chapwithwings Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Pleased I went. Thought Lance compered the evening very well. Normally speaking I'm of the opinion of opening up a meeting to the floor without set agenda can be frustrating if questions go off on a tangent about relatively trivial matters. Tonight was an exception and the mix of EGM related questions and non EGM stuff went down very well. On the rather trivial matter of Friday night football I still fail to understand why we've elected to be out of 32 clubs the guinea pig for this, and then of all games risking what would be potentially our largest Saturday attendance. I understood it to be that we didn't so much volunteer as were 'requested' by the SFL to take part, and felt we couldn't refuse in case it led to a TV deal or more revenue coming into the club. Disappointed they hadn't thought to get a deal with the SFL in place to compensate for any loss of revenue from moving the Morton game though - as was pointed out by someone on the floor, it's usually a big gate for us. For anyone who didn't make it, btw, I and a few others were doing Twitter updates during the night - I've collated them here http://sfy.co/Hi4 if anyone needs a guide to the bulletpoints from the evening and who said what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Col Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Whoa! That wasn't gordon Peden that said that! Apologies - looked like it from where i was sitting a few rows back - any idea who it was? I know it was meant to be a joke but it went down like a lead balloon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted September 22, 2011 Members Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) Yep Col, I know him well. He sits a couple of rows down from me. Smahing bloke actually. He was the Club mascot at a game for his 65th Birthday 3 or 4 years ago. Edited September 22, 2011 by Willjag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) Some good stuff tonight , not a lot of new things but a fair amount of clarification. Especially liked Ian Maxwell's thoughts on how the playing side is moving with a conscious decision to pick up younger players who have a hunger to improve in the game and to promote from within from our own youth teams. Good joined up thinking on saying to potential new players that 5 from last years u19 went into the first team pool and that should help them attract better players at a younger age and coach them the way they want to. Pretty remarkable turn around from £250k loss to £46k profit , if that can be sustained then we will get out of the financial mess in a medium term. Also that we break even on around 2500 with anything above that allowing the player budget to be increased. If we are playing good football and more importantly winning then I dont see a reason we cant get bigger crowds than 2500 into Firhill , sounds like even as little as 100 extra people a game will make a decent difference to the budgets. Loads more that I cant remember but a positive evening, a ton better organised than a lot of the previous efforts for these things. Organised AND professional. Like everything that has been done under this Board's tenure. What we as fans need to do now is step up to the plate and give these guys something to play with and build with. Like Maxi said if there are ventures brought forward by the club we need to be doing our bit to participate and promote them. The people we have within the club can only do so much and we need the fans, whether that be through an organisation, off their own backs our through something like the WeAreThistle Fundraising site to do our bit. A good place to start is here... Join The Jags like Maxi said. Edited September 22, 2011 by Vom Itorium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broomhill jag Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 I thought it was an informative and well organised event and no questions were ducked by the directors (as they had promised). Beattie did duck on a few questions regarding previous board members. Understandable really, considering the next EGM vote is around the corner and his emphasis on looking to the future and forgetting the past. I agree with Beattie about focussing on the future but when previous board members have a say in the Club's future - through free shares handed to them then it's pretty hard not to. It's important to have a good mix of questions thrown at the BoD in meetings like these. Overall a positive meeting with a great turnout, compared to the last one. Everyone spoke well and I was very impressed with Allan. Glad I went. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted September 22, 2011 Members Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 For anyone who didn't make it, btw, I and a few others were doing Twitter updates during the night - I've collated them here http://sfy.co/Hi4 if anyone needs a guide to the bulletpoints from the evening and who said what. Good work there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Taylor Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Yep Col, I know him well. He sits a couple of rows down from me. Smahing bloke actually. He was the Club mascot at a game for his 65th Birthday 3 or 4 years ago. Yes John was trying to be ironic but it got lost in the room. He got pelters all the way down to the woody. As Will said he is a smashing bloke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Yep Col, I know him well. He sits a couple of rows down from me. Smashing bloke actually. He was the Club mascot at a game for his 65th Birthday 3 or 4 years ago. So that would make him now how old? Guess we're all too uneducated to work that out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Organised AND professional. Like everything that has been done under this Board's tenure. Except, by their own admission, the recent EGM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Beattie did duck on a few questions regarding previous board members. Understandable really, considering the next EGM vote is around the corner and his emphasis on looking to the future and forgetting the past. I agree with Beattie about focussing on the future but when previous board members have a say in the Club's future - through free shares handed to them then it's pretty hard not to. It's important to have a good mix of questions thrown at the BoD in meetings like these. Overall a positive meeting with a great turnout, compared to the last one. Everyone spoke well and I was very impressed with Allan. Glad I went. I don't think Beattie "ducked" any of those questions - had he responded in the manner which I've no doubt some (if not many) of the attendees would have enjoyed then he'd be indicating that he doesn't deserve the trust that he was seeking. His