Jump to content

New Chairman announced...


jagfox
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, scotty said:

Everyone's talking about the club as though it is a separate entity from the shares, which are mainly owned by 3BC. Is this the case? It seems to me that if 3BC bought propco then that would mean be the ground it owned would be back to the club.

Completely the other way around mate.

Three Black Cats owns a majority of shares in Thistle.

Three Black Cats therefore controls Thistle and Thistle’s assets.

Thistle does not have any shares in Three Black Cats.

Thistle does not control what Three Black Cats does. It has no say at all.

Thistle has no claim or control over Three Black Cats’ assets except and insofar as there is a contractual agreement between the two (e.g. for the transfer of assets from 3BC and to PTFC Ltd).

To illustrate this.

If Three Black Cats wanted to it could borrow a mortgage against the Bing and Main Stand tomorrow. It would receive the credit and Thistle would receive nothing.

If Three Black Cats then got into financial difficulty, the bank could then sell that bit of the ground from under it. The new owner of said land could then demolish the Main Stand and, planning permission permitting, convert it into flats. Thistle would have no say whatsoever short of objecting to the planning proposal.

If Three Black Cats is to be wound up as part of the arrangements for distributing Colin Weir’s estate, the executors might sell off its land to any Tom, Dick or Harry. Again the Club would have no say. And even if it did... oh wait, Three Black Cats are the majority shareholder and would have control over who its own Thistle shares then get sold to.

For the land to be Thistle’s it has to be owned outright by Partick Thistle Football Club Limited or owned by a corporate entity over which PTFC Limited has a position of control or ownership.

It would be more accurate to say, the majority shareholding for the first time in a long time at Thistle now being held by a single corporate entity, that the Jackie Husband and John Lambie Stands are almost “less Thistle’s” than they were before, because 3BC could now effectively sanction the selling off of the rest of the ground to any entity it liked, including one with no shareholding or direct interest in Partick Thistle.

Edited by Woodstock Jag
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Completely the other way around mate.

Three Black Cats owns a majority of shares in Thistle.

Three Black Cats therefore controls Thistle and Thistle’s assets.

Thistle does not have any shares in Three Black Cats.

Thistle does not control what Three Black Cats does. It has no say at all.

Thistle has no claim or control over Three Black Cats’ assets except and insofar as there is a contractual agreement between the two (e.g. for the transfer of assets from 3BC and to PTFC Ltd).

To illustrate this.

If Three Black Cats wanted to it could borrow a mortgage against the Bing and Main Stand tomorrow. It would receive the credit and Thistle would receive nothing.

If Three Black Cats then got into financial difficulty, the bank could then sell that bit of the ground from under it. The new owner of said land could then demolish the Main Stand and, planning permission permitting, convert it into flats. Thistle would have no say whatsoever short of objecting to the planning proposal.

If Three Black Cats is to be wound up as part of the arrangements for distributing Colin Weir’s estate, the executors might sell off its land to any Tom, Dick or Harry. Again the Club would have no say. And even if it did... oh wait, Three Black Cats are the majority shareholder and would have control over who its own Thistle shares then get sold to.

For the land to be Thistle’s it has to be owned outright by Partick Thistle Football Club Limited or owned by a corporate entity over which PTFC Limited has a position of control or ownership.

It would be more accurate to say, the majority shareholding for the first time in a long time at Thistle now being held by a single corporate entity, that the Jackie Husband and John Lambie Stands are almost “less Thistle’s” than they were before, because 3BC could now effectively sanction the selling off of the rest of the ground to any entity it liked, including one with no shareholding or direct interest in Partick Thistle.

Prospective asset stripping?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jaf said:

Which of course in no way means a profit was made does it?

Someone might say that, for example, if they expected not to ever get cash for something, but then did?  Or other reasons unknown to us - anyway, I only wanted to point out the facts

Precisely. If you’re in your 60s and you think an investment you made in your 50s totally tanked, then you actually get your money back when you weren’t expecting it, you’d be pretty pleased when all is said and done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Completely the other way around mate.

Three Black Cats owns a majority of shares in Thistle.

Three Black Cats therefore controls Thistle and Thistle’s assets.

Thistle does not have any shares in Three Black Cats.

Thistle does not control what Three Black Cats does. It has no say at all.

Thistle has no claim or control over Three Black Cats’ assets except and insofar as there is a contractual agreement between the two (e.g. for the transfer of assets from 3BC and to PTFC Ltd).

