David Beattie

[allyo]

I think he's doing great and I enjoyed the piece. And I too wish that people could get back to focussing on the positives instead of constantly looking for something to whIne about. Look around Scottish football and see how lucky we are to have someone who genuinely seems to want to do good things the right way.

[Mr Bunny]

I'd say this thread has been anything but people just having a go at the board. Most of the critics have admitted the board has done some things well. That doesn't make them immune from criticism. I'd say it's fair criticism for as far as I can see they were a) slow to respond when the news first broke and 2) their statement when they did finally respond wasn't at all clear as to whether this will apply only when Celtic visit.

 

Nobody as far I've seen has really gotten nasty about this (compare a few years back threads about the board) and it's a bit of a nonsense to say this is just folk looking to find something to complain about. You might not agree with them but they're entitled to their opinion on this.

[twinny]

Or 3) - Non-Celtic away fans in a segregated north stand.

 

How would you organise turnstiles etc in a segregated North Stand?

 

You'd have to move one set of turnstiles further over, put a fence/wall up between the stand and the turnstiles to make sure one set of fans travel under the stand to the far entrance segregating them from the other set using the near side, double the catering available to that stand. It would be daft.

[LawleffErskeneDoohlan_Inc]

Think there has been a bit of journalistic licence taken with that piece.

 

Don't remember our debt ever being £3M and Beattie said at the meet the board night a couple of seasons back that our debt was less than £500K and would have been paid off in full but for the bank putting penalty clauses in place for early repayment.

 

I hope the same journalistic licence has been applied to the away fans. I would be absolutely gutted to hear that we have given it back to away fans.

 

IIRC debt was just over £1.2 mill at time of propco. If propco had bought Firhill 100% the deal would have virtually wiped out debt. When revised to 50% it almost halved it.

 

 

[potty trained]

IIRC debt was just over £1.2 mill at time of propco. If propco had bought Firhill 100% the deal would have virtually wiped out debt. When revised to 50% it almost halved it.

 

From the press at the time of Propco (August2009).

 

The £1m investment will cut the club’s £1.6m debt in half and reduce annual repayments and interest payments by 50%. There will be an exit premium of 5% for investors.

 

Which would suggest that in August 2009 our debt halved to 800k. so we have cleared a further 300k off that in 4 years.

 

 

 

Edited to add... a year after Propco, Sept 2010, Cowan, in one of his last engagements with the press before resigning, was again proclaiming financial doom and part time football was on the horizon.

Edited June 24, 2013 by potty trained

[LawleffErskeneDoohlan_Inc]

 

 

From the press at the time of Propco (August2009).

 

The £1m investment will cut the club’s £1.6m debt in half and reduce annual repayments and interest payments by 50%. There will be an exit premium of 5% for investors.

 

Thanks pt, so I was slightly out but the rreduction to 600k was correct as such. Your quote from press does remind me though as to what I felt at the time was a strange line, in that "the £1 million investment will cut the club's £1.6 million debt in half " and that whoever wrote that line wasn't very good at basic arithmetic, or the at least one of the two figures quoted was incorrect to some degree.

[Lenziejag]

 

 

Thanks pt, so I was slightly out but the rreduction to 600k was correct as such. Your quote from press does remind me though as to what I felt at the time was a strange line, in that "the £1 million investment will cut the club's £1.6 million debt in half " and that whoever wrote that line wasn't very good at basic arithmetic, or the at least one of the two figures quoted was incorrect to some degree.

 

Not all the 1M need go against the outstanding debt

[Harry Wragg]

Don't necessarily disagree with you but think you are being a bit of a hypocrite here. I remember you telling us that Archie wasn't the right man for the job after taking 7 points from his first 3 games.

 

So be careful before jumping on your high horse.

Didnt say he wasnt capable , but certainly did have my reservations due to him being untried /untested, and I am very very happy in this case to have been proved entirely, totally and unequivocably WRONG and to any who got upset at my opinion (and I am entitled to one ) then I apologise profusely, learning a valuable lesson in the interim , which is , be careful what you post here , because there are too many sensitive buggers who reckon they know it all and no one else knows better !!!

