"I really don’t want to say much more than David has already said, but for the record the club’s inability to budget (and to mange this) has been the root cause of the financial gaps which have occurred over the past few years. Yes Tom Hughes was a member of those boards but trust me it was not his singular contribution which made this happen, indeed I found Tom to be the ‘loudest voice’ raising concerns over the level of expenditure."
Billy Allan, Feb 18th 2011
Waited until today to post this because no other day is more appropriate for it. You can judge for yourselves the impact of this statement from Thistle's man of mystery about his fellow Propco investor.
It's certainly very revealing to have someone at the heart of the club finally come clean and identify precisely the root cause of our problems. Let's see those words again:
"for the record the club’s inability to budget (and to mange this) has been the root cause of the financial gaps which have occurred over the past few years."
They couldn't budget properly, couldn't manage the budget even when they set it and the level of expenditure was a cause for concern and, apparently, disagreement within the boardroom. Wow.
But it raises one very uncomfortable question for us: whodunnit?
If it wasn't Tom, maybe it was Allan. But if Allan was to blame for this catastrophic mismanagement, why would the club tolerate him as new head of the Business Club and continue with him as official matchday host in hospitality? Makes no sense at all.
So perhaps it was Eddie. But if that was true, only a lunatic would leave Eddie in charge of the Centenary Fund. (Actually, even if it isn't true...)
Hang on! It must have been Jim. Yeah, that'll be why they voted him off the board. But wait a minute - Jim was only an associate director and wasn't involved in these decisions at all, so if there's one man who absolutely couldn't be to blame for this, it's Jim.
So, by process of elimination, it's got to be Grant and Ronnie. I know we all think they are minor figures on the board, but if it wasn't Tom or Allan or Eddie or Jim or David or Billy (or Kieron) then who else could it be? But if these two guys were really the ones bullying poor Tom into this reckless budgeting, how come they weren't the ones to get voted out with his pocket full of proxies? The whole idea is crazy.
Like a PTFC budget, nothing adds up. Whch brings us back to where we started.
"We are still recovering from building the stand and dropping out of the SPL. We decided to change our policy last year," explained Hughes. "In the past we had always reacted by cutting costs but when you do that you go into freefall.
"We had a big discussion on whether we should turn part-time, but we made the decision to stay full-time. This year, with the management changes, we decided to support Ian and stay full-time. At the beginning of last year we budgeted for a loss and gave him a budget to sign players on longer-term contracts."
NB: Just so we're clear how much money this board budgeted to lose in a single year, here's another quote from the same article:
"This year, we expected to lose between £300,000 to £350,000..."
If anyone has a copy of that budget, it would be incredibly interesting to see the detail.
Another trip down memory lane. As fans talk about encouraging the board to make better use of the stadium away from matchdays and the board talk about producing some dynamic new scheme to involve everyone, let's go back nearly 30 years and see how far we've come. Or not.
Peter Shand and his generation of directors are long gone from the club. I'm sure they had their faults, too, but they didn't seem to have the open contempt for the ordinary supporter that the club's public pronouncements have reeked of in recent years.
Others in and around the boardroom have had many, many years to take the club forward, but are we in any way better off than we were back in 1982? It's hard to see how. So many things have gone wrong and to listen to the men in charge, none of it - absolutely none of it - can be blamed on them. They can blame it on the SPL, the world economic crisis, the council, the internet, the boo boys...and you, in your dwindling numbers. But not them because they are Thistle-minded and martyrs to the cause.
If I'd been hanging around the boardroom for the best part of the last 15 years I like to think I'd be too ashamed to stay around a moment longer. I like to think I'd take some responsibility, apologise and crawl away.
But maybe I'd sit tight, keep a grip on my wee bit of crumbling empire and backstab anyone who got in the way.
And when it all goes under, I could just get the Evening Times to tell you how great I was and how it was really all the fault of (INSERT NAME).
We've been sweeping out the archive of key moments in the club's modern history this week and wrap it up (for now) with a gem.
Following on from Brown McMaster's epic post from 1998, full of hope and determination, we now jump forward to 2006. After the miracle of the Lambie years, we were now getting back into deep trouble.
