New Owner

[jlsarmy]

13 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Who is asking about dual ownership and why are they asking ? 

Because it’s the rules , they obviously could influence both clubs depending on the circumstances whether that was giving us some of their better players from Barnsley or sending PTFC players down to Barnsley if they were good enough.

[BowenBoys]

Over 100 pages and I haven't seen anything even remotely Shakespearean yet. Oh well, keep it up.

Onwards to infinity...

[allyo]

1 hour ago, BowenBoys said:

Over 100 pages and I haven't seen anything even remotely Shakespearean yet. Oh well, keep it up.

Onwards to infinity...

To Be Or Not To Be. ..

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 hours ago, javeajag said:

As you well know Beattie left in a fanfare if we won’t make he mistakes others have done and slash budgets etc so he gave low a hospital pass ..,. Indeed you criticised him for it .... so he is partially responsible 

But this Seasons Budget had nothing to do with Beattie and it was only balanced by the Transfer Monies from Fitz and Liam - so are you suggesting that those Transfer Monies which were not in the Managers agreed budget in May were given to him rather than Balance the Club Budget ?     

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 hours ago, javeajag said:

I think I now go back to simplifying what’s going on 

1 the club is being dressed up for a sale hence the cutbacks and budget reductions 

2 if the Sfa are considering whether the new guys can buy the club it’s totally incredulous that an outline deal is not in place .. I mean we have gone to to the sfa and said we are thinking we might sell to these guys what do you think ?!!!

thr current board are certainly not being up front with us 

Well they were being upfront about there need to balance the budget but that doesnt seem  to matter in your opinion 

[allyo]

Can't help thinking you only answer the questions that are easy to answer 

[Jordanhill Jag]

2 hours ago, Ancipital said:

I'm not defending it but the current board statement said a major proportion of the budget had been committed  when the boardroom changes took place. 

Since then we've signed Jones and Austin on a permanent basis and de Vita on loan, so the devil may be in the detail there. 

I think Caldwell thought he was getting a good chunk of the AF fee but that's had to be used to plug a hole. 

Correct 

[allyo]

I have no problem with balancing budgets

If we couldn't afford the 4 players then I'm glad we're not signing them. I just think they should have been more open about it. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

2 minutes ago, allyo said:

Can't help thinking you only answer the questions that are easy to answer 

No for me the budget balancing is key - everything else is a subjective opinion - thats something tangible 

[Jordanhill Jag]

Just now, allyo said:

I have no problem with balancing budgets

If we couldn't afford the 4 players then I'm glad we're not signing them. I just think they should have been more open about it. 

I think the Comms has been shocking to be honest and I think a lot of the previous Directors  are living in a past era when you announced stuff in the Programme - No idea who is advising them on Communications but they need to up there game  

[allyo]

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

No for me the budget balancing is key - everything else is a subjective opinion - thats something tangible 

Sorry to be pedantic but earlier in the week budgets were also subjective.

So much in this thread seems to depend on which side you are on. I don't have side. I have no reason to think badly of the current board but I'd feel a lot better if their statements were transparent and if we had some idea how the takeover might benefit the club.

[Lenziejag]

12 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Thats not what was said Gerry Britton confirmed 100% that there were no Player Budget Cuts - this was reinforced by David Kelly who advised Player Budget was the sdame as last Year ( given we had circa £900K between Parachute & EUFA Money ) thats a fair achievement - what he did say was that the Transfer Money balanced the Club Budget "just"   - so there are 100% no cuts 

 

So it has all been spent and Caldwell wanted to go over budget with 4 other players ?

[Lenziejag]

12 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

My interpitation  is thus  - Budget was the same as last Year despite No Large Parachute Income - we then get Transfer Money from Liam & Fitzy - Caldwell thinks it will get added to his budget ( which is the norm ) - New Directors then say this cant go into Player Budget as its needed to balance the Books and it was never in the Budget in the First Place ? 

The Cut is purely based on a Firhill Insider stating it - it could have been anyone ? 

Why do you put capitals at random places in your posts ?

genuine question.

[Lenziejag]

12 hours ago, allyo said:

My recollection is that the newspaper article from the insider suggested that 200k had been available for new players and this was cut.

The board statement, which was a reaction to the article, claimed that the budget was not being cut, but didn't specifically mention 200k or four players.

Therefore it was completely open to interpretation, but it would be naive beyond belief for the board to think this would not lead people to beliving that money was still available for players.

