Jump to content

Jag

New Owner

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Message added by douglas clark

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, jagfox said:

Sorry for selective quoting but that is worrying in itself if any truth to the rumours. 

Miller may not come cheap as was rumoured possibly by yourself with McDonald but if GGH is getting something in the region of £1500-2000 a week that's insane.

Without naming your source is this the resurrection  of the Firhill Mole?

I see in other news that Barnsley bid has been scuppered by SFA red tape and read on Facebook that Weir's bid is set to go through...  

Do you have a link jagfox to where it says weirs bid is set to go through as I honestly cannot find anything on that part. Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Do you have a link jagfox to where it says weirs bid is set to go through as I honestly cannot find anything on that part. Thanks 

Nope. Mentioned on Facebook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jagfox said:

Sorry for selective quoting but that is worrying in itself if any truth to the rumours. 

Miller may not come cheap as was rumoured possibly by yourself with McDonald but if GGH is getting something in the region of £1500-2000 a week that's insane.

Without naming your source is this the resurrection  of the Firhill Mole?

I see in other news that Barnsley bid has been scuppered by SFA red tape and read on Facebook that Weir's bid is set to go through...  

Miller is (from what I was told) on more than Skippy was.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Norgethistle said:

Miller is (from what I was told) on more than Skippy was.  

 

Much difference between McDonald and Harkins with Miller and Harkins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I def agree that the club lost its way, vision and became too bloated.  Became dependent (and a tad obsessed) on a sugar Daddy.  Paid players too much who had little desire.  Tried to do too much.

Strip it back.  Concentrate on our core vision.  Keep it tight and controlled.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Paul Conway said to the Daily Mail

Speaking about his Thistle hurdles, Conway says the SFA haven’t been helpful.

He told the Scottish Daily Mail (page 88, 06/11/19): “The SFA asked us to send a presentation asking what we were doing with Partick Thistle and said they would come back with a structure that would work for everybody. We did that and then we were asked to write a letter with details of our group and our plans.

“We sent a four-page letter and got no response. Then the club hired a lawyer to try to advance our discussions and we were asked to fill out more forms. What we have basically been met with is a non-answer from the SFA. We came into this very friendly.

“The reality is we’ve been at this for four months and we have nothing. ‘It’s kind of a joke because what we are saying is that we are willing to work with the authorities in Scotland to find a structure that can work. But we got nothing back.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lambies Lost Doo said:

I def agree that the club lost its way, vision and became too bloated.  Became dependent (and a tad obsessed) on a sugar Daddy.  Paid players too much who had little desire.  Tried to do too much.

Strip it back.  Concentrate on our core vision.  Keep it tight and controlled.

Naming a stand that required no name for the previous 90 years of its existence after said Daddy was and remains an embarrassment.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, West of Scotland said:

Naming a stand that required no name for the previous 90 years of its existence after said Daddy was and remains an embarrassment.

One poster on a previous forum (cannot remember who) always used to refer to it as "The Excellent Main Stand" and I thought that this was its official name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, partickthedog said:

One poster on a previous forum (cannot remember who) always used to refer to it as "The Excellent Main Stand" and I thought that this was its official name.

It was Kieron who was the JT Rep on the Board  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, javeajag said:

This is what Paul Conway said to the Daily Mail

Speaking about his Thistle hurdles, Conway says the SFA haven’t been helpful.

He told the Scottish Daily Mail (page 88, 06/11/19): “The SFA asked us to send a presentation asking what we were doing with Partick Thistle and said they would come back with a structure that would work for everybody. We did that and then we were asked to write a letter with details of our group and our plans.

“We sent a four-page letter and got no response. Then the club hired a lawyer to try to advance our discussions and we were asked to fill out more forms. What we have basically been met with is a non-answer from the SFA. We came into this very friendly.

“The reality is we’ve been at this for four months and we have nothing. ‘It’s kind of a joke because what we are saying is that we are willing to work with the authorities in Scotland to find a structure that can work. But we got nothing back.”

Sounds as if the SFA were as dubious as some of the fans were about the takeover, it would have been a big call to set a precedent re dual ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Sounds as if the SFA were as dubious as some of the fans were about the takeover, it would have been a big call to set a precedent re dual ownership.

Looking at the SFA's history in running the game they wouldn't give a rats arse about any precedent as long as it didn't affect the two scumbags. 

Edited by Garscube Road End
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Garscube Road End said:

Looking at the SFA's history in running the game they wouldn't give a rats arse about any precedent as long as it didn't affect the two scumbags. 

It’s ok Maxie is in charge now !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jlsarmy said:

Sounds as if the SFA were as dubious as some of the fans were about the takeover, it would have been a big call to set a precedent re dual ownership.

Dubious or not, to not give a response in 4 months is negligent 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, javeajag said:

This is what Paul Conway said to the Daily Mail

Speaking about his Thistle hurdles, Conway says the SFA haven’t been helpful.

