e4b Posted September 29, 2010 Report Share Posted September 29, 2010 The Board has repeatedly given a clear commitment to Firhill, on the the long term at least, returning to normality as a four-sided stadium. They did so in writing,at the AGM at which I was present,and in one-to-one conversations.This most fundamental of issues raises a serious question about the good faith of the Board, and supporters' trust in them. Indeed I strongly suspect that the disgraceful "U-turn" on this matter in Mr.Cowan's flippant progamme notes of 11 September, proved to be calamitous for both the club and Mr.Cowan's standing. It was certainly the last straw for me. As a result there's now the perception that the club, at best, doesn't know what it's exact plans for our once great stadium are. We really must have clarity on the matter. No ambiguity. And some honesty - I don't like being lied to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Here's why I think it is too late and the new folk in charge wont change it... If planning permission isn't granted we as a Club will suffer because in addition to the debt owed to the bank we will now owe almost a million quid to the Propco investors. You realise that is a lie? They invested in a deal. If it doesn't work out, we owe them nothing. BUT... they own half our ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) You realise that is a lie? They invested in a deal. If it doesn't work out, we owe them nothing. BUT... they own half our ground. Sorry, not a lie just my wrong interpretation of things (its happening more and more these days ), but Allan Heron put me right earlier in the thread And they only own half of half our stadium. Edited September 30, 2010 by Steven H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Sorry, not a lie just my wrong interpretation of things (its happening more and more these days ), but Allan Heron put me right earlier in the thread And they only own half of half our stadium. yip, the same half the trust wrote an open letter to the council approving they tear it down! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 yip, the same half the trust wrote an open letter to the council approving they tear it down! Well that's up to others to explain, but they already have so no point picking that scab again. A line needs be drawn and a fresh start needs to be allowed, the recent boardroom changes and the upcoming open meeting will provide that opportunity, time to figure out the best way to grab it instead of moaning about how we got to this point in the first place. Ye cannae change wits done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Well that's up to others to explain, but they already have so no point picking that scab again. A line needs be drawn and a fresh start needs to be allowed, the recent boardroom changes and the upcoming open meeting will provide that opportunity, time to figure out the best way to grab it instead of moaning about how we got to this point in the first place. Ye cannae change wits done! sweep sweep, sweepity sweep sweep. Have you heard of the word "accountable"? Why not grow a pair? Demand answers? Or are you just happy to let the ball roll? You do know your trust has let you down? Deserted you? Jumped on the club band wagon?... And now that all seems shit!!! Read the trust boards posts 6 months ago... read them now. Why not ask them, why from telling it's members the only way forward was to trust the club board. We now have trust board members saying that was a crock of sht, and propco is the devils work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 sweep sweep, sweepity sweep sweep. Have you heard of the word "accountable"? Why not grow a pair? Demand answers? Or are you just happy to let the ball roll? You do know your trust has let you down? Deserted you? Jumped on the club band wagon?... And now that all seems shit!!! Read the trust boards posts 6 months ago... read them now. Why not ask them, why from telling it's members the only way forward was to trust the club board. We now have trust board members saying that was a crock of sht, and propco is the devils work! Patronising doesnt even come close to describing your attitude mate, I wont bite (much) will only say this...Are you trying to influence people on here? With your attitude? Seriously? NAw thought not, just talking sh!t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 C'mon ladies... deep breaths Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 C'mon ladies... deep breaths OK! What now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 What the Trust board said publicly in June 09. "The Trust Board therefore does not believe that the proposed property deal will, on its own, generate the kind of annual savings which are required in order to safeguard the Club’s future, in even the short to medium term. We do not like the deal that is on the table, but we have to be realistic and accept that without significant financial backing, the Trust cannot stop the deal from proceeding." Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Propco, but we are where we are and the bald facts of the matter are that with the horse bolted, the best outcome for the club is that money is made and more bank debt is paid off. Happy to post the whole two pages of that Trust statement if anyone is interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChewinGumMacaroonBaaaz Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Happy to post the whole two pages of that Trust statement if anyone is interested. Yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Yup. Several weeks have now passed since the shareholder meeting to discuss the Club’s proposed property deal. The Trust Board understands that the Club Board is committed to pressing on with a partial sale of the ground (being the Main Stand and South end), subject to final shareholder approval. We have not been provided with a date for this shareholder meeting, but expect that it will take place some time between now and the end of August, with the deal completing shortly after the meeting. Given the allocation of shareholdings at the Club, we fully expect that the decision to proceed with the partial sale to be ratified at the shareholder meeting, regardless of whether the Trust supports the proposal. We will shortly canvass our membership with a view to obtaining your mandate at the upcoming shareholder meeting. It is well known that the purpose of the property deal is to reduce the debt repayments which are due to the Bank, so as to assist the Club to trade at break even going forward. Based on the level of investment in the property deal disclosed by the Club Board at the June shareholder meeting, the Trust Board estimates that the reduction in payments due to the Bank (assuming no additional borrowing) will be in the region of £60,000 per annum. That clearly leaves a significant six figure funding gap when we look at the annual losses posted by the Club in recent years. The Trust Board therefore does not believe that the proposed property deal will, on its own, generate the kind of annual savings which are required in order to safeguard the Club’s future, in even the short to medium term. We do not like the deal that is on the table, but we have to be realistic and accept that without significant financial backing, the Trust cannot stop the deal from proceeding. Separately, the Trust Board understands that funds received from the sale of Gary Harkins and Mark Twaddle will be allocated towards last season's losses; The sale of these players will therefore have no impact on the position with the Bank. It is clear that in the current environment, the Club cannot continue to operate at a loss unless significant