Dick Dastardly

I think that Mansell is onside. There is clearly one defender behind him and the keeper is running back, but hidden by Mansell in that frame. The other jag is not interfering in play

Hopefully on topic. An interesting read for those that like the idea of big data analysis of player potential. https://www.modernfitba.com/blogs/2018/5/10/diamonds-in-the-rough-miles-storey

Not much celebration for either goal. I still don't like short corners !

Does the cheep beer not result in more spilt pakora sauce ?

I do admire ambition although I doubt it is a realistic achievement. I personally wouldn't hold that against TfE if they don't succeed, I am more interested in the long term sustainability and ownership.

Chelsea and Man City were hardly established big clubs before the money men arrived.

If we are being bough as a lottery ticket to get into the Scottish Premiership, I'd hate to think what the second prize is.

That makes sense. Thanks. Nothing transformational. A bit more debt, but I suspect still low compared to others in the list. How do they get crowds of 13,000 from a smaller catchment area ?

Not sure that I understand the above. In the first graph, it shows player sales as £0m and the third shows profit on player sales as £4m. Even though the directors remuneration is up, £185k aint going to attract a venture capitalist

Mitch Austin ! He has been spotted. BTW what is O'Ware doing ?

If it is, then why Thistle ? I could be wrong, but I don’t believe that the shareholders were actively looking to sell (if they were then why let JLow become chairman). Therefore they must have approached Thistle when there are cheaper options that would be actively looking to sell. I also don’t buy the loaning kids as there is no history of them doing that between Nice and Barnsley. The one thing that probably makes us unique is the lack of debt, so they can take the pot of cash from the reserves then land us with debt without having to deal with a bank. PS. I would love it if Chien/Conway/whoever were reading this an laughing at our theories

And that is £50k more than the consortium are likely to put in. They will be looking to make a profit... ie take money out

I agree with a lot of what you say and it covers many of my concerns, however it doesn’t explain “why Thistle”. If the plan was simply loaning Barnsley kids (which I believe started as speculation on this forum and never confirmed) or simply lumping us with debt then there must be easier clubs on the continent which don’t require the same dual ownership scrutiny and probably play at a higher standard. To my mind there has to be something else behind it, but in the absence of any hard facts, I am clueless, and very concerned, as to what that might be.

Probably a coincidence that Zanatta is the only one who didn’t play for Rangers

The no bank facilities is a myth. Of course we don’t pay our players and staff in cash, or our suppliers. What we don’t have is a loan facility. One if the decisions that the new board (from whoever takes over) is to decide if one is needed and then to negotiate with the bank on the terms. Remember also that there will also be the reserves (held in a bank, not a tin in the office) which we know to be around £350k.

I'm not sure they are being held to different standards. A TfE meeting is something that can be done, while the consortium would be a pointless excercise to even contemplate. Besides, TfE need to get the supporters on board. The consortium don't give a sfuff about the supporters, just the shareholders.

The Jacqui Low involvement is an interesting one. If she were to support TfE financially, like any other punter and offer herself for election to the board like any other member of TfE, are we saying that she would not be eligible ? I think it unlikely that she would get the required votes, but I can't see how she can be prevented from standing. It is therefore a very difficult question for TfE to answer regarding her involvement

You miss the point. You can’t even ask the consortium any questions

All good valid questions. Have you asked the same of the consortium ? Oh no ! You can’t

For me, the difference is that the Thistle community would remain in overall control. If we were to sell to outsiders, it would be the end of the club as we know it, and become a franchise for whoever has the next great idea. While that may be OK with the current consortium/splinter group, we have no say down the line of who takes over next, or after that. Actually, I am unhappy with either offer at a personal level. I have been outspoken about the English Premier League teams being taken over as billionaires play things and predicted that the smaller teams (like Bury and Bolton) would suffer, resulting in the inevitable casualties. It would be hypocritical of me to continue to support Thistle if they went down that route and with Weir now onboard with TFE, that becomes a big problem for me.

But is that not exactly what we would be letting the consortium do. This is my issue with it. We would have lost all control and there is no possible governance of their actions once they take over. They will have full and unilateral control

For my money, we have zero control over the future of our club if the consortium take over. With the right governance in place (and that is a big caveat) the directors will be answerable to fans in some form. There is little info from either side to judge future plans. I just don't like handing everything over to people we don't know and had never heard of Partick Thistle until 6 months ago.

Only pearls of wisdom

I don't want to call on the Supreme Court again, they have been a bit busy this week, but you are asking a lot of us to believe that you don't have an agenda. Reading your posts you would think the sun shines out of David Beatties arse and any alternatives are the devil incarnate

What was ? The Times article didn’t say anything new. Like allyo, I’ll remain uneasy until we know what the plans are