New Owner

[javeajag]

2 minutes ago, admin said:

I feel I'm repeating myself but anyway here goes. 

The point I'm trying to make is the current performance of the BoD is, or should be, irrelevant when debating the takeover. 

It needs to be judged on its merits alone. 

Of course I'll be opened minded. I've said from day one that it could potentially be great for Partick Thistle but that shouldn't prevent anyone from trying to articulate why they are concerned. 

My concerns in no way relate to the current BoD. Personally I have no major issue with them. Or at least I see no maelovent intent in their actions that would prompt me to want their removal. 

I don't know anyone on the Board far less have any relationship, cosy or otherwise, with any of them.  

I’m not sure that’s entirely correct because effectively a choice has to be made between the consortium and the board and that brings you into an assessment of both 

[Dark Passenger]

7 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

The fact the club has relied on investment from outside the club is massively different from before.

wut

[jaf]

10 minutes ago, admin said:

I feel I'm repeating myself but anyway here goes. 

The point I'm trying to make is the current performance of the BoD is, or should be, irrelevant when debating the takeover. 

It needs to be judged on its merits alone. 

Of course I'll be opened minded. I've said from day one that it could potentially be great for Partick Thistle but that shouldn't prevent anyone from trying to articulate why they are concerned. 

My concerns in no way relate to the current BoD. Personally I have no major issue with them. Or at least I see no maelovent intent in their actions that would prompt me to want their removal. 

I don't know anyone on the Board far less have any relationship, cosy or otherwise, with any of them.  

And my point is that it is irrelevant (to me), the reason being the Board, or portions of it, may be retained, we do not know.

So you are suggesting the reasons some people are pro-takeover is that they are anti-board is flawed.

if the new owners decide this board should be retained, then their position has immeasurably been strengthened as they have the mandate of the majority shareholder. We do not know the new owners would remove any board members.  Therefore there is a risk to someone of anti-board persuasions that the Board emerge from this greatly strengthened.

This is not about being anti-board. Of course, they might be casualties on the way past. They may not. It is about raising the ceiling of expectation of Partick Thistle (for me). The board are irrelevant to that - we owe them nothing.

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by jaf

[Norgethistle]

3 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

wut

Previously the likes of Beattie, Oliver, Watson, Reid etc all had the ability to put their hand in their pocket to pull us out a hole, whether it be a cash flow issue or emergency maintenance.

Who on the current board can do that?

[javeajag]

Just now, Norgethistle said:

Previously the likes of Beattie, Oliver, Watson, Reid etc all had the ability to put their hand in their pocket to pull us out a hole, whether it be a cash flow issue or emergency maintenance.

Who on the current board can do that?

No one .... nor have they even bought one share each .... but happy to take Colin weirs cash 

[Norgethistle]

Just now, javeajag said:

No one .... nor have they even bought one share each .... but happy to take Colin weirs cash 

The alarming part is we also have no banking facilities. No ability to have an overdraft (common for businesses our size) or short term loans.

[javeajag]

4 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

The alarming part is we also have no banking facilities. No ability to have an overdraft (common for businesses our size) or short term loans.

Yes I’d forgotten about that 

[KemoAvdiu]

33 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

wut

The club has relied on investment from people who aren’t on the board and nobody on the board has or is likely to invest their own money. There’s nothing ‘wut’ about it. Nor do most of them have any previous interest in Thistle prior to joining the board. This isn’t to say that the new consortium are the best option, but let’s stop pretending the current board can’t be improved upon. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by KemoAvdiu

[Dark Passenger]

So they club used to rely on handouts from rich people and now it relies on handouts from...a rich person?

And again for the hard of reading, I've never said the current board are infallible. But some of the sh*t being flung their way is preposterous. 

[javeajag]

12 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

So they club used to rely on handouts from rich people and now it relies on handouts from...a rich person?

And again for the hard of reading, I've never said the current board are infallible. But some of the sh*t being flung their way is preposterous. 

Where did the 850 go ?

[KemoAvdiu]

15 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

So they club used to rely on handouts from rich people and now it relies on handouts from...a rich person?

And again for the hard of reading, I've never said the current board are infallible. But some of the sh*t being flung their way is preposterous. 

