New Owner

[allyo]

15 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

two more disagreements

I don't think that's necessary... 

[Dick Dastardly]

9 minutes ago, allyo said:

I don't think that's necessary... 

You think what you like, but I have the right to disagree 

[javeajag]

4 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Show me where any other takeover Consortium has met with Fans prior to a takeover - it doesn't happen - you are demanding something that simply doesn't happen in takeovers - whatismore - given the level of vitriol being fed to the Press - all meeting with Fans would do is provide more ammo to those who are against it ( its there right to be against it ) but its also the Right of the Consortium to say nothing until they actually have a confirmed deal - this is standard business practice 

The Consortium have no status on any level at the Club they are a bidder - until they own the Club get a chance to assess things then they arent going to discuss plans that can be used to beat them up with in the future - thats madness 

As for TFE - we have a vague wish list and they pick and choose the questions they wish to answer - so they arent as open as you are making out 

There is not answering because you are in detailed legal discussions and not answering because you dont like the questions  

TFE and there Supporters play on the fact they are Fans - well so are the Board and as Fans they meet people publicly and answer questions as best they can - they dont vet every question and take 3 days to respond to get the wording exactly correct    

  

 

This is simply misleading or a load of mince take your pick  .....have you ever heard of a company meeting trade unions as part of the process of buying a company before the deal is done ? Yes you have indeed I’ve done it myself ...Have you ever heard of a company explaining why they are bidding to buy another company before the deal is done  ?  Yes you have indeed I’ve done it myself and I could go on .......yet you persist in peddling this nonsense that no company buying another ever talks to anyone before the deal is done ....not only do companies talk to shareholders they often talk to customers, staff , suppliers etc etc  What approach a company takes depends on a whole range of factors ....it is neither a legal or commercial requirement to say nothing.

indeed I’ll go further and say  any potential owner worth their salt should be reaching out to the fans to sell their deal as part of the process not  to do so in my opinion is a worrying sign 

I’ll just mention that if you  read the Barnsley fans forum it’s clear they don’t know why the consortium bought them nor has it been properly explained and that’s after 18 months 

defending the communication performance of the board since they took over is a brave position

 

[javeajag]

5 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Show me where any other takeover Consortium has met with Fans prior to a takeover - it doesn't happen - you are demanding something that simply doesn't happen in takeovers - whatismore - given the level of vitriol being fed to the Press - all meeting with Fans would do is provide more ammo to those who are against it ( its there right to be against it ) but its also the Right of the Consortium to say nothing until they actually have a confirmed deal - this is standard business practice 

The Consortium have no status on any level at the Club they are a bidder - until they own the Club get a chance to assess things then they arent going to discuss plans that can be used to beat them up with in the future - thats madness 

As for TFE - we have a vague wish list and they pick and choose the questions they wish to answer - so they arent as open as you are making out 

There is not answering because you are in detailed legal discussions and not answering because you dont like the questions  

TFE and there Supporters play on the fact they are Fans - well so are the Board and as Fans they meet people publicly and answer questions as best they can - they dont vet every question and take 3 days to respond to get the wording exactly correct    

  

 

I just did a quick google search and this is the first page......so stop making stuff up.....

 

Falkirk 2 October 2019

Mark Campbell would 
welcome another fans open forum at Falkirk to address rumours and explain more 
detail on his takeover deal.

Yeovil July 2019

Prospective new Yeovil Town owner Scott Priestnall met with Glovers fans at a meet and greet ahead of their pre-season friendly with Stratford Town on Saturday. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by javeajag

[Auld Jag]

13 hours ago, scotty said:

To be fair AJ most of the speculation came about because the "consortium" and the selling shareholders refused to engage with the fan-base of the club they were buying/selling. Many people were concerned about what was happening to this club and being kept in the dark was not helping. The supporters of the board/consortium did not help much by saying that we should all just trust the current chair and a couple of other board members purely because they were better businessmen and therefore knew better than the rest of us.

When the TFE proposals appeared they were much clearer about what direction they wanted the club to go in. In a few days they offered more communication with the fans than the consortium did in almost half a year. It was a pity that those against the fan-owned model could only resort to trying to attack personalities instead of addressing the principles.

Granted all has gone quiet on the TFE proposals. I don't know why this is and hope we will hear something definite from either side soon.

