javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 You want evidence that if the football Club does not survive, several individuals would stand to gain financially? The Property Company GUARANTEES a return on investment for all individual shareholders thereof (except the Club). If the Club goes into insolvency procedures, the other investors also legally have an option to buy the Club's share instead of it going straight onto the open market. David Beattie (director), Billy Allan (director) and Tom Hughes (ex-director and current Club Secretary and Accounts Boff) are 3 of aforementioned investors. Yes a return less than buying a 100k flat in Glashow and renting it for 600 a month ie a not very good return....I like others looked at propco but frankly it was a poor investment....oh yes if the club goes tits up I could have lots of shares worth hee haw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Who said that any director had MADE any personal gain? Your constant attempts at misdirection are getting a little tiresome. The agreement made between the football club and PropCo means that investors in PropCo can gain whether the club has a glorious future, or whether it fails. And when such investors are also on the board of the football club, how can we be certain that they are not looking to be the current generation's Bill Hiddleston. I'm sure Bill was considered to be Thirds-minded in the 1960's! Bland assurances that these people are Thistle minded never has been enough. It was perfectly possible for more robust and transparent protection for the football club to be incorporated into the arrangement between the club and PropCo. This did not happen. Which leaves the inevitable question - why not? Correct me if I'm wrong but you can predict the future ?! If they did this and that happened then this could happen it's all speculation and I wonder with what motive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 So why was the director who authorised an audit of the club's financial transactions over the tenure of Hughes /Cowan's time on the BoD thenremoved from the board at the first opportunity? What exactly are they trying to hide?? Putting aside any personal dislike you obviously have for Jim, that is the question that needs answering. I've never met Jim so I have no personal view on him as a person one way or another....this is all if buts and maybes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Yep. Makes you wonder why the likes of Tom Hughes has stuck around so long to take it doesn't it? Actually it was a condition of our loan from the bank that he stayed on the board poor ******* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Correct me if I'm wrong but you can predict the future ?! If they did this and that happened then this could happen it's all speculation and I wonder with what motive? You don't need to predict the future - you only need to see the potential conflict and take appropriate action to avoid any speculation (and that terms has multiple meanings in this context). You've acknowledged yourself that this could happen - that's precisely why action should have been taken to protect the interests of all the shareholders of PTFC in coming to the arrangement with PropCo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 yes we have financial problems big surprise who doesnt....director voted off board who cares? is that affecting the fianacial issue? Could do. Why was this director on the Board in the first place? We've been told that the way to go is to have board members with expertise in certain areas. As Jim Alexander was the first/only director appointed since this new direction was announced it would surely be reasonable to accept that JA was brought on board to implement his own sphere of expertise. If that sphere of expertise has anything in common with his previous remit (match day experience) then, given that the level of on going attendances is the single most important financial issue to our football club, there could easily be financial implications. You ask "who cares". I feel that when there's a possibility that Jim A's voting off the Board was done for primarily petty personal reasons above the financial well being of the Club then we should all care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) Actually it was a condition of our loan from the bank that he stayed on the board poor ******* It was confirmed by Tom Hughes himself at the AGM a couple of years ago that this was no longer the case. Edited February 10, 2011 by Allan Heron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 this is a very good example of what i mean...where is there any EVIDENCE of any personal gain to any director in any of this speculation? all i do know is to join the thistle board board costs you real money lots of time and endless abuse! It doesn't cost you real money if you're given shares to hold as a custodian and then placed on the board. This does become 'real money' though if you choose to slope off with them when your useless time is up as a Director. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) It doesn't cost you real money if you're given shares to hold as a custodian and then placed on the board. This does become 'real money' though if you choose to slope off with them when your useless time is up as a Director. It would only become real money if he tried to sell them. Given how he came into possession of them that would undoubtedly create another shitstorm, but it would at least break his ties with the club. Edited February 10, 2011 by Allan Heron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stolenscone Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 TROLL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) oh yes if the club goes tits up I could have lots of shares worth hee haw But a quality troll would not be so transparent, stolenscone. Methinks javeajag's words betray his identity too well. Are they really your shares ? Did you buy them or 'earn' them ? Edited February 10, 2011 by sandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Yes a return less than buying a 100k flat in Glashow and renting it for 600 a month ie a not very good return....I like others looked at propco but frankly it was a poor investment....oh yes if the club goes tits up I could have lots of shares worth hee haw You'd be doing very well to get a £600pcm return on a £100k flat in Glasgow. PropCo *guarantees* a return on investment; the purchase of real estate for various reasons (such as actual market value) doesn't. Surely a financial supremo such as yourself would understand something as simple as that. It's interesting that you mention £100k as the base-investment... wasn't that exactly the amount our good friend Impecunious invested into PropCo? I notice you say you have a lot of shares that would be worth hee haw? I didn't realise there was a roaring trade for Partick Thistle shares... perhaps you could enlighten me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 TROLL I believe the term you're looking for is "obvious troll is obvious" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Despite efforts to reduce this to a situation where it's about some people liking Tom Hughes and some people not liking him, let's not lose sight of the main questions which are about whether it is good for PTFC for someone with his track record over the last five or six years to be involved in any way with the club's financial future. At the root of it we're talking about competence and confidence and someone who seems to have lost sight of why he was gifted those shares way back when. