Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
jagfox

New Chairman announced...

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, partickthedog said:

I cannot claim to be an expert on all the boardroom comings and goings, and my focus is on backing the team in the vital relegation scrap with Queen of the South on Tuesday. However, I can confirm the current position regarding registered title to the various parts of Firhill Stadium and related ground as disclosed on the Land Register of Scotland. This is all publicly available through the Registers of Scotland ScotLIS (Scottish Land and Information Service).

Title Number GLA205256 relates to the Main Stand and the Bing as well as the steep section of South Drive. Title is registered as from 2nd December 2019 in the name of Three Black Cats Limited (Company Number SC591721), who paid a price of £1956000 and took entry on 20th November 2019. There is no pending application to register any further transfer of title. Although there is a limit to what can be ascertained regarding the title history (the Title Sheet tells you the title position now, and you do not see the bundle of consecutive deeds that led to the current position), it would appear that what Three Black Cats Limited acquired in 2019 was the same precisely as Firhill Developments Limited acquired from Partick Thistle Football Club Limited in 2009.

Title to the remaining land at Firhill Stadium, 80 Firhill Road, Glasgow G20 7AL  (ie the pitch, John Lambie Stand and Jackie Husband Stand (and continuation of South Drive/parking area behind) is registered under Title Number GLA162711 in name of Partick Thistle Football Club Limited (Company Number SC005417). The title was registered voluntarily (ie not consequent on a transfer of title) with entry on 8th June 2002.

Some points of historical interest:

1) Part of the land is included in the entry on the Schedule of Monuments  for the Forth and Clyde Canal. There is a pending similar application for Scott Fox standing on his goal line at corners (sorry, I made that last bit up).

2) By a deed recorded on 12th December 1916, Caledonian Railway Company required  Partick Thistle Football Club Limited (and I paraphrase) "for so long as the ground is used for football or other athletic purposes, to suitably fence off the ground from [land retained by the Railway Company] in such way and manner as will prevent all persons from being able to view the playing pitch from [the retained land], including the canal bank and towing path".

3) Can any of the history buffs explain why a railway company owned land adjacent to a canal (London Midland and Scottish Railway Company are also mentioned in relation to the title in 1933)?  The 1916 deed mentioned above is the first one referred to for title conditions. My understanding is that Thistle began playing at Firhill in 1909. Is it the case then that Thistle did not own Firhill for the first 7 years they played there (either leasing or paying up a price by instalments)? It is possible that there could have been an earlier acquisition recorded by a deed which did not contain any permanent title conditions. That would be unusual, so historical explanation welcomed.

In other words, the promise that the land would be transferred back to the Club and from Three Black Cats and that this would happen within seven days, made categorically on the Club website on 21 November 2019, has not happened despite the passage of some three months.

image.thumb.png.4db1abe658aa2db0cd301dd0d14bd677.png

It also suggests that the follow-up statement from the Interim Board, later that same day, continues to be false.

image.thumb.png.2b2a67a54b5b233dc8657842cbabd77c.png

As I have emphasised elsewhere, unless and until Three Black Cats transfers the relevant property interest to Partick Thistle Football Club Ltd, the Club actually now owns less of an interest (whether direct or indirect) in the stadium than it did before, because it was itself a shareholder in Firhill Developments Limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, javeajag said:

So propco put in £1m in 2009 and took out £2m in 2019 

No that's not right. You are forgetting that PTFC was a major shareholder in PropCo. The private individuals that invested in it did not own Firhill Developments Limited outright, and (from memory) owned slightly over half of the shares, but with certain preferential treatment as to how the assets of the company were to be distributed as and when it was to be wound down.

When Three Black Cats bought the assets of PropCo, some of that money will have gone back to Thistle, because it will effectively have sold its interest in PropCo. Without sitting down and doing the sums properly on this, the private investors in PropCo will have at most made a very modest profit because of their preferential entitlement to proceeds. They certainly have not doubled their money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, javeajag said:

So propco put in £1m in 2009 and took out £2m in 2019 

The accounts (of Firhill Developments) would suggest otherwise. As indeed do our own audited accounts,

They are publicly available, and may not support your argument and that of jls, which is inconvenient but nonetheless the simple facts of the matter.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Woodstock Jag said:

No that's not right. You are forgetting that PTFC was a major shareholder in PropCo. The private individuals that invested in it did not own Firhill Developments Limited outright, and (from memory) owned slightly over half of the shares, but with certain preferential treatment as to how the assets of the company were to be distributed as and when it was to be wound down.

