javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: Busted. ”But I never said why he was smiling and I didn’t imply they walked away with a big profit.” Ad ******* nauseam. Jesus in reference to selling the club AND propco ... you can read ? Add them together Beattie said what he said you make of it what you will and no where does it say he made substantial profits from propco .. next 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 12 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: You’re still missing the point. PropCo is a company. It has never been bought or sold. Only land was ever bought or sold. A transaction in which the Club forms all or part of both legal persons is a fundamentally different one than a transaction between PropCo and a third party. The numbers £1 million and £2 million relate to different things and therefore are not an “in” and “out” comparable. This isn’t pedantry it’s basic shit about the transactions that happened. it’s pedantic mate really 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, javeajag said: Jesus in reference to selling the club AND propco ... you can read ? Add them together Beattie said what he said you make of it what you will and no where does it say he made substantial profits from propco .. next If the profit is made from selling “both” of them that means each of them made a profit. If the profit is just from selling the shares and he only broke even or made a loss on the land then guess what... it’s not “both”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Just now, Woodstock Jag said: If the profit is made from selling “both” of them that means each of them made a profit. If the profit is just from selling the shares and he only broke even or made a loss on the land then guess what... it’s not “both”. Guess what .... we didn’t know that at the time and I’m not sure we know what the clubs shares were sold/bought / transferred got and it is possible to look at all your investments in an entity and say overall I made a profit even though one part didn’t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 1 minute ago, javeajag said: Guess what .... we didn’t know that at the time and I’m not sure we know what the clubs shares were sold/bought / transferred got and it is possible to look at all your investments in an entity and say overall I made a profit even though one part didn’t Even if we entertain this particular and ironic head of a pin nonsense from you, that would require you to have evidence that the PTFC shares were sold for a rate that was higher than the rate Beattie paid for his. What evidence do you have even for that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Just now, Woodstock Jag said: Even if we entertain this particular and ironic head of a pin nonsense from you, that would require you to have evidence that the PTFC shares were sold for a rate that was higher than the rate Beattie paid for his. What evidence do you have even for that? I have none which is what the words ‘ we don’t know ‘ mean .... the point being we don’t know if shareholders made a profit on selling their shares . Unless you do ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlsarmy Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, javeajag said: I have none which is what the words ‘ we don’t know ‘ mean .... the point being we don’t know if shareholders made a profit on selling their shares . Unless you do ? A 7% shareholding returned just under 100k if that helps , I believe it was a slight profit Edited March 5, 2020 by jlsarmy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, jlsarmy said: A 7% shareholding returned just under 100k if that helps , I believe it was a slight profit This won't tell you whether every seller of shares made a profit, because that will depend on what consideration they paid for their shares at the outset. In many cases, shares were acquired at different points in time and in different circumstances, with different share premiums. Three Black Cats holds, according to the confirmation statement of February this year: 427,006 A shares (nominal value £1 each) - of about 7,354,329 B shares (nominal value £0.10 each) - of about 13.2 million in total This resulted from the following shareholders transferring their shares: Shareholder A Shares B Shares Norman Springford 27495 500000 Dorothy Springford 27495 500000 Eddie Prentice 54990 1000000 Jim Oliver 113054 500000 TC McMaster 22973 260000 Jill McMaster 22973 260000 SC McMaster 22974 260000 John McMaster 22973 260000 Arch Investments (Tom Hughes) 54990 1000000 Thomas Longley 27495 500000 Billy Allan 29594 354735 Ronnie Gilfillan 0 1000000 David Beattie 0 500000 Grant Bannerman 0 420000 I've obviously missed something out and/or there's something not quite right in the confirmation statement, because there are 39,594 fewer shares on that list than the total held by Three Black Cats and as far as I can see no new shares have been issued. Part of this discrepancy seems to result from something not quite adding up with Billy Allan's B shareholding (which I can't make sense of). He is listed in the January 2018 confirmation statement as holding 384,329 shares, but as having transferred 354,735 in November 2019 in the February 2020 confirmation statement and now having none. That explains 29,594 of the gap. It's possible I've missed another transfer of 10,000 shares to Three Black Cats somewhere else, but that would be the smallest shareholding to be part of this deal. As best I understand it, the A shares are basically worthless despite continuing nominally to exist and the split between the types of share was originally brought about after STJ. The holding of B shares is generally understood as being more relevant to who owns how much of the Club. As you can see, David Beattie was not one of the very big ticket shareholders (rather a sort of mid-level one). Unless the shareholders otherwise agreed between them that he should receive more consideration than his nominal shareholding would suggest, he's definitely not receiving as much as the McMasters (collectively), Springfords (collectively), Prentice, Gilfillan or Arch Investments/Hughes (specifically, he's getting about half as much as each of those groups). If you spoke to one of the McMasters, then David Beattie probably received £200k or so for his shares (which is about what he put in when he subscribed shares in 2007). If you spoke to someone with the same Ordinary B shareholding as David Beattie, your information suggests he got about £100k back. This is less than what he put into the Club in 2007. If you spoke to Eddie Prentice, Tom Hughes or Ronnie Gilfillan, or to the Springfords, and what they told you was true, this means David Beattie would have got about £50k back, which is much less than what he put in. Unless David Beattie was somehow getting a premium for co-ordinating the deal on behalf of all of these shareholders (in PTFC Ltd and/or in PropCo) there is no evidence he made any money in either transaction whatsoever and on the face of it he may well have lost money on his original investment. All of this while ignoring the directors' fee he paid throughout his time on the board (a fee also paid by other people on this list from time to time). If David Beattie is smiling on the beach it's because he got (most of) his money back. Edited March 5, 2020 by Woodstock Jag 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 10 hours ago, javeajag said: Still can’t quite admit it.....my post never implied anything your head did and you have no statements I have ever made the statement that propco investors made substantial profits everything else you keep saying follows on from this false assumption. 