: +18 / -3
Approval: +5,386
Gold Stars: 53
Quoted from 1054


I think the difficulty that I am having with some of the trust members who post on here is that they think that paying ten pounds to the trust gives them some kind of mandate as if they were elected.  I get the feeling that they think they have some kind of right when it comes to GTFC.  Have that right if you wish so long as you are able to shoulder the burden of responsibility when it all goes to sh1t and Fenty wants some money off you (soon)!!!



I don't think anyone particularly thinks that, sounds like you've pretty much made this situation up.





Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 58 - 309
ticker_1610
February 15, 2012, 3:13pm
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,510
Posts Per Day: 0.60
Reputation: 83.35%
Rep Score: +32 / -6
The reason I havnt yet joined the trust, is because of this current issue. I heard about the proposals to transfer trust shares to JF and the rest of the proposals, I mentioned it to a member of the trust board n I was suprised by the reaction it made me feel that no one but trust board members should know about the proposal. I didn't bother posting what I'd heard because I felt if things were in negotiation with JF then it wasn't the right thing to start speculative arguments.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 59 - 309
lislemariner
February 15, 2012, 3:20pm

Coke Drinker
Posts: 37
Posts Per Day: 0.01
Reputation: 81.78%
Rep Score: +1 / 0
Apologies if this has already been mentioned but just read tweet from John T  "Important news about the control of Grimsby Town FC coming up on @radiohumberside sport this afternoon" Sounds like we'll find out exactly what's been going on very shortly


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 60 - 309
sonik
February 15, 2012, 3:21pm

Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,667
Posts Per Day: 0.28
Reputation: 73.64%
Rep Score: +23 / -9
Approval: +28
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Quagmire
Genuine question:

I believe Sonik is a Trust member, and maybe other Fenty family members are too (maybe even JF himself).

Obviously they have the right to vote on this issue BUT surely there is a conflict of interest here?


Yes I am member of the trust and a minor shareholder.  Because I'm a supporter first and foremost. I will read what the proposal is regarding this vote and vote accordingly.  To coin a phrase from John "I won't be brow beaten"  LOL!
  


The Futures Bright Its Black And White!
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 61 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 3:30pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from Trawler


It is stated on the Mariners Trust website homepage that this an important postal ballot regarding our share ownership.

"shrouding what is done in mystery" may be an over statement.

Trust members get to vote postally - by 5th March 2012, a date in the correspondence.

So it would seem if non-members want a say then there's nothing to prevent them joining up prior to this date? There's plenty of time.

Shouldn't Trust members get sight of the specifics of what they are voting on prior to the rest of the GTFC community?


It says there is a vote but not the details of it - why should Trust members see it first when it affects all fans. Nobody seems willing to reveal details of it on this site, the Trust site or the official site. The attitude of most members on this thread is one of 'It's none of your concern if you're not a member'. Saying 'Something really important is being sent to all members but we're not telling everyone else what it is' kind of is shrouding it in secrecy isn't it?

I feel, as a member of the Trust myself, that it would be better to be totally open with members and non-members alike about what is happening and what John Fenty is demanding. The Trust can then openly demonstrate how important this is and use it to encourage people to join and have a say - as you rightly say they can. This wasn't supposed to sound critical of the Trust board, who I know are under resourced and massively busy - it's just I know that other clubs have had issued where a big divide has been created between members and non members. That's something we need to try and avoid.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 62 - 309
forza ivano
February 15, 2012, 3:35pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
the fenty/shares issue is actually the next vote for trust members

the present vote is regarding ctering.Ihave the letter here to summarise there are 5 options

1) flasks but no mcdonalds to be allowed in the ground
2) mcdonalds but no flasks to be allowed in the ground
3) retain the status quo
4) fish n chips, maccy d's, flasks,drugs, alcohol, anything alowed in the ground
5) maccy d's to provide all catering


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 63 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 3:38pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from sonik


Yes I am member of the trust and a minor shareholder.  Because I'm a supporter first and foremost. I will read what the proposal is regarding this vote and vote accordingly.  To coin a phrase from John "I won't be brow beaten"  LOL!
  


No dig at you Sonik btw but I do think the Trust need to take some legal advice on this.  There clearly is a conflict of interest here for any member of the Fenty family.  As a Trust member you absolutely have a right to vote on Trust matters but you can clearly influence a decision which could provide your brother with £400,000 worth of shares for £200,000

Someone from the Trust really needs to make a comment on this in my opinion.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 64 - 309
forza ivano
February 15, 2012, 3:41pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from Quagmire


No dig at you Sonik btw but I do think the Trust need to take some legal advice on this.  There clearly is a conflict of interest here for any member of the Fenty family.  As a Trust member you absolutely have a right to vote on Trust matters but you can clearly influence a decision which could provide your brother with £400,000 worth of shares for £200,000

Someone from the Trust really needs to make a comment on this in my opinion.


everyone's vote is equal quagmire! just because sonik is a fenty doesn't give him any more or any less voting power than myself. everyone knows who he is - it's exactly the same as an MP or a member of the house of lords who can vote on anything, even if there's a myriad of conflicts of interest.think you're getting your knickers ina twist about nothing, or else you're just trying to stir things up
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 65 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 3:51pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from forza ivano


everyone's vote is equal quagmire! just because sonik is a fenty doesn't give him any more or any less voting power than myself. everyone knows who he is - it's exactly the same as an MP or a member of the house of lords who can vote on anything, even if there's a myriad of conflicts of interest.think you're getting your knickers ina twist about nothing, or else you're just trying to stir things up


Not trying to stir anything up, just a genuine question.

John Fenty has the potential to financially benefit from a decision that his own brother (and potentially other family members) can directly influence via his / their vote(s).

I think it's best someone looks into the legalities of this.

Don't know about MP's and conflicts of interest but several councillors had to abstain from the Great Coates stadium vote because there was supposedly a conflict of interest as they were Town fans.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 66 - 309
STB
February 15, 2012, 3:51pm

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,958
Posts Per Day: 0.70
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Quoted from Devonmatt


WHS.  If you haven't joined the trust then quite frankly you have no basis from which to comment on the actions there of.


That is precisely the reason I haven't joined the trust.

I respect the people who have dedicated their time to run it.



Former lover of all things GTFC . . .
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 67 - 309
gymadman
February 15, 2012, 3:57pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 426
Posts Per Day: 0.07
Reputation: 85.92%
Rep Score: +4 / 0
I am not a trust member, or a long lost Fenty family member, but with my limited knowledge of all the facts, the one issue that concerns me is, if John Fenty does not get the majority shareholding, who is going to fund the club in the mid to long term future
I was led to believe from several posters on here that the town was full of potential benefactors waiting for JF to stand down and ride to our rescue, it never materialised.
We have the bases of a decent managership duo, the first signs of a decent squad and hopefully a successful future over the next few seasons.
I think we need to be careful what we wish for, and be realistic in what we expect of other people.

                                    U T M
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 68 - 309
Sixpence
February 15, 2012, 4:03pm
Shandy Drinker
Posts: 67
Posts Per Day: 0.01
Reputation: 71.98%
Rep Score: +0 / -1
Approval: -6
Quoted from gymadman
I am not a trust member, or a long lost Fenty family member, but with my limited knowledge of all the facts, the one issue that concerns me is, if John Fenty does not get the majority shareholding, who is going to fund the club in the mid to long term future
I was led to believe from several posters on here that the town was full of potential benefactors waiting for JF to stand down and ride to our rescue, it never materialsed.
We have the bases of a decent managership duo, the first signs of a decent squad and hopefully a successful future over the next few seasons.
I think we need to be careful what we wish for, and be realist in what we expect of other people.

                                    U T M


WHS.  Good post.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 69 - 309
crusty ole pie
February 15, 2012, 4:26pm

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,046
Posts Per Day: 0.53
Reputation: 89.09%
Rep Score: +16 / -1
Approval: +3,310
Gold Stars: 62
Quoted from Quagmire


Not trying to stir anything up, just a genuine question.

John Fenty has the potential to financially benefit from a decision that his own brother (and potentially other family members) can directly influence via his / their vote(s).

I think it's best someone looks into the legalities of this.

Don't know about MP's and conflicts of interest but several councillors had to abstain from the Great Coates stadium vote because there was supposedly a conflict of interest as they were Town fans.

John fenty has the potential to benefit  ? It's costing him another 200000 quid on top of the money he has already poured into the club think it would take a lot of football fortune for him to benefit just be grateful he is prepared to keep throwing money in and if a big if he is ever in a position to benefit from his investment who could blame him
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 70 - 309
pontoonlew
February 15, 2012, 4:27pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
All seems a bit confusing from the outside looking in. The trust want to give Fenty 200k of shares (we have 500k as a trust do we?) in return he'll pump in 200k of his own money into the club thus getting 400k at half price but pumping more money into the club for our security? Then what? Does he become Chairman again then? All seems like a good idea if this is the case.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 71 - 309
80sglory
February 15, 2012, 4:33pm
Guest User
Quoted from Rodley Mariner
I'm a member of the Trust but I don't think shrouding what is done in mystery is a positive thing. The Trust needs to be careful that it doesn't create an 'us and them' scenario - whilst non-members aren't entitled to vote, I do think they're entitled to know what's happening and to have an opinion. Alienating and excluding people completely won't persuade anybody to join up.

I agree.

I'm a trust member and have received the paperwork.

Saw 4 pages on this thread and expected to see an interesting debate.

Instead the proposal hasn't even been made public ! (not that I can see anyway)
I ask you, is this really the best way forward ?....

I'm personally unsure on the proposal (tbf think gymadman is probably right), but in any case I don't want to be slagged off for making it public and it would be nice to be in a postion to openly debate the issue and ask follow up questions before I vote.

Yes I can e-mail the trust but I always prefer everything to be in a public domain because I value the wider range of opinions of fishy posters and GTFC fans.

I actually was pleasantly suprised to read some good things coming from the trust but if they want membership to explode, they need to stop living in fear, jumping at shadows and be more open and share it.

Then again, I wonder if they want that ?
They've arguably missed another opportunity to engage interest and potentially boost membership by making it public before the vote.

tbh if the vote passes I'm already thinking there's a case for handing over any hypothetical remaining 13% of shares to JF.
If a similar situation is gonna crop up later (tbh from what I've read I see no reason why it might not), then stop wasting everyone's time (including GTST themselves) and get it over with !  
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 72 - 309
SkegFan
February 15, 2012, 4:47pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 114
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +5 / 0
I am a fully paid up trust member for life.

Look forward to getting home tonight and reading my letter. But if it is as suggested a vote on gifting an element of our shareholding to John Fenty in return for him buying a further equivalent amount of shares, then I for one will be voting "YES".

John Fenty continues to work financial miracles for our club. He continues to throw money in which he knows he is never ever likely to see again. He really has been a diamond geezer for us on the financial front, and he is now getting the results he deserves for his efforts as far as football results are concerned.

There is no better man to have at our helm as far as I am concerned. He has been around a very expensive and torrid learning curve and there is now a light at the end of the tunnel that he deserves.

So if this is this the vote, then I will be voting a firm YES.

Oh and I am in no way related to John Fenty.

Cheers
Skeggy
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 73 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 4:49pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from 1600

They've arguably missed another opportunity to engage interest and potentially boost membership by making it public before the vote.

No opportunities have been missed.  The vote deadline is not until March 5th and the ballot papers only started reaching members today.

So there's plenty of time for this to be placed officially in the public domain and to engage interest and potentially boost membership by making it public before the vote. Is there not?



"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 74 - 309
sonik
February 15, 2012, 4:50pm

Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,667
Posts Per Day: 0.28
Reputation: 73.64%
Rep Score: +23 / -9
Approval: +28
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from SkegFan
I am a fully paid up trust member for life.

Look forward to getting home tonight and reading my letter. But if it is as suggested a vote on gifting an element of our shareholding to John Fenty in return for him buying a further equivalent amount of shares, then I for one will be voting "YES".

John Fenty continues to work financial miracles for our club. He continues to throw money in which he knows he is never ever likely to see again. He really has been a diamond geezer for us on the financial front, and he is now getting the results he deserves for his efforts as far as football results are concerned.

There is no better man to have at our helm as far as I am concerned. He has been around a very expensive and torrid learning curve and there is now a light at the end of the tunnel that he deserves.

So if this is this the vote, then I will be voting a firm YES.

Oh and I am in no way related to John Fenty.

Cheers
Skeggy

And I'll second that.  Related that is!


The Futures Bright Its Black And White!
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 75 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 4:59pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from pontoonlew
All seems a bit confusing from the outside looking in. The trust want to give Fenty 200k of shares (we have 500k as a trust do we?) in return he'll pump in 200k of his own money into the club thus getting 400k at half price but pumping more money into the club for our security? Then what? Does he become Chairman again then? All seems like a good idea if this is the case.


The suggestion is that Hearn was likely to be sold unless the voting rights to 200,000 shares  were transferred from the Trust to JF so this happened. The vote is that 200,000 shares be transferred to JF from the Trust. He in turn will buy 200,000 more to fund the club until the end of May 2013. In return the Trust doesn't seem to get anything particularly solid: 'to be involved in on-going budget setting' whatever that means.

The thing is, what about post May 2013? This is pretty short term stuff we're talking about? How much of the losses will be covered by the Bennett money and (let's be honest) the likely sale of Hearn in the Summer? If JF is 'covering losses' in return, could these losses end up not amounting to much? In May 2013, will he want more shares? From the start of initial negotiations what concessions has Mr Fenty made if any or are these simply  his demands? Has the Trust board asked for a place on the Board of the Club in return for the shares?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 76 - 309
Wrawby_Mariner
February 15, 2012, 5:10pm
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.72
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Rodley Mariner


The suggestion is that Hearn was likely to be sold unless the voting rights to 200,000 shares  were transferred from the Trust to JF so this happened. The vote is that 200,000 shares be transferred to JF from the Trust. He in turn will buy 200,000 more to fund the club until the end of May 2013. In return the Trust doesn't seem to get anything particularly solid: 'to be involved in on-going budget setting' whatever that means.

The thing is, what about post May 2013? This is pretty short term stuff we're talking about? How much of the losses will be covered by the Bennett money and (let's be honest) the likely sale of Hearn in the Summer? If JF is 'covering losses' in return, could these losses end up not amounting to much? In May 2013, will he want more shares? From the start of initial negotiations what concessions has Mr Fenty made if any or are these simply  his demands? Has the Trust board asked for a place on the Board of the Club in return for the shares?


This is My view and not the view of the Trusts.

If the Trust did not give up the voting rights to 200,000 shares then Liam Hearn would have been sold. If Hearn was sold then the Trust would have have received the blame and effectively killed the Trust. Since The Trust have pledged the voting rights to shares in favour of Mr Fenty, but the Trust still own the shares. Fenty is asking for the ownership of the shares the Trust gave him the voting rights to. In return he will invest a further 200k etc
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype Skype
Reply: 77 - 309
aaron rattray
February 15, 2012, 5:11pm
allright viewers?
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,968
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 46.03%
Rep Score: +71 / -90
Approval: -4
whos the leader of the trust anyway. does he post on here?


i am a season ticket holder and i always will be one  


"aaron is the next michael barrymore, hes a comedinan"

it is official, i am a comedian

]
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 78 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 15, 2012, 5:13pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Quoted from aaron rattray
whos the leader of the trust anyway. does he post on here?


Some homework for you, Aaron >> http://www.marinerstrust.co.uk/index.php/contactus
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 79 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 5:18pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

If the Trust did not give up the voting rights to 200,000 shares then Liam Hearn would have been sold. If Hearn was sold then the Trust would have have received the blame and effectively killed the Trust.


It almost sounds like our esteemed ex-chairman has been making threats?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 80 - 309
Chris
February 15, 2012, 5:21pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Read the letters carefully, more than once, twice, ten times if neccessary.

Make your choices. Choose well people. Good Luck.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 81 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 5:22pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner


This is My view and not the view of the Trusts.



Marc - can you confirm whether the Trust has asked for a place on the Board in return for the shares and what was said in return? Also, what does being involved in setting the budget actually mean?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 82 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 5:34pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from crusty ole pie

John fenty has the potential to benefit  ? It's costing him another 200000 quid on top of the money he has already poured into the club think it would take a lot of football fortune for him to benefit just be grateful he is prepared to keep throwing money in and if a big if he is ever in a position to benefit from his investment who could blame him


John Fenty has the potential to benefit financially from this, yes.

Irrespective of likelihood, if someone came in to take the club over and offered to pay him his loans back and £1 per £1 in shares he would benefit to the tune of £200,000.

There is clearly a conflict of interest here and this should be looked at.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 83 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 5:37pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from Chris
Read the letters carefully, more than once, twice, ten times if neccessary.

Make your choices. Choose well people. Good Luck.


Is it possible to create some kind of Q&A thread for Trust members and Trust board members to discuss things?  Might be a good idea to have one central location for Q&A's on this ballot - people can PM you their questions and you can add them to a thread with the answer?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 84 - 309
Chris
February 15, 2012, 5:41pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from Quagmire


Is it possible to create some kind of Q&A thread for Trust members and Trust board members to discuss things?  Might be a good idea to have one central location for Q&A's on this ballot - people can PM you their questions and you can add them to a thread with the answer?


I'd expect Trust Chair Chris P to view this request and no doubt he'd speak with other sto decide whether this was deemed appropriate. I'm afraid it's not within my remit to agree to anything like that. Sorry I cant help mor
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 85 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 15, 2012, 6:08pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Absolutely unbelievable that the trust would consider giving any shares to Fenty. The trust board have clearly been bamboozled into this and have shown how painfully weak they are. The club have finally started to go well and Fenty and the trust have found a way to divide the fans and fucck the progress up.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 86 - 309
Sixpence
February 15, 2012, 6:25pm
Shandy Drinker
Posts: 67
Posts Per Day: 0.01
Reputation: 71.98%
Rep Score: +0 / -1
Approval: -6
Quoted from headingly_mariner
Absolutely unbelievable that the trust would consider giving any shares to Fenty. The trust board have clearly been bamboozled into this and have shown how painfully weak they are. The club have finally started to go well and Fenty and the trust have found a way to divide the fans and fucck the progress up.


And you know all the facts do you?  Harsh comments if you ask me.  Trust members and the board hopefully will make a balanced opinion and vote for the benefit of GTFC.  We shall see.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 87 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 6:32pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
For all you saying you have to be a member to comment on this, why don't you all fook off and create a Trust members only board then and discuss it there instead of posting it on a public forum...??? Some of you are so far up your own arses you're sucking on your tonsils... Get the fook over yourselves...  



"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 88 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 6:41pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Oh and one last thing - the trust hasn't earned it's right to speak up on the fans behalf, it was gifted to them... After hearing how slow the uptake of membership had been I think the general consensus amongst the majority of Town fans is that they don't want the Trust to act on their behalf, yet it has pretty much been forced upon them...

Personally I waited before deciding whether to join or not, I have to say i'm pleased I did... I'm not having a personal dig at the board members because they have my full respect for trying to help and giving up their time etc but for me it just doesn't seem to be working at the minute... I'm sure others will disagree and they will never be able to please everyone all the time, I guess at the minute they are failing to please me...


"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 89 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 6:47pm
Guest User
If the above is true. . . then fenty has played the trust like a cheap fiddle! How is fenty (who lets not forget is NOT) our current chairman negotiate thatwhen that other guy has been in charge. I dont really see how an unappointed supporters trust and a former chairman make decisions about the playing staff! Whilst Fenty's chairmanship of the club has been debated ad nauseum on here . . . No one can deny he  is one hell of a good businessman!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 90 - 309
Tinymariner
February 15, 2012, 6:48pm

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,120
Posts Per Day: 0.74
Reputation: 90.63%
Rep Score: +30 / -2
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +1,456
Gold Stars: 12
I should have made my views a little clearer. What I meant to say was that if people want their opinions or ideas to be put forward to the club then they should join the trust. I am not yet a member of the trust, thankyou very much, my membership is pending. However, I did not intend to offend or ostracize anyone.  


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 91 - 309
pontoonlew
February 15, 2012, 6:50pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
Quoted from headingly_mariner
Absolutely unbelievable that the trust would consider giving any shares to Fenty. The trust board have clearly been bamboozled into this and have shown how painfully weak they are. The club have finally started to go well and Fenty and the trust have found a way to divide the fans and fucck the progress up.


Started to go well on the pitch but up until the big burst of money from the Bennett fee (which Fenty engineered) absolutely plunged off it. After seeing what happened to those who cannot be named in our league, what do you suggest? intercourse the progress up? What progress is that exactly, losing 900k a year and now having nobody to plug that gap? That's brilliant progress! You in particular are blind to the facts in your hate of Fenty. If the trust doesn't accept this the club will be 200k worse off and would be without our best player due to HAVING to sell. But hey ho, we're making good progress according to Headingly so intercourse Fenty and his club saving money!

What does grind my gears is why the trust see that £10 makes it some sort of gentleman's club and won't relay vital information regarding the club onto the fan's who don't pay the £10. When was the trust actually going to come out and make this info public exactly?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 92 - 309
SkegFan
February 15, 2012, 7:07pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 114
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +5 / 0
Ok I got home, read the letter, voted yes and posted the letter back.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 93 - 309
Quagmire
February 15, 2012, 7:08pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from pontoonlew


... until the big burst of money from the Bennett fee (which Fenty engineered)


Engineered???  Don't make me laugh!

It's pretty basic, standard operating procedure to have a sell-on clause when clubs sell a young player on.  It's hardly some genius idea that Fenty came out with and nobody has ever done this in the past.

If anyone deserves credit for the Bennett money it is Ferguson and Fry at Posh for advancing him way beyond what GTFC could have done.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 94 - 309
SuperJoeyWaters
February 15, 2012, 7:11pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 122
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 76.57%
Rep Score: +2 / -1
Location: Cleethorpes
Approval: +45
Quoted from SkegFan
Ok I got home, read the letter, voted yes and posted the letter back.



SAME HERE
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 95 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 7:16pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner


This is My view and not the view of the Trusts.

If the Trust did not give up the voting rights to 200,000 shares then Liam Hearn would have been sold.
If Hearn was sold then the Trust would have have received the blame and effectively killed the Trust. Since The Trust have pledged the voting rights to shares in favour of Mr Fenty, but the Trust still own the shares. Fenty is asking for the ownership of the shares the Trust gave him the voting rights to. In return he will invest a further 200k etc


Was there a ballot on the trust giving up voting rights on the 200,000 shares or was it an executive decision taken by the trust board?



"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 96 - 309
BlackBoots
February 15, 2012, 7:29pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
Wow!

Just read the letter. Had to do so twice to follow it!

Seems the guys and gals on the Trust board have been through the mill sorting this out!