When Three Black Cats bought the assets of PropCo, some of that money will have gone back to Thistle, because it will effectively have sold its interest in PropCo. Without sitting down and doing the sums properly on this, the private investors in PropCo will have at most made a very modest profit because of their preferential entitlement to proceeds. They certainly have not doubled their money.

Correct, the carrying value of the property stock at the time of the last accounts was £2,123,627, so they will be reporting a loss on the disposal at the amount previously quoted. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

As you and I both said , David Beattie and Co made substantial profits both from Propco and the shares they sold , the rhetoric doing it for the best interests of the Club and relying on David Beattie ‘s judgement is nonsense .

The sale of the Club was a business deal , pure and simple and it shouldn’t be dressed up any other way .

 

As I've just explained to javeajag, this isn't correct. Crude sums suggest they just about made their money back and might (because of the corporate structure of Firhill Developments Ltd) have made a little bit of a profit. But slightly less than half of the consideration paid to Firhill Developments Limited will represent the Club's own share in that enterprise. The (just shy of £2 million) categorically isn't all going to Beattie and his mates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jaf said:

Correct, the carrying value of the property stock at the time of the last accounts was £2,123,627, so they will be reporting a loss on the disposal at the amount previously quoted. 

Thanks, that was the missing information I was looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

In other words, the promise that the land would be transferred back to the Club and from Three Black Cats and that this would happen within seven days, made categorically on the Club website on 21 November 2019, has not happened despite the passage of some three months.

image.thumb.png.4db1abe658aa2db0cd301dd0d14bd677.png

It also suggests that the follow-up statement from the Interim Board, later that same day, continues to be false.

image.thumb.png.2b2a67a54b5b233dc8657842cbabd77c.png

As I have emphasised elsewhere, unless and until Three Black Cats transfers the relevant property interest to Partick Thistle Football Club Ltd, the Club actually now owns less of an interest (whether direct or indirect) in the stadium than it did before, because it was itself a shareholder in Firhill Developments Limited.

I always thought the way to have done this was by PTFC (funded by CW) to purchase the entire share capital of FDL. That would have reduced the stamp duty cost. It would also have saved another transfer being needed within seven days. Finally, the whole title could have been put back together with ease by transferring the land out of the (now subsidiary company) FDL back into PTFC with no LBTT nor corporate tax issue, and FDL dissolved in future after that had been done. I never understood the interim step of using 3BC for the land transfer (especially for only 7 days), but I guess they took advice.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jaf said:

I always thought the way to have done this was by PTFC (funded by CW) to purchase the entire share capital of FDL. That would have reduced the stamp duty cost. It would also have saved another transfer being needed within seven days. Finally, the whole title could have been put back together with ease by transferring the land out of the (now subsidiary company) FDL back into PTFC with no LBTT nor corporate tax issue, and FDL dissolved in future after that had been done. I never understood the interim step of using 3BC for the land transfer (especially for only 7 days), but I guess they took advice.

 

Stamp duty was immediately what I thought of with that too. All very odd.

Unless the intention was not in fact to return the land to the Club at all, but, and here's my conspiracy hat being put on, it was seen as a way to make it look like TBC has assets which can underpin it being seen to "invest" in the Club for a few years and hide the extent to which the Club had previously depended on the financial input and goodwill of its previous shareholders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jaf said:

The accounts (of Firhill Developments) would suggest otherwise. As indeed do our own audited accounts,

They are publicly available, and may not support your argument and that of jls, which is inconvenient but nonetheless the simple facts of the matter.

 

 

 

I didn’t make an argument just posted two facts 

so three black cats paid £1m to shareholders and £1m to the club they spent x million buying 

Share this post


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

I didn’t make an argument just posted two facts 

so three black cats paid £1m to shareholders and £1m to the club they spent x million buying 

You were giving impression Beattie et al had walked away with a million quid profit. You were misleading people and/or wrong. A loss of £160,000 was actually made (per the publicly available accounts). As I have said previously only the individuals concerned know their own motivations and so this is simply endless and quite boring speculation, but if you all feel the need to have that debate, it should at least be based on facts?