He told the Scottish Daily Mail (page 88, 06/11/19): “The SFA asked us to send a presentation asking what we were doing with Partick Thistle and said they would come back with a structure that would work for everybody. We did that and then we were asked to write a letter with details of our group and our plans.

“We sent a four-page letter and got no response. Then the club hired a lawyer to try to advance our discussions and we were asked to fill out more forms. What we have basically been met with is a non-answer from the SFA. We came into this very friendly.

“The reality is we’ve been at this for four months and we have nothing. ‘It’s kind of a joke because what we are saying is that we are willing to work with the authorities in Scotland to find a structure that can work. But we got nothing back.”

This is the bit I don't get. What club? Barnsley?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Sounds as if the SFA were as dubious as some of the fans were about the takeover, it would have been a big call to set a precedent re dual ownership.

Why would they be "dubious" - the only thing they have to review is the possibility of Two Teams owned by the same people meeting each other in Europe 

Therefore its nonsense to suggest they had the same view as some of the Fans 

What is more likely is that the thought of someone getting involved with Scottish Football who may want change to the Cosy wee existence of the SFA isnt Welcome 

However they seem to cope with Dual Ownership throughout Europe but in Scotland we cant 

Ignoring Thistle - this will harm Scottish Football as its desperate  for Investment - the Multi Club Ownership Model is being used more and more 

Scotland has now stated New Money is not Welcome 

So lets hope all other Clubs get a Fan with a Massive Lotto Win to buy them - or they are going to struggle 

The Non Response the Consortium received is frankly a disgrace from our National Body and reflects the General State of Scottish Football - it will be interesting to see who benefits from the Consortium failing  - be careful what you wish for - you may just get it 

 

    

  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Why would they be "dubious" - the only thing they have to review is the possibility of Two Teams owned by the same people meeting each other in Europe 

Therefore its nonsense to suggest they had the same view as some of the Fans 

What is more likely is that the thought of someone getting involved with Scottish Football who may want change to the Cosy wee existence of the SFA isnt Welcome 

However they seem to cope with Dual Ownership throughout Europe but in Scotland we cant 

Ignoring Thistle - this will harm Scottish Football as its desperate  for Investment - the Multi Club Ownership Model is being used more and more 

Scotland has now stated New Money is not Welcome 

So lets hope all other Clubs get a Fan with a Massive Lotto Win to buy them - or they are going to struggle 

The Non Response the Consortium received is frankly a disgrace from our National Body and reflects the General State of Scottish Football - it will be interesting to see who benefits from the Consortium failing  - be careful what you wish for - you may just get it 

 

    

  

 

 

 

Within the home countries it’s not allowed at this moment so the FA and the SFA would have to change the rules and set a precedent and I believe it would have to be exceptional circumstances to do this .

The Daily Mail is obviously a very one sided article maybe Paul Conway wrote it himself ? 

For balance maybe Ian Maxwell should make public his concerns, an Investment Company trying to make money by trading players , getting Barnsley’s young players game time to sell them on , all to the benefit of Barnsley FC not our Club.

Just my opinion, this deal was always a non starter .

 

Edited by jlsarmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the full text of the Mail article? Does it give the sense that the journalist approached the SFA for comment? If so, has the body responded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how often people in this thread, whilst keen to point out that they aren’t involved or connected to any interested party, drop little insider secrets into the mix or quote something as fact without explaining how they would know that fact if not actually more connected than most fans. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Norgethistle said:

Dubious or not, to not give a response in 4 months is negligent 

And that’s just from our board....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Why would they be "dubious" - the only thing they have to review is the possibility of Two Teams owned by the same people meeting each other in Europe 

Therefore its nonsense to suggest they had the same view as some of the Fans 

What is more likely is that the thought of someone getting involved with Scottish Football who may want change to the Cosy wee existence of the SFA isnt Welcome 

However they seem to cope with Dual Ownership throughout Europe but in Scotland we cant 

Ignoring Thistle - this will harm Scottish Football as its desperate  for Investment - the Multi Club Ownership Model is being used more and more 

Scotland has now stated New Money is not Welcome 

So lets hope all other Clubs get a Fan with a Massive Lotto Win to buy them - or they are going to struggle 

The Non Response the Consortium received is frankly a disgrace from our National Body and reflects the General State of Scottish Football - it will be interesting to see who benefits from the Consortium failing  - be careful what you wish for - you may just get it 

I don't want to be part of a multi club ownership model. No ifs or buts. I'd rather watch an independent Partick Thistle than the Scottish branch of an international portfolio of clubs. In fact I wouldn't really be interested in watching the Scottish branch of an international portfolio of clubs. Certainly not paying for it.

This for me is more important than football success. Becoming the top club in Scotland under this model would mean very little to me. It would just be economics. It's about identity. The multi ownership thing is a massive dilution of the club as we know it.

220 pages and you'll never convince me that this would be a good thing. But that's just me. I'm not trying to convince anyone to agree.

Having said that, I do think the non response if true sounds a bit shoddy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×