[Jaggernaut]

David Beattie interview in today's Herald:

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/questions-of-balance-tally-with-the-scale-of-ambition-at-firhill.21480984

 

 

So the club does appear to have planning permission to include a "small" stand at the city end...

[uberteeb]

"Our hands are tied. There would be 10,000 at the Celtic game and we have a duty of care to 10,000, not a few people [the unhappy group of Thistle fans] whose views I do understand. We need to look at the big picture.""

 

As chairman of the club his first duty must surely be to fans who have been going for decades, who have been giving money to the club for years and who will continue to do so for the rest of their days.

 

His hands are not tied, he can give Celtic the usual away section of the JHS only.

 

He can call out the authorities on their inability to prevent Celtic supporters from breaking the law and endangering public safety..

 

"Falling out with some of their own supporters pains Beattie because he prides himself on being transparent and honest with them"

 

Where was this transparency with the Sevco affair last summer?

 

"It would be fair to say I'm the worst football fan at the club," he says. "I probably know the least about the football side of it. I've always been a fan but never a supporter: in other words, I always looked at the papers and the results, but I was never at the games."

 

Ahhh, so he doesn't know what its like to go to games as a supporter. I would never have guessed

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Knowing that propco is a "benign consortium" is so reassuring.

 

Actually not a bad article when taken in its entirety. It's only natural tho' that Flaregate and the £3m debt patter will again be highlighted.

[ian_mac]

He's certainly getting himself about isn't he?

 

Again, you have to wonder why he is doing so many interviews just now.

[Willjag]

I wonder how old that interview is? Still giving the impression that it will be all games the Thistle support will be moved from the North Stand.

[1 John Lambie]

He's certainly getting himself about isn't he?

 

Again, you have to wonder why he is doing so many interviews just now.

 

Because he's the chairman of the promoted club & a new voice that journalists are interested in hearing from? Guessing but I'd presume the Ross County chairman was asked to do alot of interviews last season.

[potty trained]

It's great to see the term "wooden stand" getting so much space. Just like the old days.

 

If you tell a lie often enough, folk will take it as truth.

[ColinKelvin]

Never joined in the north stand myself but from the JHS the extra atmosphere generated last season was superb, as many others have said. It's therefore sad and more than a little shoddy that the club/chairman did not make any up front statement to the fans that the north stand singing section would not be facilitated by the club in the SPL and that folk have had to second guess the plans from comments in interviews during and after 'Flaregate'. Not very impressive.

 

However, if away fans are generally going to be in the north stand, and the old main stand is going to be back in use and for home fans when they are, is there any reason why a section of that (e.g. the centre) should not be designated as the new singing section of the stadium? I know it's a bit old and decrepit but if our 'Ultras' were there, singing, with the flags etc, then they'd be more prominent in televised games - which would reflect well on the club. Just an idea and probably a stupid idea at that, but....?

[yoda-jag]

"Our hands are tied. There would be 10,000 at the Celtic game and we have a duty of care to 10,000, not a few people [the unhappy group of Thistle fans] whose views I do understand. We need to look at the big picture."

 

"A few people" ?

 

667 people signed the petition. These are people who would have heard about the petition through wat, p&b, or the fans fb page. In other words, i'd guess only about 50% of our support were aware of the petition.

 

Even disregarding that 50%, 667 is a heck of a lot more than "a few people".

 

The NS regularily attracted well over 667 per match, and as season went on, numbers in NS steadily kept increasing over the piece. In SPFABCL or whatever they are calling it, it's likely it would be even better attended by Thistle supporters, thats on the proviso that the club stuck to their word of a year ago when the move was made, that it would become and remain a Thistle supporters area of the stadium.

 

So for Beattie to state it's only " a few" thistle fans who are unhappy at this, is quite simply insulting.

 

 

 

And as for "we need to look at the big picture" ..... yes, it's time you started to David, instead of this insular head in sand stance you have adopted.