The letter is balanced and well written. My view is that the club/JF have held a gun to the head of the Trust. They, and us members, really don't have a choice as far as I can see.

If there are other businessmen/investors willing to put up significant amounts of cash to buy Fenty out they would have shown their hand by now. They haven't so for me this is a no brainer.

Its a Yes from me
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 97 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 15, 2012, 7:34pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from pontoonlew


Started to go well on the pitch but up until the big burst of money from the Bennett fee (which Fenty engineered) absolutely plunged off it. After seeing what happened to those who cannot be named in our league, what do you suggest? intercourse the progress up? What progress is that exactly, losing 900k a year and now having nobody to plug that gap? That's brilliant progress! You in particular are blind to the facts in your hate of Fenty. If the trust doesn't accept this the club will be 200k worse off and would be without our best player due to HAVING to sell. But hey ho, we're making good progress according to Headingly so intercourse Fenty and his club saving money!

What does grind my gears is why the trust see that £10 makes it some sort of gentleman's club and won't relay vital information regarding the club onto the fan's who don't pay the £10. When was the trust actually going to come out and make this info public exactly?


The point is that if what is said is true then Fenty has been able to hold the trust to ransom to get free shares. Fenty has caused or financial woes and is the worst chairman in our history and now he wants the fans to give him 200k worth of shares, it is unbelievable. I don't hate Fenty i just think he has been a poison for the club. The club is in his stranglehold already because of the loans and people who have been willing to take the club on have been put off doing this because of these loans.


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 98 - 309
Wrawby_Mariner
February 15, 2012, 7:37pm
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.72
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from voice of reason


Was there a ballot on the trust giving up voting rights on the 200,000 shares or was it an executive decision taken by the trust board?



Given how long it would have taken would have taken us past the transfer window and Hearn would have been sold
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype Skype
Reply: 99 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 15, 2012, 7:40pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner


Given how long it would have taken would have taken us past the transfer window and Hearn would have been sold


If this is true then how can anyone possibly vote to give the shares to fenty?  The trust have just been bullied and Fenty has shown his true colours again.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 100 - 309
80sglory
February 15, 2012, 7:57pm
Guest User
Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner


Given how long it would have taken would have taken us past the transfer window and Hearn would have been sold

Do you mean without any financial guarantees from JF the trust would have voted to sell Hearn to raise the short term finance the club arguably needed ?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 101 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 7:58pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from BlackBoots

The letter is balanced and well written. My view is that the club/JF have held a gun to the head of the Trust. They, and us members, really don't have a choice as far as I can see.


The first part I agree with - a threat was effectively issued re selling Hearn and another threat has been issued re the shares.

However, the Trust and its members do have an option, which is to try and negotiate a better deal with JF - for instance insisting on a place on the board in return for the shares. I would like to know what negotiations have gone on before this poll was issued - knocking back this deal doesn't mean another one can't be done. What is he offering in return at the minute? To cover all losses to May 2013. That's only 15 months and a period which will see us receive money for Ryan Bennett, probably money in the Summer for Liam Hearn, money from possibly one, maybe even two Wembley visits. Is he offering that much at the minute?

JF is a Grimsby Town fan. He's from the Town as are his family and his businesses are based here. Under his leadership the football club has become a non league entity and has been run in a manner which sees it lose £900k a year. I would very much hope and expect that this would mean that he recognises some responsibility to help put this right and that it would be a last resort to walk away.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 102 - 309
pontoonlew
February 15, 2012, 8:00pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
Quoted from headingly_mariner


The point is that if what is said is true then Fenty has been able to hold the trust to ransom to get free shares. Fenty has caused or financial woes and is the worst chairman in our history and now he wants the fans to give him 200k worth of shares, it is unbelievable. I don't hate Fenty i just think he has been a poison for the club. The club is in his stranglehold already because of the loans and people who have been willing to take the club on have been put off doing this because of these loans.




It's easy to blame Fenty for that, but all clubs in the country have debt. The problem is if we do not get the crowds to sustain a top budget in this league, admittedly Fenty sets that budget but it's his money at the end of the day. There's only so much you can do if you appoint a manager who inexplicably buys so much excrement and pisses your budget up the wall. The only thing I massively disagree with is the appointment of Woods, most of what else happened to this club happened with optimism from the fans. It's far to easy to blame Fenty in hindsight but at the time most of the fan base would've appointed Newell, many would've appointed and in turn sacked Buckley and many would've tried thrown money at the club in desperation to get it out of the dire straits.

The supporters trust have no choice in my opinion, I think Fenty has been strong in his words because he want's the trust to understand that it's for the best of the club. The trusts board are good people i'm sure but generally they don't have Fenty's experiance, if he's saying that it's vital that this happens then the chances are it is. The trust couldn't sustainably run this club, giving part of the money to somebody who in turn will double it and be able to keep your star man is for the best of the club imo.

Any business man could come here and say they want to buy the club and Fenty would happily let them IF they were right for the club. I have 100% trust that Fenty would never let the club go to some dodgy businessman and nor would he let the money he is owed (which is tiny to what he's actually put in and the repayment terms are reasonable and I believe certain situations could mean we'd never owe him anything) stand in the way of the club going forward. If I was in the GTFC Gentlemans club this evening i'd be sending a ballot paper off with a big fat YES written on it.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 103 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 8:06pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Quoted from 1600

Do you mean without any financial guarantees from JF the trust would have voted to sell Hearn to raise the short term finance the club arguably needed ?


Nope I think what he means is, the Trust was told that unless they gave over the voting rights the club was going to sell Hearn... If true it stinks... JF for saying that (if he did) and the trust for actually going along with it, particularly without consulting with their members who they are meant to represent...

Already I find it alarming that so early on the trust board have made such a decision without consulting their members, did they even bother to tell their members once they had done it? 80's did you know about this, you're a member aren't you? The only time this should ever happen is if the clubs existance is in jeopardy, other than this, they should never make such a decision...



"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 104 - 309
Mariners Trust
February 15, 2012, 8:07pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 176
Posts Per Day: 0.04
Reputation: 89.2%
Rep Score: +8 / 0
Approval: +87
Quoted from Quagmire


Is it possible to create some kind of Q&A thread for Trust members and Trust board members to discuss things?  Might be a good idea to have one central location for Q&A's on this ballot - people can PM you their questions and you can add them to a thread with the answer?


Thank you for this Quagmire.

If any questions can be e-mailed to enquiries@marinerstrust.co.uk we will collate them, answer them and post them on the website for all to see.

The Trust board note the comments regarding the full ballot details not being made public.
We felt that we owed it to our members to at least give them the opportunity (depending on the postal system!) to have first knowledge of what was going on.
We hope to have the full 'script' of the ballot letter on the website by tomorrow for general consumption.

Thanks
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 105 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 8:10pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Quoted from Mariners Trust


Thank you for this Quagmire.

If any questions can be e-mailed to enquiries@marinerstrust.co.uk we will collate them, answer them and post them on the website for all to see.

The Trust board note the comments regarding the full ballot details not being made public.
We felt that we owed it to our members to at least give them the opportunity (depending on the postal system!) to have first knowledge of what was going on.
We hope to have the full 'script' of the ballot letter on the website by tomorrow for general consumption.

Thanks


Why is that? don't you claim to act on behalf of all fans?


"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 106 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 8:13pm
Guest User
Hasnt the decision to hand over the shares (or else hearn goes) been done? What are trust members voting on? Confused!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 107 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 15, 2012, 8:20pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from pontoonlew


It's easy to blame Fenty for that, but all clubs in the country have debt. The problem is if we do not get the crowds to sustain a top budget in this league, admittedly Fenty sets that budget but it's his money at the end of the day. There's only so much you can do if you appoint a manager who inexplicably buys so much excrement and pisses your budget up the wall. The only thing I massively disagree with is the appointment of Woods, most of what else happened to this club happened with optimism from the fans. It's far to easy to blame Fenty in hindsight but at the time most of the fan base would've appointed Newell, many would've appointed and in turn sacked Buckley and many would've tried thrown money at the club in desperation to get it out of the dire straits.

The supporters trust have no choice in my opinion, I think Fenty has been strong in his words because he want's the trust to understand that it's for the best of the club. The trusts board are good people i'm sure but generally they don't have Fenty's experiance, if he's saying that it's vital that this happens then the chances are it is. The trust couldn't sustainably run this club, giving part of the money to somebody who in turn will double it and be able to keep your star man is for the best of the club imo.

Any business man could come here and say they want to buy the club and Fenty would happily let them IF they were right for the club. I have 100% trust that Fenty would never let the club go to some dodgy businessman and nor would he let the money he is owed (which is tiny to what he's actually put in and the repayment terms are reasonable and I believe certain situations could mean we'd never owe him anything) stand in the way of the club going forward. If I was in the GTFC Gentlemans club this evening i'd be sending a ballot paper off with a big fat YES written on it.


He makes all the decisions, he should pay for them. If appointing Woodsy was the only decision you have disagreed with you have not been watching closely or long enough.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 108 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 15, 2012, 8:24pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from 1054
Hasnt the decision to hand over the shares (or else hearn goes) been done? What are trust members voting on? Confused!


The voting rights to 200,000 shares have been handed over without consultation of members. The first I knew of this as a member of the Trust was today. The postal vote is whether to now hand over those 200,000 shares.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 109 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 15, 2012, 8:29pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from Rodley Mariner


The voting rights to 200,000 shares have been handed over without consultation of members. The first I knew of this as a member of the Trust was today. The postal vote is whether to now hand over those 200,000 shares.


I did not know that was the case, that is just embarrassing fenty has pull the trusts pants down. Why are the trust board so quiet about it? What is the point of having members?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 110 - 309
blasty
February 15, 2012, 8:31pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 941
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 85.85%
Rep Score: +10 / -1
Approval: +227
Quoted from Rodley Mariner


The voting rights to 200,000 shares have been handed over without consultation of members. The first I knew of this as a member of the Trust was today. The postal vote is whether to now hand over those 200,000 shares.


Surely this is very wrong, would be interesting (as a non trust member, who has been thinking about joining) to understand the thought process behind this, I wonder that if important decisions such as this can be and are taken in isolation without canvassing option of trust members, how can the trust claim to serve its members??

I have also very much been a sitter on the fence in terms of Mr Fenty's stewardship but if true that a gun as such had been placed to the Trusts head by Mr Fenty, I find this most distasteful.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 111 - 309
woodi147
February 15, 2012, 8:33pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 674
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 74.75%
Rep Score: +10 / -4
Approval: +29
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from 1054


Calm down mate, you have chipped in a tenner and you think that gives you more of an interest in GTFC than me.  That type of sentiment is the problem with the trust and was the problem with the last trust.

Everyone wants their little bit of power and you know what?  You are gonna throw it all away by giving the shares to fenty!  It is decisons like that that made me hold off on becpoming a memeber of the trust and will continue to dissuade me in the future.

It is OUR club, not the trust's, not fenty's and (even though you have chucked a tenner on the table) not yours!!!  Awaits dull response. . .


Well said that man.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 112 - 309
DocDock
February 15, 2012, 8:36pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 759
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Location: Cleethorpes
Approval: +235
Gold Stars: 3
Quoted from Rodley Mariner


The voting rights to 200,000 shares have been handed over without consultation of members. The first I knew of this as a member of the Trust was today. The postal vote is whether to now hand over those 200,000 shares.


If that's the case i'm really disappointed the trust have done this without the members having a say. Perhaps i'm missing something but surely being a trust member should entitle you to have a say on this, irregardless of whether it's right or wrong for the club? Otherwise what's the point of being a trust member?

As for it not being made available to the public, i have to say i disagree with the decision. Something like this has the potential to affect the future of the club and needs to be known to all fans, trust members or not. I've had to find out about this through the fishy, which i shouldn't have to. Information like this needs to be made available on the offical website, and also via other social networking sites.

I agree with what other people have said about this looking like John Fenty has manipulated the situation to get effectively "free" shares. Could be coincidence with Bennett being sold but if the trust are being forced to sell shares why does it appear they're giving them away with no provisions set in place?


Basically the lack of clear information is leading to confusion and it all needs to be cleared up asap.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 113 - 309
woodi147
February 15, 2012, 8:37pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 674
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 74.75%
Rep Score: +10 / -4
Approval: +29
Gold Stars: 1
God it will be secret handshakes next
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 114 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 8:38pm
Guest User
Can anyone tell me how many trust board members did fenty negotiate  the hearn for votes deal with?.  genuine question
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 115 - 309
Chris
February 15, 2012, 8:46pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from 1054
Can anyone tell me how many trust board members did fenty negotiate  the hearn for votes deal with?.  genuine question


The proposals were voted on by the entire trust board.

The Trust members now have the say. If the vote is for NO then it doesnt happen. Under those conditions, it would be interesting to see what happens to the voting rights, Id quite agree.

Id say sleep on it before posting your ballots back, (I wont need to tho cos I know how Im voting) leave it till the weekend and digest what has gone on and what has been said/proposed in full.

Then just make the right choice.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 116 - 309
Chrisblor
February 15, 2012, 9:04pm

Elemér Berkessy
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,205
Posts Per Day: 1.22
Reputation: 72.75%
Rep Score: +51 / -20
Location: somewhere along the m180
Approval: +8,678
Gold Stars: 229
The Trust shoud come out and announce what is going on to ALL supporters. Acting in secret over important issues involving the club's future ownership and funding will only alienate non-trust members and cause feelings of distrust (lol pun) towards the trust. I'm not a Trust member and I don't think I want to be after their handling of this issue. I seriously hope they haven't given up 200k shares without even bothing to consult their members because Fenty threatened to sell Hearn (who he's come out and said we never received any offers for anyway). It would go against everything they are meant to represent if they have.


gary jones
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 117 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 9:10pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from Chrisblor
The Trust shoud come out and announce what is going on to ALL supporters. Acting in secret over important issues involving the club's future ownership and funding will only alienate non-trust members and cause feelings of distrust (lol pun) towards the trust. I'm not a Trust member and I don't think I want to be after their handling of this issue. I seriously hope they haven't given up 200k shares without even bothing to consult their members because Fenty threatened to sell Hearn (who he's come out and said we never received any offers for anyway). It would go against everything they are meant to represent if they have.


If you don't want the trust to hand over their shares, join and vote no. If you're not a member, you don't have a say.

I don't mean this aggressively or anything. My knowledge and involvement with the trust goes no further than when I handed over my fee, but as a member they've communicated the situation and asked my opinion. As non members, all people can do is snipe from the sidelines. Seems to me this is a matter between the trust, its members and the board.

Not joining simply does not make any sense. If you don't agree with the what the trust is doing, then joining and changing it / voting against their proposals is surely the only way you can have your say on what they're doing.

I think I and many others have written variations of this post countless times...


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 118 - 309
blasty
February 15, 2012, 9:12pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 941
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 85.85%
Rep Score: +10 / -1
Approval: +227
Quoted from Dan


If you don't want the trust to hand over their shares, join and vote no. If you're not a member, you don't have a say.

I don't mean this aggressively or anything. My knowledge and involvement with the trust goes no further than when I handed over my fee, but as a member they've communicated the situation and asked my opinion. As non members, all people can do is snipe from the sidelines. Seems to me this is a matter between the trust, its members and the board.

Not joining simply does not make any sense. If you don't agree with the what the trust is doing, then joining and changing it / voting against their proposals is surely the only way you can have your say on what they're doing.

I think I and many others have written variations of this post countless times...


Quick one. Were you given a say/vote in the decision making process of handing over voting rights of 200k worth of shares?

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 119 - 309
pontoonlew
February 15, 2012, 9:12pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
Quoted from headingly_mariner


He makes all the decisions, he should pay for them. If appointing Woodsy was the only decision you have disagreed with you have not been watching closely or long enough.


I've had a season ticket since 98 and watched my first game in 97, not bad for a 20 year old! So basically my entire time supporting Town has been under Fenty, I do understand that mistakes have been made but running this club in particular must feel like an impossible task at times. There is a pressure from the fans who in fairness think we should be higher. We've had some rotten luck in and amongst bad decisions and at times Fenty should be given the benefit of the doubt. The Woods decision was his chance to save us from relegation and the wrong choice was made, let us not forget however that a lot of know all's on here told us Slades football was 'not easy on the eye' and ignored his impressive history to have kittens at the thought of him dragging us out the League 2 relegation zone. It's easy for fans to come on here and say what he's done wrong but it's the same fans who were happy to have Newell and Woods and in return not have Slade and wanted to sack the current two. Fenty is in a lose lose situation at times and I think on this one he's taking the bull by the horns by saying this IS the best way for the club.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 120 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 9:14pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
No.

But that's not how these things work is it? The board are elected to make decisions in the same way a parliament is elected to make decisions. Not everything goes to a referendum.
As it happens, I think they did the right thing. I imagine most members feel the same way. Looks like those who aren't members mostly don't. Well if you joined up and were active on the trusts board, maybe it would be different.

I speak only as a member, I have no idea who the board are.


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 121 - 309
80sglory
February 15, 2012, 9:16pm
Guest User
Quoted from voice of reason
Nope I think what he means is, the Trust was told that unless they gave over the voting rights the club was going to sell Hearn

You may well be right but I'm not 100% convinced as yet.
tbh I'm just confused !

Talking about relinquishing voting rights the letter says:

"This enabled enquiries for our players to be turned aside and assisted in the signing of a new player."

What would the club want with these voting rights ?
Is it about players or about an AGM/control of the boardroom ?

The club now have these voting rights but haven't sold Hearn.
But they would have sold him had they not had control of the vote ?
Maybe I'm mistaken or missing something but it makes no sense ?....

I may be completely wrong but to parpahrase the letter, I personally interpeted it as...  

"Since the club needed money and the trust couldn't meaningfully help there, the trust looked at ways to help it's finances.
Realising John Fenty was the only option we handed over our voting rights to him to make sure WE weren't forced to consider voting for selling our best players/(calling an AGM ?) in order to raise the short term finance the club needed."

The trust are now saying it's vital we keep the squad together.
I guess just so long as the money is there everyone's gonna say that ?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 122 - 309
blasty
February 15, 2012, 9:18pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 941
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 85.85%
Rep Score: +10 / -1
Approval: +227
Quoted from Dan
No.

But that's not how these things work is it? The board are elected to make decisions in the same way a parliament is elected to make decisions. Not everything goes to a referendum.
As it happens, I think they did the right thing. I imagine most members feel the same way. Looks like those who aren't members mostly don't. Well if you joined up and were active on the trusts board, maybe it would be different.

I speak only as a member, I have no idea who the board are.


So I would only have a say/vote on issues the trust board thought I should have a say on? Interesting angle
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 123 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 9:22pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from blasty


So I would only have a say/vote on issues the trust board thought I should have a say on? Interesting angle


You've cracked it.

Just like in any other business. The Board of the place I very rarely ask for my opinion.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 124 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 9:25pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from blasty


So I would only have a say/vote on issues the trust board thought I should have a say on? Interesting angle


Exactly. Like I say, that's actually how democratic decision making works. And there was absolutely nothing to stop you being on the board. Remember, it was about November time, they were asking for people to step forward. Yeah.


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 125 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 9:31pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Quoted from Dan


Exactly. Like I say, that's actually how democratic decision making works. And there was absolutely nothing to stop you being on the board. Remember, it was about November time, they were asking for people to step forward. Yeah.


You make it sound like people should be happy to just go along with the idea of the trust supposedly representing the fans views...

Some people never wanted the trust involved (I have to say I wasn't one of these, I was willing to give them a go) in the first place but they were forced upon them... Now they are told in order to have a say about something to do with their club they have to pay the trust, which was forced upon them, to have this say...

I personally can understand why some people are drunk off about this...


"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 126 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 9:32pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from voice of reason


You make it sound like people should be happy to just go along with the idea of the trust supposedly representing the fans views...

Some people never wanted the trust involved (I have to say I wasn't one of these, I was willing to give them a go) in the first place but they were forced upon them... Now they are told in order to have a say about something to do with their club they have to pay the trust, which was forced upon them, to have this say...

I personally can understand why some people are drunk off about this...


Eh? That makes no sense.



Logged
Private Message
Reply: 127 - 309
voice of reason
February 15, 2012, 9:34pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Quoted from psgmariner


Eh? That makes no sense.



It makes perfect sense to me but then it would as I wrote it... What you struggling with...???



"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 128 - 309
MeanwoodMariner
February 15, 2012, 9:52pm

Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,326
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Reputation: 79.34%
Rep Score: +19 / -5
Approval: +2,673
Gold Stars: 8
Quoted from voice of reason


You make it sound like people should be happy to just go along with the idea of the trust supposedly representing the fans views...

Some people never wanted the trust involved (I have to say I wasn't one of these, I was willing to give them a go) in the first place but they were forced upon them... Now they are told in order to have a say about something to do with their club they have to pay the trust, which was forced upon them, to have this say...

I personally can understand why some people are drunk off about this...


You seem to fail to understand what the Trust is. It does not "represent the fans views" in the way you seem to think it should. It is a collection of people who have paid to join and have their say on issues like this one. Clearly all of the people involved are fans and want the best for the club but they have no obligation to canvas opinions of non-trust members.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 129 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 10:00pm
Guest User
Quoted from MeanwoodMariner


You seem to fail to understand what the Trust is. It does not "represent the fans views" in the way you seem to think it should. It is a collection of people who have paid to join and have their say on issues like this one. Clearly all of the people involved are fans and want the best for the club but they have no obligation to canvas opinions of non-trust members.



No there is no reason to canvas opinion but I think they have a RESPONSIBILITY that has been gifted to them which appears to have been thrown away . . . . .  they have been ridden like a Cleethorpes donkey by hardened businessman Fenty!  Who do you think got the better deal? The trust or Mr Fenty?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 130 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:03pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from 1054


No there is no reason to canvas opinion but I think they have a RESPONSIBILITY that has been gifted to them . . . . . and they have been ridden like a Cleethorpes donkey by hardened businessman Fenty!  Who do you think got the better deal? The trust or Mr Fenty?


What do you propose a fishy poll ffs?!




Logged
Private Message
Reply: 131 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 10:04pm
Guest User
Quoted from psgmariner


What do you propose a fishy poll ffs?!




Er? no FFS
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 132 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:05pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from 1054


Er? no FFS


So how can they canvass all the fans then? Surely balloting members on the big decisions is the best option and this is the option they have taken.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 133 - 309
davmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:06pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,012
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 78.9%
Rep Score: +37 / -10
Approval: +4,860
Gold Stars: 75
Jesus I've been away for a few hours and then all this?!? What the hell has gone on?! Anyone kind enough to summarise to avoid me starting a new thread?


Up The Mariners!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 134 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 10:11pm
Guest User
Quoted from psgmariner


So how can they canvass all the fans then? Surely balloting members on the big decisions is the best option and this is the option they have taken.


