Rooted In The Community.....

Re-establishing Partick Thistle as a valued and integral part of the community is one of the prime aims of the JagsTrust. Our elected member of the Club Board, Kieron Dempsey, has led the way on many initiatives as the club’s Community Director. We hope to provide you with further details over the coming weeks and months, but Kieron reports below on his excellent efforts to date:-

Our community programme has almost run full circle with the anniversary of the Trust’s first event A League for All coming in June. The programme has been running for about 18 months and as a joint initiative with the club for six months beginning November last year.This programme is designed to benefit the community and to create closer links between the Jags Trust and Partick Thistle Football Club with regard to Community Development projects and issues.

Partnerships

We are pushing ahead on a number of areas of our engagement programme and initiatives. Currently, we are in partnership or in the process of making partnerships with a number of groups including: Scottish Association for Mental Health (SAMH), Glasgow Old People’s Welfare Association (GOPWA), C.O.P.E. (Caring Over People’s Emotions), GYP (Govanhill Youth Project), WestGAP (West Glasgow Against Poverty), Street League, Show Racism the Red Card, Scottish Refugee Council, Glasgow City Education, Glasgow City Asylum Support Group and two Glasgow colleges of education. These will soon be joined by North Glasgow Mental Health and hopefully Glasgow University. In tandem with these we are now working with Glasgow Rugby on some joint initiatives.

Groups/Initiatives

We have been working with a number of groups including: the elderly, youths, school children, ethnic minorities including Roma and Asian kids and adults; NEETs (not in employment, education or in training); socially excluded groups including the homeless, disabled, people with mental health issues and, soon, those with addiction problems.

Initiatives include: ASSIST Training, Anti bullying, Learning Centre (North and South), Literacy and Numeracy, Healthy Heart, Health and Well being, food and hygiene, A League for All, Roma centred integration football team, and, possibly, a female football team.

Politically

We have had a presentation at the Scottish Parliament, had ourselves mentioned in the Commonwealth Legacy Debate, mentioned again by both the chairman and CEO of SAMH in their speeches launching their new national initiative to combat mental health issues in the 3 in 4 Project (which is an initiative based on preventive care). Finally, a visit from the Sports Minister took place at Firhill on 2nd June.

Another New Face......

We are pleased to announce that Martin Towers has joined the Trust Board with immediate effect. Biographical details for Martin are shown below, along with the details for Carol Briggs

Carol Briggs

Carol currently works in a medium secure unit supporting people with mental health issues. She has experience in fundraising on a number of levels, and has successfully set up a club in North Lanarkshire for children identified by 3 local head teachers for having bullying tendencies. Two other groups who have benefited from her fundraising experience are ptfc.net fc (now JagsTrust AFC) and theharrywraggs.com.

Carol was introduced to Thistle by my father in the late 70s. She is known to posters on the forum as Ptfccaz.

Martin Towers

Martin is 32 years old and lives in Cumbernauld. He started supporting Thistle at Secondary School after moving to Summerston. He studied maths at Stratclyde University followed by a couple of years working as a supply teacher before joining Inland Revenue (now HMRC) nearly 8 years ago.

Driving the Centenary Fund forward so it meets then exceeds its target income is the area he would like to be involved in but for the short term is happy to be involved in anything that will result in the membership seeing the Trust functioning effectively.

Further Information on Stadium Company Proposal...

The Trust Board has now received confirmation that income from all stadium activities generated after the sale and leaseback of the stadium to the property company will accrue for the benefit of the football club (i.e. the tenant under the lease).

Whilst this is welcome, we do consider that a meeting to address all of the remaining issues would be the most productive way forward, and the Trust Board will continue to press the Club Board to agree to such a meeting.

Further updates will be posted as and when information becomes available.

Update on Stadium Company Proposal

A copy of this statement in PDF format is available to download here

Introduction


Since the beginning of April, The Jags Trust has been working with a number of professional advisors (acting in their private capacity) who are also supporters of Partick Thistle to try to determine the strategy of the Football Club board in relation to the proposed split of the existing stadium assets from the football business as outlined at the Football Club AGM. These same advisors have been making their own enquiries to the Football Club board and to date only limited information has been forthcoming. The assessment made by the Trust and its advisors in this note can only ever be as good as the information provided. As more information becomes available, the Trust may require to alter its position from the one outlined below.

