Is there a missing piece in the shares jigsaw? The recent ballot being put forward by the Trust suggests that:

"This will give John Fenty approx. 47% of the issued share capital, Mike Parker approx. 24% and the Mariners Trust approx.13%".

This only adds up to 84%. Does this mean that the remaining 16% lays with individual shareholders? Can anyone shed light on this?

It's more likely that the percentages presented are a result of the vagaries of financial / share representation, of which I understand nothing. But if not, doesn't that change the picture somewhat and suggest there may be other possibilities not yet considered?

Apologies if this query results from my lack of knowledge and understanding.

The other board members have some, and some fans purchased some a few years back, but i don't know the amounts.

Thanks Henry, would be interesting to know percentages/amounts

There are many individuals who hold shares also. There was much made of small shareholding at the club AGM, with many such shareholders being uncontactable.

Parker "at present" still holds a large percentage of shares", watch this space for the next stage in the shares merry go round???

Don't the board member hold only 500 shares each? Or approx 0.025% based on the figures above.

Might be worth a concerted effort on behalf of the club and Trust to find out given this amounts to over 1/6th of the total number of shares

Quoted from Fishbone

Might be worth a concerted effort on behalf of the club and Trust to find out given this amounts to over 1/6th of the total number of shares

Given that GTFC is a PLC, would this information not be available from Companies House?  Pretty sure anyone can get access to it therefore (maybe for a small fee).

Quoted from alvinghammariner

The other board members have some, and some fans purchased some a few years back, but i don't know the amounts.

about 16% ;D

It's quite remarkable really given all the focus on shares and ownership that little, if anything has been made about 16% that are currently owned 'elsewhere' (i.e not Parker, Fenty, Trust). If this 16% could act collectively, leverage, sell, transfer their shares or whatever, surely this may change the picture. I personally have a very modest amount of shares and would be willing to consider what might be done  with them should reasonable proposals that looked to safegaurd the club as a whole were put forward.

We are a PLC. Anyone can buy share in a PLC. It's no different to buying a share in any business that is listed on the stock market.

That's kind of my point Skegfan, - can the collective power of those investors in the PLC who own 16% be harnessed in some way

It was stated that many of these "missing" shareholders could not be contacted (move address etc) and that some of the shares were so old as to it being likely that some of the holders might actually be dead!

Quoted from Chris

It was stated that many of these "missing" shareholders could not be contacted (move address etc) and that some of the shares were so old as to it being likely that some of the holders might actually be dead!

So what actually happens in that case. There must come a point in time where the Shares can be recycled back into the company. Isn't there some takeover rule where you need 85% shareholding. If a new buyer came in and 16% can't be found, what happens??

If half that 16% are 'redundant' shares JF's share could automatically increase by a couple of %.

Quoted from SkegFan

We are a PLC. Anyone can buy share in a PLC. It's no different to buying a share in any business that is listed on the stock market.

I thought that: but when I left the RAF some years ago my workmates contacted GTFC and enquired about getting me a single share in the club so they could frame it and present it to me on my retirement. Not allowed (in 1996 anyway). Not sure if only wanting one was an issue or if shares were not available to individuals at all.

not sure that sounds like a rigorous exploration has gone on - perhaps not in certain interests - as a PLC would have thought there would be more responsibility to shareholders

Missing shares are probably down the side of someone's chair or setee  ;)

Ok another dumb question.
If this goes through, JF has 47%, doesn't that mean control still lies outside the boardroom?
I am guessing this is where the original poster was coming from.
But if MP, Mariners Trust and 'the 16%' all voted the same way, they could technically out vote JF (and the remaining board members who we are let to believe have sodomist all shares)

So if JF is only interested in obtain more shares that MP+Mariners Trust, could there be a proposal to give him only approx 100,000 shares, to give him approx 43%, with MP+MT combined at 41%.

And what if the Trust then donated the other 100,000 shares to 'A N Other'???

At the AGM they said that many of the 'missing shares' were issued donkeys years ago and that the shareholders may well be dead by now (founding members etc), also seem to remember the clubs accountant suggesting that to locate/reissue these shares would cost more than its worth to any party... My shareholding has been a disaster, bought in the championship years for £100 and now I'd be lucky if someone would STEAL them from me! Haha. But, in fairness, I got mine through love of the club, of course not for financial gain.

Either way, any vote that were to involve shareholders in the coming months, I'd side with JF. Other board members claim not to be in a position to invest more money, the trust is sidestepping anything that could come across as a decision, and there's only one man offering to put his hand in his pocket to help this club. If he wants control in order to justify ploughing his own money into the bottomless pit, I'd give him it every day of the week.

Besides, I'm fed up of the negativity while we haven't been playing! We're close to the play-offs, in the quarter final of the cup and on a run like we haven't seen in years! Let's beat southport tomorrow and get one step closer  ;D

The original post was as much about the potential value of the shares and what might or could be done with them to help the club. Obviously there are numerous permeatations of how this could pan out. I take the clubs suggestions that over the years some shareholders may no longer be around and that to track them may be costly, however, there are probably just as many people likely to be sat on them who are relatively easily contactable or could be if the will was there. You never know, aside from the struggle for control, the missing shares could be possibly harnessed in a productive way for the good of the club. Just a thought

I thought that maybe the Ramsden family had a block of shares?

If there are a large number of old untraceable shares, more than 6% of the issued capital, then 47% would effectively give JF majority control without triggering a mandatory offer under the take over rules as he would not own more than 50%. Just a thought.

Anyway, I am pleased that this has worked out. JF has kept the club going with numerous injections of cash, and it's right that his position should be secured. Now with his continued support and the Ryan Bennett money, the club is financially secure until the end of next season, by which time we may well be back in L2.

Great days. We are on our way back! ;D

Quoted from Fishbone

The original post was as much about the potential value of the shares and what might or could be done with them to help the club. Obviously there are numerous permeatations of how this could pan out. I take the clubs suggestions that over the years some shareholders may no longer be around and that to track them may be costly, however, there are probably just as many people likely to be sat on them who are relatively easily contactable or could be if the will was there. You never know, aside from the struggle for control, the missing shares could be possibly harnessed in a productive way for the good of the club. Just a thought

My understanding is that there is no limit on the amount of shares that are available for anyone to buy although I do think there is a minimum spend applicable, so If you were suggesting maybe the shares could be sold/bought to generate funds, them Im pretty sure that that option is available at all times. That is to say shares are available to be bought at any time, you just need to contact Ian Fleming the Chief Executive (I believe).