Read my post, I have said that there is no reason to canvas the fans. . . Before you start FFSing at me FFS!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 135 - 309
psgmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:14pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from 1054


No there is no reason to canvas opinion but I think they have a RESPONSIBILITY that has been gifted to them which appears to have been thrown away . . . . .  they have been ridden like a Cleethorpes donkey by hardened businessman Fenty!  Who do you think got the better deal? The trust or Mr Fenty?


Apologies if I have misread your post. From the above I interpreted it as you saying they had no reason for canavassing opinion but did have a responsibility to do so.



Logged
Private Message
Reply: 136 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 10:20pm
Guest User
No worries, tbh I am very confused with what is going on right now. . . but worried what it might mean!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 137 - 309
MeanwoodMariner
February 15, 2012, 10:20pm

Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,326
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Reputation: 79.34%
Rep Score: +19 / -5
Approval: +2,673
Gold Stars: 8
Quoted from 1054


No there is no reason to canvas opinion but I think they have a RESPONSIBILITY that has been gifted to them . . . . . and they have been ridden like a Cleethorpes donkey by hardened businessman Fenty!  Who do you think got the better deal? The trust or Mr Fenty?


But what does that responsibility involve? Asking every Town fan? Who counts as a Town fan. Season ticket holders? Fishy members? People who have been to a game at some point in the last 5 years? I'm not being a d1ck, I'm just pointing out that there isn't a definition of a Town fan and even if there was how do you begin to gather a consensus? It seems a pretty fair system to me to have an organisation like the Trust that anyone can join if they want and have their say.

As for the deal itself, I dont know the full details as I am not a Trust member (yet). I suspect Fenty could have got a much better for a deal for himself if he had really wanted to fu(k the Trust over. The Trust still have a significant proportion of shares and can continue to grow with time. Right now Fenty is in a better position to sustain the club and IMO the club are better off with those shares in Fenty's control right now. But as i'm not a member of the Trust yet my opinion is not relevant.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 138 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 10:23pm
Guest User
I don't mean a responsibility to listen to my or any other non trust member's opinion just a huge (and possibly unwanted) responsibility given to them by Mr Parker and on behalf of all fans

Logged
E-mail
Reply: 139 - 309
diehardmariner
February 15, 2012, 10:29pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,771
Posts Per Day: 0.97
Reputation: 82.7%
Rep Score: +35 / -7
Approval: +17,063
Gold Stars: 518
I've not read my paperwork yet but from the bits on this thread it seems too many people are not appreciating the impossible situation the Trust board were put under here.

Balloting members in such a short space of time?  Come off it, they had to act there and then and were on a hiding to nothing.  No bids for Hearn? Maybe not but few phone calls to declare his availability and the bids would have rolled in.  

The Trust had to make a quick decision, which they did. Right or wrong, they made it.  If anyone else wanted to be in that position they had plenty of opportunity to do so.  
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 140 - 309
BlackBoots
February 15, 2012, 10:31pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
Quoted from 1054
I don't mean a responsibility to listen to my or any other non trust member's opinion just a huge (and possibly unwanted) responsibility given to them by Mr Parker and on behalf of all fans



Mr Parker's gift was not to the fans, but to the Trust, that was very clear when the transfer was made.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 141 - 309
blasty
February 15, 2012, 10:39pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 941
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 85.85%
Rep Score: +10 / -1
Approval: +227
Quoted from diehardmariner
I've not read my paperwork yet but from the bits on this thread it seems too many people are not appreciating the impossible situation the Trust board were put under here.

Balloting members in such a short space of time?  Come off it, they had to act there and then and were on a hiding to nothing.  No bids for Hearn? Maybe not but few phone calls to declare his availability and the bids would have rolled in.  

The Trust had to make a quick decision, which they did. Right or wrong, they made it.  If anyone else wanted to be in that position they had plenty of opportunity to do so.  


Fair point and I agree the situation was very difficult. Better to make a wrong decision that not to make one at all.

Nothing but respect for the people who give up their time, I wouldnt want to do it.

I just think the whole situation could have been handled better, it just seems a bit cloak and dagger that it should come out in this way.

That said I will be putting my money where my mouth is and joining the Trust at the end of this month.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 142 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 15, 2012, 10:58pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Quoted from blasty


Fair point and I agree the situation was very difficult. Better to make a wrong decision that not to make one at all.

Nothing but respect for the people who give up their time, I wouldnt want to do it.

I just think the whole situation could have been handled better, it just seems a bit cloak and dagger that it should come out in this way.

That said I will be putting my money where my mouth is and joining the Trust at the end of this month.


Oh no it's not!

http://ambiguityadvantage.blogspot.com/2008/02/action-bias-in-decision-making-problem.html



Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 143 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 15, 2012, 11:11pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
I'm clearly an odd one out here. I.E. the only Trust member who seems to be against this proposal.

To all you other antis - this shows why you should have joined the Trust. This is the sort of thing that happens when people stand on the sidelines moaning but refuse to do anything about it. Well done.

I really don't know why we bother with a Supporters Trust. This is the third time its bent over and given JF what he wants. This time it smacks of having one so with a (metaphorical) gun to its head. Even if you agree with the logic that we need his money, it has missed an opportunity for something in return. Pure short-termism.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 144 - 309
Dan
February 15, 2012, 11:13pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from 1054
Who do you think got the better deal? The trust or Mr Fenty?


GTFC.

Quoted from blasty
I just think the whole situation could have been handled better, it just seems a bit cloak and dagger that it should come out in this way.


This is I do agree with. It would have been far better to have published the contents of the letter on the day it was sent out.


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 145 - 309
SkegFan
February 15, 2012, 11:17pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 114
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +5 / 0
Look everybody, this was always going to be the case. The Trust is brassic apart from a paper value. It has no cash to support the club with. Some pleasant ideas but no hard cash.

Nobody else is offering any cash either.

The only person who is prepared to put his money where his mouth is, once again, is John Fenty.

Critic John Fenty all you like, but there isn't another person amongst us that has the wealth, the bottle or the nads to invest huge amounts of cash. Cash that is that you are never likely to ever see again as Football Clubs are bottom less hollows where your money disappears never to be seen again.

I say thank you very much John Fenty for your continued support. I really don't know how you remain so committed and motivated for the club when there are so many people that are happy to hide behind their keyboards whilst knocking you. You are a bloody saint. A remarkable person and you must be the most avid supporter of Grimsby Town out of all of us. We are lucky to have you John. I know that the likes of Kettering, Darlington, Luton, Portsmouth and all of the others would have been delighted to have somebody like you on board, somebody prepared keep throwing in his hard earned cash.

VOTE YES IF YOU ARE TRUST MEMBER. I AM AND I AM VOTING YES
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 146 - 309
Trawler
February 15, 2012, 11:21pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6


I really don't know why we bother with a Supporters Trust......it has missed an opportunity for something in return. Pure short-termism.



How do you figure that? The member's votes haven't been cast, let alone counted yet. They could still say no and the trust could negotiate further. Cart before the horse sir?

Anyone who wants to vote why not join up? £10 to say yes or no. Cheap at the price.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 147 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 15, 2012, 11:26pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Skeggy, and why do we need so much cash in the first place? It all smacks of the bankers farrago again. Oh you've copulated things up. Let's give you the opportunity to do it again. No no. We don't want any more controls.

Its not a question of JF's morality. I'm sure there's no financial benefit to him. It's about track record.

It's also about supporters having a real say in how their club is run. This is a backward step. Why not disband the organisation now.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 148 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 15, 2012, 11:30pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Quoted from Trawler


How do you figure that? The member's votes haven't been cast, let alone counted yet. They could still say no and the trust could negotiate further. Cart before the horse sir?

Anyone who wants to vote why not join up? £10 to say yes or no. Cheap at the price.


Just going on past experience Trawler. This is the third time something like this would have happened. I would love it if 1000 new people joined up and voted no. I can't see it happening though. No one outside the Trust seems to get it and the majority in the Trust seem to want to roll over each time.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 149 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 15, 2012, 11:32pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Anyway, right now I feel like saying "sod it". It was a nice idea but ultimately doomed.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 150 - 309
SkegFan
February 15, 2012, 11:42pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 114
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 86.91%
Rep Score: +5 / 0
Skeggy, and why do we need so much cash in the first place? It all smacks of the bankers farrago again. Oh you've copulated things up. Let's give you the opportunity to do it again. No no. We don't want any more controls.

Its not a question of JF's morality. I'm sure there's no financial benefit to him. It's about track record.

It's also about supporters having a real say in how their club is run. This is a backward step. Why not disband the organisation now.


Fella I am a life member of the Trust. But I am not naive to think that a community run club will ever be able to run our club financially. It can't and never will be able to.

John Fenty's track record is currently improving if you are considering football matters. Infact you would have to say that JF is the form man as far as running a football club is concerned.

Financially he has been top class too. His dealing with Ryan Bennett and Peterborough was a master stroke, not this season, but when he sold Bennett with such a terrific sell on clause.

His historical dealings with HMRC have been first class too.

His only failings have been in managerial choice. But it seems he has now cracked that problem too.

The Trust cannot give GTFC what it needs. Hard cash.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 151 - 309
Chris
February 15, 2012, 11:56pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
There is another viewpoint of course that would argue that the board of GTFC shouldn't be budgeting to lose money which is what has brought us to where we stand right now.

If JF ceased to exist tomorrow, what would become of GTFC? Should we be making our club totally dependant upon one man?

Just thoughts that all supporters of GTFC should have. Does it ensure we stay BSP? Not necessarily, but overspending year on year is a road straight to disaster in time.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 152 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 15, 2012, 11:56pm
Guest User
How does that work skeg. . . 8 years of abject failure as chairman. . . he resigns and we are the highest scoring team in england! Now you tell me thats a good record!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 153 - 309
pontoonlew
February 16, 2012, 12:40am
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
Quoted from SkegFan
Look everybody, this was always going to be the case. The Trust is brassic apart from a paper value. It has no cash to support the club with. Some pleasant ideas but no hard cash.

Nobody else is offering any cash either.

The only person who is prepared to put his money where his mouth is, once again, is John Fenty.

Critic John Fenty all you like, but there isn't another person amongst us that has the wealth, the bottle or the nads to invest huge amounts of cash. Cash that is that you are never likely to ever see again as Football Clubs are bottom less hollows where your money disappears never to be seen again.

I say thank you very much John Fenty for your continued support. I really don't know how you remain so committed and motivated for the club when there are so many people that are happy to hide behind their keyboards whilst knocking you. You are a bloody saint. A remarkable person and you must be the most avid supporter of Grimsby Town out of all of us. We are lucky to have you John. I know that the likes of Kettering, Darlington, Luton, Portsmouth and all of the others would have been delighted to have somebody like you on board, somebody prepared keep throwing in his hard earned cash.

VOTE YES IF YOU ARE TRUST MEMBER. I AM AND I AM VOTING YES


Best post on the thread.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 154 - 309
pontoonlew
February 16, 2012, 12:44am
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,542
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72%
Rep Score: +36 / -15
Approval: +8,721
Gold Stars: 163
Quoted from 1054
How does that work skeg. . . 8 years of abject failure as chairman. . . he resigns and we are the highest scoring team in england! Now you tell me thats a good record!


Please not this again, that is something plucked up from the air to support your stupid obsession with wanting the only person who can see that this club survives, out.

John Fenty is the chairman of this football club in all but title. His decisions are still the backbone of this club and his money still pays the players on the pitch. You don't have one single fact that supports that stupid idea. Unless we had a new chairman who came in and brought in a new manager and a new set-up. Please, you seem like an intelligent person in general even if your views on here are often daft at best. But surely you are not THAT stupid to think because John Fenty changed his office that we started winning?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 155 - 309
STB
February 16, 2012, 1:22am

Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,958
Posts Per Day: 0.70
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Just to lighten the mood a bit, I tried to set fire to one of my farts and got a bit of blowback which singed some scrotal hairs resulting in minor nad discomfort.


Former lover of all things GTFC . . .
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 156 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 2:40am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from STB
Just to lighten the mood a bit, I tried to set fire to one of my farts and got a bit of blowback which singed some scrotal hairs resulting in minor nad discomfort.


I've never been able to pluck up the courage to 'torch one commando style'.  I ran an experiment in my youth which basically involved farting into a crisp packet and then setting fire to it in a 'controlled environment'.  Sadly that fatal fascination that many of us have with the pungency of our own emissions resulted in the 'controlled environment' being at the end of my nose.  Two singed eyebrows and a hand, shrink wrapped in 'walkers finest', later and my fascination in the combustible properties of my farts became a distant but painful memory.  These days I just play 'stick it' with the wife, this involves me farting in bed, forcing her head under the quilt and seeing how long she can stick it.  Much safer.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 157 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 16, 2012, 2:52am
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Quoted from SkegFan


Fella I am a life member of the Trust. But I am not naive to think that a community run club will ever be able to run our club financially. It can't and never will be able to.

John Fenty's track record is currently improving if you are considering football matters. Infact you would have to say that JF is the form man as far as running a football club is concerned.

Financially he has been top class too. His dealing with Ryan Bennett and Peterborough was a master stroke, not this season, but when he sold Bennett with such a terrific sell on clause.

His historical dealings with HMRC have been first class too.

His only failings have been in managerial choice. But it seems he has now cracked that problem too.

The Trust cannot give GTFC what it needs. Hard cash.


You're having a laugh? "you would have to say that JF is the form man as far as running a football club is concerned." Unless by form you mean bad form. The man who has led us to our lowest ebb since we joined the Football Alliance 120odd years ago?

As has been pointed out elsewhere, there was nothing unique about the Bennett deal.And everyone who's got into debt with the tax man would try for staged payments.

And I've seen no evidence that JF's track record is improving. He might have finally appointed some managers who are getting some success on the pitch, but he's had enough throws of the dice so a six was bound to turn up sooner or later.

There's nothing naive about a community run football club. Sure it ain't gonna happen at GY any time soon. But it never will if the people involved in the organisation which is all about community involvement lacks vision and runs scared every time JF says jump. I agree the response from fans generally to the idea of a Trust has been disappointing. But I'm beginning to think the cynics were right all along.

If it's a case of finding a sugar daddy to fund success you may as well follow Man City.

By the way, I too am a life member. It means jackshit in terms of the argument though.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 158 - 309
TWAreaTownSupporter
February 16, 2012, 2:57am
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,515
Posts Per Day: 0.43
Reputation: 82.94%
Rep Score: +26 / -5
Approval: +1
Quoted from pontoonlew


John Fenty is the chairman of this football club in all but title. His decisions are still the backbone of this club and his money still pays the players on the pitch. You don't have one single fact that supports that stupid idea. Unless we had a new chairman who came in and brought in a new manager and a new set-up. Please, you seem like an intelligent person in general even if your views on here are often daft at best. But surely you are not THAT stupid to think because John Fenty changed his office that we started winning?


So basially you are saying him resigning as chairman was merely a gesture. I'm shocked you could say such a thing.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 159 - 309
Quagmire
February 16, 2012, 6:13am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Absolutely gobsmacked at your naievity SkegFan - how you can claim the Bennett deal is a 'masterstroke' by Fenty is beyond me! It's such a common idea to have a sell on clause when selling a young player that it's been a feature of those daft footy manager games for years.

How can anyone trust a man who has effectively blackmailed the Trust into handing over voting rights or we sell our main asset is beyond me - no wonder Mike Parker couldn't work with him.

Personally I'm going to wait and see what the Q&A's look like when they are published by the Trust before voting.

As an aside why can't we continue with the current arrangement ie voting rights to Fenty but not ownership?

Considering that he is only willing to guarantee funding for a 15 month period which will be far more financially secure due to the Bennett money and possible Hearn sale what are the Trust getting out of this deal other than being shafted?

Let's not forget that Fenty '(mis)controls' our yearly deficit - he knows roughly how much our revenue will be yet always errs on the optimistic side and then agrees a wage budget far in excess of what we can afford - he can control our losses to a certain extent by cutting our cloth accordingly.

If he wants control back in the Boardroom he should convert his loans to shares but he won't, ask yourselves why he won't do that!!!

I think the Trust also need to take advice re the conflict of interest point I made earlier - I cannot see how any Fenty family member can vote on this issue - they can effectively influence a decision to grant him 200k worth of shares for free - there's nothing to stop Fenty himself being a Trust member and voting for himself to receive 200k of shares for free, absolute conflict of interest and needs addressing ASAP.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 160 - 309
Harlem mariner
February 16, 2012, 7:08am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 494
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 70.44%
Rep Score: +9 / -5
Fenty and the words master stroke... Comedy genius. The trust is showing its true worth
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 161 - 309
1542
February 16, 2012, 7:31am
Guest User
People need to wake up and smell the coffee! The club has been on the decline since the ITV Digital saga and JF has tried to pick up the pieces since then. He has done everything that the fans wanted, sack managers, oust Board Members and buy players. The managers have chosen players, he has just supported them financially.

One comment, JF resigns and we have the highest scoring team in the league, is utter dross. He is still running the club!

I think what you will all find is that he has actually selected the right managers!

Nobody else will stand by this club like he does.

Back him and we will still have a club!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 162 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 7:38am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
This is my football, it's been seriously abused by me for 10 years and I don't want it anymore.  However, nobody else can play with it unless they pay me back all of the money I originally paid plus all the money I wasted on punctured bladders and nice but useless stickers.  You can buy shares in my football but it's still mine.

FFS will someone call his bluff.  All of the good feelings and optimism built up in the last few months could be ruined by a child in a man's body.  Time you grew up and accepted responsibility for your actions, no one person is bigger than the club and that includes you John Fenty.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 163 - 309
BlackBoots
February 16, 2012, 7:41am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
I have just seen the full details of the ballot letter are on the Trust Website (have they been there all along?)

"13/2/2012
Dear Member
"Most of you will be aware that since the Trust were gifted 500,000 shares, John Fenty has stated on many occasions that he wouldn't be prepared to continue to fund the football club whilst 'control lay outside the boardroom'.

Over recent months the Trust have tried to broker a solution, as we have been told repeatedly that the finances of the club are balanced on a knife edge with cash urgently needed to meet the club’s financial obligations. It had been publicly and privately stated that there was a real risk of funds running out during the early part of February.

Recently the team on the pitch have been magnificent; scoring goals for fun and with a young side that will improve and potentially return us to the Football League. The Trust considers it vital to try and keep this squad together.

The statements put out by the club suggested that without the injection of cash, there was a very real likelihood that assets would need to be sold in order to meet the budget shortfall, impacting not only the clubs ability to retain existing players, but could also hinder the process of resigning them as contracts expire.

With no new investor on the horizon and with the Trust lacking the financial means to meaningfully assist, the only person who is likely to assist the club is John Fenty.

The Trust Board after taking legal advice what could be done instigated meetings to try and find a solution. The Trust Board felt that in order to ensure the current squad were retained then urgent action needed to be taken to try and ensure interest in our players could be rebuffed. A decision was taken to transfer the voting rights of 200,000 shares to the chairman of any AGM/EGM of the football club and this decision meant John Fenty was more relaxed as to his own position. Prior to this he had expressed his vulnerability to the shareholding outside of the boardroom.

On the Saturday prior to the close of the transfer window the voting rights to a portion of the trust share
holding was released after a majority vote from the Trust Board. This enabled enquiries for our players to be turned aside and assisted in the signing of a new player.

The events of deadline day have changed the ongoing requirements somewhat but the Trust board still feels that with the actual timing of receipt of the money from the sell on of Ryan Bennett being uncertain there is still a need for funding to assist cashflow. Although this has been a huge boost to the financial side of GTFC, the trust still believes that by putting Mr Fenty in a position where he would be more comfortable in assisting with funding requirements is for the benefit of the stability, and increases the clubs chances of a return to the Football league.

After considering many options and making proposals to the football club board that were rejected, the Trust Board are now recommending, following a majority vote, the following proposal.

That the Trust Transfer's 200,000 shares in GTFC to John Fenty for a non cash consideration
In return, Mr Fenty purchases a further 200,000 of new shares in the club. This represents 'new money'
Mr Fenty agrees to cover any losses for the current season and for the year ending May 2013.
The Trust agrees not to accept any further shares from Mr Mike Parker.
The football club involves the Trust in the on-going budget setting.
The football club agrees to work hand in hand with The Trust to promote the trust activities in a positive manner

This will give John Fenty approx. 47% of the issued share capital, Mike Parker approx. 24% and the Mariners Trust approx.13%.The advice.  We have been assured that this change does not have any implications for the takeover panel.

The Trust board believes that this still leaves us with a significant shareholding and ensures an ongoing positive and inclusive relationship with the club, which ultimately will benefit members, supporters, the community and the football club alike. For too many years now boardroom issues have dominated the scene at the football club and we believe this is a chance to put that firmly in the past and get on with a positive agenda.

The alternative would appear to be that there is no person or body with overall control and no individual or
group willing, or able, to assist in financing day to day requirements.

The Trust fully appreciates that this is difficult issue, as it has been for the Board, but the majority of the board are in favour of this proposal to give the club stability at a time when we appear to have a much greater degree of optimism for the long term success of GTFC. It also, we believe, gives the Trust the opportunity to develop its idea’s and plans without the worry of ownership/ongoing funding. Most importantly we believe it is in the best interest of the Football club.

Please complete the simple voting below and return it using the stamped addressed envelope to arrive no later than 5th March. If you have any questions please e mail enquiries @marinerstrust.co.uk
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 164 - 309
Quagmire
February 16, 2012, 7:42am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from LeightonMariner
This is my football, it's been seriously abused by me for 10 years and I don't want it anymore.  However, nobody else can play with it unless they pay me back all of the money I originally paid plus all the money I wasted on punctured bladders and nice but useless stickers.  You can buy shares in my football but it's still mine.

FFS will someone call his bluff.  All of the good feelings and optimism built up in the last few months could be ruined by a child in a man's body.  Time you grew up and accepted responsibility for your actions, no one person is bigger than the club and that includes you John Fenty.


Best post on this thread.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 165 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 8:00am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
The one thing Fenty won't do is write off his loans, why do you think Mike Parker walked away?  Nobody in the world is going to pay c£3m more for the club than it's worth.  Ask yourself a couple of questions, has Fenty ever said he'd do the above?  Will he ever do the above?