We'd fallen from the SPL to the Second Division and clawed our way back up to the First under Dick Campbell (to whom we all send good wishes). But the football wasn't pleasing many fans and some of the results were starting to get scary.
With deep problems on the park, an unpopular manager, attendances flatlining despite a promotion and their grandiose development plans in tatters, it's no wonder the board were starting to get jittery.
When one fan going by the username of Red Monkey stated on the ptfc.net forum that a director had suggested Dick was just one defeat away from the chop, the club had the great idea of issuing legal threats against him and the site as a whole. Even when they climbed down later, it was badly handled, a sign of things to come under the chairmanship of Allan Cowan.
Which brings us to this dotnet classic. To his credit, one of the rare occasions when a director actually posted a message on a fans' forum without pretending to be someone else. Step forward Tom Hughes, AKA Impecunious:
I am the director who forecast Armageddon. I am also the director who said that he could deal with losing games more than losing money. Both honest assessments of the situation and an attempt to make it clear how precarious balancing financial prudence with success on the football park can be. I was severely criticised by posters on this board for both.
What I was acutely aware of was that our fans do not easily grade up. Although a lot of them have a certain amount of wealth and have businesses, the hospitality is seldom full. The Golden Thistle has less than 10 paying members. The majority of our support, and this is not a criticism, prefer to pay as they go or many buy an ordinary season ticket. The appointment of Gerry Carey was an optimistic view that this could be changed. The response to Gerry Carey's initiatives was so poor that the Board had to accept that the expense was unaffordable. Some may say that was because of the manager, but it is a situation that has pertained throughout my 10 year involvement.
Partick Thistle lottery makes no money after expenses. The 800 club has given PTFC only 10K in the current season. Clubs in the 3rd division do better. No matter what is tried, nothing seems to work. My firm has contributed in the region of 15k per annum for the past 10 years. D H Morris, TPC, Cowan & Co, Environmental Air Conditioning and only a few others give the Club substantial support. It may be argued that the money is wasted anyway, but that doesn't help the Club.
The bank debt is heading north of 1.5million and it is difficult to reduce forecast losses for the reasons above. A director resigned on Monday and it is a tribute to the Chairman that continuity was maintained. For my part, I am happy to pass the parcel, but if Red Monkey's best idea is to take free shares and everything will be OK, then I don't buy that.
Another gripe that I have on a personal level is the failure to disclose the Director who it is alleged gave Red Monkey certain information. As explained to Lobster Noise, I personally, along with other members of the Board felt it important to know if we had a trojan horse in our midst. It is my understanding that Allan Cowan offered to receive the information confidentially to allow us to deal with it. The accuser did not have the bottle to disclose the name or withdraw the remark.
The statement made by Allan Cowan is not scaremongering. Although we have assets, without appropriate steps we will run out of cash. The suggestions on this site that administration could be a good thing are ludicrous. For my part, I will do my best to negotiate a solution which is beneficial for the football club. The Board are war weary and realistic proposals and suggestions which will have a major impact are invited. Time is of the essence.
Completing a hat-trick of posts, is it really almost five years since the board so proudly smashed up the last bit of terracing and led us into a bright, financially secure future?
Previously, this blog featured an explanation from Brown McMaster of how he and Tom Hughes and the Jags Trust came to receive one million shares each in the aftermath of Save the Jags. That was taken from a couple of internet posts made to the Over Land And Sea site which was the main discussion forum for Jags fans back in the troubled times of 1998.
In order to give a fuller and, no doubt, fairer picture of what went on at the time, here's the full text of Brown's posts and the thinking behind that arrangement. It's amazing to see now that of the 5.5 million shares that were either bought by or gifted to Norman Springford, Eddie Prentice, Brown McMaster, Tom Hughes, The Jags Trust and Jim Oliver, and are all still held by them or their relations, not a single one of those shares is now represented in the boardroom when decisions are made about the club's future. (Although we have seen how those shares can still be used to oust a working director.)
A complete subversion of the arrangement set up back then has been achieved without consultation or scarcely a murmur of effective dissent along the way. Who ultimately benefits the most from this remains to be seen. Our hunch is that it won't be the fans.
