Just announced

on Trust website

Dear David

The result of the postal ballot on whether or not to transfer shares (see below for full details of the proposal) to John Fenty is 82% in favour and 18% against with a participation of 72%.

We would like to thank all members who have voted and comments received. This vote emphasises that for the first time the supporters have a say in THEIR football club and will continue to have a big say going forward.

We are encouraged by the 40+ new members who have joined in the weeks since the vote was announced and we hope to continue to attract as many members as possible.

Mariners Trust is the key vehicle to give the fans the opportunity for a greater say in the future of GTFC.

The Mariners Trust board would like to thank Paul Smith (Deputy Sports Editor, Grimsby Telegraph) for his time verifying and counting the ballot papers this evening.

The Trust board will now put the wheels in motion to carry out the mandate of the membership.

Full 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.
                                          
Up The Mariners
                                            
Mariners Trust Board

Eighty flipping two percent voted yes? Are you kidding me?

This is terrible.

disappointed that so many trust members have fallen for this, but not surprised

I could be wrong but i can't help thinking the vote wasn't fair, what with the revelation that Fenty has offered a place to the trust on the board.

Quoted from DocDock

I could be wrong but i can't help thinking the vote was fair, what with the revelation that Fenty has offered a place to the trust on the board.

Separate issue I believe, the board place I mean

It is what it is if you don`t agree with the democratic decision join the trust and have your say next time,  should there be a next time

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

Separate issue I believe, the board place I mean

How is it seperate?

The fact the trust publicised the "seat on the board" while voting was going on is farcical and invalidates any prospect of a fair vote in my opinion. Any discussions about a seat on the board should have been kept private until voting was complete or until the offer of such a seat had been finalised.

Hallelujah.  Lets move on!!

UTM!!

just proves the gobby Fenty bashers on here are a minority

sonik, as you're there, perhaps you could clarify whether the £200k of funding was included in former chairman john fenty's original funding promise (alongside former board member mike parker) or is on top of the £500k figure agreed?  thanks

Quoted from Pass and Move

How is it seperate?

The fact the trust publicised the "seat on the board" while voting was going on is farcical and invalidates any prospect of a fair vote in my opinion. Any discussions about a seat on the board should have been kept private until voting was complete or until the offer of such a seat had been finalised.

Exactly. That's my main issue with it.

Quoted from supertown

just proves the gobby Fenty bashers on here are a minority

WHS.

Be careful..you may get what you wish for.


You have. Will sit back and watch with interest.

Pointless complaining about it now. Votes have been counted, verified. Decision is made. Let's all get behind the team and now that control is back in the boardroom we can all hope the board make the right decisions for the long term future of our club.
Pack the park Saturday roar the team on to 3 points and get the intercourse out of this excrement league with it's excrement referees and excrement away days.

Quoted from Sixpence

WHS.

What a crock of crap.

I wonder how many who voted YES felt they had no choice, i.e. had been pressured/blackmailed by the clear vieled threats made re funding, players etc. This isnt new money, its just the balance of the money he promised to put in as part of his agreement with Parker! Speaking of whom, I wonder how he feels about this decision, do the trust have the balls to ask him?

Wrawby? Chris? BIGChris?

Quoted from Denby

sonik, as you're there, perhaps you could clarify whether the £200k of funding was included in former chairman john fenty's original funding promise (alongside former board member mike parker) or is on top of the £500k figure agreed?  thanks

Where?  I'm having a beer at home Denby!  82% can't be wrong can they. Please move on and support the team that has a chance of the playoffs and is secure for the immediate future.

UTM!

Quoted from supertown

just proves the gobby Fenty bashers on here are a minority

Of trust members. (which is fair enough, they've paid their money)

Quoted from Pass and Move

What a crock of crap.

I wonder how many who voted YES felt they had no choice, i.e. had been pressured/blackmailed by the clear vieled threats made re funding, players etc. This isnt new money, its just the balance of the money he promised to put in as part of his agreement with Parker! Speaking of whom, I wonder how he feels about this decision, do the trust have the balls to ask him?

Wrawby? Chris? BIGChris?

In the interests of fairness it should be pointed out that the issue of Mike Parker's view on the deal with the shares was covered in the Q and A which went out. As I understand it there have been a few communications with Mr Parker.

Quoted from supertown

just proves the gobby Fenty bashers on here are a minority

As were non-nazis in third reich Germany!

Quoted from supertown

just proves the gobby Fenty bashers on here are a minority

No it doesn't, at all, and frankly I'm disappointed that you could make such a short-sighted, glib statement!

The only thing that vote proves is that 82% of Trust members (at the time the ballot opened) felt that giving Fenty the shares was the best option for the long-term interests of the club.

Had the vote been held next week, after a fairly healthy level of debate had been raised, I can guarantee the result would be different.

The result also does not prove that 'Fenty bashers on here' are the members who voted against the proposal. I know of members who did not necessarily agree with the idea, but felt pressured to vote 'yes' as they felt that was the only way to secure any future for the club.

Please don't try and twist these results to fit a certain agenda. They prove one thing and one thing only.

I agree I for one am happy with the outcome but more so that we still have a chairman that loves the club, unlike some of the chairmen at other clubs.

Quoted from sonik

Where?  I'm having a beer at home Denby!  82% can't be wrong can they. Please move on and support the team that has a chance of the playoffs and is secure for the immediate future.

UTM!

i meant in front of a computer...the lack of an answer from anyone on this important subject speaks volumes

and i always support the team, supporting the board is another matter completely

Quoted from Denby

sonik, as you're there, perhaps you could clarify whether the £200k of funding was included in former chairman john fenty's original funding promise (alongside former board member mike parker) or is on top of the £500k figure agreed?  thanks

You won't get any answers to questions JF doesn't like.  JF won't buy any more shares after his agreed amount because of rule 9.  Any further money will be in the form of benign loans spiraling out of control.

I'd like to see how much the benign loan is now and at the end of the period he has agreed to fund.  This deal stinks but it is done by the the trust with the best intentions.

No wonder Sonik is happy his brother is finally honouring the money he agreed with MP that started this whole share fiasco.

82%, whichever way you look at it is an overwhelming majority in favour. Those who voted either way had also paid for the privilege. That's democracy, and it's also called putting your money where your mouth is. Only time will tell if it's the right one, but surely nobody who didn't put money in themselves have the right to condemn the vote?

Quoted from ska face

No it doesn't, at all, and frankly I'm disappointed that you could make such a short-sighted, glib statement!

The only thing that vote proves is that 82% of Trust members (at the time the ballot opened) felt that giving Fenty the shares was the best option for the long-term interests of the club.

Had the vote been held next week, after a fairly healthy level of debate had been raised, I can guarantee the result would be different.

The result also does not prove that 'Fenty bashers on here' are the members who voted against the proposal. I know of members who did not necessarily agree with the idea, but felt pressured to vote 'yes' as they felt that was the only way to secure any future for the club.

Please don't try and twist these results to fit a certain agenda. They prove one thing and one thing only.

Doesn't that make the assumption that everyone who voted "Yes" rushed their ballot paper off within a day or two of the ballot opening? I know of a lot of people who waited until they'd had listened to/read about the issues before making their choice. How can you guarantee the vote would have been different? This vote was open for the best part of a month what, that has been said recently, would have made anybody change their mind. The posts about the vote have dropped off the front screen of the Fishy.

