One For The Jags Trust

[Willjag]

How about setting a precedent and handing back the shares to the Club that were given to the Trust at the time of STJ. I wonder if this would put Hughes and McMaster on the spot with their nil consideration holding?

 

As an aside, have the Club handed over the agreed amount of shares yet for the Trusts involvement with the Centenary Fund?

[Guest Argus]

How about setting a precedent and handing back the shares to the Club that were given to the Trust at the time of STJ. I wonder if this would put Hughes and McMaster on the spot with their nil consideration holding?

 

As an aside, have the Club handed over the agreed amount of shares yet for the Trusts involvement with the Centenary Fund?

 

Not that I disagree but what's your rationale for handing them back?

[twinny]

Not that I disagree but what's your rationale for handing them back?

 

I suppose it would show that we're not wanting hand-outs - if a goal of the Trust was to own/run the club, then it could wait until it's in a position where it can gain enough shares without a handout, and put pressure on those board members with the 'guardianship' shares to hand theirs back.

[Guest Argus]

I suppose it would show that we're not wanting hand-outs - if a goal of the Trust was to own/run the club, then it could wait until it's in a position where it can gain enough shares without a handout, and put pressure on those board members with the 'guardianship' shares to hand theirs back.

 

That's an interesting take because mine would have been the fact that the supporters association is not representative any longer and therefore has no right to the shares.

[twinny]

That's an interesting take because mine would have been the fact that the supporters association is not representative any longer and therefore has no right to the shares.

 

I'm a glass half full type of guy... sometimes. Whilst many feel that way, I'm sure the Jags Trust board want to do the best they can to resurrect the trust (as they wouldn't be in their positions if they felt it was a dead duck),and they would require the shares and boardroom position to do all they can.

 

Edited to add: and in a way I guess I kind of agreed, I meant that the trust would only be able take over if it found itself in a sustainable position whereby income could be generated, meaning that if the trust could not be resurrected, then it wouldn't have shares. It would be good, though, to find out the answer to Willjag's second question.

Edited August 29, 2010 by twinny

[Guest Argus]

I'm a glass half full type of guy... sometimes. Whilst many feel that way, I'm sure the Jags Trust board want to do the best they can to resurrect the trust (as they wouldn't be in their positions if they felt it was a dead duck),and they would require the shares and boardroom position to do all they can.

 

You can hardly ask people to hand back shares they got as the're not carrying out the functions they were when they got them without applying that to all. I can't see why the supporters association would be different in that respect.

[twinny]

You can hardly ask people to hand back shares they got as the're not carrying out the functions they were when they got them without applying that to all. I can't see why the supporters association would be different in that respect.

 

I think I wasn't very clear - I meant that (in my hypothetical world) the trust would hand back shares gained during STJ, but continue to raise funds with the objective of gaining shares (through CF membership or actually buying shares) and generate income at the same time, proving itself to be something capable of running the club, at the same time putting pressure on those who also received shares for nothing. The supporters association would not be treated any differently. Even if it is possible, it's a million miles away anyway.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

That's an interesting take because mine would have been the fact that the supporters association is not representative any longer and therefore has no right to the shares.

A very interesting and valid point. Can I suggest that the Trust address this immediately.

Indeed on a hypothetical, where a White Knight were to appear, could the Trust justify holding onto a disproportinate (in regards to current membership) amount of shares?

Btw I don't like prejudging or analising reasons behind a post or in this case a thread but I do sense pigeons and cat are strongly involved here.

[Hot Shot]

You can hardly ask people to hand back shares they got as the're not carrying out the functions they were when they got them without applying that to all.

 

I don't think Willjag is applying this train of thought on the jags trust without applying to all. If it was as simple as applying it to all then I don't think Willjag be asking the trust to set an example that the others would hopefully feel pressured into following.

 

Maybe i'm reading his idea wrong though?

[Junior]

If the trust were to consider this I would want ALL "free" shares to be handed back at the same time. No point in throwing out any sort of chance of influence on the board if it doesnt accomplish anything.

[Guest Argus]

A very interesting and valid point. Can I suggest that the Trust address this immediately.

Indeed on a hypothetical, where a White Knight were to appear, could the Trust justify holding onto a disproportinate (in regards to current membership) amount of shares?

