Egm

[Fellow Traveller]

Small point of info: when we were drafting up the initial statements that announced the whole Centenary Fund proposal, Eddie Prentice specifically asked that we didn't refer to it as a "joint venture" as that term had legal implications which might mislead people. It was always a PTFC operation, the Trust were always going to be the tea boys and they knew it fine well at the time, so it's just a load of hooey to whine about that now.

 

On all other aspects of the shafting, though, they seem to make very valid points.

[Woodstock Jag]

Small point of info: when we were drafting up the initial statements that announced the whole Centenary Fund proposal, Eddie Prentice specifically asked that we didn't refer to it as a "joint venture" as that term had legal implications which might mislead people. It was always a PTFC operation, the Trust were always going to be the tea boys and they knew it fine well at the time, so it's just a load of hooey to whine about that now.

 

On all other aspects of the shafting, though, they seem to make very valid points.

 

I suspect said legal implications are that it would be treated as a partnership rather than a plain subsidiary operation of either PTFC Ltd or the PTSA IPS.

[Fellow Traveller]

I suspect said legal implications are that it would be treated as a partnership rather than a plain subsidiary operation of either PTFC Ltd or the PTSA IPS.

 

He specifically didn't want anyone thinking there would be an equal (or indeed any) share of the revenue. So we took out "joint venture" and replaced it with "joint initiative", which doesn't seem like a massive alteration, but it was really just a phrase to reflect the fact that club and fans were moving in the same general direction, although there was only ever going to be one driver (as shown by the Trust's complete lack of influence over the scheme since day one).

 

Just wouldn't like anyone to think the "joint venture" term was ever applied to the CF or that it was ever a full partnership in the way this seems to imply. (JTB members of the time can check their emails for 5th Dec 2008 if they want a reminder of this phrase being junked and precisely when they were informed of it. )

[Julie Ann]

Quite good document circulated to members by the JagsTrust this morning with some relevant points for the forthcoming EGM, and the way its' been organised.

the stuff about the cf is an irrelevance. it stopped being relevant when certain members of the current board of the trust voted with their pile of proxies to hand it over to eddie.

[jags365]

There's now a couple of documents on the Trust website available for download: here.

 

These include the flyer handed out by the Trust Board on Saturday incase you missed it, the proposed amended articles of associations and a proxy form for the club EGM should you require it.

[potty trained]

There's now a couple of documents on the Trust website available for download: here.

 

These include the flyer handed out by the Trust Board on Saturday incase you missed it, the proposed amended articles of associations and a proxy form for the club EGM should you require it.

 

Any truth in the rumour, going round firhill, on Saturday...

 

The Trust have enlisted the proxy votes of some ex Thistle directors, who financially mis managed the Club into it's current state. To pass a vote of no confidence... All on the promise, that should said directors return to power, the Trust will get it's seat on the board back?

 

Or is it just that Maggie and eddie have actually been on an innocent date, together?

 

I don't know what's worse!

 

I wouldn't welcome Cowan Hughes and prentice anywhere near the boardroom again... But it would see them stop drinking in the Star...

 

Or the current regime, hell bent on ego and power with blatant disregard for Partick Thistle's history or future.

 

One fact remains... We're fckd.

[Allan Heron]

Any truth in the rumour, going round firhill, on Saturday...

 

The Trust have enlisted the proxy votes of some ex Thistle directors, who financially mis managed the Club into it's current state. To pass a vote of no confidence... All on the promise, that should said directors return to power, the Trust will get it's seat on the board back?

 

Or is it just that Maggie and eddie have actually been on an innocent date, together?

 

I don't know what's worse!

 

I wouldn't welcome Cowan Hughes and prentice anywhere near the boardroom again... But it would see them stop drinking in the Star...

 

Or the current regime, hell bent on ego and power with blatant disregard for Partick Thistle's history or future.

 

One fact remains... We're fckd.

 

This represents the endgame to years of dysfunction within the Thistle boardroom and we are all stuck between a rock and a hard place. Outside of the boardroom there appears to be a general concensus that the changes are a bad thing. The other things surrounding it (the timing of the meeting, and the lengths to which shareholders have to go to obtain a copy of the new Articles) stink to high heaven.

 

But it does seem as if the club is currently being run as efficiently as it has been for some time. I'm told this is sticking to a budget but I do wonder how much these supposed debts to Europa are just actually cloaking the situation.

 

It's not clear why these changes are needed but reputedly it's something of a requirement for Billy Allan. If that's the case then it needs to be made crystal clear to shareholders what that need is - and, by definition, that implies not making a decision on Friday.