Given the passage of time and the ongoing uncertainty, the Trust needs to make its position clear and explain matters, to the best of its ability, to its members. The following note has been put together using information freely offered by the club board, available at the club AGM or within the public domain. Where full information has not been made available and assumptions have been made, these are clearly identified.



Background

• Partick Thistle Football Club Limited (the “Football Club”) owes a significant debt, believed to be in the region of £1.6M, to Halifax Bank of Scotland (the “Bank”).
  


• This money is secured against Firhill Stadium in the same way that a loan for a residential purchase is secured against the house that is being bought. In the event that the Football Club defaults on its loan repayments, or breaches other terms of its loan agreement with the Bank, then the Bank is entitled to recall the loan.
  


• If the Football Club is then unable to immediately repay the loan in full, the Bank would be entitled to “call up” the security, ultimately resulting in the repossession and sale of the stadium in much the same way that houses are repossessed.

Until recently, the value of Firhill has significantly outweighed the amount of debt that has been secured against it – i.e. if the Football Club were ever to default on the loan, the Bank remained confident that the money received from any repossession and sale of Firhill would be more than enough to re-pay the loan in full. (It is important to understand that the “value” of Firhill that the Bank is interested in, is the value of the land for development, most likely residential development.)

However, over the last 18 months, several things have happened which are likely to have changed the position with the Bank:

1. Property prices, and in particular the price of residential development land, have plummeted. It is possible that the land is worth less than half of the value it could have achieved if it had been sold in the summer of 2007.
   
   As a result of this, the amount of the Football Club’s debt is now much nearer to the development value of Firhill, meaning that the Bank may not be comfortable that it could easily repossess Firhill and recover its loan should the Football Club default on its repayments.
   
   Added to this, purchasers of residential development land are currently few and far between, meaning that even if the Bank repossessed, it could be difficult for it to find a suitable buyer.
   


2. The crisis within the financial sector has, amongst other things, forced all banks to carry out a review of their balance sheets, looking at which borrowers present a serious risk of defaulting on their loan repayments and, where appropriate, forcing them to take appropriate action to reduce their exposure to the risk of “bad debt”.
   


3. The recession in the wider economy will almost certainly have a detrimental impact on the Football Club’s income over the next few years.

We know from previously published annual accounts that the Football Club has already been operating at a loss for a number of years. With a possible reduction in income as a result of the recession, and in the absence of the Bank being willing to continue to support a loss making business, the Football Club may find it difficult to sustain full time football.

Add falling property prices into the mix, and it is easy to understand why the Football Club Directors believe that significant action as outlined at the Football Club’s 2009 AGM, is required to pre-empt any possible withdrawal of support by the Bank.

The Proposal

Against this backdrop, the Football Club announced plans in March 2009 to raise money through the sale of Firhill Stadium to a separate company (the “Property Company”) which would enable the Football Club to repay its debts in full to the Bank, but at the expense of selling its primary asset, namely the stadium. The Football Club announced that investors in the Property Company would be “Thistle Minded People” and that the Football Club would retain a “major interest” in the Property Company.

Immediately following the sale, the Property Company would lease Firhill back to the Football Club. Details of the terms of this lease were not released by the Football Club in March, however, the following details have since been disclosed by the Directors of the Football Club in response to questions raised by individual fans and the Jags Trust:

• The duration of the lease will be in the region of 100 years;
  
  
• A nominal annual rent (e.g. £1) will be charged by the Property Company to the Football Club under the lease;
  


• The Football Club will retain responsibility for the repair and maintenance of the stadium.
  


• The Football Club would retain a 50% interest in the Property Company. In effect, a 50% stake in the land would be sold in order to clear the debt.

The Benefits

• The sale of Firhill to the Property Company would remove the cost of servicing the debt (reported in the press to be around £175,000 per annum) from the Football Club’s balance sheet, giving it a better chance to break even without the Bank debt dragging it down.
  


• Repayment of the debt would take the Bank out of the picture and enable the Football Club to proceed safe in the knowledge that the Bank could not repossess Firhill. (Note that even if the Property Company “mortgaged” Firhill to a bank at a later date, the bank would be obliged to sell Firhill with the lease still in place should a repossession take place, so while the landlord might change, the Football Club should be unaffected.)
  


• The grant of a 100 year lease at an annual rent of £1 gives the Football Club some security to enable it to plan for the future.