He's been using the same old tired lines for years, now he wants the trust to roll over and have their tummy tickled.  Why don't the trust just tell him that until he writes off the loans nothing moves?  I notice that he wasn't publicly saying that assets would be sold, that was only mentioned to the puppets.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 166 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 16, 2012, 8:02am
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
The letter that has been sent to members is now available to view on the Trust website (www.marinerstrust.co.uk).  Remember, only members can actually vote on the proposal - I'm assuming that returned ballot papers will be cross checked against the membership database to ensure this.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 167 - 309
Harlem mariner
February 16, 2012, 8:07am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 494
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 70.44%
Rep Score: +9 / -5
Quoted from LeightonMariner
The one thing Fenty won't do is write off his loans, why do you think Mike Parker walked away?  Nobody in the world is going to pay c£3m more for the club than it's worth.  Ask yourself a couple of questions, has Fenty ever said he'd do the above?  Will he ever do the above?

He's been using the same old tired lines for years, now he wants the trust to roll over and have their tummy tickled.  Why don't the trust just tell him that until he writes off the loans nothing moves?  I notice that he wasn't publicly saying that assets would be sold, that was only mentioned to the puppets.


Where all in it together arent we? Well not really
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 168 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 9:04am
Guest User
Fenty has held the trust board to ransom and they have buckled at the slightest bit of pressure.  Fenty has all the power and the trust were set ti get the blame shiuld hearn be sold.

I wonder if the trust took any legal advice about their position? I wonder if the trust have a position.

The club undet fenty's dictatorship havr dropped 60+ places thru the pyramid. . . A return to this and we will rot down here forever more mark my words!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 169 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 16, 2012, 9:33am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
Quoted from 1054

The club undet fenty's dictatorship havr dropped 60+ places thru the pyramid. . . A return to this and we will rot down here forever more mark my words!


whats the answer then? or should i say who is/are the answer?

cos, last time i checked, only smarties have the answer! pmsl


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 170 - 309
biggles9999
February 16, 2012, 9:36am
Main Stander
Posts: 2,809
Posts Per Day: 0.51
Reputation: 69.34%
Rep Score: +24 / -12
Approval: +367
Quoted from STB
Just to lighten the mood a bit, I tried to set fire to one of my farts and got a bit of blowback which singed some scrotal hairs resulting in minor nad discomfort.


I'll bet it was nothing compared to this.....

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 171 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 16, 2012, 9:36am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
One thing I'm unsure about is that Mr Fenty wants the 200,000 shares and in return he will cover losses until the end of May 2013. However, during that period money will be coming in from the Ryan Bennett sale. It also seems distinctly possible that Liam Hearn will be sold in the Summer and we'll receive money for that. What if we also get to Wembley twice? Could we potentially trade profitably during this period?

In that case is Mr Fenty effectively getting the shares for nothing?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 172 - 309
lobsterpot
February 16, 2012, 9:47am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 878
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 86.79%
Rep Score: +18 / -2
Location: The Ponny
Approval: +742
Gold Stars: 15
Anyone fancy a pint?


" YOU ALWAYS SCORE FROM OUR CORNERS, SCORE FROM OUR CORNERS........"

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 173 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 9:50am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from 1054
Fenty has held the trust board to ransom and they have buckled at the slightest bit of pressure.  Fenty has all the power and the trust were set ti get the blame shiuld hearn be sold.

I wonder if the trust took any legal advice about their position? I wonder if the trust have a position.

The club undet fenty's dictatorship havr dropped 60+ places thru the pyramid. . . A return to this and we will rot down here forever more mark my words!


There's reasonable argument and then there's speculative bo11ocks, guess where I think yours sits?  Despite my thoughts on JF's ability to run a football club he has risked his money so some credit is due.  However up until around mid-november there wasn't any obvious improvement and he was making it clear that enough was enough.  Then we start to show a bit of promise and he changes tac to not wanting to support further while.control lay outside the boardroom.  Let's just pause for a moment and consider who must have played a part in sanctioning a share purchase transaction that started that particular chain of events?

Move on now to the trusts decision to pass on voting rights for a number of shares in exchange for JF not selling the family heirlooms.  Good decision by the Trust board IMO, a decision that can be reversed if necessary.  Now comes a more important decision, whether to take the opportunity to have a real say in the club or to simply posture.

How about this, the Trust sells enough shares to JF for £200k so that he has a controlling interest while not exposing himself to having to offer on all of the other shares.  In exchange the Trust receive a place on the board and immediately loan the £200k to the club and insist that this becomes the minimum 'investment' for existing directors.  If the other two don't like it then give them their loans back and send them away, I really don't see what they offer.

The club has a serious asset in Liam Hearn that can fund the medium term future, along with realistic budgeting of the club.  JF shouldn't need to keep dipping into his pockets.  The club simply has to become self sufficient and if they choose to use their influence now, the Trust can play a vital role in facilitating that.

That is all.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 174 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 9:59am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from LeightonMariner


There's reasonable argument and then there's speculative bo11ocks, guess where I think yours sits?  Despite my thoughts on JF's ability to run a football club he has risked his money so some credit is due.  However up until around mid-november there wasn't any obvious improvement and he was making it clear that enough was enough.  Then we start to show a bit of promise and he changes tac to not wanting to support further while.control lay outside the boardroom.  Let's just pause for a moment and consider who must have played a part in sanctioning a share purchase transaction that started that particular chain of events?

Move on now to the trusts decision to pass on voting rights for a number of shares in exchange for JF not selling the family heirlooms.  Good decision by the Trust board IMO, a decision that can be reversed if necessary.  Now comes a more important decision, whether to take the opportunity to have a real say in the club or to simply posture.

How about this, the Trust sells enough shares to JF for £200k so that he has a controlling interest while not exposing himself to having to offer on all of the other shares.  In exchange the Trust receive a place on the board and immediately loan the £200k to the club and insist that this becomes the minimum 'investment' for existing directors.  If the other two don't like it then give them their loans back and send them away, I really don't see what they offer.

The club has a serious asset in Liam Hearn that can fund the medium term future, along with realistic budgeting of the club.  JF shouldn't need to keep dipping into his pockets.  The club simply has to become self sufficient and if they choose to use their influence now, the Trust can play a vital role in facilitating that.

That is all.


http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk.....30-detail/story.html

I'd urge all GTFC supporters to join the Trust and give us the voice we all crave. JF's views on the trust's shares are laid bare in the article linked above.

The current Trust board needs strengthening, with skills sets from all walks of life needed to compliment those already on the board. There are plenty of posters on here who display all the intellectual capacity to ensure the Trust is run with level heads, realism and enthusiasm, and while we already have this on the board now, we'd very much like more of it. We're not 'YES' men, we want what is best for the club, but in an ideal world we'd have 4,000 members not 400. You can't ignore a number that large.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 175 - 309
bax
February 16, 2012, 10:02am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 978
Posts Per Day: 0.20
Reputation: 86.94%
Rep Score: +25 / -3
Approval: +2,645
Gold Stars: 30
Why does this need to be done now? At a time when the fans are united and the club is doing great on the pitch, Fenty splits everyone AGAIN. We should be talking about Southport and York not yet ANOTHER boardroom squabble. As soon as we lose the fans will  jump on Fenty as the man who caused the distraction. It's the wrong time to discuss this. He says in the Telegraph today we have enough money to last until the end of next season - so wait until the end of this one to sort out the share issue. We could be in League 2 with extra TV revenue, higher gates etc

I'll be voting no simply because it's the wrong proposal at the wrong time.

I've ranted away in a bit more length at http://tooggodtogodown.wordpress.com if anyone fancies a read.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 176 - 309
Quagmire
February 16, 2012, 10:42am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
I agree with Bax - this proposal needs to be put to one side until the end of the season when it will be clear what additional funding may be required to get us through to May 2013 - we could for once not require additional funding and there wouldn't be any need for Fenty to have the control he seems to crave.

Why can't we continue with the current arrangement?

Plus it gives more time for questions and answers, counter proposals etc not forgetting other potential issues such as conflict of interest amongst Trust members related to Fenty voting on whether he gets 200k of shares for free.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 177 - 309
Marinerz93
February 16, 2012, 10:53am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
1)  That the Trust Transfer's 200,000 shares in GTFC to John Fenty for a non cash consideration, In return, Mr Fenty purchases a further 200,000 of new shares in the club. This represents 'new money'

2)  Mr Fenty agrees to cover any losses for the current season and for the year ending May 2013.
3)  The Trust agrees not to accept any further shares from Mr Mike Parker.
4)  The football club involves the Trust in the on-going budget setting.
5)  The football club agrees to work hand in hand with The Trust to promote the trust activities in a positive manner


1)  I'm split with the pro's and cons to this.  It can be read either as an incentive or ultimatum depending were it came from.  Why not include an executive position on the board.

2)  So he'll honour the budget set by the board.

3)  Why, this stinks on many levels.  This leads me to believe that there was a falling out and if MP tried to oust JF it will cost MP more than it did for JF to bring to were we are now with JF's share holding and benign debt.

4)  This is were the trust must stop JF saddling the club with more loans.

5)  This is a gimmie and a no brainer.

This deal is too one sided, a plan to pay back JF and stop him increasing the benign debt should have been included.  He could have all the £500K shares if he wiped £1 million off the benign debt.  We have the gates for a top 3 side in this league without running up debt.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 178 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 10:53am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from Quagmire
I agree with Bax - this proposal needs to be put to one side until the end of the season when it will be clear what additional funding may be required to get us through to May 2013 - we could for once not require additional funding and there wouldn't be any need for Fenty to have the control he seems to crave.

Why can't we continue with the current arrangement?

Plus it gives more time for questions and answers, counter proposals etc not forgetting other potential issues such as conflict of interest amongst Trust members related to Fenty voting on whether he gets 200k of shares for free.


Thirded, assuming that the sell on windfall will see us through to the end of the season and assuming that it's used to service operating costs and football creditors.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 179 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 10:55am
Guest User
Quoted from LeightonMariner


There's reasonable argument and then there's speculative bo11ocks, guess where I think yours sits?  Despite my thoughts on JF's ability to run a football club he has risked his money so some credit is due.  However up until around mid-november there wasn't any obvious improvement and he was making it clear that enough was enough.  Then we start to show a bit of promise and he changes tac to not wanting to support further while.control lay outside the boardroom.  Let's just pause for a moment and consider who must have played a part in sanctioning a share purchase transaction that started that particular chain of events?

Move on now to the trusts decision to pass on voting rights for a number of shares in exchange for JF not selling the family heirlooms.  Good decision by the Trust board IMO, a decision that can be reversed if necessary.  Now comes a more important decision, whether to take the opportunity to have a real say in the club or to simply posture.

How about this, the Trust sells enough shares to JF for £200k so that he has a controlling interest while not exposing himself to having to offer on all of the other shares.  In exchange the Trust receive a place on the board and immediately loan the £200k to the club and insist that this becomes the minimum 'investment' for existing directors.  If the other two don't like it then give them their loans back and send them away, I really don't see what they offer.

The club has a serious asset in Liam Hearn that can fund the medium term future, along with realistic budgeting of the club.  JF shouldn't need to keep dipping into his pockets.  The club simply has to become self sufficient and if they choose to use their influence now, the Trust can play a vital role in facilitating that.

That is all.


You can dismiss my speculation as bo11ocks if you wish, it is based on my experience of the way that Fenty has run the club (into the ground) over the last few years.  I think you dismiuss it because it doesn't fit in with your view of the world.

While we are talking about speculation. . . . .you say that the trust can play a major role in facilitating self-sufficiency. . . . but you don't say how this may be achieved.  What do you base this on?  Is it speculative bo11ocks?  You talk about ousting board members. . . . how is this going to happen?  Is it speculative bo11ocks?

ALL football chairman dip into their pockets, that is the nature of the position, no one has put a gun to his head and told him to run the club, he clearly wanted to do it. . . . and if he wanted to do it in a half-ar$ed way then that is his responsibility.  The way that you and others paint Fenty to be some kind of benevolent sugar daddy rather than a moderately successful businessman who fancied fulfilling his (and many people's) dream of owning a football club is part of his skill as a businessman.

Fenty will milk the good will of the supporters trust for all it is worth, all of the finanacial side of things are known to him alone, he does the deals etc and the first thing he does is holds the trust to ransom threatening to sell our best valued player when clearly the consensus would be that selling hearn would be foolish in the short term both in footballing terms and business terms.  This sets one hell of a precident!

Basically, Fenty gets to play the game of being a football chairman, enjoying all of the privelages, status, kudos that this gives him, yet the supporters end up footing more of the bill!

Fenty for all of his faults (and as a football chairman they are clearly many) is one sharp operator when it comes to business.  My specualtion that Town will slump when he gets full control of the club again is based on our previous performance when he has been chairman.  I will accept it is "bo11ocks" if it turns out to be. . . . Unfortunately, I think it will turn out exactly as predicted.

Please re-post this if after 3 months of Fenty returning as chairman we have not slumped. . . . mark my words. . . . That is all!

Logged
E-mail
Reply: 180 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 11:00am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from 1054


You can dismiss my speculation as bo11ocks if you wish, it is based on my experience of the way that Fenty has run the club (into the ground) over the last few years.  I think you dismiuss it because it doesn't fit in with your view of the world.

While we are talking about speculation. . . . .you say that the trust can play a major role in facilitating self-sufficiency. . . . but you don't say how this may be achieved.  What do you base this on?  Is it speculative bo11ocks?  You talk about ousting board members. . . . how is this going to happen?  Is it speculative bo11ocks?

ALL football chairman dip into their pockets, that is the nature of the position, no one has put a gun to his head and told him to run the club, he clearly wanted to do it. . . . and if he wanted to do it in a half-ar$ed way then that is his responsibility.  The way that you and others paint Fenty to be some kind of benevolent sugar daddy rather than a moderately successful businessman who fancied fulfilling his (and many people's) dream of owning a football club is part of his skill as a businessman.

Fenty will milk the good will of the supporters trust for all it is worth, all of the finanacial side of things are known to him alone, he does the deals etc and the first thing he does is holds the trust to ransom threatening to sell our best valued player when clearly the consensus would be that selling hearn would be foolish in the short term both in footballing terms and business terms.  This sets one hell of a precident!

Basically, Fenty gets to play the game of being a football chairman, enjoying all of the privelages, status, kudos that this gives him, yet the supporters end up footing more of the bill!

Fenty for all of his faults (and as a football chairman they are clearly many) is one sharp operator when it comes to business.  My specualtion that Town will slump when he gets full control of the club again is based on our previous performance when he has been chairman.  I will accept it is "bo11ocks" if it turns out to be. . . . Unfortunately, I think it will turn out exactly as predicted.

Please re-post this if after 3 months of Fenty returning as chairman we have not slumped. . . . mark my words. . . . That is all!



Oops, clumsy me.  Looks like I trampled all over somebodys ego.  My apologies for that, hope I haven't spoilt your day.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 181 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 11:04am
Guest User
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Oops, clumsy me.  Looks like I trampled all over somebodys ego.  My apologies for that, hope I haven't spoilt your day.


Not really, I think I have a little bit more Ego-strength than you give me credit for.  I have robustly challenged your post and as far as I can see you have no reply.  If you wish to engage in the discussion (and this is a discussion forum after all) please feel free.  Please don't be concerned about any impact you feel you may have on my mental state, you are irrelevant to me (as I am sure you are to many people)
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 182 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 11:06am
Guest User
. . . . and for a 'man' who lists his second favourite hobby as masturbating, i would be more concernd for your fragile Ego than mine. . . . Now get your Super-ego to get hold of your Id and leave your Ego alone.

need a tissue?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 183 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 11:07am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from 1054


Not really, I think I have a little bit more Ego-strength than you give me credit for.  I have robustly challenged your post and as far as I can see you have no reply.  If you wish to engage in the discussion (and this is a discussion forum after all) please feel free.  Please don't be concerned about any impact you feel you may have on my mental state, you are irrelevant to me (as I am sure you are to many people)


*laughter*  Have a word with yourself......seriously.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 184 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 11:13am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from 1054
. . . . and for a 'man' who lists his second favourite hobby as masturbating, i would be more concernd for your fragile Ego than mine. . . . Now get your Super-ego to get hold of your Id and leave your Ego alone.

need a tissue?


Actually it's my third favourite hobby.  Your anger should lead you to working out my second favourite.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 185 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 11:14am
Guest User
Another failure to respond to the point I have made. . . . . Two words. . . . YOUR SIGNATURE
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 186 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 11:17am
Guest User
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Actually it's my third favourite hobby.  Your anger should lead you to working out my second favourite.


I can categorically state that I am not feeling anger, am sat at my desk at work, on a break, chatting to my colleagues and tapping soem stuff out on the Fishy (with someone incapable of stringing an argument together)  I have no interest in what your other hobby is, like I said, you are irrelevant to me (and many others, I  would wildly speculate!!!!!!!!!!!)
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 187 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 11:35am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from 1054


I can categorically state that I am not feeling anger, am sat at my desk at work, on a break, chatting to my colleagues and tapping soem stuff out on the Fishy (with someone incapable of stringing an argument together)  I have no interest in what your other hobby is, like I said, you are irrelevant to me (and many others, I  would wildly speculate!!!!!!!!!!!)


Sorry about the delayed response, I had to go and sanitize 'grill parking 1'.
Toilets are next.

Anyway, beware the voices "kill LeightonMariner".


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 188 - 309
Marinerz93
February 16, 2012, 11:35am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from 1054


I can categorically state that I am not feeling anger, am sat at my desk at work, on a break, chatting to my colleagues and tapping soem stuff out on the Fishy (with someone incapable of stringing an argument together)  I have no interest in what your other hobby is, like I said, you are irrelevant to me (and many others, I  would wildly speculate!!!!!!!!!!!)


I think you failed to read his post (173) about JF, pretty much spot on.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 189 - 309
barralad
February 16, 2012, 11:36am
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,791
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,193
Gold Stars: 121
As someone who believes in openness at all times I have no difficulty in sharing my entirely personal views on why I support the strategy that has seen the current stand point negotiated with Mr Fenty accepted by a majority of Trust board members to be put to a vote of the members.

If I'm entirely honest I've never been really enthused by the idea of one day GTFC being run by the Mariners Trust. It has always had an element of "Pie in the Sky" for me and evidence suggests that it has only ever really worked when there has due to circumstances, been no other alternative.

I have however been motivated by the belief that a strong Trust can help to ensure that the club cements it's place in the community it lives and works within. Far more important to me has been a desire to see improvements in the match day experience for ALL fans.

The achievement of such aims requires any Trust to have a good working relationship with those who run a football club.

A lot has been said in this thread about bluffing by the club's owners around the funding issue. I believed at the time that I was asked to make my decision that I couldn't call any bluff in the absence of the wherewithall to step into the funding "shoes" should the worst case scenario come to fruition. Others have recently put money into GTFC and walked away and I couldn't reconcile myself to the probability that it couldn't happen again. Hindsight is a marvellous gift but at the time of my decision there was no "Bennett Legacy" only the very real possibility that our biggest asset could be sold to ensure the club continued to function. Much has been said about how well things are going on the pitch but this cannot IMO be divorced from the fact that the money to support the day to day running of the club was close to drying up. I suspect there aren't too many out there who would have been happy to see our current squad weakened.

I cannot and will not speak for the other board members but family decisions aside the decision to back the recommendation that members have before them was the hardest decision I've made for a long time.

Personally I hope that the issue resolves itself and that the Trust can get on with ensuring that the still sizeable share holding we possess can be used to further the aims of our mission statement.


The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 190 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 11:46am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from barralad
As someone who believes in openness at all times I have no difficulty in sharing my entirely personal views on why I support the strategy that has seen the current stand point negotiated with Mr Fenty accepted by a majority of Trust board members to be put to a vote of the members.

If I'm entirely honest I've never been really enthused by the idea of one day GTFC being run by the Mariners Trust. It has always had an element of "Pie in the Sky" for me and evidence suggests that it has only ever really worked when there has due to circumstances, been no other alternative.

I have however been motivated by the belief that a strong Trust can help to ensure that the club cements it's place in the community it lives and works within. Far more important to me has been a desire to see improvements in the match day experience for ALL fans.

The achievement of such aims requires any Trust to have a good working relationship with those who run a football club.

A lot has been said in this thread about bluffing by the club's owners around the funding issue. I believed at the time that I was asked to make my decision that I couldn't call any bluff in the absence of the wherewithall to step into the funding "shoes" should the worst case scenario come to fruition. Others have recently put money into GTFC and walked away and I couldn't reconcile myself to the probability that it couldn't happen again. Hindsight is a marvellous gift but at the time of my decision there was no "Bennett Legacy" only the very real possibility that our biggest asset could be sold to ensure the club continued to function. Much has been said about how well things are going on the pitch but this cannot IMO be divorced from the fact that the money to support the day to day running of the club was close to drying up. I suspect there aren't too many out there who would have been happy to see our current squad weakened.

I cannot and will not speak for the other board members but family decisions aside the decision to back the recommendation that members have before them was the hardest decision I've made for a long time.

Personally I hope that the issue resolves itself and that the Trust can get on with ensuring that the still sizeable share holding we possess can be used to further the aims of our mission statement.


That shareholding is still 27% until the membership votes otherwise

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 191 - 309
Marinerz93
February 16, 2012, 11:46am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from barralad

Personally I hope that the issue resolves itself and that the Trust can get on with ensuring that the still sizeable share holding we possess can be used to further the aims of our mission statement.


I feel for the situation you were faced with and what you will go through in this process.  

There are a few niggling problems with this, the fact the trust has agreed not to accept any more shares from MP and also that the shares the trust has left are not free from being pillaged again should JF take his fancy at free shares.

JF said he wouldn't be buying any more shares yet here he is buying more shares.  He could have done what I said some time ago and convert benign debt into shares to gain control.  The timing of this deal and all it entails stinks of a one sided deal with an ultimatum.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 192 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 11:47am
Guest User
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Sorry about the delayed response, I had to go and sanitize 'grill parking 1'.
Toilets are next.

Anyway, beware the voices "kill LeightonMariner".


Not hearing them mate, my auditory hallucinations are mood and knowledge congruent. . . . you are irrelevant!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 193 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 11:47am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from barralad
As someone who believes in openness at all times I have no difficulty in sharing my entirely personal views on why I support the strategy that has seen the current stand point negotiated with Mr Fenty accepted by a majority of Trust board members to be put to a vote of the members.

If I'm entirely honest I've never been really enthused by the idea of one day GTFC being run by the Mariners Trust. It has always had an element of "Pie in the Sky" for me and evidence suggests that it has only ever really worked when there has due to circumstances, been no other alternative.

I have however been motivated by the belief that a strong Trust can help to ensure that the club cements it's place in the community it lives and works within. Far more important to me has been a desire to see improvements in the match day experience for ALL fans.

The achievement of such aims requires any Trust to have a good working relationship with those who run a football club.

