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

24 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Im not criticising him - I don't know the man - Im stating that "benefactor" carries major risks - as there is no direct link to the Club 

Also that him going isn't the disaster people are making out - its blown out of proportion 

The prospective “ new owners “ carry a much greater risk for our future than a benefactor who wants to give us funds with no real stipulations or expectancies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

No its exactly the Model we should follow get Players in there late Teens from the larger Clubs - he was part of the U19 squad that won a Cup for Thistle 

Point still remains jj, you keep using him as an example and you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

First Ive never done the lottery so can hardly be jealous of his picking of 6 Numbers - second why on any level would I be jealous of Colin Weir - seriously mate you really talk some nonsense - I argued six months ago reference the Weir involvement on this Forum - my stance has not changed on any level - jealously - I did a Cross Country Run through Mugdock yesterday the same run Ive been doing since my early 20s - Im in my late 50s - Colin Weir can keep his Euro Millions _ I will take my Cross Country Run every day 

What the feck has your cross country run go to do with it. You really are a blow hard, with your pious nonsense about athletics, business, coaching. Your jealousy rips right out of you in your posts. You can deny all you like but your pathetic digs about colin weir over the past 12 to 18 months is enough evidence for me. People like you are what's wrong with our club at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Auld Jag said:

First thing I don't want to get involved in any of the many personal 'discussions' that are going on in this thread. Also not taking any sides. The programme last season marked a red A against some players names. This denoted Academy Graduate.  4 Players had this A against their names. They were Penrice, Bannigan, McCarthey and Fitzpatrick.

Thanks AJ, but that does not help my arguement :getmecoat:

 

Joking aside, the club can rightly claim they were a major factor in his development and that was through the academy but and I may be wrong, it has been known, I regard players as being products of our youth programme as being kids starting at the academy from being a primary kid. Perhaps I'm overly complicating the process. I guess many kids are spotted during their time at clubs academy's but end up breaking through to the 1st team of another club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lindau said:

Finding it hard to hold my tongue on this subject, so making a short term return to post these two views from different sportswriters that sum up my feelings on the matter. How anyone can argue that having a multi millionaire benefactor at a club our size is a bad thing is frankly nuts!!

 

ONLY in Scottish football would a club chase away a multi- millionaire diehard fan with a wide-open wallet in favour of a foreign consortium who haven’t yet put up a penny.

But that’s where Partick Thistle find themselves this morning.

There’s not a board in the land — maybe on the planet — who wouldn’t want the kind of sugardaddy who arrived in the shape of Colin Weir, the lotto rollover winner whose investment made the Jags debt-free and who’d put £6million aside to build a training academy.

Yet last week, he cut all ties in the wake of ex-directors calling in Sheriff Officers, current directors being binned, the players having their team bus taken away and more.

Now it appears that all Firhill’s eggs are in the basket dangled by Chinese-American tycoon Chien Lee and his consortium.

On paper, they sound big time. On paper, them taking over the club could be the best thing that ever happened to Thistle.

But on paper, the same went for Hearts, for Airdrie, for Raith, for Livi and more — and all of these ended up in the grubber, with their self-styled saviours nowhere to be seen.

Me? If I was sitting in that Maryhill boardroom and the choice was between a fan putting up enough for my club to stay in the black, stay at the heart of the community and sustain a realistic level within the game, that’d do me fine.

Here’s hoping for their sake that they make that homespun attitude look silly.

 

AND

 

PARTICK Thistle directors should be flogged for allowing EuroMillions winner Colin Weir to slip through their hands.

Having put £2.5million into Thistle with another £6m pledged for the academy, Weir was the most important person at Firhill bar none.

At a time Jags’ players are having to drive to away games, the loss of the multi-millionaire is a hammer blow to Gary Caldwell’s future plans.

As for the proposed takeover by billionaire Chinese American Chien Lee? If that turns out to be a good deal for Thistle, I’ll eat my hat.

 

 

 


 

Can't agree more but try convincing jordanhill jag........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ClydebankJag said:

It’s clear that CW wanted any money he gave to go to PTFC and not into the pockets of shareholders. He donated money to the youth setup with no expectation of us paying him back. He bought shares in the club and gifted them to the fans, the money from his shares clearing the debt. He put in place plans for a training ground, with a significant planned cash outlay. What he didn’t do is what Beattie and co want from the consortium, he didn’t give them cash and allow them to walk away from the club. 

