Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
javeajag

Big Announcement

Recommended Posts

3 hours 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.

I think that this example neatly makes our point for us!

Share this post


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

I think that this example neatly makes our point for us!

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

Share this post


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

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

Except that deal isn’t done is it ? 

Regarding point 3 - you are right, it doesn’t need to be called due diligence, but that is what it is. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

Share this post


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

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

That was then , this is now …..I suspect going heavy on formal due diligence will be counter productive 

maybe send Gerry a few more emails the last one worked 

Share this post


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

That was then , this is now …..I suspect going heavy on formal due diligence will be counter productive 

maybe send Gerry a few more emails the last one worked 

It worked in as much as it elicited a response. We've still to see if that response is accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, scotty said:

It worked in as much as it elicited a response. We've still to see if that response is accurate.

FWIW I trust that the response is accurate (the 2023 typo aside!)

Share this post


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

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

And just to reiterate I indicated that I didn't know where the 'blockage' in terms of knowledge sharing was. 

To the best of my knowledge there was no issue in terms of Gavin playing a full Directors role with access to all relevant information. 

Yet that information didn't filter down to TJF Board. 

The knowledge sharing approach didn't work. Is that an argument for a more formal Due Diligence approach or an arguement that greater effort should have been made to make it work? 

Thankfully that debate no longer needs to occupy my thinking, and I have a more chilled time of things as a result. Good luck to those that will be tasked with trying to inch us closer to a fan owned Club. I don't envy you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great News!

The Registers of Scotland website finally discloses today that there is a pending application being processed in respect of a Disposition transferring title to the whole of Title Number GLA205256 (Firhill Main Stand & Bing etc) for "certain good and onerous causes" by Three Black Cats Limited in favour of The Partick Thistle Football Club Ltd.

The application was only submitted on 18th May 2022, so no question of a delay by the Registers as some have suggested. What the Disposition has been doing for the past few weeks since the Club announcement I do not know, but that does not matter now.

Accordingly the whole of Firhill does indeed belong to the Club and it is official.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Great News!

The Registers of Scotland website finally discloses today that there is a pending application being processed in respect of a Disposition transferring title to the whole of Title Number GLA205256 (Firhill Main Stand & Bing etc) for "certain good and onerous causes" by Three Black Cats Limited in favour of The Partick Thistle Football Club Ltd.

The application was only submitted on 18th May 2022, so no question of a delay by the Registers as some have suggested. What the Disposition has been doing for the past few weeks since the Club announcement I do not know, but that does not matter now.

Accordingly the whole of Firhill does indeed belong to the Club and it is official.

So when I asked Gerry on 11 May:

“Could you please confirm for me whether the title has been registered by PTFC Ltd (and if so, on what date this happened)?”

And he answered on 12 May:

“Yes, 29 April 2023”

It had not in fact, at that point, been registered?

Edited by Woodstock Jag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about information sharing protocols falling short of due diligence is that you are taking on trust that the information you will be provided with is accurate.

Share this post


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

The thing about information sharing protocols falling short of due diligence is that you are taking on trust that the information you will be provided with is accurate.

Which as it happens it is 

Share this post


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

Which as it happens it is 

No it isn’t!

I asked Gerry on 11 May whether the title had been registered by PTFC and if so on what date.

He replied on 12 May “Yes” (that it had been registered) and “29 April”.

We now know that the documents were only furnished to the Registers of Scotland on 18 May.

Therefore the correct answer on 12 May should have been “No not yet.”

Share this post


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

So when I asked Gerry on 11 May:

“Could you please confirm for me whether the title has been registered by PTFC Ltd (and if so, on what date this happened)?”

And he answered on 12 May:

“Yes, 29 April 2023”

It had not in fact, at that point, been registered?

I do not want to become "a football of contending factions", an expression with which you as a constitutional lawyer will be well familiar! However I would just confirm that the date of the application for registration was 18th May 2022.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2022 at 12:04 PM, javeajag said:

Jesus……reading this I’m convinced it’s bad news 

But in fact it was news of a transaction that actually hadn’t been completed. Good to see it is on its way through the process now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sandy said:

But in fact it was news of a transaction that actually hadn’t been completed. Good to see it is on its way through the process now. 

Yep exactly this Sandy. When this statement was made by the Club it was not true.

23E84D15-DC89-4441-8FEE-7937611932B4.thumb.jpeg.b0f3c95f486eed5339cb1b588fde0fa9.jpeg

I am pleased that, if they were to make it today, it would now be true.

I am at a loss to understand why they said this when it wasn’t true, when they could have just waited 3 weeks.

The statement went out of its way to say that the land had been “formally transferred”. It didn’t have to say that.

