Jump to content

jaf

Members
  • Posts

    1,379
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jaf

  1. Hi all I thought I should contribute here from a position of certain knowledge. 1. There were investment discussions which TJF were part of and central to. Two of us including myself were subject to NDAs in respect of this. IF these discussions had progressed to a successful conclusion, there would have been full transparent disclosure / consultation with members given TJFs involvement in the process and the consortium of investors. 2. Those particular investment discussions did not proceed to an investment. For various reasons but it is entirely wrong to say it was rejected by the club nor anything to do with Ian McCall. Completely wrong. 3. The club needs investment. That remains the case as we have mentioned previously. The process was useful as it showed that fan ownership and private capital / investment could Co-exist with the right investor. 4. I am very happy to privately discuss further @javeajag if there is any specific questions that remain unanswered. Sandy Fyfe
  2. Hi Martin Indeed, we said we would do a comparison table of net current assets once more accounts published; net current assets being the 'margin of safety'. It remains our intention to publish that to members as promised.
  3. No. There will be an opt in option at season ticket renewal time.
  4. Three of the current top four were the three clubs with the longest odds pre-season! Really interesting to look back on that
  5. Hi thanks for the feedback I think you are right to acknowledge that there is some very specific wording we either had to, or wished to use. I think we also wish to come across in as professional a way as we can whilst we continue to build the case for fan ownership by being credible. To do so, we adopt that professional language. But it is also important to educate/inform as many people as possible with these updates, so your point on clarity is noted. Of course, we also have some members who actually appreciate the language used (from private feedback received), so we have a challenge keeping everyone happy - but we will do our best! Thanks
  6. Just to confirm we have now clarified with a statement. We did not know about this at all. To clarify, we were asked to put forward / nominated a board member onto the new board but she is not “our representative”. She serves in the position in her own right as a director, with the personal responsibilities that brings. One of the many things on the to do list for the future is working together protocols between the board and the fans organisations. This has always been an important aspect of TJFs idea of an ideal or best case solution. At the moment, TJF have not yet got any formal position - although progress has been made on this. Whilst we have worked much better alongside this board, the board are independent of us and we have no formal position. Perhaps all of this highlights why we need the formality clarified soon. And why we need working together protocols that function well and give us all the version of fan ownership we wish for and expect.
  7. Martin, You will not have to wait too much longer to hear something - unfortunately I cannot comment for 'on the park'
  8. Is he not going to Dundee United anyway? (Flush with cash from the souttar sell on).
  9. I don’t think the club realise this. Going to the football is the most habit forming thing. Go every week, you never want to miss a week. However get out of the habit…… Being privileged to know what I do, I will find it difficult to buy the 3 season tickets a year i currently buy (and today will be the last hospitality I take, only because I had committed to do so) whilst Gerry Britton remains in post and whilst certain board members remain at our club.
  10. Please do. You will be VERY welcome. If you need private reassurance, PM me and I will gladly speak with you one to one. Consequences are not something TJF can do alone. We need all of your help. We aren't giving up. We aren't going away. We told TBC that when they told us we weren't getting the shares. We told Jacqui Low it again when she later asked what our intentions were for TJF. We remain resolved to be true to those promises - as long as our members want us. Sandy
  11. This depends entirely on how you define well run! There is conventional wisdom. And there is PTFC's. Some seem to argue, or accept , being well run is whatever fancy valuation method you have used to swell your net assets. Under those criteria, PTFC trounce St Johnstone. PTFC have net assets of in excess of £14m, with St Johnstone having a lowly £1.8m of net assets. (This is of course because St Johnstone have not revalued their stadium which shows exactly the limitations of concentrating on net assets, as I suspect no one truly believes we are 8 times as wealthy as St Johnstone?) This exact point - which emerges in the TJF accounts analysis - is further proven by looking at two other key figures, namely cash, and net current assets. In cash terms St Johnstone hold £3.9m of cash reserves versus our £330k in the May 2022 accounts. So they have nearly 12 times the amount of cash reserves as we do - something more in line with the view of them being a well run club. This is explained well in their (non-petulant) directors report. Furthermore, whilst our net current assets ratio is 1.1 (down from 1.65 and lurching closely towards being under 1 - not a good thing), the net current assets ratio of St Johnstone is 8.2 in their last published accounts. Sometimes you need to scratch beneath the surface.
  12. I have been saying all week I hope we have been practising defending set pieces as that’s Dundee’s best chance of scoring (as evidenced by the game at Dundee). i don’t claim to be any master analyst of football tactics. If I could see that, I would have hoped our management team would have. To me, therefore, the second goal was just a terrible goal to concede.
  13. It’s not an exchange of views its an opinion (yours) which is now corroborated as being erroneous versus inconvenient facts which are now corroborated as being true. Yet still no apology that your speculation was wrong? I hope, if elected, you can leave these petty biases and erroneous preconceptions behind.
