Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
javeajag

Big Announcement

Recommended Posts

In the interests of full transparency, I contacted Gerry Britton last night to get clarity on four questions:

(a) whether the title had been registered yet, and if so when

(b) whether the Club paid any consideration and if so how much

(c) whether the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd or by another entity

(d) whether the title is free from any charges (i.e. secured debt)

His swift answers were:

(a) 29 April 2023 (I assume this was a typo and he meant 2022!)

(b) that nil consideration was paid

(c) that the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd

(d) that the title is and will be free from any secured debt.

It therefore seems as though this is a delay at the Land Register’s end, which is fair enough.

Edited by Woodstock Jag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

In the interests of full transparency, I contacted Gerry Britton last night to get clarity on four questions:

(a) whether the title had been registered yet, and if so when

(b) whether the Club paid any consideration and if so how much

(c) whether the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd or by another entity

(d) whether the title is free from any charges (i.e. secured debt)

His swift answers were:

(a) 29 April 2023 (I assume this was a typo and he meant 2022!)

(b) that nil consideration was paid

(c) that the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd

(d) that the title is and will be free from any secured debt.

It therefore seems as though this is a delay at the Land Register’s end, which is fair enough.

Hi Mr Woodstock Jag, just catching up after a few hours off the forum.

Well done for going to the horse's mouth and getting such good information.

I am still puzzled, as a delay (especially of this duration) in showing that an application has been made goes against all my experience of the Land Register of Scotland. I accept that there are often huge delays in processing applications, but not usually in acknowledging that they have been made in the first place. I have just checked my own recent applications and all of them are showing up on SCOTLIS, including a couple I submitted to the Registers on Monday of this week.

I don't suppose your communication with  Gerry could stretch as far as asking him to scan across a copy of the official Registers' acknowledgment of receipt of the Disposition transferring title for registration under Title Number GLA205256!?

It so happens that I have the occasional online catch up meeting with one of the staff members at the Registers about specific issues relating to registrations of church properties which have their own peculiar complications! I see that I have such a meeting scheduled for a week today, so if the confirmation of registration has not shown up by then, without disclosing the particular property involved, I will try and gain some understanding of the reasons why there could be such a lengthy delay in an application showing up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

In the interests of full transparency, I contacted Gerry Britton last night to get clarity on four questions:

(a) whether the title had been registered yet, and if so when

(b) whether the Club paid any consideration and if so how much

(c) whether the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd or by another entity

(d) whether the title is free from any charges (i.e. secured debt)

His swift answers were:

(a) 29 April 2023 (I assume this was a typo and he meant 2022!)

(b) that nil consideration was paid

(c) that the land is to be held by PTFC Ltd

(d) that the title is and will be free from any secured debt.

It therefore seems as though this is a delay at the Land Register’s end, which is fair enough.

So all your previous speculation, possibly scaremongering and questioning was well…..way way off beam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, javeajag said:

So all your previous speculation, possibly scaremongering and questioning was well…..way way off beam 

I didn’t speculate or scaremonger.

I said we didn’t have the full picture unambiguously stated and in the public domain.

Courtesy of the Club CEO we now do, even though the Land Register does not yet show what he has now provided clear assurances has been done.

I have no reason to disbelieve Gerry and the answers he’s given are reassuring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, partickthedog said:

Hi Mr Woodstock Jag, just catching up after a few hours off the forum.

Well done for going to the horse's mouth and getting such good information.

I am still puzzled, as a delay (especially of this duration) in showing that an application has been made goes against all my experience of the Land Register of Scotland. I accept that there are often huge delays in processing applications, but not usually in acknowledging that they have been made in the first place. I have just checked my own recent applications and all of them are showing up on SCOTLIS, including a couple I submitted to the Registers on Monday of this week.

I don't suppose your communication with  Gerry could stretch as far as asking him to scan across a copy of the official Registers' acknowledgment of receipt of the Disposition transferring title for registration under Title Number GLA205256!?

