Fellow Traveller Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Have they broken their word though ? The JT rep put to them was in their mind (and in the mind of many/most of us) not what was needed to work with the club and represent the shareholding and the fans. What if someone else was put up for the board ? Until the JT test that scenario we wont know. Well, here's the definition of "in perpetuity". It doesn't say anything about "unless we don't like your face". And I share everyone's reservations about the candidate offered up by the Trust, but in the absence of any legal obstacle that makes her an unfit person to serve, I'd say they did indeed break their word if the agreement was as Kieron stated. Which I firmly believe it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 In my period on the Trust Board I never saw a signed document which outlined such an agreement. I was not at the meeting which saw the Trust decide to merge the 1876 scheme with the CF so can't speak to what was said (in public or behind the scenes) there. If they don't have it carved in stone, that was very, very foolish, but I've got to say that "join us in a leap of faith" and "you can't trust us unless we put it in writing" are two ideas that don't sit together very easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 I have no knowledge of how this is going to work but who says that the representation David speaks about is going to be from the Trust? That, Mr Towers, is a very interesting question. What will the club's politburo want? A useful idiot, I suspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawlty Towers Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 That, Mr Towers, is a very interesting question. What will the club's politburo want? A useful idiot, I suspect. I would hope that we can all move beyond that sort of stuff to be honest, the most important thing is creating a positive, sustainable future for Partick Thistle and there are enough passionate and intelligient people between those involved at the Club and within the supporters for that to be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Countess of Wemyss Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 If they don't have it carved in stone, that was very, very foolish, but I've got to say that "join us in a leap of faith" and "you can't trust us unless we put it in writing" are two ideas that don't sit together very easily. I resigned the JTB shortly after the merger vote. I recall our Club Board Rep was still talking to the Club Directors to get the post-vote agreement in writing. I'm pretty sure the JT Treasurer would have been down the middle of this as she and her bus seemed to swing quite a few votes behind the merger on the night. I don't know what was negotiated or put in writing after Ieft. Presumably the JT Secretary at the time, the official conduit between the Club and Trust on legislative and procedural matters, may recall ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted February 20, 2011 Members Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Oops! Looks like someone's got mixed up with their log-in's!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Countess of Wemyss Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Oops! Looks like someone's got mixed up with their log-in's!!! Trust the laws of Gravity to let me down, Willjag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 What I don't get is, why do we still let under 16s in for free? It's a great scheme and all that, but it costs us about £20k a year to keep it going, I don't know if this benefits us. PS. We can still be a part time club with some full time players, look at Ayr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) What I don't get is, why do we still let under 16s in for free? It's a great scheme and all that, but it costs us about £20k a year to keep it going, I don't know if this benefits us. PS. We can still be a part time club with some full time players, look at Ayr. Where do you get this figure from? How many youngsters would come regardless of whether they have to pay? And the ones that have to come with an adult, how many times would that adult come if he had to pay full whack for a couple of kids every time? Unless you've got figures for these and other questions, that number is just a wild guess. I suppose we're maybe losing something but I'd bet the club itself wouldn't be sure how much. And then how do you quantify the long term effect of encouraging kids who wouldn't come otherwise. Edited February 20, 2011 by Mr Bunny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Where do you get this figure from? How many youngsters would come regardless of whether they have to pay? And the ones that have to come with an adult, how many times would that adult come if he had to pay full whack for a couple of kids every time? Unless you've got figures for these and other questions, that number is just a wild guess. I suppose we're maybe losing something but I'd bet the club itself wouldn't be sure how much. And then how do you quantify the long term effect of encouraging kids who wouldn't come otherwise. I read this not long after the scheme was unveiled. I'm not making it up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) I read this not long after the scheme was unveiled. I'm not making it up Making it up or not it's the same difference. Perhaps you read, tho' I don't recall it, that we took £20K pa in at the under 16 gate (tho' again I thought all concessions went thru the same gate)prior to the under 16s free initiative. Neither you, me, the Club, nor anyone knows how many adults have started going/coming back as they can now take their youngsters in for nothing. Likewise and more importantly how many extra youngsters now pledge allegiance to Thistle thanks to being introduced to Jaggydom thru this initiative. Sticking my old marketing bunnet on, gut feeling would tell me that £20K pa spent on such an initiative seems a real bargain. Edited February 20, 2011 by lady-isobel-barnett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerryHell Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Having the kids go free scheme does make a day at the football an affordable day out, especially when compared to other things that you can do with your kids. I cant be bothered checking but im pretty sure a 3D film at the cinema would set you back around £17 for and adult and child and other places where you pay (science centre, bowling etc.) are all around the same. Having to pay for my boy to go to the football wouldnt stop me, but for those with two or more kids, it could be the thing that reduces our potential future fan base. Personally, I try and compensate for the free entry by pitching in where i can, such as centenery fund membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Have they broken their word though ? The JT rep put to them was in their mind (and in the mind of many/most of us) not what was needed to work with the club and represent the shareholding and the fans. What if someone else was put up for the board ? Until the JT test that scenario we wont know. maybe by testing this scenario the jags trust board could regain some credibility?