eljaggo
-
Posts
1,156 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by eljaggo
-
-
The PTFC Trust have poodles.
-
1
-
-
Best performance I've seen for ages. Pace at last, movement off ball and incisive passing, not to mention great ball winning in midfield and defence. Milne was my man of the match - what a signing. Hope we can keep him.
-
1
-
-
What did Beattie say about Low?
-
10 minutes ago, stolenscone said:
Hi - if you read my post, I have said that all trustees owe certain legal duties to the beneficiaries of the trust that they represent.
It would be for a beneficiary (a qualifying season ticket holder) to raise a legal action personally against a trustee who they thought was acting in breach of their legal duties as trustees.
Speaking of trustees, I see that there is an almost entirely new set of names at at end of the Trust's statement today. Did I fall asleep and miss ANOTHER set of elections?
I understand that a breach of their legal duties is actionable, but the point I was trying to make was about trustees acting against the best interests of shareholders. I don't know how the two conflate.
-
28 minutes ago, stolenscone said:
The Trust is not a company. It has no legal requirement or constitutional structure for engagement with season ticket holders, other than the trustee elections which it does not hold. It is, by its nature, a passive structure. There's no point in asking a cat to bark like a dog, and then be surprised when it doesn't.
It is incredibly difficult for a beneficiary to demand engagement. But trustees do owe certain legal duties to beneficiaries. Query whether those duties are being properly discharged by the trustees? It would require legal action against the trustees personally for breach of trust by a qualifying season ticket holder to determine the point.
I am not a lawyer, but I would be surprised if the Trustees carried no responsibilty to those who now own the shares, namely us lot. With that responsibilty must come accountability, and there must be a legal way by which that is exercised by the share owners.
-
I foolishly hoped that Low had found an individual willing to invest in the Club and to work with fans in a constructive way. Simply handing the shares to the Trust does nothing to address the need for investment in the stadium and the team. The TJF has funds and an income from fans to help the Club. The Trust offers nothing.
-
So Low keeps control of the Club, despite having no shares and having invested nothing. There must be some way by which season ticket holders can pressure the Trust into holding an EGM. I think TJF should now use some of their funds to examine legal avenues to make the Trust accountable to fans.
-
2
-
-
The drop down menu when I tried it (many times) was stuck at yes, and would not allow me to select no.. maybe it was a temporary blip. Good that it is working now.
-
44 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:
You would need to be able to cross-reference two lists, each of which is held by different GDPR controllers.
When people sign-up as a Foundation member, we ask them if they are a season ticket holder, but we have no way of checking that and it will (at best) be accurate at the point the information is collected.
For what it's worth, though, about 60% of our members identify as season-ticket holders. Many of those will have disclosed that last season, but others will have done so this season. This would obviously undercount those who weren't but now are, and vice versa.
When I signed up a few days ago, the form would not let me say that I was not a season ticket holder. Might be worth fixing that.
-
Allowing members to have a good think about the announcement, examining facts about the choice, and forming opinions about what should happen next are important, and therefore the timing seems to me to be spot on.
-
Very interesting WSJ, and pretty depressing since it highlights the machinations that Low uses to retain control. From what you say there is little even a well organised group of seaon ticket holders who meet the Trust's membership criteria can do to even call the Trust to account far less change its behaviour. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, and the Trust will not figure in Low's plans, but it looks to me that the Trust has been carefully tailored over time to provide a destination for the Weir shares, while at the same time allowing Low to retain control of the Board.
-
Many thanks WSJ. From what you say, it seems a pretty impregnable organisation, but not one that comes remotely close to meeting the criteria set out most recently by 3BC for a preferred share recipient. It does however seem to fit the bill in other respects.
As I mentioned earlier, the recipient criteria set out by 3BC were termed in the future tense, and so grasping at straws, perhaps if the Trust was chosen, some modification to its Deed may legally be required, and that might prove an achillies heel in terms of allowing fans a genuine and meaningful say in the Club's affairs.
-
Further to my post above, I have emailed the club asking for a copy of the PTFC Trust's articles of association.