Btw I don't like prejudging or analising reasons behind a post or in this case a thread but I do sense pigeons and cat are strongly involved here.

 

I'm lost with that bit.

Can you explain it in a bit more of a simple way, for a simple soul.

[Guest Argus]

I don't think Willjag is applying this train of thought on the jags trust without applying to all. If it was as simple as applying it to all then I don't think Willjag be asking the trust to set an example that the others would hopefully feel pressured into following.

 

Maybe i'm reading his idea wrong though?

 

It was my reading of twinny's post not Willjags. I'm not sure what he or she was driving at.

[Guest Argus]

If the trust were to consider this I would want ALL "free" shares to be handed back at the same time. No point in throwing out any sort of chance of influence on the board if it doesnt accomplish anything.

 

Tend to agree.

Though I doubt any one would in any case.

[Willjag]

I don't think Willjag is applying this train of thought on the jags trust without applying to all. If it was as simple as applying it to all then I don't think Willjag be asking the trust to set an example that the others would hopefully feel pressured into following.

 

Maybe i'm reading his idea wrong though?

No you're not Hot Shot. The usual guff isn't working so why not try a new tact. With the advent of Propco, I feel the shares are worthless in any case.

[McKennan]

How about setting a precedent and handing back the shares to the Club that were given to the Trust at the time of STJ. I wonder if this would put Hughes and McMaster on the spot with their nil consideration holding?

 

As an aside, have the Club handed over the agreed amount of shares yet for the Trusts involvement with the Centenary Fund?

 

Excellent idea, just a couple of years too late, oor Will.

[Willjag]

While we're here, what benefit has the Trust gained from owning these shares other than having a seat on the board where the Trust Director can't communicate back to the Trust fully when important stuff is happening?

[honved]

No you're not Hot Shot. The usual guff isn't working so why not try a new tact. With the advent of Propco, I feel the shares are worthless in any case.

 

You are right. The usual guff hasn't worked. This particular guffmeister despairs at the state we are in and just wishes that the board would be honest with the fans. Straight talking seems in short supply at Firhill apart from when we hear the windbags on the board moan that the fans don't understand how hard their job is.

[Willjag]

H, any news on part 2 of my initial post?

[honved]

H, any news on part 2 of my initial post?

 

The club hasn't handed over any shares for the Centenary Fund yet. Maybe they will sometime. I really don't know. The whole Trust/board/supporters thing is getting a bit surreal from my point of view, but you've been there yourself so you know what it's like. I reckon everyone should try it sometime. It must feel great when you eventually decide that it's too hard and chuck it in.

[Junior]

It must feel great when you eventually decide that it's too hard and chuck it in.

 

It does

 

But sometimes I get the urge to do it again , then I realise its not worth the hassle and go have another beer

[Woodstock Jag]

It does

 

But sometimes I get the urge to do it again , then I realise its not worth the hassle and go have another beer

 

That taunting is bang out of order!

[honved]

It does

 

But sometimes I get the urge to do it again , then I realise its not worth the hassle and go have another beer

 

Here's the weird thing though Junior. Folk that have had the enthusiasm knocked out of them still come on here and post, not because they want to moan and get things off their chest (which is quite understandable) but because they care. Imagine if all of those folk hadn't had their enthusiasm wrung out of them by the weirdly efficient mental torture that the club hierarchy exerts. We might actually be able to do stuff.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

I'm lost with that bit.

Can you explain it in a bit more of a simple way, for a simple soul.

Sorry, Argus, I was suggesting that Willjag may by starting the thread be throwing things up for debate and counter argument from the Trust rather him expressing a strongly held opinion.

Of course I could be completely wrong

[Willjag]

It must feel great when you eventually decide that it's too hard and chuck it in.

Don't forget to let us know then! You're the only member of the Trust Board that I can recall that's came onto any of the forums and told it exactly how it is. We'd be in a far better position if there were more like you H.

[Willjag]

Sorry, Argus, I was suggesting that Willjag may by starting the thread be throwing things up for debate and counter argument from the Trust rather him expressing a strongly held opinion.

Of course I could be completely wrong

Debate and new options are always good in my view!