The Drawbacks

• Following the sale of Firhill, the Football Club would not be able to approach a bank for any form of secured lending since it would no longer have any tangible assets to offer the bank in security. The market for unsecured lending is expensive and limited, so in effect, the Football Club would require to operate within its means going forward.
  
  For the year ending 2007, the Football Club posted losses of £269,000 (which included Bank interest costs of £100,000). In 2008, the Football Club posted losses of £512,000 (which included Bank interest costs of £83,000). Supporters will recall that the “option” granted to PTF Developments straddled these two financial years, so while the figures are skewed somewhat, any impact of that option should even itself out over the two year period.
  
  If we assume that the larger figure of £175,000 for loan repayments is correct, once this sum is deducted from the Football Club’s overheads, it appears that the Football Club is still unable to reach the break even point. In a very short space of time, without the option of further bank borrowing (this option will be lost if there is no land asset to “underpin” its business model), the Football Club will run out of money unless it is able to substantially reduce costs or increase income to enable it to break even.
  
  We are not aware of the Football Club having made any public statement as to how they intend to achieve a break even trading point.
  


• Switching from outright ownership of Firhill to being the tenant under a lease (even a long lease) presents its own problems. Insolvency of a tenant will typically result in the landlord being able to terminate the lease.
  
  In practical terms, this means that if the Football Club were ever put in administration then the Property Company would be entitled to terminate its lease, even if the Football Club successfully came out of administration (for example as Motherwell did a number of years ago). The Football Club have not confirmed in public whether protections will be put in place to prevent this from happening.
  


• It is not clear how the structure of the deal would impact on the Football Club’s ability to generate revenue from the stadium. For example, would income from catering and shop concessions, the ground share deal with Glasgow Warriors, corporate hospitality, trackside advertising, international matches, boxing matches, concerts and function hire be for the benefit of the Football Club or the Property Company?

Differing Interests of Property Company and Football Club

Since a commercial rent is not to be charged to the Football Club under the lease, future development of Firhill appears to be the primary means for Property Company investors to make money from their investment.

There is a clear conflict between the interests of a Property Company investor (to maximise his profits by developing the whole of Firhill as soon as the property market recovers) and the interests of the Football Club (to remain playing at Firhill rent free indefinitely).

To date, no information has been provided by the Football Club as to how this conflict is to be resolved. The Trust will continue to press for an answer to this point and will update its members as soon as the Football Club has responded.

In addition, there remains the potential for conflicts of interest to arise if both companies are managed by common directors;

• For example, say the stadium is sold and a 100 year lease is put in place at an annual rent of £1. Five years later, the property market recovers and the Property Company investors wish to sell Firhill for development and claim their profit.
  
  They cannot do so without removing the lease, so the common directors of the landlord and tenant companies agree to vary the duration of the lease from 100 to 6 years. The Directors of the Football Club have given no information as to how such a situation might be avoided / prevented.

Gaps in Information

Since the Property Company investors can only realise value from their investment by removing or substantially varying the long lease to the Football Club, it is essential that we understand how that will be achieved, and importantly, what will happen to the Football Club when the Property Company takes back possession of the stadium in order to effect redevelopment.

If the intention is for the Property Company investors to secure their profit from developing around the edges of the stadium (for example, by developing the former South terracing), then it is not clear why the whole stadium would require to be sold to and leased back from the Property Company, although it should be noted that partial development around the fringes of the stadium gives rise to its own set of difficulties.

We have no information on the protections that will be put in place to ensure that tenant insolvency does not terminate the lease and to ensure that the commercial terms of the lease are not varied to dilute the protection offered to the Football Club.

At present, no information has been provided to confirm who will receive the benefit of income from the Glasgow Warriors’ deal and other income generated from the stadium. It is important to understand up front what income will be stripped out of the Football Club’s balance sheet so that this can be assessed against the cost savings resulting from the removal (or reduction) of the Bank debt. As explained above, it is essential for the survival of the Football Club that it is able to trade at break even point following the sale of Firhill. Again, detailed proposals from the Football Club as to how this can be achieved have not been provided as yet.

The Football Club have not given any public indication how potential conflicts of interest between the Football Club and the Property Company might be resolved.

Going Forward

In the current economic climate, the Jags Trust and all fans of the club are united with the Football Club’s Directors in their desire to secure the long term future of Partick Thistle Football Club. However, in the absence of detailed information on the proposal to sell Firhill Stadium to a Property Company comprised of “Thistle Minded Investors”, outlined in Allan Cowan’s letter to shareholders on 18 March 2009, the Trust cannot in all conscience throw its support behind the proposal as it stands at present.

