New Owner

[Dark Passenger]

Posted this on Facebook, so I'll post it here, too...

It nearly slipped my mind...back in June when I suggested that the takeover talk was a smokescreen to unseat sitting directors I was contacted by a fan - someone involved in events connected to the club, but an ordinary fan nonetheless - who told me that he and others had met someone from the consortium who "outlined what was going to happen". And yet the club Chairman has told the PTFC Trust that there are conditions attached to any meeting with the potential new owners. And some people are claiming there are legal reasons for blocking the Trusts' reps access to the buyers. What a crock of sh*t.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Dark Passenger

[Jaggernaut]

1 hour ago, jaf said:

 

But in addition, I understand there was one specific financial issue too.    

 

 

 

Would that be propco-related, by any chance?

[sandy]

This takeover is sounding less of a good idea as time moves on.

Investors are not generally interested in the history or long-term future of a Club, unless they also happen to be fans. This lot will come in, inject some new players, help us up the table a bit then sell us on for a profit. That’s not the outcome I want for our Club.

[Dark Passenger]

Just now, sandy said:

Investors are not generally interested in the history or long-term future of a Club, unless they also happen to be fans. This lot will come in, inject some new players, help us up the table a bit then sell us on for a profit. That’s not the outcome I want for our Club.

That's the best case scenario.

I appreciate we're in the early days of a new season, but have a look at the Barnsley fans' reaction on their forums to the four defeats they've suffered in the six games they've played this season, including Saturday's 1-3 loss to Luton. 

[sandy]

12 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

That's the best case scenario.

I appreciate we're in the early days of a new season, but have a look at the Barnsley fans' reaction on their forums to the four defeats they've suffered in the six games they've played this season, including Saturday's 1-3 loss to Luton. 

Yes DP. Barnsley were playing quite well last season, what’s gone wrong?

[Dark Passenger]

You can't discount the fact they're playing in a higher division. But their fans a re bemoaning the sale of their best talent, the lack of investment in the playing squad and the "spreadsheet" nature of signings. 

[Dick Dastardly]

3 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

You can't discount the fact they're playing in a higher division. But their fans a re bemoaning the sale of their best talent, the lack of investment in the playing squad and the "spreadsheet" nature of signings. 

They are still doing better than Liam Lindsay’s Stoke. His start has been a nightmare and already the Stoke fans want rid.

If only we were able to put in a loan bid

[Dick Dastardly]

33 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

That's the best case scenario.

I appreciate we're in the early days of a new season, but have a look at the Barnsley fans' reaction on their forums to the four defeats they've suffered in the six games they've played this season, including Saturday's 1-3 loss to Luton. 

I have to agree that as much as I have been opposed to this from the start, the Chien/Conway takeover is probable the best outcome, whatever that brings. The alternative is that the current shareholders remain with a nominated board and having lost our benefactor we will be run on a shoestring budget as there is no sign that the current shareholders are prepared to invest a penny.

Edited August 26, 2019 by Dick Dastardly

[Semi Nurainen]

I share Sandy's concern about what happens next.

I have so far been guided by the thought that the biggest indictment of the old board is sitting in the dug out - I know he'll agree with me on that!

Therefore - so far - I have been inclined to view the replacement of the old by the new, as overall a good thing. If nothing else were to happen I would still regard it as a 'Labour gain', though what the way forward would be literally anybody's guess, so I'm not going to.

Like JJ I am totally against the 'sugar daddy' business model (though it's a nice to have if you already have a working model), and think than an investor led model is the lesser of the two evils. But the continuing lack of information/engagement from the new regime is certainly worrying. 

I've been keeping an eye on Barnsley: good that they've had promotion and many (of their) fans accept that they'd never have got that far before the takeover, but some of their results have shocking - pumped by Carlisle for example (equivalent to our getting knocked out of cup by Est Fife), but then a creditable result against Charlton . Their fans' forum reads pretty much like ours - you almost delete 'Barsnley' and insert 'Jags', and you wouldn't know the difference. Happy clappers saying it's been the best two and a half years of their existence and the awkward squad asking why there isn't enough money for players  and satirising what they call the 'dogma' of the new regime; the former saying the manager's hand are tied, the latter booting his chuckies, etc.