The takeover is a very emotive subject, as Jags fans we all want the best for Thistle. But on this thread it seems that some posters want to monopolize the thread. If anybody disagrees with them they are wrong and that is that. Nobody is allowed to have a different opinion and the thread deteriorate's  into a point scoring exercise.

[ARu-Strathbungo]

I think there are a few people who have monopolised this subject over the 200+ pages and 5000+ who would have been far better conducting a series of PM's to discuss their issues and disagreements, I do not for one minute think there is any real interest in this forum 'discussion' within the wider membership of the group.

[Jordanhill Jag]

1 hour ago, javeajag said:

This is simply misleading or a load of mince take your pick  .....have you ever heard of a company meeting trade unions as part of the process of buying a company before the deal is done ? Yes you have indeed I’ve done it myself ...Have you ever heard of a company explaining why they are bidding to buy another company before the deal is done  ?  Yes you have indeed I’ve done it myself and I could go on .......yet you persist in peddling this nonsense that no company buying another ever talks to anyone before the deal is done ....not only do companies talk to shareholders they often talk to customers, staff , suppliers etc etc  What approach a company takes depends on a whole range of factors ....it is neither a legal or commercial requirement to say nothing.

indeed I’ll go further and say  any potential owner worth their salt should be reaching out to the fans to sell their deal as part of the process not  to do so in my opinion is a worrying sign 

I’ll just mention that if you  read the Barnsley fans forum it’s clear they don’t know why the consortium bought them nor has it been properly explained and that’s after 18 months 

defending the communication performance of the board since they took over is a brave position

 

And Hibs New Owners met with Fans in advance and lay out there Plans ?

Given the level of Vitriol thats been put out against the takeover via the Press then they are 100% correct not to feed it nor say anything that comes back to haunt them 

The norm for takeover is to carry out a detailed assessment after you have taken over then lay out your Plans once you are clear on exactly where you stand - thats sensible business    

In most instances the Boards were positive about the takover from the outset therefore there could be a degree of transparency - so you cant compare our position with a normal takeover where the Board and the Potential Buyer were working together from the outset - by the time this happened the leaks & negativity had pretty much made itimpossible for a proper dialogue to happen with large levels of  distrust built up 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Jordanhill Jag

[javeajag]

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

And Hibs New Owners met with Fans in advance and lay out there Plans 

Given the level of Vitriol thats been put out against the takeover via the Press then they are 100% correct not to feed it nor say anything that comes back to haunt them 

The norm for takeover is to carry out a detailed assessment after you have taken over then lay out your Plans once you are clear on exactly where you stand - thats sensible business    

 

 

 

 

 

See now your changing your argument ....so it’s perfectly possible for them to meet the fans but because of press vitriol They shouldn’t  ?! What are you talking about ? What press vitriol ?! 
 

it’s also perfectly possible they are nit engaging with fans because they don’t give a monkeys about us that’s often business as well 

 

[lady-isobel-barnett]

29 minutes ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

I think there are a few people who have monopolised this subject over the 200+ pages and 5000+ who would have been far better conducting a series of PM's to discuss their issues and disagreements,

You know, you might just be onto something here. 

[JeanieD]

This thread reminds me of the David Niven quote in "Bring on the Empty Horses "  Michael Curtiz in a fury when being ridiculed  has an outburst along the lines of "You think I know f*** nothing but I know f*** all" 

Some oft made contributions on this fiasco seem to demonstrate a similar understanding of what seemingly actually hasn't been going on at all.

[partickthedog]

2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The norm for takeover is to carry out a detailed assessment after you have taken over then lay out your Plans once you are clear on exactly where you stand - thats sensible business    

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not trying to make a point either way in the general argument, but the above does not sound like sensible business. Surely you carry out your detailed assessment before you take over, and part of that assessment is whether or not you should take over at all. Seems rather too late to do this after you have taken over.  What happens if your detailed assessment  then tells you that you should not have taken over in the first place?

It's a bit like posting too quickly on to a non-editable forum, and then reading your post and thinking "I should never have said that!"

Edited October 16, 2019 by partickthedog

[Garscube Road End]

3 hours ago, Auld Jag said:

The takeover is a very emotive subject, as Jags fans we all want the best for Thistle. But on this thread it seems that some posters want to monopolize the thread. If anybody disagrees with them they are wrong and that is that. Nobody is allowed to have a different opinion and the thread deteriorate's  into a point scoring exercise.

