Dodged a bullet ….

[Jordanhill Jag]

1 minute ago, scotty said:

Legally binding is far removed from never an option. All the discussion at the time was around fan ownership.

 

1 minute ago, scotty said:

Legally binding is far removed from never an option. All the discussion at the time was around fan ownership.

And when it came to it we were told that only two people knew Colin Weirs wishes - and they were not going to reveal what they were ?
 

And that TJF were not a suitable organisation to receive shares ? 
 

So beyond press reports -we have No way of knowing what the plans for the Club were ref Fan Ownership 

 

My View is that is was PR to get the Fans behind a 3BC takeover - I emphasise this is my view- as we have nothing to tell us what Colin Weirs actual plans were as they are shrouded in mystery 

Im aware that the previous shareholders believed it was going to be Fan Ownership but again it was never legally binding 

[Woodstock Jag]

What I think Jim is saying here is that there was no legal mechanism by which 3BC were compelled to transfer the shares to any fan owned group.

On that front, transparently, he is absolutely correct. Whilst it is understood that Colin Weir’s wishes for the shares were set out in a side letter to his will (which unlike the will itself is not in the public domain) the sale of shares from Beattie, Allan et al was not done with any legal guarantees of the shares going anywhere beyond 3BC.

What there was, however, was a clear promise, presentationally, at least, that a suitable vehicle would be developed to do that. That vehicle grew out of Thistle For Ever, first as the Working Group and then as TJF.

Thistle For Ever did of course start up as an attempt to fly the fan ownership flag (but, bluntly, it didn’t have several million pounds to buy the shares, let alone PropCo’s assets). So it quickly found itself having to find someone who was prepared to pony up and give, at least, warm homilies towards the fan ownership direction.

[Jordanhill Jag]

6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

What I think Jim is saying here is that there was no legal mechanism by which 3BC were compelled to transfer the shares to any fan owned group.

On that front, transparently, he is absolutely correct. Whilst it is understood that Colin Weir’s wishes for the shares were set out in a side letter to his will (which unlike the will itself is not in the public domain) the sale of shares from Beattie, Allan et al was not done with any legal guarantees of the shares going anywhere beyond 3BC.

What there was, however, was a clear promise, presentationally, at least, that a suitable vehicle would be developed to do that. That vehicle grew out of Thistle For Ever, first as the Working Group and then as TJF.

Thistle For Ever did of course start up as an attempt to fly the fan ownership flag (but, bluntly, it didn’t have several million pounds to buy the shares, let alone PropCo’s assets). So it quickly found itself having to find someone who was prepared to pony up and give, at least, warm homilies towards the fan ownership direction.

As always WJ  turns my rambling into English 😭

[Tom Hosie]

29 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

There was never an option for fan ownership - this is an urban myth 

 

 

 

It would only be an urban myth if anyone other than yourself was claiming that it was an option. 

The reported Conway/Lee takeover was catalyst for a chain reaction of events that ultimately took the Club down that route. A route with a fair few wrong turns and dead ends. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

Just now, Tom Hosie said:

It would only be an urban myth if anyone other than yourself was claiming that it was an option. 

The reported Conway/Lee takeover was catalyst for a chain reaction of events that ultimately took the Club down that route. A route with a fair few wrong turns and dead ends. 

It was an Urban Myth because beyond Press Statements- Fan Ownership did not form part of the 3BC takeover- and it was not on the table by any other means 

The Status Quo Option- which was 3BC -led to Fan Ownership - as it meant the finances drove the changes 

if it hadn’t been for the finances -the previous Board would still be there- and the Thistle Trust would own the shares 

[javeajag]

There is nothing in the behaviour of Conway and Lee at Barnsley to be recommended despite some people’s best efforts to do so at the time .So much so that they removed from the Barnsley board last year.

[sandy]

All this is past history & conjecture.

We are where we are and TJF has been instrumental in pushing for that change. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

53 minutes ago, javeajag said:

There is nothing in the behaviour of Conway and Lee at Barnsley to be recommended despite some people’s best efforts to do so at the time .So much so that they removed from the Barnsley board last year.

