New Owner

[Dick Dastardly]

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

And a Board on Non Thistle Fans who haven't invested a penny is different from this hoe exactly ? 

Because they were accountable to the shareholders who are Thistle fans.

[jaf]

14 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Because they were accountable to the shareholders who are Thistle fans.

Accountable, ultimately yes 

Cognisant  of the fact in all of their actions?  Perhaps less so ?  Otherwise they may still be in post. 

Edited August 27, 2019 by jaf

[jagfox]

Looks like the Nice sale has gone through....at least Mr Chien has a few bob to play with....

[jlsarmy]

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

And a Board on Non Thistle Fans who haven't invested a penny is different from this hoe exactly ? 

Not sure what difference that makes at all , it’s usually the Chief Executive who runs the Club on a day to day basis , the most important part is that he/she is competent at what they do

We’re getting into bed with an Investment Company whose turnover is many millions with investments in lots of other different areas Hospitality, Property etc .

As regards the importance of of our Club in relation to this , we’re just a punt , in their eyes if it works great and if it doesn’t it won’t be a big deal and they’ll move on.

Do you really want our Club to go in that direction?

[javeajag]

7 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

so does that include the £300K of additional funding at Xmas is that a strategic project ? 

 

And we will find out how "self sufficient " at the AGM 

Speculation.....I thought you hated it ?

[javeajag]

2 hours ago, jaf said:

People ought to stop comparing with options which no longer exist as that’s hit helpful  

1. Colin weir has gone. 

2. There is no longer a board of “non thistle fans. “

3  the status quo option is a shareholder group and board who have already sold in their heads  

there would not appear to be a rewind to where we were option  

at the moment, it seems to be that the only two options are the takeover or being run by a disinterested board keen to divest their interests   

 

 

 

1. That’s an assumption maybe he is funding a bid 

2. There were Thistle fans on the last board 

3. The status quo is always an option 

4. If the consortium bid fails Beattie will fund Colin weirs email 

5. There are only two options because you decided there were only two options 

[javeajag]

26 minutes ago, jaf said:

Accountable, ultimately yes 

Cognisant  of the fact in all of their actions?  Perhaps less so ?  Otherwise they may still be in post. 

Really poor from you ....they were removed  to facilitate the take over

there is also something both you and JJ seem to assume which is that shareholders always operate in the interests of football clubs rather than themselves this is clearly not true eg mike Ashley at Newcastle ....

[javeajag]

22 minutes ago, jagfox said:

Looks like the Nice sale has gone through....at least Mr Chien has a few bob to play with....

He could buy as out of his small change .....there will be no millions coming our way 

[Dick Dastardly]

1 hour ago, jaf said:

Accountable, ultimately yes 

Cognisant  of the fact in all of their actions?  Perhaps less so ?  Otherwise they may still be in post. 

But that is exactly the point. The JLo board did something that the shareholders did not agree with and were removed from office. The difference with Chien/Conway is that they can do what the hell they like and stick up 2 fingers if it is not in Thistle's interest. There is no accountability

[jagfox]

51 minutes ago, javeajag said:

He could buy as out of his small change .....there will be no millions coming our way 

Who said there was?

[javeajag]

35 minutes ago, jagfox said:

Who said there was?

No one 

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 hours ago, javeajag said:

1. That’s an assumption maybe he is funding a bid 

2. There were Thistle fans on the last board 

3. The status quo is always an option 

4. If the consortium bid fails Beattie will fund Colin weirs email 

5. There are only two options because you decided there were only two options 

Sorry - Im confused are you stating that David Beattie has an offer from Colin Weir to buy the Club -apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick - just the way it reads sort of implies that ? 

[Jordanhill Jag]

2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

But that is exactly the point. The JLo board did something that the shareholders did not agree with and were removed from office. The difference with Chien/Conway is that they can do what the hell they like and stick up 2 fingers if it is not in Thistle's interest. There is no accountability

Yes you have a point - but as they will own the Majority of the Shares then thats the way things work - however you may want to ask why there was a relationship between the last Board & the Shareholders that meant rather than looking at the potential bid in a manner that ensured all avenues were explored - that the drastic action that unfolded occurred

   

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 hours ago, javeajag said:

Speculation.....I thought you hated it ?

The £300K was stated in Public - its not speculation - so any guess as to where it was coming from ?   

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Not sure what difference that makes at all , it’s usually the Chief Executive who runs the Club on a day to day basis , the most important part is that he/she is competent at what they do

We’re getting into bed with an Investment Company whose turnover is many millions with investments in lots of other different areas Hospitality, Property etc .