Here are the posts from December 1998. It's a long read, but really essential stuff as this is an inside view of the cornerstone of the club's post-Save the Jags restructuring:
Please find attached file for you and your readers to be included in Supporters Views, writen by Mr. Brown McMaster - Chairman PTFC.
Regards,
Scott C. McMaster.
In order to ensure there is no uncertainty regarding the ownership of the Club, the respective shareholdings of the various parties in control or the payment they made for their shares I detail below the situation as frankly as I can together with the reasons for the various decisions.
Approximately one year ago Partick Thistle F.C. was effectively bankrupt. In any normal business the Bank would have forced the Company into liquidation. I was approached by a number of people as someone who cared for the Club and had some idea of how the Club worked, having previously been the Vice-Chairman for a number of years. I was given all financial and other information required by me, by the then current Board. The situation looked to be irretrievable, but I felt I could not live with myself if I did not at least give it a try. I approached a friend Gilbert Anderson ( a lawyer ) and we spent several hours going over various options. He suggested we meet again together with the friend and fellow season ticket holder who he sat next to every week at Firhill, Tom Hughes, who he advised was an expert on liquidation and receivership. Gilbert felt if Tom Hughes could not resolve the financial matters then nobody could. A meeting was therefore arranged for the following day. Various meeting were then held involving Tom Hughes, myself and sometimes Gilbert on an almost daily basis. We decided the Club was well and truly burst.
We decided therefore that the best course of action was to try to buy time until the inevitable millionaire arrived on the scene. He/She never came.
We then had to take several severe actions which are adequately reported elsewhere, whilst we attempted to publicise the Club's plight as much as possible and hope that perhaps ten people would come forward with £100,000 each, or 1000 with £1,000 each or any other combination.
Around this time " Save the Jags" was born. I believe the initial idea was conceived one dreary night at Boghead by Allan Cowan, Robert Reid, Bobby Briggs and Michael Max. An idea for which we should all be eternally grateful. The idea was to raise money to pay the players wages until the inevitable buyer came along. He/She never did. The money raised however, allowed the Club to continue to trade and I believe the fact that so many people were involved and so much publicity was generated that it put pressure on Creditors to agree to the moratorium. " Save the Jags" was essential to save Partick Thistle and the fact that over £100,000 was raised in such a short time was quite incredible. The money was raised by the effort of many people not just the few who may be better known.
As a result of the early publicity Tom received an approach from Norman Springford, an Edinburgh hotelier to say that whilst not really a football person ( he still plays competitive hockey ) he would be interested in assisting, as he had been impressed with the efforts of the various people whom he had seen on television. Tom gave him our proposals and he agreed to become one of the ten to invest £100,000. Around the same time I spoke with Eddie Prentice who I was at school with and who I used to go to Thistle games with in the 1960's. Eddie had previously been a major sponsor of the Club through his former Company , Woodend Communications, which he had recently sold to Scottish Telecom. Eddie agreed to become another £100,000 investor in the hope that he would be one of ten. These ten effectively buying control of the Club for £1,000,000.
Tom and I spoke with many other but no more came forward with cash, just talk. We did however receive offers of help at a lower level and indeed three people with Maryhill roots or connections invested five figure sums, the most substantial being £50,000.
While various discussions were going on we had managed to receive positive feedback on the creditors compromise. Whilst things were still bleak it now looked possible to perhaps trade out of our difficulties if Tom and I continued to give the constant daily time required to resolve matters. It should be remembered that in amongst other matters we were trying to resolve an outstanding court case against a Architect who was looking for £100,000 and was not at all interested in any compromise.
Eventually it became clear that only Norman and Eddie were going to come forward with £100,000 and take up seats on the Board. This was a problem for Tom and I as we had given many hours of work, with the disruption to our business and family lives, and were going to require to continue to do so for some time, yet we were effectively going to hand over ownership of Partick Thistle for £200,000. They would have at any time in the future have been able to sell the Company to the highest bidder and any profit they made would have been a result of our efforts. We also felt we had to protect the supporters' interest who has raised so much money to keep the Club going. There would have been nothing to prevent them selling the Club the very next day to a property developer, supermarket chain or whoever. This was not why we had all worked so hard over the previous few months.
