Jump to content

Jacqui Low


blakey
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Springburnjag said:

Conway Goodwin Greene Ashley .....explain the difference and why they are preferable to thistle fans 

Can you clarify do you mean Paul or Fred?

I'm totally confused by the purpose of the last few pages

Theres big issues and choices ahead for our club and we are arguing about things that didn't end up happening

The choice now is not between Conway and fans, it is between fans imperfect solution and fans close to perfect solution. Lets all try to deliver the latter

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve never heard of Paul Goodwin but I have heard of Fred Goodwin , Mike Ashley  and Philip Greene and Paul Conway is exactly the same type....

fan ownership will only work if people give it a chance and my suspicions are that certain people are trying to undermine it from the start .....you can see that from the relentless questions and speculation that they never subjected the consortium to.....disgraceful 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Springburnjag said:

I’ve never heard of Paul Goodwin but I have heard of Fred Goodwin , Mike Ashley  and Philip Greene and Paul Conway is exactly the same type....

fan ownership will only work if people give it a chance and my suspicions are that certain people are trying to undermine it from the start .....you can see that from the relentless questions and speculation that they never subjected the consortium to.....disgraceful 

 

Actually there is of course a neat coincidence in the Goodwins

Paul facilitated a transaction by being second horse running and having limited ability to do due diligence etc

Fred's crowning glory which turned into a nightmare was ABN-AMro in the same situation, clutching it from Barclays and relying on their due diligence

Lets hope Pauls vision has a better outcome (as I am sure it will)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jaf said:

Actually there is of course a neat coincidence in the Goodwins

Paul facilitated a transaction by being second horse running and having limited ability to do due diligence etc

Fred's crowning glory which turned into a nightmare was ABN-AMro in the same situation, clutching it from Barclays and relying on their due diligence

Lets hope Pauls vision has a better outcome (as I am sure it will)

I’m not sure what that means but I don’t want Fred Goodwin types near my club some apparently do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Springburnjag said:

I’ve never heard of Paul Goodwin but I have heard of Fred Goodwin , Mike Ashley  and Philip Greene and Paul Conway is exactly the same type....

fan ownership will only work if people give it a chance and my suspicions are that certain people are trying to undermine it from the start .....you can see that from the relentless questions and speculation that they never subjected the consortium to.....disgraceful 

 

For someone that is very up on the model and proposal being offered from TFE you don’t know who is running them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Norgethistle said:

For someone that is very up on the model and proposal being offered from TFE you don’t know who is running them

You know much more about it than I do....I just want fans to run the club you want Fred  Goodwin  types to own us 

and nice deflection from your evidence of Conways professionalism ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Springburnjag said:

You know much more about it than I do....I just want fans to run the club you want Fred  Goodwin  types to own us 

and nice deflection from your evidence of Conways professionalism ? 

I want fans to run the club.

But you cant compare them to Conway anymore, Conway is gone.

Now the comparison has to be with good practice and standards - which is definitely what a fan run club should aspire to.

Important to note, we are not yet fan run.  And also important to note, in achieving those goals people with an opinion can and should feed into the working group consultation process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jaf said:

I want fans to run the club.

But you cant compare them to Conway anymore, Conway is gone.

Now the comparison has to be with good practice and standards - which is definitely what a fan run club should aspire to.

Important to note, we are not yet fan run.  And also important to note, in achieving those goals people with an opinion can and should feed into the working group consultation process.

I agree with you 

I just worry some people are trying to undermine that happening 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Springburnjag said:

I agree with you 

I just worry some people are trying to undermine that happening 

No one is trying to undermine it. People just want to ensure it is set up properly with transparency and accountability. The history with The Jags Trust and even The PTFC Trust make folk jittery as to this happening. Your comments on board members not needing to follow company law doesn’t help

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

No one is trying to undermine it. People just want to ensure it is set up properly with transparency and accountability. The history with The Jags Trust and even The PTFC Trust make folk jittery as to this happening. Your comments on board members not needing to follow company law doesn’t help

Can you give me evidence to support your statement that Paul Conway would bring professionalism to the club ? 
 

third time of asking 

Edited by Springburnjag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul Conway is no longer relevant to the situation.

I am confused as to why anyone thought the consortium would be good for Thistle, but it no longer really matters.

What is important is that Thistle fans can come together to run the club well. That will require diligence but it will also require positivity.

I really hope that there are not attempts to undermine it before it gets a chance to start, because this will only succeed if people engage.

Anyone who seeks to discourage that engagement at this stage is, in my view, doing a huge disservice to the club.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, allyo said:

Paul Conway is no longer relevant to the situation.

I am confused as to why anyone thought the consortium would be good for Thistle, but it no longer really matters.

What is important is that Thistle fans can come together to run the club well. That will require diligence but it will also require positivity.

