Springburnjag
-
Posts
194 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Springburnjag
-
-
34 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:
Out of likes.
I agree this is a great opportunity, but it’s critical that it’s not squandered.
Transparency is key, as is accountability to the fans if this is to be a true fan run club. Those running it need to be running it for the fans, not themselves, not a Trust and not 3BC and should be elected by and answerable to the fans first and foremost.
As far as I know that’s the plan so let’s hope that’s how it turns out
-
7 hours ago, jaf said:
There are two major reasons why, in my opinion, it is in the best interests of Partick thistle supporters to NOT transfer the ptfc trust shares into a single parcel with the tfe ones and , if anyone will listen, I will make those representations when there is an opportunity to do so. Some of the answers in this thread just prove the point unequivocally though.
I’m not sure tfe have any shares
-
21 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:
Has it been decided how we will all get to be involved
Not that I’ve seen
-
7 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
No your missing the point - the requirements of Directors are Covered in the Companies Act ?
There is No "lets just ignore it " in practice ?
Ok let’s assume one of your bad scenarios happens .....what would happen. Next ?
-
1 minute ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
There is no distinction between Boardroom theory and Practice - its not a "theory" as you describe it - its a requirement
You really are missing the point ..., I understand there are requirements there is also how things actually work in practice
-
3 minutes ago, jaf said:
Sounds to me like no one from the transitionary board or 3BC should be anywhere near the steering group then? If I understand governance that would be a clear conflict of interest - approving something you have had influence over creating?
Anyeay, i am sure this has all been thought through.That sounds right to me and would not only be avoiding any conflict but would be sensible as well
-
Just now, Jordanhill Jag said:
OOFT
Directors represent Shareholders plural - not a specific Group ?
The Board dont have 55% of the shares - 3BC have 55% they are not the Board ? or are you trying to argue they are one in the same
I dont need to take anyone to Court ? Why would I need to take someone to Court ?
Yes a director can represent a specific group in a board but still have a Responsibility to all shareholders I’m surprised you don’t know that
no I’m trying to say the obvious that any decision of the board cannot be overturned by shareholders because at least 55% if shareholders would vote against so it won’t happen
legal action would be the only remedy available
-
3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
"We will take it from there " - Aye fair enough - says everything
No confusion - Directors represent Shareholders - who in turn get a Vote - they can remove said Directors - a Majority can provide written Instruction to the Directors which should be minuted at the Board Meeting
Board beyond that carry out there duties - they have a duty to ALL Shareholders not a specific group - the Shareholders do not have any say in Running the Club unless its a formal written Instruction
there is very very clear distinction between Shareholders and Directors
For instance if a Shareholder made a decision and it was acted upon and there was serious issue resulting from it - the legal responsibility is with the Directors
So if a Major Shareholder instructs the Board its in writing - Board Vote Approval - Minuted - and that applies to each and every shareholder instruction - cant be a generic one so that they comply with H&S legislation
But Im sure the BOD understand all this and they are following correct procedure
I think the distinction between theory and practice is getting lost .... but I suspect your not a Marxist
all your legal points are pretty dependent - assuming there was any basis for legal action - on someone actually doing that and funding it ... you ?
-
1 minute ago, jaf said:
I have been told categorically that 3Bc have to approve the important work of the steering group.
it’s simple and there’s no confusion in m mind
- do TBC have the right of approval
- or do the transitionary board of ptfc limited have that right ?
its a simple question/clarification
As 3BC own the club I would think they do as would the BOD ....they would be transferring their shares to this new body ...only an opinion I’m not in any loop
-
3 minutes ago, ian_mac said:
I guess we'll never know.
I just told you so you do know ... who are you connected to ?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, ian_mac said:
springburnjag if you are anything to do with the PTFC trust or TFE I would suggest you are digging huge hole for yourself today.