-
1
-
-
As a matter of interest could someone post the articles of association of the Trust, and possibly indicate when the AGM is scheduled for. Perhaps too, an indication of how an EGM can be organised.
-
Like GRE2, I have joined today. I too had reservations about fan ownership, particularly in relation to financing long term asset replacement (main stand etc). However the duplicitous Low has persuaded me that the Club is unsafe in her control. In my opinion TJF should now make every effort to recruit as many season ticket holders as possible so that in the (likely) event that Low gives the Weir shares to the Trust, TFF have the moral high ground in any future episode. That may not count for much with someone like Low, but it maybe the best option.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:
I think this is the point. TJF has 640 members. There were almost 2,800 jags fans at Firhill on Saturday. The perception of the 3BC and PTFC Board will be that TJF is still small fry. You have a lot of work to do.
Not sure what more can be expected of TJF, Lenziejag - they have over 770 signed up members that is equivalent to over 25% of the fans you mention. They are by far the biggest fan group, but you cannot deal rationally with those who have a secret agenda. What work do you suggest they now do?
-
1
-
-
Pound to a pinch of salt that it will be the PTFC Trust named as share recipients. Low appointed Caldwell and Byron to the PTFC board from the Trust, and thus set things up to allow her to retain control through these compliant and beholden individuals while at the same time appearing to meet the terms of the Weir will. I hope that I am wrong.
-
1
-
-
I really appreciate the effort that TJF board have made in dealing with that pair of charlatans, and the well written account of the whole sorry saga. Although it appears that the shares will not be going their way, they have created an organisation that may yet prove influential in the running and ownership of the Club and has united a large proportion of Partick Thistle fans - something that has not happened since the Save the Jags campaign. This story has not ended.
-
I dreamed of being a star. Thank you.
-
I like to be precise DMQ but seems I've overdone it!
-
One (longer term) option is to infiltrate the preferred organisation. They must open themselves up to new fan membership to comply with 3BC's own requirements, and since the two options are small affairs, could be controlled in due course.
Should they block new fans joining, then that might open themselves up to a legal challenge.
-
The two conditions 3BC set out for a preferred share recipient are couched in the future tense. There is no requirement for historical achievements. Therefore recipients' past behaviour is irrelevant, and the preferred organisation can modify its future intentions to suit. .
We have been well and truly stitched up. Not at all surprising.
I'm assuming that Low's interest is in control. She owns no shares and would not therefore benefit directly from a sale of the ground and a move elsewhere. However the gift of the shares to a very small group without rigorous fan oversight, would be risky.
-
Sorry WJ, but it's irrelevant what us fans think what fan ownership should "involve". The debate is meaningless.
Low is obviously seeking to define Weir's will in a way that allows her to retain control by either allowing 3BCs to retain the shares, or giving them to one of the fan groups she can dominate.
To re-iterate my earlier points, we need:
1 A definitive legal decision (not opinion) on Weir's will, and
2. To unite the three share owning fan groups so that 3BC's cannot divide and rule.
-
12 minutes ago, denismcquadeno.eleven said:
The other share-owning supporter groups are not set up in the same way as TJF and cannot just be ‘joined’ to it. We don’t even know if any/all of them support the notion of Thistle being a majority, supporter-owner football club. But, if they do and wanted to join with TJF, they could do so with all the other supporters who are members of TJF. Colin Weir bought a clear majority of the PTFC shares, so that the club would become a community, supporter-owned, football club. A group is needed that believes in that principle, run democratically with an elected, accountable leadership (board). That group IS TJF. There are no others that fit that description and designed for the purpose.
Problem is DMQ, our opinion of what constitutes an acceptable recipient of the shares is irrelevant. We have somehow to stymie Low's attempts to wriggle out of avoiding our interpretation of of Weir's will, while obtaining a legal decision on that.
The Jags Foundation
in Main Jags forum
Posted
With the transfer of the Weir shares to the PTFC Trust, Low will have fulfilled her obligations and duties to the Weir estate.
What then is the reason for her continued presence on the Board of Partick Thistle Football Club?