I’m glad this has now been dealt with, but I’m concerned that fans are so routinely being given a picture that isn’t accurate about easily checkable things about the company that runs our football club. It is not conducive to an environment of mutual trust.

Share this post


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

No it isn’t!

I asked Gerry on 11 May whether the title had been registered by PTFC and if so on what date.

He replied on 12 May “Yes” (that it had been registered) and “29 April”.

We now know that the documents were only furnished to the Registers of Scotland on 18 May.

Therefore the correct answer on 12 May should have been “No not yet.”

I get that your detail focused, dot the it’s and cross the t’s focus is ideal for your job but it’s not a strength in every occasion …..details don’t always matter and can stop you seeing the bigger picture …..who cares if the transfer is dated the 29 April, 12 May or next June …..it’s done without any of your doom and gloom….so be happy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, sandy said:

But in fact it was news of a transaction that actually hadn’t been completed. Good to see it is on its way through the process now. 

Yes it’s very good news

Share this post


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

I get that your detail focused, dot the it’s and cross the t’s focus is ideal for your job but it’s not a strength in every occasion …..details don’t always matter and can stop you seeing the bigger picture …..who cares if the transfer is dated the 29 April, 12 May or next June …..it’s done without any of your doom and gloom….so be happy 

I don’t care about whether it’s done on 29 April or 12 May.

I care that the Club is honest with the fans and the press about the fundamentals of its business.

For two reasons:

(a) fostering mutual trust

(b) basic professional competence

Without both of these any route either to:

(a) fan ownership

or

(b) a successful alternative ownership model

Is going to face a lot of obstacles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I don’t care about whether it’s done on 29 April or 12 May.

I care that the Club is honest with the fans and the press about the fundamentals of its business.

For two reasons:

(a) fostering mutual trust

(b) basic professional competence

Without both of these any route either to:

(a) fan ownership

or

(b) a successful alternative ownership model

Is going to face a lot of obstacles.

There is no evidence of anything problematic here, there could have been lots of boring reasons why the date was now rather than a few weeks earlier. 

Share this post


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

There is no evidence of anything problematic here, there could have been lots of boring reasons why the date was now rather than a few weeks earlier. 

Which is exactly what makes it so concerning that inaccurate information was announced on the Club website and disclosed in email communications with fans.

If there are "lots of boring reasons why" then:

(a) you delay the announcement

(b) you phrase the announcement differently

(c) you don't say demonstrably untrue things to people

If this happens with things for which there are "boring" explanations, what does it say about our ability to trust the Club and its custodians when the explanations aren't "boring"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really lighten up …. Your flogging a dead course ….. leave the trees and see the Forrest ….

it was announced the two sides would be returned to the club , they have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, javeajag said:

There is no evidence of anything problematic here, there could have been lots of boring reasons why the date was now rather than a few weeks earlier. 

There IS something problematic however about the OTHER aspect pending, ie the supporters being given the shares to make them majority-owners of PTFC in line with Colin Weir’s OTHER wishes.  Certainly, based on JL, 3BCs, PTFC board’s current stance. Thus, I feel it is not unjustified for Thistle supporters to wonder WHY the misleading response given to ‘Woodstock Jag’ (WJ) by the PTFC Chief Executive (CE) was given. After all, WJ made it clear (in comments on this site) when he got in touch with the CE, he was doing so to CLARIFY four key things. In those circumstances the onus was on the person (CE) being asked the questions to be as clear as possible. Surely, the CE must have known that. All he had to say was, “It’s going to happen, but, officially, it’s not been completed yet. It will be shortly.” When asked, whether it had been completed,  the CE answered, “Yes.”That’s as unequivocal an answer to any question, that you can get. (Hence, politicians rarely give it!) It’s fair to ask, Why did the CE answer in that way? And, particularly in light of the statements made to the PTFC supporters about the shares, on 09/04/22, which were vague, leaving many questions unanswered.
 

There’s been lack of transparency, lack of clarity, lack of accuracy, surrounding BOTH of these issues, and  right now EVERYTHING the club puts out for supporters’ consumption needs to be clear and accurate. For, it is reasonable to wonder what HAS been going on, and what IS going on surrounding these aforementioned matters. The longer the silence continues from the club over the question of shares going to the supporters,  the longer the speculation will go on with increasing worries about IF it will happen, WHEN it will happen and TO WHOM those shares (that Colin Weir wanted given to the supporters ) will  be given (in the supporters’ name).
 

The ball really is in the court of Jacqui Low, 3BCs, the PTFC board and we’re ALL awaiting THEIR next move. 

Edited by denismcquadeno.eleven

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.

×