Quoted from Pass and Move

What a crock of crap.

I wonder how many who voted YES felt they had no choice, i.e. had been pressured/blackmailed by the clear vieled threats made re funding, players etc. This isnt new money, its just the balance of the money he promised to put in as part of his agreement with Parker! Speaking of whom, I wonder how he feels about this decision, do the trust have the balls to ask him?

Wrawby? Chris? BIGChris?

To be fair this is a question you should direct to Mr Fenty. The  membership had their say and they have voted overwhelmingly for this proposal.

I think its time to move on and for the Trust board, time to concentrate our enegies on the things we've always wanted to be doing. That's alll I have to say about it.

[quote=36]

Where?  I'm having a beer at home Denby!  82% can't be wrong can they. Please move on and support the team that has a chance of the playoffs and is secure for the immediate future.

UTM![/quote


It's a majority of a small percentage of the clubs support. Nothing like a true representation across the board. Please don't have the audacity/smugness/cheek to question peoples support of Grimsby Town FC. Many have been here long before the Fenty family appeared.

   Is it a good decision? Who knows.?...time will tell.

moving the goalposts part way through the consultation makes the whole process flawed imo

Quoted from marinerjase

[quote=36]

Where?  I'm having a beer at home Denby!  82% can't be wrong can they. Please move on and support the team that has a chance of the playoffs and is secure for the immediate future.

UTM![/quote


It's a majority of a small percentage of the clubs support. Nothing like a true representation across the board. Please don't have the audacity/smugness/cheek to question peoples support of Grimsby Town FC. Many have been here long before the Fenty family appeared.

   Is it a good decision? Who knows.?...time will tell.

I am in no way questioning peoples support of Grimsby Town FC Jase or Smug about the end result.  Believe me I had genuine concerns about the clubs future some months ago and pleased that we can now move on after this vote.  

Quoted from barralad

Doesn't that make the assumption that everyone who voted "Yes" rushed their ballot paper off within a day or two of the ballot opening?

No.

Quoted Text

I know of a lot of people who waited until they'd had listened to/read about the issues before making their choice. How can you guarantee the vote would have been different? This vote was open for the best part of a month what, that has been said recently, would have made anybody change their mind. The posts about the vote have dropped off the front screen of the Fishy.

When was the issue of a seat on the board raised? A fortnight ago? To say that hasn't influenced the decisions of many members of the Trust would be foolish.

Oh, and how would I guarantee it'd be different? Because I'd be entitled to vote and I'd tell Fenty to stick his offer right up his flipping bottom  :)

Quoted from sonik

I am in no way questioning peoples support of Grimsby Town FC Jase or Smug about the end result.  Believe me I had genuine concerns about the clubs future some months ago and pleased that we can now move on after this vote.  

I still have. But as said will sit back and watch with interest. Hope for all our sakes it turns out right in the end/long term.

Quoted from ska face

No.



When was the issue of a seat on the board raised? A fortnight ago? To say that hasn't influenced the decisions of many members of the Trust would be foolish.

Oh, and how would I guarantee it'd be different? Because I'd be entitled to vote and I'd tell Fenty to stick his offer right up his flipping bottom  :)

Don't want to get into an argument over semantics but I suggest you re-read the first bit of your post. Did laugh at your last point and will concede to that major difference! :)

FANTASTIC NEWS, Well done to all who voted

Quoted from barralad

Don't want to get into an argument over semantics but I suggest you re-read the first bit of your post. Did laugh at your last point and will concede to that major difference! :)

Neither do I, luckily for us all as I usually LOVE an argument over semantics, as I've had a bowl of coco pops and I'm off to bed.

Laters. x

Quoted from ska face

Neither do I, luckily for us all as I usually LOVE an argument over semantics, as I've had a bowl of coco pops and I'm off to bed.

Laters. x

Proper weetabix and hot milk should be compulsory at bedtime....

Quoted from barralad

Proper weetabix and hot milk should be compulsory at bedtime....

Whaaaat. . No Ovaltine??

Really pleased: those people who could have joined the Trust but didn't (for whatever reason) and are now complaining need to realise they have only themselves to blame if they are not happy with the vote.

3 Points on Saturday now please.

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

Whaaaat. . No Ovaltine??

zzzzzzzzz see it works!!!

Quoted from MyDogsThoughts

Really pleased: those people who could have joined the Trust but didn't (for whatever reason) and are now complaining need to realise they have only themselves to blame if they are not happy with the vote.
3 Points on Saturday now please.

True but what's clear is that unless there's a rush to sign up now from people who see the Trust as anything other than a glorified supporters club there to do the bidding of Club directors, the organisation is as dead as a door nail.

RIP GTST. It was a nice dream while it lasted. Time to close the book.

Quoted from barralad

In the interests of fairness it should be pointed out that the issue of Mike Parker's view on the deal with the shares was covered in the Q and A which went out. As I understand it there have been a few communications with Mr Parker.

What Q&A was that please barralad? I can't remember receiving one either with the ballot paper letter or subsequently. Even though it is now immaterial to the outcome, I am still interested in learning what Mike Parker's view was (it might allay some concerns) so would appreciate someone posting the relevant wording from the Q&A and/or a summary of the communications - thanks!

Might be referring to this David.

http://www.marinerstrust.co.uk/index.php/news/36-q-and-as

Quoted from Biccys

Pointless complaining about it now.

Pointless complaining before too.  ;)  ;D

Quoted from Biccys

Pack the park Saturday roar the team on to 3 points and get the intercourse out of this excrement league with it's excrement referees and excrement away days.

Well said.

Others shouldn't feel guilty for having a say but just personally, that's precisely my bottom line to put off what I'd like to say.
No it's not a moan or finger pointing (quite the opposite) but it probably isn't gonna change anything for the better right now anyway.

You're quite a wise man Biccy's  8)

PS I'll let you off Anthony Church conceding that pen !  ;)

Quoted from Pass and Move

How is it seperate?

The fact the trust publicised the "seat on the board" while voting was going on is farcical and invalidates any prospect of a fair vote in my opinion. Any discussions about a seat on the board should have been kept private until voting was complete or until the offer of such a seat had been finalised.

Spot on that

Two points.

1. The 'seat on the board' was clearly influential and should, equally clearly, have caused the vote to be re-run.

2. 82% of a 72% turnout means that 59% of the Trust membership voted YES which whilst still a majority isn't that sensational bearing in mind the above.

[quote] The Trust agrees not to accept any further shares from Mr Mike Parker. [quote]

I'm suprised noone's picked up on this? Or am I just being stupid? ... Why shouldn't the club recieve further shares if offered to them  :-/

Oh and I'm happy with the result, I'm just curious

Quoted Text

Oh and I'm happy with the result, I'm just curious

You're happy that GTFC remains in the current situation of being utterly reliant on the good will of a single person whilst being in such debt that it continues to be a totally unattractive proposition to external investors. OK.

Quoted from 1600

Might be referring to this David.

http://www.marinerstrust.co.uk/index.php/news/36-q-and-as

Thanks 80sglory

Quoted from DavidB

What Q&A was that please barralad? I can't remember receiving one either with the ballot paper letter or subsequently. Even though it is now immaterial to the outcome, I am still interested in learning what Mike Parker's view was (it might allay some concerns) so would appreciate someone posting the relevant wording from the Q&A and/or a summary of the communications - thanks!

