Shortfall Met?

[kni]

"Believe" and "budget", two words that do not naturally go with Mr Beattie's words in the article...

 

"There was a £100,000 hole"

 

Personally, I don't have faith that the board of directors have set a sensible budget for next year because there is no sign that anything has changed. If there was a £100,000 "hole" this year, then surely there is the same in the pipeline for next year? Is the recession over? Are our crowds growing? Is there a new sponsor? All rhetorical questions for which I make no apology, because I "believe" that the current pattern of financial mismanagement is set to continue.

 

My belief is that the wage bill is going to be even lower next season. Buchanan has gone and I doubt that the larger earners will be offered extensions on the same terms. Rowson, Archibald, Paton and Boyle are probably earning more than we can afford next season. They may have to accept similar deals to those have signed on to 2013 or leave.

[honved]

 

 

 

In complete agreement with Honved's post, in particular the emboldened parts.

Jedi Master of fiscal prudence you are.

 

I just can't help thinking that as far as next year's budget is concerned, the board are sitting with their fingers in their ears saying out loud "la la la, I don't want to hear this". The alternative view, that they are somehow ignoring this year's "£100,000 hole" is unthinkable.

[sandy]

Honved, their fingers or the fingers attached to someone elses shadowy hand?

 

For the future of this Club, Directors need to cut their puppet strings, lift his hand and ask him to shut the door quietly on his way out.

[Allan Heron]

Jedi Master of fiscal prudence you are.

 

I just can't help thinking that as far as next year's budget is concerned, the board are sitting with their fingers in their ears saying out loud "la la la, I don't want to hear this". The alternative view, that they are somehow ignoring this year's "£100,000 hole" is unthinkable.

 

Fully agree that the circumstances which have generated this year's black hole are still in existence meaning, as you have pointed out, that the same scenario awaits for next year.

 

The one positive is that at least we're not budgetting to lose £250,000 which was the case a couple of seasons ago. Doesn't lessen the challenges though.

 

But we do need to know that there is a coherent and realistic plan before there can be any realistic expectation for fans to contribute even further. No plan, no cash.

[Fellow Traveller]

Tom Hughes is the bogeyman pantomime villain figure, but as others have said we've got to keep bringing this back to measurable performance and not our own interpretations of people's motives, for good or ill.

 

There has been a systemic failure of the entire football club board (the bullish ones and the meek ones who fall in behind) to budget and manage our very limited finances over the past few years. If you look at the budgets they set and the money they spent each year, I don't think that's even a point that's arguable. Yes, these are hard times in the economy, but that's not an excuse - that's a reason to be even firmer in your grip of what money you've got.

 

This has been a story of repeated failure and with the same people making the decisions, it's really not enough just to have a friendlier gloss put on things (and we know from recent actions that these guys are anything but friendly if their intentions are challenged) or a call to arms to rally round for the sake of this great club blah blah blah, kiss badge etc.

 

A workable, affordable financial plan. I bet Propco has one, so why can't they produce the same when they swivel their chairs round and put on their PTFC hats? Come on, gents. You wouldn't run your bakeries and bean counteries on wacky budgets like this, so why put Thistle through it?

[hebridean jag]

Aargh...... he's used the "c" word

 

Well done if that's the case and it is certainly a more positive and proactive of dealing with the finances than has been the case for years.

 

We all await the details of these initiatives, although I do cringe that "engaging the fans"

is mentioned in the same breath as "marketing"

 

Let us buy shares in the club, David. Make it possible on a one-off or regular basis. And make it genuinely affordable for the great majority of us. I'd make a regular commitment on that basis. And I might even yet spend a penny or two on whatever this marketing group comes up with.

Normally I`d agree Alan. I`ve said for years that I`d invest on a small/reasonable scale if the shares were made available to the plebs. However I`m not paying a penny whilst Hughes and McMaster hold onto the shares issued to them after STJ and justify their actions by trying to re-write history.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Normally I`d agree Alan. I`ve said for years that I`d invest on a small/reasonable scale if the shares were made available to the plebs. However I`m not paying a penny whilst Hughes and McMaster hold onto the shares issued to them after STJ and justify their actions by trying to re-write history.

I guess a lot of folk will have similar opinion. This is where some sort of effective fans association could play a part. Canvass members and pass on to the Board the views of its membership.

[Colognejag]

I guess it isn't if everyone already has full-time deals. But maybe the "acting chairman" should be careful to make that clear when he speaks to the papers about cash problems and fans digging deep. Although I'm sure the journalist will be blamed, as usual, for putting words in that he never said.

 

He says we know what we have to spend next season, but any money the fans raise will be for the playing budget. So we clearly don't know what we have to spend on the most crucial element of the club.

 

Nothing ever really hangs together with these half-baked statements they give out.

 

 

I know what I have in terms of money because my wage is fixed. I know how much my mortgage/tax/car and other fixed costs I will have to pay. I know how much I have left each month to spend.

 

Anything on top of that is a bonus which I might spend, might save for later.