To illustrate this.

If Three Black Cats wanted to it could borrow a mortgage against the Bing and Main Stand tomorrow. It would receive the credit and Thistle would receive nothing.

If Three Black Cats then got into financial difficulty, the bank could then sell that bit of the ground from under it. The new owner of said land could then demolish the Main Stand and, planning permission permitting, convert it into flats. Thistle would have no say whatsoever short of objecting to the planning proposal.

If Three Black Cats is to be wound up as part of the arrangements for distributing Colin Weir’s estate, the executors might sell off its land to any Tom, Dick or Harry. Again the Club would have no say. And even if it did... oh wait, Three Black Cats are the majority shareholder and would have control over who its own Thistle shares then get sold to.

For the land to be Thistle’s it has to be owned outright by Partick Thistle Football Club Limited or owned by a corporate entity over which PTFC Limited has a position of control or ownership.

It would be more accurate to say, the majority shareholding for the first time in a long time at Thistle now being held by a single corporate entity, that the Jackie Husband and John Lambie Stands are almost “less Thistle’s” than they were before, because 3BC could now effectively sanction the selling off of the rest of the ground to any entity it liked, including one with no shareholding or direct interest in Partick Thistle.

And people were scared over the consortium.

The club is now effectively wide open to be asset stripped if either 3BC or the Estate determines, this just gets worse and worse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Garscube Road End said:

Prospective asset stripping?

The conspiracy theory I’m ruminating over is that this has been designed this way to insulate a vanity project. For as long as 3BC owns a key bit of the ground it has an asset it can borrow against.

That asset can then be used to make it look like someone is injecting “new investment” into the club when really all they’ve done is pay for it by depriving the club of beneficial ownership of the stadium it occupies.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

The conspiracy theory I’m ruminating over is that this has been designed this way to insulate a vanity project. For as long as 3BC owns a key bit of the ground it has an asset it can borrow against.

That asset can then be used to make it look like someone is injecting “new investment” into the club when really all they’ve done is pay for it by depriving the club of beneficial ownership of the stadium it occupies.

This could turn out worse than we thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, scotty said:

Once again - how do you become a member of PTFC Trust? (never mind elect anyone!

Every season ticket holder is apparently one, but at election time they never balloted most and they have made no statements in months, add to that they also sent ballot papers to under 16s to vote which is against their own rules alongisde not sending out papers to a large number of eligible voters. Two of those in charge at the time are now on the club's board.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

The conspiracy theory I’m ruminating over is that this has been designed this way to insulate a vanity project. For as long as 3BC owns a key bit of the ground it has an asset it can borrow against.

That asset can then be used to make it look like someone is injecting “new investment” into the club when really all they’ve done is pay for it by depriving the club of beneficial ownership of the stadium it occupies.

A legitimate concern. I'm sure the first action of the new chairman on Monday will be to put out a statement to end this ( and other ) conspiracy theories....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

The conspiracy theory I’m ruminating over is that this has been designed this way to insulate a vanity project. For as long as 3BC owns a key bit of the ground it has an asset it can borrow against.

That asset can then be used to make it look like someone is injecting “new investment” into the club when really all they’ve done is pay for it by depriving the club of beneficial ownership of the stadium it occupies.

Why would 3BC renege on Colin Weirs wishes to hand the club over to fan ownership? At this rate I'm half expecting someone to suggest that 3BC are secretly planning to sell to Paul Conway. As others have said previously firhill is a dead duck for asset stripping.....unless I misunderstood that elongated debate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

Why would 3BC renege on Colin Weirs wishes to hand the club over to fan ownership? At this rate I'm half expecting someone to suggest that 3BC are secretly planning to sell to Paul Conway. As others have said previously firhill is a dead duck for asset stripping.....unless I misunderstood that elongated debate? 

You don’t have to sell the assets, only finance against them then not be able to pay 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

Every season ticket holder is apparently one, but at election time they never balloted most and they have made no statements in months, add to that they also sent ballot papers to under 16s to vote which is against their own rules alongisde not sending out papers to a large number of eligible voters. Two of those in charge at the time are now on the club's board.

 

Name names please Norge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

You don’t have to sell the assets, only finance against them then not be able to pay 

Which is what any football club owner can do. Even under fan ownership this is a possibility. I understand why JL is not trusted by some, but it's a hell of a leap to think 3BC have some sort of underhand agenda. That said I agree a clear the air statement is required. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Completely the other way around mate.

