New Owner

[Dark Passenger]

13 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

Is it to prevent someone else taking it over from within and diluting shareholding’s further so their block is powerless? Potentially, there have been mutterings since our latest board member came on and his contacts and more worryingly their record with Clydebank.

You're the only person I've seen make reference to that - on any platform.

[AndyMac]

1 hour ago, dl1971 said:

A lot of detailed speculation on here. My question is this. If andy mac is right the level of knowledge required must mean that the board ( or shareholders ) have been actively trying to sell the club. These guys didn't just stumble into this. Secondly if we are being bought simply to asset strip why not buy a Premier League team? For example Livingstone or Hamilton or almost any team for ty hat matter.

I may well be wrong about this and I hope my fears are unfounded.

I know everyone on here wants the best for the club, some may not see eye to eye, some may not like one another, but nonetheless we all want the best for the Jags.

I am speculating about the consortium, speculating about the speculators if you like. I don't know much about them , but I do know a bit about the leverage buyouts that have been all the rage in the corporate US over the past decade. It's vulture capitalism, no more no less. They go in for the kill and pick the bones until they're bare.

Is this consortium guilty of vulture capitalism? I don't know. However there are some worrying signs. They put £20 Million into Nice and then put the club £20 Million in debt at 9% interest,  in order to get their cash back. Are these the actions of people who run a tight ship for a trading profit? Why have your club borrowing at 9% commercial risk interest when you're Billionaires? Surely £20 Million would be small beer to these people? Why didn't they lend the money to the club at 2% bank rates?

[allyo]

Struggling to keep up.

Are these shareholders who are unhappy with the way things are running anything to do with this forum, and all the "this isn't the club I've supported" stuff that's been going around? Or is that me putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5. 

I always assume I'm just speaking to other fans on here. Is the forum being used for something else?

Taking the conspiracy theories too far? 

Edited June 23, 2019 by allyo

[AndyMac]

3 minutes ago, allyo said:

Struggling to keep up.

Are these shareholders who are unhappy with the way things are running anything to do with this forum, and all the "this isn't the club I've supported" stuff that's been going around? Or is that me putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5. 

I always assume I'm just speaking to other fans on here. Is the forum being used for something else?

You mean like a really bad version of The Secret Millionaire?

[dl1971]

16 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

I may well be wrong about this and I hope my fears are unfounded.

I know everyone on here wants the best for the club, some may not see eye to eye, some may not like one another, but nonetheless we all want the best for the Jags.

I am speculating about the consortium, speculating about the speculators if you like. I don't know much about them , but I do know a bit about the leverage buyouts that have been all the rage in the corporate US over the past decade. It's vulture capitalism, no more no less. They go in for the kill and pick the bones until they're bare.

Is this consortium guilty of vulture capitalism? I don't know. However there are some worrying signs. They put £20 Million into Nice and then put the club £20 Million in debt at 9% interest,  in order to get their cash back. Are these the actions of people who run a tight ship for a trading profit? Why have your club borrowing at 9% commercial risk interest when you're Billionaires? Surely £20 Million would be small beer to these people? Why didn't they lend the money to the club at 2% bank rates?

I agree vigilance is required here. I'm assuming those in power at PTFC have thought this through properly. 

[Norgethistle]

5 minutes ago, allyo said:

Struggling to keep up.

Are these shareholders who are unhappy with the way things are running anything to do with this forum, and all the "this isn't the club I've supported" stuff that's been going around? Or is that me putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5. 

I always assume I'm just speaking to other fans on here. Is the forum being used for something else?

The board, past & present have always monitored here (and previous dotnet days) and have also posted either behind a alias or upfront.

One of the funniest things was Red Monkey outing them all on the old forum 

[Third Lanark]

Just now, dl1971 said:

I agree vigilance is required here. I'm assuming those in power at PTFC have thought this through properly. 

Do they even have a choice if as suggested they are bypassing those currently in power?

[allyo]

5 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

The board, past & present have always monitored here (and previous dotnet days) and have also posted either behind a alias or upfront.

One of the funniest things was Red Monkey outing them all on the old forum 

Intriguing. 

[ChiThistle]

That Wikipedia article has incorrect attribution - the Thistle portion links to the purchase of Nice years ago and has naught to do with Thistle.

Am I the only one who sees the footballing reasons for this?  They could sell all of Firhill, the players, Kingsley, everything for what would be a pittance for a group of billionaire investors.  I don’t see how the effort would be worth the payoff.  Doing that would cast them in such a terrible light that they would be blackballed.

What Thistle DOES give them is a minor-league system that fits into the Billy Beane Moneyball side of things.  We sold them Liam Lindsay at tremendous value, everyone knows English clubs can get Scottish players on the cheap, and they’ve probably heard about Aidan Fitzpatrick and the Weirs investment into our training center development (jury’s out on that I suppose).  That pipeline fits into the  Moneyball ideal to a T in my opinion.  I imagine someone looked at Lindsay and Fitzpatrick and said taking us over would provide a reasonable return on investment.

