douglas clark
-
Posts
411 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by douglas clark
-
-
Well, we have the other side at Firhill on Saturday, let's hope we gub them too, but
com·pla·cen·cy
ain't a good look!
You do know I hope we win?
-
1 hour ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:
Have we now entered the debriefing stage of this mega thread?
It seems so. Congratulations on 14,000 posts here, that is frankly astonishing.
-
That was pretty impressive.
-
Don't know about you, but that was pretty emotional. I really, really want him back in some sort of role hereabaouts.
-
2 hours ago, Jaggernaut said:
Easy: change it to an ironic LUV yer pope and LUV yer queen.
That works for me!
-
It is quite noticeable that, when it is sung, the volume around the word ' Pope' and the volume around 'Queen' are around 50% less than of the surrounding volume of the piece. It suggests to me that folk see the overall point, but - probably rightly - have no truck with extremism.
-
Gentlemen,
Please stop the ad hominem attacks!
-
I know it is kind of old but Ken Bates had a controlling interest in Chelsea and PTFC once upon a time.
-
We have apparently signed two new players. I welcome them.
How was that possible?
Something is going on...
-
Ahem.
I have no idea where a 140 page thread, which lacks any sort of clarity or illumination actually takes us as supporters of PTFC.
Personally. I think that the sale is a done deal.
The likes of Jordanhill Jag and others make the obvious point that shareholders outweigh us. This reminds me of a couple of things, 'Save the Jags' and the death of Clydebank.
It is kind of obvious that the board machinations are about folk who'd essentially written off their shareholdings in our football club as 'lost money' becoming aware that perhaps they'd get at least as much as they had invested and perhaps more. That their earlier disinterest, y'know money written off, becomes an unexpected opportunity. They awake from their sleep and look to their bank books. Wow! An opportunity presents itself!
Instantly reclaim the board. Immediately negotiate.
Are they entitled to do so? Of course they are.
That is a consequence of our inability to actually win back when you and I 'saved the Jags', We should have had at least a majority of the shares. Perhaps someone can remind me why we didn't?
I would love to think that this sort of takeover is going to be astonishingly positive, I really do.
But.
-
2
-
-
I have never been particularily interested in the financial side of running a football club. However with around 2500 paying fans - y'know excluding kids go free and suchlike - at say £20 pounds each, it is £50000 per fortninght or £25,000 a week in gate money alone. That makes us a million pver a 40 week season. This takes no account of all the other money that the club gets and I have no idea how much that might add up to. There are payments for final league position, transfers and move on's. And the pies are dear as.
Without all of the latter, it is unlikely that our earnings are much under £1.5 million per annum ( made up of gates over the assumed 40 weeks and the price of the pies)
Outgoings are perhaps more interesting. The cost of the player pool and those that put them on the park ought to be the first order of business.
Beyond that priority we absolutely require is a way of producing our own talent. And that means all the way from five year olds to potential first team players in a seamless manner. There should be nowhere where the gap is too large to broach, we ought to have teams at every level.
Whoever can take PTFC to that would have my support, but, so far, no-one is offering anything like it. At least as a meaningful manifesto for taking our club forward.
-
The Herald has a 'Board Response' up:
"
PARTICK THISTLE have responded to claims made around the running of the club with a statement, refuting suggestions that manager Gary Caldwell transfer budget has been altered.
The statement read: "The current board of directors have honoured the playing squad budget signed off by the previous board, a major proportion of which was already committed when the new directors were appointed. However, the budget did run at a significant deficit which could not be recouped from the club’s recurring income. This shortfall has been partly covered by the fees to be received following the sale of Aidan Fitzpatrick and the sell on percentage which the club will receive as a result of Liam Lindsay’s transfer from Barnsley to Stoke. The remainder of the deficit will be funded by adjusting aspects of our logistical operations, not by reducing the funds available for the playing budget.
“The current playing budget available to the manager is likely to be around the third or fourth highest in the league. As a result of these factors we are able to fully support the manager’s aspirations to challenge at the top of the Championship this season. Any suggestions that the ultimate target is anything other than promotion are false.
