Jump to content

Fan Director / Jt Board Rep Position


stolenscone
 Share

Recommended Posts

It’s time for the trust to take a stand and call for changes in the board room. Time for Allan Cowan and Tom Hughes to go. The club seems to be deliberately going out their way to discredit the trust.

 

You have got to wonder what the real reason is for all of this. This means no fan representative will be in on the proco deal and if we go into admin. Its shocking behavior and they can’t be allowed to go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It’s time for the trust to take a stand and call for changes in the board room. Time for Allan Cowan and Tom Hughes to go. The club seems to be deliberately going out their way to discredit the trust.

 

You have got to wonder what the real reason is for all of this. This means no fan representative will be in on the proco deal and if we go into admin. Its shocking behavior and they can’t be allowed to go on.

 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many people (having spent some time chatting with quite a few people (long time Jags fans) on saturday) think the time is now for a fans body who are completely remote from the club to voice views and perhaps raise funds to attempt to take over the club when it eventually goes t1ts up in a few years time.

The timing may be right, the atmosphere around Firhill certainly suggests that and our situation appears dire, but we really require a leader or figurehead to come forward.

I don't think there would be any shortage of names put forward say in a petition or the likes and a good percentage of those names could be counted on to join such a fans body. I'm not meaning to sound negative about such a movement but I only feel it could be effective if it's lead from the front. Put another way without strong leadership it would end up as a talking shop, forming committees, consulting membership at every single juncture, EGMs etc etc.

Sorry, but I feel the Chiefs and Indians thingy could be a major stumbling block. Thinking more positvely there must be someone from within our fanbase or the world of football, maybe an ex Jags player, ex boardmember, well known fan that we could rally behind?

Edited by lady-isobel-barnett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s time for the trust to take a stand and call for changes in the board room. Time for Allan Cowan and Tom Hughes to go. The club seems to be deliberately going out their way to discredit the trust.

 

You have got to wonder what the real reason is for all of this. This means no fan representative will be in on the proco deal and if we go into admin. Its shocking behavior and they can’t be allowed to go on.

 

Well said, Alan: this is the reality.

 

The very fact that the BoD are happy to take every penny that the JT raises for them yet are equally happy to bite the hand that feeds them, tells us that they really and truly don't give a flying f*ck about the JT or the fans.

 

Alan's point about no fan representative being around the board when the shadowy propco deal is finalised is, or should be, of major concern to all of us. I'm no prophet of doom by nature, but there does seem to be growing credibility in the idea that this lot (BoD) have long since chucked any notion of working for the survival and betterment of Partick Thistle Football Club and now see their primary duty as being for the betterment of themselves come Armageddon.

 

Cowan and Hughes' departure would at least be indicative that we have a future. As for the expected, "yeah, but where are all the sugar daddies that are queueing up to invest"?, I have to reply that, however safe or otherwise the club would be in the hands of the fans, it looks like being far less safe in the hands of those 'me first' buffoons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many people (having spent some time chatting with quite a few people (long time Jags fans) on saturday) think the time is now for a fans body who are completely remote from the club to voice views and perhaps raise funds to attempt to take over the club when it eventually goes t1ts up in a few years time.

Me too.. what we have at present is a shambolic something that has no identity ans is generally seen by the fans as being firmly lodged up the ersehole of a BoD that the fans have little faith in.

 

The time has come for a stance to be taken and if means telling them to stick their board rep then so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Chairman has advised the Trust board that the Club needs to “consider how best to represent [the fan’s] views."

 

Now I don't know if this has been said before - the curse of skim/scan reading a long and interesting thread - but the wording here is quite interesting. My own reading of it is that the Club will decide how the fans views will be represented. Setting aside the issue that they do not appear to have a mechanism in place to carry out any information gathering at this time (when was the last time the Club wrote and asked for your opinion?) my concern is that the club not the fans themselves will decide....etc.

 

Why?

 

Am I as a fan (and a member of the Jags Trust I might add) incapapable of deciding how I want to be represented?

 

Indeed as a member of the Jags Trust have I not made it abundantly clear how i wish to be represented?

 

Seems to me that this is nothing short of the actions of a dictatorship. And I for one have a problem with supporting such a regime.

 

Now I will not allow Messrs Cowan and Co to deny me my fix of my favourite football team. No matter how dreadful they are on any given Saturday. Having paid the Season Ticket money up front, and being somewhat of a tightwad anyway, I feel that a boycott of football matches is not what is called for here.

