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

1 hour ago, douglas clark said:

Ahem.

I have no idea where a 140 page thread, which lacks any sort of clarity or illumination actually takes us as supporters of PTFC.

Personally. I think that the sale is a done deal.

The likes of Jordanhill Jag and others make the obvious point that shareholders outweigh us.  This reminds me of a couple of things, 'Save the Jags' and the death of Clydebank.

It is kind of obvious that the board machinations are about folk  who'd essentially written off their shareholdings in our football club as 'lost money' becoming aware that perhaps they'd get at least as much as they had invested and perhaps more.  That their earlier disinterest, y'know money written off,  becomes an unexpected opportunity.  They awake from their sleep and look to their bank books. Wow! An opportunity presents itself!

Instantly reclaim the board. Immediately negotiate.

Are they entitled to do so? Of course they are.

That is a consequence of our inability to actually win back  when you and I 'saved the Jags', We should have had at least a majority of the shares. Perhaps someone can remind me why we didn't?

I would love to think that this sort of takeover is going to be astonishingly positive, I really do.

But.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m not so sure this is going to happen at all, especially as they’ve let Caldwell bring in 2 new players, doubtful if the prospective new owners would have sanctioned that , the new owners usually have their own management team in mind and also their own playing targets .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, javeajag said:

We don’t have any bank facilities and no bank is going to give us any 

So we keep our cash in a shoebox in Gerry Britton’s office?

Having no banking facilities means we have no “approved” overdraft or loaning facilities, doesn’t mean we can’t technically overdraw, it just incurs massive penalties 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

So we keep our cash in a shoebox in Gerry Britton’s office?

Having no banking facilities means we have no “approved” overdraft or loaning facilities, doesn’t mean we can’t technically overdraw, it just incurs massive penalties 

Yes we have a bank account but no overdraft or agreed borrowing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that for a business like Thistle with really fluctuating income but regular and known outgoings, without having some facility to get over the the cash flow blips, they would struggle to pass the going concern requirement that the company auditors will insist on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I think that for a business like Thistle with really fluctuating income but regular and known outgoings, without having some facility to get over the the cash flow blips, they would struggle to pass the going concern requirement that the company auditors will insist on.

I believe that facility might well have been Colin Weir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I think that for a business like Thistle with really fluctuating income but regular and known outgoings, without having some facility to get over the the cash flow blips, they would struggle to pass the going concern requirement that the company auditors will insist on.

An auditor speaks -

not necessarily,  the lack of overdraft facilities is irrelevant if there is sufficient cash reserves and a budget that withstands scrutiny and is balanced or at least not utilising all the cash reserves. The auditor requires to look forward 12 months from the date of signing the accounts in making that judgement. 

We have had no overdraft facility for more than  a year and yet last years accounts were signed off without a going concern issue. That will be because of the reserves we had rolling forward and on the basis of the budget the auditors will have seen. 

An overdraft facility is only crucial where you have insufficient cash reserves rolling forward and/or the budget carries too large a deficit. 

I doubt we would ever return to having a true overdraft or bank debt. But you will recall Michael Robertson mentioning that the budget was “fully costed” by which I think he meant the deficit and/or extra funds perhaps required in January were covered in cash terms (remember a deficit is in profit & loss terms and in cash terms - you can run a deficit if you can cover the cash). .  How they were to be covered  would have been a good supplementary question to ask him as it likely would have saved a few of the posts on here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

I believe that facility might well have been Colin Weir.

If it had been in the past, might it have been again in the future but for a bigger number?  And if so I wonder what terms would have attached to a loan?   For example if our benefactor could have demanded repayment on a whim, that would have caused our auditors an issue I suspect. Cheap way to effectively control the club too and to top trump shareholders. 

Anyway, all pure speculation and hypotheticals of course.

 

 

Edited by jaf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, jaf said:

If it had been in the past, might it have been again in the future but for a bigger number?  And if so I wonder what terms would have attached to a loan?   For example if our benefactor could have demanded repayment on a whim, that would have caused our auditors an issue I suspect. Cheap way to effectively control the club too and to top trump shareholders. 

Anyway, all pure speculation and hypotheticals of course.

 

 

As you say all made up 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, is what has happened to Bury FC a warning about how vulnerable a club can become when its owner doesn't pay debts or wages, and also refuses to sell because he or she wants more than is on offer? If I understand correctly, in Bury's case, the current owner bought them for ONE POUND, but has refused to accept another offer to buy the club. One wonders why.

I feel sorry for their fans. Always had a soft spot for Bury since they bought Hugh Tinney from us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, javeajag said:

"...if our benefactor could have demanded repayment on a whim, that would have caused our auditors an issue I suspect. Cheap way to effectively control the club too and to top trump shareholders. "

This is my concern about Colin Weir's involvement with the club. Whether deliberately or not, and it's entirely possible that the situation came about with no malicious intent, he appears to have wished to make major decisions about the club without having the responsibility of running it.