responses were entirely appropriate to his position and responsibility. The turnout was good but the challenge for us all is going to be about maintaining that same level of involvement regardless of the perception of the situation. A similar turn out when all seems stable and uncontentious would be a positive sign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alx Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 You could tell how busy it was by how many cars were parked down Firhill Rd. A good night and folk were glad to hear the new board. You could tell that us uneducated (snigger) jags don't take the new board for granted. Negatives.... I hate that phrase 'going forward' and the friday night football excuses were rubbish ie people playing golf on a saturday might like a friday night game (ie Rugby fans). Overall, good stuff though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Thistle Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Like a lot of other people I was surprised by the fact not one question was raised by the Jags Trust board, I had assumed that because no questions were asked they were now in agreement with the changes. Then I come home to find several pages of bumpf on the new articles and it looks like saying they are against the changes. Why in hell did they not seek to get clarification to their points last night so that they could put it across to the membership. As a Jags trust member I am completely disgust by their attitude. To me this just shows the arrogance the trust board members have for the membership as a whole As a result of this I have gone and cancelled my standing order for future years. I can fully understand why the PTFC board do not want a Jags Trust rep on the board Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Thanks to everyone for the reports of the night. If these financial reports are accurate (and they're a lot more specific than anything we used to be told), the turnaround since these guys took charge is amazing, and happened just in the nick of time. I know we're being asked not to harp on about the past, but how can you not wonder at the chaos that was going on at the club before that? The kindest thing you could say about the former directors is that they didn't run a very tight ship. So thanks for your efforts, chaps, but don't embarrass yourselves by thinking you can lecture Beattie and Allan about finances, communication, management or how to be a worthy custodian of the club. I hate the whole Propco thing, but that isn't going to make it go away, so the only concern now has to be making sure it works as well as possible for Thistle's benefit. As for the Trust, if they decided not to enter the discussion and still vote against, then they are clearly finished. My money is on them caving in and clinging on. But I've got a tenner set aside if someone wants to set up something that really speaks to and for the fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 To be honest given the excellent turnout, had I still been on the Trust Board I'd have sat back and not asked any questions when there were so many coming from everyone else. I'm not sure what you were reading last night, Paddy, but i suspect this is the information that was circulated last week and which has been discussed/dismissed either in this thread or the one on EGM Round 2. I do know that there have been discussions between the Trust and the club (they are, after all, one of the major shareholders that David Beattie said he'd been speaking to since the original EGM) but whilst the documentation does raise some (spurious) issues there's nothing to suggest that this will relate to a decision to vote against. What is sadly missing from that document is any acknowledgement of what has been addressed from their original list of concerns. As it happens, I don't believe that the Trust will vote against this but if anyone is a Trust member concerned about then they should attend the meeting being held in advance of the EGM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 As for the Trust, if they decided not to enter the discussion and still vote against, then they are clearly finished. My money is on them caving in and clinging on. But I've got a tenner set aside if someone wants to set up something that really speaks to and for the fans. Gets us back to the age old question though. Because if you're looking for a structure for such an organisation to operate within it starts to look suspicously like the same way that the Trust would operate. Ironically, when answering my question last night about making shares easily available so that individual fans could buy Billy Allan said it would be more convenient to make shares available to fans generally via a single organistion rather than to have a huge number of additional individual shareholders which would then require additional cost to meet the obligations that this requires. "Sounds familiar", I thought. The issue remains as it always has - there's a structure there. There's no need to reinvent the wheel. Get involved. Put yourself forward. If there are people there currently that you don't think are doing a good job, then challenging them for their positions will either get rid of them or suggest that your opinion is maybe not as widely based as you might think. One of the counters to that is that if you don't want to get involved becuase you might not like who you'd end up sitting around a table with then you're not fit for the role imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 You could tell how busy it was by how many cars were parked down Firhill Rd. A good night and folk were glad to hear the new board. You could tell that us uneducated (snigger) jags don't take the new board for granted. Negatives.... I hate that phrase 'going forward' and the friday night football excuses were rubbish ie people playing golf on a saturday might like a friday night game (ie Rugby fans). Overall, good stuff though. I think they should look to expunge that from use going forward........ oops!! I got the impression that there was no great belief from anyone on the top table about Friday night football. I suspect there's a hope that this game will happen and that'll be the end of it. Mention was made about the possibility of a telly deal - if that were to happen and games took place on a Friday night I think the crowd situation would be even worse. In my view, there's no place for live football in the SFL - this will just serve to reduce the numbers. I'm not sure that's a good thing, EVEN IF it's better for revenue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 For anyone who didn't make it, btw, I and a few others were doing Twitter updates during the night - I've collated them here http://sfy.co/Hi4 if anyone needs a guide to the bulletpoints from the evening and who said what. Much appreciated. Allan: directors could have faced jail over things like buying in pies from McGees #partickthistle Were they that bad?