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaf Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Absolutely right DU. If we stick to analysis of performance and facts, then people can form their opinions themselves....personally my own view is that there have been a series of failures in the financial management of the club over a number of recent years; the pride of when TH used to lecture the rest of Scottish football replaced by utter embarressment. As for propco, those who know me, know that I could talk forever on this subject but please lets not let javeajag try to persuade us this was some altruistic deed. With hindsight, it may not look such a good investment NOW for a few reasons, but this was not envisaged or intended when it was first dreamt up - 1 a sustained period of low interest rates which would have helped the club manage debt 2 a sustained period of property recession and shortage of capital in the markets 3 a continuing inability to balance the football clubs budgets - as I said at the time, propco was only half a plan, fundamental to it (from the football clubs point of view) was that we had to operate within a balanced budget; as I also predicted at the time, there was no chance of that happening with a repeat offender of FAILURE to balance the budgets of the football club holding the keys to the petty cash tin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 But a quality troll would not be so transparent, stolenscone. Methinks javeajag's words betray his identity too well. Are they really your shares ? Did you buy them or 'earn' them ? Hehheh I have precisely 20 a shares and 100 b shares.....! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 You'd be doing very well to get a £600pcm return on a £100k flat in Glasgow. PropCo *guarantees* a return on investment; the purchase of real estate for various reasons (such as actual market value) doesn't. Surely a financial supremo such as yourself would understand something as simple as that. It's interesting that you mention £100k as the base-investment... wasn't that exactly the amount our good friend Impecunious invested into PropCo? I notice you say you have a lot of shares that would be worth hee haw? I didn't realise there was a roaring trade for Partick Thistle shares... perhaps you could enlighten me? It is actually interesting how things get twisted and taken here so: The 100k was a figurebmentioned to me at a party by a property guy recently and i assume he knows his business The 100k has nothing to do with any body or any thing else Hee haw means nothing precisely because there is no market and they have very little value The guaranteed return can be exceed by other investments so it's not attractive The worst case scenario ptfc goes bust andnpropco get the lot if they can sell the everything minus the £1m theybput in not the best bet in the world is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 It is actually interesting how things get twisted and taken here so: The 100k was a figurebmentioned to me at a party by a property guy recently and i assume he knows his business The 100k has nothing to do with any body or any thing else Hee haw means nothing precisely because there is no market and they have very little value The guaranteed return can be exceed by other investments so it's not attractive The worst case scenario ptfc goes bust andnpropco get the lot if they can sell the everything minus the £1m theybput in not the best bet in the world is it? It's not a bad deal. The valuation put on the bit of stadium sold to the propco was £1.6m. And "they" didn't put in £1m they put in half. So if PTFC go into administration (not bust) the propco directors automatically acquire the propco shares owned by the club. I'm not great at maths but on the land value alone that would be 100% profit. The planning permission that's been obtained will have increased the value of the bing (by how much is anyone's guess) so it is likely to be in excess of 100% profit. All of this is ascertainable fact, not speculation or conjecture, so is it any wonder that some folk are nervous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaf Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) Absolutely right Tom; the irony is that in response to a comment about how twisted things get on here, one of the most twisted pieces of logic is used...propco remains a good deal for the preferential investors Edited February 10, 2011 by jaf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted February 11, 2011 Members Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Actually it was a condition of our loan from the bank that he stayed on the board poor ******* As it was that BMcM also stayed on the Board. You've to be admired for standing up for your mate javeajag, so fair do's. He obviously has something about him that folk such as yourself seem to trust him and hang onto his every word, and that's really scary! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted February 11, 2011 Members Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 As this rumbles on, I was doing a little bit of searching there and came across this statement..... An expert in the study of human behaviour Yeoman also specialises in business mentoring, executive coaching, sports psychology and has been recruited by ITV, HBOS, Dr Charan Gill and former SFA chief Gordon Smith. Inverness boss Terry Butcher also credited him with the Highland’s club’s incredible end of season push which earned them promotion to the SPL. Partick Thistle fan Yeoman has been captivated by Whistlegate and feels it is pertinent to ask why McDonald felt the need to lie given he made the right call regarding the penalty incident at Tannadice. Maybe we should be getting him to help Ian McCall and the business side of the Club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Countess of Wemyss Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 He obviously has something about him that folk such as yourself seem to trust him and hang onto his every word, and that's really scary! The shadowy figure is wearing the emperors new clothes, Will. More and more good people are seeing that he's actually naked - his accountants pinstripe suit no longer hides the questionable business ethics that have been rippling through his veins. As Joy Division once said...power, corruption and lies. Like Icarus ascending, his belief in his own immortality at the heart of the Firhill machine is going to be his undoing. He has long outstayed his welcome. The more he diplays arrogance and tries to scare his questioners off by throwing his weight around, the more the wax around his feathers start to loosen. Some very astute, professionally aware Thistle fans are cranking up the core temperature of the sun. If his new mate Daedalus on the Board examines recent history closely and asks why Icarus hasn't let go of the books by now, then he will surely realise it's time let him crash and burn. For the good of PTFC, cut him loose before he takes our Club down with him. Apologies if the metaphors seem a bit mixed. It's because I'm angry (as Belle & Sebastian might say) at the state we're in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaf Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Dumb & Dumber have had their chance...they are now fans of the Wily Coyote (actually thats unfair, the wily coyote is likeable) and as such lose my support. We are Partick Thistle. Not them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted February 14, 2011 Report Share Posted February 14, 2011 So I guess this just slips off the radar as folk become bored with the news that it's business as usual at Firhill. I haven't made the last two games, but heard that Mr Hughes was in the director's box at Perth. Anyone spot our directors and the major shareholders at Palmerston? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Report Share Posted February 14, 2011 So I guess this just slips off the radar as folk become bored with the news that it's business as usual at Firhill. I haven't made the last two games, but heard that Mr Hughes was in the director's box at Perth. Honved, it's probably not so much off the radar as under the radar right now (in a positive way for the fans). Haven't been to St Js or Queens, but I had heard that TH was sitting beside one current Director and one ex-Director. He moves in mysterious ways. 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.