If nothing else, our current circumstances are likely to ensure that this won't happen in the future. If Mr Weir wants to be involved with Thistle, I suspect it will need to be on a more engaged footing. So either  he buys the club or we never see him again...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, javeajag said:

Cryptic....so who 

There are Multi Sources of Funding outwith Banks - the £300K WAS NOT - budget shortfall - it was in addition to the Budget as stated publicly by the previous Board 

Therefore if its not Budgeted - then £300K was going to appear from a source  - question is how and whom - you have plenty to say about the Current Board but seem very disinterested in this "additional" £300K      

So I will ask again - if not Banks - where was the £300K coming from ? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Firhillista said:

This is my concern about Colin Weir's involvement with the club. Whether deliberately or not, and it's entirely possible that the situation came about with no malicious intent, he appears to have wished to make major decisions about the club without having the responsibility of running it.

If nothing else, our current circumstances are likely to ensure that this won't happen in the future. If Mr Weir wants to be involved with Thistle, I suspect it will need to be on a more engaged footing. So either  he buys the club or we never see him again...

You know that is all speculation and made up ?

weir has stopped funding the academy at the end of this season hardly pulling funding on a  whim ...I could easily characterise that as recognising the club will be owned by billionaires his funding us no longer required 

and out new owners can pull out at any second 

i for one never realised how damaging Colin weir was for the club 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

There are Multi Sources of Funding outwith Banks - the £300K WAS NOT - budget shortfall - it was in addition to the Budget as stated publicly by the previous Board 

Therefore if its not Budgeted - then £300K was going to appear from a source  - question is how and whom - you have plenty to say about the Current Board but seem very disinterested in this "additional" £300K      

So I will ask again - if not Banks - where was the £300K coming from ? 

 

For small Scottish football clubs ? Name two 

i know your implying it was being underwritten by Colin weir which you think is bad but if you Knew you would say 

this takeover  had better be good because so far we have lost academy funding, a training ground and now apparently  £300k 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jaf said:

If it had been in the past, might it have been again in the future but for a bigger number?  And if so I wonder what terms would have attached to a loan?   For example if our benefactor could have demanded repayment on a whim, that would have caused our auditors an issue I suspect. Cheap way to effectively control the club too and to top trump shareholders. 

Anyway, all pure speculation and hypotheticals of course.

 

 

Are there any examples of where Colin weir has actually put ad hoc money into the club ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Are there any examples of where Colin weir has actually put ad hoc money into the club ?

I'm not the person to ask. I have told you previously who to ask if you want to understand these interactions, and importantly future plans.

Because you personally do not know about something, does not mean that it is untrue. Just that it has not been verified to you.

We all are told many things I am sure from many sources, and it is our right to decide to choose which to believe, what to disbelieve, and what to remain sceptical of.  It is not a court of law, it is a football forum, and therefore some things will never meet the evidentiary threshold you prefer to use. Which is absolutely fine. I am content and accepting of things I have been told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

There are Multi Sources of Funding outwith Banks - the £300K WAS NOT - budget shortfall - it was in addition to the Budget as stated publicly by the previous Board 

Therefore if its not Budgeted - then £300K was going to appear from a source  - question is how and whom - you have plenty to say about the Current Board but seem very disinterested in this "additional" £300K      

So I will ask again - if not Banks - where was the £300K coming from ? 

 

Your implication is that this came from Colin Weir. While this is speculation, even if it is, so what ? We know he was providing ad hoc funding for specific projects, so perhaps avoiding relegation was one such case. You have made a lot of this £300k, so why is it so important to you ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaf said:

I'm not the person to ask. I have told you previously who to ask if you want to understand these interactions, and importantly future plans.

Because you personally do not know about something, does not mean that it is untrue. Just that it has not been verified to you.

We all are told many things I am sure from many sources, and it is our right to decide to choose which to believe, what to disbelieve, and what to remain sceptical of.  It is not a court of law, it is a football forum, and therefore some things will never meet the evidentiary threshold you prefer to use. Which is absolutely fine. I am content and accepting of things I have been told.

The people to ask don’t respond but sometimes ambiguity suits people.

so what have you been told and by whom ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, javeajag said:

The people to ask don’t respond but sometimes ambiguity suits people.

so what have you been told and by whom ?

Haha, I am not in the witness box!!  Ask Michael Robertson and then there can be no doubt, he was keen to tell us the £300k was fully costed, so he will know where it was coming from and the terms of it. He seemed to be happy to share information on facebook?

Saves us getting in a needless debate as whatever I say you will not believe, so better to go to source....I will leave that with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jaf said:

Haha, I am not in the witness box!!  Ask Michael Robertson and then there can be no doubt, he was keen to tell us the £300k was fully costed, so he will know where it was coming from and the terms of it. He seemed to be happy to share information on facebook?

Saves us getting in a needless debate as whatever I say you will not believe, so better to go to source....I will leave that with you.

I’ll take that as you don’t know 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, javeajag said:

You know that is all speculation and made up ?

weir has stopped funding the academy at the end of this season hardly pulling funding on a  whim ...I could easily characterise that as recognising the club will be owned by billionaires his funding us no longer required 

and out new owners can pull out at any second 

i for one never realised how damaging Colin weir was for the club 

I asked at the time of Colin Weir’s announcement, what the point of it was. And if, as you say funding for the academy remains for the rest of this season and the takeover, if it happens, will be done by then, I am even more perplexed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Your implication is that this came from Colin Weir. While this is speculation, even if it is, so what ? We know he was providing ad hoc funding for specific projects, so perhaps avoiding relegation was one such case. You have made a lot of this £300k, so why is it so important to you ?

How do we know that he was funding ad hoc projects ?

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...