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

4 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The point is that Mr Weir is not Partick Thistle - he has decided to take his Money away - fine - he can do so - but will we have a Youth Development Structure without him - Yes - will it produce decent Players - Yes - is it likely leaner - meaner- hungrier as a result of Mr Weir no longer being involved - highly likely - I think his departure makes us a real Club - we work within our budgets - we focus - we come out punching - he is gone and get that Stand renamed the Davie McParland Stand Pronto - it was a nonsense to call it the Colin Weir Stand - Jim Oliver was our biggest benefactor - where is his stand ?   Time to cut ties with Mr Weir - move on ...........  

While I would like to have it renamed the Davie mcparland stand to do so right now would seem a bit petty and vindictive.

you have often suggested the old board were petty and vindictive so I don’t see the benefit of doing that until the whole situation has calmed down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paulo said:

Most of this thread is complete nonsense, but I think we might have hit the pinnacle if we're suggesting that removing the funding from a youth academy will make it better.  

The Funding of the Youth Academy has already been removed - Im stating that being beholding to a benefactor who can remove funding at any point is not a good model to adapt - living within your own resources means you are focused  on what works  

Edited by Jordanhill Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Funding of the Youth Academy has already been removed - Im stating that being beholding to a benefactor who can remove it at any point is not a good model to adapt - living within your own resources means you are foccused  on what works  

Both gilfilan And springford both stated they hope Colin Weir will become involved with the consortium.  Maybe once he here’s their plans he might say he wants to be involved or alternatively it’s even worse than he thought and it’s a no thanks- but I think the guy at the very least deserves a chance 

If he likes what he hears then  for all we know he might wish to continue again funding the youth setup.

As for the benefactor part are we not going to be entirely at the mercy of Lee and Conway for them to take whatever direction suits them with the club?

Edited by Third Lanark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

While I would like to have it renamed the Davie mcparland stand to do so right now would seem a bit petty and vindictive.

you have often suggested the old board were petty and vindictive so I don’t see the benefit of doing that until the whole situation has calmed down

Matt - I agree but frankly the whole Colin Weir Stand thing I never got - Clubs name Stands after there Legend - simple as that - its a Sporting Honour -  one that is earned 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Third Lanark said:

Both gilfilan And springford both stated they hope Colin Weir will become involved with the consortium.  Maybe once he here’s their plans he might say he wants to be involved or alternatively it’s even worse than he thought and it’s a no thanks- but I think the guy at the very least deserves a chance 

If he likes what he hears then  for all we know he might wish to continue again funding the youth setup.

 

Well I dont - the future will be what it will be - but my preference is without Coin Weir being involved on any level going forward - thats my view - thanks for what he has done - but we need to move forward from Mr Weir   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norgethistle said:

I’m not sure if their holding would be necessary as the 9 shareholders hold a majority on their own

That would appear to be the case. Although the Trust made clear in its lengthy statement dated 12 July that it had been made aware of "a move to alter the composition of the Board" and had supported it. It might not have been needed, but it was definitely beneficial for those who initiated that move to be seen to enjoy the support of 'the fans'.

There's one thing that now strikes me as odd about that very same statement. It makes reference to "concerns regarding the actions of the current members of the Board". Additionally, the paragraph absolving Colin Weir of  any "implicit or explicit" criticism, suggests that the Trust believes an individual or group *is* worthy of criticism (I think we can all work out who that is).

And yet, as I've noted elsewhere, Norman Springford stressed on Saturday that the selling group didn't have an issue with the way the club was being run.

I think the Jags Trust board has a few questions to answer.

Edited by Dark Passenger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is not having a benefactor. The problem is relying on one.

I don't think it is mutually exclusive, to run on a sustainable basis, but also to make the most of the opportunities that the additional funds will bring you. If this has not been done to date then it is down to the people running the club (old board, new board, whoever), it's not the fault of the benefactor.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

must be security at your end, it is just a simple word document in 'open document text' format

Think it may be a forum permissions thing:

Sorry, there is a problem

This attachment is not available. It may have been removed or the person who shared it may not have permission to share it to this location.

Error code: 2C171/1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The point is that Mr Weir is not Partick Thistle - he has decided to take his Money away - fine - he can do so - but will we have a Youth Development Structure without him - Yes - will it produce decent Players - Yes - is it likely leaner - meaner- hungrier as a result of Mr Weir no longer being involved - highly likely - I think his departure makes us a real Club - we work within our budgets - we focus - we come out punching - he is gone and get that Stand renamed the Davie McParland Stand Pronto - it was a nonsense to call it the Colin Weir Stand - Jim Oliver was our biggest benefactor - where is his stand ?   Time to cut ties with Mr Weir - move on ...........  

Your obsessed with Colin weir who I didn’t even mention and I counted at least seven assumptions in that load of ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jagfox said:

Interesting that nobody has questioned the Jags Trusts involvement in the removal of the previous board. Apparently their share holding was used to force through the EGM that led to the removal of the old board. Were Jags Trust members consulted on this?

Who sanctioned their use?

No one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, blakey said:

JJ - I don't see anything wrong with having a wealthy benefactor. Okay -  we need to manage the relationship but most clubs would love to have a wealthy supporter who is willing to invest. It seems folly in the extreme to jeopardize that. You seem to want us to be self sufficient when a few of us  welcome having additional investment.

This relationship can and did work until the recent souring of the relationship/

We seem to have forgotten that Celtic Rangers Hibs Hearts Falkirk etc etc all have benefactors as directors ... but jj will fix that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Well I dont - the future will be what it will be - but my preference is without Coin Weir being involved on any level going forward - thats my view - thanks for what he has done - but we need to move forward from Mr Weir   

Clearly I missed the part where Colin weir getting involved with the club was an utter disaster for us 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Clearly I missed the part where Colin weir getting involved with the club was an utter disaster for us 

The issue with an ad hoc benefactor is exactly where we find ourselves - for any reason they can walk away ( quite rightly ) but the informality of the arrangement brings risk and an organisation cannot plan long term with potential funding being  pulled - thats not a sustainable business model on any level      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Nor has it been sweetness and light and we would it have been a disaster without  him ? 

I think that since he put in upwards of £1M in paying off the debt and funding the academy, then yes, I think it would have been a disaster.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The issue with an ad hoc benefactor is exactly where we find ourselves - for any reason they can walk away ( quite rightly ) but the informality of the arrangement brings risk and an organisation cannot plan long term with potential funding being  pulled - thats not a sustainable business model on any level      

It’s perfectly reasonable to argue that as the shareholders decided to sell the club to a billionaire he had no choice 

Man City benefactor never work 

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...