I really hope that there are not attempts to undermine it before it gets a chance to start, because this will only succeed if people engage.

Anyone who seeks to discourage that engagement at this stage is, in my view, doing a huge disservice to the club.

That’s my concern .... the undermining already seems to have startered  imo

the reference to Conway s professionalism I viewed as a pretty obvious barb against fan ownership 

Edited by Springburnjag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, fenski said:

Yep. To think this thread started on the same day the New Owner thread was closed...

Yeah I wonder why it's turned to sh*t ...

Please, for the love of f*ck, could you take your idiotic squabbles into private messages before the rest of us jump off a bridge.

We don't have to read it BUT YOU SURE AS HELL DON'T HAVE TO WRITE IT, keeping this garbage at the top of the page. Endlessly sniping back and forth at each other, quote after quote after quote over insignificant maybes and could bes and waggling your willies over who knows more about company law. It's sad, pathetic and most of all BORING.

No wonder this website's a f*cking laughing stock.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, West of Scotland said:

Yeah I wonder why it's turned to sh*t ...

Please, for the love of f*ck, could you take your idiotic squabbles into private messages before the rest of us jump off a bridge.

We don't have to read it BUT YOU SURE AS HELL DON'T HAVE TO WRITE IT, keeping this garbage at the top of the page. Endlessly sniping back and forth at each other, quote after quote after quote over insignificant maybes and could bes and waggling your willies over who knows more about company law. It's sad, pathetic and most of all BORING.

No wonder this website's a f*cking laughing stock.

As you said. You don't have to read it!. Where is it said that this site is a laughing stock? People are entitled to air and write their views on it. Who are you? The KGB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, fenski said:

Quite a lot of disdain for this forum on Pie & Bovril, because of threads like this and the one this replaced.

You are right though, if i'm reading it it's a sure sign I need to put my phone down and find something more constructive to do.

I wouldn't put P&B as a vehicle where virtue is abound!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Springburnjag said:

Conway Goodwin Greene Ashley .....explain the difference and why they are preferable to thistle fans 

You are obviously looking to divert the conversation away from the very simple fact  that the Board of Directors Run the Club and they do it for all Shareholders equally-  not a particular Group - this is not a theoretical position to be ignored in practice -as you have implied - this is how it works  

That No other person or vehicle - can make decisions regards the Club - apart from the Board of Directors - to do so would be against the Companies Act and despite your views on lots of people break the Law -  its still the Legislation- and it can be enforced by a report to the relevant Authorities ( therefore  there is no requirement to go to Court ) and morally PTFC should comply with all  Legislation - at all times 

The reason for only Directors making decisions - is that if there was a serious issue - they and  only they - are accountable to the relevant Authorities - otherwise its a complete mess - thats why there are rules defining  who runs a Company 

To try and Spin this into being negative- or having an Anti Fan Ownership Agenda speaks volumes 

But lets just see what emerges over the coming months .............

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you frequently close your posts with this foreboding "...let's see what emerges" stuff?

Forgive me, but it's like you're willing it to fail so you can say told you so.

Can I ask, from where we stand now, is there anything that those currently with influence could do to get you enthused?

If so, what? And if not, why not? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

You are obviously looking to divert the conversation away from the very simple fact  that the Board of Directors Run the Club and they do it for all Shareholders equally-  not a particular Group - this is not a theoretical position to be ignored in practice -as you have implied - this is how it works  

That No other person or vehicle - can make decisions regards the Club - apart from the Board of Directors - to do so would be against the Companies Act and despite your views on lots of people break the Law -  its still the Legislation- and it can be enforced by a report to the relevant Authorities ( therefore  there is no requirement to go to Court ) and morally PTFC should comply with all  Legislation - at all times 

The reason for only Directors making decisions - is that if there was a serious issue - they and  only they - are accountable to the relevant Authorities - otherwise its a complete mess - thats why there are rules defining  who runs a Company 

To try and Spin this into being negative- or having an Anti Fan Ownership Agenda speaks volumes 

But lets just see what emerges over the coming months .............

 

 

JJ , think you’ll find a people who have a 55% shareholding have the control of our Club , they’ve obviously got 55% of any vote that goes on , whether that’s the removal of a director or whatever if they thought that the BOD weren’t working in their favour , is that not how the last boardroom coup worked ?

The BOD are really at the behest of the Shareholders if it’s deemed they’re not working in their interests or the Clubs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not expert, but my understanding would be that the shareholders can influence the question of who is on the Board, and can ultimately remove it if it is unhappy with its performance, but should not be influencing the decisions taken by the Board while it is in place.

This (if accurate) seems quite logical,  and simple. And not really in conflict with much that has been said here (before we get into another shouting match).

  • Like 1
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...