 

So the benefactor gave without expectation whilst the investors had an eye on their profit/loss.

Well said, perfectly put. Money before club 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ClydebankJag said:

No idea why Beattie and co didn’t do their own due diligence before pushing this on .

In this modern age , a lot of stuff is documented through Companies House etc .

The purported new owners are an Investment company with various interests in Real Estate , Hospitality, Sports etc .

They have no interest in PTFC or its future apart from making a quick buck . It looks like they do this by moving  money around.

This looks like a Craig Whyte , Charles Green scenario on a lesser scale as happened at Sevco .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Thistleberight said:

What the feck has your cross country run go to do with it. You really are a blow hard, with your pious nonsense about athletics, business, coaching. Your jealousy rips right out of you in your posts. You can deny all you like but your pathetic digs about colin weir over the past 12 to 18 months is enough evidence for me. People like you are what's wrong with our club at this time.

Obviuosly not that bright - - why on any level would I ever in a Million Years be jealous of Colin Weir- seriously ? 

What has Colin Weir ever done that I would on any level be jealous of ? 

The point of the Cross Country Run is simple all the money in the World doesn't buy it ? 

 

Edited by Jordanhill Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

No idea why Beattie and co didn’t do their own due diligence before pushing this on .

In this modern age , a lot of stuff is documented through Companies House etc .

The purported new owners are an Investment company with various interests in Real Estate , Hospitality, Sports etc .

They have no interest in PTFC or its future apart from making a quick buck . It looks like they do this by moving  money around.

This looks like a Craig Whyte , Charles Green scenario on a lesser scale as happened at Sevco .

Unlike Whyte Green etc these guys have cash - its an unfair comparison - define a Quick Buck 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Unlike Whyte Green etc these guys have cash - its an unfair comparison - define a Quick Buck 

 

 

 

 

Ok , what they did at Nice was borrow or mortgage the assets, nullifying their original investment, similar to what the Glazers did at Man United .

They’ve now sold Nice all within the space of under 3 years for a big profit , a quick buck ?

Do you really believe they see our Club as a long term investment, similarly I think they’ll be looking at Barnsley and thinking about the riches of the English Premier League if they get there .

This has got disaster written over it 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Ok so we now have No Funding for the Youth Academy as it was a stand alone organisation under the auspices of Colin Weir - Club had no direct control 

Utter rubbish......you think Colin weir ran the academy .....delusional and a control freak 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

First Ive never done the lottery so can hardly be jealous of his picking of 6 Numbers - second why on any level would I be jealous of Colin Weir - seriously mate you really talk some nonsense - I argued six months ago reference the Weir involvement on this Forum - my stance has not changed on any level - jealously - I did a Cross Country Run through Mugdock yesterday the same run Ive been doing since my early 20s - Im in my late 50s - Colin Weir can keep his Euro Millions _ I will take my Cross Country Run every day 

I’d run some more ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

But we traded at a profit and the debt was being paid down - escorted him to his seat in the JHS twice - seemed pleasant enough - so don't know the guy beyond that - stop trying to personalise things with trivial nonsense - grow up 

Me personalize things ? Your having a laugh.....I think you must be the only fan who doesn’t think Colin weir was good for the club 

and your central point that a benefactor is a bad thing is just not always true eg Tom farmer at hibs

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

It’s not a loan against assets it’s a floating charge, standard when a director puts significant cash into a club 

Not sure that’s right , certainly not in the Hospitality industry in which I work , a  floating charge is usually part of the deal when a client borrows money 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Ok , what they did at Nice was borrow or mortgage the assets, nullifying their original investment, similar to what the Glazers did at Man United .

They’ve now sold Nice all within the space of under 3 years for a big profit , a quick buck ?

Do you really believe they see our Club as a long term investment, similarly I think they’ll be looking at Barnsley and thinking about the riches of the English Premier League if they get there .

This has got disaster written over it 

 

It doesn’t necessarily make it a bad thing for Nice that they were in and out in a short time, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lindau said:

Completely different. 

I know facts won’t ckear this up as this is a convenient stick to beat the board with. But let’s at least put them out there.  