A lot has been said in this thread about bluffing by the club's owners around the funding issue. I believed at the time that I was asked to make my decision that I couldn't call any bluff in the absence of the wherewithall to step into the funding "shoes" should the worst case scenario come to fruition. Others have recently put money into GTFC and walked away and I couldn't reconcile myself to the probability that it couldn't happen again. Hindsight is a marvellous gift but at the time of my decision there was no "Bennett Legacy" only the very real possibility that our biggest asset could be sold to ensure the club continued to function. Much has been said about how well things are going on the pitch but this cannot IMO be divorced from the fact that the money to support the day to day running of the club was close to drying up. I suspect there aren't too many out there who would have been happy to see our current squad weakened.

I cannot and will not speak for the other board members but family decisions aside the decision to back the recommendation that members have before them was the hardest decision I've made for a long time.

Personally I hope that the issue resolves itself and that the Trust can get on with ensuring that the still sizeable share holding we possess can be used to further the aims of our mission statement.


An excellent post, different to my admittedly more militant views but logical and very well reasoned.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 194 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 11:49am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from LeightonMariner


An excellent post, different to my admittedly more militant views but logical and very well reasoned.


Someone more militant than Barralad? Stone the crows!

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 195 - 309
arryarryarry
February 16, 2012, 11:56am
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,193
Posts Per Day: 1.71
Reputation: 52.76%
Rep Score: +26 / -28
Approval: +9,945
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from pontoonlew


I've had a season ticket since 98 and watched my first game in 97, not bad for a 20 year old! So basically my entire time supporting Town has been under Fenty, I do understand that mistakes have been made but running this club in particular must feel like an impossible task at times. There is a pressure from the fans who in fairness think we should be higher. We've had some rotten luck in and amongst bad decisions and at times Fenty should be given the benefit of the doubt. The Woods decision was his chance to save us from relegation and the wrong choice was made, let us not forget however that a lot of know all's on here told us Slades football was 'not easy on the eye' and ignored his impressive history to have kittens at the thought of him dragging us out the League 2 relegation zone. It's easy for fans to come on here and say what he's done wrong but it's the same fans who were happy to have Newell and Woods and in return not have Slade and wanted to sack the current two. Fenty is in a lose lose situation at times and I think on this one he's taking the bull by the horns by saying this IS the best way for the club.



I for one was never happy with the decision to appoint Woods and said so on may an occasion and also complained when he was never sacked despite that dismal run of games without a win.

I know lots of clubs are in financial difficulties but I would ask you how many clubs have sunk from what was effectively the Championship to non league in 10 years.

I would also ask you how is it that clubs such as Macclesfield, Accrington, Barnet, Dagenham & Redbridge, much smaller clubs than ours are still Football League Clubs.

For me it just shows that GTFC has been badly run for the past 10 years or more and none more so than the decision to appoint someone who had only managed kids to save our Football League status and even then still giving him the job despite his appalling record as caretaker manager.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 196 - 309
barralad
February 16, 2012, 11:56am
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,791
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,193
Gold Stars: 121
Quoted from Chris


That shareholding is still 27% until the membership votes otherwise



Indeed it is. I apologise unreservedly. I was trying not to pre judge. Seems I've failed monumentally...


The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 197 - 309
Dan
February 16, 2012, 12:02pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Quoted from Marinerz93

There are a few niggling problems with this, the fact the trust has agreed not to accept any more shares from MP and also that the shares the trust has left are not free from being pillaged again should JF take his fancy at free shares.


I see it at these issues are interlinked aren't they? If the trust were to accept more shares from MP, his entire shareholding say, then we are back in a similar position where the majority of the shareholding lays away from the major benefactor. I don't expect the trust to give away any more shares, but selling them for a cash injection is hardly out of the question.


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 198 - 309
Marinerz93
February 16, 2012, 12:14pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Dan


I see it at these issues are interlinked aren't they? If the trust were to accept more shares from MP, his entire shareholding say, then we are back in a similar position where the majority of the shareholding lays away from the major benefactor. I don't expect the trust to give away any more shares, but selling them for a cash injection is hardly out of the question.


I see your point about the whole of MP shares being passed on but I doubt the trust would ever take the lot considering how the last lot of shares given went down.

If the trust are doing well in supporting the club and they needed to sell shares to raise money they could sell some that they already own to 'others'.  MP see's this and thinks I'll give them x amount that they sold from my shares so they are still in the same position but with money raised.  This block stops that and it also slams the door in MP's face, it can be seen as a bit of an insult to someone who put over £1 million pound in to GTFC in one year.  


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 199 - 309
siy2k5
February 16, 2012, 12:14pm
Bite me!
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,651
Posts Per Day: 0.87
Reputation: 84.65%
Rep Score: +36 / -6
Location: Grimsby
Approval: -2
This whole thing just doesn't sit right with me. The one sentance that jumped out when reading the trusts statement was that they agree to accept no further shares from MP.

I can't help thinking that JF is using the trust as a tool to get one over on MP.


Quoted from marinerian
If Newport win it b4 heir vist to BP, I will sit in The Osmond dressed as Little Bo-Peep for the match against them!  

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 200 - 309
pier39
February 16, 2012, 12:16pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 765
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 60.18%
Rep Score: +0 / -3
Location: ross house
Approval: +1
Quoted from siy2k5
This whole thing just doesn't sit right with me. The one sentance that jumped out when reading the trusts statement was that they agree to accept no further shares from MP.

I can't help thinking that JF is using the trust as a tool to get one over on MP.


no sh!t sherlock
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 201 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 12:29pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from siy2k5
This whole thing just doesn't sit right with me. The one sentance that jumped out when reading the trusts statement was that they agree to accept no further shares from MP.

I can't help thinking that JF is using the trust as a tool to get one over on MP.


Or perhaps he's ensuring that the balance of power can't sit outside the boardroom.  Then again he's 'open' to the idea of the Trust having a place on the board so it's a needless clause.  Unless of course he isn't open to the idea at all and it's just flannel, I mean, there's a huge difference between being open to and actually letting it happen!

Call his bluff I say, let's see what his true agenda is.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 202 - 309
forza ivano
February 16, 2012, 12:30pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
i speak as a life member and someone who had a very minor role in setting up the trust in the first place.
firstly it's a relief to find so many different and generally well balanced,well argued points of view.
secondly i'd urge those sniping from the sidelines to pay up their tenner and then snipe and vote on something that you're obviously concerned about
thirdly i feel a little uncomfortable that this is the first we have heard of the share movements over 2 weeks after the events.

finally i have to say that despite being pro fenty and pro trust i'm very much in 2 minds about this, and think that someone posted some very good advice i.e. that they would not be voting until they'd read the q & a's from the trust in a couple of weeks time.
my initial view was that i should vote yes and support the trust board and fenty, that the shares were gifted in the first place (you don't miss what you haven't got etc) and that fenty back on board and helping out with funding wasn't a bad deal.in other words the trust hed got the club an extra £200k for doing very little!
but the more i've thought the more i'm thinking of voting no. seems to me like jf has been negotiating with the trust for some while.it also seems clear to me that the bennett transfer was not a bolt from the blue (the story about fry offering jf a pay off predated it by several weeks) and that jf probably guessed ,if not knew, that summat was in the offing either in jan or the summer. then suddenly 2 days before deadline day he apparently tells the trust that 'we've got to sort this out NOW or Hearn gets sold on deadline day'.bet he didn't tell the trust board about the possiblilty of bennett being sold......
be also interested to know why we can't maintain the staus quo until at least the summer, as someone suggested. Why couldn't we give up the voting rights, but retain the shares on a rolling 6 month basis? jf gets the security he needs but knows that he has to retain the 'trust of the trust' to renew that agreement every 6 months.
if that's not possible then voting no and going back to the negotiating table gives jf summat to think about, and now the pressure is off somewhat, the trust board may well be able to get a better settlement. if we are to give up voting rights and shares then a place on the board should be a minimum. after all i find it difficult to believe that if chapman and elsom are suitable board members the same opportunity should not be given to the trust
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 203 - 309
marinerjase
February 16, 2012, 12:36pm
Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,117
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 93.06%
Rep Score: +31 / -1
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +2,608
Gold Stars: 146
Quoted from forza ivano
i speak as a life member and someone who had a very minor role in setting up the trust in the first place.
firstly it's a relief to find so many different and generally well balanced,well argued points of view.
secondly i'd urge those sniping from the sidelines to pay up their tenner and then snipe and vote on something that you're obviously concerned about
thirdly i feel a little uncomfortable that this is the first we have heard of the share movements over 2 weeks after the events.

finally i have to say that despite being pro fenty and pro trust i'm very much in 2 minds about this, and think that someone posted some very good advice i.e. that they would not be voting until they'd read the q & a's from the trust in a couple of weeks time.
my initial view was that i should vote yes and support the trust board and fenty, that the shares were gifted in the first place (you don't miss what you haven't got etc) and that fenty back on board and helping out with funding wasn't a bad deal.in other words the trust hed got the club an extra £200k for doing very little!
but the more i've thought the more i'm thinking of voting no. seems to me like jf has been negotiating with the trust for some while.it also seems clear to me that the bennett transfer was not a bolt from the blue (the story about fry offering jf a pay off predated it by several weeks) and that jf probably guessed ,if not knew, that summat was in the offing either in jan or the summer. then suddenly 2 days before deadline day he apparently tells the trust that 'we've got to sort this out NOW or Hearn gets sold on deadline day'.bet he didn't tell the trust board about the possiblilty of bennett being sold......
be also interested to know why we can't maintain the staus quo until at least the summer, as someone suggested. Why couldn't we give up the voting rights, but retain the shares on a rolling 6 month basis? jf gets the security he needs but knows that he has to retain the 'trust of the trust' to renew that agreement every 6 months.
if that's not possible then voting no and going back to the negotiating table gives jf summat to think about, and now the pressure is off somewhat, the trust board may well be able to get a better settlement. if we are to give up voting rights and shares then a place on the board should be a minimum. after all i find it difficult to believe that if chapman and elsom are suitable board members the same opportunity should not be given to the trust



Excellent post.



‘I just f*cking threw myself at it’

Mani D 23 May 2022
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 204 - 309
siy2k5
February 16, 2012, 12:48pm
Bite me!
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,651
Posts Per Day: 0.87
Reputation: 84.65%
Rep Score: +36 / -6
Location: Grimsby
Approval: -2
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Or perhaps he's ensuring that the balance of power can't sit outside the boardroom.  Then again he's 'open' to the idea of the Trust having a place on the board so it's a needless clause.  Unless of course he isn't open to the idea at all and it's just flannel, I mean, there's a huge difference between being open to and actually letting it happen!

Call his bluff I say, let's see what his true agenda is.


You could be right. However the more i think about it, the more I smell a rat.


Quoted from marinerian
If Newport win it b4 heir vist to BP, I will sit in The Osmond dressed as Little Bo-Peep for the match against them!  

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 205 - 309
DocDock
February 16, 2012, 12:50pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 759
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Location: Cleethorpes
Approval: +235
Gold Stars: 3
It may or may not have been mentioned but if the proposal was to go through what happens to the £200k for the shares?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 206 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 16, 2012, 12:53pm
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
The proposal is that Mariner Trust would GIVE 200k of their current shareholding to JF.
JF would then invest £200k of his money purchasing additional (presumably unissued) GTFC shares.

JF would NOT be purchasing the 200k shares from Mariners Trust.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 207 - 309
DocDock
February 16, 2012, 1:17pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 759
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Location: Cleethorpes
Approval: +235
Gold Stars: 3
That all being said and having just read todays cod almighty diary, this just further reinforces my view that the trust have been emotionally blackmailed by John Fenty. What a mess this situation is.

Just to add why isn't there any mention of this on the official website?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 208 - 309
Trawler
February 16, 2012, 1:31pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano
i speak as a life member and someone who had a very minor role in setting up the trust in the first place.
firstly it's a relief to find so many different and generally well balanced,well argued points of view.
secondly i'd urge those sniping from the sidelines to pay up their tenner and then snipe and vote on something that you're obviously concerned about
thirdly i feel a little uncomfortable that this is the first we have heard of the share movements over 2 weeks after the events.

finally i have to say that despite being pro fenty and pro trust i'm very much in 2 minds about this, and think that someone posted some very good advice i.e. that they would not be voting until they'd read the q & a's from the trust in a couple of weeks time.
my initial view was that i should vote yes and support the trust board and fenty, that the shares were gifted in the first place (you don't miss what you haven't got etc) and that fenty back on board and helping out with funding wasn't a bad deal.in other words the trust hed got the club an extra £200k for doing very little!
but the more i've thought the more i'm thinking of voting no. seems to me like jf has been negotiating with the trust for some while.it also seems clear to me that the bennett transfer was not a bolt from the blue (the story about fry offering jf a pay off predated it by several weeks) and that jf probably guessed ,if not knew, that summat was in the offing either in jan or the summer. then suddenly 2 days before deadline day he apparently tells the trust that 'we've got to sort this out NOW or Hearn gets sold on deadline day'.bet he didn't tell the trust board about the possiblilty of bennett being sold......
be also interested to know why we can't maintain the staus quo until at least the summer, as someone suggested. Why couldn't we give up the voting rights, but retain the shares on a rolling 6 month basis? jf gets the security he needs but knows that he has to retain the 'trust of the trust' to renew that agreement every 6 months.
if that's not possible then voting no and going back to the negotiating table gives jf summat to think about, and now the pressure is off somewhat, the trust board may well be able to get a better settlement. if we are to give up voting rights and shares then a place on the board should be a minimum. after all i find it difficult to believe that if chapman and elsom are suitable board members the same opportunity should not be given to the trust


Forza forza!  You make a lot of sense. As one of the (minor) founding fathers have you thought about standing for the Trust Board?


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 209 - 309
ticker_1610
February 16, 2012, 1:49pm
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,510
Posts Per Day: 0.60
Reputation: 83.35%
Rep Score: +32 / -6
I was suprised by the inclusion of the no more Parkers shares. I had been reliably informed MP was going to gift the trust a further 200,000 shares once JF had put up the cash n invested in his new shares. Seems JF got wise to this and included the caveat in the agreement. The trust would have been back to 500,000 and in a position to ask for a seat on the board! Hopefully they still are pursuing a seat in the boardroom. If not I doubt I will be joining as planned in March!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 210 - 309
forza ivano
February 16, 2012, 2:19pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from Trawler


Forza forza!  You make a lot of sense. As one of the (minor) founding fathers have you thought about standing for the Trust Board?


thanks for the thoughts but live too far away to make the contribution i'd like to make.would far rather enthusiastic, intelligent/sensible/business headed locals took up the places!

fao ticker - that's interesting stuff - perhaps the trust board are in a slightly stronger bargaining position than i initially thought - the chink in jf's armour seems to be mike parker and his remaining shares. wonder if the trust board have good lines of communication with mr parker? i rather hope so - can then play the role of honest broker, or more deviously ,play one off against the other
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 211 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 2:38pm
Guest User
Quoted from barralad
As someone who believes in openness at all times

Are members of trust board trying to convince us they've been transparent and open ?
Jesus wept.

Quoted from barralad
Far more important to me has been a desire to see improvements in the match day experience for ALL fans.

But it doesn't stop you throwing your voice behind something that has nothing to do with it ?

Didn't you say before it's not the role of the trust to represent the interests of ALL fans, only the trusts membership ?

Personally, I think the lines are sufficiently greyed for the trust to be able to justify anything.

Quoted from barralad
A lot has been said in this thread about bluffing by the club's owners around the funding issue. I believed at the time that I was asked to make my decision that I couldn't call any bluff in the absence of the wherewithall to step into the funding "shoes" should the worst case scenario come to fruition. Others have recently put money into GTFC and walked away and I couldn't reconcile myself to the probability that it couldn't happen again.

Fair enough but whilst it's great news that it provides stability until 2013 it doesn't tackle the issue of JF's willingness to fund the club long-term.

I was someone who suggested the trust hand over some of it's shares to solve the "control outside the boardroom" issue, but I presumed that was the only issue JF had with in terms of funding the club long term.
Obviously not ?

What's going to be the trusts response if JF comes back in June 2013 asking for the remaining trust shares ?
Will the trust go out of their way to formulate yet ANOTHER proposal ?

Whilst I'm not personally convinced these shares offer too much value in real terms, other members may not feel the same and (presumably depending on football fortune) they might be of greater value in the future ?

More importantly weren't the trust (according to their statements) THEMSELVES saying they held some value ?

So in that case, what guarantees can the trust offer it's membership for the future ?
If none are made, I see no reason why the trust won't lose all of it's remamining shareholding later for the exact same reasons.

Should the the trust and it's membership not consider it's position on this issue if only to convince and attract future members ?

Quoted from barralad
Hindsight is a marvellous gift but at the time of my decision there was no "Bennett Legacy" only the very real possibility that our biggest asset could be sold to ensure the club continued to function. Much has been said about how well things are going on the pitch but this cannot IMO be divorced from the fact that the money to support the day to day running of the club was close to drying up.

Yet JF has now come out in the Telegraph and said the club has the money until the end of NEXT season.
How quickly things can change in football !  

Quoted from barralad
I suspect there aren't too many out there who would have been happy to see our current squad weakened.

I find it very difficult to believe JF would walk away.
Or for that matter weaken the squad.

For one he's already said he's providing further funding.
He'd look a bit of a prat if he walked away with Town improving on the piitch or looking good for next season wouldn't he ?
And didn't he say he also wouldn't walk away anyway ?
Surely as a fan, he wants promotion just as much as anybody else and will continue to ensure we have the means to have the best chance ?

Bottom line is I find it difficult to believe JF wouldn't fund the club or cover the losses whilst we're in League 2 (hopefully next year) or whilst we're chasing promotion in the BSP next season.

That said we know things can quickly change in football - right now I'm probably gonna vote yes simply because it buys time until 2013 (just in case god fobid things go mammaries up on the pitch again).

But tbh I don't buy the trust's version of events (or that they've been "held to ransom").

From thinking the outcome a mere formaility, I was also suprised to read in the GET that "it is understood the issue has divided its board".
I didn't expect that !  

Whether the same is true of it's membership is another matter but I feel disadvantages of the "Yes" and advantages of the "No" arguments should at least be discussed.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 212 - 309
sam gy
February 16, 2012, 3:04pm
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,782
Posts Per Day: 0.33
Reputation: 83.91%
Rep Score: +18 / -3
Approval: +5,386
Gold Stars: 53
Quoted from 1600



Didn't you say before it's not the role of the trust to represent the interests of ALL fans, only the trusts membership ?

Personally, I think the lines are sufficiently greyed for the trust to be able to justify anything.
.


It is the role of the trust to represent the interests of ALL fans that WANT to have their interests represented. if you want to have your say in GTFC related matters, you pay a measly tenner which goes towards fulfilling those ideas and interests.

I really don't understand this 'us and them' attitude that people have with the trust, FFS in an ideal world, every GTFC fan would join, so they then WOULD represent the views of ALL GTFC fans (and they'd have a lot more money and power as a result!).





Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 213 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 3:04pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Anyone got a number for Dignitas?


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 214 - 309
WOZOFGRIMSBY
February 16, 2012, 3:26pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 12,495
Posts Per Day: 2.74
Reputation: 75.45%
Rep Score: +66 / -22
Location: Londonderry
Approval: +8,759
Gold Stars: 177
Quoted from lobsterpot
Anyone fancy a pint?


marc north


He’s one of our loans
He’s one of our loans
Harvey Cartwright
He’s one of our loans
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 215 - 309
Squarkus
February 16, 2012, 3:42pm

Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
Quoted from Marinerz93


I feel for the situation you were faced with and what you will go through in this process.  

There are a few niggling problems with this, the fact the trust has agreed not to accept any more shares from MP and also that the shares the trust has left are not free from being pillaged again should JF take his fancy at free shares.

JF said he wouldn't be buying any more shares yet here he is buying more shares.  He could have done what I said some time ago and convert benign debt into shares to gain control.  The timing of this deal and all it entails stinks of a one sided deal with an ultimatum.
all fenty has been banging on about is that the club needs future funding, how does turning his loans into shares give the club future funding, doing it the way he is, is great for gtfc.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 216 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 16, 2012, 3:44pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from Squarkus
all fenty has been banging on about is that the club needs future funding, how does turning his loans into shares give the club future funding, doing it the way he is, is great for gtfc.



Hi John


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 217 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 3:56pm
Guest User
Quoted from sam gy


It is the role of the trust to represent the interests of ALL fans that WANT to have their interests represented.

Exactly, what has it got to do with ALL fans ? (as was claimed)

Quoted from sam gy
I really don't understand this 'us and them' attitude that people have with the trust, FFS in an ideal world, every GTFC fan would join, so they then WOULD represent the views of ALL GTFC fans (and they'd have a lot more money and power as a result!).

If they really want people to join they're arguably not engaging as much as they could to try to win them over ?
I've tried hard as I can to persuade them to engage on the messageboards but some just won't have it.

300 or so is hardly a very large figure so I'm as disappointed as you are.

But whatever the numbers are what extra power do the trust have in terms of this shares issue ?
In terms of the vote it doesn't matter if it's 300 voters or 3000, just that more people have a smaller voice.
Would the outcome change if it did ? Maybe, who knows !

Extra members will hopefully enrich every supporters matchday experience - as far as I can see that's about it.

I stand by my question of what's to stop a similar proposal occuring again in June 2013.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 218 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 4:03pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Hi John


WHS
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 219 - 309
Quagmire
February 16, 2012, 4:04pm

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
Quoted from Squarkus
all fenty has been banging on about is that the club needs future funding, how does turning his loans into shares give the club future funding, doing it the way he is, is great for gtfc.



Fenty supposedly won't make additional funds available whilst 'control sits outside of the boardroom'.

By converting his loans into shares he would get the control he so obviously desires.

A positive side to converting loans into shares is that it looks better on the club accounts and has the potential to attract inward investment - something he basically just gives lip service to.

He could quite easily buy 200k of shares and then convert the necessary amount of loans into shares so that he gets the control he wants.

He appears reluctant to do so.

My opinion is that he is hedging his bets. If the club eventually goes to the wall as a creditor he will get some of this money back out of the club - as a shareholder he is likely to get zip.

If he had genuine belief in the future of GTFC then it shouldn't be a problem for him to convert loans to shares.

Instead he try's to bully the Trust into handing shares over to him.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 220 - 309
barralad
February 16, 2012, 4:19pm
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,791
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,193
Gold Stars: 121
Quoted from 1600

Are members of trust board trying to convince us they've been transparent and open ?
Jesus wept.


But it doesn't stop you throwing your voice behind something that has nothing to do with it ?

Didn't you say before it's not the role of the trust to represent the interests of ALL fans, only the trusts membership ?

Personally, I think the lines are sufficiently greyed for the trust to be able to justify anything.


Fair enough but whilst it's great news that it provides stability until 2013 it doesn't tackle the issue of JF's willingness to fund the club long-term.