The difference being that previously the board - who run the club - were those rich people. I don’t think it’s tricky to understand the difference between a board whose own finances and own club are at stake and a board of non-Thistle fans who are in it for, what? A nice addition to their professional CV and an ego boost. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by KemoAvdiu

[Jag]

https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/club-statement-6/

Move on. There is nothing to see.

Until there is.

[javeajag]

1 minute ago, Jag said:

https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/club-statement-6/

Move on. There is nothing to see.

Until there is.

I think the key word is ‘official’ must think we are idiots .... charlatans 

[Norgethistle]

8 minutes ago, Jag said:

https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/club-statement-6/

Move on. There is nothing to see.

Until there is.

They must think we’re buttoned up the back. A representative from the consortium was at Firhill yesterday meeting the board 

[javeajag]

Just now, Norgethistle said:

They must think we’re buttoned up the back. A representative from the consortium was at Firhill yesterday meeting the board 

I know !!! 

But that wasn’t ‘ official ‘ .....

talk about abusing your fans 

[scotty]

8 minutes ago, javeajag said:

I think the key word is ‘official’ must think we are idiots .... charlatans 

Who? The shareholders who may or may not be negotiating to sell shares and not telling the board.

[javeajag]

2 minutes ago, scotty said:

Who? The shareholders who may or may not be negotiating to sell shares and not telling the board.

Ok so explain why Conway was at firhill yesterday meeting g the board .... talking about ? It’s s joke 

they know exactly what’s going on 

[ChiThistle]

I dunno how much you can really say if there’s no formal activity.  Official statements from most companies usually wait until there’s fire, not smoke.

Even club statements regarding transfers usually wait - the papers report the rumours as they get them and the clubs report anything that’s actually happened.

 

 

[javeajag]

How about we said

we are aware of the speculation on some shareholders selling their shares  to a consortium which would potentially give them a controlling interest in the club. Whilst the Board as a group and as individuals are neither involved nor party to these discussions we are aware that they are taking place. Therefore we find ourselves in the difficult position of not being able to communicate with our fans as we round like . We hope that these discussions are concluded quickly so that all parties can update our supporters.

[Rid Skwerr]

The English League seemed to have no problem with the consortium's simultaneous ownership of Barnsley and Nice, so why should they object to their owning of Barnsley and Thistle?

Consistency in football decisions?

Hmmmm.....

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Dark Passenger said:

So they club used to rely on handouts from rich people and now it relies on handouts from...a rich person?

And again for the hard of reading, I've never said the current board are infallible. But some of the sh*t being flung their way is preposterous. 

Nit that you need my support DP but I agree with this. We are in virtual meltdown referencing the inadequacies of the current board, I'm no apologist nor supporter of this board and have shared in criticism of them, but some of the sh1te some people on here are making up to throw snowballs at the board are beyond harsh. Yes criticism where due and based on facts and/or decisions made but don't just make stuff up just cos we don't know the facts.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

They must think we’re buttoned up the back. A representative from the consortium was at Firhill yesterday meeting the board 

 

28 minutes ago, javeajag said:

I know !!! 

But that wasn’t ‘ official ‘ .....

talk about abusing your fans 

 

24 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Ok so explain why Conway was at firhill yesterday meeting g the board .... talking about ? It’s s joke 

they know exactly what’s going on 

Agree but, who saw this guy Conway at Furhill. Genuine question, I'm away on holiday and am missing the daily media reporting

[scotty]

36 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

They must think we’re buttoned up the back. A representative from the consortium was at Firhill yesterday meeting the board 

Says who?

[jaggymct]

3 minutes ago, Thistleberight said:

 

 

Agree but, who saw this guy Conway at Furhill. Genuine question, I'm away on holiday and am missing the daily media reporting

the report in the Daily Mail states that he was in Glasgow, no mention of being actually at Firhill.  Does anyone actually know he has been at Firhill ?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7207281/Takeover-Partick-Thistle-faces-EFL-obstacle-consortium-breach-dual-ownership-rules.html

[Norgethistle]

3 minutes ago, scotty said:

Says who?

If I told you they’d be kicked off the board