Time will tell.

[Dark Passenger]

2 minutes ago, Semi Nurainen said:

I've been keeping an eye on Barnsley: good that they've had promotion and many (of their) fans accept that they'd never have got that far before the takeover

They were a Championship club when NewCity Capital/Pacific Media Group acquired its majority shareholding. In fact, they've spent the majority of their 107-year history in the second tier.

[javeajag]

I think to characterise Colin weir as some kind of sugar daddy/benefactor is actually wrong .... he was not funding the club day to day we had to stand on our own two feet but he was  putting cash into strategic projects eg clearing the debt , the academy etc which help the club stabilise and move forward without being dependent on him day to day for cash ... what’s the problem with that ?

would we criticise Tom farmer at hibs then ? Don’t think many hibs fans would 

 

[jaf]

23 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

You can't discount the fact they're playing in a higher division. But their fans a re bemoaning the sale of their best talent, the lack of investment in the playing squad and the "spreadsheet" nature of signings. 

Its a very young team.  Some fans are also saying the manager has lost dressing room, whilst some saying he is playing totally the wrong players/tactics.

 

[Semi Nurainen]

I haven't counted but they seem to have done an awful lot of bouncing up and down (a bit like Morton) , so I wouldn't see them as standard 'second tier'.

'December 2017 - Chien Lee becomes owner; 2018-19 Barnsley promoted'?

Barnsley fans divided - I'm not in a potion to take sides.

 

[javeajag]

Just now, Semi Nurainen said:

I haven't counted but they seem to have done an awful lot of bouncing up and down (a bit like Morton) , so I wouldn't see them as standard 'second tier'.

'December 2017 - Chien Lee becomes owner; 2018-19 Barnsley promoted'?

Barnsley fans divided - I'm not in a potion to take sides.

 

I think we can see some things 

1. No major investment in club infrastructure 

so don’t expect money to be spent on an academy or the stadium ( unless there is money to be made )

2. No investment in the squad outside our current limits 

that would go up if we are promoted or increased our income in some way 

 

[Semi Nurainen]

Yep.

[Dark Passenger]

6 minutes ago, Semi Nurainen said:

I haven't counted but they seem to have done an awful lot of bouncing up and down (a bit like Morton) , so I wouldn't see them as standard 'second tier'.

76 years in the second tier out of 107. Relegated to the third tier three times in the past 20 years.  They played in the Premier League prior to that, albeit for one season.

[Semi Nurainen]

I count ten relegations since 1932.

[Jordanhill Jag]

13 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

JJ , as I’ve said before, your argument falls down with the Club at heart bit , I’m sure Chien Lee , Paul Conway etc were all big Nice , Barnsley and now  PTFC supporters.

The problem I’ve got with this is ,investors go into any business to make money. the reality is when investors  don’t make any return on their money, they look at it in a business sense , time spent on a project, no return on their investment and cut ties and then they move onto their next project. Where does that leave our Club ?

Their templates for their other projects, I can maybe understand, getting Nice to the Champions League ( then selling the Club ) , they’re obviously looking at getting Barnsley to the Premier League with all the riches that go with it and tapping into the Asian market as well .

Don’t see what the attraction is with a Club at our level , turnover of less than £2 million , crowds of 2,500 ,  in my opinion if they can’t make ends meet , they’re gone and we’re left to pick up the pieces .

Surely that shouldn’t be the future of our Club 

 

 

You stated the existing shareholders should sell there Shares to Thistle Fans - Who - where are these mythical investors that want to take over the Club ? 

