Planning Application Now Submitted.

[GrantB]

I was against PropCo from the word go.

 

However, when it was said that the money they made from it would half the debt and the moeny saved be used for the playing budget, I reluctantly accepted it as the best thing for the club.

 

However, what has happened since is that the club have slashed the playing budget to such an extent that we cannot even sign a goalkeeper and have given us as much of a chance of winning the league as St Mirren have of winning the SPL with last season's Cowdenbeath team.

 

That is an absolute disgrace and one that I for one as a fan am not willing to accept. These people are killing the club as surely as plunging us into liquidation. Only it is a slow, lingering death we are being subjected to.

 

There wont be a Thistle left to support unless there is radical change at boardroom level.

[The Incredible Adam Spark]

That is an absolute disgrace and one that I for one as a fan am not willing to accept.

So what are you going to do about it?

[GrantB]

So what are you going to do about it?

 

Not a lot that I can do as a fan other than to attend away games instead of home ones and not join the farcical centenary fund.

[Steven H]

The only way for the Trust, as a supporters association, to have the influence people want it to have is for fans to join it. Put your ideas, thoughts, complaints and points of action forwards. Let the majority speak rather than leave decisions to a minority who can be treated as they have been by the BoD BECAUSE they are a minority.

 

Only with a strong Jags Trust that has a large membership of Thistle fans, who want nothing but to see our Club survive and prosper, can we influence anything never mind something as big as Propco. Or is there another way to ensure the fans can have influence?

 

All the 'past decisions' are history that can't be changed, the 1876 Club/CF merger seems to be a big problem for many but surely this went to a vote and the majority elected for the merger?

 

Yes the JT may need ANOTHER change of direction in order to make it what we want (we being Thistle fans everywhere), so the folk who aint happy with it now and aint members because they arent happy should have a lot of thoughts in how it can be changed for the better. Like I said before, and David has said earlier, we can dwell on the past or try to move forward as best we can! So if there is a better way of doing that than having a strong JT with a large active membership, and in the process having the numbers to make the BoD listen to and respect us, then lets hear it.

[Third Lanark]

I was against PropCo from the word go.

 

However, when it was said that the money they made from it would half the debt and the moeny saved be used for the playing budget, I reluctantly accepted it as the best thing for the club.

 

However, what has happened since is that the club have slashed the playing budget to such an extent that we cannot even sign a goalkeeper and have given us as much of a chance of winning the league as St Mirren have of winning the SPL with last season's Cowdenbeath team.

 

That is an absolute disgrace and one that I for one as a fan am not willing to accept. These people are killing the club as surely as plunging us into liquidation. Only it is a slow, lingering death we are being subjected to.

 

There wont be a Thistle left to support unless there is radical change at boardroom level.

Grant like the majority of us breathe Partick Thistle, for you to go down this route shows how much damage these 'characters' are doing to the club.

 

Like you I am seething at Cowans comments but how we would still have a budget that would allow us to challenge fo rpromotion, the fact we are so skint to sign a goalkeeper up till now gives me the impression he was talking a load of rubbish. I would urge you and any other supporter as angry to email him on [email protected] and ask basically what he is playing at.

 

Only takes a couple of mins to send an email and contrary to what was stated before he does actually read the emails, again given that he and the other board members claim not to read the forums they will probably pretend to be ignorant of the fans anger, they cant quite do the same when they are emailed directly.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Third Lanark

[Third Lanark]

Edited July 16, 2010 by Third Lanark

[stolenscone]

I personally find that it can be difficult at times to have a productive and properly engaged discussion with folk in this format. I've typed and deleted a couple of responses already because the substance or tone wasn't what I wanted to achieve -- I therefore think that it's best just to let this one lie. I'd like to think that I've made my views as clearly as I can, but if I haven't achieved that, then I can only apologies.