But I’m not connected to either in any way
-
7 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:
Who has decided to give TFE the trusts shares
Don’t know
-
35 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
Wow are you really stating that - for the sake of the Board of Directors I hope that is not in any shape or form what they believe
The Companies Act does not differentiate between what Shareholders you represent - if the Majority wish to remove the Board as they are not happy they can do so - They Can also write to the Board with written Instructions - the Board can decide what to do - debate it and Vote on it - this should be minuted at the Board Meetings
If your suggesting that because we are not a PLC that a large Shareholder can hold sway or interfere with the Board your very very wrong and the Club Directors would be on Thin Ice if they think otherwise - if what your suggesting was to occur that would mean that having a Board is a meaningless exercise as the largest Shareholder is making the decisions - not the BOD ?
So is that what your suggesting ?
Ffs
individual directors can ‘represent ‘ shareholders on a board
if the board have 55% of the shares good luck with trying to overturn their decision
have you the funds to take the club to court ?
-
22 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:
On the Motherwell model, are we looking at the Well Society model or the Motherwell Community Trust?
Ive just sat next to a Well fan on the flight to Bergen and he stated both were different, Well Society effectively aiming to buy and run the club, whilst the Community Trust is merely about taking football to the community as a way to improve it
Well society as I understand it and looks very sensible and no one is excluded
-
Just now, Norgethistle said:
So they won’t pass the shares over Paul
Who or what is paul ?
if their members approve it -
16 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
3BC will approve it -not the Board
But Im confused if we are following the Well Trust Model as already decided by 3BC - where does the Board fit in ?
Also Where does the Steering Group fit in ?
How about you stop being ultra pedantic .... it is BASED on the Motherwell model and we will all take it from there ....
I don’t go into your earlier posts on the distinction between 3BC , the board and company law as I think your co fusing yourself
-
26 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:
Surely the PTFC Trust can only do that at the request of their members, the Trust is only the platform for the control of shares gifted to the supporters, it is entirely different from TFE or Colin Weirs shares. If the PTFC Trust board was to act on its own behalf without consulting and then acting on its members instructions then we have an issue, especially as two members of the Trust board are also now on the Club board who would in effect be controlling those shares. This could be a legal mine field if tried.
Which of course is why that won’t happen
-
36 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
But TFE dont exist beyond a Group of concerned Supporters who do they represent exactly ?
Why are you asking me ?
-
37 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
Sorry but you cleary stated since Colin Weir took over we are going to use the Motherwell Trust Model so whats the point of the Steering Committee the Model has already been decided by 3BC - Fans had No say in it .........
No I never said that but carry on
-
2 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:
By the law of averages we have to beat this lot sometime, and we've had plenty of opportunities even since we got binned from the Premier.
Why not this time?
It’s the 52/2 ratio that gets in the way
-
Just now, Pinhead said:
Both Trusts need to become one and then everyone needs to stand down and face re-election to the new trust. Not sure those who are power hungry and who love the status would be willing to do so though!
The PTFC. Trust and tfe I expect to create a new fan group and effectively disappear
the jags trust ? No idea
-
13 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
So your advising that the Steering Committee on Fan Ownership Model is a waste of time - 3BC or TFE / Trust have already decided its the Motherwell Model - wow thats a massive decision if true - what happened to Fan Consultation ?
By your statement your inferring Colin Weir had an input is that correct ?
No
no
and
no
-
9 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
Again - PTFC Trust has ZERO to do with 3BC and are answerable to there members
Are you suggesting that the Trust and 3BC are acting as one Voting Block ?
And again the Trust only has Votes - at the AGM or to change Directors it has No other position
I think you are missing the reality that a bod are there to look after the interests of shareholders - yes I know all shareholders - and the biggest shareholders get more say .... and directors do represent blocks of shareholders
this is a small private club not a plc
-
1 minute ago, Norgethistle said:
Yes I did and I also have the messages sent from TFE to me who state that only those who signed up get a say, so that is why I’m asking.
And keeping up with openness I’m Stuart Goldie
Things moved on once Colin weir got involved
it’s the Motherwell model
Fan Ownership
in Main Jags forum
Posted
Got it ! What’s the issue ?