I was someone who suggested the trust hand over some of it's shares to solve the "control outside the boardroom" issue, but I presumed that was the only issue JF had with in terms of funding the club long term.
Obviously not ?

What's going to be the trusts response if JF comes back in June 2013 asking for the remaining trust shares ?
Will the trust go out of their way to formulate yet ANOTHER proposal ?

Whilst I'm not personally convinced these shares offer too much value in real terms, other members may not feel the same and (presumably depending on football fortune) they might be of greater value in the future ?

More importantly weren't the trust (according to their statements) THEMSELVES saying they held some value ?

So in that case, what guarantees can the trust offer it's membership for the future ?
If none are made, I see no reason why the trust won't lose all of it's remamining shareholding later for the exact same reasons.

Should the the trust and it's membership not consider it's position on this issue if only to convince and attract future members ?


Yet JF has now come out in the Telegraph and said the club has the money until the end of NEXT season.
How quickly things can change in football !  


I find it very difficult to believe JF would walk away.
Or for that matter weaken the squad.

For one he's already said he's providing further funding.
He'd look a bit of a prat if he walked away with Town improving on the piitch or looking good for next season wouldn't he ?
And didn't he say he also wouldn't walk away anyway ?
Surely as a fan, he wants promotion just as much as anybody else and will continue to ensure we have the means to have the best chance ?

Bottom line is I find it difficult to believe JF wouldn't fund the club or cover the losses whilst we're in League 2 (hopefully next year) or whilst we're chasing promotion in the BSP next season.

That said we know things can quickly change in football - right now I'm probably gonna vote yes simply because it buys time until 2013 (just in case god fobid things go mammaries up on the pitch again).

But tbh I don't buy the trust's version of events (or that they've been "held to ransom").

From thinking the outcome a mere formaility, I was also suprised to read in the GET that "it is understood the issue has divided its board".
I didn't expect that !  

Whether the same is true of it's membership is another matter but I feel disadvantages of the "Yes" and advantages of the "No" arguments should at least be discussed.


There you go again. Taking a point out of a sentence and using it to "have a go". The context of my whole post (as I think you very well know) was that I didn't mind coming on the Fishy and explaining why I personally voted in favour of the negotiated stand point and voted that it should be put before the Trust membership.

I can only assume from your second point that some of the bile you are spitting has got into your eyes or affected your powers of reasoning. Perhaps I should have spelt it out. Given that I believe that currently only Mr Fenty has the wherewithal to fund the club I judged that the surrender of some of our (gifted) shareholding and accompanying voting rights was a price worth paying given our current inability as a Trust to fund the club to be able to get around the negotiating table regarding some of the improvements to the match day experience the Trust wish to see.
As a Trust Board member I firmly believe that my responsibilities are firstly with the Trust membership. Any improvements along the lines of what we are looking for will of course also benefit supporters who are not Trust members.

The point I was making that at the time we were asked to vote on this issue I couldn't be certain that John Fenty wouldn't pull the plug on funding. John Fenty didn't to my knowledge agree to fund the club further until he'd had the discussions with the Trust. I certainly had no idea that Bennett would definitely be sold late on deadline day. The only concrete point was that we had an asset in Liam Hearn who could have been sold to provide some cash to keep the club running. How you or anyone else for that matter cannot see that when faced with the prospect of ploughing more money into the club anybody would look to try to lessen that load by liquidising assets is totally beyond my comprehension.

I wasn't aware that anyone had given a version of events. I merely tried to put my reasons for voting "Yes" in writing. I didn't need to and was advised against it but what do I know?

As for the decision not being unanimous I'm surprised that you are surprised. There have been full and frank debates on this subject at board level.

Finally I have absolutely no issue at all in discussing the issues with Trust members.

Perhaps you should look elsewhere for your conspiracy theories.



The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 221 - 309
sam gy
February 16, 2012, 4:34pm
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,782
Posts Per Day: 0.33
Reputation: 83.91%
Rep Score: +18 / -3
Approval: +5,386
Gold Stars: 53
Quoted from 1600

Exactly, what has it got to do with ALL fans ? (as was claimed)

But like I said, it's ALL fans who wish to have their say. If people don't want to have their say, then don't join, but for christs sake don't flipping moan when decisions get made which you disagree with.


Quoted Text
If they really want people to join they're arguably not engaging as much as they could to try to win them over ?
I've tried hard as I can to persuade them to engage on the messageboards but some just won't have it.

300 or so is hardly a very large figure so I'm as disappointed as you are.


Love and passion for GTFC and having a chance to have your say on the clubs future should be a big enough incentive to join, not whether members have or haven't replied to questions on a message board, FFS they're not criminals who are planning to run away with your money, they're fans just like you and me, whats the worst that could happen?


Quoted Text
Extra members will hopefully enrich every supporters matchday experience - as far as I can see that's about it.


Just off the top of my head, I know for a fact that the trust are getting involved in raising cash for the future of our youth team, amongst other things, including the improvement of match day experience (which starts with having a successful team!).


Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 222 - 309
AndyGTFC
February 16, 2012, 4:53pm

Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,697
Posts Per Day: 0.31
Reputation: 88.72%
Rep Score: +23 / -2
Approval: +774
Gold Stars: 4
Fenty's the only man willing to back the club so I've got to agree with this. The idea that we'll suddenly be crap again because he's chairman is ridiculous. We might not continue our good form but that won't be because he suddenly has the word chairman next to his name in in the Telegraph.  He's still been chairman in all but name anyway.

The way some of you make Fenty out to be a pantomine villain is so daft. You can't expect him to put his money in without being in control. At the end of the day, people can moan about him being in charge but they aren't able to offer any sort of alternative.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 223 - 309
forza ivano
February 16, 2012, 4:59pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from AndyGTFC
Fenty's the only man willing to back the club so I've got to agree with this. The idea that we'll suddenly be crap again because he's chairman is ridiculous. We might not continue our good form but that won't be because he suddenly has the word chairman next to his name in in the Telegraph.  He's still been chairman in all but name anyway.

The way some of you make Fenty out to be a pantomine villain is so daft. You can't expect him to put his money in without being in control. At the end of the day, people can moan about him being in charge but they aren't able to offer any sort of alternative.


agreed andy, although if i was entering into any negotiation with him i think i'd check my hands at the end to make sure i still had all my fingers! he is our best (and only) hope and compared to many other club chairman we have the best of a fairly bad/ruthless lot. that doesn't mean to say that the trust should just turn over and have its belly tickled. he seems almost paranoid about control/mike parker and i'd urge the board to use that to their advantage
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 224 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 5:16pm
Guest User
Quoted from sam gy

But like I said, it's ALL fans who wish to have their say. If people don't want to have their say, then don't join, but for christs sake don't flipping moan when decisions get made which you disagree with.

Who said I disagreed with it ?
Read my post !
All I'm saying is people should be able to discuss the pros and cons of each option without being shot down.

Barralad is suprised I'm suprised the board was split.

I know nothing of the going ons of the trust board except for what I receive by way of trust's communication.
All I see is almost every trust (board) member saying "yes" on the fishy.

But if it's such a tough decision, there must be SOME potential disadvatages to the choice ?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 225 - 309
Trawler
February 16, 2012, 5:18pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Mariners Trust have this afternoon tweeted:

"Mariners Trust wish to clarify that only people who were members on Feb 13th will be allowed to vote. Members processed after this date not."

My apologies for posting otherwise earlier in this thread.

To use an awful Americanism - my bad (shoot me now).




"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 226 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 5:27pm
Guest User
Quoted from Trawler
Mariners Trust have this afternoon tweeted:

"Mariners Trust wish to clarify that only people who were members on Feb 13th will be allowed to vote. Members processed after this date not."

My apologies for posting otherwise earlier in this thread.

To use an awful Americanism - my bad (shoot me now).


  The more i hear about the trust, the less i want to join. . . fenty stooges!

Logged
E-mail
Reply: 227 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 5:42pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from 1600

.

Barralad is suprised I'm suprised the board was split.

I know nothing of the going ons of the trust board except for what I receive by way of trust's communication.
All I see is almost every trust (board) member saying "yes" on the fishy.



Show me this or retract the statement because it just not true.

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 228 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 5:43pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from 1054
  The more i hear about the trust, the less i want to join. . . fenty stooges!



On the advice of Supporters Direct I understand. There is only so much that can be said in 140 characters!!

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 229 - 309
voice of reason
February 16, 2012, 5:49pm
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
Can anyone from the trust explain to me what transferring these shares solves long term, or is it a case of at the end of 2013 JF will ask for another 200,000 shares you will just give them to him...???



"I am surprised that Bright pratt like you fails to get a grasp of the queens English been as your allways pulling up anyone who fails to follow your thoughts and if they don't give you verbal pats on the back get real and grow up this is a free speech site.UTMM".(Cleefish, 2012)       
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 230 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 5:54pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from voice of reason
Can anyone from the trust explain to me what transferring these shares solves long term, or is it a case of at the end of 2013 JF will ask for another 200,000 shares you will just give them to him...???



There will be a question and answer set up by the Trust. Please email all questions such as that one directly to enquiries@marinerstrust.co.uk
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 231 - 309
Trawler
February 16, 2012, 5:57pm
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Chris


On the advice of Supporters Direct I understand. There is only so much that can be said in 140 characters!!



Chris - do you happen to know what SD's reasoning was for a freeze on members eligible to vote?

Apologies - just seen your post above.  I'll email this question.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 232 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 6:20pm
Guest User
Quoted from Chris
Show me this or retract the statement because it just not true.

I give my honest impression based on what I see on here (and I can't read everything).
I don't have full knowledge of who's a member and who isn't but for those that are(or say they are), I'm struggling to find any arguments in favour of the No" cause. (to be fair Rodley Mariner was one)

If you or anyone else knows better I'd honestly appreciate to hear or see them simply to help me make a more informed decision.

That's all I'm asking.
Some of us have considered opinions, were not all idiots on the Fenty warpath !

No need for the your over-defensiveness IMO.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 233 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 6:24pm
Guest User
Were supoorters direct consulted throughout?

It is hard not to feel that the gift of these shares is a fricking albatross around the fans neck. . .

we seem divided at a time when we have been doing the biz on the pitch because up crops all of this sh1t!

I just cant help thinking that this plays into the hands of people with their own intrrests. . . Not denying fenty is a fan but i dont think for a second that his interest is completely altruistic.  He knows the fans are split on many issues and that there wont be a consensus. . . dovide and rule is the phrase!  

Consider this. . . if parker put in a million at the start of the season; we have a playing budget of 500k. . . why was it imperative that the tryst hand over their votes or else hearn has to leave.

I have a great deal of respect for folk who give up their free time and i cant fault their commitment yo the cause but overall. . . wuth no firm game plan, no knowledge of finances; no dealings regarding selling ir buying
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 234 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 6:25pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
Quoted from 1600

I give my honest impression based on what I see on here (and I can't read everything).
I don't have full knowledge of who's a member and who isn't but for those that are(or say they are), I'm struggling to find any arguments in favour of the No" cause. (to be fair Rodley Mariner was one)

If you or anyone else knows better I'd honestly appreciate to hear or see them simply to help me make a more informed decision.

That's all I'm asking.
Some of us have considered opinions, were not all idiots on the Fenty warpath !

No need for the your over-defensiveness IMO.


I'm not getting involved in this discussion other that to say that as the release clearly communicates to you, the Trust board came to a majority decision, not a unanimous one. This was a difficult decision as it will be for the membership we are sure. Vote how you see fit and I hope you make the right choice.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 235 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 6:30pm
Guest User
I understand that and thanks for pointing it out but I was talking about the arguments flying around on the fishy.

I'll be voting yes but not sure I fully understand the advantages of a "no" (or even the disadvatages of a "yes") - that's all I'm saying.

Who knows, maybe there are none ?
God knows !
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 236 - 309
891
February 16, 2012, 6:46pm
Guest User
Quoted from 1600
I understand that and thanks for pointing it out but I was talking about the arguments flying around on the fishy.

I'll be voting yes but not sure I fully understand the advantages of a "no" (or even the disadvatages of a "yes") - that's all I'm saying.

Who knows, maybe there are none ?
God knows !


Agree and mine is already in Pat's post bag
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 237 - 309
Dan
February 16, 2012, 6:48pm

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
80's Glory is back then. This forum had a brief nirvana at least...


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 238 - 309
BlackBoots
February 16, 2012, 6:48pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
Quoted from voice of reason
Can anyone from the trust explain to me what transferring these shares solves long term, or is it a case of at the end of 2013 JF will ask for another 200,000 shares you will just give them to him...???



I could wrong but surely the point of the share transfer and JF's proposed purchase, is to put him in a position wereby he holds sufficent shares that he can not be voted off the board by those other large share groups(Trust and Parker).

If this goes through Fenty wouldnt need, or want, anymore shares as, if he did he would have to make an offer for all the shares in GTFC.

I therefore deduce that he will not be coming back for anymore shares although I am no expert in this matter
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 239 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 16, 2012, 6:49pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
I think that if handing over the shares guaranteed the mid to long term future of the club then that would be a compelling enough reason to do so. I don't feel that guaranteeing the next 15 months (particularly 15 months which look reasonably prosperous) is a strong enough case to do so. The fact that they have been asked for in an almost threatening way makes me feel further drawn towards voting no. I noted a Trust Board member stated they felt it would be the Trust who were blamed by the fans if Hearn were sold. I wonder if Mr Fenty suggested this to them?

I won't be voting until I've read the answers to the questions that have been raised but I feel I need to be convinced 'Yes' because my head and heart say 'No' at the moment.

I'm also curious why new members would be unable to vote - I thought it would have been a good opportunity to drive the importance of having a say to non-members? Did Supporters Direct explain their advice? This isn't a dig at anybody by the way, I'm just genuinely interested to know.  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 240 - 309
BlackBoots
February 16, 2012, 6:51pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
Quoted from 1054
  

Consider this. . . if parker put in a million at the start of the season; we have a playing budget of 500k. . . why was it imperative that the tryst hand over their votes or else hearn has to leave.

I have a great deal of respect for folk who give up their free time and i cant fault their commitment yo the cause but overall. . . wuth no firm game plan, no knowledge of finances; no dealings regarding selling ir buying


I think our playing budget is a hell of a lot more than £500kpa

I thought that one of the board was a former Youngs Finance Director and another an ex senior banker which suggest they have more knowledge of finances than Mr Fenty???
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 241 - 309
BlackBoots
February 16, 2012, 6:58pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 555
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 78.02%
Rep Score: +17 / -5
I would have thought that as the Trust is governed by the FSA they have laid down rules for voting criteria?

Even without these rules I think it is normal in any members club that only people who are members at the time a vote is called can vote. Otherwise the vote could be hijacked by undesirables. For instance what if 300 Scunny fans joined today at £1pm, voted en bloc and then cancelled their standing orders!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 242 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 16, 2012, 7:08pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
Quoted from BlackBoots
I would have thought that as the Trust is governed by the FSA they have laid down rules for voting criteria?

Even without these rules I think it is normal in any members club that only people who are members at the time a vote is called can vote. Otherwise the vote could be hijacked by undesirables. For instance what if 300 Scunny fans joined today at £1pm, voted en bloc and then cancelled their standing orders!


Sounds sensible - cheers for the explanation.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 243 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 7:24pm
Guest User
Quoted from Rodley Mariner
I feel I need to be convinced 'Yes' because my head and heart say 'No' at the moment.

I understand your feelings - a good post IMO.

The main reason I'm voting "yes" is just in case things go pear shaped on the pitch - whilst it doesn't solve the long term funding issue I'd hope it's stops any potential kneejerking before May 2013.

There are some questions like "Would Fenty pull his money out if we said no ?" I guess we'll never know the answers to no matter how many questions we ask the trust.

But in any event, I honestly don't see how the Trust can be blamed for anything if JF decided to. (not that I'm suggesting JF should necessarlly be blamed either)

But if it does goes through one other thing we'll have is time on our side to find alternative forms of investment in the meantime ?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 244 - 309
barralad
February 16, 2012, 7:44pm
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,791
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,193
Gold Stars: 121
[quote=3673]

I could wrong but surely the point of the share transfer and JF's proposed purchase, is to put him in a position wereby he holds sufficent shares that he can not be voted off the board by those other large share groups(Trust and Parker).

If this goes through Fenty wouldnt need, or want, anymore shares as, if he did he would have to make an offer for all the shares in GTFC.

I therefore deduce that he will not be coming back for anymore shares although I am no expert in this matter[
/quote]

I have to say that is the conclusion I came to when making my decision. I could be wrong but there is no "safety" reason for him doing so.


The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 245 - 309
Chris
February 16, 2012, 8:06pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
FFS Barra, will you change your sig????

I'm off home. It's been a long day.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 246 - 309
MeanwoodMariner
February 16, 2012, 8:07pm

Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,326
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Reputation: 79.34%
Rep Score: +19 / -5
Approval: +2,673
Gold Stars: 8
I think it is a very carefully and thoughtfully worded letter and I strongly disagree with those claiming JF is holding a gun to anyone's head. JF has repeated said that he is not willing to fund the club while control lay outside the boardroom. It's a pretty reasonable stance to take.

There is an offer on the table from JF to get himself back in more control - there's nothing inherently evil in his desire to do that. The consequences of a 'yes' vote are laid out in the terms of the deal. The consequence of a 'no' appear to be the ending of Fenty's funding as we have known it. This isn't a threat from JF, it's just the realisation of the position he told everyone about months ago after all the mess with the Mike Parker situation.

In an ideal world would the Trust want to give up 40% of their shares so recently after acquiring them? Obviously not. But then again they would not be giving them up - they would be getting the guarantees of the agreement.

Some people think that the Trust are being bullied/blackmailed/ar$eraped. To paraphase I think this means that the result of a 'no' vote would not be that bad and the potential consequences are being exaggerated. I have yet to hear an argument that completely satisfies me that why we would be just fine. Talk of money from 2 Wembley visits in the near future seem to be a bit of a gamble to say the least.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 247 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 8:56pm
Guest User
I reckon that thrre will be about 3/4 million pound coming in from bennet and summer Hearn deal. . . 900k playing budget this season, settled squad so playing budget will probably he same or less next season. . . I think that probably takes care of most of the financing needed for next season.

Has fenty got himself another year of being chairman for no expenditure? Smoke and mirrors!
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 248 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 16, 2012, 9:00pm
Guest User
What is the longest thread ever on the fishy?
Do you think the trust has made a low profile entrance into gtfc life?
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 249 - 309
Biccys
February 16, 2012, 10:38pm
Moderator
Posts: 12,208
Posts Per Day: 2.05
Reputation: 72.32%
Rep Score: +55 / -22
Approval: +1,226
Gold Stars: 27
Quoted from 1054
What is the longest thread ever on the fishy?


http://www.thefishy.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1261668481/s-new/ so far I assume.

Quoted from 1054
Do you think the trust has made a low profile entrance into gtfc life?


Understated and possibly could have been made higher profile by advertising in the ground more and removing the old GTST logo's and adverts tyewrapped around the pillars in the Pontoon.


Logged Offline
Private Message Skype
Reply: 250 - 309
bax
February 16, 2012, 10:40pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 978
Posts Per Day: 0.20
Reputation: 86.94%
Rep Score: +25 / -3
Approval: +2,645
Gold Stars: 30
80s Glory - I have posted a lengthy explanation of why I've voted 'no' at http://toogoodtogodown.wordpress.com
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 251 - 309
80sglory
February 16, 2012, 11:55pm
Guest User
Quoted from bax
80s Glory - I have posted a lengthy explanation of why I've voted 'no' at http://toogoodtogodown.wordpress.com

Thanks for sharing your article and bringing it to my attemtion.

I think you raise some fairish points.

Your question:

"Therefore, why should we be handing over 200,000 shares to allow “Mr Fenty agrees to cover any losses for the current season and for the year ending May 2013” when he’s just admitted this is already covered?"

The way I interpret it (and obviously I may be completely wrong) is that he's saying he's got the ability to fund until May 2013 ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT CONTROL RETURNS TO THE BOARDROOM.

Or in other words, slightly jumping the gun on the understanding that the vote passes, but moreso creating some feelgood factor for the future in the Telegraph.

I guess the 200 or 400 thousand shares aren't specifically to cover these losses (even thought they might) but simply to return control to the boardroom (but again I'm only guessing and I haven't even looked at figures).

But you raise a valid point - if the money is there then I would guess it appears to be a "Do we want to risk it if we say no..." type scenario.

Your other question about voting rights and Hearn.

Regardless of what actually happened, maybe I'm being thick but personally, I'm totally lost what the connection between voting rights and the potential selling of players is full stop.

Some people say the letter is "carefully worded" and it is but I also find it confusing trying to join up the dots.

I'm not really motivated to do so but the trust have been decent enough to answer questions so I suppose I should compile mine and fire them off.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 252 - 309
Dan
February 17, 2012, 12:36am

Exile
Posts: 2,054
Posts Per Day: 0.36
Reputation: 69.68%
Rep Score: +36 / -17
Location: London
Approval: +551
Oh you're still here....


Quoted from John Fenty, April 2013
I deconstructed the flag to the point where it was safe and couldn’t be considered a danger
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 253 - 309
davmariner
February 17, 2012, 12:57am
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,012
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 78.9%
Rep Score: +37 / -10
Approval: +4,860
Gold Stars: 75
Briefly... I think the Trust and Mr Fenty have come to an appropriate compromise. My main concern however, is the future beyond May 2013 and I also feel that the Trust should explore the possibility of joining the board (if they aren't already).


Up The Mariners!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 254 - 309
Brisbane Mariner
February 17, 2012, 1:00am

UTM!
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,113
Posts Per Day: 0.20
Reputation: 83.37%
Rep Score: +12 / -2
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Approval: +163
Quoted from forza ivano


agreed andy, although if i was entering into any negotiation with him i think i'd check my hands at the end to make sure i still had all my fingers! he is our best (and only) hope and compared to many other club chairman we have the best of a fairly bad/ruthless lot. that doesn't mean to say that the trust should just turn over and have its belly tickled. he seems almost paranoid about control/mike parker and i'd urge the board to use that to their advantage


Probably the most sensible posts I have read so far! UTM Fenty is a fan just like us - he just pays a bit more to watch than any of us!! GTFC Trust Fenty Cash.....we would be fuked without him! IMHO


Its hard enough remembering my opinions without remembering my reasons for them!
Brisbane - beautiful one day and perfect the next! UTM!!!