80's to the rescue? Let me know if it's anything else...

Thank god the long term future of the club is now secured. Well the next 14 months anyway. By which time we'll be further in debt, further dependent on one man and presumably still operating on a budget way beyond our means.

As I said, thank god the long term future of the club is secured.......

I was a 'No' - but would have voted yes if a seat on the board had been offered in exchange for the shares from the outset.

I am not for the Trust owning/running the club outright, but I do think their involvement at board level would have been a positive step forward.

The Mariners Trust must now push Mr Fenty hard for that mooted seat, bringing media pressure to bear if needs be to make him deliver on the vague offer made part way through the voting process.

The pessimist within tells me he will lose interest now he has control back in his hands.

But there is now a mandate:

• The football club involves the Trust in the on-going budget setting.

It’s an awkward position to be in. Regardless of whether the Trust are consulted by the club on any budget setting going forward or not, the Trust is now perceived to be complicit in this process, by the terms of this vote. They have this publicly stated aim and yet without a seat on the board it relies on JF and the club board giving the Trust the time and the access to financial info to have any say.

Nonetheless, this is now something the Trust is publicly tied to and has to work hard to effect, and they need to be open with members about how they are going about it.  It's a heavy responsibility. They must contend with the weight of Trust members’ expectations for financial sustainability, but have no real influence to effect change – yet.

If they fail or are stymied by the GTFC board to effect change they still have their members to answer to. And not just the members. There’ll by many vocal non Trust members fingers pointing Trust-wards as well as at Mr Fenty if we continue to make substantial losses each season.

How will the Trust be involved in on-going budget setting in reality if there is no seat on the board? Will the Trust rep be invited to attend all budget meetings?

The Trust has acted in good faith. One can only hope Mr Fenty will do the same.

This just puts off the fact that in 14 months time we will be looking for another solution to our financial woes.

The timing of this ballot has been shocking, just when we get a trickle of success on the pitch "discussions" regards shares and investment pop up. I for one cannot understand (especially after the financial benefits that will come our way from the Bennett deal in the not too distant future) the requirement to have such a discussion when focus of supporters should be with the team on the pitch. I believe the ideal time for sorting this out would have been the end of the season, or at least after our play-off push had stalled.

The simple fact that so many people are readily prepared to trust a man that has overseen such a demise in our club fortunes is unhealthy. This would suggest to me that they think that Mr Fenty is the only answer to the long term security of the club.

Being at the whim of one man is not a suitable way forward for a club of our size, we need multiple investors/investments. The burden must be shared!

What a joke. I regret my membership already.

oh well, that's democracy. disappointing result for us doubters. agree with much of trawlers post. the cynic in me says that in 12 months time
1) the trust will not be on the board
2) fenty will have dismissed their thoughts on the budget with 'thanks very much, a pat on the head and  a wave goodbye'
3) the club will'gift' the hire of mcmenemys at  a reduced rate for a race night, so the trust can raise money to repaint the toilets or the gate

just hope i'm being over pessimistic and the trust will see that fenty has done em up like a kipper and won't get caught out again by his omissions/threats and half truths

Ahhh, democracy. When 2 idiots have more strength than one genius!

Seems to me like the silent majority on here have done the right thing.

Quoted from Dan

Seems to me like the silent majority on here have done the right thing.

I disagree completely.  Fenty had no intention of walking away - can you imagine the fallout for him if he had done? He wouldn't have been able to show his face locally ever again and he certainly wouldn't ever win another local election!

I don't particularly blame the Trust Board as they are well meaning but inexperienced at dealing with him -  they were well and truly blackmailed!  And as far as the Trust having a representative on the Board is concerned...at best it will be non-exec if at all.  As someone posted on here a couple of weeks ago, the Trust should have asked for £200,000 worth of benign debt be wiped off the slate as a price and if he didn't agree tell him that's the final offer.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

Thank god the long term future of the club is now secured. Well the next 14 months anyway. By which time we'll be further in debt, further dependent on one man and presumably still operating on a budget way beyond our means.

As I said, thank god the long term future of the club is secured.......

It's 14 months more security than a 'no' vote would have brought. Is the current reliance on one man healthy? No, of course not. But a rejection of this deal would not have resolved that.

This deal was not about completely restructuring the entire financial workings of the club!

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

It's 14 months more security than a 'no' vote would have brought. Is the current reliance on one man healthy? No, of course not. But a rejection of this deal would not have resolved that.

No, but further negotiations could've secured the trust a place on the board and firmer commitments than 'input towards setting future budgets' or whatever the clause is. All this deal does is delay future problems whilst at the same time deepening them. As a football club we are completely beholden to Mr Fenty and becoming even more so.

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

It's 14 months more security than a 'no' vote would have brought.  

But at what cost to the Trust's influence and long term viability Meanwood? With the loss of shares the Trust's bargaining position is substantially weakened. They have given away much and got little in return. A seat on the board could and should have been a minimum requirement. The 14 month's security is a red herring.  Neither you nor I can say if JF would have walked for sure. The only person who knows is Mr Fenty himself.

To be clear I was not against parting with 200,000 shares per se, but this was the one big chance to get something meaningful and quantifiable in exchange.

And all we got were vague promises.

I don't blame the Trust board. They presented to their members the situation as they saw it.  It was the members that ratified it.

We get what we deserve.

Mr Fenty got what he wants - I just hope a Trust seat on the board is forthcoming.

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

It's 14 months more security than a 'no' vote would have brought. Is the current reliance on one man healthy? No, of course not. But a rejection of this deal would not have resolved that.

This deal was not about completely restructuring the entire financial workings of the club!

A rejection of the deal would have brought a much quicker focus to the long term financial wellbeing of the club. Fenty has manoeuvred a situation where he has bought 14 months of control and hoodwinked the Trust into giving him someone else's shares.

Aww mammaries forgot to vote.

Quoted from Trawler

A seat on the board could and should have been a minimum requirement.

The Trust are not in a position to take a seat on the Board...that is why the previous Trust Board accepted the shares without seeking Board membership.  With power comes financial resposibility and the Trust are not in a position to meet those responsibilities.

Quoted from Trawler

But at what cost to the Trust's influence and long term viability Meanwood? With the loss of shares the Trust's bargaining position is substantially weakened. They have given away much and got little in return. A seat on the board could and should have been a minimum requirement. The 14 month's security is a red herring.  Neither you nor I can say if JF would have walked for sure. The only person who knows is Mr Fenty himself.

To be clear I was not against parting with 200,000 shares per se, but this was the one big chance to get something meaningful and quantifiable in exchange.

And all we got were vague promises.

I don't blame the Trust board. They presented to their members the situation as they saw it.  It was the members that ratified it.

We get what we deserve.

Mr Fenty got what he wants - I just hope a Trust seat on the board is forthcoming.