The Choice was them or a Jlo Board it was as simple as that - Fan Ownership was not an Option on the table

The Club was sold to 3BC and we are now where we are 

at the time No one had a Chrystal Ball and neither option looked like a Good one Conway etc had a plan and the cash which is why I backed it 

beyond press reports there was no actual legal link from the 3BC takeover with Fan Ownership ( I accept most people believed there was ) 

[javeajag]

47 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Choice was them or a Jlo Board it was as simple as that - Fan Ownership was not an Option on the table

The Club was sold to 3BC and we are now where we are 

at the time No one had a Chrystal Ball and neither option looked like a Good one Conway etc had a plan and the cash which is why I backed it 

beyond press reports there was no actual legal link from the 3BC takeover with Fan Ownership ( I accept most people believed there was ) 

Conway and Co as was said at the time had no plan, no cash and a poor track record at Barnsley. And so it has been proved.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23653854.barnsley-woes-show-partick-thistle-dodged-bullet/

[scotty]

19 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23653854.barnsley-woes-show-partick-thistle-dodged-bullet/

Does Mr Cairney read this forum?

I'm not going to subscribe to see if he's written his article after being on here.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

14 minutes ago, scotty said:

Does Mr Cairney read this forum?

I'm not going to subscribe to see if he's written his article after being on here.

Sorry. Didn't realise you have to subscribe. I don't myself, so perhaps you get so many free goes? Too long an article to copy & paste. Here's the final para 

Quote

Barnsley aren’t the first club to fall foul of laissez-faire capitalists and they won’t be the last, either. Their plight should serve as a warning to other clubs who find themselves approached by prospective owners promising them the moon. Those who regard football clubs as playthings will not stride the corridors of power at Firhill ever again, and the unfortunate developments at Barnsley have shown precisely why they shouldn’t.

 

[stolenscone]

It might be a controversial opinion, but my own view is that the 2nd JLow incarnation wasn't a complete disaster.  Was it during this period that the ground ownership was unpicked and returned to the Club?  That alone was a very generous act by the Weirs.

But of course, I'm not suggesting that the financial performance of the previous Club board (absent a lottery winner to prop them up) was anything other than problematic.

Anyway, despite the financial pressures we are under now, I'm glad we are where we are - in other words, that the Barnsley thing didn't happen AND that Ms Low is no longer running the Club Board.

[Garscube Road End 2]

39 minutes ago, stolenscone said:

It might be a controversial opinion, but my own view is that the 2nd JLow incarnation wasn't a complete disaster.  Was it during this period that the ground ownership was unpicked and returned to the Club?  That alone was a very generous act by the Weirs.

But of course, I'm not suggesting that the financial performance of the previous Club board (absent a lottery winner to prop them up) was anything other than problematic.

Anyway, despite the financial pressures we are under now, I'm glad we are where we are - in other words, that the Barnsley thing didn't happen AND that Ms Low is no longer running the Club Board.

That 2nd spell left the club in a very precarious financial position!!

[stolenscone]

It did indeed.  (I did say that it was a controversial view!!)

[sandy]

Apart from other things, JLow failed to communicate with the fans, failed to come clean about the finances and failed to engage with TJF. 

She was a stunning success….not.

[allyo]

Lots of complicated arguments but for me it was always quite simple. For me, what Partick Thistle is, will always be more important than league position. 

I'd have no interest in supporting a club that is part of a group where it lies down the hierarchy and feeds others. In fact I'd argue that at that stage it ceases to be a "club".

I'd struggle to support a club with dodgy ownership.

I get frustrated by one where the owners are just a bit useless. But we've been there and it's never really put me off.

I'm delighted to support a fan owned club. For me that's the ideal. I just really hope we can make it work. I dont expect it to be plain sailing, bit I'm feeling positive.