Religion: An Idiotic holding of firm belief in an unknown entity. The more challenging it gets, the firmer the hold. Atheists are often condemned as enemies, infidels or morons. Strange rituals are performed at the weekend. My Religion is GTFC!
Logged Offline
Private Message Skype
Reply: 255 - 309
80sglory
February 17, 2012, 1:24am
Guest User
Quoted from davmariner
Briefly... I think the Trust and Mr Fenty have come to an appropriate compromise. My main concern however, is the future beyond May 2013 and I also feel that the Trust should explore the possibility of joining the board (if they aren't already).


Not sure if their postion has changed since but if you look at the FAQ on the site it says:

"Do you intend to ask for a place on the Board of GTFC ?

Not immediately but our long term aim is to have a seat, or even seats on the board, however, we accept that we initially have to build our membership and be able to quantify any financial commitment we can put our name to. We have already established a regular dialogue with the club and directors and our ultimate aim is to have a seat on the board of GTFC."

http://www.marinerstrust.co.uk/index.php/faqs

JF also said in the recent GET article:

"They are looking to gain credibility, and they are ultimately looking for a seat on the board. I don't have an objection to that."

http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk.....30-detail/story.html

Hope that helps.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 256 - 309
barralad
February 17, 2012, 7:03am
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,791
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,193
Gold Stars: 121
Quoted from 1600

Thanks for sharing your article and bringing it to my attemtion.

I think you raise some fairish points.

Your question:

"Therefore, why should we be handing over 200,000 shares to allow “Mr Fenty agrees to cover any losses for the current season and for the year ending May 2013” when he’s just admitted this is already covered?"

The way I interpret it (and obviously I may be completely wrong) is that he's saying he's got the ability to fund until May 2013 ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT CONTROL RETURNS TO THE BOARDROOM.

Or in other words, slightly jumping the gun on the understanding that the vote passes, but moreso creating some feelgood factor for the future in the Telegraph.

I guess the 200 or 400 thousand shares aren't specifically to cover these losses (even thought they might) but simply to return control to the boardroom (but again I'm only guessing and I haven't even looked at figures).

But you raise a valid point - if the money is there then I would guess it appears to be a "Do we want to risk it if we say no..." type scenario.

Your other question about voting rights and Hearn.

Regardless of what actually happened, maybe I'm being thick but personally, I'm totally lost what the connection between voting rights and the potential selling of players is full stop.

Some people say the letter is "carefully worded" and it is but I also find it confusing trying to join up the dots.

I'm not really motivated to do so but the trust have been decent enough to answer questions so I suppose I should compile mine and fire them off.


Halle bloody lujah! The penny has dropped...


The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 257 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 17, 2012, 7:43am
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
What happens in May 2013 then? That's in just over 14 months time, it isn't way off in the distant future.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 258 - 309
cardiffmariner
February 17, 2012, 8:29am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 653
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 80.9%
Rep Score: +9 / -2
Approval: +1,293
Gold Stars: 23
Quoted from forza ivano
i speak as a life member and someone who had a very minor role in setting up the trust in the first place.
firstly it's a relief to find so many different and generally well balanced,well argued points of view.
secondly i'd urge those sniping from the sidelines to pay up their tenner and then snipe and vote on something that you're obviously concerned about
thirdly i feel a little uncomfortable that this is the first we have heard of the share movements over 2 weeks after the events.

finally i have to say that despite being pro fenty and pro trust i'm very much in 2 minds about this, and think that someone posted some very good advice i.e. that they would not be voting until they'd read the q & a's from the trust in a couple of weeks time.
my initial view was that i should vote yes and support the trust board and fenty, that the shares were gifted in the first place (you don't miss what you haven't got etc) and that fenty back on board and helping out with funding wasn't a bad deal.in other words the trust hed got the club an extra £200k for doing very little!
but the more i've thought the more i'm thinking of voting no. seems to me like jf has been negotiating with the trust for some while.it also seems clear to me that the bennett transfer was not a bolt from the blue (the story about fry offering jf a pay off predated it by several weeks) and that jf probably guessed ,if not knew, that summat was in the offing either in jan or the summer. then suddenly 2 days before deadline day he apparently tells the trust that 'we've got to sort this out NOW or Hearn gets sold on deadline day'.bet he didn't tell the trust board about the possiblilty of bennett being sold......
be also interested to know why we can't maintain the staus quo until at least the summer, as someone suggested. Why couldn't we give up the voting rights, but retain the shares on a rolling 6 month basis? jf gets the security he needs but knows that he has to retain the 'trust of the trust' to renew that agreement every 6 months.
if that's not possible then voting no and going back to the negotiating table gives jf summat to think about, and now the pressure is off somewhat, the trust board may well be able to get a better settlement. if we are to give up voting rights and shares then a place on the board should be a minimum. after all i find it difficult to believe that if chapman and elsom are suitable board members the same opportunity should not be given to the trust


A good post.  It does feel like Fenty has been somewhat disingenuous during the negotiations.  Like you say, the selling of Bennett can't have come that much out of the blue.

On another note, the mis-management of the club has been as bad off the pitch as it has on it. A yes vote on this puts the control of the club back into the hands of the man who has been largely responsible for that mis-management.  I posted some time ago, on one of the many Fenty threads, that his reign could never be seen as a success whilst it left the club in hoc to one man and unable to to support iself - something the club has to strive for.

Right now the club does have a cash injection (Bennett) even if it is not yet clear exactly when we will get that money.  We also have a very saleable asset in Hearn.  He is just this, an asset.  If we need to sell him to balance the books then so be it, that is how clubs our size work.  I would take that over putting the club back into the hands of one individual - even if it didn't mean promotion this year.

I know it's too simplistic, but it does feel like Fenty wants to play again now he sees some success on the horizon.

On a final note, I've just joined the Trust, as I for one want a say on this matter as a Town fan, and the Trust have put themselves in a position to have that say.  This is why the Trust exists - to have real say in what happens to the future of the club.  For less than the price of a match ticket you can vote on what happens next.  So whether you agree with the action/motivation/use of the trust I urge you to do it.

BTW, I've just paid £15 and not ten to join.  A piece of opportunism by the Trust?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 259 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 8:34am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Quagmire


Fenty supposedly won't make additional funds available whilst 'control sits outside of the boardroom'.

By converting his loans into shares he would get the control he so obviously desires.

A positive side to converting loans into shares is that it looks better on the club accounts and has the potential to attract inward investment - something he basically just gives lip service to.

He could quite easily buy 200k of shares and then convert the necessary amount of loans into shares so that he gets the control he wants.
He appears reluctant to do so.

My opinion is that he is hedging his bets. If the club eventually goes to the wall as a creditor he will get some of this money back out of the club - as a shareholder he is likely to get zip.

If he had genuine belief in the future of GTFC then it shouldn't be a problem for him to convert loans to shares.

Instead he try's to bully the Trust into handing shares over to him.



Spot on post, the bit in bold I have said before that he could convert enough benign loan to gain control and still have all the club assets covered by whats left and it wouldn't cost anything more than he'd already spent.  He has engineered this to place a covenant on the shares the trust has and how the trust does business.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 260 - 309
Grim_Exile
February 17, 2012, 8:45am
Beer Drinker
Posts: 108
Posts Per Day: 0.02
Reputation: 87.77%
Rep Score: +6 / 0
Quoted from cardiffmariner


BTW, I've just paid £15 and not ten to join.  A piece of opportunism by the Trust?


Adult membership has always been £15 (or £12 if paid by standing order) - it's been that since the initial formation of GTST way back when.  I really don't know where the figure of a tenner that some are quoting has come from....
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 261 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 8:51am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano
going back to the negotiating table gives jf summat to think about, and now the pressure is off somewhat, the trust board may well be able to get a better settlement. if we are to give up voting rights and shares then a place on the board should be a minimum. after all i find it difficult to believe that if chapman and elsom are suitable board members the same opportunity should not be given to the trust


For me Forza hits the nail on the head.

Allowing The Trust a seat on the board in exchange should be the minimum quid pro quo, and surely it's no skin off Fenty's nose?

If JF has majority control again then having a Trust dude on the board shouldn't make much difference to the way the cub runs.

It's a win win - the Trust would have a demonstrable voice which would bring more members into the Trust's fold > which brings in more funds which - if the Trust see fit - can be used to help club expenditure.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 262 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 8:59am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Trawler


For me Forza hits the nail on the head.

Allowing The Trust a seat on the board in exchange should be the minimum quid pro quo, and surely it's no skin off Fenty's nose?

If JF has majority control again then having a Trust dude on the board shouldn't make much difference to the way the cub runs.

It's a win win - the Trust would have a demonstrable voice which would bring more members into the Trust's fold > which brings in more funds which - if the Trust see fit - can be used to help club expenditure.


There is nothing to stop the trust giving JF 150K worth of shares then selling him 50K, it's all Elsom and Chapman have to front for all the freebies they get.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 263 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 9:07am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Marinerz93


There is nothing to stop the trust giving JF 150K worth of shares then selling him 50K, it's all Elsom and Chapman have to front for all the freebies they get.


Marinerz93 I agree. As a Trust member I would happily vote to give him 200,000, sell him 50,000 and then stick the money straight into GTFC's pocket IF it meant a seat on the board for The Trust.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 264 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 9:13am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Trawler


Marinerz93 I agree. As a Trust member I would happily vote to give him 200,000, sell him 50,000 and then stick the money straight into GTFC's pocket IF it meant a seat on the board for The Trust.


I'm not a trust member yet but will be soon, Elsom apparently is a good host but what does he do to take the club forward.  Chapman who is rarely there, especially in racing season has achieved what for Town.  I believe the trust would be more proactive than any of the board members have ever been in taking the club forward.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 265 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 9:19am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Marinerz93


I believe the trust member would be more proactive than any of the board members have ever been in taking the club forward.


I agree. A Trust member would be massively proactive in intent - of course then that person would face the challenge of getting any Trust proposals agreed by a board of executives!


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 266 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 9:23am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from Trawler


I agree. A Trust member would be massively proactive in intent - of course then that person would face the challenge of getting any Trust proposals agreed by a board of executives!


A radical move, why don't the trust give JF a BOGOF share option so that the trust sells 400K worth of shares to the value of 200K and two seats in the boardroom.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 267 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 9:29am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from Marinerz93


A radical move, why don't the trust give JF a BOGOF share option so that the trust sells 400K worth of shares to the value of 200K and two seats in the boardroom.


If you throw in some nectar points too I'd bite your hand off.

In truth I'd settle for one seat on the board. It would be a massive step in the Trust's short life, and a very good news story for the club in general.

I would urge JF to consider this last point. Think of the positive spin if GTFC are seen to be a progressive club leading from the front on the issue of fan involvement with a Trust member on the board in an age where disgruntled fans of Rangers, Darlo et al are bemoaning the fact they have no representation while their club goes mammaries up.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 268 - 309
cardiffmariner
February 17, 2012, 9:35am
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 653
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 80.9%
Rep Score: +9 / -2
Approval: +1,293
Gold Stars: 23
Quoted from Grim_Exile


Adult membership has always been £15 (or £12 if paid by standing order) - it's been that since the initial formation of GTST way back when.  I really don't know where the figure of a tenner that some are quoting has come from....


Fair enough.  Taken the tenner figure from the numerous times its been mentioned on here.  Should know better than to take what's on here as gospel!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 269 - 309
Southwark Mariner
February 17, 2012, 9:56am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,153
Posts Per Day: 0.69
Reputation: 78.29%
Rep Score: +21 / -6
Location: London
Approval: +3,537
Gold Stars: 80
I'm guessing the £10 Trust figure came from the Alan Buckley evening £15 non members £10 members. So, you could say it's £10 to join the Trust and £15 to attend the evening.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 270 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 10:07am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from MeanwoodMariner
I think it is a very carefully and thoughtfully worded letter and I strongly disagree with those claiming JF is holding a gun to anyone's head. JF has repeated said that he is not willing to fund the club while control lay outside the boardroom. It's a pretty reasonable stance to take.

There is an offer on the table from JF to get himself back in more control - there's nothing inherently evil in his desire to do that. The consequences of a 'yes' vote are laid out in the terms of the deal. The consequence of a 'no' appear to be the ending of Fenty's funding as we have known it. This isn't a threat from JF, it's just the realisation of the position he told everyone about months ago after all the mess with the Mike Parker situation.

In an ideal world would the Trust want to give up 40% of their shares so recently after acquiring them? Obviously not. But then again they would not be giving them up - they would be getting the guarantees of the agreement.

Some people think that the Trust are being bullied/blackmailed/ar$eraped. To paraphase I think this means that the result of a 'no' vote would not be that bad and the potential consequences are being exaggerated. I have yet to hear an argument that completely satisfies me that why we would be just fine. Talk of money from 2 Wembley visits in the near future seem to be a bit of a gamble to say the least.


interesting argument Meanwood. I agree that if i was JF i'd want control, given the amount of money he's throwing away.What are the consequences of a yes vote? JF will fund the club for another 15 months; but one could argue that with the Bennett money coming in, the increase in crowds, the potential of wembley/play offs etc and a saleable asset in Hearn then this is about the only time in recent history when we could get by without jf!
You mention the guarentees the trust have got. These are' the football club involves the trust in the on going budget setting' - one could argue that as a major shareholder the trust would have to be consulted anyway, and so what if they are 'involved' ?- at the end of the day jf will jut go his own way anyway.
'the football club works hand in hand with the trust to promote the trust activities in a positive manner' - well, it would be sensible to do that anyway, as the trust are one of the few bodies actually trying to help the club. Is a bit of advertising and the use of Mcmenemys for a couple of do's adequate recompense for giving away 200,00 shares?
i don't think a no vote automatically leads to JF walking away - it actually gives the board a chance to say to jf ' the members don't think this is a reasonable deal, you're going to have to bring more to the table'. throw in a place on the board and i think you've got the makings of a deal.

ps not having a dig meanwood, but your arguments have in a funny way made me lean even more towards a no vote!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 271 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 10:20am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano

i don't think a no vote automatically leads to JF walking away - it actually gives the board a chance to say to jf ' the members don't think this is a reasonable deal, you're going to have to bring more to the table'. throw in a place on the board and i think you've got the makings of a deal.


I don't disagree Forza. But unfortunately the way the vote is structured the Trust will have no way of knowing why an individual member has said no, or if they would be prepared to say yes with a better deal.

The only way to find out why it's a no will be to canvas members again - probably though a meeting first to establish the voting options?

I wish there was an option which said "No, but if you give the Trust a seat on the board yes."


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 272 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 10:26am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from Trawler


I don't disagree Forza. But unfortunately the way the vote is structured the Trust will have no way of knowing why an individual member has said no, or if they would be prepared to say yes with a better deal.

The only way to find out why it's a no will be to canvas members again - probably though a meeting first to establish the voting options?

I wish there was an option which said "No, but if you give the Trust a seat on the board yes."


i'd vote for that in a flash. maybe we could insert a suitable note on the bottom of the voting form?? it would put across our 'third way' idea.

nb increasingly coming to the conclusion that the trust got the best deal they could at the time, given the info they had at the time and that they were being backed into a corner. events subsequently have shown that had they known about bennett they could probably have got a better deal. am not criticising the trust board, i think jf has prob been a little underhand. hope its not too late for them to regain the initiative and get some more concessions out of him
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 273 - 309
Southwark Mariner
February 17, 2012, 10:30am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,153
Posts Per Day: 0.69
Reputation: 78.29%
Rep Score: +21 / -6
Location: London
Approval: +3,537
Gold Stars: 80
I'm still slightly confused that JF's argument is control lies outside of the board....and the Trust with its shares wants to be on the board. Problem solved. You could  offer up a period of 2years or so with no voting rights or something but seems simple.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 274 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 10:36am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano


i'd vote for that in a flash. maybe we could insert a suitable note on the bottom of the voting form?? it would put across our 'third way' idea.

nb increasingly coming to the conclusion that the trust got the best deal they could at the time, given the info they had at the time and that they were being backed into a corner. events subsequently have shown that had they known about bennett they could probably have got a better deal. am not criticising the trust board, i think jf has prob been a little underhand. hope its not too late for them to regain the initiative and get some more concessions out of him


Yup me too. "Vote the Third Way!" or as the twitterati would have it #standupandfight.

As for your other comments - the more I think about it - it isn't too late to regain the initiative. Arguably the pressure is off. Hearn is staying (for the time being), Bennett funds are on their way to GTFC. Gates are building at BP.  Is there any real damage done if we say no for now and barter with Mr Fenty in the Summer?  Noone is going to spit out their dummy if it's handled properly.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 275 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 10:44am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from Trawler


Yup me too. "Vote the Third Way!" or as the twitterati would have it #standupandfight.

As for your other comments - the more I think about it - it isn't too late to regain the initiative. Arguably the pressure is off. Hearn is staying (for the time being), Bennett funds are on their way to GTFC. Gates are building at BP.  Is there any real damage done if we say no for now and barter with Mr Fenty in the Summer?  Noone is going to spit out their dummy if it's handled properly.


agree with that approach totally.maybe we could ask that on the q&a?

think you're probably in our camp are you southwark? your idea seems sensible, although we should remember that when jf says he's not happy with control lying outside the boardroom, what he actually means is that he's not happy not being in total control!(which is understandable when you're throwing away thousands of pounds every week)
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 276 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 10:46am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano


agree with that approach totally.maybe we could ask that on the q&a?


I've emailed the Trust as follows:

Dear MT

Are you open to members adding their own comments to the ballot paper
as to why they have said no? or indeed if a popular third voting
option can be found among members prior to March 5th then adding this
as a 'Third Way'?

For me it isn't that I disagree with the proposal outright - I would
vote yes under an improved deal, namely a seat on the board.

It may move things forward if the Trust knew that their members voting
no were prepared to move towards JF with better terms?

UTM,


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 277 - 309
MeanwoodMariner
February 17, 2012, 10:52am

Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,326
Posts Per Day: 0.39
Reputation: 79.34%
Rep Score: +19 / -5
Approval: +2,673
Gold Stars: 8
Quoted from forza ivano


interesting argument Meanwood. I agree that if i was JF i'd want control, given the amount of money he's throwing away.What are the consequences of a yes vote? JF will fund the club for another 15 months; but one could argue that with the Bennett money coming in, the increase in crowds, the potential of wembley/play offs etc and a saleable asset in Hearn then this is about the only time in recent history when we could get by without jf!
You mention the guarentees the trust have got. These are' the football club involves the trust in the on going budget setting' - one could argue that as a major shareholder the trust would have to be consulted anyway, and so what if they are 'involved' ?- at the end of the day jf will jut go his own way anyway.
'the football club works hand in hand with the trust to promote the trust activities in a positive manner' - well, it would be sensible to do that anyway, as the trust are one of the few bodies actually trying to help the club. Is a bit of advertising and the use of Mcmenemys for a couple of do's adequate recompense for giving away 200,00 shares?
i don't think a no vote automatically leads to JF walking away - it actually gives the board a chance to say to jf ' the members don't think this is a reasonable deal, you're going to have to bring more to the table'. throw in a place on the board and i think you've got the makings of a deal.

ps not having a dig meanwood, but your arguments have in a funny way made me lean even more towards a no vote!


Fair enough. I am by no means rooted in the 'yes' camp. What I do not agree with is the (admitted small) number of posters who believe the deal is bad purely because it has come from Fenty (he can't be trusted, he's playing the trust like a fiddle, he'd have the fingers from your hand etc). The deal of course offers Fenty some benefits. It would be a pretty strange move for him to try to broker a deal that did not benefit him in any way!

I remain sceptical that our financial situation is solid enough to not need JF at the moment. The Bennett money is obviously great, no arguments. The higher crowds have taken above what was budgeted which is a positive but we are on our best run of form for years - this is as good as it will get while we are outside the League and may not last. Furthermore, were we not budgetted to actually make a loss still? Hearn is definitely an asset but unless he is sold we won't get any money. There have been plenty of discussions that his sale may not actually be of any benefit if form and crowds dropped because of his sale. Wembley visits would be great but if you asked a dispassionate bookie they would point out that we are more likely to fail to reach Wembley than we are to get there. Clearly I'm a glass half empty man.

This phrase you used has really got me thinking too:
"adequate recompense for giving away 200,00 shares"

What do the Trust really lose? They still have a significant amount of shares that they did not have to pay for. Other than the vague sense that they are losing something they only just got, what will the negative impact be on the Trust? I'm not being rhetorical, I am genuinely asking for people's thoughts.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 278 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 10:58am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

What do the Trust really lose? They still have a significant amount of shares that they did not have to pay for. Other than the vague sense that they are losing something they only just got, what will the negative impact be on the Trust? I'm not being rhetorical, I am genuinely asking for people's thoughts.


In my view we stand to lose bargaining power.

I'm not against handing the shares over per se meanwood, but I think the Trust could get a better deal from doing so. Once 200,000 shares go to Mr Fenty and he regains majority shareholding the Trust loses its teeth.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 279 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 11:02am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from MeanwoodMariner


Fair enough. I am by no means rooted in the 'yes' camp. What I do not agree with is the (admitted small) number of posters who believe the deal is bad purely because it has come from Fenty (he can't be trusted, he's playing the trust like a fiddle, he'd have the fingers from your hand etc). The deal of course offers Fenty some benefits. It would be a pretty strange move for him to try to broker a deal that did not benefit him in any way!

I remain sceptical that our financial situation is solid enough to not need JF at the moment. The Bennett money is obviously great, no arguments. The higher crowds have taken above what was budgeted which is a positive but we are on our best run of form for years - this is as good as it will get while we are outside the League and may not last. Furthermore, were we not budgetted to actually make a loss still? Hearn is definitely an asset but unless he is sold we won't get any money. There have been plenty of discussions that his sale may not actually be of any benefit if form and crowds dropped because of his sale. Wembley visits would be great but if you asked a dispassionate bookie they would point out that we are more likely to fail to reach Wembley than we are to get there. Clearly I'm a glass half empty man.

This phrase you used has really got me thinking too:
"adequate recompense for giving away 200,00 shares"

What do the Trust really lose? They still have a significant amount of shares that they did not have to pay for. Other than the vague sense that they are losing something they only just got, what will the negative impact be on the Trust? I'm not being rhetorical, I am genuinely asking for people's thoughts.



fair enough ,back!! it was me who made the comment about counting your fingers having shook hands with jf - may be a bit ott, but, although i think he is a fan and wants the best for the club, i think he wants the best for the club on his terms only. i also think that jf wants those shares and that control and in those circs i would be very,very wary of dealing with him coz i wouldn't trust him to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth! yes , am probably guilty of being a bit over optimistic on the finances, but its not inconceivable that we make the play offs, perhaps just fail to go up and there would be a huge surge in interest for season tickets etc which would make us a lot more stable, immediately.what does the trust lose? well it's been dealt ,by fortune, a bloody good hand and giving over those shares loses us that good hand. it could also impact negatively on the trusts ability to be effective and attract new members if it were perceived that the trust were somehow fenty's poodle and had been shafted by him, and given away 200,00 votes in return for very little


ps anyone else think that this thread is one of the best there's ever been on the fishy? plenty of well reasoned, sensible intelligent contributions from a large cross section of fishy posters. good work people!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 280 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 11:05am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Here's a bit of left field speculation for you.  It's fairly well documented that money from the sale/sell-on of Ryan Bennett plus perhaps a fee for Liam Hearn in the summer will secure the short term future of our club.  Therefore absolutely no need for the Trust to give JF anything, particularly as he's using his standard 'if I can't play with it then no-one can' approach.  So today we don't need his money............ unless of course............ god forbid......... that good old JF has casually mentioned that he'd like some of his 'loans' repaying from the windfall.  Now that would be real sneaky, if he hasn't already thought of it, well, watch this space!


