Jump to content

New Owner


Jag
 Share

Message added by douglas clark

'Tis not the job of a moderator to stop people writing here. The rules are pretty simple:

reported ad hominem attacks will be investigated (and if found to be true) or write stuff that could get the site into trouble

and you'll either be warned / your post deleted, or - worst case scenario -  banned either temporarily or permanently.

This particular thread has had a vigorous exchange of views, and perhaps more heat than light. But the quality of the debate - it seems to me at least - is down to the lack of information.  That, in and of itself, means that whatever side you happen to be on is for a fan, very frustrating.

So, I have no intention of closing threads just because the quality of the postings isn't great. That is not the role of a moderator.

If you wake up the following morning you can always delete something you wish you'd never said.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommended Posts

Another way to view this is that Beattie and co want to sell their shares. The only way they can do that is by taking control of the board again, on a very temporary measure.

Presumably if the sale goes through we’ll have another board. Am not sure if we have gone from frying pan to fire, or vice versa but...this is not a good state of affairs.

im still concerned that Colin weir will be pissed off as he brought jacqui on board. I also think she was somebody that cared for the club, even if she had little/no financial input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, javeajag said:

So I’m guessing from this second statement that Jlow was considered not to have done a good job and finances are poor

the Colin weir reference I thought a bit desperate / bizarre ?

It appears to read that way. It appears that the fans may have be led a merry wee dance by our (now ex) Chairperson.

Im expecting all the skeletons to come out the cupboard over next week or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, blakey said:

Another way to view this is that Beattie and co want to sell their shares. The only way they can do that is by taking control of the board again, on a very temporary measure.

Presumably if the sale goes through we’ll have another board. Am not sure if we have gone from frying pan to fire, or vice versa but...this is not a good state of affairs.

im still concerned that Colin weir will be pissed off as he brought jacqui on board. I also think she was somebody that cared for the club, even if she had little/no financial input.

If they wanted just to sell the shares they could, the board (as non shareholders)could not go against the shareholders wishes, there job and responsibility is to the shareholders, doing anything else is against company law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

If they wanted just to sell the shares they could, the board (as non shareholders)could not go against the shareholders wishes, there job and responsibility is to the shareholders, doing anything else is against company law.

Why didn’t they sell their shares then? Surely they are only there as an interim step?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since only Ian Dodd among the previous board held shares, I suspect that David Beattie et al thought that their best interests during any takeover negotiations lay in controlling the Board themselves.  This despite the requirement that a board has a legal duty to act in the best interest of the shareholders, and in the case of a possible takeover, advise shareholders whether to accept or reject the share purchase offer.  The boardroom coup seems therefore about trust rather than anything else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BowenBoys said:

"Contrary to a previous club statement (Wednesday 3 July), the interest from potential new investors is not speculative but a formal approach."

Does this mean the old Board lied in their statement of 3 July?

Have just re-read that statement and probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BowenBoys said:

"Contrary to a previous club statement (Wednesday 3 July), the interest from potential new investors is not speculative but a formal approach."

Does this mean the old Board lied in their statement of 3 July?

Well the old board didn’t own any shares and were therefore not directly involved so I would say it was disingenuous  or misleading 

what we do know is 

1. There is a formal takeover bid

2. It will be considered by shareholders

3. There was concern at the old boards running of the club 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BowenBoys said:

"Contrary to a previous club statement (Wednesday 3 July), the interest from potential new investors is not speculative but a formal approach."

Does this mean the old Board lied in their statement of 3 July?

 

Further  PTFC Trust statement 5 July 

Quote

In relation to ongoing speculation regarding a potential change to the shareholding at PTFC, the PTFC Trust would like to state unequivocally that no official or unofficial approach has been made to the PTFC Trust from any party regarding the shareholding held by the Trust.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

 

Further  PTFC Trust statement 5 July 

 

As stated at the time ......what they didn’t say was more important ....thought to be fair the Trust has said a lot more about things today than the Board 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, javeajag said:

As stated at the time ......what they didn’t say was more important ....thought to be fair the Trust has said a lot more about things today than the Board 

To avoid confusion you refer to the Jags Trust as opposed to the PTFC Trust, who must be due to publish an update on last Friday's statement..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

To avoid confusion you refer to the Jags Trust as opposed to the PTFC Trust, who must be due to publish an update on last Friday's statement..

Yes the Jags Trust .... the other one us probably a bit confused atm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, javeajag said:

Well the old board didn’t own any shares and were therefore not directly involved so I would say it was disingenuous  or misleading 

what we do know is 

1. There is a formal takeover bid

2. It will be considered by shareholders

3. There was concern at the old boards running of the club 

 

1 hour ago, eljaggo said:

Since only Ian Dodd among the previous board held shares, I suspect that David Beattie et al thought that their best interests during any takeover negotiations lay in controlling the Board themselves.  This despite the requirement that a board has a legal duty to act in the best interest of the shareholders, and in the case of a possible takeover, advise shareholders whether to accept or reject the share purchase offer.  The boardroom coup seems therefore about trust rather than anything else.

Agree with your post , after reading all the statements, it looks like there is possibly a more level headed approach going to be taken by the BOD , whether it’s good for our Club or not 

I don’t think it’s a given that this is going to happen at all .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jlsarmy said:

 

Agree with your post , after reading all the statements, it looks like there is possibly a more level headed approach going to be taken by the BOD , whether it’s good for our Club or not 

I don’t think it’s a given that this is going to happen at all .

I would say it’s probable a sale will happen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, West Ender said:

I think the new board just want out with a good price for their shares. I worry that this doesn't necessarily mean it's a good takeover for the club and the punters, just one that gives the shareholders a good deal.

I would be concerned about the implications on how the club was being run and that Kelly was put back in 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...