So yes, it probably turns Thistle into more of a feeder club, but if the feeder club doesn’t succeed then it breaks the chain.  The idea is that talent is developed and moved on instead of always having to look for value players outside your organization.  We’d probably get a few players not ready for the Barnsley first team, but that’s more “scouting” than we’ve had the last, I dunno, decade?

In that way, it’s hard to see much of a difference in Steven Gerrard bringing over Ryan Kent/Sheyi Ojo from his old club.  The difference is this ownership group is establishing a more direct pipeline.

 

[jaf]

2 hours ago, AndyMac said:

I may well be wrong about this and I hope my fears are unfounded.

I know everyone on here wants the best for the club, some may not see eye to eye, some may not like one another, but nonetheless we all want the best for the Jags.

I am speculating about the consortium, speculating about the speculators if you like. I don't know much about them , but I do know a bit about the leverage buyouts that have been all the rage in the corporate US over the past decade. It's vulture capitalism, no more no less. They go in for the kill and pick the bones until they're bare.

Is this consortium guilty of vulture capitalism? I don't know. However there are some worrying signs. They put £20 Million into Nice and then put the club £20 Million in debt at 9% interest,  in order to get their cash back. Are these the actions of people who run a tight ship for a trading profit? Why have your club borrowing at 9% commercial risk interest when you're Billionaires? Surely £20 Million would be small beer to these people? Why didn't they lend the money to the club at 2% bank rates?

 

And they haven’t at Barnsley whose debt has reduced by 6 million since they took over. 

And they can’t do what you suggest they are going to do due to uk company law. 

So I am surprised you want to keep telling everyone “this is what they will do”.    You don’t know what they will do. You think they will do something they haven’t done in the one other case governed by uk company law and which would be impossible in our set of circumstances. 

Finally you ignore the fact that the people selling their shares have invested large amounts of money and/or time to stop our club failing at various times. Why would hey now introduce an inappropriate investor, and not do their due diligence in the buyer? 

 

 

 

[jaf]

1 hour ago, ChiThistle said:

That Wikipedia article has incorrect attribution - the Thistle portion links to the purchase of Nice years ago and has naught to do with Thistle.

Am I the only one who sees the footballing reasons for this?  They could sell all of Firhill, the players, Kingsley, everything for what would be a pittance for a group of billionaire investors.  I don’t see how the effort would be worth the payoff.  Doing that would cast them in such a terrible light that they would be blackballed.

What Thistle DOES give them is a minor-league system that fits into the Billy Beane Moneyball side of things.  We sold them Liam Lindsay at tremendous value, everyone knows English clubs can get Scottish players on the cheap, and they’ve probably heard about Aidan Fitzpatrick and the Weirs investment into our training center development (jury’s out on that I suppose).  That pipeline fits into the  Moneyball ideal to a T in my opinion.  I imagine someone looked at Lindsay and Fitzpatrick and said taking us over would provide a reasonable return on investment.

So yes, it probably turns Thistle into more of a feeder club, but if the feeder club doesn’t succeed then it breaks the chain.  The idea is that talent is developed and moved on instead of always having to look for value players outside your organization.  We’d probably get a few players not ready for the Barnsley first team, but that’s more “scouting” than we’ve had the last, I dunno, decade?

In that way, it’s hard to see much of a difference in Steven Gerrard bringing over Ryan Kent/Sheyi Ojo from his old club.  The difference is this ownership group is establishing a more direct pipeline.

 

Agreed. And the other footballing reason of course is that it takes a lot less money to reach the higher reaches of Scottish football than they would need to pump into  Barnsley to get them into too half of English premier league. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

4 hours ago, Dark Passenger said:

 

Really -  thats News to me ?  as I don't know the Finances - so you might want to reconsider your accusation ? 

As for Shareholders not being happy - the fact they are selling out would tend to indicate that - so you don't need to be CSI Maryhill to work it out ?

As for David Beattie being introduced to Mr Lee - No idea ? and other Shareholders being desperate - No idea or the reasons for selling 

Your making an awful lot of accusations here of a personal nature against numerous people ? 

And seem to be getting very personal and angry about things - one may ask why ? 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Jordanhill Jag

[Jordanhill Jag]

4 hours ago, Dark Passenger said:

 

4 hours ago, Garscube Road End said:

Houses. 

There is lots of Land in Maryhill - Non of it sitting below a Canal and None of it involving demolishing a Football Stadium the cost of which would run into Millions 

Edited June 24, 2019 by Jordanhill Jag

[javeajag]

6 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

There is lots of Land in Maryhill - Non of it sitting below a Canal and None of it involving demolishing a Football Stadium the cost of which would run into Millions 

Exactly......and why would  these guys bother with housing in maryhill makes no sense 

[admin]

11 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Fair Enough - but whilst the focus is on the New Buyers - it does seem very very strange that this has been pulled together - lets face it not an easy task - so what do the former Directors Know that we dont ? its not all about cashing in - there are say 9 - at least three of them gave the Money to support the Club - zero interest in ever seeing it again  - a Third the owners haven't a connection to the Club anymore so fair enough get a pay out - why not ?  - a Third get some cash-  but only if it benefits PTFC 

Knowing them all - thats my take on it - but something changed - why now - why so dramatic a change after all these Years - lets face it - we have seen worse times ?

