Philip Day Appointed Club Chairman

Quoted from golfer

If a vote in the boardroom is against JSF what will Day do - if they don't have votes what is the chairmans job -is it a SPOKESMAN and not a chairman that is being created

There is nothing he can do.There can't be a vote against JSF because he has the majority shareholding so 49% of votes can go against him but he just piles in with 51% of the votes and it's a done deal (I don't actually know what JSF's shareholding is in % terms).

Hopefully Day can advise and influence JSF's decisions but it's ultimately his decision. In some cases a majority shareholder can delegate their votes to another board member but that doesn't appear to have happened here.

Fenty is still in control of GTFC.

JF has probably appointed a chairman to isolate him from the club during any political manoeuvring on future ground building activities, has he mentioned before he has been sailing too close to the wind as a Councillor

This is likely a move to ensure Fenty doesn’t incur and damage to his political career whilst still wanting to be the despot leader of the club.

I don’t imagine Day would ever vote against Fenty, and as a few have already pointed out, Fenty ultimately still has the overall control and decision making power as majority shareholder.

Bit of a non story really...

Yes-man gets new title.

But he's still a yes-man, so this is meaningless/cosmetic.

Quoted from BobbyCummingsTackle

There is nothing he can do.There can't be a vote against JSF because he has the majority shareholding so 49% of votes can go against him but he just piles in with 51% of the votes and it's a done deal (I don't actually know what JSF's shareholding is in % terms).

Hopefully Day can advise and influence JSF's decisions but it's ultimately his decision. In some cases a majority shareholder can delegate their votes to another board member but that doesn't appear to have happened here.

Fenty is still in control of GTFC.

I'm having a giggle to myself here because I've got 3 red crosses as if people don't agree with my opinion (which is fine) - this isn't my opinion, it's how companies, boards and shareholdings work!

Ho hum.

Voting at the board is on the basis of one member one vote. So in that sense JSF can be outvoted. When it comes to AGMs and EGMs and a vote based on shareholding is called then JSF has c43% of the shares/vote. I may be slightly out on the percentage. But he can still technically be outvoted there.

Where the control can really be exerted is through his loans and his guarantee to meet cash flow shortages (up to a limit). He could decide to take his bat home if he doesn’t like a decision.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Voting at the board is on the basis of one member one vote. So in that sense JSF can be outvoted. When it comes to AGMs and EGMs and a vote based on shareholding is called then JSF has c43% of the shares/vote. I may be slightly out on the percentage. But he can still technically be outvoted there.

Where the control can really be exerted is through his loans and his guarantee to meet cash flow shortages (up to a limit). He could decide to take his bat home if he doesn’t like a decision.

This.  Technically, each board member has a single vote with the appointed chairman usually having the casting vote should there be a deadlock.  But considering Fenty's financial power, other members are unlikely to vote against him if he strongly espouses a certain viewpoint.  This is very unlikely anyway as most of the board members always seem to be aligned on the direction of the club.  That's how it appears publicly at least.

This is just to create some semblance of hierarchy during the next few months and, of course, to guarantee Championship football by 2023.

Quoted from MarinerDevil

This.  Technically, each board member has a single vote with the appointed chairman usually having the casting vote should there be a deadlock.  But considering Fenty's financial power, other members are unlikely to vote against him if he strongly espouses a certain viewpoint.  This is very unlikely anyway as most of the board members always seem to be aligned on the direction of the club.  That's how it appears publicly at least.

This is just to create some semblance of hierarchy during the next few months and, of course, to guarantee Championship football by 2023.

Vote against JSF on any major issue and the remaining directors will find themselves financially liable for any debts as JSF could easily pull all his funding/loans/guarantee's...........just as happened when the trust received its shares from Mike Parker.......and as the directors have hardly put a penny in (relatively speaking) to date i doubt very much they will want to p1ss off the cash cow and be sweating on stumping up themselves.  

JF is distancing himself from the club to concentrate on his Deputy Leader / regen'n role at the council, and to avoid conflict of interest re the New stadium.
The board need a figurehead, JF fulfilled this role as non chairman/ major shareholder.
So PD to chairman makes sense,  
Who else?, Jon Wood, Ian Holloway, Stephen Marley, Michael Chapman, is Dave Roberts a director.
IMO PD is the sensible option.

Not being involved in the day-to-day running of the club does not mean there isn’t a conflict of interest! He still owns 43% of the shares and is owed in region of £1.5m (assuming all the debt owed to directors is to him). For there to be no conflict of interest he would have to step away from any council decision affecting the club’s future.