I see where you're coming from. But suppose for a second it is a bad move by the Trust. Suppose, as Old Codger so impartial puts it, the Trust have been 'hoodwinked' into allowing JF to continue to fund the club. If the Trust as a group make poor decisions then losing some power in the running of the club is no bad thing...  ;)

Quoted from forza ivano

oh well, that's democracy. disappointing result for us doubters. agree with much of trawlers post. the cynic in me says that in 12 months time
1) the trust will not be on the board
2) fenty will have dismissed their thoughts on the budget with 'thanks very much, a pat on the head and  a wave goodbye'
3) the club will'gift' the hire of mcmenemys at  a reduced rate for a race night, so the trust can raise money to repaint the toilets or the gate

just hope i'm being over pessimistic and the trust will see that fenty has done em up like a kipper and won't get caught out again by his omissions/threats and half truths

I suspect you are spot on. During next season when the project losses come out and people are staggered at us yet again setting a budget way above sensible means we can perhaps look forward to the masses asking serious questions regards the realistic progress and running of the club.

Quoted from Biccys

we can all hope the board make the right decisions for the long term future of our club and get the intercourse out of this excrement league with it's excrement referees and excrement away days.

If the board make just one right decision (right for the club that is as opposed to right for Fenty - I suspect every decision from now on will be 'right' for our John) it will be the first time since Fenty got on the board

As for excrement referees, the vote was so discredited by the 'seat on the board sweetener' it was so bent it made the referee at Fleetwood look honest.

You voted for it Trust members (well 82% of 72% of the membership which I make about 177 based on a membership of 300 voted for it) so enjoy your beief spell in Fenty's good books and feel smug for another 14 months if you wish but don't forget when it goes mammary's up - you voted for it, it's down to you, just 177 of the total fanbase decided the course of the club and sold out what was left of the club in 'independent' hands (no disrespect to other 'private' shareholders but your shares are like mine totally useless vote-wise)

It will be interesting to see if the Trust's increased membership is maintained or if following the giveaway of the shares many will not renew their subscriptions.

RIP the Trust, your one and only opportunity to make a mark thrown away - welcome back to total obscurity

Quoted from Ipswin

If the board make just one right decision (right for the club that is as opposed to right for Fenty - I suspect every decision from now on will be 'right' for our John) it will be the first time since Fenty got on the board

As for excrement referees, the vote was so discredited by the 'seat on the board sweetener' it was so bent it made the referee at Fleetwood look honest.

You voted for it Trust members (well 82% of 72% of the membership which I make about 177 based on a membership of 300 voted for it) so enjoy your beief spell in Fenty's good books and feel smug for another 14 months if you wish but don't forget when it goes mammary's up - you voted for it, it's down to you, just 177 of the total fanbase decided the course of the club and sold out what was left of the club in 'independent' hands (no disrespect to other 'private' shareholders but your shares are like mine totally useless vote-wise)

It will be interesting to see if the Trust's increased membership is maintained or if following the giveaway of the shares many will not renew their subscriptions.

RIP the Trust, your one and only opportunity to make a mark thrown away - welcome back to total obscurity

Entirely the point - the vote was totally derailed so should have been re-run with ALL of the available information not some of it.

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

If the Trust as a group make poor decisions then losing some power in the running of the club is no bad thing...  ;)

Your point's probably made with tongue in cheek - but sadly it's one I find I can't argue with.  Who knows - maybe there are some Trust members who voted yes not to put Fenty back in charge, but to stop the Trust being involved at a higher level.

Any way - what's done is done - the membership voted and gets what it deserves.

I turn to Stephen Sondheim's words in Sunday In The Park with George.

"I chose and my world was shaken,
So what?
The choice may have been mistaken
The choosing was not,
You have to move on."

Quoted from GodHelpUs

The Trust are not in a position to take a seat on the Board...that is why the previous Trust Board accepted the shares without seeking Board membership.  With power comes financial resposibility and the Trust are not in a position to meet those responsibilities.

You would have been if you had sold Fenty the shares instead of giving them to him but of course you folded under his veiled threats about withdrawing finance and selling Hearn so he got your shares for absolutely nowt and spent his £200000 on another lot

Don't see what choice people had, the trust are in no position to run the club, nor can I see them ever being, and without Fenty's money we probably won't even have a club. At least now we have one till the end of next season instead of this one, who knows maybe then we will be back in the league and not have as big as money worries, if not we can then argue about it again this time next year.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

and without Fenty's money we probably won't even have a club.

That's right because the countless other clubs who have gone into administration are miles bigger than us.  

We didn't go into admin because JF would have lost everything, he didn't have the clubs asests at the time, now he does and all is good.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

who knows maybe then we will be back in the league and not have as big as money worries, if not we can then argue about it again this time next year.

and you could always give Fenty the other 200,000 shares?

Quoted from Ipswin

and you could always give Fenty the other 200,000 shares?

He won't want them, rule 9.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

;D

Quoted from Marinerz93

He won't want them, rule 9.

Oh I'm sure someone as astute as John Fenty (Con) will be able to find a way around that, after all it appears it is his life's ambition to own and control every last part of GTFC and anyway how can he twist the Trust's arm in 14 months time if they have nothing he wants.

Come to think of it if the Rule 9 limit applies the Trust haven't got anything left that he wants now, he's screwed them forwhat he can so no reason not to kick them in the b@llocks right now really?

Quoted from Ipswin

If the board make just one right decision (right for the club that is as opposed to right for Fenty - I suspect every decision from now on will be 'right' for our John) it will be the first time since Fenty got on the board

As for excrement referees, the vote was so discredited by the 'seat on the board sweetener' it was so bent it made the referee at Fleetwood look honest.

You voted for it Trust members (well 82% of 72% of the membership which I make about 177 based on a membership of 300 voted for it) so enjoy your beief spell in Fenty's good books and feel smug for another 14 months if you wish but don't forget when it goes mammary's up - you voted for it, it's down to you, just 177 of the total fanbase decided the course of the club and sold out what was left of the club in 'independent' hands (no disrespect to other 'private' shareholders but your shares are like mine totally useless vote-wise)

It will be interesting to see if the Trust's increased membership is maintained or if following the giveaway of the shares many will not renew their subscriptions.

RIP the Trust, your one and only opportunity to make a mark thrown away - welcome back to total obscurity

what a tube, where was the money for future funding comming from then, the vote is fantastic support for fenty and for another season,if we dont get promoted this season (which we will) fenty will keep the squad together and next season will be our season, SO THANKYOU TRUST MEMBERS FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THE CLUB.

Quoted from Squarkus

if we dont get promoted this season (which we will) fenty will keep the squad together and next season will be our season

Ah, so that's the plan. Well, I'm convinced. I mean these negative Fenty-knockers will say things like "what about that bit in football where you don't actually know who's going to win?" but what do they know, with their negativeness and their Fenty-knocking. No, this logic is impeccable. Well done.

Quoted from Squarkus

where was the money for future funding comming from then

From JF.  You choose to believe he would have stopped funding the club in the event of a NO vote.  Others don't agree with your assumption.

Quoted from Biccys

Pointless complaining about it now. Votes have been counted, verified. Decision is made. Let's all get behind the team and now that control is back in the boardroom we can all hope the board make the right decisions for the long term future of our club.
Pack the park Saturday roar the team on to 3 points and get the intercourse out of this excrement league with it's excrement referees and excrement away days.

my sentiments exactly

Quoted from Trawler

From JF.  You choose to believe he would have stopped funding the club in the event of a NO vote.  Others don't agree with your assumption.

of course he would, why would he put money into somthing that he has no control over, his hands where tied equally as much as the trusts where, thankfully the overwhelming majority voted for, so on we go utm.

