|
dapperz fun pub |
February 17, 2012, 1:16pm |
|
Posts: 9,346
Posts Per Day: 1.59
Reputation: 84.95%
Rep Score: +37 / -6
Approval: +9,929
Gold Stars: 82
|
what spin you tube, have you met him, do you know him, he is one of the most honourable men i have come across, if you do buisness with him and shake his hand you can take it to the bank.
i could blow that out of the water but due to legal reasons i wont,well not yet anyway
|
|
|
|
|
Denby |
February 17, 2012, 1:16pm |
|
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 931
Posts Per Day: 0.16
Reputation: 83.37%
Rep Score: +12 / -2
|
What spin? Its fairly clear to me that this will benefit all sides for the long term future of GTFC. Isn't that what we all want. Your horrified at what exactly? Options have you?
Come on Denby give JF and the Trust some credit for getting this far. The vote gets a YES from me because these two parties have agreed in principle and require the members to rubberstamp it so we can all look forward to a brighter future.
Up The Mariners.
fenty is attempting to tell the trust who can and can't pool their shares within the trust, this doesn't seem right to me why do the trust board "feel" that the actual timing of the bennett money is uncertain, why don't they know, it's pretty damn important
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
LeightonMariner |
February 17, 2012, 1:16pm |
|
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
|
|
| When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory |
|
|
|
|
Squarkus |
February 17, 2012, 1:19pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
|
That's great, what will the trust be taking to the bank in exchange for 40% of their shares?
the fact that we still have a football club to move forward with and by the way 40% of fcuk all is nowt.
|
|
|
|
|
Squarkus |
February 17, 2012, 1:27pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
|
Yeah. Give me this, give me that cos if you don't bad things might happen. Honourable, look it up in a dictionary along with buisness (sic)i can drive a tractor,ooh arr
|
|
|
|
|
LeightonMariner |
February 17, 2012, 1:34pm |
|
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
|
the fact that we still have a football club to move forward with and by the way 40% of fcuk all is nowt.
We had a football club before JF arrived on the scene, a very successful one lest you forget. We will still have a football club long after he's gone. Let me explain something to you. I have 3 children, each of which costs me an absolute fortune. I'm comfortable with that because that's my investment in their future. No great shakes there from me, nothing special, I'm simply doing what all parents do. One thing I'll never do though is 'over-speculate' on luxurys that I can't really afford, neither will I take risks or gambles unless the odds are hugely in my favour and even then I'll have a contingency in case the worst were to happen. That said if I did put my family unit at risk because of my poor decisions or gambles I wouldn't expect them to hand over their precious gifts from Nanna when I could just as easily sell one of my cars. I hope that makes sense to you.
|
| When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory |
|
|
|
|
Squarkus |
February 17, 2012, 1:36pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
|
i could blow that out of the water but due to legal reasons i wont,well not yet anyway
you couldn,t blow a bubble, not yet anyway, what do you mean by that, i will keep buying the GET now to see what happens daperz
|
|
|
|
|
davmariner |
February 17, 2012, 1:39pm |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,047
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 78.9%
Rep Score: +37 / -10
Approval: +4,911
Gold Stars: 79
|
Oh so you're actually speculating then, you know, I would never have guessed. Look, neither of us really know the reason behind Mike Parkers decision or indeed even if it was his decision. Take a look at what JF is currently trying to get the trust to do and then perhaps you'll realise that he tends to deal the odd one from the back of his hand. I have absolutely no issue with anyone having a different opinion to mine and to be honest if I'm wrong I always hold my hand up. On this occasion I'm not siding with either party, but you are. I simply quoted a fact, you didn't, that's fine but don't assume that anyone who disagrees with you is an 'idiot'....... unless you can support your statement with a fact!