  14. As most people know, I am Sandy Fyfe and I am standing. Good suggestion Tom.
  15. I know you won’t believe me, and that’s why I suggested @tom hosie should pop on and verify this so we can move on from your erroneous unfair speculation. Tom had a desire to put facts out there on this thread and you respected and accepted his version of events. You are speculating entirely wrongly. Tom can confirm you are and I hope he does so we can move on. You could perhaps even proactively PM him to validate what I am saying?
  16. I might think there are various reasons for there not being greater communication of facts but we won’t get into those just now. we are all different but whether your default position is overly trusting of everything from one side, or the other, there are facts and opinions Tom hosie did a good job of bringing some facts to this forum in the spirit of transparent honesty I would hope he could now confirm that there was never any suggestion of what you speculate in either documentation or from any individual at any TJF board meeting If he won’t confirm , as I say the minutes and documentation shall do so lets stick to the facts best we can rather than speculation? Good luck in the remainder of the election campaign
  17. Comes from third party voting software.
  18. Check spam jaggy. That’s where mine was!
  19. 100 per cent inaccurate. if elected , the detailed documented minutes will prove the point to you. I hope you will come back to say you were wrong and put the record straight. I also hope tom hosie will confirm that point to you since you seem to trust his previous posts would be good for the election campaign to be grounded in the reality of facts rather then erroneous speculation
  20. Hi Tom, I recall this meeting well. It was 13th October. I remember you saying , and I am paraphrasing, 'Whoever does this role , its a poisoned chalice - I think you should do it Sandy'! The reason I did not take the club board role was not due to a general reluctance though. It was due to a very specific one which you have omitted from your history of events. It was because I noted that I was best placed to remain on the TJF Board to oversee due diligence process without being compromised nor conflicted. On 14 October, I wrote to Gavin Taylor to decline the board position formally (having said I would sleep on it), including this paragraph which one of your fellow board members at the time described as a 'compelling reason' for me not to go onto the Club board (because at that time, there was an expectation by all on the TJF board that due diligence, as fed back during engagement sessions, was indeed a prerequisite to move forward). The position of others changed later. I have simply remained consistent. "3. I think I can add more value to TJF than to the PTFC board. That is a matter of opinion, but in particular for example in assessment/instruction of due diligence. I know you and I differ on this. You think it doesn’t matter as we will never refuse the share transfer. I agree with that to an extent, but I feel passionately that it absolutely does matter for our credibility that we know the position we are taking into fan ownership so there is a realistic set of expectations for our friends and fellow supporters." I am glad you and I now agree that the approach which was taken and was supported by the majority of the TJF Board 'did not work well'. As you know I felt this approach was flawed and I consulted my Institute and ethically was therefore required to resign on their advice. At the time you opined, how could I speak about working together and compromise and then resign when not getting my way? I think that matters of ethics where you have a regulatory body don't quite work like that, in that you sacrifice having the choice of compromise. Compromise over ethical matters is something I would not do. For fan ownership to work, in my opinion, the fan ownership body needs to be professional and have independent thought and standards (and ethics) from the outset. For the avoidance of doubt, this need not be adversarial as you suggest. I truly believe that can be avoided, but I also do not think there is any harm in having the ambition to do things as professionally as can be done from the outset.
  21. I am happy to go on the record that I have no desire to be on the football club board. I know others in our group feel the same. TJF previously tried to suggest that role for me, and I declined. I think its easy to underestimate some of the fabulous skills among our support though. I think I agree with you in that TJF board and club board members require different skillsets and motivations. Also to whoever said that 'getting rid of the entire club board' as the agenda of TJF - past or prospective - that is absolutely untrue.
  22. My predetermined view is aligned to yours. We need to increase numbers. I don’t think you will find disagreement to that among any of the group standing. Nor indeed any of the group standing down I suspect. Its hard to sell something to sceptical people when you don’t know what you are actually selling. That’s why there have been the demands for clarity on what criteria would make TBC engage with a fans organisation, something we do not yet know after two and a half years.
  23. Running a slate gives voting members a little more meat on the bones of what they are voting for. it also means that after an inordinate amount of time so far , if elected, that group can “hit the ground running”, and won’t spend time arguing with themselves over initial steps. There is I think some merit to that. But everyone is entitled to their opinion. Ultimately, it’s firstly for the members to decide when they vote, and secondly for TBC to decide whether to engage with whoever the new TJF comprises of. Every member is entitled to stand. Every member is entitled to vote.
  24. I recognise much of this, and we cannot MAKE TBC engage with the next TJF board. But by making TJF a stronger and stronger members organisation, we increase the opportunity for engagement with them. The 'Common Platform' also means that the next TJF board could be aligned and have unity. This will help accelerate options, and the group has been an ideas factory so far, and so I have high hopes that there are lots of ways we can move this forward - if elected.
×
×
  • Create New...