Quoted from Squarkus

of course he would, why would he put money into somthing that he has no control over

Good point. Except the bit where he actually did have control, because the trust had already done a secret deal with him on voting rights, before the share transfer was even proposed. Otherwise, excellent reasoning again, keep it up.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

without Fenty's money we probably won't even have a club

When will people get it through their thick skulls that John Fenty is the reason we need this additional income??

We 'need' this money to pay for a budget that he chooses and knows is way above our means and his general mismanagement.

He could quite easily decide to have a playing budget of 10 million quid next season and then at the end of the season come riding in on his horse to 'pay off' this 10 million deficit.  Of course what he won't say is that the reason we owe 10 million is because he decided to spend 10 million, nor will he mention that the club continues to grow ever deeper in debt to him.

Bad day for GTFC but not unexpected considering that so many cretins on here continue to worship at the altar of a man who has taken us from the Championship to non-league and has saddled us with millions of pounds of (ever increasing) 'benign' debt.

The only solace I can take is that there are 39 Trust members plus myself that voted 'no' who at least appear to have their eyes open.

Still, at least Honest John can add the names of another 170 yes men to the likes of Furneaux, Chapman & Elsom.

Quoted from Quagmire

When will people get it through their thick skulls that John Fenty is the reason we need this additional income??

We 'need' this money to pay for a budget that he chooses and knows is way above our means and his general mismanagement.

He could quite easily decide to have a playing budget of 10 million quid next season and then at the end of the season come riding in on his horse to 'pay off' this 10 million deficit.  Of course what he won't say is that the reason we owe 10 million is because he decided to spend 10 million, nor will he mention that the club continues to grow ever deeper in debt to him.

Bad day for GTFC but not unexpected considering that so many cretins on here continue to worship at the altar of a man who has taken us from the Championship to non-league and has saddled us with millions of pounds of (ever increasing) 'benign' debt.

The only solace I can take is that there are 39 Trust members plus myself that voted 'no' who at least appear to have their eyes open.

Still, at least Honest John can add the names of another 170 yes men to the likes of Furneaux, Chapman & Elsom.

I love this post because its true. Great Post.

Quoted from Quagmire

When will people get it through their thick skulls that John Fenty is the reason we need this additional income??

We 'need' this money to pay for a budget that he chooses and knows is way above our means and his general mismanagement.

He could quite easily decide to have a playing budget of 10 million quid next season and then at the end of the season come riding in on his horse to 'pay off' this 10 million deficit.  Of course what he won't say is that the reason we owe 10 million is because he decided to spend 10 million, nor will he mention that the club continues to grow ever deeper in debt to him.

Bad day for GTFC but not unexpected considering that so many cretins on here continue to worship at the altar of a man who has taken us from the Championship to non-league and has saddled us with millions of pounds of (ever increasing) 'benign' debt.

The only solace I can take is that there are 39 Trust members plus myself that voted 'no' who at least appear to have their eyes open.

Still, at least Honest John can add the names of another 170 yes men to the likes of Furneaux, Chapman & Elsom.

WHS with knobs, bells & whistles! The club that beat Liverpool & Tottenham less than a decade ago now up in arms over a penalty against the might Fleetwood, why are we in this mess? Cue the ITV Digital, tax debt argument........

Quoted from Squarkus

fenty will keep the squad together

FFS you don't actually believe that do you? Hearn and anyone else Fenty can raise a few quid on will be gone in June

'The cheque's in the post'
'You can't get pregnant doing it standing up'
'Don't worry it doesn't taste of anything'
and now:
'I'll keep the squad together'

Jeez!

[quote=476]

I love this post because its true. Great Post.[/quote

Agreed.

Quoted from Ipswin

You would have been if you had sold Fenty the shares instead of giving them to him but of course you folded under his veiled threats about withdrawing finance and selling Hearn so he got your shares for absolutely nowt and spent his £200000 on another lot

You? I'm not a member of the Trust Board but the rest of that post is spot on!

Quoted from Marinerz93

That's right because the countless other clubs who have gone into administration are miles bigger than us.  

We didn't go into admin because JF would have lost everything, he didn't have the clubs asests at the time, now he does and all is good.

yep Boston, Chester, Darlington, Kettering, Halifax, Scarborough......... are all so much better than us.

If you want we can take a gamble, go into admin and hope someone with more money than Fenty comes in and saves us, like these bigger clubs you speak off. If not we can rely on a trust that has no money to save us and we may eventually end up like some trust run clubs, or we could just re-form and start off lower down, or even worse cease to exist.

Me personally would rather not gamble with our clubs future and let fenty carry on throwing his own money away. Until he stops then maybe we will have no choice, but right now I'd rather not gamble and lose.

Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

yep Boston, Chester, Darlington, Kettering, Halifax, Scarborough......... are all so much better than us.

If you want we can take a gamble, go into admin and hope someone with more money than Fenty comes in and saves us, like these bigger clubs you speak off. If not we can rely on a trust that has no money to save us and we may eventually end up like some trust run clubs, or we could just re-form and start off lower down, or even worse cease to exist.

Me personally would rather not gamble with our clubs future and let fenty carry on throwing his own money away. Until he stops then maybe we will have no choice, but right now I'd rather not gamble and lose.

Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.

I take it you don't own or run a business then.

Quoted from Ipswin

FFS you don't actually believe that do you? Hearn and anyone else Fenty can raise a few quid on will be gone in June

'The cheque's in the post'
'You can't get pregnant doing it standing up'
'Don't worry it doesn't taste of anything'
and now:
'I'll keep the squad together'

Jeez!

It's a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas really. Oh yes, we love what you've done to GTFC John, carry on regardless.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

yep Boston, Chester, Darlington, Kettering, Halifax, Scarborough......... are all so much better than us.

If you want we can take a gamble, go into admin and hope someone with more money than Fenty comes in and saves us, like these bigger clubs you speak off. If not we can rely on a trust that has no money to save us and we may eventually end up like some trust run clubs, or we could just re-form and start off lower down, or even worse cease to exist.

Me personally would rather not gamble with our clubs future and let fenty carry on throwing his own money away. Until he stops then maybe we will have no choice, but right now I'd rather not gamble and lose.

Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.

well that's an embarrassing post

Quoted from Quagmire

The only solace I can take is that there are 39 Trust members plus myself that voted 'no' who at least appear to have their eyes open.

Still, at least Honest John can add the names of another 170 yes men to the likes of Furneaux, Chapman & Elsom.

If anyone who voted yes is a Fenty "yes man" then does it  follow that anyone who voted no is a "no man" who objects to absolutely anything Fenty does? I suggest you consider the merits of each decision or action rather than base everything on personalities - i suspect it's how most voters made their opinion. It's how people with "their eyes open" should operate in my opinion. Using terms like "cretins", "get it through their thick skulls" etc is, without question, the worst possible way to bring people over to your side of the argument.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

yep Boston, Chester, Darlington, Kettering, Halifax, Scarborough......... are all so much better than us.

If you want we can take a gamble, go into admin and hope someone with more money than Fenty comes in and saves us, like these bigger clubs you speak off. If not we can rely on a trust that has no money to save us and we may eventually end up like some trust run clubs, or we could just re-form and start off lower down, or even worse cease to exist.

Me personally would rather not gamble with our clubs future and let fenty carry on throwing his own money away. Until he stops then maybe we will have no choice, but right now I'd rather not gamble and lose.

Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.

;D

Your funnier than Aaron.

Well i for one am bitterly dissapointed with this news but not at all suprised i just hope BC and the Trust have got it right?In fairness to JF there wasnt really a clammer from his detractors to keep him away from sort of mugging the shares though was there?

Quoted from 1mickylyons

Well i for one am bitterly dissapointed with this news but not at all suprised i just hope BC and the Trust have got it right?In fairness to JF there wasnt really a clammer from his detractors to keep him away from sort of mugging the shares though was there?

No clamour, but why would there be when he has immersed the club in so much debt - TO HIM! He was/is the only option and all this vote does is to perpetuate that situation.

Quoted from Ipswin

FFS you don't actually believe that do you? Hearn and anyone else Fenty can raise a few quid on will be gone in June

'The cheque's in the post'
'You can't get pregnant doing it standing up'
'Don't worry it doesn't taste of anything'
and now:
'I'll keep the squad together'

Jeez!

So we bring another player in then, Fenty has had the misfortune of previouse managers that carnt manage or no what a good player is, surly even you can see that these two have somthing that we havent seen since we got SIR BUCKLEY from kettering, what wonderfull times lay ahead after that,ITS HAPPENING AGAIN SO STOP BEING NEGATIVE if you havent got anything constructive SHUT the F.U. UTM

Quoted from Squarkus

So we bring another player in then, Fenty has had the misfortune of previouse managers that carnt manage or no what a good player is, surly even you can see that these two have somthing that we havent seen since we got SIR BUCKLEY from kettering, what wonderfull times lay ahead after that,ITS HAPPENING AGAIN SO STOP BEING NEGATIVE if you havent got anything constructive SHUT the F.U. UTM

ok john. ;)

This seems the ideal result for the moaners on here. Most knew that the Trust would have a majority voting "Yes" so the Trust Board, Trust Members and Fenty could be criticised in equal measure without the worry that funding might disappear this season. The club could then go on funding new players (Soares and Winn) in an attempt to get out of this god-forsaken division but the moaners would still have the moral high ground claiming that 82% of voters had been duped and apparently they are "cretins".

I voted late on to hear the arguments and I voted "Yes". I don't know the Trust Board members and I don't know Fenty. I know that Fenty's debts make our club an unattractive proposition to potential investors and I have been very critical of his decisions and communications to fans as Chairman. However, I do think he's a fan and I'm certain that there is no-one else likely to fund this club until the end of next season. I also think that next season is the most critical season we face as I think we'll fall short this year. So, as the least worst option, I'll give my support to the Trust Board to negotiate with Fenty and hopefully help to keep my club afloat. If he doesn't negotiate properly or the Trust Board aren't up to it I'd either withdraw my support for the Trust - or even put myself forward to get more involved. I wouldn't snipe on the sidelines/messageboards.

So carry on moaning on here and then you will have the satisfaction to be able to say "I told you so" next season if it doesn't work out. Alternatively you could join the Trust and give it a proper mandate to represent the fans. Rant over.  

Quoted from lancspontooner

This seems the ideal result for the moaners on here. Most knew that the Trust would have a majority voting "Yes" so the Trust Board, Trust Members and Fenty could be criticised in equal measure without the worry that funding might disappear this season. The club could then go on funding new players (Soares and Winn) in an attempt to get out of this god-forsaken division but the moaners would still have the moral high ground claiming that 82% of voters had been duped and apparently they are "cretins".

I voted late on to hear the arguments and I voted "Yes". I don't know the Trust Board members and I don't know Fenty. I know that Fenty's debts make our club an unattractive proposition to potential investors and I have been very critical of his decisions and communications to fans as Chairman. However, I do think he's a fan and I'm certain that there is no-one else likely to fund this club until the end of next season. I also think that next season is the most critical season we face as I think we'll fall short this year. So, as the least worst option, I'll give my support to the Trust Board to negotiate with Fenty and hopefully help to keep my club afloat. If he doesn't negotiate properly or the Trust Board aren't up to it I'd either withdraw my support for the Trust - or even put myself forward to get more involved. I wouldn't snipe on the sidelines/messageboards.

So carry on moaning on here and then you will have the satisfaction to be able to say "I told you so" next season if it doesn't work out. Alternatively you could join the Trust and give it a proper mandate to represent the fans. Rant over.  

Sums it up perfectly in my opinion. You should post more often :)

Quoted from lancspontooner

This seems the ideal result for the moaners on here. Most knew that the Trust would have a majority voting "Yes" so the Trust Board, Trust Members and Fenty could be criticised in equal measure without the worry that funding might disappear this season. The club could then go on funding new players (Soares and Winn) in an attempt to get out of this god-forsaken division but the moaners would still have the moral high ground claiming that 82% of voters had been duped and apparently they are "cretins".

I voted late on to hear the arguments and I voted "Yes". I don't know the Trust Board members and I don't know Fenty. I know that Fenty's debts make our club an unattractive proposition to potential investors and I have been very critical of his decisions and communications to fans as Chairman. However, I do think he's a fan and I'm certain that there is no-one else likely to fund this club until the end of next season. I also think that next season is the most critical season we face as I think we'll fall short this year. So, as the least worst option, I'll give my support to the Trust Board to negotiate with Fenty and hopefully help to keep my club afloat. If he doesn't negotiate properly or the Trust Board aren't up to it I'd either withdraw my support for the Trust - or even put myself forward to get more involved. I wouldn't snipe on the sidelines/messageboards.

So carry on moaning on here and then you will have the satisfaction to be able to say "I told you so" next season if it doesn't work out. Alternatively you could join the Trust and give it a proper mandate to represent the fans. Rant over.  

Top drawer post.

Quoted from lancspontooner

This seems the ideal result for the moaners on here. Most knew that the Trust would have a majority voting "Yes" so the Trust Board, Trust Members and Fenty could be criticised in equal measure without the worry that funding might disappear this season. The club could then go on funding new players (Soares and Winn) in an attempt to get out of this god-forsaken division but the moaners would still have the moral high ground claiming that 82% of voters had been duped and apparently they are "cretins".

I voted late on to hear the arguments and I voted "Yes". I don't know the Trust Board members and I don't know Fenty. I know that Fenty's debts make our club an unattractive proposition to potential investors and I have been very critical of his decisions and communications to fans as Chairman. However, I do think he's a fan and I'm certain that there is no-one else likely to fund this club until the end of next season. I also think that next season is the most critical season we face as I think we'll fall short this year. So, as the least worst option, I'll give my support to the Trust Board to negotiate with Fenty and hopefully help to keep my club afloat. If he doesn't negotiate properly or the Trust Board aren't up to it I'd either withdraw my support for the Trust - or even put myself forward to get more involved. I wouldn't snipe on the sidelines/messageboards.

So carry on moaning on here and then you will have the satisfaction to be able to say "I told you so" next season if it doesn't work out. Alternatively you could join the Trust and give it a proper mandate to represent the fans. Rant over.  

Looking at Honest John's interview in the Tellywag, it seems that it is yet another short term fix to a long term problem.

If you seriously want GTFC to have a future Mr Fenty, write off your loans!

There may be 177 people prepared to buy in to your 'smoke & mirrors' solution but when are you going to act like a fan and not a businessman?

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Looking at Honest John's interview in the Tellywag, it seems that it is yet another short term fix to a long term problem.