As for not seeing the "attraction " ref Thistle - they obviously do and they have a track record so Im far more happy with that than what we had - a Board of Non Fans - Non Investors sort of trundling along 

If the Club could be Run by Thistle Fans - Great - but it wasnt being Run by Fans - so if thats the case - then may as well be Run by Non Fans with a track Record in Sports Management 

Im fed up with the Glorified Bowling Club Mentality of Scottish Football - Time for change 

[Jordanhill Jag]

46 minutes ago, javeajag said:

I think to characterise Colin weir as some kind of sugar daddy/benefactor is actually wrong .... he was not funding the club day to day we had to stand on our own two feet but he was  putting cash into strategic projects eg clearing the debt , the academy etc which help the club stabilise and move forward without being dependent on him day to day for cash ... what’s the problem with that ?

would we criticise Tom farmer at hibs then ? Don’t think many hibs fans would 

 

We dont actually Know the level of Funding from  Colin Weir over the Years and the specifics of it - therefore your making assumptions 

And I would be really really interested to know where the agreed £300K of additional funding for a Promo Push was going to come from 

Also the word Sugar Daddy was used in a statement from the former Chairman 

No one is criticizing Colin Weir - but questions have to be asked on the nature of ad hoc funding regards it being sustainable 

We have never been given Clarity as to just how much direct or indirect funding we received each season  

[Jordanhill Jag]

15 hours ago, Dark Passenger said:

Has it? The statement doesn't say that.

"any meeting between Supporters/Trustees and the Consortium will not take place until the SFA have dealt with the dual interest issue or when the share transfer has went through"

Actually It does pretty much say that ? 

[javeajag]

4 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

We dont actually Know the level of Funding from  Colin Weir over the Years and the specifics of it - therefore your making assumptions 

And I would be really really interested to know where the agreed £300K of additional funding for a Promo Push was going to come from 

Also the word Sugar Daddy was used in a statement from the former Chairman 

No one is criticizing Colin Weir - but questions have to be asked on the nature of ad hoc funding regards it being sustainable 

We have never been given Clarity as to just how much direct or indirect funding we received each season  

You don’t know if there was any ad hoc funding from Colin Weir but imply/assume there was ...therefore you are making assumptions 

and let’s suppose there was another £50k or £100k of ad hoc funding each year so what ? Your asking questions as though clearing the debt , funding an academy was a bad thing ....was Tom farmer bad for hibs? 

On the financial questions why not ask for a meeting with the chairman ....

 

[javeajag]

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

"any meeting between Supporters/Trustees and the Consortium will not take place until the SFA have dealt with the dual interest issue or when the share transfer has went through"

Actually It does pretty much say that ? 

Which is not what they said on August 10

[Jordanhill Jag]

1 hour ago, Dark Passenger said:

You can't discount the fact they're playing in a higher division. But their fans a re bemoaning the sale of their best talent, the lack of investment in the playing squad and the "spreadsheet" nature of signings. 

Ok - So Where was the Money going to come from assuming we nothing had changed and  we carried on as we were - We were already selling our Best Talent - Budget for Players was already tight - Balancing the Books - Major Challange - Previous  Chairman stated  Colin Weir did not fund us ( so reality is its only the Academy thats impacted by him going ) 

So what was so Magical about the Status Quo ? 

[javeajag]

17 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

You stated the existing shareholders should sell there Shares to Thistle Fans - Who - where are these mythical investors that want to take over the Club ? 

As for not seeing the "attraction " ref Thistle - they obviously do and they have a track record so Im far more happy with that than what we had - a Board of Non Fans - Non Investors sort of trundling along 

If the Club could be Run by Thistle Fans - Great - but it wasnt being Run by Fans - so if thats the case - then may as well be Run by Non Fans with a track Record in Sports Management 

Im fed up with the Glorified Bowling Club Mentality of Scottish Football - Time for change 

You will really love the mentality of the private equity guys then .....

[Dark Passenger]

1 minute ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

"any meeting between Supporters/Trustees and the Consortium will not take place until the SFA have dealt with the dual interest issue or when the share transfer has went through"

Actually It does pretty much say that ? 

Erm, no. The statement doesn't say that the consortium has stipulated that. As I've said above, a member of the consortium has been meeting fans since June - it appears to be more than one or one single group - so it seems strange that they wouldn't be willing to meet with reps from the fans' trusts. And it certainly seems to put to bed any suggestion that the consortium can't communicate its vision to the supporters due to legal restrictions.