 

As things stand, it just all seems to be a scheme to keep things to a smaller group and for the shareholders to vote to emasculate their rights as owners of the football club.

 

The challenge then becomes what Billy Allan's response would be should the motion be rejected - might he walk? And, if so, what happens next. There's probably a list of options none of which are particularly palatable but they will be the only ones on the table.

 

Quite a challenge all round, but under any circumstances these changes should still be rejected by the shareholders. You might consider that what's happened to date has ripped the heart from the club - this could be the soul following in quick order.

[Fellow Traveller]

Ha! That's saved me writing a long blog post that no one would have read to the finish anyway.

 

Yeah, watch the ladies and the men who hide behind their skirts. Should be interesting.

 

Definitely agree that the motion on Friday deserves to be shot down - asking the shareholders to strip away the protection the law gives them against dodgy goings on in the boardroom is the ultimate "big ask". The current board have done nothing (yet) to earn the level of trust that sort of move would require. They've never put forward a clear and honest proposal for the future of the football club. Claiming to be Thistle-minded just won't cut it when you're saying to people, "Would you please sign away your legal rights and protections?"

 

But they do provide what flimsy financial underpinning the club has and they've cleared up the worst of the disastrous legacy of the Cowan/Hughes/Prentice era of decline.

 

The fact that the only people who can and might block this are the washed-up clueless board who got us into the mess is tragic. If they regain control of the club, our fate is sealed.

 

If Allan and/or Beattie walked away now, how long would Propco hold together? I don't know how much Europa have put into the club this past two years but it's more than we can pay back. Administration becomes a very real threat, very quickly if they go.

 

So looks like it's a straight choice between being run by people with a conflict of interest or people with an interest in conflict. None of them seem to have the best interests of the FOOTBALL CLUB at heart.

 

I won't even waste your time saying we really need a supporter-owned club with an elected board and to bury the Jags Trust down the nearest mineshaft, but...oh, well.

 

Under the current board we have a very uncertain future. It's better than a return of the old crowd, but not by as much as it ought to be.

[stolenscone]

Any truth in the rumour, going round firhill, on Saturday...

 

The Trust have enlisted the proxy votes of some ex Thistle directors, who financially mis managed the Club into it's current state. To pass a vote of no confidence... All on the promise, that should said directors return to power, the Trust will get it's seat on the board back?

 

 

Really? Surely the Trust Board wouldn't think it a good idea to return any of Hughes, Cowan or Prentice to the boardroom? I can see the merit in voting against the proposal being put forward by the Club at the EGM, but that's just loopy. Perhaps Donald, Bob or one of the others could come on here and set minds at rest?

 

Either way, it does highlight what an absurd position we're in when disliked former directors who were gifted shares can exert this sort of control for personal gain. Quite the opposite of how these "protections" were intended to operate.

 

It's already been posted, but what happens if Billy Allan leaves and calls in his Eurpoa debt? Would the Trust Board be entirely happy being directly involved in finally putting the Club out of its misery and having the administrators called in?

 

It's really rather unpleasant being beholden to the goodwill of one or two people for the survival of the football club (just ask Dundee), but that's the unpleasant truth.

 

Anyway, perhaps Hughes, Cowan & Prentice are riding to the rescue, will inject millions into the club and have learned how to use a calculator to help them run a balanced budget. Or maybe not. What would you believe? In bed with Tom Hughes? Bonkers.

[jags365]

Any truth in the rumour, going round firhill, on Saturday...

 

The Trust have enlisted the proxy votes of some ex Thistle directors, who financially mis managed the Club into it's current state. To pass a vote of no confidence... All on the promise, that should said directors return to power, the Trust will get it's seat on the board back?

 

Or is it just that Maggie and eddie have actually been on an innocent date, together?

 

I don't know what's worse!

 

Not a hint of truth in this. Maggie was/has been meeting Eddie to go over CF figures to work out the exact amount of shares the Trust are due for this - nothing else.

[stolenscone]

Not a hint of truth in this. Maggie was/has been meeting Eddie to go over CF figures to work out the exact amount of shares the Trust are due for this - nothing else.

 

Well that's a relief. Thanks for nipping this in the bud so quickly, Donald. You know what rumour and speculation are like!

[Fellow Traveller]

But Friday's vote has to go one way or the other. Either it goes through and we have a board largely unfettered by any concerns arising from the conflict of interests in them wearing several hats when dealing with club business...or it falls because of let's call it a loose alliance of shareholders.