 

 

 

 

Never joined in the north stand myself but from the JHS the extra atmosphere generated last season was superb, as many others have said. It's therefore sad and more than a little shoddy that the club/chairman did not make any up front statement to the fans that the north stand singing section would not be facilitated by the club in the SPL and that folk have had to second guess the plans from comments in interviews during and after 'Flaregate'. Not very impressive.

 

However, if away fans are generally going to be in the north stand, and the old main stand is going to be back in use and for home fans when they are, is there any reason why a section of that (e.g. the centre) should not be designated as the new singing section of the stadium? I know it's a bit old and decrepit but if our 'Ultras' were there, singing, with the flags etc, then they'd be more prominent in televised games - which would reflect well on the club. Just an idea and probably a stupid idea at that, but....?

 

 

As the post above shows, the impact of having the NS populated by thistle supporters was seen and valued by those in the JHS too, and i think we would be hard pressed to find one person who attended Firhill last season and who would have come away saying the atmosphere was not improved by having part of the Thistle support in the NS, and ultimately benefited the team and acted as the 12th man.

 

On this thread, many posts and pertinent points have been made - has Beattie considered or addressed any of these? (No is the short answer based on his latest use of the press to peddle the perception that this is a nothing issue and no Thistle supporter is really bothered about it). There have been a number of valid and workable alternatives suggested, to ensure the NS remains red and yellow and populated by Thistle supporters, while accomodating opposition supporters safely elsewhere inside Firhill.

 

Has anyone received a reply to their emails to the club, other than the generic auto response?

 

Where is the news about the much promised but never happening Meet the Board ?

 

It's easy to use the media, and put out such bland and misleading info, when you are a club chairman.

 

Try getting the media to give the same airtime or column inches to a supporter or group of supporters, the people who are the customers and lifeblood of any club ..... good luck with that.

 

As the trained potty user said earlier, if you tell a lie (or lets call it a mistruth in Beatties case, don't want nasty letters now do we) often enough people will believe (and accept) it.

 

And it's much easier to do so and achieve, when you'll speak to and respond to the media, but not the plebs, fans, supporters or whatever you wish to call them Mr Beattie.

 

 

 

ETA: Rewind a year ago, and it was the same, when it came to the other lot. Quite happy to say he listens to the supporters, but when push comes to shove and it involves either of the ugly two, he goes deaf and gets his nose brown.

 

Yes, he and rest of board have done well for the club in some other areas and issues, but there remains an arrogance and a f you culture within the boardroom towards those who come through the turnstiles.

Edited July 1, 2013 by yoda-jag

[Dr.D]

Many of the 667 were very probably a knee jerk reaction to the initial announcement but quite possibly would reconsider their decision when confronted with all the facts.

[potty trained]

Many of the 667 were very probably a knee jerk reaction to the initial announcement but quite possibly would reconsider their decision when confronted with all the facts.

 

What facts, would make folk reconsider?

[Mr Bunny]

To me this is the most annoying thing. The complete lack of clarity. Statements are made which seem to say we get the NS when the Celtic are not in attendance but when you look at the words closely they could easily mean we don't get it at any time.

 

All it takes is a clear statement, when Celtic come they get the NS (I know some of you would not prefer this but be realistic) but at all other times the NS stand is for Thistle fans only. But he won't do that and we can only assume since he does seem to have command of the Queen's English that it's a deliberate leaving of a loophole to allow them to use the NS for other supporters when they want to do that.

 

All he has to say is that "Thistle fans will be in the NS except [insert qualification regarding one team]" It's that easy.

[The Sons of Somner]