 

But what would be the immediate impact of me deciding (for myself) that I can no longer morally suuport this board through its Centary Fund? And indeed would I off-set a withdrawl from the C.F. by perhaps putting the cash in my Soccersaver account in order to make it avaailable to a group such as the Jags Trust when and if it ever became necessary for them to lead a STJ Part 2 campaign.

 

Anyone have any similar ideas?

 

Or a contrary opinion?

 

Maybe you should get them in quick before SOMEONE decides for you -the fan- what you sould be thinking/doing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TBH - the club have timed their run pretty well. It's hard to argue a mandate when member levels are down so low and that the vast majority of internet activity by fans seems to be always be centred around issues of how ineffectual the trust are/how unrepresentative they are etc. Indeed, it has been stated within such conversations that the situation is so bad that another body, one that is seemingly more representative of the views of the fans, should be created. (Although what would happen if these bad apples get in charge of new body? Would democracy have to be sacrified to ensure purity of purpose?) This remedy has come up on heated and passionate discussions this forum, the jags forum blog and the harrywrags forum - all of which is no doubt used by the BOD to gauge the mood of the fans. Given that the fans themselves are calling into question the utility of the jags trust as the voice of the fans (by voting by their feet by leaving it and moaning online) is it any suprise that the BOD would not delight in an opportunity to use this a pretext to get rid of a fans rep on the board?

 

IMO this overall bad situation of the organising of the fans as a power to challenge dominance by the BOD comes down to the culture where people like to do a lot of tounge wagging and very little in the way of action of organising the fans into an effective group. People say they have very little time on their hands to do stuff but how much time does it take to write the erudite dissertation length posts on forums like this about whatever the latest controversy is with ptfc? For example how many members turn up to observe (and perhaps [participate)in the trust board meetings? There are many excuses forwarded by the indignant bloggers, twit-terers, and general forum junkies to excuse themselves from getting involved with the trust but still allowing themselves the luxury to have a go at those who have stepped up to the mark. One common one is that is advanced is that the trust is tainted by people that do not have the best intersts of the fans at heart or are sellouts etc.

 

They would rather engage in that BS than stepping up to the plate and utilising the democratic structure of the trust to advance another agenda. Nah seemingly its of more benefit to the situation to write populist posts on the forum picking fault with those dodgy members of the trust (who they are usually too cowardly to specify who they are talkign about.

 

Heres a radical idea. Instead of coming up with 5 point plans to make a more democratic fans body why not just use democracy in the trust? The fact that only 11 people signed up to this new proposed body demonstrates that sadly once the longly considered posts are put together that there is very little energy left in the reserves to doing something positve.

 

Another radical idea - ever heard of the expression 'actions speak louder than words'?

 

I reckon that instead of the trust with a large membership united in purpose and 10% of shares to keep the BOD in check that they should get one of the aforementioned internet commentators be the rep to carry on their good work at holding the club to account. Its obviously working well :rolleyes:

Edited by mrD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Time to take a stand ladies and gents, what can be done before this meeting tho?

 

easy put the pressure back on the board ,

 

boycott with a difference .

 

still support the team keep going to games but,

 

don't buy programmes,raffle tickets, give the pie stalls a miss ,

 

don't buy any merchandise from graves.

 

stop direct debits to centenary fund

 

 

see how the board react to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be reluctant to do any of that because it takes away finance from the Club and can still be used as a stick to beat us (the fans) with if/when the brown stuff hits. However if the outcome of this meeting is as I expect it to be then I feel we have no choice but to do some of the stuff you mentioned.

 

Take this scenario as an example:

The meeting results in the Jags Trust being denied a Fan Rep on the Board of the Club. That puts the Jags Trust in a position where 'playing them at their own game' comes into play. By that I mean the BoD get held to account over the non-payment of shares to the Trust as part of the CF arrangement, the arrangement is basically nulled by this therefore an 1876 Club II can be formed under those grounds (yes?). Now how many of us are likely to switch from CF to 1876 mark 2? If it is as many as I suspect then the BoD will have to take notice.

 

Not buying programmes will not majorly impact on the BoD imo, the money made from this is minimal and I think this is more a service provided for the fans who want a programme on a Saturday.

 

Greaves would lose money if we didnt buy merchandise not the Club, at least not in the short term (not saying Im against this action tho).

 

With regards to boycotting with a difference, if there were enough of us involved then Id envisage something along the lines of turning up at firhill earlish on matchday, congregating outside the JHS and voicing our displeasure loudly. Hospitality, press etc will all be there. Stay there till fifteen minutes after kick-off then enter en masse still voicing our displeasure.Then take our seats and change the tone from anger at BoD to support for the guys in rednyella. Mix it up by at times leaving 15 minutes early in some games to do the exact same thing, remain outside the JHS for long enough for fans, hospitality guests, press and board members to leave.