1. I doubt propco investors made a profit but I don’t know for certain but I would be surprised if they did 2. your use of forensic language isn’t helping particularly in relation to posts that are not written with a future court of law case in mind ...I know propco investors paid c£1m for 50% of the two assets and that 3BC paid £2m to buy those assets 3. I assume the club will get c£900k but that’s not 100% clear either Ok so point 3 - is the key bit - the Club should have got there £900K at point of Sale - thats agreed by everyone Now Propco was highly controversial - that again we are all agreed on Fans were never comfortable with it - that again we are all agreed on But its been bought and the Propco Shareholders get paid - that again is something we all agree on So its very simply - this was a very large and highly controversial property deal - it was publicised as being good for the Club - therefore as its now concluded - the Club has a duty to issue a statement as to the Clubs Investment return - as its substantial ( £900K ) this is unrelated to any land deal from 3 BC - or Colin Weir Estate or Fan Share Transfer - Not related in any shape or form We cannot wait until the AGM and as Propco was set up via an EGM then there is precedent that Propco is large enough to get treated separately from the General Accounts Propco has ZERO do do with 3BC and ZERO to do with Land Transfer - Share Transfer or CW Estate - ZERO Its a long standing PTFC Investment - the 45% Shareholders have a reasonable right to know what the outcome is ( of which your one of them ) Happy for anyone to state alternate views as to the premise on why I believe we should have a statement from the Club ref Propco So straightforward Question - as a Shareholder do you support the need for a Clear & immediate Statement regards the return the Club received from Propco Investment Puts it to bed once and for all - as to who got what - and where any cash ended up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 3 hours ago, jlsarmy said: A 7% shareholding returned just under 100k if that helps , I believe it was a slight profit JlS - incorrect - 7% was diluted down from 10% - the £100K was the exact investment sum for the 10% - there was no profit My understanding - everyone got there money back they put in - irrespective of Share % - No Profit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 3 hours ago, javeajag said: I have none which is what the words ‘ we don’t know ‘ mean .... the point being we don’t know if shareholders made a profit on selling their shares . Unless you do ? I was told directly they got the money back they put in - JLS has supported this by the Sum he stated for 7% ( £100K ) which was one of the original STJ Investors who put in £100K for 10% ( diluted down to 7% ) No we "Dont Know" but all evidence points to zero profit ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delurker Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Thanks for all the forensic analysis, WJ, superb effort. And the contributions from those of you (JJ, jlsarmy) who have inside knowledge and have given actual facts rather than innuendo and rumour, much appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Yep, top analysis from those who can get their head around the figures and actually know; as opposed to those who make throwaway comments to generate speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 2 hours ago, sandy said: Yep, top analysis from those who can get their head around the figures and actually know; as opposed to those who make throwaway comments to generate speculation. God loves a humble person 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, javeajag said: God loves a humble person No I don't ! That is pure speculation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 16 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: No I don't ! That is pure speculation Said if I may say so with great humility Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 17 minutes ago, javeajag said: Said if I may say so with great humility Perhaps not a quality that you practice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 40 minutes ago, javeajag said: God loves a humble person Ok I will ask again - do you agree that the Club should make a Statement regards its Propco Investment - given its value and High Profile ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 16 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said: Ok I will ask again - do you agree that the Club should make a Statement regards its Propco Investment - given its value and High Profile ? I thought that they had in the statement earlier this week from the working group and Low. My translation was ... we ****ed up but we're sorting it. I'm not expecting more than that for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Whether and when PropCo's cash assets are distributed will be a matter for PropCo, in which the Club is a significant but ultimately (just) minority shareholder. PropCo's next set of accounts don't have to be published until about August, and there's a good chance it will be liquidated before then (or at least its cash assets distributed and the company made in some meaningful sense dormant). Firhill Developments has been able to claim an exemption on submitting full accounts so they produce only very high level details. The Club's own accounts are normally published around October time, so we won't know if the Club is to receive the £900k or whatever it is and when unless and until PropCo or the Club tell us what has happened to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: I thought that they had in the statement earlier this week from the working group and Low. My translation was ... we ****ed up but we're sorting it. I'm not expecting more than that for now. The Club statement made no reference at all to what was expected to happen to any distribution of PropCo's cash assets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: I thought that they had in the statement earlier this week from the working group and Low. My translation was ... we ****ed up but we're sorting it. I'm not expecting more than that for now. No - thats in relation to the land Transfer - it has zero to do with the propco Investment - the two are not related The Club should-assuming it all went to plan ( return wise ) - have received £900K from Propco That has nothing to do with 3BC - any land Transfer etc etc - Now at some point there may be an offset of the £900K in Lieu of the Land - that will be a decision as to wither its better to have the £900K or the Land - but currently its the £900K - the land is a maybe - as there are lots of factors at play ref CW Estate Edited March 5, 2020 by Jordanhill Jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Here’s great PR for you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laukat Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 9 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: Here’s great PR for you She's an absolute embarrasment. Surely as an experienced PR professional she must know how that looks. I hope Ian McCall and Gerry Britton are asking her WTF she is doing and telling her to get stay away from commenting on football. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paralytic thistle Posted March 5, 2020 Report Share Posted March 5, 2020 Just now, laukat said: She's an absolute embarrasment. Surely as an experienced PR professional she must know how that looks. I hope Ian McCall and Gerry Britton are asking her WTF she is doing and telling her to get stay away from commenting on football. I wish she would stay away from football Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.