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

On 7/17/2023 at 11:27 AM, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Sorry. Didn't realise you have to subscribe. I don't myself, so perhaps you get so many free goes? Too long an article to copy & paste. Here's the final para 

 

I think the article is a bit disingenous - for a start the simple fact was that when the offer was made to buy the Shares from the Barnsley Owners - that was the only offer on the table - the option for the Shareholders was continue with the existing Board of JLo etc - or go down a different route 

The removal of the Board by David Beattie etc was to allow proper discussions with potential New Owners in line with the Shareholders wishes - No deal had been done at that point 

Fan Owenership was muted by a Group of Fans - but they had No Cash to buy out the Shareholders - if I understand correctly - approaches were made to Colin Weir - in turn 3BC Bought the Club and reinstated the previous Board that had been removed by David Beattie 

Fan Ownership was not part of the 3BC Purchase - it was stated as an intent ( however so was the Training Ground) but there was nothing legally binding 

Now the Journalist has argued that by not taking the Barnsley Owners Cash we dodged a Bullet and that we have Fan Ownership withing our grasp 

That only happened for Two reasons 

1. We got the Rangers Money and Financial Support from our current Chairman - otherwise we had a £600K Black Hole 

2.And this is key - TJF never blinked nor wavered - they pointed out the Financial Black Hole at the AGM - when the Thistle Trust took over - they agreed with TJF Numbers - then we started serious change towards Fan Ownership 

Whilst the Barnsley Takeover was a Catalyst for Change - we were going No Where Fast as a Club and on the surface it had to be considered as an option - however to talk about the risks and not to give equal discussion on the actual financial risk of a £600K Black Hole is not in my opinion good Journalism ( and I do like the Journalist ) but he writes like a Fan - he has to actulally ask 

What was the greatest risk to PTFC - being run by the Barnsley Owners or a £600K Financial Black Hole 

As far as Im concerned its a case of "there but the grace of The Jags Foundation go us " 

Without them and the Rangers Cup Draw we were in serious bother   

     

  

[Lenziejag]

1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

I think the article is a bit disingenous - for a start the simple fact was that when the offer was made to buy the Shares from the Barnsley Owners - that was the only offer on the table - the option for the Shareholders was continue with the existing Board of JLo etc - or go down a different route 

The removal of the Board by David Beattie etc was to allow proper discussions with potential New Owners in line with the Shareholders wishes - No deal had been done at that point 

Fan Owenership was muted by a Group of Fans - but they had No Cash to buy out the Shareholders - if I understand correctly - approaches were made to Colin Weir - in turn 3BC Bought the Club and reinstated the previous Board that had been removed by David Beattie 

Fan Ownership was not part of the 3BC Purchase - it was stated as an intent ( however so was the Training Ground) but there was nothing legally binding 

Now the Journalist has argued that by not taking the Barnsley Owners Cash we dodged a Bullet and that we have Fan Ownership withing our grasp 

That only happened for Two reasons 

1. We got the Rangers Money and Financial Support from our current Chairman - otherwise we had a £600K Black Hole 

2.And this is key - TJF never blinked nor wavered - they pointed out the Financial Black Hole at the AGM - when the Thistle Trust took over - they agreed with TJF Numbers - then we started serious change towards Fan Ownership 

Whilst the Barnsley Takeover was a Catalyst for Change - we were going No Where Fast as a Club and on the surface it had to be considered as an option - however to talk about the risks and not to give equal discussion on the actual financial risk of a £600K Black Hole is not in my opinion good Journalism ( and I do like the Journalist ) but he writes like a Fan - he has to actulally ask 

What was the greatest risk to PTFC - being run by the Barnsley Owners or a £600K Financial Black Hole 

As far as Im concerned its a case of "there but the grace of The Jags Foundation go us " 

Without them and the Rangers Cup Draw we were in serious bother   

     

  

Unless I have misunderstood something, the £600K black hole this season came about as a result of a budgeting error. In any case, I think you answered your own question, as Thistle fans have plugged the hole, and have done so before, the bigger risk was the Barnsley owners.

[Woodstock Jag]

20 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

Unless I have misunderstood something, the £600K black hole this season came about as a result of a budgeting error. In any case, I think you answered your own question, as Thistle fans have plugged the hole, and have done so before, the bigger risk was the Barnsley owners.

I think the £600k Jim is talking about is the shortfall in the Club's finances in the 2018-19 season, and a budget set in early summer 2019 for the 2019-20 season. Not the shortfall experienced in the 2022-23 season.

Edited July 19, 2023 by Woodstock Jag

[Jordanhill Jag]

14 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I think the £600k Jim is talking about is the shortfall in the Club's finances in the 2018-19 season, and a budget set in early summer 2019 for the 2019-20 season. Not the shortfall experienced in the 2022-23 season.