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I didn’t make an argument just posted two facts 

so three black cats paid £1m to shareholders and £1m to the club they spent x million buying 

No, you put forward two things that were not comparable.

If £1 million was given to the Club by private investors in 2009 for a (circa) 50% share of a piece of land, and that land was then sold to a third party in 2019 for under £2 million pounds, then the private investors only get about £1 million of that if/when Firhill Developments Limited is wound up.

As jaf rather strikingly points out, that suggests that they will barely have got their money back if at all, and may well even have posted a loss as and when they distribute the remaining assets of FDL. If David Beattie and others had put their investment in an RBS personal savings account in 2009 they would be better off than if they had done FDL. This ignores the other financial contributions those individuals made directly and in a personal capacity to the running of the club, such as the annual director's fee David Beattie and others paid. At best these folk probably broke even by the time they had sold their interests in the ground and the Club.

Edit to add: and in choosing to forgo a safe-as-houses personal investment and instead to own a bit of the ground for a decade, David Beattie et al saved the Club a significant (five figure) amount annually in debt interest payments.

Edited by Woodstock Jag
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jaf said:

You were giving impression Beattie et al had walked away with a million quid profit. You were misleading people and/or wrong. A loss of £160,000 was actually made (per the publicly available accounts). As I have said previously only the individuals concerned know their own motivations and so this is simply endless and quite boring speculation, but if you all feel the need to have that debate, it should at least be based on facts?

 

You took an impression from two facts that I didn’t make 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No, you put forward two things that were not comparable.

If £1 million was given to the Club by private investors in 2009 for a (circa) 50% share of a piece of land, and that land was then sold to a third party in 2019 for under £2 million pounds, then the private investors only get about £1 million of that if/when Firhill Developments Limited is wound up.

As jaf rather strikingly points out, that suggests that they will barely have got their money back if at all, and may well even have posted a loss as and when they distribute the remaining assets of FDL. If David Beattie and others had put their investment in an RBS personal savings account in 2009 they would be better off than if they had done FDL. This ignores the other financial contributions those individuals made directly and in a personal capacity to the running of the club, such as the annual director's fee David Beattie and others paid. At best these folk probably broke even by the time they had sold their interests in the ground and the Club.

We’re my two facts incorrect ? So if the £2m £1m went to the investors and the other £1m to 3BC 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, One t in Scotland said:

Great post @partickthedog

The Caledonian Railway Company owned the F&C canal at that point ( and were subsequently swallowed up by the LM&S railway ).

 

The Firhill basin was used as a timber pond, which I imagine was turned into railway sleepers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, javeajag said:

We’re my two facts incorrect ? So if the £2m £1m went to the investors and the other £1m to 3BC 

You're talking out your arse. 3BC were paying for the land, not receiving money for it.

3BC owns a majority shareholding in PTFC Ltd. PTFC Ltd. is a major but (I think just) minority shareholder in PropCo.

Of £2 million consideration for an interest in land, how PropCo distributes those proceeds is a matter for it and its constitution. In crude terms, however, we would expect about half of it will go to the original investors who had put in about £1 million into PropCo (i.e. they put in a million and they've taken back out about... a million). The other half (ish) will go to the Club, not to 3BC.

Share this post


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

You're talking out your arse. 3BC were paying for the land, not receiving money for it.

3BC owns a majority shareholding in PTFC Ltd. PTFC Ltd. is a major but (I think just) minority shareholder in PropCo.

Of £2 million consideration for an interest in land, how PropCo distributes those proceeds is a matter for it and its constitution. In crude terms, however, we would expect about half of it will go to the original investors who had put in about £1 million into PropCo (i.e. they put in a million and they've taken back out about... a million). The other half (ish) will go to the Club, not to 3BC.

Insulting to say the least

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Javeajag furiously backpeddling now that his insinuation that PropCo (a) made a profit and (b) that its private investors stood to double their money has been comprehensively debunked.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

You're talking out your arse. 3BC were paying for the land, not receiving money for it.

3BC owns a majority shareholding in PTFC Ltd. PTFC Ltd. is a major but (I think just) minority shareholder in PropCo.