No, I'm not speculating I'm going by what Mike Parker said directly to Radio Humberside and Look North. The reasons he stated for leaving was that he was unhappy with the set-up of the board of directors at GTFC, therefore he resigned. I would trawl through various archives but I'm pretty sure someone switched on with verify. At no point did Parker say 'The reason I left was because of John Fenty' at all. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/g/grimsby_town/9410893.stm Here's a link that pretty much sums up Mike Parker's view. The problem wasn't John Fenty it was the board as a whole. And before anyone says 'John Fenty wouldn't change for Mike Parker' etc etc, this decision is made by the board as a whole not soley by John Fenty. In fact Fenty said himself that he actually voted with Mike Parker on this issue. As I mentioned previously the departure of Furneaux soon after showed a willingness from the board to reconcile with Mike Parker which wasn't matched by he himself. At no point have I personally attacked anyone for a differing opinion, just the people who speculate themselves and come up with these theories about Fenty and his motives. People seem to forget that he is a fan of the club and wants to work forward towards a better future. Of course John has made some bad decisions and he has been personally attacked for the appointment of Neil Woods when it was a majority board decision. With regards to the whole Mariners Trust situation, I don't think Fenty is trying to shaft them, he wants security. He's willing to match the £200,000 from the Trust from his own back pocket which is fair enough. It's not like he's demanding the Trust transfer all the shares over to him, all he wants is security which most people would agree is fair enough. The Trust would remain significant Shareholders in GTFC, enough to make a difference. Fenty has also considered the idea of the Trust gaining a seat on the board of directors, and I'm pretty confident that this will happen in the near future. You'll have to ask the Trust themselves what the situation is. With regards to your comment about 'siding', you're are correct in that respect. I'm siding with a man who hasn't left GTFC over petty disputes and man who has continuously put his hand in his pocket for this club. I feel that if we are to move on as a club we should put our differences aside and support the current regime because at this stage there is no alternative.
|
| Up The Mariners! |
|
|
|
|
Coley Surfer |
February 17, 2012, 1:45pm |
|
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 299
Posts Per Day: 0.05
Reputation: 69.11%
Rep Score: +8 / -5
|
So he never said it was Furneaux then did he?
|
| So here I am once more in the playground of the broken hearts One more experience, one more entry in a diary, self-penned Yet another emotional suicide overdosed on sentiment and pride Too late to say I love you, too late to re-stage the play Abandoning the relics in my playground of yesterday |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
LeightonMariner |
February 17, 2012, 1:46pm |
|
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 369
Posts Per Day: 0.08
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
|
No, I'm not speculating I'm going by what Mike Parker said directly to Radio Humberside and Look North. The reasons he stated for leaving was that he was unhappy with the set-up of the board of directors at GTFC, therefore he resigned. I would trawl through various archives but I'm pretty sure someone switched on with verify. At no point did Parker say 'The reason I left was because of John Fenty' at all. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/g/grimsby_town/9410893.stm Here's a link that pretty much sums up Mike Parker's view. The problem wasn't John Fenty it was the board as a whole. And before anyone says 'John Fenty wouldn't change for Mike Parker' etc etc, this decision is made by the board as a whole not soley by John Fenty. In fact Fenty said himself that he actually voted with Mike Parker on this issue. As I mentioned previously the departure of Furneaux soon after showed a willingness from the board to reconcile with Mike Parker which wasn't matched by he himself. At no point have I personally attacked anyone for a differing opinion, just the people who speculate themselves and come up with these theories about Fenty and his motives. People seem to forget that he is a fan of the club and wants to work forward towards a better future. Of course John has made some bad decisions and he has been personally attacked for the appointment of Neil Woods when it was a majority board decision. With regards to the whole Mariners Trust situation, I don't think Fenty is trying to shaft them, he wants security. He's willing to match the £200,000 from the Trust from his own back pocket which is fair enough. It's not like he's demanding the Trust transfer all the shares over to him, all he wants is security which most people would agree is fair enough. The Trust would remain significant Shareholders in GTFC, enough to make a difference. Fenty has also considered the idea of the Trust gaining a seat on the board of directors, and I'm pretty confident that this will happen in the near future. You'll have to ask the Trust themselves what the situation is. With regards to your comment about 'siding', you're are correct in that respect. I'm siding with a man who hasn't left GTFC over petty disputes and man who has continuously put his hand in his pocket for this club. I feel that if we are to move on as a club we should put our differences aside and support the current regime because at this stage there is no alternative.
I'm not going to argue with any of that.
|
| When in doubt, start a conspiracy theory |
|
|
|
|