It so happens that I have the occasional online catch up meeting with one of the staff members at the Registers about specific issues relating to registrations of church properties which have their own peculiar complications! I see that I have such a meeting scheduled for a week today, so if the confirmation of registration has not shown up by then, without disclosing the particular property involved, I will try and gain some understanding of the reasons why there could be such a lengthy delay in an application showing up.

 

Is it possible 2023 isn’t a typo - but a mistake in the registration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lenziejag said:

Is it possible 2023 isn’t a typo - but a mistake in the registration?

I don’t think you can register a disposition that hasn’t happened yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I didn’t speculate or scaremonger.

I said we didn’t have the full picture unambiguously stated and in the public domain.

Courtesy of the Club CEO we now do, even though the Land Register does not yet show what he has now provided clear assurances has been done.

I have no reason to disbelieve Gerry and the answers he’s given are reassuring.

Eh yes you did …..you did that thing where someone hasn’t denied everything therefore something might have happened or be true just because you ‘speculated’ ….which you do a lot ….

Eg the club haven’t said they didn’t pay a consideration for the return if the two sides therefore that might have happened or has it been transferred to another entity …well we just don’t know because they haven’t denied it …..only because nobody thought that but you ….scare, scare, doubt , doubt ….not  helpful

meanwhile you actually email the CEO and 10 minutes later….all your cards fall down

if you get elected to the THF foundation be a bit more responsible 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Eh yes you did …..you did that thing where someone hasn’t denied everything therefore something might have happened or be true just because you ‘speculated’ ….which you do a lot ….

No I didn’t. I said something was “cautiously to be welcomed” provided that certain other related things were not the case.

I then sought and received assurances to allay caution.

35 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Eg the club haven’t said they didn’t pay a consideration for the return if the two sides therefore that might have happened or has it been transferred to another entity …well we just don’t know because they haven’t denied it …..only because nobody thought that but you ….scare, scare, doubt , doubt ….not  helpful

No, again I just wanted confirmation about things that weren’t confirmed. These were not about things that it is sensible to presume or take on trust that is the case, not least because there are also benign reasons why they would not be the case.

35 minutes ago, javeajag said:

meanwhile you actually email the CEO and 10 minutes later….all your cards fall down

No, I email the CEO because the title hasn’t appeared yet and prevents us from having this information clearly stated in the public domain, and I get the answers I am looking and hoping for.

35 minutes ago, javeajag said:

if you get elected to the THF foundation be a bit more responsible 

I don’t think anyone, including you, honestly thinks anything I have said about this was “irresponsible”. They were legitimate questions given both (a) commitments made about the land in previous statements not materialising and (b) the (for reasons unclear) lack of public record to corroborate the Club statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2022 at 8:17 PM, Woodstock Jag said:

This is to be cautiously welcomed provided that:

(a) it returns unencumbered by any debt

(b) there are no plans to secure any debt against any part of the stadium or adjacent land

(c) the Club has not incurred significant expense in the transaction.

The approach taken back in November 2019 was distinctly ****-up over conspiracy when it came to LBTT and VAT. It’s a bit of a mystery why they did the original transaction the way they did. There is a case for saying that the stadium (in its entirety) should be in a different company than the footballing operations but part of the same group.

But in the round, it is better that decisions about the stadium, secured credit and redevelopment rest with the Club Board rather than Three Black Cats, albeit the latter still controls the former at the moment.

This is what you posted …..

1. you speculated there might be debt associated with the transfer …there hasn’t been and only you suggested that might be a possibility ….I’m not sure why you thought that as no one , no one had ever mentioned it previously 

2. not satisfied with that you assert well maybe there’s debt or security involved …..with literally zero evidence , not a slither 

3. we’ll even if there is  none of that maybe it’s cost the club money …..based on absolutely nothing 
 

meanwhile back on planet earth the two sides have been returned to the club with no debt, no security, no conditions , no costs ….nada…..as some of us suggested

Maybe wait till there is reason to speculate rather than just go through a list of endless possibilities 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

This is what you posted …..