Of £2 million consideration for an interest in land, how PropCo distributes those proceeds is a matter for it and its constitution. In crude terms, however, we would expect about half of it will go to the original investors who had put in about £1 million into PropCo (i.e. they put in a million and they've taken back out about... a million). The other half (ish) will go to the Club, not to 3BC.

But as I can read you don’t actually know where the £2m has gone but are speculating 

Share this post


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

I cannot claim to be an expert on all the boardroom comings and goings, and my focus is on backing the team in the vital relegation scrap with Queen of the South on Tuesday. However, I can confirm the current position regarding registered title to the various parts of Firhill Stadium and related ground as disclosed on the Land Register of Scotland. This is all publicly available through the Registers of Scotland ScotLIS (Scottish Land and Information Service).

Title Number GLA205256 relates to the Main Stand and the Bing as well as the steep section of South Drive. Title is registered as from 2nd December 2019 in the name of Three Black Cats Limited (Company Number SC591721), who paid a price of £1956000 and took entry on 20th November 2019. There is no pending application to register any further transfer of title. Although there is a limit to what can be ascertained regarding the title history (the Title Sheet tells you the title position now, and you do not see the bundle of consecutive deeds that led to the current position), it would appear that what Three Black Cats Limited acquired in 2019 was the same precisely as Firhill Developments Limited acquired from Partick Thistle Football Club Limited in 2009.

Title to the remaining land at Firhill Stadium, 80 Firhill Road, Glasgow G20 7AL  (ie the pitch, John Lambie Stand and Jackie Husband Stand (and continuation of South Drive/parking area behind) is registered under Title Number GLA162711 in name of Partick Thistle Football Club Limited (Company Number SC005417). The title was registered voluntarily (ie not consequent on a transfer of title) with entry on 8th June 2002.

Some points of historical interest:

1) Part of the land is included in the entry on the Schedule of Monuments  for the Forth and Clyde Canal. There is a pending similar application for Scott Fox standing on his goal line at corners (sorry, I made that last bit up).

2) By a deed recorded on 12th December 1916, Caledonian Railway Company required  Partick Thistle Football Club Limited (and I paraphrase) "for so long as the ground is used for football or other athletic purposes, to suitably fence off the ground from [land retained by the Railway Company] in such way and manner as will prevent all persons from being able to view the playing pitch from [the retained land], including the canal bank and towing path".

3) Can any of the history buffs explain why a railway company owned land adjacent to a canal (London Midland and Scottish Railway Company are also mentioned in relation to the title in 1933)?  The 1916 deed mentioned above is the first one referred to for title conditions. My understanding is that Thistle began playing at Firhill in 1909. Is it the case then that Thistle did not own Firhill for the first 7 years they played there (either leasing or paying up a price by instalments)? It is possible that there could have been an earlier acquisition recorded by a deed which did not contain any permanent title conditions. That would be unusual, so historical explanation welcomed.

 

 

Good work sherlockthedog. However, I think there should have been a transfer of land ownership for a small, yet vital, part of the ground around May 2016. Can you confirm?

:happy2:

 

Reading that post makes me realise how far we have fallen from the togetherness of that period. Players, club and supporters as one. Such a terrible shame.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, javeajag said:

But as I can read you don’t actually know where the £2m has gone but are speculating 

It's not "speculation" to read the latest detailed Confirmation Statement of Firhill Developments Limited.

The holders of the preference shares get a premium in certain contexts, which might mean, for example, that the distribution or liquidation of FDL would give them (say) £1.2-1.3 million rather than £1 million, and the Club correspondingly less, but we can say with confidence that, unless the corporate structure of PropCo was to be changed as part of the deal (and we have no evidence to support this) the Club will be entitled to a significant share of the £2 million.

If the intention had been to give PropCo's investors the full £2 million (or anything close to it) the transaction would have been structured completely differently.

