Mariners Trust - Seat on GTFC Board

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

Board member without voting powers it looks to me non executive

first paragraph of the trust statement:

GTFC have agreed that the Mariners Trust should have a position on the football club board, at the current time this is likely to be a Non-Executive position

Just found this as part of a definition of an non executive board member

They are generally held equally liable as the executive directors under certain statutory requirements such as tax laws

I would hope the Trust are aware of this and I assume they will put in place some sort of insurance to cover any liabilities.

I am getting in touch with TESCO to get on their board because i go there every week. I thought having a waste of space on the board is what drunk old Nosey off hence him dumping the shares. The club needs wealthy successful businessmen on the board

I think cause for celebration might be a tad premature, given the wording of the MT announcement (selected key relevant parts, my italics):

"..we are pleased to clarify that in principal GTFC have agreed that the Mariners Trust should have a position on the football club board, at the current time this is likely to be a Non-Executive position.  Discussions regarding the exact details of this are on-going and we hope to be able to announce further details over the next couple of weeks.
...
...John Fenty says” I have embraced both the previous board and the current Mariners Trust board and have already agreed with my colleagues that the Trust will have a slot at GTFC board meetings to present ideas, support and challenge. I can see the merit in having a Trust member on the board and welcome a detailed discussion to set terms with the board relative for this to happen “"

So as it stands currently the Trust will be invited to speak at Board meetings at an agreed Agenda item; and John Fenty is open to further Board discussion about the terms under which the Trust could be given a Board seat.

There are two immediate issues:

1) is the timing of this given the Trust members' vote a coincidence or not? Arguably this is difficult to ascertain - so perhaps best to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was a coincidence (albeit maybe not wise timing to make such an announcement!)

2) how does this influence arguments for and against the Trust's proposal that is being voted on? One line of argument suggests that a 'No' vote should now be more likely: retaining its current gifted shareholding will give the Trust more influence at Board level, and also having the Trust formally on the Board means that majority ownership no longer resides outside the Boardroom, so removing the reason that JF gave for not being comfortable with committing further investment.

Quoted from HarryHaddocks

if it can be confirmed in time for me to get my postal ballot in for March 5th then I will definitely be voting YES, rather than the NO that would have been there previously!

A classic example of how this last minute announcement (which isn't all it seems incidentally - please see DavidB's post on the details of what Trust participation is likely to be limited to) could radically alter how people vote.

Quoted from Ipswin

A classic example of how this last minute announcement (which isn't all it seems incidentally - please see DavidB's post on the details of what Trust participation is likely to be limited to) could radically alter how people vote.

I would only vote 'yes' if a concrete seat on the board were to be agreed between now and posting my vote back to the trust, a slot in board meetings won't change my vote from a NO.

So it hasn't really radically altered my vote.

But then I'm only an inflatable fish.

#wewantharryback  

Quoted from HarryHaddocks

I would only vote 'yes' if a concrete seat on the board were to be agreed between now and posting my vote back to the trust, a slot in board meetings won't change my vote from a NO.

So it hasn't really radically altered my vote.

But then I'm only an inflatable fish.

#wewantharryback  

whs

Quoted from HarryHaddocks

I would only vote 'yes' if a concrete seat on the board were to be agreed between now and posting my vote back to the trust  

That'll give you 'nobby-stiles' mate, take a cushion is my advice!

Quoted from HarryHaddocks

I would only vote 'yes' if a concrete seat on the board were to be agreed

#wewantharryback  

They are all concrete now - they stopped using chairs when Mike Newell was around

super dodgy, another clear as mud communication from the trust.