1. you speculated there might be debt associated with the transfer …there hasn’t been and only you suggested that might be a possibility ….I’m not sure why you thought that as no one , no one had ever mentioned it previously 

No this categorically false.

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

2. not satisfied with that you assert well maybe there’s debt or security involved …..with literally zero evidence , not a slither 

Again, categorically false. I did not “assert well maybe” anything. Indeed “asserting” “well maybe” is an oxymoron.

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

3. we’ll even if there is  none of that maybe it’s cost the club money …..based on absolutely nothing.

Again, categorically false. I didn’t say “maybe it’s cost the Club money” I said that the news was welcome provided that, among other things, it has not cost the Club money.

Remember that the Club did not receive the remuneration that we would have expected to fall due to it when PropCo was wound up.

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

meanwhile back on planet earth the two sides have been returned to the club with no debt, no security, no conditions , no costs ….nada…..as some of us suggested

Which, as I originally said, is to be welcomed!

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Maybe wait till there is reason to speculate rather than just go through a list of endless possibilities 

I didn’t speculate so this is all moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No this categorically false.

Again, categorically false. I did not “assert well maybe” anything. Indeed “asserting” “well maybe” is an oxymoron.

Again, categorically false. I didn’t say “maybe it’s cost the Club money” I said that the news was welcome provided that, among other things, it has not cost the Club money.

Remember that the Club did not receive the remuneration that we would have expected to fall due to it when PropCo was wound up.

Which, as I originally said, is to be welcomed!

I didn’t speculate so this is all moot.

I’m sorry but this is ridiculous ……your post should simple have been…..’this is to be cautiously welcomed.’

why mention debt, security or costs if not to suggest all might not be above board ? This is something you do all the time it’s like posting ….

‘ this is to be cautiously welcomed provided :

a. Gerry Briton didn’t get a bonus as a result

b. The stadium isn’t going to be painted blue 

c. Cats are not going to be allowed in the stadium as a result ‘

and it your world all your are doing is apparently saying it’s good news provided things that didn’t happen well didn’t happen !
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, javeajag said:

I’m sorry but this is ridiculous ……your post should simple have been…..’this is to be cautiously welcomed.’

why mention debt, security or costs if not to suggest all might not be above board ?

Because they are pertinent questions to any transfer of land, Three Black Cats had previously reneged on a promise to transfer the land “within 7 days” and the Club had not received (as might have been expected) a distribution from PropCo for its share of the proceeds of the November 2019 sale.

It was important, therefore, to clarify what, exactly, had been announced. The Land Register would have helped to answer those questions but we have an unexplained delay. Gerry’s helpful answers imply that this is just a processing delay, and that is a comfort to those of us who are by temperament cautious and sceptical about all major transactions involving Club property.

Just now, javeajag said:

This is something you do all the time it’s like posting ….

‘ this is to be cautiously welcomed provided :

a. Gerry Briton didn’t get a bonus as a result

b. The stadium isn’t going to be painted blue 

c. Cats are not going to be allowed in the stadium as a result ‘

No it’s completely different. Those are things legally, financially and practically unrelated to a transfer of land.

Just now, javeajag said:

and it your world all your are doing is apparently saying it’s good news provided things that didn’t happen well didn’t happen !

Yes, that’s all I was saying. But we only knew for sure that they “didn’t happen” subsequently, and because I asked the questions, transparently and directly, of those who could answer them.

Some might even say this is a culture of due diligence. Making sure that things are as they seem so that there are no nasty surprises later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Because they are pertinent questions to any transfer of land, Three Black Cats had previously reneged on a promise to transfer the land “within 7 days” and the Club had not received (as might have been expected) a distribution from PropCo for its share of the proceeds of the November 2019 sale.