If you seriously want GTFC to have a future Mr Fenty, write off your loans!

There may be 177 people prepared to buy in to your 'smoke & mirrors' solution but when are you going to act like a fan and not a businessman?

What is your solution Old Codger?

Quoted from BlackBoots

What is your solution Old Codger?

No magic solutions, just pointing out that there is no chance of anyone taking on GTFC as a viable concern whilst it is in so much debt to one man - benign or otherwise. I have respect for Mr Fenty's continued financial support for the club - but he, like anyone else with half a commercial brain, knows that the club has no long-term solid fiscal footing with the club's balance sheet as it is.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

No magic solutions, just pointing out that there is no chance of anyone taking on GTFC as a viable concern whilst it is in so much debt to one man - benign or otherwise. I have respect for Mr Fenty's continued financial support for the club - but he, like anyone else with half a commercial brain, knows that the club has no long-term solid fiscal footing with the club's balance sheet as it is.

I agree with you. The club is SO entrenched with JF that there is no chance of an alternative coming forward.

For this reason I felt the Trust had no choice and so far I havent heard from anyone who has put forward a viable alternative.

The only way out is IF the new ground gets the go ahead. Until that time JF holds ALL the aces (sad but true) :'(

Quoted from Squarkus

Fenty has had the misfortune of previouse managers that carnt manage or no what a good player is,

Misfortune? FFS John 'I know fuk all about football but I own the club so I'll decide' Fenty employed most of 'em. It's thanks to his selections that we are now a non-league team.

Quoted from BlackBoots

I agree with you. The club is SO entrenched with JF that there is no chance of an alternative coming forward.

For this reason I felt the Trust had no choice and so far I havent heard from anyone who has put forward a viable alternative.

The only way out is IF the new ground gets the go ahead. Until that time JF holds ALL the aces (sad but true) :'(

Can anyone who is so against the proposal give details of a viable alternative to JF?

I dont mean JF writing all his debt off and leaving the club as I dont see that as viable.

I probably aren't bright enough to come up with a fool proof solution. Can you?

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Two points.

1. The 'seat on the board' was clearly influential and should, equally clearly, have caused the vote to be re-run.

2. 82% of a 72% turnout means that 59% of the Trust membership voted YES which whilst still a majority isn't that sensational bearing in mind the above.

The running and future of this country has many times been decided by a lot less percentage turnout and majority than these figures. That is what democracy is - you cast your vote ( if you can be arsed to ) and accept the result. Unfortunately too many people want a democratic system that only results in what they want.

Quoted from rancido

The running and future of this country has many times been decided by a lot less percentage turnout and majority than these figures. That is what democracy is - you cast your vote ( if you can be arsed to ) and accept the result. Unfortunately too many people want a democratic system that only results in what they want.

But how many times have you voted in an ballot that is derailed by a change in circumstances?

Quoted from MuddyWaters

But how many times have you voted in an ballot that is derailed by a change in circumstances?

In what way? Again I may be missing the point but why was it derailed? Are you suggesting that the discussions regarding the seat of the board had a positive bearing on the 'Yes' vote?

Sorry if I am misunderstanding your point :B

Quoted from MuddyWaters

But how many times have you voted in an ballot that is derailed by a change in circumstances?

Like I said in my original post  some people only want a democratic system if the result is what they want. You are one of many posters on here who only see your side of the argument ie JF is bad for the club and we would be better off without him. Unfortunately you cannot name a specific alternative but take the view that all will be ok if JF goes. I have no specific view either anti or pro JF but until a viable DEFINITE alternative appears then " better the devil you know ". My only concern is that at the moment we have a club with a person who is prepared to fund said club and if he was to decide he had had enough then who would come forward to replace him.

Quoted from rancido

Like I said in my original post  some people only want a democratic system if the result is what they want. You are one of many posters on here who only see your side of the argument ie JF is bad for the club and we would be better off without him. Unfortunately you cannot name a specific alternative but take the view that all will be ok if JF goes. I have no specific view either anti or pro JF but until a viable DEFINITE alternative appears then " better the devil you know ". My only concern is that at the moment we have a club with a person who is prepared to fund said club and if he was to decide he had had enough then who would come forward to replace him.

It is impossible to come up with a viable alternative and that is the clever bit in JF's plan.

Loaning the club massive funds and saddling it with the debt (from JF's fun and mismanagement) makes it one of the least attractive offers since tickets for the Titanic's return voyage went on sale!

Quoted from 1054

It is impossible to come up with a viable alternative and that is the clever bit in JF's plan.

Loaning the club massive funds and saddling it with the debt (from JF's fun and mismanagement) makes it one of the least attractive offers since tickets for the Titanic's return voyage went on sale!

WHS

Quoted from 1054

It is impossible to come up with a viable alternative and that is the clever bit in JF's plan.

Loaning the club massive funds and saddling it with the debt (from JF's fun and mismanagement) makes it one of the least attractive offers since tickets for the Titanic's return voyage went on sale!

IF that is correct then the Trust were correct to overwhelmingly support the proposal.

I must admit to being slightly disappointed that nobody can come up with an alternative. Otherwise it seems there was no  point with the vote or this debate :B

Did you actually read my post Blackboots or selectively read the bit that you highlighted.

You and Squarkus seem hellbent on getting into a 'Human Centipede Situation' with JF. . .

That. . . . . or you are both JF!!!

Quoted from 1054

Did you actually read my post Blackboots or selectively read the bit that you highlighted.

You and Squarkus seem hellbent on getting into a 'Human Centipede Situation' with JF. . .

That. . . . . or you are both JF!!!

you make it sound as if it is all his fault, fenty himself holds his hands up to having made mistakes, but please tell me what is your plan B as i can only see that he is the only one who is willing to fund the future, and you keep banging on about his loans, he has writen them off, however if somone comes along or we get football fortune why should he not get his money back

Quoted from 1054

Did you actually read my post Blackboots or selectively read the bit that you highlighted.

You and Squarkus seem hellbent on getting into a 'Human Centipede Situation' with JF. . .

That. . . . . or you are both JF!!!

I read the lot but you have posted that there isnt a viable alternative (and added why). I am desperately trying to find an alternative to letting JF continue but cannot for the life of me find one.

I am about as far away as being JF as anyone possibly could be ;D

Quoted from BlackBoots

I read the lot but you have posted that there isnt a viable alternative (and added why). I am desperately trying to find an alternative to letting JF continue but cannot for the life of me find one.

I am about as far away as being JF as anyone possibly could be ;D

There will be a time when Mr Fenty decides he no longer wants to play such an active role at the club and although I do not think for a second he will leave us in the mire we need someone to take over the reigns when this happens, It shouldn't be down to one person to look when every single one of us loves the club

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

There will be a time when Mr Fenty decides he no longer wants to play such an active role at the club and although I do not think for a second he will leave us in the mire we need someone to take over the reigns when this happens, It shouldn't be down to one person to look when every single one of us loves the club

I suppose we are lucky we have you and the Trust to make sure we are not reliant on the funding of one man.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

I suppose we are lucky we have you and the Trust to make sure we are not reliant on the funding of one man.

I, like you don't have the spending power other town fans do but I still want to do my bit. My post had nothing to do with the trust.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

I suppose we are lucky we have you and the Trust to make sure we are not reliant on the funding of one man.

??)