The fact that it is not, I think, leaves the statement not necessarily looking dishonest, but definitely unclear. 

But the fact that they are now saying that the budget was unsustainable and they had to rein it in. In what way is that not "cutting" it? I'm certainly confused.

The board statement did mention £200k but not the number of players.

It sounds as if the budget has already been spent. 

Two things you can take from this 

Caldwell can’t manage a budget or

Lows board were prepared to go over budget.

[Lenziejag]

12 hours ago, javeajag said:

They did not tell the truth in their statement .

They maybe told the truth, just not the whole truth .

[scotty]

7 hours ago, BowenBoys said:

Over 100 pages and I haven't seen anything even remotely Shakespearean yet. Oh well, keep it up.

Onwards to infinity...

Is that a Shakespearean quote? I was sure it was Toy Storian!

[sandy]

23 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

The board statement did mention £200k but not the number of players.

It sounds as if the budget has already been spent. 

Two things you can take from this 

Caldwell can’t manage a budget or

Lows board were prepared to go over budget.

I think we may find when the Accounts are released that the old board did overspend. Any ‘clawback’ by the new board is probably a reflection of the gap they found when looking at the books. 

One thing David Beattie did was to ensure the Club ran within its means. It just may be that last season, paying 4 managers and giving GC funds in January, that we over-spent in a gamble that promotion would sort everything. That gamble failed. 

[javeajag]

7 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Because it’s the rules , they obviously could influence both clubs depending on the circumstances whether that was giving us some of their better players from Barnsley or sending PTFC players down to Barnsley if they were good enough.

I was being slightly ...... they need sfa approval for any takeover not just dual ownership but my point is you don’t do that at the beginning of the process do you ? 

[javeajag]

5 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

But this Seasons Budget had nothing to do with Beattie and it was only balanced by the Transfer Monies from Fitz and Liam - so are you suggesting that those Transfer Monies which were not in the Managers agreed budget in May were given to him rather than Balance the Club Budget ?     

I know it’s your job to bat back any criticism of Beattie on here and on the Facebook group but since the financial controller struggled to exactly clear up anything on this yesterday in what even you said was a poor meeting and springford said he would not make the criticisms of the board re mismanagement .....so what do you know ?

[javeajag]

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Well they were being upfront about there need to balance the budget but that doesnt seem  to matter in your opinion 

Of course we need to balance the budget and where did I say that doesn’t matter ? Deflection and avoidance yet again 

[javeajag]

31 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

They maybe told the truth, just not the whole truth .

Then it’s not the truth 

[javeajag]

What is pretty clear from yesterday’s meeting 

the board members were poor and didnt inspire confidence 

Eg the current board put out a statement on the last board that members of the current board didn’t know about and don’t agree with .....ffs

amateur hour and no wonder fans are suspicious 

[jaf]

8 hours ago, Third Lanark said:

It’s been stated he took a pay cut - never been confirmed it was massive.  

Though think it was a bigger pay cut than keown Storey etc

I believe it was 50 per cent. 

[Dick Dastardly]

One thing that is bothering me with talk of budget deficits is the statement from JLow in May (before any Lindsay/Fitzpatrick money) where her statement said

"Off the pitch, the Board took the decision that the Club, while having no debts, needed to improve its financial planning. Our budgets do not include monies from cup runs, stadium hires by third parties etc. It encourages us to live within our means and extra monies that come in – such as that from our Scottish Cup run – can be used to supplement the playing budget or on unforeseen issues as they arise.

But, until season 2018/19, the focus had been solely on the current season which we felt wasn’t enough, we needed sight of what was coming down the track towards us. Our finances are now structured on a rolling two year basis (with a view to extending that to three years) so that we know exactly what we can spend in year, without compromising the Club’s viability for the following year. As the season ended, we came in on budget without depleting our reserves, which can be drawn on to support plans for the coming season."

That doesn't sound as if we were running at a budget deficit then. or had any plans to do so. Either someone is not telling the truth, or morelikely we are getting different versions of the truth depending on what they want us to believe.

[Lambies Lost Doo]

11 hours ago, West of Scotland said:

The plan is for the board to sit and cross their fingers that this consortium are still interested, and the SFA decide it's alright.

There's no plan b.

Why would there be a Plan B?  I heard this shouted out at the meeting as the loudmouths tried to turn it into an episode of Question  Time.

Plan A and it is the only plan is to break even.