It was important, therefore, to clarify what, exactly, had been announced. The Land Register would have helped to answer those questions but we have an unexplained delay. Gerry’s helpful answers imply that this is just a processing delay, and that is a comfort to those of us who are by temperament cautious and sceptical about all major transactions involving Club property.

No it’s completely different. Those are things legally, financially and practically unrelated to a transfer of land.

Yes, that’s all I was saying. But we only knew for sure that they “didn’t happen” subsequently, and because I asked the questions, transparently and directly, of those who could answer them.

Some might even say this is a culture of due diligence. Making sure that things are as they seem so that there are no nasty surprises later on.

And some might say …..stop flying kites grasshopper 

Edited by javeajag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, javeajag said:

c. Cats are not going to be allowed in the stadium as a result ‘


 

That's it for me. Low Out! Britton Out! McCall Out! 50/50 sellers, one in particular Out! Retired Programme Editors Out!

On a serious note, are these kind of exchanges at all helpful or useful? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tom Hosie said:

That's it for me. Low Out! Britton Out! McCall Out! 50/50 sellers, one in particular Out! Retired Programme Editors Out!

On a serious note, are these kind of exchanges at all helpful or useful? 

My cat agrees…..

maybe your right but there is too much speculation around with little foundation in fact as in this case 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tom Hosie said:

On a serious note, are these kind of exchanges at all helpful or useful? 

No. They aren’t! It’s always unhelpful to accuse people of speculating when it isn’t what they’re doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we move this to a Zoom room or possibly a pub?  I generally enjoy reading posts from javeajag and WJ, but we need to get you two to hug this out over a couple pints.

(And that’s me proposing solutions with no ability to follow through - precisely why I did not run for TJF this time around!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChiThistle said:

Can we move this to a Zoom room or possibly a pub?  I generally enjoy reading posts from javeajag and WJ, but we need to get you two to hug this out over a couple pints.

(And that’s me proposing solutions with no ability to follow through - precisely why I did not run for TJF this time around!)

Actually if you go this option, I can PayPal somebody for the cost of the pints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ChiThistle said:

Can we move this to a Zoom room or possibly a pub?  I generally enjoy reading posts from javeajag and WJ, but we need to get you two to hug this out over a couple pints.

(And that’s me proposing solutions with no ability to follow through - precisely why I did not run for TJF this time around!)

Not a bad idea ….but as I’m currently in Sydney and not in Glasgow much till November it’s unlikely …..but virtual beers to all 

ps craft beer scene in Sydney is amazing 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sydney is tops on my list of places to visit.  The craft beer info only sweetens the deal…

Maybe a Jags fan virtual happy hour would be a good idea.  I think with the time zones, I’d get more opportunities to day-drink!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Not a bad idea ….but as I’m currently in Sydney and not in Glasgow much till November it’s unlikely …..but virtual beers to all 

ps craft beer scene in Sydney is amazing 

Nobody, just nobody, should fall into marketing traps. There's no such thing as "craft" beer. 

Sorry. Carry on, everyone!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Nobody, just nobody, should fall into marketing traps. There's no such thing as "craft" beer. 

Sorry. Carry on, everyone!

Sorry ! The small batch brewery scene in Sydney is booming ! You gotta love Watermelon Lager !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This made me chuckle given the due diligence saga ….. $44bn and no DD……

The doubt introduced by Musk’s tweet is the latest example of the whirlwind manner in which the transaction came together, which even led to Musk waiving his right to carry out due diligence while negotiating terms.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, javeajag said:

This made me chuckle given the due diligence saga ….. $44bn and no DD……

The doubt introduced by Musk’s tweet is the latest example of the whirlwind manner in which the transaction came together, which even led to Musk waiving his right to carry out due diligence while negotiating terms.

 

One can only imagine the carnage on the ‘Big Announcement’ thread on the twitter forum.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×