new investment is found – in short, the Bank is unlikely to continue to fund a loss making business. Since the Club Board has been unable to secure the level of investment which would see the Bank debt cleared, they believe that they have no option but to proceed with the proposed property deal while also looking at other ways of cutting costs and increasing revenue, all at a time when the wider economy is struggling under recession. We know that none of this makes pleasant reading, but every Thistle fan is united by a desire to ensure that the Club survives for generations to come. We all want better players, and clamour for them, but we have to be realistic in our expectations. The Club has been making unsustainable losses for years and we now have to pay the price for that. The Trust Board is committed to trying to help the Club Board to achieve the magic “break even point”, so that the long term security of Partick Thistle Football Club can be guaranteed. In reality, that is our only option. We hope that all supporters will join together in demonstrating to the Club Board that we accept as fans that we can sacrifice short term success for long term stability. We all have a part to play in helping the Club to achieve that stability. Regardless of our differences, we are all united by our love of the Club, and we believe that this is the only way forward to secure its long term future. After checking again, this was written on 20 July 2009. Happy to try to answer any queries about propco as well as I can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 After checking again, this was written on 20 July 2009. Happy to try to answer any queries about propco as well as I can. As you have held various discussions face to face, and by email and phone, with couple of those involved with Propco (which also is now even nearer to being the same lineup as our current Board of Directors), has any dialogue taken place with them as to whether if Propco planning application fails, what plans they may have thereafter, both for themselves, and the club? And, has any dialogue touched on the current planning application and it's ommission of club facilities, and also the last programme notes of a chairman whose name is now generally dirt amongst the majority of Thistle supporters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 As you have held various discussions face to face, and by email and phone, with couple of those involved with Propco (which also is now even nearer to being the same lineup as our current Board of Directors), has any dialogue taken place with them as to whether if Propco planning application fails, what plans they may have thereafter, both for themselves, and the club? And, has any dialogue touched on the current planning application and it's ommission of club facilities, and also the last programme notes of a chairman whose name is now generally dirt amongst the majority of Thistle supporters? No. Personally I think that the new system of pre consultation and pre determination discussion means that it would be unlikely for the application to be allowed to get to the stage of failing. The system should allow the applicant and the council to work through issues that arise during consultation. If there are insurmountable problems then the application can be withdrawn before it goes to a decision. No. I have my own views on the omission of club facilities, which I see as generally positive on balance, which is that there may be an intention to sell the development once planning is secured, which takes out risk and could generate an early return for the club (which goes to the bank to reduce debt). The fact that the club facilities are staying in the main stand suggests that there is no rush to develop this part of the stadium, which I think is a good thing from a fans perspective. This is the reverse of most people's concerns about propco, which is that it is an exercise in making a quick buck by knocking down the stadium and building stuff. I can't be certain however. As for the former chairman's programme notes and again it's a personal view, whilst it's understandable that folk get annoyed when they read things they don't agree with, we should all move on and consign that particular moment to history as being unimportant in the business of getting this club back on track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 As for the former chairman's programme notes and again it's a personal view, whilst it's understandable that folk get annoyed when they read things they don't agree with, we should all move on and consign that particular moment to history as being unimportant in the business of getting this club back on track. Absolutely, yesterday's man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 No. Personally I think that the new system of pre consultation and pre determination discussion means that it would be unlikely for the application to be allowed to get to the stage of failing. The system should allow the applicant and the council to work through issues that arise during consultation. If there are insurmountable problems then the application can be withdrawn before it goes to a decision. No. I have my own views on the omission of club facilities, which I see as generally positive on balance, which is that there may be an intention to sell the development once planning is secured, which takes out risk and could generate an early return for the club (which goes to the bank to reduce debt). The fact that the club facilities are staying in the main stand suggests that there is no rush to develop this part of the stadium, which I think is a good thing from a fans perspective. This is the reverse of most people's concerns about propco, which is that it is an exercise in making a quick buck by knocking down the stadium and building stuff. I can't be certain however. As for the former chairman's programme notes and again it's a personal view, whilst it's understandable that folk get annoyed when they read things they don't agree with, we should all move on and consign that particular moment to history as being unimportant in the business of getting this club back on track. Thanks for the reply and your opinions Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Update on the planning application. So far as I can see it's not on the agenda for the planning committee meeting next Tuesday. The next committee is at the end of November. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernsoul Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 Update on the planning application. So far as I can see it's not on the agenda for the planning committee meeting next Tuesday. The next committee is at the end of November. What is then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 What is then? Other planning applications? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagtastic Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 What is then? This lot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernsoul Posted October 29, 2010 Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 This lot Ah. I assumed there would have still been some Propco related stuff going on anyway. My mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.C.G. JAG Posted October 30, 2010 Report Share Posted October 30, 2010 GCC have wasted months of my time as well as that of some architects and structural engineers this year with their completely backwards planning department. All I wanted was to redesign our bathroom a little, nothing exactly radical! God knows how anything in this City actually gets built at all? I really have a bad feeling about this application... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.