 

It is the same for the club. They know the fixed costs. They can work out an average of of season tickets/sponsorship income/hospitality etc (even budgeting for a worst case scenario). I do not think it unreasonable to ask the fans to contribute on top of this if we want better players.

 

I'd like to thank the board for finding 100,000 quid. It wasn't like this in the past few years, so well done them!

Edited February 16, 2011 by Colognejag

[Fellow Traveller]

I'd like to thank the board for finding 100,000 quid. It wasn't like this in the past few years, so well done them!

 

Who lost it?

[Jaggernaut]

I know what I have in terms of money because my wage is fixed. I know how much my mortgage/tax/car and other fixed costs I will have to pay. I know how much I have left each month to spend.

 

Anything on top of that is a bonus which I might spend, might save for later.

 

It is the same for the club. They know the fixed costs. They can work out an average of of season tickets/sponsorship income/hospitality etc (even budgeting for a worst case scenario). I do not think it unreasonable to ask the fans to contribute on top of this if we want better players.

 

I'd like to thank the board for finding 100,000 quid. It wasn't like this in the past few years, so well done them!

Good post.

[Allan Heron]

I guess a lot of folk will have similar opinion. This is where some sort of effective fans association could play a part. Canvass members and pass on to the Board the views of its membership.

 

One of the problems with this is that the matter of the shares is not an issue for the Board.

 

The shares were issued without any provision for the circumstances in which they should be handed back way back. The matter that's been raised about the way in which they were registered is really one between the taxman and the holder of the shares.

 

I don't believe there's any way that the Board of Directors can effectively confiscate an existing shareholder on an individual basis without their consent.

 

The targets for such action should be Hughes and McMaster themselves. Trying to tackle it with the current board is only going to seem like fighting last decade's battle, and I'd tend to agree

[kni]

Normally I`d agree Alan. I`ve said for years that I`d invest on a small/reasonable scale if the shares were made available to the plebs. However I`m not paying a penny whilst Hughes and McMaster hold onto the shares issued to them after STJ and justify their actions by trying to re-write history.

 

Agree 100%. If Hughes and McMaster sold their shares back to the club for no personal gain, I would buy shares in the club.

[Vom Itorium]

Yoga Jag, melodic it sounds, this hymn sheet we all seem to be sharing.

 

What tune is the Jags Trust humming right now?

 

I believe it's this...

[hebridean jag]

One of the problems with this is that the matter of the shares is not an issue for the Board.

 

The shares were issued without any provision for the circumstances in which they should be handed back way back. The matter that's been raised about the way in which they were registered is really one between the taxman and the holder of the shares.

 

I don't believe there's any way that the Board of Directors can effectively confiscate an existing shareholder on an individual basis without their consent.

 

The targets for such action should be Hughes and McMaster themselves. Trying to tackle it with the current board is only going to seem like fighting last decade's battle, and I'd tend to agree

Again I find it hard to disagree but the fact remains that the actions of these two characters effectively means that I will not otherwise contribute financially to the club............every month I even question my centenary fund memberships which I have taken out to compensate in some way for my inability to attend most matches.

 

Whilst it is not the direct responsibility of the current board, surely they are in a position to bring the matter to the attention of both parties. Failing that I would at least appreciate some verbal criticism of the status quo. I for one take their continued silence on the matter as tacit approval

[Third Lanark]

Player budgets have always depended on things like season tickets. It’s the norm for a manager not to know his budget till income has been taken into account.

 

For the manager to sign these players on full-time contracts he must believe his budget will be enough to cover this. Same with the board.

 

I don’t have a problem with anything in the article, they may be a few unanswered questions but I don’t see anything unusual in that.

I presumed each round we progressed in the Scottish cup we maybe made a little bit of money to go towards helping extend the players contracts. But then again not enough to have covered that many, though I presume freeing up Liam Buchanan may also have helped with this.

[Third Lanark]

My belief is that the wage bill is going to be even lower next season. Buchanan has gone and I doubt that the larger earners will be offered extensions on the same terms. Rowson, Archibald, Paton and Boyle are probably earning more than we can afford next season. They may have to accept similar deals to those have signed on to 2013 or leave.

Dont think those 2 are on much. Boyle was brought in possibly as a replacement for Twaddle and I remember it being mentioned at the time that he was on a much smaller wage.

[McKennan]

There's nothing in The Glaswegian article that is any different from what was said by David Beattie on Jan 19 (see here for more) other than to announce that now it's the fans turn to find some cash.

 

 

Much as it pains me I'm not a multi-millionaire businessman. Like most fans, the cash I 'find' will be paying for a luxury item such as 90 minutes of football or a fat bloke sized shirt. Many of us are struggling to get to games.

 

This is not about some bargain the directors have made up in their heads and daydreamed the fans into taking. "It's your turn" doesn't quite cut it. I realise the fans will have to turn out to improve the club's income and cash flow. I wonder if the board realises that, too.

 

There is no bargain, Thistle. You try and sell us crap football and crap merchandise we'll walk away. You sell us good football and good merchandise and you'll get more of us back. You can keep your covenant, thank you.