 

And then, planned or otherwise, we have a very messy situation of the real power to direct the club's major strategies not lying in the boardroom but in the hands of people evicted from the boardroom - which doesn't sound like the kind of situation guys like Beattie and Allan would be prepared to work under. Something's got to give.

[Allan Heron]

Anyway, perhaps Hughes, Cowan & Prentice are riding to the rescue, will inject millions into the club and have learned how to use a calculator to help them run a balanced budget. Or maybe not. What would you believe? In bed with Tom Hughes? Bonkers.

 

Just a week or so too late to win the Joke of the Fringe competition but it would have blasted all of the other contenders out of the park!

[Vom Itorium]

This looks to me that an almost Armageddon-like situation is just around the corner. The thought of Coco and Co suddenly utilising their custodianship of the club to drive away the ones who seem to be doing a decent job of running the show, albeit with this 'conflict of interest' situation in place is horrific.

[stolenscone]

This looks to me that an almost Armageddon-like situation is just around the corner. The thought of Coco and Co suddenly utilising their custodianship of the club to drive away the ones who seem to be doing a decent job of running the show, albeit with this 'conflict of interest' situation in place is horrific.

 

 

Agreed. The sensible, grown up thing to do would be to vote down the current proposal at the EGM and then sit down for a constructive discussion with the Club Board to craft a new proposal which adequately protects the supporters/shareholders, and also affords the flexibility that the Board needs to operate (for example, something does need to be done to regularise the conflict of interest).

I have no great hope of a sensible solution being worked out.

[Allan Heron]

Agreed. The sensible, grown up thing to do would be to vote down the current proposal at the EGM and then sit down for a constructive discussion with the Club Board to craft a new proposal which adequately protects the supporters/shareholders, and also affords the flexibility that the Board needs to operate (for example, something does need to be done to regularise the conflict of interest).

I have no great hope of a sensible solution being worked out.

 

Those involved who might be reading this would have been baffled by "sensible" and totally lost by "constructive"

Edited August 30, 2011 by Allan Heron

[jaf]

This looks to me that an almost Armageddon-like situation is just around the corner. The thought of Coco and Co suddenly utilising their custodianship of the club to drive away the ones who seem to be doing a decent job of running the show, albeit with this 'conflict of interest' situation in place is horrific.

 

It should not be forgotten that if the rumour is true, those returned triumphantly to the scene of their previous crimes, would also (at least in one case) still have a conflict of interest.

[Jordanhill Jag]

The forthcoming EGM has raised a number of questions regards the involvement of Europa and Billy Allan with PTFC.

 

Given that I was responsible for bringing them onboard I will lay out the facts ,people can then judge for themselves as to there value and I suppose intentions regards PTFC.

 

My initial approach to Billy Allan was as a result of a text, yes a text telling me the Club was running out of cash and did I know of anyone who would invest –I replied saying I might and was asked to pass on the details –the person was Billy Allan a Jags Fan I was acquainted with within the same industry. The cash crisis was critical and was averted by non payment of HMRC –all a matter of public record.

 

Propco/PTFC Developments was already in existence long before the approach was made to Billy Allan, numerous people had been approached to invest (including myself and the Jags Trust) it was pitched as the route to solving the Clubs debt crisis –some invested, some didn’t -however Propco was never at any point in time raised as a condition of Billy Allan being involved in PTFC –he joined for one simple reason he is a Jags Fan and answered the call to help out the club –I made that call.

 

The Propco issue has been raised by the Jags Trust regards conflict of interest – my question is why now –the Jags Trust raised no objections to Propco or conflict of interest at the time –why the sudden concern.

 

It has also been suggested that the Club has been taken over by Europa and concerns regards the possible debt levels.

 

Last September the Club faced( yet another) financial crisis or Armageddon Part 8 as we have come to know it –David Beattie freely admitted this to the Fans, at this point three Directors resigned, I joined the Board and Europa got involved in trying to sort out the finances ,we also received support from David Stewart and Sandy Fyffe.

 

Put bluntly if it hadn’t been for Europa using there business contacts and financial clout PTFC would not be here, they threw resource and cash at the problem (and still do).

 

What we had was the Corporate equivalent of people including myself, Europa, Sandy ,David running into a burning building at risk to our Business reputations and not insignificant cash commitment. There was no cunning plan ,no long term strategy –the Club was in the shit and people stepped forward.

 

As for Europa coming onboard to asset strip if this was the case the time to do it was then ,let us sink - others carry the blame no damage to your reputation –the fact they did the reverse, suggests they are here for the long haul in turning round PTFC.