Which can explains some peoples deep reservations on fan ownership.

[Jordanhill Jag]

14 hours ago, javeajag said:

See now your changing your argument ....so it’s perfectly possible for them to meet the fans but because of press vitriol They shouldn’t  ?! What are you talking about ? What press vitriol ?! 
 

it’s also perfectly possible they are nit engaging with fans because they don’t give a monkeys about us that’s often business as well 

 

You really are obsessed with this and just make stuff up - Hibs New Owners did not speak to Fans before the takeover 

The Takeover was leaked and a whole load of anti Takeover Press Put out 

Given the Circumstances it makes perfect sense not to fuel things and get on with satisfying the SFA Requirements - if that happens then they obviously engage with the Supporters - if it doesnt they move on 

As things stand the Current Board are committed to remaining - we have a New Manager and we have Control of Finances 

So by and large its as good a place as we have been in over the last few Seasons and David Beattie deserves Credit for getting us here 

 

   

 

[lady-isobel-barnett]

12 hours ago, Garscube Road End said:

Which can explains some peoples deep reservations on fan ownership.

I'd have deep reservations about fan ownership too if I believed that fans would be running the Club.

[Dark Passenger]

1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Takeover was leaked and a whole load of anti Takeover Press Put out 

C'mon, Jim. It's clear that the leak came from the selling side. It paved the way for the removal of the board. Did anyone really expect the 'other side' to disappear without putting up some kind of a fight? 

It's been a pretty unedifying spectacle all-round. Let's hope it's finally coming to an end, one way or another.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Dark Passenger

[Fearchar]

It occurs to me that the disputes and confusion between ownership and management (in the broad sense) relating to our football clubs may be the legacy of company structures dating from long ago which have outlived their usefulness. Owners of private companies usually expect to take a profit and act accordingly, but for football clubs they are expected to contribute, probably financially, and bear losses.

Should Scotland consider changes in corporate law so that sport clubs can become a more appropriate, different model for our kind of circumstances? Germany, in particular, has a strong sporting sector overall (despite the recent satisfying U19 win over them at Firhill!), and some of this may be down to having an appropriate structure rather than just numbers participating and good coaching.

[Jordanhill Jag]

12 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

C'mon, Jim. It's pretty clear that the leak came from the selling side. It paved the way for the removal of the board. Did anyone really expect the 'other side' to disappear without putting up some kind of a fight? 

It's been a pretty unedifying spectacle all-round. Let's hope it's finally coming to an end, one way or another.

Ok 100% upfront - I think the "Leak" was not planned and had nothing to do with the removal of the Old Board - I think it was simply someone who had the info gabbed - what side it came from originally - impossible to tell 

My View is that we had a very very strange scenario where the Board had No real links  with the Main Shareholders - who as it happens are all former Directors - the norm is that there is still a working relationship - but this wasn't the case - so we ended up with Two Opposing Sides - and as you correctly state an unedifying spectacle  being fought out in the Press and via Lawyers 

I think most Fans would be happy with the Status Quo and get on with getting the Club back to the Football 

[Jordanhill Jag]

18 minutes ago, Fearchar said:

It occurs to me that the disputes and confusion between ownership and management (in the broad sense) relating to our football clubs may be the legacy of company structures dating from long ago which have outlived their usefulness. Owners of private companies usually expect to take a profit and act accordingly, but for football clubs they are expected to contribute, probably financially, and bear losses.

Should Scotland consider changes in corporate law so that sport clubs can become a more appropriate, different model for our kind of circumstances? Germany, in particular, has a strong sporting sector overall (despite the recent satisfying U19 win over them at Firhill!), and some of this may be down to having an appropriate structure rather than just numbers participating and good coaching.

Agree 100% that the Corporate Structures and the Model in general is out of date 

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Have we now entered the debriefing stage of this mega thread?

[Dick Dastardly]

Driving up the M6 from Coventry last night and there was an interesting discussion on 5 Live regarding EFL club finances. It maybe available on podcast and worth a listen. Much of it is relevant to our situation, however there were several points worthy of note.

