Jump to content

New Owner


Jag
 Share

Message added by douglas clark

'Tis not the job of a moderator to stop people writing here. The rules are pretty simple:

reported ad hominem attacks will be investigated (and if found to be true) or write stuff that could get the site into trouble

and you'll either be warned / your post deleted, or - worst case scenario -  banned either temporarily or permanently.

This particular thread has had a vigorous exchange of views, and perhaps more heat than light. But the quality of the debate - it seems to me at least - is down to the lack of information.  That, in and of itself, means that whatever side you happen to be on is for a fan, very frustrating.

So, I have no intention of closing threads just because the quality of the postings isn't great. That is not the role of a moderator.

If you wake up the following morning you can always delete something you wish you'd never said.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, javeajag said:

Ok....give some examples ? As I think it’s been pretty much on the money eg there is a takeover, it’s lee and Conway , shareholders open to selling 

I'm not going back through 62 pages, but yes some of the comments have been correct, but there has also been a lot of crap too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

Thanks, I did and it does! As far as I can see, there is a possible planning permission subject to a section 75 agreement, [although I am no expert in understanding the words of Glasgow City Council's planning department].

I wonder if this is all that is stopping the development of the bing?  I was under the impression there was issues on the design / proximity / access etc etc etc. ...… reading the application is looks to be a case of ensuring money is provided for amenities in the area local to the development.

I wonder if this is something that could be taken up by any new owner?

If I recall correctly there was/is  just no interest in the commercial side of the development as has been stated at every agm since  .....and it’s not  hard to see why 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2019 at 11:12 AM, javeajag said:

I’ve supported thistle long enough to know that pre season results, player signings etc are no prediction of anything !!

we will see after s few games how we are shaping up 

True 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jlsarmy said:

JJ , think you can look at this at least a couple of ways , Beattie and co weren’t happy at the running of the Club or there was concerns from Jaqui Low etc about the direction that we were going in , in terms of a possible takeover and investment.

The easiest way to deal with this from Beatties perspective is to get rid of the dissenting factions .

Agreed - but so we are clear - it wasn't takeover verse Status Quo - the Jlo Board had there own Investors lined up -  we have No idea why they same as the Barnsley Owners - want to invest in Thistle - we do know roughly the Barnsley Model ( Good or Bad ) 

So it wasnt about dissenting factions  - it looks like two very different beliefs in where we were  going - but there was change - no matter which Board  you choose  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Firhillista said:

The only way anyone can make any significant amount of money out of Thistle is if success can be achieved on the playing front. The ground isn't worth enough for anyone to be interested.

So, are we looking at becoming successful?

I don't think that any Thistle board ever planned to make us unsuccessful.

Investors will want their money back and if you read through the full thread, lots of people have ideas about how it could be done and being successful on the park is just one idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Firhillista said:

The only way anyone can make any significant amount of money out of Thistle is if success can be achieved on the playing front. The ground isn't worth enough for anyone to be interested.

So, are we looking at becoming successful?

These people quite clearly have no understanding of Thistle, if their objectives are based on us being successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Agreed - but so we are clear - it wasn't takeover verse Status Quo - the Jlo Board had there own Investors lined up -  we have No idea why they same as the Barnsley Owners - want to invest in Thistle - we do know roughly the Barnsley Model ( Good or Bad ) 

So it wasnt about dissenting factions  - it looks like two very different beliefs in where we were  going - but there was change - no matter which Board  you choose  

I'm reallty confused. So is Chien Lee Jacqui Low's investor or DBeat's?

(And what about Status Quo?)

Edited by allyo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, allyo said:

These people quite clearly have no understanding of Thistle, if their objectives are based on us being successful.

Not having a go at all, but is this not largely what's the problem with Thistle? An acceptance that we'll never achieve anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

Thanks, I did and it does! As far as I can see, there is a possible planning permission subject to a section 75 agreement, [although I am no expert in understanding the words of Glasgow City Council's planning department].

I wonder if this is all that is stopping the development of the bing?  I was under the impression there was issues on the design / proximity / access etc etc etc. ...… reading the application is looks to be a case of ensuring money is provided for amenities in the area local to the development.

I wonder if this is something that could be taken up by any new owner?

I originally wrote this:

Those different planning documents are fascinating for the ridiculous, nonsensical, and frankly idiotic ideas they had for that piece of land. A seven or eight storey building with between thirty and fifty flats, two thousand to three thousand square feet of office space, underground parking ...

Oh, and maybe a thousand -seat stand. One of the applications doesn't even have that.

I can just imagine the owners of the land sitting around, dollar signs filling their eyeballs as they picture the deluge of cash pouring in for as many tiny, rabbit-hutch flats they can squeeze in and offices wedged onto one end of Firhill. It was fantasyland nonsense even before the financial crisis in 2008 and I'm not surprised they were rejected.