 

Obviously my personal reward for stepping into the breach with cash and time is there to see from the people who brought us Armageddon Parts 1-8.In short the crisis was over and they wanted there ball back, and if rumour is to be believed –still do

 

We are currently in a period of financial and managerial stability –without that we cannot progress, yes there are a million challenges- but they can be addressed –the alternative of going from one cash crisis to another or going back to the “good old days” of the Gentlemans Club doesn’t bare thinking about.

 

On Friday there will be a vote at the egm –the merits of the motion are for people to decide on ,what it is not is a vote of confidence on the Board or an opportunity for those with an axe to grind to get some payback (they got that at the agm so they have had there day).The motion should have been explained in detail as to why it was being proposed ,given the History of mistrust then frankly there is a naivety that you apply normal Corporate rules to anything associated to PTFC .

 

As for the Jags Trust not being consulted and this being a key compliant are they saying that if they had been consulted but other shareholders had not, it would have made it ok –ALL shareholders have a right to information not just the Jags Trust.

 

There is one thing that we should expect from the Jags Trust and that is openness, they vote as the Jags Trust –no backroom deals, no unholy alliances by them or there associates –they vote with there 11% nothing more, nothing less.

 

If people with large shareholdings want to vote they should have the courage of there convictions, but hey this is PTFC maybe it’s me and not Europa who is being naive.

 

Jim Alexander

[McKennan]

But it does seem as if the club is currently being run as efficiently as it has been for some time. I'm told this is sticking to a budget but I do wonder how much these supposed debts to Europa are just actually cloaking the situation.

 

 

The crux of the biscuit, in my 'umble opinion. Does anyone who uses this forum seriously believe that Friday's vote is not about shaping the club's business so that the property company comes to own Firhill in its entirety?

 

What alternatives are there? Please suggest something.

 

As Allan indicates above and as Dave and Greig also point out in their own ways, gossip and speculation is the only currency we have. Why would a business engage with its shareholders at a time when most of them are either working or inadvertently haven't been told about the meeting? The old board had the club by the throat; the latest incarnation has the club by the throat and the balls. The former can't let out a squeal as the latter is torn away.

 

For all the chumsy-wumsy crap about fan initiatives and brave futures we've so far had a strip that looks like something from 40 years ago and a t-shirt that looks like a plate of puke. Meaningful engagement. Serious, meaningful engagement that gets us excited? F*ck all. As someone else said, meet the new boss ...

 

So, here's my tuppence worth: Friday's vote goes through and we're going to see Thistle bought out of the property company somewhere down the line. This lets the club pay its bills. There are pretty words about a new era for Thistle.

 

There's more bloodletting on the Thistle board and 'fresh talent' comes in from companies associated with Beattie and Allan.

 

The entire ground is owned by the property company and its 'Thistle-minded' directors. These directors are also hard-nosed and successful businessmen. Suddenly, the football club business becomes a burden. No-one likes to be associated with the death of a cultural institution, so there's a share sale and the rump of fans buys into it. The board graciously steps down and, to much fanfare, Thistle becomes 'fan run'. After all, it's what we wanted.

 

Thistle's board is told Firhill will be sold off for property development. Mission accomplished.

 

 

PS: If this club is to have a future it looks like lot of people who dislike and distrust each other will have to start making nice with each other.

[Allan Heron]

The Propco issue has been raised by the Jags Trust regards conflict of interest – my question is why now –the Jags Trust raised no objections to Propco or conflict of interest at the time –why the sudden concern.

 

Actually, this was raised with the club on numerous occasions without getting any satisfactory responses. It was always as I recall things one of the critical issues around the deal.

 

We were told no more than that the club had sought advice from a different source to that which advised PropCo. We don't know what that advice was, or the extent to which it was adhered to.

[McKennan]

We were told no more than that the club had sought advice from a different source to that which advised PropCo. We don't know what that advice was, or the extent to which it was adhered to.

 

 

In other words, you're just a fan/customer. Go away. The adults are talking.

[Jordanhill Jag]

The crux of the biscuit, in my 'umble opinion. Does anyone who uses this forum seriously believe that Friday's vote is not about shaping the club's business so that the property company comes to own Firhill in its entirety?

 

What alternatives are there? Please suggest something.

 

As Allan indicates above and as Dave and Greig also point out in their own ways, gossip and speculation is the only currency we have. Why would a business engage with its shareholders at a time when most of them are either working or inadvertently haven't been told about the meeting? The old board had the club by the throat; the latest incarnation has the club by the throat and the balls. The former can't let out a squeal as the latter is torn away.