Norman suggested that a way of protecting the supporters interests was for Tom and I to be given 1,000,000 of the new 10p. "B" shares at no cost. Both he and Eddie were comfortable with this. It meant the four of us would have equal shareholdings and equal say in the running of the Club. These shares were given to us " to preserve the future of Partick Thistle Football Club", and it is on this basis that Tom and I accepted them. Tom and I then felt as an added safeguard a similar number of shares should be allocated, on the same basis to the supporters. The best way we thought of doing this was through whatever body followed the " Save the Jags". This as we all now know is the Jags Trust. It was also agreed that as the Jags Trust were to be equal major shareholders they should have a seat on the Board. This means that all five major shareholders have an equal say in the running of the Club as we all have equal voting powers.
At the end of our Financial Year, 31st. May 1998, there were 6,470,000 " B " shares allotted and issued. The five parties as detailed above have 1,000,000 each. In our year end accounts I will be shown as having 20,000 more that this. This is because the other five members of my immediate family all bought shares and my wife and 13 year old daughter's require to be to be included with my own as under Company Law they are apparently under my control!
As matters were being concluded with the Bank of Scotland it became clear, as was stated at last Tuesday's open meeting the Club was going to have a surplus of between £150,000 and £200,000. This is as Tom put it our "safety net". This surplus is currently £170,000. The Bank have granted the Club term loans amounting to £1,250,000. Additionally they have granted an overdraft £400,000. This means they are reducing our total indebtedness to £1,650,000, by " clawing back" £50,000 of the new money.
They have also insisted that that the top 50% of the overdraft is underwritten by personal guarantees. I have covered £50,000 of this ( probably against my better judgment ) and remarkably, after having written off more that £1,000,000, Jim Oliver has agreed to guarantee the other £150,000. It was also agreed at a recent Board Meeting that Jim Oliver be given 500,000 shares for no financial consideration. This means that Tom, myself, Jags Trust and Jim Oliver now control 3,500,000 of the 6,470,000 all important "B" shares ( 54.1%). This seems to me to be the safest place for control to lie. If anyone is uncomfortable with the issue of shares to Jim Oliver I would ask that they contact me with their alternative proposals, bearing in mind that a £150,000 personal guarantee is required from someone who can prove their net worth to the Bank of Scotland. If anyone doubts Jim Oliver's commitment to Partick Thistle I would like them to ask themselves if they would be prepared to write off over £1M, take a fair amount of abuse from supporters and then agree to give a £150,000 personal guarantee to allow the club to continue to trade. He may have made mistakes in the past but he is certainly being helpful now. If his guarantee is not in place the overdraft of £400,000 will immediately be reduced to £250,000. After the Bank of Scotland "clawback", as detailed above our overdraft (which includes our "safety net") is currently £280,000.
It should also be noted that in return for their assistance, which has been considerable, the Bank of Scotland are entitled to exercise their option on 10% of the share capital ( i.e. 718,889 shares) at no additional cost. This would increase the issued share capital accordingly and reduce the 54.1% figure detailed above to only 49.2%. In theory the Bank and all minority shareholders would control the Club. In practice however, this would not happen. The Bank controls the Club at the moment in any case due to conditions laid down in the various loan agreements.
I would just draw your attention to the one Clause in the Bank Loan agreement which seems to be causing some concern. Page 3 ( of 13 ) of the Option Agreement, item 6.1.3 states: "there will be no increase, reduction, consolidation, sub division or variation in the authorised or issued share capital of the Company".
Another Clause which is fairly onerous on Tom and myself ( and our families ) is on the Credit Facilities Agreement Page 18 ( of 28 ) item 6.1 " The Bank reserves the right to elect to treat any of the following as an event of default either upon or at any time after the occurrence of any of them and while the same is/are continuing unwaived" sub section ( s) then states "either of Thomas Brown McMaster 50 Langside Drive Glasgow G43 2 QT and Thomas Hughes Westways Balmore Road Bardowie G62 6Ey cease to be full-time employees or directors of the Borrower without the prior written consent of the Bank ( except by reason of ill health, death or retirement at the normal retirement age) and, in any event, a replacement acceptable to the Bank is not appointed within 30 days of that cessation."
