Jump to content

Tranche 2 & the Preservation of Power


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lenziejag said:

I said it would be close to break even. 

So here is an issue ref the lack of clear lines between the Board & TJF 

The Board with the exception of Donald Mclymont & Elliot Gilmour are all in some shape or form linked to the Trusts - either originally nominated or elected 

Now taking out those elected 

That leaves us with Three Directors who were nominated by the various Trusts - then in effect renominated by TJF 

So the question is ref spending - is the Board going to go against what they view as the priorities of the Trusts when allocating the scarce cash resource we have available ?

Even if TJF do not directly allocate the cash - three Directors are there due to there links to the Trusts - that means if they want to stay - they are not going to go against the wishes of TJF - when it comes to where we spend Money 

The fact that a Budget was agreed with a Forecast £280K Loss - would indicate neither the Board - nor TJF were willing to reduce Non Squad Costs-  to slow down the Cash Burn 

So the Board are going to have great difficulty in balancing the Budgets & maintaining Cash Reserves going forwards - too many people with there own views as to where we spend money 

You cannot run a Business by Committee 

At the last Count we had 

The Board 

TJF Board 

The Jags Trust Board 

The Football Committee ( No idea why that's even there - but its members are a closely guarded secret - wonder why ) 

All with there views priorities ,agendas ,politics 

+ to be added 

The Community Working Group 

 The Finance Advisory Group 

The Commercial Group 

Outside the Club we have 

Thistle Community Trust 

The Academy Board 

We keep getting told the Board run the Club - they may in name - but they are not going to go against the handful of people who decide if the get to remain on the Board + Keep all the Committees Happy 

And we wonder why we are in a Mess ? 

We will need to build a New Stand on the Bing- rather than a GP Practice - simply for all the Committee Members

(Im assuming the Board must have missed the Big New State of the Art Health Centre at the bottom of Firhill Road - where one of the GP Groups is actually called "The Firhill Practice" 😀

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

That leaves us with Three Directors who were nominated by the various Trusts - then in effect renominated by TJF 

So the question is ref spending - is the Board going to go against what they view as the priorities of the Trusts when allocating the scarce cash resource we have available ?

Even if TJF do not directly allocate the cash - three Directors are there due to there links to the Trusts - that means if they want to stay - they are not going to go against the wishes of TJF - when it comes to where we spend Money 

I think you’ve missed the democratic election of the 2 trustee board reps and who voted for them, and ultimately selected them, that being the beneficiaries of PTFC Trust.

Just to remind you a beneficiary is

- Someone who has a season ticket and above 18 year old

or

- A member of the 71 club

or

- A member of the Jags Trust

or 

- A member of The Jags Foundation 

 

Some beneficiaries are in 1 of the groups, some in 2 and even some in 3. They get 1 vote each regardless of whether they are in 1 group or 3. 
 

TJF never appointed them, campaigned for or against them or had any influence in it, the beneficiaries and only the beneficiaries chose then, effectively 2500 of our fan base had their say via their individual single votes. 
 

Edited by Norgethistle
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

I think you’ve missed the democratic election of the 2 trustee board reps and who voted for them, and ultimately selected them, that being the beneficiaries of PTFC Trust.

Just to remind you a beneficiary is

- Someone who has a season ticket and above 18 year old

or

- A member of the 71 club

or

- A member of the Jags Trust

or 

- A member of The Jags Foundation 

 

Some beneficiaries are in 1 of the groups, some in 2 and even some in 3. They get 1 vote each regardless of whether they are in 1 group or 3. 
 

TJF never appointed them, campaigned for or against them or had any influence in it, the beneficiaries and only the beneficiaries chose then, effectively 2500 of our fan base had their say via their individual single votes. 
 

If you read my post I said 

“taking out those elected” 

I excluded them from discussions on being influenced by TJF -as they don't require TJF to keep them on the Board - neither does Donald Mclymont

However the rest of my comments stand - clearly there would not be cuts that might displease the various areas of influence 

Which I think is at the Core of our problem - no one wants to make unpopular decisions 

hence we try and keep all the factions happy and sign off budgets with £280K of losses ( and kept spending money we did not have ) 

 

Edited by Jordanhill Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the Club has clarified elsewhere, Donald’s wife is unwell, which is why he will be joining remotely instead of flying across from California.

I’m sure almost all folk will understand, are grateful that Donald will still be able to participate, wish his wife well, and accept this wasn’t something either the Club or he would particularly have wanted to discuss or state publicly (it’s none of our business).

Alas last night the Club felt they had little choice after certain bad faith actors (not anyone who has posted about it on here, I hasten to add) decided to go in two-footed on social media, insinuating impropriety with zero evidence whatsoever.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, fenski said:

What a cess pit social media has become.

Social media can be a good way for people to keep in touch who otherwise might not be able to do so. Unfortunately it can also be a very intimidating place, with bullying and lies being the order of the day with a lot of its users. For my own part my only online presence is on this forum. I read p & b but have never opened an account to post on it and have no intention to. I don't go on facebook,twitter etc. I also don't understand those that can't live without their smartphone. I do understand that i am very much in the minority but each to their own.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

Social media can be a good way for people to keep in touch who otherwise might not be able to do so. Unfortunately it can also be a very intimidating place, with bullying and lies being the order of the day with a lot of its users. For my own part my only online presence is on this forum. I read p & b but have never opened an account to post on it and have no intention to. I don't go on facebook,twitter etc. I also don't understand those that can't live without their smartphone. I do understand that i am very much in the minority but each to their own.

I am the same, post on here (unfortunately for everyone else) but no Twitter (or X), Facebook, etc accounts. A 20 year old mobile phone that justs phones or texts and I some how manage to survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fawlty Towers said:

I am the same, post on here (unfortunately for everyone else) but no Twitter (or X), Facebook, etc accounts. A 20 year old mobile phone that justs phones or texts and I some how manage to survive.

You are reversing the narrative. Usually we have a thread about something else, and people talk about tranches. Now we have a thread about tranches, and you are taking about something else!

Quite enjoying it actually.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, partickthedog said:

You are reversing the narrative. Usually we have a thread about something else, and people talk about tranches. Now we have a thread about tranches, and you are taking about something else!

Quite enjoying it actually.

No doubt, for better or worse it will be back on topic soon. :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just in from the meeting. 

Not going to give a blow by blow account, just an overview of the vibe I came away with. 

There was a presentation to start proceedings which I found useful and informarive. 

The questions received in advance and asked from the floor were largely excellent covering a wide range of subjects. The Board got no easy ride. 

Answers similarly were broadly good. I may not always hwvr agreed 100% with the substance of the answers but I didn't get any sense of a lack of transparency from the collective Board. 

I was most impressed though with Donald McClymont. Prior to tonight he was just a name and it was good to add some substance to that. He came across impressively IMO and more importantly, he was credible. 

I was inclined to vote Yes before tonight. There was nothing about tonight that would prompt me to change that. 

Btw the show was stolen by @Woodstock Jag's cat. Watch the video if only for that. 

 

Edited by Tom Hosie
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let us get all the wailing and gnashing of teeth out the way to coincide with a cup exit. Must say given for a week we had posts on a 15 minute basis I am a bit suprised that since we actually had the meeting and actual info everyone has gone quiet.

Apart from WJs cat am I to assume nothing happened and everything in the garden is rosy?

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...