Share this post


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

As we know you are not the most flexible thinker here....so yes it was announced at the time of the takeover but that doesn’t mean it was cancelled as there were insufficient funds left from buying out all your mates and propco for the initial plan hence the look at other options 

if our shareholders and propco had stayed where they were we would have a training ground 

OK so we are clear CW  and his Advisors approached the Shareholders - he made an Offer to Buy them out - Transfer Shares to the Fans - Buy Propco - Transfer it to the Club - Build the Training Ground and Fun the Thistle Weir Academy - Now a) He knew what all that would cost b) He knew his Health wasn't the best so as its a long term commitment he would build in clauses to ensure all of this was delivered 

The Shareholders - take one look at the deal and its obviously an amazing and generous offer for PTFC - in addition they get a Windfall of Money they never expected to see again - so agree - they are Jags Fans - so its a Great Deal for the Club - this was all stated in Public 

So at No point was there a caveat to the Shareholders that - there would be implications for Training Ground or anything else - they looked at the offer - it was Win Win for everyone 

Four Weeks later the statement regards Training Ground Funding was announced - at time of Sale it was accounted for in the CW Budget as separate from, Share & Propco Purchase ZERO do do with the Share / Propco Purchase ZERO   

The Training Ground was budgeted for blaming the previous Shareholders is complete and utter nonsense - you are attempting to rewrite History - what your stating is 100% incorrect - its all in the Public Domain Timelines and Committments  

So the First the Dropped is the Training Ground 

We are waiting on Propco being transferred to the Club ?  Has it Happened ? 

The Share Transfer is now on a "Revised Timetable " 

TFE Statement of No return of JLO - cast Iron Guarantee - well we will just leave that for now .......... 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

which might mean

As I said we don’t actually know where the £2m has gone and the club might get a portion of that but we don’t know how much  

Share this post


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

As you and I both said , David Beattie and Co made substantial profits both from Propco and the shares they sold , the rhetoric doing it for the best interests of the Club and relying on David Beattie ‘s judgement is nonsense .

The sale of the Club was a business deal , pure and simple and it shouldn’t be dressed up any other way .

 

Ok so it was muted on this Forum and various others that the offer put in by CW was not his first and there had been previous offers - this was also confirmed to me by a former Director ( No reason to disbelieve him ) however it was rejected due to how the Club would be structured  - it was when the Second Offer giving Control to the Fans was muted that they started talking to CW  - therefore your statement is incorrect - they had rejected a previous offer ( the financial terms were same on both offers for Shareholders ) - So can you stop your Anti David Beattie Nonsense as what your stating isnt true 

And if you are  close to a Shareholder as you mentioned - they will confirm what Ive stated   

Second - No one made any Profits - the Deal ( from what I can gather ) is each person got the Cash Value back in Shares or Propco they put in - ZERO Interest - that was stated to me by numerous people 

So suggest you stop trying to make out these guys were profiting from PTFC - they didnt    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, javeajag said:

As I said we don’t actually know where the £2m has gone and the club might get a portion of that but we don’t know how much  

No, we know that the Club will definitely get a portion of any capital distributed from Firhill Developments Limited (whether by way of dividend or on liquidation). We know roughly what that proportion will be because the rules about how that capital is distributed is spelt out in the Confirmation Statements of FDL (which explain what the rights are of the respective types of shares).

We know that this won't change unless (a) PTFC changes its shareholding by selling its shares in FDL or (b) otherwise enters into a contractual arrangement with the other shareholders to forgo its entitlement.

Which would be firmly on 3BC, since it now has a controlling interest in PTFC Ltd.

Just accept that you were grotesquely misleading as to what has been done about PropCo and give us some peace.

If 3BC had intended for the Club to own its stadium again quickly there is no good reason why it would have bought the land rather than the PropCo investors' share capital. It is reasonable to question why it was done that way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No, we know that the Club will definitely get a portion of any capital distributed from Firhill Developments Limited (whether by way of dividend or on liquidation). We know roughly what that proportion will be because the rules about how that capital is distributed is spelt out in the Confirmation Statements of FDL (which explain what the rights are of the respective types of shares).

We know that this won't change unless (a) PTFC changes its shareholding by selling its shares in FDL or (b) otherwise enters into a contractual arrangement with the other shareholders to forgo its entitlement.

Which would be firmly on 3BC, since it now has a controlling interest in PTFC Ltd.

Just accept that you were grotesquely misleading as to what has been done about PropCo and give us some peace.

If 3BC had intended for the Club to own its stadium again quickly there is no good reason why it would have bought the land rather than the PropCo investors' share capital. It is reasonable to question why it was done that way.

The Value of FDL in our Accounts is shown as an Investment of £500K - therefore Im assuming Club will get the £500K  ? 

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×