“The current board strongly refutes any suggestion that £200,000 has been removed from the playing budget, as the figure available to the Manager remains as it was under the previous board.”
More to follow... "
-
I have had to delete one post,
Please do the political stuff somewhere else.
-
Well, not a lot that I can see. The two people that want to take us over are both Americans.
There are a lot of places where whether London is Moscow on Thames or not is a legitimate subject. I am not at all sure that this web site is one of them.
Please take this 'discussion' elsewhere.
-
The problem for me is the lack of verifiable facts. Everything around here is rumour built on very narrow foundations.
Will probably turn up for the Saturday event.
-
Fearchar,
I think that the two investors are American. Correct me if I am wrong.
Linking them to Moscow on Thames seems a bit of a stretch.
-
Jagsman is asking interesting questions.
Is Gary Caldwell about to be sacked?
I'd assume not. It is argueable that his 'spread sheet' theory of football is actually very attractive to our potential new overlords.
I share his worries that fans are not getting meaningful updates.
This is a tough question. There has to be a gavotte whilst the two sides find common or uncommon ground. How that works out matters to fans like you, me and Jagsman.
The good, or bad, future of our club is at stake here. And we have inadequate information to determine that, as fans.
Our exclusion from that discussion is both understandable and frustrating, equally.
I have been insultingly angry about this.
Put that down to a lack of up-dates, and a lack of news. It is a heck of a frustrating.
What we have seen, so far, is what they want us to see, so far.
It is "a riddle, wrapped in an enigma..."
Maybe
-
I expect we are in a mutual 'discovery' period. This might take a while before any decisions are made, on either side. ( This assumes that a deal has not already been done and that both sides are working towards a common objective, which may be true.)
So, we sit and wait whilst our club is subject to what?
I know not.
It is a bit ridiculous to say that it could be 'transformational' for Thistle without spelling it out. (Ridiculous, I know, but being taken over by Elon Musk would also be transformational, but, not, necessarily in a good way. The Firhill Space Port? No room for football?)
I, for one, hope it will be positive, but the lack of facts to support that, whether suppressed or not, is a bit worrying.
Fans make clubs.
We ought to be on the inside loop.
-
And me
-
15 hours ago, allyo said:
Top marks for rising above the unnecessary grammar lesson
Point taken, I apologise. I am just finding this whole thing very frustrating but that ain't a decent excuse.
-
1
-
-
Jordanhill Jag,
You say:
" because they cant influence any share Sale outcome - there duty is to there Shareholders - nor could they discuss it without advising all shareholders atb the same time ? "
It seems that they have control over the shares they own. It is their, not there, btw.
To the extent that they own shares, then they certainly do have a voice, or do you have evidence to the contrary?
-
Just wondering if they knew, whether they would share it with us, y'know, mere fans?
This is getting ridiculous and beyond a joke.
We need a meaningful statement either from the buyers or those against it.
Perhaps this will happen this week, or next week or the week after?
So far, proposals appear to be on a continuum of 'next week' on a rolling, next weekly basis. Y'know, never.
In other words there is no conclusion and this will just forment here until it is a 25 year old malt whisky or summat.
-
" This is my problem. Rich American Investors are unlikely to by philanthropic benefactors. But I just don’t see how they can make money out of Thistle (legally). "
And you know this how?
-
eljaggo,
Any reply from them?
New Owner
in Main Jags forum
Posted
May I intervene here?
This is all fun and games, but it is not fun and games.
It is frankly ridiculous to pretend that TFE were ISIS related. One is the takeover of a football club and t'other is, ahem, murderous. YMMV.
It is also a tad strange that everyone see's everyone else as a 'liar'. I go to games, not as often as I would like, but most fans seem to me do not call other fans 'liars'.
Please desist. I will, probably, delete posts that describe other posters as 'liars'. It is unproductive and wrong.
Could you good people please accept that there is more than one opinion about what is best for Partick Thistle?
It is worth remembering that our survival a good few years ago wasn't guaranteed. We are lucky to be here.
Please, moderate yourselves.
Make my job easy.