 

If enough of us are involved the Board (and press) would have no option but to take notice, what to others think of this type of thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more you think about Cowan's statement, the more infuriating it is. After his shambolic tenure, he thinks he's got a right to tell the Trust how to conduct their business! Jeezo.

 

Anyway, picking up on some previous points, but if the BOD no longer want to play ball and have any input from a representative of the fans, then I think the Trust is duty bound to go on the offensive. I'd like to see it set up an alternative fund to the Centenary Fund and recommend all supporters cancel their direct debits to the CF and pay into this new fund - a fighting fund to legally challenge both the Shares issues and the conflict of interests the BOD have in Propco. If we can disgrace a few people into handing back their shares into a neutral pot then we can at least strengthen our influence and start a serious campaign to challenge the current incumbents of the BOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be reluctant to do any of that because it takes away finance from the Club and can still be used as a stick to beat us (the fans) with if/when the brown stuff hits. However if the outcome of this meeting is as I expect it to be then I feel we have no choice but to do some of the stuff you mentioned.

 

Take this scenario as an example:

The meeting results in the Jags Trust being denied a Fan Rep on the Board of the Club. That puts the Jags Trust in a position where 'playing them at their own game' comes into play. By that I mean the BoD get held to account over the non-payment of shares to the Trust as part of the CF arrangement, the arrangement is basically nulled by this therefore an 1876 Club II can be formed under those grounds (yes?). Now how many of us are likely to switch from CF to 1876 mark 2? If it is as many as I suspect then the BoD will have to take notice.

 

Not buying programmes will not majorly impact on the BoD imo, the money made from this is minimal and I think this is more a service provided for the fans who want a programme on a Saturday.

 

Greaves would lose money if we didnt buy merchandise not the Club, at least not in the short term (not saying Im against this action tho).

 

With regards to boycotting with a difference, if there were enough of us involved then Id envisage something along the lines of turning up at firhill earlish on matchday, congregating outside the JHS and voicing our displeasure loudly. Hospitality, press etc will all be there. Stay there till fifteen minutes after kick-off then enter en masse still voicing our displeasure.Then take our seats and change the tone from anger at BoD to support for the guys in rednyella. Mix it up by at times leaving 15 minutes early in some games to do the exact same thing, remain outside the JHS for long enough for fans, hospitality guests, press and board members to leave.

 

If enough of us are involved the Board (and press) would have no option but to take notice, what to others think of this type of thing?

 

Cash is all that matters.

 

But its too late now. Its checkmate. Or perpetual check at the very least. The Board won the game the moment propco was voted through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cash is all that matters.

 

But its too late now. Its checkmate. Or perpetual check at the very least. The Board won the game the moment propco was voted through.

 

Probably, but we can't just give up. I'm astounded the press and football authorities are not 'more interested' in this Propco deal, surely there is (or should be) a story there. Although if its nowt to do wi the Ugly Sisters the press aint interested :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably, but we can't just give up. I'm astounded the press and football authorities are not 'more interested' in this Propco deal, surely there is (or should be) a story there. Although if its nowt to do wi the Ugly Sisters the press aint interested :(

 

Yes we are largely inconsequential in the eyes of the media, but the shareholders ratified it and the supporters organisation did not oppose it so wheres the story???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we are largely inconsequential in the eyes of the media, but the shareholders ratified it and the supporters organisation did not oppose it so wheres the story???

 

That the shareholders who ratified it stand to make more money if Thistle went bust (contentous yes but thats the kind of issues the media report). Again tho, would they even care enough to listen never mind dig into the story themselves? Doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably, but we can't just give up. I'm astounded the press and football authorities are not 'more interested' in this Propco deal, surely there is (or should be) a story there. Although if its nowt to do wi the Ugly Sisters the press aint interested :(

 

I'm not. They don't give a flying f*ck. Get used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll need to find out more about this..... some posters seem fairly clued up. There are some things I would like the trust to tell me at the AGM.

 

- Have the trust been receiving shares from the CF.

- Were these shares only for the initial applications anyway?

- If these shares do get handed over, are they worthless? Or do they still have a stake in the 'other half of the ground'.

- If the football half of the shares go bust, do propco get them (and the other half of the ground) for free.

- Does the trust need it's own money due to not getting shares, or getting worthless shares.

- If some of the above is true the trust should cease arrangements with the CF after the AGM.

- Recreate a new financial vehicle for fundraising for the trust.