Edited February 18, 2011 by McKennan

[McKennan]

Who lost it?

 

That and the other £2.4million you blog asks about.

[sandy]

Much as it pains me I'm not a multi-millionaire businessman. Like most fans, the cash I 'find' will be paying for a luxury item such as 90 minutes of football or a fat bloke sized shirt. Many of us are struggling to get to games.

 

This is not about some bargain the directions have made up in their heads and daydreamed the fans into taking. "It's your turn" doesn't quite cut it. I realise the fans will have to turn out to improve the club's income and cash flow. I wonder if the board realises that, too.

 

There is no bargain, Thistle. You try and sell us crap football and crap merchandise we'll walk away. You sell us good football and good merchandise and you'll get more of us back. You can keep your covenant, thank you.

 

This. Sadly.

 

And the worst thing is how McK knows I also have to buy fat bloke shirts!

[Colognejag]

Who lost it?

 

That is my point. In the past years, we have clearly been spending money we do not have. I wish we could go out and spend millions. We can't.

 

At least the board have now decided to be sensible. Who lost it is a valid question about the past, but for the future I am happier knowing that we will budget sensibly. With year-on-year debt accumulation we coudn't carry on.

 

If the board have raised 100,000 quid in a short space of time, it bodes well for future income streams from the contacts the board have raised this money. Asking fans if they can give any extra money is fine by me. Some may choose to do so, some may not be able to do so, some may simply choose not to outright. It is worth asking, though.

 

I am happier now that we are steady more than anything else.

[yoda-jag]

Yoga Jag, melodic it sounds, this hymn sheet we all seem to be sharing.

What tune is the Jags Trust humming right now?

 

The only religion i am familiar with is that of the Jedi, never understood the human trait of bible bashing and false fairy tales, so apart from "Oh come all ye faithful" being the only hymn that springs to mind right now, answer your question i cannot.

 

I would suggest though that THIS would be a very likely candidate for a singsong in the kitchen at the next JT meeting.

 

Or maybe they are big Elton John or Tom Jones fans and either of the songs linked would be prime candidates to be sung by the JT to the club/propcon boards.

 

 

 

A workable, affordable financial plan. I bet Propco has one, so why can't they produce the same when they swivel their chairs round and put on their PTFC hats? Come on, gents. You wouldn't run your bakeries and bean counteries on wacky budgets like this, so why put Thistle through it?

 

Multi-tasking and impartial, without conflicts of interest? There's a novel idea.

 

 

 

Agree 100%. If Hughes and McMaster sold their shares back to the club for no personal gain, I would buy shares in the club.

 

As would many others.

 

 

 

Again I find it hard to disagree but the fact remains that the actions of these two characters effectively means that I will not otherwise contribute financially to the club............every month I even question my centenary fund memberships which I have taken out to compensate in some way for my inability to attend most matches.

 

Whilst it is not the direct responsibility of the current board, surely they are in a position to bring the matter to the attention of both parties. Failing that I would at least appreciate some verbal criticism of the status quo. I for one take their continued silence on the matter as tacit approval

 

All of the above, agree I do, particularily the final point. Shameful.

[Trotter]

At least the board have now decided to be sensible.

 

Problem I have with this statement Colognejag was that after Save the Jags, the then finace director boasted to all and sundry about being 'the best run club in Scotland'. This was the same guy who led us to the brink of Save the Jags 2 and this is the same guy who's still in the background of the inner workings of the club, the same guy who was using block votes to get rid of another director.

 

They have now decided to be sensible? Or do you reckon history will continue to repeat itself with some the current custodians unwilling to hand back their free shares and walk away from the club.

 

After all, good for their other business and still Plopco to think about.

[Fellow Traveller]

It's a couple of years now (Nov or Dec 2008) since it was raised with the board that Brown McMaster was in breach of SFL rules by having an interest in two clubs (director at Stenhousemuir and major shareholder at Thistle). David Beattie was on the board at the time, as was Tom Hughes. They chose to ignore it and in Feb 2009 Hughes filled in the club's annual return, registering McMaster's transfer of the shares to his immediate family, a transaction dated back to the previous summer - see here - but still in breach of the SFL regulations on having a dual interest as they prohibit dumping your shares on a close family member to get around the rule.

 

In the end, it was only when McMaster and the SFL got into a public dispute with another club that the matter was brought into the open.

 

So it's a bit more than tacit approval. The board have made it clear by their actions and inactions that the destination of these shares is just fine with them, so I'd say there isn't a hope in hell of them exerting any pressure at all to see the shares returned to the club. Can't see anybody else taking it on, either.

[Fawlty Towers]

At the risk of sounding like I am using this thread to shamelessly plug the programme there will be something on this subject in David Beattie's page so we will hopefully be in a better position after the match to discuss what the plans are going forward:

 

http://ptfc.co.uk/news/2010-2011/february_2011/saturdays_programme_v_falkirk_19_02_11

[honved]

Help! It's the wolf, it's the wolf, it's the wolf, it's the wolf, it's the wolf, it's the wolf, it's the wolf...phew, we scared it off but next time it's your turn.