Javeajag has said their model is to borrow all the money of their original investment  jlsarmy suggested that they did that at nice  both of these are incorrect   

At nice, they originally bought 80 per cent of club   The money they borrowed for the short term was to finance the purchase of the other 20 per cent to allow them to have 100 per cent in event of sale  debt is cheaper than equity and so , whilst I am not saying this is right thing to do, in a business/corporate finance sense it does stack up and would not be uncommon to swap debt for equity   Furthermore it did not endanger the future of nice, being for the short term and nice will probably emerge stronger from their new owners  

at Barnsley (whose asset ownership is not dissimilar to our own) they have taken a bond and floating charge    This has nothing to do with the original investment   Nothing at all  It is likely to be for a  small amount given the asset base of a football club and is probably for some short term reason - for example may be to bridge funding on short term of  a transfer because the money incoming for a transfer deal is on a phrased basis whilst the selling club demand full payment up front  there are a myriad of other reasons   

The factual point is that in neither case have they leveraged the original purchase of the club with any debt whatsoever   In fact in the year they purchased Barnsley debt was reduced   These are the facts  

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Ok , what they did at Nice was borrow or mortgage the assets, nullifying their original investment, similar to what the Glazers did at Man United .

They’ve now sold Nice all within the space of under 3 years for a big profit , a quick buck ?

Do you really believe they see our Club as a long term investment, similarly I think they’ll be looking at Barnsley and thinking about the riches of the English Premier League if they get there .

This has got disaster written over it 

 

Completely untrue. (See above). 

Edited by jaf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Our debts were circa £400K to the bank  - other Clubs were getting offered 20 p in the £ from HBOS - I doubt it was anywhere near the figure your quoting - my guess is less than half of that 

I can’t be bothered looking for the post - but someone has already pointed out the accounts of the club show that shares issued around the time of Colin Weir getting involved was £1M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lenziejag said:

I can’t be bothered looking for the post - but someone has already pointed out the accounts of the club show that shares issued around the time of Colin Weir getting involved was £1M.

Yes that was me. 

1.1 m was put in between the weirs and billy Allan at that time. 

Of which around 850k was  used to pay off overdraft, bank loan and a build up of other creditors   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Thistleberight said:

Can't agree more but try convincing jordanhill jag........

Well that is Mission Impossible isn’t it.  As I said in my original piece any supporter that thinks it’s better NOT to have a multi millionaire at a club our size has completely lost the plot. Now I am not saying the takeover (if it happens) might not be the best thing that has ever happened to the club, nobody knows that. Then again, nobody knows whether it might end up a total disaster and risk the whole structure and existence of the club. Better, in my opinion with a safe pair of hands, in the shape of Colin Weir. All that has happened since Beattie has come back is that the club has become a total laughing stock for the rest of Scottish football, the manager has an incomplete squad because money promised to him has been directed to plug a funding gap, we are told there is as much chance of the takeover not going ahead as going ahead and that contrary to reports the shareholders were not unhappy with the way the previous board were running the club.  Honestly you couldn’t make it up!!

Edited by Lindau
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jaf said:

Completely different. 

I know facts won’t ckear this up as this is a convenient stick to beat the board with. But let’s at least put them out there.  

Javeajag has said their model is to borrow all the money of their original investment  jlsarmy suggested that they did that at nice  both of these are incorrect   

At nice, they originally bought 80 per cent of club   The money they borrowed for the short term was to finance the purchase of the other 20 per cent to allow them to have 100 per cent in event of sale  debt is cheaper than equity and so , whilst I am not saying this is right thing to do, in a business/corporate finance sense it does stack up and would not be uncommon to swap debt for equity   Furthermore it did not endanger the future of nice, being for the short term and nice will probably emerge stronger from their new owners  

at Barnsley (whose asset ownership is not dissimilar to our own) they have taken a bond and floating charge    This has nothing to do with the original investment   Nothing at all  It is likely to be for a  small amount given the asset base of a football club and is probably for some short term reason - for example may be to bridge funding on short term of  a transfer because the money incoming for a transfer deal is on a phrased basis whilst the selling club demand full payment up front  there are a myriad of other reasons   

The factual point is that in neither case have they leveraged the original purchase of the club with any debt whatsoever   In fact in the year they purchased Barnsley debt was reduced   These are the facts  

 

 

 

 

Yes to a point ....clearly debt for equity and their other financial instruments are designed to either protect their investment, fund it cheaply or ensure the costs are bourne by the club not them ....my point us still valid they buy the asset effectively for very little or nothing 

your next task is to work out how they make a 25% plus return in their investment 

Edited by javeajag
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...