Three Black Cats owns a majority of shares in Thistle.

Three Black Cats therefore controls Thistle and Thistle’s assets.

Thistle does not have any shares in Three Black Cats.

Thistle does not control what Three Black Cats does. It has no say at all.

Thistle has no claim or control over Three Black Cats’ assets except and insofar as there is a contractual agreement between the two (e.g. for the transfer of assets from 3BC and to PTFC Ltd).

To illustrate this.

If Three Black Cats wanted to it could borrow a mortgage against the Bing and Main Stand tomorrow. It would receive the credit and Thistle would receive nothing.

If Three Black Cats then got into financial difficulty, the bank could then sell that bit of the ground from under it. The new owner of said land could then demolish the Main Stand and, planning permission permitting, convert it into flats. Thistle would have no say whatsoever short of objecting to the planning proposal.

If Three Black Cats is to be wound up as part of the arrangements for distributing Colin Weir’s estate, the executors might sell off its land to any Tom, Dick or Harry. Again the Club would have no say. And even if it did... oh wait, Three Black Cats are the majority shareholder and would have control over who its own Thistle shares then get sold to.

For the land to be Thistle’s it has to be owned outright by Partick Thistle Football Club Limited or owned by a corporate entity over which PTFC Limited has a position of control or ownership.

It would be more accurate to say, the majority shareholding for the first time in a long time at Thistle now being held by a single corporate entity, that the Jackie Husband and John Lambie Stands are almost “less Thistle’s” than they were before, because 3BC could now effectively sanction the selling off of the rest of the ground to any entity it liked, including one with no shareholding or direct interest in Partick Thistle.

Thank you for your posts Woodstock Jag.

I wouldn't trust these people as far as I could throw them.

Jacqui Low is a 3 time loser and a serial liar.

The PTFC Trust is a sham organisation and the board of directors are stooges for the black cats.

Whether we go down this year or next, it doesn't really matter, because sure as the sunrise; with these imposters in charge, our club is going to go right down the toilet.  :(

Edited by AndyMac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dl1971 said:

Why would 3BC renege on Colin Weirs wishes to hand the club over to fan ownership? At this rate I'm half expecting someone to suggest that 3BC are secretly planning to sell to Paul Conway. As others have said previously firhill is a dead duck for asset stripping.....unless I misunderstood that elongated debate? 

Because then they get to own and run a football club...?

Firhill is not a dead duck for development. But that’s slightly besides the point. The point is if it has value of any sort, it can be used to leverage credit that can then be presented as investment that isn’t really anything of the sort

Much easier to “sell” that line when the credit being leveraged is against a piece of land the Club technically doesn’t own or have control over than if it’s literally Club debt against its own fixed assets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Because then they get to own and run a football club...?

Firhill is not a dead duck for development. But that’s slightly besides the point. The point is if it has value of any sort, it can be used to leverage credit that can then be presented as investment that isn’t really anything of the sort

Much easier to “sell” that line when the credit being leveraged is against a piece of land the Club technically doesn’t own or have control over than if it’s literally Club debt against its own fixed assets.

As 3BC effectively is in debt as per last financial report to Colin Weir (Now his Estate), would this be a reason behind it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Because then they get to own and run a football club...?

Firhill is not a dead duck for development. But that’s slightly besides the point. The point is if it has value of any sort, it can be used to leverage credit that can then be presented as investment that isn’t really anything of the sort

Much easier to “sell” that line when the credit being leveraged is against a piece of land the Club technically doesn’t own or have control over than if it’s literally Club debt against its own fixed assets.

Ok. I understand that 3BC aka CW estate own the club lock stock and barrel. Why would they leverage credit facilities to the detriment of the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3BC ....we don’t even know it’s status as Colin Weirs estate goes through the legal process nor do we know the contents of his will nor do we know who and How his is affairs are being currently managed yet Infowars are now out in full force  .....so on the other hand ....

- Colin weirs will could easily mandate the shares 3BC be transferred to fan ownership

- his will could also restrict lots of other actions in relation to the club 

- various financial transaction could be affected by his passing 

- even this assumes he had an up to date will

meanwhile person or persons unknown are scheming in not yet clear ways to do something which we don’t know but will definitely be to the detriment of the club .....

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...