As regards the importance of of our Club in relation to this , we’re just a punt , in their eyes if it works great and if it doesn’t it won’t be a big deal and they’ll move on.

Do you really want our Club to go in that direction?

Ok lets again for the sake of argument and based on many Years of Experience in balancing PTFC Budgets accept David Kellys statement ref the Budget Shortfall - he is a CA and duty bound by there rules   - based on Transfer Values to balance that looks like circa £200K  - add in the £300K already in place for Xmas - bottom line - are you ok with this ?

Because all you do is discuss the risks with the takeover - thats understandable - but you seem to ignore the risks of the Status Quo -

[Third Lanark]

I’ve done my fair bit of critic

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Ok lets again for the sake of argument and based on many Years of Experience in balancing PTFC Budgets accept David Kellys statement ref the Budget Shortfall - he is a CA and duty bound by there rules   - based on Transfer Values to balance that looks like circa £200K  - add in the £300K already in place for Xmas - bottom line - are you ok with this ?

Because all you do is discuss the risks with the takeover - thats understandable - but you seem to ignore the risks of the Status Quo -

To be fair Jim have you not been solely discussing the risks of the status quo and little of the takeover?

[javeajag]

12 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Sorry - Im confused are you stating that David Beattie has an offer from Colin Weir to buy the Club -apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick - just the way it reads sort of implies that ? 

No idea ... we don’t know if anyone else is interested because we know just about nothing atm.... I’m just pointing out that options are often create by our self imposed restrictions and there is always more that we don’t know 

[javeajag]

10 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The £300K was stated in Public - its not speculation - so any guess as to where it was coming from ?   

More speculation !

[Dick Dastardly]

5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Ok lets again for the sake of argument and based on many Years of Experience in balancing PTFC Budgets accept David Kellys statement ref the Budget Shortfall - he is a CA and duty bound by there rules   - based on Transfer Values to balance that looks like circa £200K  - add in the £300K already in place for Xmas - bottom line - are you ok with this ?

Because all you do is discuss the risks with the takeover - thats understandable - but you seem to ignore the risks of the Status Quo -

The risks of the status quo are largely known. The risks of the consortium could be anything

[javeajag]

33 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Ok lets again for the sake of argument and based on many Years of Experience in balancing PTFC Budgets accept David Kellys statement ref the Budget Shortfall - he is a CA and duty bound by there rules   - based on Transfer Values to balance that looks like circa £200K  - add in the £300K already in place for Xmas - bottom line - are you ok with this ?

Because all you do is discuss the risks with the takeover - thats understandable - but you seem to ignore the risks of the Status Quo -

We need to know more about this budget shortfall and clearly you know as little as the rest of us

but if we got into debt who would hold it ? 

[Jordanhill Jag]

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

We need to know more about this budget shortfall and clearly you know as little as the rest of us

but if we got into debt who would hold it ? 

I will repeat for the umpteenth time - the previous Board stated they had arranged "additional" funding for a Promo Push if required at Xmas - thats a statement of fact - where do you think the £300K was coming from - simple question   

[Dick Dastardly]

I was wondering about the budget shortfall and why it appeared around the time of the change of directors. Could it be that it cost £200k to remove them from office ? I am assuming that the directors were on some sort of paid contract and that normal employment rules apply, so we would have to pay them off (unless there was gross misconduct) plus legal fees/sheriff officer fees. I could quite easily see that getting to £200k.

[Jordanhill Jag]

5 minutes ago, javeajag said:

We need to know more about this budget shortfall and clearly you know as little as the rest of us

but if we got into debt who would hold it ? 

The thing is - Banks wont lend to us - so it needs to be alternate Funders 

[Jordanhill Jag]

Just now, Dick Dastardly said:

I was wondering about the budget shortfall and why it appeared around the time of the change of directors. Could it be that it cost £200k to remove them from office ? I am assuming that the directors were on some sort of paid contract and that normal employment rules apply, so we would have to pay them off (unless there was gross misconduct) plus legal fees/sheriff officer fees. I could quite easily see that getting to £200k.

They are unpaid - so No 

[Dick Dastardly]

2 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

I will repeat for the umpteenth time - the previous Board stated they had arranged "additional" funding for a Promo Push if required at Xmas - thats a statement of fact - where do you think the £300K was coming from - simple question   

I think they also said that they had delayed some capital expenditure, so perhaps it was £300k of main stand  maintenance. Basically we don't know and can therefore make any supposition to fit our argument

Edited August 27, 2019 by Dick Dastardly