I conclude by advising that a lot of time and thought has been put into the restructuring of Partick Thistle Football Club. I honestly believe that what we have best protects and preserves the future. We cannot put our Club at risk, not after the efforts of so many people over the last year. Power struggles only weaken and fragment a Club, that is why we have worked so hard to get it right first time. I can assure everyone that there are absolutely no hidden agendas from anyone on the Board. We only wish what is best for our Club. Our Board all support Partick Thistle and I am sure with that with the united support of all our fans we can take the Club forward towards our rightful place in Scottish Football.
Brown McMaster-Chairman P.T.F.C.
4.12.98 From: Brown McMaster:
Re my note yesterday I have noticed I have made an arithmetic error in that I forgot to add Jim Oliver's 500,000 shares on to the total issued share capital before working out the percentages. For the avoidance of doubt the number of 'B' shares now issued is 6,970,000 (i.e. the 6,470,000 issued at the Financial Year End 31st. May 1998 plus the 500,000 referred to above).
This means the 3,500,000 held by Tom Hughes, myself, Jags Trust and Jim Oliver, repr esents 50.2% of the 'B' shares, not 54.1% as I stated. There is a knock on effect to the Bank of Scotland's option rights to 10% of the share capital. Their option is now for 774,444 shares, being 10% of the issued share capital AFTER they exercise their option.^MIf they exercise their option the above figure of 50.2% would drop to 45.0%. Everything el se is as stated yesterday.
Sorry to be so pedantic by I thought it was worth clearing up what was a genuine error before someone starts to think they are being misled.
Here's a ton of them, suggested by various supporters and gathered together into one big helpful bundle by Hugh Cooper almost four years ago. Some of the newer chaps on the board weren't around way back then, but we all were. Tom Hughes can probably tell you which wastepaper bin he filed this in, but in the spirit of collaboration, we draw it to the directors' attention once more.
Some are good, others not so good, and a few have been overtaken by the passage of time, but it would be a shame if you thought you were the first people to ever put your minds to the problem of increasing club revenue. This is the supporters offering you ways to relieve them of more of their money. Perhaps if they'd been taken more seriously at the time, we wouldn't be in such a hole now.
PS: Still waiting to hear how you voted at the AGM. Open and honest, remember?
Word of warning: Someone has reported to us that his anti-virus software went haywire after clicking on the "Fans Ideas" link (which we've just removed from below here). We're not aware of any problems with the file or the link, but don't want anyone having computer difficulties, so perhaps it would be wiser to read the document as it is embedded on this page, rather than downloading a copy. If we've got any more info on this, it'll be added as an update to this post. If anyone has had similar problems, let us know - and apologies for the inconvenience.
At the recent club AGM, Jim Alexander was removed as a director of Partick Thistle.
In a statement to the Evening Times, David Beattie said:
“I think it was down to the chemistry with some of the other shareholders. Jim was a great servant for Partick Thistle and is a great fan of the club.”
In his most recent programme notes, for the postponed game against Falkirk, he stated:
Most supporters will be aware that at the recent AGM Jim Alexander was unable to receive the required votes to keep his place on the Board. It is difficult to make too much comment about this as it was a decision of the shareholders rather than the Club Board itself. What I can say is that Jim's energy, enthusiasm and dedication towards Partick Thistle can never be called into question. We all wish him the very best for the future.
And in correspondence with a disgruntled fan who asked, "Did Mr Beattie vote against Jim being re-elected? Why did Mr Beattie decide Jim should not continue on the PTFC Board?" he replied:
"You know I will not be able to comment on this point as this was a shareholder vote decision."
The much-criticised (here and elsewhere) Jags Trust was not afraid to say how it voted, so how come you're being so shy?
Come on, David. Stop dodging the question. Stop hiding behind the bullshit. You also told that supporter, "I continue to try and be honest and open..."