Then I find an application from 2014 that was submitted by Tom Hughes and was actually GRANTED for a truly hideous plan that includes an ELEVEN STOREY tower block for 79 flats.

With the tiniest possible nod to the fact that Firhill is actually, you know, A FOOTBALL STADIUM, there's a FOUR ROW stand behind the goal.

That is the absolute height of embarrassment. It would be such a wonderful monument to sheer naked greed if it was ever built.

Partick Thistle aren't the Great Unpredictables, they're the Pig's Ear of Scottish football, and that development if ever completed would be the capper for it all.

What a laugh these plans are:

https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NFR8NBEXW4000

Look at how tiny the flats are! Imagine living in a flat that's got a floodlight right outside your window!

Edited by West of Scotland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the attempts to sort Thistle's finances over the past 20 odd years, have foundered on the inescapable fact that the fan base at around 2500 is too small to support full time football.

Speculative development of the bing will not solve anything since it would not provide a long term sustainable increase in income.  It would simply repeat the history of drip feeding smallish one off payments to stave off whatever the current emergency might be.

Two possible remedies appear to me to exist.

First, the Club becomes part of a group of clubs (Nice + Barnsley say) who generate sustainable financial benefits greater than the sum of parts, and which can be shared between the clubs.

Second, Colin Weir could be persuaded to set up a family owned trust fund that would be managed professionally to retain its capital value while giving its income to the Club.  A fund of £10m  managed that way would generate around £300,000 per annum after fees.  That is equivalent to around 5 or 6  players at the wages St Johnstone pay. 

Each of these options should improve performance significatly and that would raise attendances, providing a virtuous circle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, eljaggo said:

All of the attempts to sort Thistle's finances over the past 20 odd years, have foundered on the inescapable fact that the fan base at around 2500 is too small to support full time football.

Speculative development of the bing will not solve anything since it would not provide a long term sustainable increase in income.  It would simply repeat the history of drip feeding smallish one off payments to stave off whatever the current emergency might be.

Two possible remedies appear to me to exist.

First, the Club becomes part of a group of clubs (Nice + Barnsley say) who generate sustainable financial benefits greater than the sum of parts, and which can be shared between the clubs.

Second, Colin Weir could be persuaded to set up a family owned trust fund that would be managed professionally to retain its capital value while giving its income to the Club.  A fund of £10m  managed that way would generate around £300,000 per annum after fees.  That is equivalent to around 5 or 6  players at the wages St Johnstone pay. 

Each of these options should improve performance significatly and that would raise attendances, providing a virtuous circle.

 

This is all pie in the sky stuff.

Firstly, other clubs have sustained full time football on sustainable business models with lower average attendances than Thistle has.

Secondly, real sustainability is not about what we can flog the Bing for; it's about how we use the Club's facilities to generate revenue.

Thirdly, becoming a feeder club for Barnsley will not lead Thistle to more money. It will lead to the siphoning-off of our main extraordinary sources of revenue, probably the leveraging of debt over our core assets to finance the "big team", and real risks of financial instability if/when the relationship does not produce for the consortium the savings hoped for.

Fourthly, I wonder what on earth could possibly be stopping Colin Weir, an ill man who has separated from his wife, from tying-up an eighth of his share of the lottery winnings, and an amount that vastly exceeds the net value of the Club, in a complex financial instrument just out of the hope that maybe it would give Partick Thistle a parachute payment every year.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, West of Scotland said:

I originally wrote this:

Those different planning documents are fascinating for the ridiculous, nonsensical, and frankly idiotic ideas they had for that piece of land. A seven or eight storey building with between thirty and fifty flats, two thousand to three thousand square feet of office space, underground parking ...

Oh, and maybe a thousand -seat stand. One of the applications doesn't even have that.

I can just imagine the owners of the land sitting around, dollar signs filling their eyeballs as they picture the deluge of cash pouring in for as many tiny, rabbit-hutch flats they can squeeze in and offices wedged onto one end of Firhill. It was fantasyland nonsense even before the financial crisis in 2008 and I'm not surprised they were rejected.

Then I find an application from 2014 that was submitted by Tom Hughes and was actually GRANTED for a truly hideous plan that includes an ELEVEN STOREY tower block for 79 flats.

With the tiniest possible nod to the fact that Firhill is actually, you know, A FOOTBALL STADIUM, there's a FOUR ROW stand behind the goal.

That is the absolute height of embarrassment. It would be such a wonderful monument to sheer naked greed if it was ever built.

Partick Thistle aren't the Great Unpredictables, they're the Pig's Ear of Scottish football, and that development if ever completed would be the capper for it all.

What a laugh these plans are:

https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NFR8NBEXW4000

Look at how tiny the flats are! Imagine living in a flat that's got a floodlight right outside your window!

I think what PTFC fans would like for the bing area is something like the attached (Man City Academy ground)

man city-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...