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I resigned the JTB shortly after the merger vote. I recall our Club Board Rep was still talking to the Club Directors to get the post-vote agreement in writing. I'm pretty sure the JT Treasurer would have been down the middle of this as she and her bus seemed to swing quite a few votes behind the merger on the night. I don't know what was negotiated or put in writing after Ieft. Presumably the JT Secretary at the time, the official conduit between the Club and Trust on legislative and procedural matters, may recall ? What was exchanged with the club was the details of the motion passed at the meeting , and their confirmation (via Eddie P) that this accorded with their understanding of the agreement. Worth pointing out that the phrase "in perpetuity" was not included in the motion. Short of amending the Articles Of Association, I don't think that would be possible. Have the board broken the agreement that was made? Absolutely. I don't think there's any ambiguity about that. And it was David Beattie himself who was spouting forth about new starts and leaps of faith so that always needs to be taken into account when judging his current activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 What I don't get is, why do we still let under 16s in for free? It's a great scheme and all that, but it costs us about £20k a year to keep it going, I don't know if this benefits us. PS. We can still be a part time club with some full time players, look at Ayr. I've seen figures quoted that demonstrated that our overall revenues had increased as a result of this scheme. These were used in conjunction with a presentation made to MSP's at Holyrood about our community activities that I had the pleasure of attending. Not a presentation we could make now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) I do understand that more adults would've been encouraged to come with their kids and pay their £17 admission fee and the kids go free, but we even made it £1? Surely that's still an absolute bargain and we're still making SOME money. For an adult £20-£25 for a day out on a Saturday for you and the kids isn't much at all. Edited February 21, 2011 by Jeehon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I do understand that more adults would've been encouraged to come with their kids and pay their £17 admission fee and the kids go free, but we even made it £1? Surely that's still an absolute bargain and we're still making SOME money. For an adult £20-£25 for a day out on a Saturday for you and the kids isn't much at all. Might well have a good point there. Strictly from the marketing point of view we'll get considerably more mileage from Kids Go Free than say Kids for a Quid. The downside is that if we don't maximise the Kids go Free initiative then charging a nominal amount would be wiser. My own gut feeling is we got excellent publicity on the back of the launch but we need to keep a high profile on this initiative. McCall, Beattie, Maxwell and the players dropping it into conversation during ET or Glaswegian interviews would help and is easily done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Might well have a good point there. Strictly from the marketing point of view we'll get considerably more mileage from Kids Go Free than say Kids for a Quid. The downside is that if we don't maximise the Kids go Free initiative then charging a nominal amount would be wiser. My own gut feeling is we got excellent publicity on the back of the launch but we need to keep a high profile on this initiative. McCall, Beattie, Maxwell and the players dropping it into conversation during ET or Glaswegian interviews would help and is easily done. The soft benefit from this scheme is that we get kids into the habit of attending the game on a Saturday afternoon. It's the relative small number of the younger generation attending the game that is a real problems. Us old farts won't be around forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Might well have a good point there. Strictly from the marketing point of view we'll get considerably more mileage from Kids Go Free than say Kids for a Quid. The downside is that if we don't maximise the Kids go Free initiative then charging a nominal amount would be wiser. My own gut feeling is we got excellent publicity on the back of the launch but we need to keep a high profile on this initiative. McCall, Beattie, Maxwell and the players dropping it into conversation during ET or Glaswegian interviews would help and is easily done. That is it in a nutshell. We should be actively marketing this to the hilt before every home gome. There's no point starting something like this then just expecting people to know about it. The marketing of the club is where we always fall down. I will be interested to see where the new 'marketing group' can take us to on this front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I don't know why, But I personally take umbridge to the fact that we let the away under 16s in for free and the other clubs don't at least let out under 16s in free of charge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 John Lambie Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I posted it on another thread a while ago, if the club was thiking of starting to charge U-16s again, I'd say we should 1st introduce a donation scheme. Say where a couple of buckets are placed next to the U-16s gate, it would be sure to bring in some income & not deter those from coming who either cannot afford to pay or simply do not want to. I realise kids are unlikely to put anything in the buckets, but I would think most parents would stick in a couple of quid per game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I posted it on another thread a while ago, if the club was thiking of starting to charge U-16s again, I'd say we should 1st introduce a donation scheme. Say where a couple of buckets are placed next to the U-16s gate, it would be sure to bring in some income & not deter those from coming who either cannot afford to pay or simply do not want to. I realise kids are unlikely to put anything in the buckets, but I would think most parents would stick in a couple of quid per game. This. If under 16s were to come for at least £1 a game or whatever, the adults surely won't refuse to pay that on top of their £17 entrance fee. Say about 700 kinds every game (home and away) that's £700, and £700 every 2 weeks for 8 months is just over £11k a year. After all, every penny counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I don't know why, But I personally take umbridge to the fact that we let the away under 16s in for free and the other clubs don't at least let out under 16s in free of charge To save a lot of googling Hogwarts High Inquisitor, Senior Undersecretary to the Minister for Magic. Wouldn't go amiss as Fans' rep on the Board. Would personally get my vote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 To save a lot of googling Hogwarts High Inquisitor, Senior Undersecretary to the Minister for Magic. Wouldn't go amiss as Fans' rep on the Board. Would personally get my vote Only if she uses that magic quill of hers to get TH to write 'I must not tell lies budget with money we don't have' on the back of his hand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeehon Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 To save a lot of googling Hogwarts High Inquisitor, Senior Undersecretary to the Minister for Magic. Wouldn't go amiss as Fans' rep on the Board. Would personally get my vote Can honestly say I never knew that, certainly didn't mean 'umbridge' in that sense of the word! 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.