So why Now ? 

Why now? 

It's the first time they've been approached to sell their shares? 

[jaf]

8 minutes ago, admin said:

Why now? 

It's the first time they've been approached to sell their shares? 

I can’t believe they were approached. 

Who would waste tome approaching a 6% shareholder in the hope they could pull together enough shareholders to sell a majority in the club  that’s not credible - our sporadic shareholding making it so difficult  

I think they more likely have got together, realised they have more than 50 per cent and then sought a buyer   Which would also support Jjs question of why now (for which I believe there are a couple of theories doing the rounds)  

 

Edited June 24, 2019 by jaf

[scotty]

This is turning into another of those topics being commented on by folk who are hinting at being in the know and experts on the situation.

Looks to me that, as ordinary fans, we are going to be kept in the dark and will have to just accept that. Until someone, somewhere deigns to enlighten us.

[admin]

I don't care if our Club's owners have a connection with Thistle/Maryhill/Glasgow provided they have the best interests of the club at heart and, most importantly, the ability to progress the Club. 

It can be argued that the current BoD don't have those qualities. 

Even if that is true it doesn't mean that this prospective takeover is right for us. 

There has to be more substance than 'they are not the current BoD' for me to embrace this as a good thing. 

They need to demonstrate why they are the people to take the club forward. 

I want clarity in that respect and free from reference to the performance of the current BoD. 

I'm hoping that we will soon have that as this current state of uncertainty is unhelpful on a number of levels. 

[admin]

16 minutes ago, jaf said:

I can’t believe they were approached. 

Who would waste tome approaching a 6% shareholder in the hope they could pull together enough shareholders to sell a majority in the club  that’s not credible - our sporadic shareholding making it so difficult  

I think they more likely have got together, realised they have more than 50 per cent and then sought a buyer   Which would also support Jjs question of why now (for which I believe there are a couple of theories doing the rounds)  

 

Interesting. 

I doesn't make me feel any more comfortable though. 

I'm repeating myself I know but if the 'why now' is a motivation to remove the present BoD then I hope that that desire hasn't clouded their judgement over whether this is for the long term betterment of Partick Thistle. 

I fervently hope it is. It could be unbelievably exciting. 

One thing is certain though it will define the future of Partick Thistle for some time. Maybe I'm just resistant to change but until we know more then I'm going to remain extremely nervous about this. 

[Dark Passenger]

7 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Your making an awful lot of accusations here of a personal nature against numerous people ? 

You can always ask the admin to remove the post. I assume they'll contact me before they do. Or you could take it further.

[jaf]

4 minutes ago, admin said:

Interesting. 

I doesn't make me feel any more comfortable though. 

I'm repeating myself I know but if the 'why now' is a motivation to remove the present BoD then I hope that that desire hasn't clouded their judgement over whether this is for the long term betterment of Partick Thistle. 

I fervently hope it is. It could be unbelievably exciting. 

When thing is certain though it will define the future of Partick Thistle for some time. Maybe I'm just resistant to change but until we know more then I'm going to remain extremely nervous about this. 

Of course it is of concern to all of us. That is why having a properly constituted supporters trust is so important. 

But, regardless of motivations, the facts are that the shareholder group concerned have dug deep in their pockets and in terms of time and resource in the past to help the club. From my perspective, that makes it illogical that they would therefore sell us down the river to the wrong buyer now. Not impossible, but entirely illogical. Their past efforts buy them the right to be trusted in my opinion (although I totally get why people might have concerns). 

The thing is no one can judge whether this is the absolutely right thing for the club , or not, until they have the benefit of hindsight. 

[javeajag]

21 minutes ago, jaf said:

I can’t believe they were approached. 

Who would waste tome approaching a 6% shareholder in the hope they could pull together enough shareholders to sell a majority in the club  that’s not credible - our sporadic shareholding making it so difficult  

I think they more likely have got together, realised they have more than 50 per cent and then sought a buyer   Which would also support Jjs question of why now (for which I believe there are a couple of theories doing the rounds)  

 

I think it’s more likely having acquired Barnsley they looked at Scotland to develop a platform here and then you look at possible acquisitions, eliminate those you can’t buy, don’t fit etc and your left with a small group.....I suspect us being debt free, having the academy and our ownership structure were key reasons 

[Jordanhill Jag]

10 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

You can always ask the admin to remove the post. I assume they'll contact me before they do. Or you could take it further.

I dont moderate the Forum as for the other bit - its tittle tattle based on nada - carry on ...........

[Dark Passenger]

12 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

I dont moderate the Forum as for the other bit - its tittle tattle based on nada - carry on ...........

Everyone can take from that what they want.

[jlsarmy]

27 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

I dont moderate the Forum as for the other bit - its tittle tattle based on nada - carry on ...........

If all these negotiations are in the process, would Colin Weir be in the loop as well , what with the funding of the Academy and obviously the pending Training Academy with the 3 Black Cats .

There is not a lot of morals within the business world but I would hope Colin Weir is part of the process and given his place , it wouldn’t make any sense to lose his funding .

 

Edited June 24, 2019 by jlsarmy