|
RonMariner |
February 22, 2012, 12:16pm |
|
Posts: 7,624
Posts Per Day: 1.39
Reputation: 84.78%
Rep Score: +42 / -7
Approval: +13,011
Gold Stars: 216
|
The fact is that JF is currently the only person willing to put cash into the club. In order to do that he wants a bigger stake in the club, which is fair enough. I wouldn't invest in the club under his current circumstance, and no one else will either. Without JF we would be another Kettering or Darlington.
We now have a good management team, a fine squad, and a generous and committed benefactor. Let's get behind them all.
|
|
|
|
|
headingly_mariner |
February 22, 2012, 12:22pm |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,755
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,266
Gold Stars: 113
|
I agree, the OP raises some interesting points but consider this. The board of GTFC has never in my lifetime had the best interests of the fans at heart, this is possibly the best and only chance we'll ever get to change that. The Trust needs greater funds and a wider cross-section of opinion, that can only be achieved by (massively) increased membership. Don't sit on the outside sniping when it's so easy to become part of the process.
If this is the best chance surely throwing shares away for nothing concrete in return is suicide? The best thing for the trust to do is to prepare for life without Fenty and sit on its shares. The current losses are unsustainable and Mr Fenty will eventually have to stop loaning the club money and at some point the club will need a proactive trust, this is not that time they and Fenty are in danger of screwing up our most promising end to a season in years with off the field bollox. The only way the trust will get massively increased membership is when the club is about to go pop. Sometimes doing nothing is more effective than craching about trying to fix everything. The Trust IMO maybe felt a responsibility to act when really it was to early and unecessary for them to do anything.
|
|
|
|
|
moosey_club |
February 22, 2012, 12:44pm |
|
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 16,136
Posts Per Day: 2.71
Reputation: 76.19%
Rep Score: +69 / -22
Approval: +20,144
Gold Stars: 220
|
i agree we have far to many staff we have managers over managers cull that right down
WHS......We have two managers for a start !! Lets get rid of one of them....but which one? Hurst has won games while Scott has been banned so is proven to be able to win solo .......we need Hurst to give an irate rant to the fourth official on Saturday and get banned for a couple of games so we can see if Scott can operate on his own........ I do believe JF had hinted to the trust that members would maybe volunteer to man the turnstiles and other matchday roles and then pay to get in after as well which of course would cut operating costs while maintaining income.
|
| 2023/24 DLWDDWDLLLWDLLLLWDDDWDLLWLDLLDWDDWL 2022/23LDWDWWDWLLDWWDLLLDLWLLWLWLLWDDLDWWDDDLLWDWLWLW 2021/22 WDWWWWDLWWWWLLLWLLDLWLLWWDWWWLWDLWWDWWWDLWD play offs WWW Promoted 🥳 2020/21 LLDWWLDLDWLWLLLDLWLLDLLDLLLWLLLDDDDWDDDLWLWLWL .. hello darkness my old friend 2019/20 WDLDWWLDLWWLLLDLDLDLDDWWDLLWDDWWL WLLW - ended 2018/19 LWDDLLLLLLWWDWLLLWDWLWWWWLLLLWWWWDLLLDDLLDLWLW Hello Scunny |
|
|
|
|
Fishbone |
February 22, 2012, 1:16pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 206
Posts Per Day: 0.04
Reputation: 84.77%
Rep Score: +3 / 0
Approval: +172
Gold Stars: 1
|
How might each of us might feel if the same situation and chain of events arose in other professional or personal situations? Would it be quite differently morally? Fascinating post Golly, - I personally appreciated a different perspective and feel it is good, healthy and necessary to look at all points of view to better inform any decisions and thoughts. There are profound assumptions based on the 'wisdom of crowds' that requires healthy challenge
|
|
|
|
|
arryarryarry |
February 22, 2012, 1:30pm |
|
Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 10,194
Posts Per Day: 1.71
Reputation: 52.76%
Rep Score: +26 / -28
Approval: +9,938
Gold Stars: 113
|
Golly Mrs Molly you've certainly taken this one apart.
My advice is to move on Mate and lets make sure the Trust plays a bigger role.
If the Trust continue to give away the shares to a shareholder with a significant holding already, just how do they play a bigger role?, surely their impact on the club will diminish.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
forza ivano |
February 22, 2012, 1:47pm |
|
Exile
Posts: 14,680
Posts Per Day: 2.47
Reputation: 78.4%
Rep Score: +72 / -20
Approval: +15,142
Gold Stars: 265
|
copy of email sent to the Trust today. I await the answer with interest....(hope you don't mind the unattributed quotes golly!)
One further question: Re the £200,000 that Mr Fenty is spending on new shares. Earlier in the season it was stated by Mike Parker (and confirmed on the company accounts) that JF had so far put in £150,000 of his promised £500,000. He did this by way of a £75,000 loan and by purchasing a further £75,000 of shares.
From this it seems that the £150,000 he put in to see us through to January was actually money he had already pledged nearly a year previously, making his spend £300,000 of the £500,000 that each of them had agreed to spend.
Which leaves £200,000 left of his pledged £500,000 (to match Parker). So is the £200,000 share purchase simply the balance of his pledge from last year or is it brand new money? If the latter, when was the £200,000 balance paid and how?
|
|
|
|
|
voice of reason |
February 22, 2012, 1:55pm |
|
Brandy Drinker
Posts: 2,989
Posts Per Day: 0.58
Reputation: 73.88%
Rep Score: +46 / -17
Approval: -1
|
I posted this on the Grim Outlook and someone suggested it should get a wider audience. So here it is, slightly edited because I know you Fishy lot are sensitive/scared of Fenty objecting to a fans and shareholders opinion, for you to consider...
