January - Pivotal month?

Quoted from DB

I'd like to think the consortium had an input and decent terms for new players contracts. However the current directors listed on companies house do not show any consortium members being added to the list of directors.

While we all assume that the consortium is is taking over GTFC but the club is still officially run by JF. Incidentally the last director to leave was IH on 23rd Dec. The accounts showed him as a director, until his resignation having 5 £100 shares, but I couldn't find  IH on the list of 1817 shareholders!

I know very little about company account but can read. So the question is why have none of the consortium been co-opted onto the board. I know if I had £1 million being invested then I would want an input.

Because they are still dotting the i's and crossing the t's. Have to get the contracts drawn up and have their legal people check them over. Then there is the EFL fit and proper test to pass before it can all be ratified. Anything legal takes a while, The legal eagles have to get their billable hours in.

The takeover hasn't happened yet.  The shares have not been bought yet.  It is happening, or so we are led to believe, but until it is legally finalised the golden triumvirate cannot join the board.
No need to panic just yet

Quoted from DB

I'd like to think the consortium had an input and decent terms for new players contracts. However the current directors listed on companies house do not show any consortium members being added to the list of directors.

While we all assume that the consortium is is taking over GTFC but the club is still officially run by JF. Incidentally the last director to leave was IH on 23rd Dec. The accounts showed him as a director, until his resignation having 5 £100 shares, but I couldn't find  IH on the list of 1817 shareholders!

I know very little about company account but can read. So the question is why have none of the consortium been co-opted onto the board. I know if I had £1 million being invested then I would want an input.

At the moment they own nothing. They have agreed "head of terms" which isn't legally binding. Essentially John has agreed to sell his shares to either one, two, all three of them or a company owned by them. We don't know the full details but nobody has said they need to make an offer for everyone elses shares. The rules state this must be done if you acquire 30% so I assume at least 2 of them are buying his shares rather than one of them or a company.

Once that goes through I'm not sure if they will be co-opted onto the board or an EGM will be called. I wouldn't be surprised to see them take over with more than 50% of the shares which would give them the power to shape the boardroom to suit them. To do this they would need to buy at least half of Mike Parker's shares.

It isn't legally binding yet but Hurst has met with the consortium and we are investing in an analyst. That tells me it's going through.

No panic, just being observant. Co-opting onto the board would give the consortium a feed back on what is or is not happening.

Quoted from DB

No panic, just being observant. Co-opting onto the board would give the consortium a feed back on what is or is not happening.

They are having input, whether they sit on the board or not. They will be party to any decisions, i don't doubt that.

I sincerely hope the sale is going through but given the reported track record of JF, sale on sale off, I want to sell, o no I'm not etc. I would be more confident of it going through with a new board member.

Question.
Would Mike Parker be interested in working with them?
Would he be prepared to join the board, maybe as Chairman?  He has the shareholding.
I cant imagine that the Golden Triumvirate with all their other business interests wanting to be involved on a day to day basis

Quoted from DB

I sincerely hope the sale is going through but given the reported track record of JF, sale on sale off, I want to sell, o no I'm not etc. I would be more confident of it going through with a new board member.

Can you imagine the outrage if Fenty pulls another stunt like that? One of them being on the board wouldn't make a difference because Fenty and his puppets would outnumber him anyway.

how does the voting work,  One man one vote or is it based on shareholding?

Until he sells his shares JF will always be in control. I was just making the point if I was going to buy him out I would want my man on the inside. Yes he would be outvoted but, unlike us, who sit outside a closed shut bolted barracked boardroom, they would know what was happening