The Corporate world that I ( and I assume you also ) worked in, yes.

However it has long been the case that normal rules suddenly don't apply when it comes to running football clubs.

* Parish is responsible and empowered to lead the day to day running of the club. He may well argue that his actions were, in his opinion, in the best interests of CPFC - and therefore Textor as majority shareholder. They may well not have not been in the best interests of Eagle Holdings, Textors company.

* As I said earlier in this thread, Textor's involvement has largely been a disappointment because it's apparent that he doesn't agree with Parish on a number of issues and the result is a lack of harmony and unified direction from the Board. How did they ever agree to do business with one another in the first place ?

* Textor Eagle Holdings have investments in 2 other European clubs. There's quite a bit of money at stake. If I was him I would be all over and on top of every piece of football governance that affects my investments.

That was a point made quite forcibly by Simon Jordan on Talksport. And as SJ said, he's hardly Parish's biggest fan.

I'm just waiting for their next dispute, unless Textor can sell his shares quickly.

The Corporate world that I ( and I assume you also ) worked in, yes.

However it has long been the case that normal rules suddenly don't apply when it comes to running football clubs.

* Parish is responsible and empowered to lead the day to day running of the club. He may well argue that his actions were, in his opinion, in the best interests of CPFC - and therefore Textor as majority shareholder. They may well not have not been in the best interests of Eagle Holdings, Textors company.

* As I said earlier in this thread, Textor's involvement has largely been a disappointment because it's apparent that he doesn't agree with Parish on a number of issues and the result is a lack of harmony and unified direction from the Board. How did they ever agree to do business with one another in the first place ?

* Textor Eagle Holdings have investments in 2 other European clubs. There's quite a bit of money at stake. If I was him I would be all over and on top of every piece of football governance that affects my investments.

That was a point made quite forcibly by Simon Jordan on Talksport. And as SJ said, he's hardly Parish's biggest fan.

I'm just waiting for their next dispute, unless Textor can sell his shares quickly.

Too many cooks have really spoilt this broth, this is why nothing gets carried out and concluded. Trust us to end up with a bunch of attention seeking b******s!

Having someone with 10% ownership rights but 25% voting rights is plain crazy, but you could say not as crazy as a shareholder having 45% ownership rights but only 25% voting rights.

IMO this is a set up that’s asking for trouble and it is no surprise that there is grumbling amongst the two active protagonists in Textor and Parish.

Personally I think Textors other football holdings make him a dangerous part owner and we have already seen his influence in the transfer market. You also get the feeling his loyalties lie more with the French side of his business than Palace but this is only guesswork as no one seems to have a proper handle on him.

I think this window will be quite telling of how our boardroom is currently functioning.

Normal rules surely can be applied.

Parish has been empowered by the shareholders as a whole to run the company. If Textor wants to remove Parish, he would need to call a shareholder meeting.

Textor holds 45% of the shares but that doesn't constitute a majority. He would need the support of either Harris, Blitzer or Parish himself to get his proposal implemented. That would surely be unlikely.

It has also been suggested that each shareholder has 25% voting rights. If so, Textor would need the support of two of the others to gain more than 50% of the votes, which is even more unlikely.

It's been written elsewhere that Parish isn't stupid; it seems to me that he's pretty fireproof in this situation.