 

All the best

 

David

[chapwithwings]

Mr Withwings -- my feeling is that had the meeting been well attended by members and non-members who put forth a strong and well argued case against supporting the proposal, then the outcome may very well have been different. But as I said before, they didn't, it wasn't, and so we either need to dwell on the past, or else try to move forward as best we can...

 

Mr Withwings? Call me Iain, David, it's a little less formal.

 

The point has been made elsewhere in the thread, far more articulately than I could manage, about the trust's fence-sitting abstention last year, but I think it's worth emphasising. Because while you say try to move forward as best we can, how can members of the support have confidence in the Trust when it continues to either fudge or back plans which are NOT universally popular and are NOT the best direction for the club's long term survival.

 

The club is betting on an unrealistic, ill-thought out property development at a time when the building industry and property industries are in downturn, has sold off a substantial part of the Firhill footprint to a company largely comprised of its own board of directors for a sum of questionable market value, have failed to deliver the investment in the playing staff we were told these developments would enable, failed to consult with fans properly about the proposals... and yet the Trust has not adequately objected to any of this.

 

Elsewhere in the thread it's been said this is the only option we've got. it's not - the only realistic long-term survival option for Firhill is the removal and replacement of the existing management, who have systematically undone all the work StJ did 12 years ago - and replaced it with a feeling of apathy.

 

And before the usual 'well, how do we do that/where's the money coming from' catcalls appear - I don't know. I have no immediate answer, no magic wand to wave. But it IS something that is achievable - look at Stirling as an example of how a motivated fanbase, concerned about the club's future, can save a side in danger.

 

Surely that is what the Trust should be doing - actively engaging with and motivating the support to fight for the club's future, rather than sitting on the fence and occasionally lobbing 'well, you had your chance to come to the meeting' barbs at critics. Instead, with the Board/FDL railroading their plans through and putting Thistle in the position we now find ourselves in, we seem more likely to end up in the Clubs in Crisis pages of When Saturday Comes than the roll-call of champions.

 

We have an apathetic support now rather than a motivated one. But I don't see an incentive for the support TO be motivated. Comments like "had the meeting been well attended by members and non-members who put forth a strong and well argued case against supporting the proposal, then the outcome may very well have been different" don't help. You talk, David, of not dwelling in the past. Fine - so what is the Trust going to do in the future?

Edited July 17, 2010 by chapwithwings

[McKennan]

And before the usual 'well, how do we do that/where's the money coming from' catcalls appear - I don't know. I have no immediate answer, no magic wand to wave.

 

Then all else is moot. You have identified a problem but 'have no immediate answer', ergo status quo.

 

Don't like the composition of the board? Organise the shareholders and remove those members of the board everyone seems to be screaming about. That's how other companies with shareholders seem to do it.

 

No money? The club is about two million quid in the hole. There are groups and financiers who'll stump that up no problem, many are here in the US. They'll want their percentage every month and a big bite out of what assets the club has.

[potty trained]

in black and white.

 

if this does not go through, how has partick thistle football club benfited?

 

i assume greatly?

 

half the land has been sold to a company. how much money has entered the partick thistle bank account on the back of this?

 

the main stand can still be used for all ticket (old firm cup) games, so therefore there has been no loss to the club through the sale.

 

in cash terms, now the land has been sold, and thistle have the money from propco for the sale, how will ptfc benefit further?

 

is it only as 50% share holders of propco?

 

if so, then surely ptfc has made the big buck, and any future profit will be a dribble?

 

just how can the club benefit further from this deal?

 

is it fair to say that partick thistle as a club has gained from this deal, and that there is a possibility that the thisle minded fans may loose out?

 

 

or is it the case that certain board members are not too thistle minded, have seperated assets from the club, which they now own for their own gain, should the club go bust?

 

as a joint equal share holder in ptfc, is the trust therefore a joint equal shareholder in the 50% stake ptfc has in propco. if so, what return do the trust expect on this deal?

 

so, i'll ask again...

 

or, as they used to say... bump.