Correct 

However if you have a shortfall one Season what heppens is that it rolls into the next Season as the Season Ticket Money gets used to pay the previous Seasons Debts - if you dont make drastic budget cuts in the New Season the previous Seasons Debts give you a Cashflow problem normally around the Halfway point of the New Season and you struggle to pay Wages & Suppliers 

Budgets shortfalls eventually means Cashflow - Cashflow Kills Companies - so the Greatest Risk is always Cashflow        

[Lenziejag]

22 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I think the £600k Jim is talking about is the shortfall in the Club's finances in the 2018-19 season, and a budget set in early summer 2019 for the 2019-20 season. Not the shortfall experienced in the 2022-23 season.

That wasn’t clear as he lumped that in with the Rangers game and support from the current chairman.

[Lenziejag]

6 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Correct 

However if you have a shortfall one Season what heppens is that it rolls into the next Season as the Season Ticket Money gets used to pay the previous Seasons Debts - if you dont make drastic budget cuts in the New Season the previous Seasons Debts give you a Cashflow problem normally around the Halfway point of the New Season and you struggle to pay Wages & Suppliers 

Budgets shortfalls eventually means Cashflow - Cashflow Kills Companies - so the Greatest Risk is always Cashflow        

Or you get extra income from somewhere. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

4 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

Or you get extra income from somewhere. 

Like a Cup draw or a Fan Bailing you out at the last minute 

Thats called luck - not a Plan and if neither of them happen you go bust 

Hence why a £600K Black Hole is the single largest risk to a Club the size of PTFC 

You run the Club on Breakeven - you have prudent and sensible budgets - you minimise Non Football overhead - you build in a buffer in case your Budgets dont match your expectations 

Exact same as any other Business 

You dont "Hope" for a Old Firm Cup Draw or a Wealthy Fan last minute bail out 

Anyone at the Club who works on the "Hope" strategy should be no where near decision making 

There is no such thing as a Budget "error" there is poor budgeting & bad management - the Budget didnt trip and fall over - it wasnt a "mistake" it was poor budgeting  

[Third Lanark]

On 7/18/2023 at 5:19 PM, Jordanhill Jag said:

I think the article is a bit disingenous - for a start the simple fact was that when the offer was made to buy the Shares from the Barnsley Owners - that was the only offer on the table - the option for the Shareholders was continue with the existing Board of JLo etc - or go down a different route 

The removal of the Board by David Beattie etc was to allow proper discussions with potential New Owners in line with the Shareholders wishes - No deal had been done at that point 

Fan Owenership was muted by a Group of Fans - but they had No Cash to buy out the Shareholders - if I understand correctly - approaches were made to Colin Weir - in turn 3BC Bought the Club and reinstated the previous Board that had been removed by David Beattie 

Fan Ownership was not part of the 3BC Purchase - it was stated as an intent ( however so was the Training Ground) but there was nothing legally binding 

Now the Journalist has argued that by not taking the Barnsley Owners Cash we dodged a Bullet and that we have Fan Ownership withing our grasp 

That only happened for Two reasons 

1. We got the Rangers Money and Financial Support from our current Chairman - otherwise we had a £600K Black Hole 

2.And this is key - TJF never blinked nor wavered - they pointed out the Financial Black Hole at the AGM - when the Thistle Trust took over - they agreed with TJF Numbers - then we started serious change towards Fan Ownership 

Whilst the Barnsley Takeover was a Catalyst for Change - we were going No Where Fast as a Club and on the surface it had to be considered as an option - however to talk about the risks and not to give equal discussion on the actual financial risk of a £600K Black Hole is not in my opinion good Journalism ( and I do like the Journalist ) but he writes like a Fan - he has to actulally ask 

What was the greatest risk to PTFC - being run by the Barnsley Owners or a £600K Financial Black Hole 

As far as Im concerned its a case of "there but the grace of The Jags Foundation go us " 

Without them and the Rangers Cup Draw we were in serious bother   

     

  

What was the support from the current chairman?  I’m not in the know Jim so was just wondering what was meant