The majority vote holds sway, and that's fair enough.  In one sense, it's a relief that we don't have to worry about the club folding just yet, even though the crisis has merely been delayed, and not sorted out for good.

The only other person in recent years who appears to have been willing to put a decent amount of cash into the club has been Mike Parker. I'm still struggling to understand why there was a need to put that clause in the agreement about not wanting Mike Parker to be sold any more shares, when in the same breath Mr Fenty is bemoaning the fact that there is nobody else to share the financial burden.  Surely if Mr Parker were to get any more shares he would have to pay for them, and therefore bring much needed money into the club?

I am led to believe that Mike Parker allegedly doesn't want anything more to do with the running of the club, and also that he is unlikely to offer any more money.  That's fair enough, and I'm sure he'll have his reasons.  But if that is genuinely the case, why are we effectively banning him from buying any more shares - when he isn't going to buy any anyway!!!   Is there any purpose to that clause in the agreement, other than to make it sound slightly hostile, slightly offensive and slightly humiliating to Mike Parker?

Quoted from Harlem mariner

??)

Don't know what you find funny .. Finding an alternative should be a job for every fan . Especially ones against the share proposal

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

Don't know what you find funny .. Finding an alternative should be a job for every fan . Especially ones against the share proposal

Whoa... it's fook all to do with us non trust members remember...

Quoted from voice of reason

Whoa... it's fook all to do with us non trust members remember...

This isn't about the Trust though is it?

Quoted from lancspontooner

This seems the ideal result for the moaners on here. Most knew that the Trust would have a majority voting "Yes" so the Trust Board, Trust Members and Fenty could be criticised in equal measure without the worry that funding might disappear this season. The club could then go on funding new players (Soares and Winn) in an attempt to get out of this god-forsaken division but the moaners would still have the moral high ground claiming that 82% of voters had been duped and apparently they are "cretins".

I voted late on to hear the arguments and I voted "Yes". I don't know the Trust Board members and I don't know Fenty. I know that Fenty's debts make our club an unattractive proposition to potential investors and I have been very critical of his decisions and communications to fans as Chairman. However, I do think he's a fan and I'm certain that there is no-one else likely to fund this club until the end of next season. I also think that next season is the most critical season we face as I think we'll fall short this year. So, as the least worst option, I'll give my support to the Trust Board to negotiate with Fenty and hopefully help to keep my club afloat. If he doesn't negotiate properly or the Trust Board aren't up to it I'd either withdraw my support for the Trust - or even put myself forward to get more involved. I wouldn't snipe on the sidelines/messageboards.

So carry on moaning on here and then you will have the satisfaction to be able to say "I told you so" next season if it doesn't work out. Alternatively you could join the Trust and give it a proper mandate to represent the fans. Rant over.  

good post (from a no voter!!)

Quoted from marinette

The majority vote holds sway, and that's fair enough.  In one sense, it's a relief that we don't have to worry about the club folding just yet, even though the crisis has merely been delayed, and not sorted out for good.

The only other person in recent years who appears to have been willing to put a decent amount of cash into the club has been Mike Parker. I'm still struggling to understand why there was a need to put that clause in the agreement about not wanting Mike Parker to be sold any more shares, when in the same breath Mr Fenty is bemoaning the fact that there is nobody else to share the financial burden.  Surely if Mr Parker were to get any more shares he would have to pay for them, and therefore bring much needed money into the club?

I am led to believe that Mike Parker allegedly doesn't want anything more to do with the running of the club, and also that he is unlikely to offer any more money.  That's fair enough, and I'm sure he'll have his reasons.  But if that is genuinely the case, why are we effectively banning him from buying any more shares - when he isn't going to buy any anyway!!!   Is there any purpose to that clause in the agreement, other than to make it sound slightly hostile, slightly offensive and slightly humiliating to Mike Parker?

Good post

Quoted from Harlem mariner

Good post

It would have been a good post except where has this vote stopped Parker from buying any more shares? The proposal was to stop Parker from gifting any more of his shares to the trust therefore stopping the same thing happening again, not stopping Parker buying any more shares.

it would be interesting if mr fenty came forward and publicly stated that he would write his loans off if someone pays £1 per share for his entire holding.  then we would finally see if another 'investor' would step in to his shoes.  however, i fear that mr fenty and his loans will continue to be a barrier to invest and will be so until we eventually fold

Quoted from cod.gtfc

It would have been a good post except where has this vote stopped Parker from buying any more shares? The proposal was to stop Parker from gifting any more of his shares to the trust therefore stopping the same thing happening again, not stopping Parker buying any more shares.

Ah yes, I got that wrong - my apologies.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure that naming Mike Parker personally like that shows the club in a very good light, especially as Mike Parker has made a substantial financial contribution to GTFC in the not-too distant past.  If I suddenly found myself with a big pot of money, I'm not sure I would want to give it to an organisation that treated its investors in such a way - it almost seems as if MP is being blacklisted.  

Quoted from marinette

Ah yes, I got that wrong - my apologies.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure that naming Mike Parker personally like that shows the club in a very good light, especially as Mike Parker has made a substantial financial contribution to GTFC in the not-too distant past.  If I suddenly found myself with a big pot of money, I'm not sure I would want to give it to an organisation that treated its investors in such a way - it almost seems as if MP is being blacklisted.  

If you win the Euromillions tonight you could always give JF a call and find out!

Quoted from MuddyWaters

If you win the Euromillions tonight you could always give JF a call and find out!

That's a big if.  Just supposing I did, and I decided to donate a few shares to the Trust - what would happen then?

Quoted from marinette

That's a big if.  Just supposing I did, and I decided to donate a few shares to the Trust - what would happen then?

We would have another vote then you would be blacklisted like MP and banished from Blundell Park for eternity :)

anyone who voted yes should be ashamed of themselves. scarred little cowards and thats being polite. what a bunch of muppetts!

Quoted from realityman

anyone who voted yes should be ashamed of themselves. scarred little cowards and thats being polite. what a bunch of muppetts!

Look whos back  :'(
You should be ashamed of yourself for coming onto a public fourm to purposely wind people up. Grow up mate

Quoted from realityman

anyone who voted yes should be ashamed of themselves. scarred little cowards and thats being polite. what a bunch of muppetts!

82% !!

Quoted from cod.gtfc

It would have been a good post except where has this vote stopped Parker from buying any more shares? The proposal was to stop Parker from gifting any more of his shares to the trust therefore stopping the same thing happening again, not stopping Parker buying any more shares.

You mean like he and the board allowed MP to buy his shares then call up rule 9 sometime later.  Again people need to look at the time lines of this whole sorry saga.

Quoted from cod.gtfc

It would have been a good post except where has this vote stopped Parker from buying any more shares? The proposal was to stop Parker from gifting any more of his shares to the trust therefore stopping the same thing happening again, not stopping Parker buying any more shares.

Even if Parker gifted the remainder of his shares to the trust, the trust holding would still be only 38%, still a "minority" shareholding as JF now holds 47-48%. He or anyone else would need to buy a good few (new) shares to get to a majority shareholding now (or buy shares from existing shareholders).

Quoted from realityman

anyone who voted yes should be ashamed of themselves. scarred little cowards and thats being polite. what a bunch of muppetts!

No real need for that. You really are a horrible person.  Yes, I'm being polite just like you!!!!!!!!