I know this whole issue has been touched upon in another post but I felt this statement and the issue in general deserves to be taken apart on its own thread.
And here it is in all it's glory...
A few points.
As I remember it Parker and Fenty agree to invest another £500,000 each to cover the latter part of 2010-11 and the 2011-12 season. Parker did this (despite having left the board in the mean time) by doubling his shareholding. He subsequently gifted these £500,000 of shares to the Supporter's Trust.
When all this rubbish kicked off earlier in the season it was stated by Parker (and confirmed on the company accounts) that Fenty had so far put in £150,000 of his promised £500,000. He did this by way of a £75,000 loan and by purchasing a further £75,000 of shares.
From this it seems that the £150,000 he so generously put in to see us through to January was actually money he had already pledged nearly a year previously.
Which leaves £200,000 left of his pledged £500,000 (to match Parker). Which funnily enough is what he is promising to invest if the Mariners Trust donate just under 40% of their shareholdings to our multi-millionaire former Chairman.
Now, it's bad enough that Fenty is holding a gun to the Mariners Trust board and hoping their inexperience will see them capitulate. But the fact that he is doing it over money he has previously promised makes his actions seem even more suspicious.
And he keeps mentioning this mythical "control returned to the boardroom" rubbish with every official statement he subjects us to.
Load of rubbish. When have the board of directors ever accounted for 50% of the shares in GTFC? Here's a run down from the end of year accounts stretching back to 2001. All figures are for May 31st of the year in question...
2001: 46.1% 2002: 44.7% 2003: 46.7% 2004: 34.2% 2005: 18.5% 2006: 42.2% 2007: 42.1% 2008: 42.0% 2009: 42.0% 2010: 42.1% 2011: 39.9%
And currently with in the region of £1.85 million of shares issued Fenty, Elsom and Chapman have 32.4% of the shares between them.
Now, if you add into the equation the £200,000 of shares that the Mariners Trust have given voting power to Fenty for the board room actually has 43.1% of votes.
So, actually the board has more direct control over the club (in terms of shareholder voting rights) than at anytime since 2003.
And these 2 single blocks of shares that leave all board members looking over their shoulders...
Well Parker has £500,000 of shares and the Mariners' Trust have approx £522,000. This equates to 55% of shares and therefore votes.
But wait a minute, the Trust have already given £200,000 of voting rights to Fenty haven't they? So actually Parker and the trust have £822,000 worth of shares to physically vote with between them. Which is only 44% of votes and not enough to force out any board member.
And anyhow are the Mariners Trust really going to try and force a director out? Of course they aren't. It's just an excuse for Fenty to water down Parker stake in the club, and pay half the market price for doing so. And he would get the Mariners Trust's power reduced as the cherry on the cake.
Here's how the shares would lie if Fenty gets his way...
Fenty 975,000 Elsom 25,500 Chapam 500
BOARD 1,001,000 (48.7%)
Trust 322,000 Parker 500,000 A.N.Other 234,000
NON-BOARD 1,056,000 (51.3%)
The board still wouldn't own the magical 50% of the shares in the club. Maybe Fenty could achieve that by asking for another load of shares from the Mariners Trust this time next year?
I just hope the Trust members tell Fenty where to go.
If you got to the end of that you have a longer attention span than me.
It's a great post Golly and a very interesting read... Maybe you will get a reply on the offical website from our saviour...
|
| "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 |
|
|
|
|
Squarkus |
February 22, 2012, 2:09pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
|
good work golly. can someone confirm that golly's logic is correct? i.e. the £200,000 that jf has promised to put in is simply the money he had previously pledged. if so not only has he pulled the wool over the trust's eyes about the bennett transfer situation but he's got another 200,000 shares simply for fulfilling his previous agreement with MP! Obviuosly a trick he learnt from Gordon brown - all smoke and mirrors and never any new money, just recycling old pledges in new packages
What makes you think Wally Golly is right?? Good work my foot. The only broken agreement as i see it that Parker took control of Fenty in the first place in return for sharing in the funding of GTFC this is undeniable fact and was voted . Sombody posted the ageement on here the other month which was aparantly ratified at an AGM.
|
|
|
|
|
Squarkus |
February 22, 2012, 2:20pm |
|
Lager Top Drinker
Posts: 252
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 53.5%
Rep Score: +4 / -8
Approval: -295
|
Like I mentioned recently, we have twice as many non-footballing staff as Scunny - this needs resolving!!
really are you sure and can you back this statement up as the Trust should take it on if its true. Please evidance this
Only then, when we can balance the books, will we be able to move forward and properly attract potential new investors.
Not being funny but who balances books repeatedly in football!!! you are joking surely
|
|
|
|
|
cleefish |
February 22, 2012, 2:25pm |
|
L:incoln Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 728
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 74.75%
Rep Score: +10 / -4
Location: Back in Grimsby
Approval: +6
|
You can quote history as much as you like, but it is the future we Are concerned about Parker has gone fenty is still here propping up our club love him or loath him one thing is clear without him we would very quickly become The next Darlington.
well put imho Iam with you 100% if I was him and got all the slagging off he gets I would with draw and say enough your on your own I will have whats owed me but no he is honest unlike a certain share holder who threw his rattle and ran give him a go. He as not done a bad job this season as he so far with SD&H and the players.utmD
|
|
|
|
|