"A few people" ? 667 people signed the petition. These are people who would have heard about the petition through wat, p&b, or the fans fb page. In other words, i'd guess only about 50% of our support were aware of the petition. Even disregarding that 50%, 667 is a heck of a lot more than "a few people". The NS regularily attracted well over 667 per match, and as season went on, numbers in NS steadily kept increasing over the piece. In SPFABCL or whatever they are calling it, it's likely it would be even better attended by Thistle supporters, thats on the proviso that the club stuck to their word of a year ago when the move was made, that it would become and remain a Thistle supporters area of the stadium. So for Beattie to state it's only " a few" thistle fans who are unhappy at this, is quite simply insulting. And as for "we need to look at the big picture" ..... yes, it's time you started to David, instead of this insular head in sand stance you have adopted. As the post above shows, the impact of having the NS populated by thistle supporters was seen and valued by those in the JHS too, and i think we would be hard pressed to find one person who attended Firhill last season and who would have come away saying the atmosphere was not improved by having part of the Thistle support in the NS, and ultimately benefited the team and acted as the 12th man. On this thread, many posts and pertinent points have been made - has Beattie considered or addressed any of these? (No is the short answer based on his latest use of the press to peddle the perception that this is a nothing issue and no Thistle supporter is really bothered about it). There have been a number of valid and workable alternatives suggested, to ensure the NS remains red and yellow and populated by Thistle supporters, while accomodating opposition supporters safely elsewhere inside Firhill. Has anyone received a reply to their emails to the club, other than the generic auto response? Where is the news about the much promised but never happening Meet the Board ? It's easy to use the media, and put out such bland and misleading info, when you are a club chairman. Try getting the media to give the same airtime or column inches to a supporter or group of supporters, the people who are the customers and lifeblood of any club ..... good luck with that. As the trained potty user said earlier, if you tell a lie (or lets call it a mistruth in Beatties case, don't want nasty letters now do we) often enough people will believe (and accept) it. And it's much easier to do so and achieve, when you'll speak to and respond to the media, but not the plebs, fans, supporters or whatever you wish to call them Mr Beattie. ETA: Rewind a year ago, and it was the same, when it came to the other lot. Quite happy to say he listens to the supporters, but when push comes to shove and it involves either of the ugly two, he goes deaf and gets his nose brown. Yes, he and rest of board have done well for the club in some other areas and issues, but there remains an arrogance and a f you culture within the boardroom towards those who come through the turnstiles.

 

Like this, I do.

[uberteeb]

That's a very good point about the numbers on the petition. And it is very true to say that most fans won't have known about.

 

His comments today were patronising to say the least. He is fully aware how many people are really pissed off about this but dismisses it as "a few". He clearly isn't an idiot given he runs a successful business, why is he willingly disenfranchising a very significant proportion of his 'customers'? I wouldn't expect that from someone with a successful business, would he discontinue a product in his bakery that was bought by 25%+ of his customers each day if he didn't really have to?

[allyo]

One thing that strikes me in all this is that in our one game with a capacity crowd this season, against Morton, the overspill was from the Jackie Husband to the North Stand, not the other way round. So the large majority of Jags fans still want to be in the JH. If there are going to be accusations of arrogance and eff you attitudes, it could as easily be directed at the noisy minority who seem determined to paint the NS as the Thistle fans' position of choice and promote the cause of away fans in the Jackie Husband. Not taking away from the positive effect of the NS singing section, but the fact is it is not the best stand in the ground.

(And now I run away)

[thornwoodjag]

One thing that strikes me in all this is that in our one game with a capacity crowd this season, against Morton, the overspill was from the Jackie Husband to the North Stand, not the other way round. So the large majority of Jags fans still want to be in the JH. If there are going to be accusations of arrogance and eff you attitudes, it could as easily be directed at the noisy minority who seem determined to paint the NS as the Thistle fans' position of choice and promote the cause of away fans in the Jackie Husband. Not taking away from the positive effect of the NS singing section, but the fact is it is not the best stand in the ground.

(And now I run away)

surely the JHS was busiest because of the child restrictions. They couldn't wait to get in NS when told to move. Edited July 1, 2013 by thornwoodjag

[1 John Lambie]

That's a very good point about the numbers on the petition. And it is very true to say that most fans won't have known about.

 

His comments today were patronising to say the least. He is fully aware how many people are really pissed off about this but dismisses it as "a few". He clearly isn't an idiot given he runs a successful business, why is he willingly disenfranchising a very significant proportion of his 'customers'? I wouldn't expect that from someone with a successful business, would he discontinue a product in his bakery that was bought by 25%+ of his customers each day if he didn't really have to?

The interview was given before the one with Hugh Keevins I believe, at that time it probably was a few complaints.