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 281 - 309
psgmariner
February 17, 2012, 11:07am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from Trawler




I'm not against handing the shares over per se meanwood, but I think the Trust could get a better deal from doing so.  


Which I why I voted no.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 282 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 11:10am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from psgmariner


Which I why I voted no.


Concise.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 283 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 11:10am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from LeightonMariner
Here's a bit of left field speculation for you.  It's fairly well documented that money from the sale/sell-on of Ryan Bennett plus perhaps a fee for Liam Hearn in the summer will secure the short term future of our club.  Therefore absolutely no need for the Trust to give JF anything, particularly as he's using his standard 'if I can't play with it then no-one can' approach.  So today we don't need his money............ unless of course............ god forbid......... that good old JF has casually mentioned that he'd like some of his 'loans' repaying from the windfall.  Now that would be real sneaky, if he hasn't already thought of it, well, watch this space!


oooh , you'd have to be really desperate/sneaky/underhand/ruthless/ a nasty piece of work if you'd resort to those tactics! can't believe you could even think that jf would stoop to such a level

just another thought that hasn't been mentioned - will jf really want to walk away or to potentially ruin the club when we are possibly on the cusp of a return to some sort of glory? i can imagine that he wants to be the man who is lauded as being our saviour and number 1 fan if and when we get back into the league, in a blaze of glory. any pyschologists out there who can comment on the pursuit by rich men of power and glory?
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 284 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 11:11am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from psgmariner


Which I why I voted no.


sounds like another potential member of your 3rd way, trawler!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 285 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 11:13am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from LeightonMariner
Here's a bit of left field speculation for you.  It's fairly well documented that money from the sale/sell-on of Ryan Bennett plus perhaps a fee for Liam Hearn in the summer will secure the short term future of our club.  Therefore absolutely no need for the Trust to give JF anything, particularly as he's using his standard 'if I can't play with it then no-one can' approach.  So today we don't need his money............ unless of course............ god forbid......... that good old JF has casually mentioned that he'd like some of his 'loans' repaying from the windfall.  Now that would be real sneaky, if he hasn't already thought of it, well, watch this space!


But then he'd be going back on his word of putting the club in peril, something he said he wouldn't do.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 286 - 309
Trawler
February 17, 2012, 11:14am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
Quoted from forza ivano


sounds like another potential member of your 3rd way, trawler!


It sounds as if PSG has already voted. And to be fair I think you coined "3rd way" first forza.


"Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 287 - 309
psgmariner
February 17, 2012, 11:15am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from Trawler


Concise.


To use the terminology of Deal or No Deal I think there is another round in this!

Say no now and I am sure a better offer would be made in 6 months time.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 288 - 309
psgmariner
February 17, 2012, 11:16am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,120
Posts Per Day: 1.70
Reputation: 73.33%
Rep Score: +39 / -15
Approval: +5,478
Gold Stars: 33
Quoted from Trawler


It sounds as if PSG has already voted. And to be fair I think you coined "3rd way" first forza.


I have, posted it yesterday. Would have voted for the 3rd way if it was there though.


Logged
Private Message
Reply: 289 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 11:17am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
One more point, I don't know what this would look like but I'm sure that there's one or two accountants out there who have access to the right figures and can do the maths:-

What I would be interested to see is the clubs current balance sheet plus all of the loans that JF has put in.  Divide this by the number of years that he's been involved in a controlling capacity to give an annual trading loss position.  Make an assumption on what the relegations/poor management decisions/poor player acquisitions have cost in the same period and remove the figures.

I have absolutely no idea what that would look like because I'm not an accountant, but I'd like to know because that would be the shortfall that we'd looking to fund if JF's dummy finally hits the floor.  I'm not for a moment suggesting that he should walk away, but I'd like to know the position if he did and wether his threats (albeit veiled) carry any real weight.

Interested as ever in all constructive comments.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 290 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 11:17am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from psgmariner


To use the terminology of Deal or No Deal I think there is another round in this!

Say no now and I am sure a better offer would be made in 6 months time.


I think JF should ring into the trust meeting with his offer, maybe we could get fatty Burns to do Noel Edmonds bit  


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 291 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 11:20am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from Marinerz93


But then he'd be going back on his word of putting the club in peril, something he said he wouldn't do.


Sure, he has said that, but then he's also said he isn't prepared to continue funding alone and he also said that there isn't any funding beyond February.  The trouble when people make too many statements, is that at some point they have to renage on one and that's the point that credibility goes out of the window.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 292 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 11:24am

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from psgmariner


I have, posted it yesterday. Would have voted for the 3rd way if it was there though.


perhaps you could send a letter or email to the trust saying that? the more feedback they get from the members ,the better
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 293 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 11:28am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from LeightonMariner


Sure, he has said that, but then he's also said he isn't prepared to continue funding alone and he also said that there isn't any funding beyond February.  The trouble when people make too many statements, is that at some point they have to renage on one and that's the point that credibility goes out of the window.


Fair comments, my problem lays with the benign loan, the lack of paying it back and the club losing money when in fact we should be in the black now the tax debt is gone.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 294 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 11:32am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from Marinerz93


Fair comments, my problem lays with the benign loan, the lack of paying it back and the club losing money when in fact we should be in the black now the tax debt is gone.


See my post #290, I'm kind of asking the same question.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 295 - 309
Quagmire
February 17, 2012, 11:40am

Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 777
Posts Per Day: 0.13
Reputation: 93.41%
Rep Score: +19 / 0
Approval: +929
Gold Stars: 43
I am not Fenty's biggest fan obviously but this proposal is not 'bad' for the club per se and there is certainly nothing wrong with him wanting to strengthen his position, nor is this anything sinister or 'evil' on his part.

I am firmly in the camp of "the deal has to be in the best interests of the club rather than something that whilst benefitting the club is primarily designed to benefit an individual (Fenty) or an organisation (the Trust)".

Whilst a yes vote does benefit GTFC I firmly believe that there are other options that not only provide Fenty with the security he desires but also have more benefits to GTFC than the current proposal.

The benign loans argument is one that has raged for a while. Some Wayne doesn't expect the money back, some say he does, some say it dissuades inward investment.

In my opinion a better deal for GTFC would be for Fenty to buy the 200k of new shares as planned and convert the required number of loans to shares so that he regains control.

This achieves the same objective as the current proposal but has additional benefits to both the club and Fenty. Fenty's additional gain is that it would dilute the holdings of both the Trust and Mike Parker. The club gains because we have a healthier balance sheet which has the potential to attract inward investment.

A second option that has greater benefits would be for the Trust to obtain a seat on the board either by holding the current stock as a whole or selling a portion of their shares to Fenty and agreeing to invest this money into the club over a period of time.  Fenty gets what he wants but GTFC benefit more from the current proposal by having greater fan influence.

Personally I would like the deadline to be extended until the summer so that more options can be considered and we will have a better idea of future funding requirements.

I don't think the current proposal is a bad deal, I just think GTfC would benefit more by other options - and at the end of the day we should be fighting for the best deal for the club rather than being any pro / anti Fenty camp.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 296 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 11:44am
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from Quagmire
I am not Fenty's biggest fan obviously but this proposal is not 'bad' for the club per se and there is certainly nothing wrong with him wanting to strengthen his position, nor is this anything sinister or 'evil' on his part.

I am firmly in the camp of "the deal has to be in the best interests of the club rather than something that whilst benefitting the club is primarily designed to benefit an individual (Fenty) or an organisation (the Trust)".

Whilst a yes vote does benefit GTFC I firmly believe that there are other options that not only provide Fenty with the security he desires but also have more benefits to GTFC than the current proposal.

The benign loans argument is one that has raged for a while. Some Wayne doesn't expect the money back, some say he does, some say it dissuades inward investment.

In my opinion a better deal for GTFC would be for Fenty to buy the 200k of new shares as planned and convert the required number of loans to shares so that he regains control.

This achieves the same objective as the current proposal but has additional benefits to both the club and Fenty. Fenty's additional gain is that it would dilute the holdings of both the Trust and Mike Parker. The club gains because we have a healthier balance sheet which has the potential to attract inward investment.

A second option that has greater benefits would be for the Trust to obtain a seat on the board either by holding the current stock as a whole or selling a portion of their shares to Fenty and agreeing to invest this money into the club over a period of time.  Fenty gets what he wants but GTFC benefit more from the current proposal by having greater fan influence.

Personally I would like the deadline to be extended until the summer so that more options can be considered and we will have a better idea of future funding requirements.

I don't think the current proposal is a bad deal, I just think GTfC would benefit more by other options - and at the end of the day we should be fighting for the best deal for the club rather than being any pro / anti Fenty camp.


Nail, hammer, head.  Points from lots of other posts condensed into one logical one.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 297 - 309
Marinerz93
February 17, 2012, 11:46am

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
I suggested this previously Quagmire and was told that JF would have to buy out the trust and MP should he get into a position he allowed MP to get into in the first round of share shenanigans.  This deal is engineered to combat that, it's the way it's done that doesn't sit right.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 298 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 12:39pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Interesting ideas from quagmire.
i have emailed the following questions to the Trust




1)       Do the Trust want to have a seat on the GTFC Board?

2)        Would they accept a seat on the GTFC Board if it were offered to them within the next 6 months (if, of course, it was financially feasible)?

3)       Why can we not have a ‘third way’ option? i.e. the current offer is a good basis for negotiation but we are not completely happy with the agreement as it stands and  would like to discuss the matter further. (The waiving of voting rights could be continued as a gesture of goodwill on the Trust’s part.)

4)       Did Mr Fenty tell you that he had had discussions with Barry Fry over Ryan Bennett’s sell on clause during the latter part of January?

5)       Did Mr Fenty ever tell you that there was a possibility of Ryan Bennett being sold by Peterborough and the financial windfall that would bring



I hope this does not sound over critical because I think you are doing a sterling job in difficult circumstances.



UTM

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 299 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 17, 2012, 1:30pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
All the trust needed to do was sit on the shares, they are not required to do anyhting with the running of the club when they are not involved with the board. The Trust for me are a safety net for when the rich men get it wrong and they should be preparing for having to take the club over not giving away their assets away.


The Trust board have really dropped a bollock and have failed at the first attempt.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 300 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 2:03pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Quoted from headingly_mariner
All the trust needed to do was sit on the shares, they are not required to do anyhting with the running of the club when they are not involved with the board. The Trust for me are a safety net for when the rich men get it wrong and they should be preparing for having to take the club over not giving away their assets away.


The Trust board have really dropped a bollock and have failed at the first attempt.


oh dear, just when i said what a good thread this was........

have you read the letter from the trust headingly? obviously not so here we go with the relevant part.
are you sitting comfortably?
then I'll begin.........

The statements put out by the club suggested that without the injection of cash, there was a very real likelihood that assets would need to be sold in order to meet the budget shortfall, impacting not only the clubs ability to retain existing players, but could also hinder the process of resigning them as contracts expire.
With no new investor on the horizon and with the Trust lacking the financial means to meaningfully assist, the only person who is likely to assist the club is John Fenty.
The Trust Board after taking legal advice what could be done instigated meetings to try and find a solution. The Trust Board felt that in order to ensure the current squad were retained then urgent action needed to be taken to try and ensure interest in our players could be rebuffed. A decision was taken to transfer the voting rights of 200,000 shares to the chairman of any AGM/EGM of the football club and this decision meant John Fenty was more relaxed as to his own position. Prior to this he had expressed his vulnerability to the shareholding outside of the boardroom.


so in other words jf forced them into a corner , so the outcome from 'just hanging on to the shares' would mean that hearn would be sold and jf could conceivably walk away. can you imagine the posts from you/80's glory hole/roundballsovalholes etc - you'd be screaming that the trust had failed to deal with jf and due to their incompetence liam hearn had been sold. damned if you do , damned if you don't.....
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 301 - 309
Rodley Mariner
February 17, 2012, 3:15pm
Special Brew Drinker
Posts: 7,798
Posts Per Day: 1.37
Reputation: 78.86%
Rep Score: +63 / -17
Location: Farsley, Leeds
Approval: +13,215
Gold Stars: 176
I agree with the 'third way' being discussed. I know from my posts on the thread I probably come across as strongly 'No' but that's not the case. My concerns are that this is more short-termism. I get the feeling we'll keep spending at the same rate and come May 2013 we'll still be losing money and still dependent on JF. It is a really dangerous thing for the Club to be beholden to one person - not because I think he's crooked or that he's not a real fan but because who knows what the future brings? The Club cannot exit long-term spending way beyond its means, dependent on person to cover the loss - that ends one way, whenever that may be.

The letter isn't specific enough for me in terms of the Trust being 'Involved in budget setting'. What does that mean? If JF were to grant a place on the Board in return for the shares that, for me, shows a commitment to the fans and the Trust and a desire to work with them/us.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 302 - 309
roundballovalhole
February 17, 2012, 3:40pm
Guest User
Quoted from forza ivano




.  so the outcome from 'just hanging on to the shares' would mean that hearn would be sold and jf could conceivably walk away. can you imagine the posts from you/80's glory hole/roundballsovalholes etc - you'd be screaming that the trust had failed to deal with jf and due to their incompetence liam hearn had been sold. damned if you do , damned if you don't.....


Imagine no longer my friend, horses mouth coming up. . . .

The 'fact' that Hearn would have been sold if the trust had not handed over the voting rights to the shares is only a 'fact' because John Fenty said it is.

Imagine Fenty deciding himself that Hearn should be sold (not a wise move in business or in footballing terms IMHO), there would have been uproar and the responsibility would have fallen at the feet of Mr Fenty himself.  Would he have done this?  has he bluffed and the trust capitulated? Does he continue to make all of the decisons at the football club but take less responsibility now? No, Yes and Yes would be my guess!

If Fenty did walk away (as you say) would he have an expectation that he is still owed the money from his benign loans?  Fenty's record as a businessman is second to none, he seems to have got exactly what he wanted from this situation with formidable ease. . . . You cant blame the trust board, he had them over a barrel. . . a barrel that he has made and used to massive effect.  Fenty holds all of the cards, he alone knows the financial matters at the club., the transfers, the ins and outs etc etc.  We have been active in the transfer market in the recent window. . . I thought we had no money and we were being forced to consider selling our most valuable asset.  None of it adds up unless you are Mr Fenty's bank manager.  There seem to have been a lot of threats, half-truths and misleading manipulative comments made and Fenty seems to hold all of the cards.

I DO want a GTFC free from Fenty, I firmly believe we could be a club which could live within our means.  Fenty has made decisons about playing budgets and saddled the club with a lot of debt (to himself) these are decsions made by him and him alone.  All the power and not a lot of responsibility seems to sum it up.

Now, if you think my username is a by-word for unreasonableness then so be it but I want the best for GTFC and am on my way to Southport right now to back up these unreasonable words.  C'MON TOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Logged
E-mail
Reply: 303 - 309
forza ivano
February 17, 2012, 4:11pm

Exile
Posts: 14,678
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 80.18%
Rep Score: +73 / -18
Approval: +15,133
Gold Stars: 265
Imagine Fenty deciding himself that Hearn should be sold (not a wise move in business or in footballing terms IMHO), there would have been uproar and the responsibility would have fallen at the feet of Mr Fenty himself

WRONG!! you know damn well it wouldn't have panned out like that - fenty would have been on mariners world, look north, radio hullside, viking, holding press conferences and telling the whole world he had to sell hearn, just to keep the club going because the trust had been completely unreasonable and un cooperative and had refused to come to an agreement, which would have seen the club gain an extra £200k in funding, would have kept the club safe for 15 months ,and wopuld have kept our prize asset. the denials of the trust would've been drowned out in the bedlam.

f Fenty did walk away (as you say) would he have an expectation that he is still owed the money from his benign loans?  Fenty's record as a businessman is second to none, he seems to have got exactly what he wanted from this situation with formidable ease. . . . You cant blame the trust board, he had them over a barrel. . . a barrel that he has made and used to massive effect.  Fenty holds all of the cards, he alone knows the financial matters at the club., the transfers, the ins and outs etc etc.  We have been active in the transfer market in the recent window. . . I thought we had no money and we were being forced to consider selling our most valuable asset.  None of it adds up unless you are Mr Fenty's bank manager.  There seem to have been a lot of threats, half-truths and misleading manipulative comments made and Fenty seems to hold all of the cards

having said that i have to agree with much of this paragraph
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 304 - 309
Harlem mariner
February 17, 2012, 4:41pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 494
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 70.44%
Rep Score: +9 / -5
Long may hrh fenty reign over us without him we wouldnt have a club apparently
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 305 - 309
80sglory
February 17, 2012, 5:05pm
Guest User
Quoted from forza ivano
can you imagine the posts from you/80's glory hole/roundballsovalholes etc - you'd be screaming that the trust had failed to deal with jf and due to their incompetence liam hearn had been sold. damned if you do , damned if you don't.....

I understand maybe you don't like me and I sincerely apologize for abusing you before, but why drag me into it ?

Firstly, I defintely wouldn't be saying all that because whilst I've read the letter, I don't really understand it clear enough to understand exactly what has gone on to make any judgement.

You may well be right that "Jf forced them into a corner" but that's your own interpretation.

That said I do admit I may be missing what is blindingly obvious regrads voting and player transfers.
If you or anyone could explain it to me I'd be grateful ! (I've already e-mailed the trust)

Personally I thought headingly made some fair points depending on what you think the trust role should be.

But most ironically, I was just about to compliment you on many of the excellent points you've raised in this discussion (and I mean that most sincerely !).

I was sat thinking "Wow, it IS possible to have a mature discussion on the fishy !"

Whether me agreeing with you narks you or not(I have no idea), I raised the same point as you about whether a no vote would necessarily mean lead to JF walking away - but at the same time I do think there is an element of "risk" as Meanwood points out.

I just would hope it may be possible to engage in mature discussion with you and others in the future because I think some of your points are very well made and well worthy of further discussion.

However, may I kindly suggest you don't simply guess what other people think and stick to speaking on behalf of your self ?
For one it makes things a lot easier - it's a complicated enough issue already without saying/guessing what eveyone else is thinking.

And to be crystal clear to put any lingering doubts to bed, I'm not "out to get the trust", John Fenty or anyone - I just want to ask my questions the same as you and anyone else to understand what's going on purely for benefit and ultimate success of Grimsby Town Football Club.
Logged
E-mail
Reply: 306 - 309
headingly_mariner
February 17, 2012, 5:23pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
Quoted from forza ivano


oh dear, just when i said what a good thread this was........

have you read the letter from the trust headingly? obviously not so here we go with the relevant part.
are you sitting comfortably?
then I'll begin.........

The statements put out by the club suggested that without the injection of cash, there was a very real likelihood that assets would need to be sold in order to meet the budget shortfall, impacting not only the clubs ability to retain existing players, but could also hinder the process of resigning them as contracts expire.
With no new investor on the horizon and with the Trust lacking the financial means to meaningfully assist, the only person who is likely to assist the club is John Fenty.
The Trust Board after taking legal advice what could be done instigated meetings to try and find a solution. The Trust Board felt that in order to ensure the current squad were retained then urgent action needed to be taken to try and ensure interest in our players could be rebuffed. A decision was taken to transfer the voting rights of 200,000 shares to the chairman of any AGM/EGM of the football club and this decision meant John Fenty was more relaxed as to his own position. Prior to this he had expressed his vulnerability to the shareholding outside of the boardroom.


so in other words jf forced them into a corner , so the outcome from 'just hanging on to the shares' would mean that hearn would be sold and jf could conceivably walk away. can you imagine the posts from you/80's glory hole/roundballsovalholes etc - you'd be screaming that the trust had failed to deal with jf and due to their incompetence liam hearn had been sold. damned if you do , damned if you don't.....


That is just rubbish, if you read what i have said it still stands. I have always said the the trust should not be involved in the funding the current regime at the club in any way. To fall for Fenty's ramblings on his telegraph mouthpiece is just weak. The trust did have a choice and they made the wrong one and Fenty has again shown  his true colours.  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 307 - 309
marinette
February 17, 2012, 5:40pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,299
Posts Per Day: 1.06
Reputation: 88.56%
Rep Score: +38 / -4
Approval: +320
Gold Stars: 3
I'm only half-way through reading this thread.  I've had my letter from the trust and my head is exploding with it all.  Just stopped reading to express a sudden thought - if Mr Fenty has agreed to fund the football club until 2013 (or whenever) in exchange for some of our shares, would there be a case for saying, at the end of that period of time (2013 or whenever) he must hand the shares back to us?  So it's like - you're only getting our shares for as long as you fund the club?  A bit simplistic, I know.  Right, I'll carry on reading this thread now.






Logged
Private Message
Reply: 308 - 309
LeightonMariner
February 17, 2012, 5:45pm
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Quoted from marinette
I'm only half-way through reading this thread.  I've had my letter from the trust and my head is exploding with it all.  Just stopped reading to express a sudden thought - if Mr Fenty has agreed to fund the football club until 2013 (or whenever) in exchange for some of our shares, would there be a case for saying, at the end of that period of time (2013 or whenever) he must hand the shares back to us?  So it's like - you're only getting our shares for as long as you fund the club?  A bit simplistic, I know.  Right, I'll carry on reading this thread now.


I think that was the intention with passing on the voting rights on 200k of shares, not sure if there was an outer time limit on that though.  Just had a thought, the voting rights were given to the chair not specifically JF.  It has to be a consideration though if legal.


When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory  
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 309 - 309
31 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... All Recommend Thread
Print

Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Classic Threads › E-Mail from the Trust

Thread Rating
There is currently no rating for this thread
 

Back to top of page

This is not an official forum of Grimsby Town Football Club, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Posts should abide by the Forum Rules. IP addresses of contributors together with dates and times of access are stored. The opinions and viewpoints expressed by contributors to The Fishy are their own and not necessarily those of The Fishy. The Fishy makes no claims that information dispersed through this forum is accurate or reliable. Also The Fishy cannot be held liable for any statements made by contributors of The Fishy.