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 The issue remains as it always has - there's a structure there. There's no need to reinvent the wheel. Get involved. Put yourself forward. If there are people there currently that you don't think are doing a good job, then challenging them for their positions will either get rid of them or suggest that your opinion is maybe not as widely based as you might think. One of the counters to that is that if you don't want to get involved becuase you might not like who you'd end up sitting around a table with then you're not fit for the role imo. As you well know, Allan, I got involved, I put myself forward. My views on where the Trust needed to go were clearly not widely held as the members opted to head in a totally opposite direction. And that's fine - we've all seen how that's turned out. I didn't like who I was sitting round the table with, I wasn't prepared to piss away month after month on internal tussles and, as such, was clearly not fit for the role. External tussles, that's something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Ann Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 To be honest given the excellent turnout, had I still been on the Trust Board I'd have sat back and not asked any questions when there were so many coming from everyone else. I'm not sure what you were reading last night, Paddy, but i suspect this is the information that was circulated last week and which has been discussed/dismissed either in this thread or the one on EGM Round 2. I do know that there have been discussions between the Trust and the club (they are, after all, one of the major shareholders that David Beattie said he'd been speaking to since the original EGM) but whilst the documentation does raise some (spurious) issues there's nothing to suggest that this will relate to a decision to vote against. What is sadly missing from that document is any acknowledgement of what has been addressed from their original list of concerns. As it happens, I don't believe that the Trust will vote against this but if anyone is a Trust member concerned about then they should attend the meeting being held in advance of the EGM. i don't understand that. last night was a perfect opportunity for the jt to raise and discuss their concerns in front of the biggest audience they've ever had. the jt chairperson sat with her arms folded all night and her colleague took pages of notes presumably suggesting he thought that lots of interesting things were being said? if the jt is supposed to represent fans views they should be right in the mix at these things. critisicm has been aimed at the club (rightly) for its poor communication and engagement but the jt needs to have a look at itself if it wonders why people are cancelling memberships and viewing it as a waste of space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 i don't understand that. last night was a perfect opportunity for the jt to raise and discuss their concerns in front of the biggest audience they've ever had. the jt chairperson sat with her arms folded all night and her colleague took pages of notes presumably suggesting he thought that lots of interesting things were being said? if the jt is supposed to represent fans views they should be right in the mix at these things. critisicm has been aimed at the club (rightly) for its poor communication and engagement but the jt needs to have a look at itself if it wonders why people are cancelling memberships and viewing it as a waste of space. I can easily see an alternative scenario where the JT took up time asking questions and being accused of not leaving sufficient time for others to ask questions when there were many wanting to do so! Maybe they were listening to what other fans had to say to help them better represent fan's views. Having said that I do agree that there has been a communication vacuum from the Trust in the past year which needs to be filled with commentary/narrative on what's happening at the club whether for good or ill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Much appreciated. Allan: directors could have faced jail over things like buying in pies from McGees #partickthistle Were they that bad?? The one thing that struck me last night was that there does remain a conundrum about the new Articles. They are either "housekeeping" as has been described in which case they should be uncontentious both in impact and consideration, or the absence of them is potentially apocalyptic and highly disruptive as implied by Billy's humourous comment about the pies. But they can't really be both at the same time. I suppose the one question that should have been asked last night was if operating under the current M&A meant that the directors had been contravening its' provisions up to this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindau Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Just as an aside, who, of the current board, were in attendance last night Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Just as an aside, who, of the current board, were in attendance last night I think it was everyone with the exception of Ronnie Gilfillan (who I think has been ill recently hence his absence) but happy to be corrected if that's not the case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Ann Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 I can easily see an alternative scenario where the JT took up time asking questions and being accused of not leaving sufficient time for others to ask questions when there were many wanting to do so! Maybe they were listening to what other fans had to say to help them better represent fan's views. Having said that I do agree that there has been a communication vacuum from the Trust in the past year which needs to be filled with commentary/narrative on what's happening at the club whether for good or ill. what about: "hello, i'm the chairperson of the jt. i appreciate that there are lots of people in the room who will have questions so i'll keep the jt's questions to just a couple to make sure everyone who wants to speak has a chance." the jt chairperson could also have stood up at the end and thanked the top table instead of sitting with her arms folded and frowning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Hosie Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 I think it was everyone with the exception of Ronnie Gilfillan (who I think has been ill recently hence his absence) but happy to be corrected if that's not the case Just to confirm that the above is indeed correct. 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.