- Should the trust Start saving this money (this is not a boycott, just creating a fund in case the club needs investment in the case of the current board trying to walk or just being in administration).

- Should the trust withhold this money from the current board as they will just blow it on crackpot schemes. Money = leverage.

 

??????? It's all a bit murky to the 'umble outsider

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

- If the football half of the shares go bust, do propco get them (and the other half of the ground) for free.

 

 

There is a compulsory transfer triggered at Market Value. The market value of shares with limited upside and no control is negligible at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll need to find out more about this..... some posters seem fairly clued up. There are some things I would like the trust to tell me at the AGM.

 

- Have the trust been receiving shares from the CF.

- Were these shares only for the initial applications anyway?

- If these shares do get handed over, are they worthless? Or do they still have a stake in the 'other half of the ground'.

- If the football half of the shares go bust, do propco get them (and the other half of the ground) for free.

- Does the trust need it's own money due to not getting shares, or getting worthless shares.

- If some of the above is true the trust should cease arrangements with the CF after the AGM.

- Recreate a new financial vehicle for fundraising for the trust.

- Should the trust Start saving this money (this is not a boycott, just creating a fund in case the club needs investment in the case of the current board trying to walk or just being in administration).

- Should the trust withhold this money from the current board as they will just blow it on crackpot schemes. Money = leverage.

 

??????? It's all a bit murky to the 'umble outsider

 

It's all a bit murky to the insiders as well, but since you have put some short and simple questions, I'll try some short an simple answers in the same order.

 

- No

- No, the value reduces after year 1, but JT-labelled applications to the CF should return shares in perpetuity (10% of the value which is pretty appalling, given that the board got 100% for the cash they invested)

- The shares are worthless in any case, given that they are shares in a company that loses money, but in theory, the remainder of the ground belongs to the club so it counts as an asset.

- If the club goes bust, its propco shares are immediately offered to the other propco investors. We don't know if there is any other arrangement in relation to the remainder of the ground.

- The trust gets money from annual subs and any other fundraising that it does. About £1000 of this is spent annually on administration such as sending out formal notices to members. The remainder is theoretically available for donation to whatever the Trust board agree to. The trust accounts will be available at the agm and need to be discussed and adopted.

- Maybe. We haven't got to the bottom of all of this yet. That's why we want to meet the board and why it would be good to meet them before the agm.

- Maybe, but I personally think that folk would need to know what they were signing up to and why.

- The Trust has a small amount of money at the moment - a reserve is needed to operate within the guidelines of the Financial Services Authority who govern our activities. We also had a reserve that was being held to fund the installation of a disabled platform lift in the JH stand, but we understand that this is not now going ahead. Some of that cash went to fund the Jackie McNamara short term loan last season.

- Maybe. Until we meet with them and ask some pertinent questions (which the club might not want to answer) we don't really know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really only going round in circles with the board. They don’t like the trust asking difficult questions and are looking to discredit them.

 

What will happen at the meeting is this; they will let the rep on and agree to give the shares however this process is all aimed at discrediting the trust. Another wee guess is the board will be too busy to meet the trust before the agm.

 

Time for straight talking from the trust and positioning themselves for the financial difficulties that lie ahead for the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my previous two posts addressed that issue, after 30 odd years Im well used to the medias attitude towards all things non-OF related. However, give enough people the info and someone might bite...you never know.

 

 

I was under the impression the council's July 2006 decision would have been of interest to football fans. It wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was under the impression the council's July 2006 decision would have been of interest to football fans. It wasn't.

 

Fair point, did we kick up enough fuss over it at the time tho (serious question as I dont really recall)? I would envisage a big fuss being kicked up in the next few months, and that's a way in. There are many eloquent Jags fans who are clued up enough about the situation(s) to do the spokesman/woman bit if it got to that...but only by taking some kind of action will we get anyones attention, and even then only if there were enough people making enough noise. Brings me back to my original question in this thread tho, there aint much we can do until this meeting takes place, or until the Jags Trust are left waiting long enough for people to get the message the BoD are sending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair point, did we kick up enough fuss over it at the time tho (serious question as I dont really recall)? I would envisage a big fuss being kicked up in the next few months, and that's a way in. There are many eloquent Jags fans who are clued up enough about the situation(s) to do the spokesman/woman bit if it got to that...but only by taking some kind of action will we get anyones attention, and even then only if there were enough people making enough noise. Brings me back to my original question in this thread tho, there aint much we can do until this meeting takes place, or until the Jags Trust are left waiting long enough for people to get the message the BoD are sending.

 

Or if planning approval is granted.

Edited by McKennan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...