Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Submitting a proposal at this stage is normal the consortium will have done the same ....you then work towards a deal and then submit an offer.....given the complexity of buying out propco as well this doesn’t surprise me 

Sorry the statement from TFE was “ Partick Thistle fans group Thistle For Ever (TFE) has today made an offer to buy out the Glasgow club’s majority shareholding to make it a supporters’ owned club”

 

Not a proposal an offer. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mgow said:

I was there.  The “old board” budget was planning to run at £700K deficit using £600K we have in bank, topped up by a loan of up to £350K as required. 

The current prediction is to run at ~£100K deficit. Much of difference was down to player sales and this League Cup run .  They were very clear to state that this windfall would be open to “old board” as well as “new board”.  

They think they can stay at same figure even when add in Caldwell compensation .

Expenditure  for this season was set by ”old board”  as was same as last season 

 

 

Thanks for that update. To budget for a £700k deficit is ridiculous. With the current budget would a decent Scottish Cup run remove the £100k deficit?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Norgethistle said:

Sorry the statement from TFE was “ Partick Thistle fans group Thistle For Ever (TFE) has today made an offer to buy out the Glasgow club’s majority shareholding to make it a supporters’ owned club”

 

Not a proposal an offer. 

 

And they may have and the board may have called it a proposal ....I’ve heard all this before and I’ve read the TFE. press release 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fawlty Towers said:

Thanks for that update. To budget for a £700k deficit is ridiculous. With the current budget would a decent Scottish Cup run remove the £100k deficit?

Totally understandable why the coup happened regardless of any takeover (which they didn’t need to be on the board to sell anyway)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotty said:

And they also cannot recommend or otherwise an offer or proposal without first doing due diligence and to do that in a few hours would be reckless.

They also stated that due diligence had been done on the consortium bid, which goes against the Trusts statement (Timed suspiciously to come out at same time if Weirs and TFE’s, almost as if a spin doctor was working it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Norgethistle said:

Totally understandable why the coup happened regardless of any takeover (which they didn’t need to be on the board to sell anyway)

It certainly looks like it was because they were concerned over the running of the club which makes Mr Springford's comments at the Open Day seem strange. No criticism of the previous board were his words but to be honest I would say criticism would have been merited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

I dint understand your point ....their proposal would always be made to the board ....now the board have called it a proposal not an offer ....that might be to suit them 

A proposal is not an offer, I deal with both daily and legally they are different.

No comments on the finances that were mentioned 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Garscube Road End said:

I think with various different outlets reporting the same financial information that you can take it as that's the situation. Surely worth comment as you are obviously interested in what is happening at Partick Thistle FC?

You want a comment?

OK. Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Garscube Road End said:

No comment on the financial aspects of the AGM? 

Yes it was reckless of David Beattie to pledge not to cut costs when we got relegated which he very publicly did ....this meant we had a premiership infrastructure and cost with championship income ....schoolboy error 

he then passed that ball to low who ran with it another school boy error 

Beattie and low are both responsible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

A proposal is not an offer, I deal with both daily and legally they are different.

No comments on the finances that were mentioned 

I think there is a lot of semantics here ....I’ll bet the consortium didn’t just turn up with a legally binding offer ( if there is one ) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Thanks for this - was it hinted at all about how much it cost to pay off Caldwell and Kerr?

Someone from floor suggested “six figure sum”.  While that wasn’t denied, the figure was avoided.  Just that it could be absorbed and keep deficit to £100K. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, javeajag said:

I think there is a lot of semantics here ....I’ll bet the consortium didn’t just turn up with a legally binding offer ( if there is one ) 

Come on. This isn’t about the consortium. It is about tfe stating a few days ago that they had made an offer for all the shares, and tonight the board saying that a proposal has been received.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...