Firstly, as a business football is a strange case, Essentially the main revenue stream (matchdays) is only open for business for about 30-35 days a year. Creating revenue from the primary assets from the other 330 days is the problem that chairmen need to solve. You can tinker with "improving the match day experience", but you need to generate income away from match days.

It is a slow process to build your customer base. Essentially you need to attract your customers aged 5 or 6 and then keep them for the next 70 years. Loosing customers is much easier.

A couple of EFL chairmen completely dismissed the idea of bringing on players as a sustainable way to improve finances from the bottom 2 English leagues there were only a handful of players who left for any significant amount. In most cases the clubs would not recover the cost of their player development.

On the budget deficit (they were discussing why no Championship side made any profit) they compared the finances to a lottery ticket. In Scottish Championship terms, there are 10 tickets available, 2 of which have the chance to double or triple their income for next season (promotion). The odds of holding a winning ticket are improved (but never guaranteed) by increasing spending on playing staff. Looking at the risk/reward analysis, the rewards are so high that it is worth the risk, so everyone does it to the point where if you don't, then you end up being relegated.

Relegation is not always a bad thing. Ipswich have increased their attendances with the supporters looking forward to travelling to new grounds and actually winning some games.

[West of Scotland]

17 hours ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

I think there are a few people who have monopolised this subject over the 200+ pages and 5000+ who would have been far better conducting a series of PM's to discuss their issues and disagreements, I do not for one minute think there is any real interest in this forum 'discussion' within the wider membership of the group.

But if the rest of the playground can't hear them, how will they know their opinions are important?

[douglas clark]

1 hour ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Have we now entered the debriefing stage of this mega thread?

It seems so. Congratulations on 14,000 posts here, that is frankly astonishing.

[Garscube Road End]

1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Driving up the M6 from Coventry last night and there was an interesting discussion on 5 Live regarding EFL club finances. It maybe available on podcast and worth a listen. Much of it is relevant to our situation, however there were several points worthy of note.

Firstly, as a business football is a strange case, Essentially the main revenue stream (matchdays) is only open for business for about 30-35 days a year. Creating revenue from the primary assets from the other 330 days is the problem that chairmen need to solve. You can tinker with "improving the match day experience", but you need to generate income away from match days.

It is a slow process to build your customer base. Essentially you need to attract your customers aged 5 or 6 and then keep them for the next 70 years. Loosing customers is much easier.

A couple of EFL chairmen completely dismissed the idea of bringing on players as a sustainable way to improve finances from the bottom 2 English leagues there were only a handful of players who left for any significant amount. In most cases the clubs would not recover the cost of their player development.

On the budget deficit (they were discussing why no Championship side made any profit) they compared the finances to a lottery ticket. In Scottish Championship terms, there are 10 tickets available, 2 of which have the chance to double or triple their income for next season (promotion). The odds of holding a winning ticket are improved (but never guaranteed) by increasing spending on playing staff. Looking at the risk/reward analysis, the rewards are so high that it is worth the risk, so everyone does it to the point where if you don't, then you end up being relegated.

Relegation is not always a bad thing. Ipswich have increased their attendances with the supporters looking forward to travelling to new grounds and actually winning some games.

In regards to Ipswich they have introduced a lot of ideas and measures to attract fans like' a kid for a quid'.  But yes their fans are enjoying League One.

[javeajag]

21 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

You really are obsessed with this and just make stuff up - Hibs New Owners did not speak to Fans before the takeover 

The Takeover was leaked and a whole load of anti Takeover Press Put out 

Given the Circumstances it makes perfect sense not to fuel things and get on with satisfying the SFA Requirements - if that happens then they obviously engage with the Supporters - if it doesnt they move on 

As things stand the Current Board are committed to remaining - we have a New Manager and we have Control of Finances 

So by and large its as good a place as we have been in over the last few Seasons and David Beattie deserves Credit for getting us here 

 

   

 

Where did I even mention hibs ? I didn’t I referenced falkirk and yeovil as two examples in the last four months where prospective owners spoke to fans before buying the clubs as you said no one ever did that . Now your deflecting onto they got some bad press ! Have you seen the press they get in Barnsley ?! They are big boys 

your defending everything they don’t do is puzzling 

 

[BowenBoys]

Admin, help me.

Please find somewhere to put this thread away from this forum.

These two are not going to stop their pointless sniping. Let them carry on somewhere else. Perhaps somewhere with padded walls.