 

For all the chumsy-wumsy crap about fan initiatives and brave futures we've so far had a strip that looks like something from 40 years ago and a t-shirt that looks like a plate of puke. Meaningful engagement. Serious, meaningful engagement that gets us excited? F*ck all. As someone else said, meet the new boss ...

 

So, here's my tuppence worth: Friday's vote goes through and we're going to see Thistle bought out of the property company somewhere down the line. This lets the club pay its bills. There are pretty words about a new era for Thistle.

 

There's more bloodletting on the Thistle board and 'fresh talent' comes in from companies associated with Beattie and Allan.

 

The entire ground is owned by the property company and its 'Thistle-minded' directors. These directors are also hard-nosed and successful businessmen. Suddenly, the football club business becomes a burden. No-one likes to be associated with the death of a cultural institution, so there's a share sale and the rump of fans buys into it. The board graciously steps down and, to much fanfare, Thistle becomes 'fan run'. After all, it's what we wanted.

 

Thistle's board is told Firhill will be sold off for property development. Mission accomplished.

 

 

PS: If this club is to have a future it looks like lot of people who dislike and distrust each other will have to start making nice with each other.

 

McKennan - For me it doesnt stack up ,if you were going to assett strip the time to do it was last September ,PTFC go pop roll up the assetts, blame the last lot ,your hands are clean -why pump lots of cash and resource into something you are looking to sell off ,it makes no sense ,the other stuff reference fan and shareholder engagement & communications I agree with you 100%.

[McKennan]

Jim, I have no idea when if or how what I outlined will go down - it's merely a feeling and neither more or less valid than anyone else's perspective. There are things we can see coming and things we cannot. I'm sure you understand that.

 

Your post (hello again, by the way) has dealt with what was. What's your take on what lies ahead?

 

You ran into the blazing building to save it. Perhaps other folk ran into the blazing building with other things in mind, like grabbing the silverware. Some people walk sideways to move forward. Why wasn't there a boardroom bloodbath and why didn't the asset stripping begin months ago, you ask. Never heard of a bloodless coup?

 

You have faith that the people you introduced to the club at its time of need are as good as their word. I hope you're right. You have their friendship. The fans have nothing but vague promises from them.

 

So, when you and everyone else gets to the meeting on Friday, how about asking the board and its non-shareholders for a map of our road ahead? Ask those who have holdings in the club and the property club where the venture ends. I'll bet you the nastiest surprises come from those closest to us.

Edited August 30, 2011 by McKennan

[Jordanhill Jag]

Jim, I have no idea when if or how what I outlined will go down - it's merely a feeling and neither more or less valid than anyone else's perspective. There are things we can see coming and things we cannot. I'm sure you understand that.

 

Your post (hello again, by the way) has dealt with what was. What's your take on what lies ahead?

 

You ran into the blazing building to save it. Perhaps other folk ran into the blazing building with other things in mind, like grabbing the silverware. Some people walk sideways to move forward. Why wasn't there a boardroom bloodbath and why didn't the asset stripping begin months ago, you ask. Never heard of a bloodless coup?

 

You have faith that the people you introduced to the club at its time of need are as good as their word. I hope you're right. You have their friendship. The fans have nothing but vague promises from them.

 

So, when you and everyone else gets to the meeting on Friday, how about asking the board and its non-shareholders for a map of our road ahead? Ask those who have holdings in the club and the property club where the venture ends. I'll bet you the nastiest surprises come from those closest to us.

 

 

Fair enough and yes agreed its History ,was just trying to fill in the gaps.

 

For me if they were as sharp operators as is being suggested -they could have done us over ,nothwistanding that two of the previous Directors also invested in Propco with little said ,so if there was a conspiracy more than the current Board were involved.As for your taking over the property and handing the Club over to the Fans with Fan ownership,if we come to that- being honest we wont do that badly in my opinion.

 

My take and I emphasise its an opinion based on the facts I know a)The M&A are outdated and need to be redone b)New Company Secretary has kittens on outdated M&A 3)Its pointed out that current M&A have big exposure to those investing in Propco and the possibilty -this needs to be addressed quickly.

 

The disconnect ,lack of trust,lack of plans ,lack of communications ,lack of explanation -lack of direction lead us to people (rightly so) having serious doubts as to the proposals.

 

Add in we are die-ing on our arse in just about everything that affects us as fans and we are where we are.Plus the Pies are rubbish !!!

 

Jim

[sandy]

Two thoughts:

 

1) this situation is a fecking mess; there are too many people playing with politics and personal power-trips, they have lost sight of what matters most (the survival of our football club).

 

2) its good to have JJ back.