The Trust Board believes that appropriate safeguards could be built into the proposal which would ring fence the future of the Partick Thistle Football Club, and the Trust Board is committed to working with the Football Club to ensure that such safeguards are put in place.
If the Trust Board is able to satisfy itself, having taken appropriate expert advice, that such safeguards exist, then the Trust Board will endeavour to explain these safeguards to its membership. Once the safeguards are in place, the Trust Board is willing to back the Directors of the Football Club by recommending in principle that its membership supports the proposal, assuming the proposal goes ahead.

In the interests of constructive oversight on behalf of its members, the Trust Board has invited the Football Club Directors to a meeting at which the current details of the Football’s Club’s proposal can be laid out and openly discussed. The Football Club Directors have indicated that they are unable or unwilling to meet the Trust Board on this basis, but have agreed to hold an open meeting with all shareholders of the Football Club to provide an update on the property proposals. We understand that this meeting is intended to take place on 24 June 2009, but we await final verification of this date from the Football Club.

The Trust Board welcomes such an open meeting, but does not believe that it provides the most suitable forum for detailed discussion and examination of the property proposal, nor will it provide any forum for non-shareholder supporters (who have a major stake in the future of the Football Club and its stadium) to express their views. The Trust Board will therefore continue to press the Football Club Directors to meet with them in advance of the open meeting so that the detail of the proposal can be properly examined and reported on to its members – as a significant minority shareholder in the Football Club, and as the principal representative body of the supporters, the Trust Board believes that the Trust is entitled to the courtesy of such a meeting with the Football Club Directors.

New Faces for the Trust Board....

The Trust Board are pleased to announce the appointment of four new faces -- Carol Briggs, Martin Dempsey, Tom Hogg, and David Stewart will join the Board with immediate effect. Brief biographical details for Martin, Tom and David are shown below - similar information for Carol will follow shortly.

Tom, Martin and David will continue to assist in forming the Trust's response to the proposed sale and leaseback of Firhill Stadium to a property company of "Thistle Minded Investors", as announced by the Club at its 2009 AGM.

The next Trust Board meeting is scheduled to take place on Monday 8th June. The Trust expects to issue, via its website, a formal update to its members on the proposed stadium sale in the early part of next week.


Biographical Details

Martin Dempsey is managing director of a family-owned property development company based is Glasgow. Responsible for project managing the planning process for the company's development sites, Martin has extensive experience in dealing with local authorities on both the technical and political requirements of development and has worked in successful partnership with some of Scotland's largest housebuilders. Martin was a convert to the Jags in his mid-teens and is known to the denizens of the jagsforum.net as "Lobster Noise".

Tom Hogg is a Director of a commercial property consultancy and has lived and worked in Edinburgh for more than 20 years after being born and brought up in Broomhill. He has been a Thistle fan since the age of nine but his first memorable match was in the 1972 UEFA cup against Honved, the name by which he is known on jagsforum.net.

David Stewart is a commercial property lawyer at a large commercial practice with offices in Glasgow and Edinburgh. David is based in Edinburgh and has worked for top tier Scottish law firms for the last 9 years. Prior to that, he spent several years in Washington DC working for an industry led think tank pushing for regulatory reform in the banking sector. David is a lifelong supporter of Partick Thistle, having been introduced to the club at an early age by his father and grandfather. David will continue to post on jagsforum.net under the name "stolenscone".

Outstanding Contribution Award

Nominations for the ‘Outstanding Achievement Award’, kindly sponsored by Stewart Murray, have now closed and from those nominations a shortlist of three has been drawn up.

Our thanks are extended to each and every individual who took the trouble and time to nominate someone for this award.

Our three nominees are, in alphabetical order;

• Hugh Cooper - Although taking a bit of a back seat with The Nomads of late, Hugh was instrumental in bringing Thistle fans from around the globe together,and giving them a voice.
  
• Campbell Hughes - Campbell was until recently the voice of PTTV, and has taken match commentary to places undreamt of by Archie McPherson and Arthur Montford
  
• David McClure - David earlier this season attended his 500th consecutive competitive first team fixture. A truly remarkable achievement.

To vote for your preferred candidate from the above list simply e-mail your vote . As obviously the trophy needs to be engraved for presentation on the night there is quite a tight time scale here. As such voting for this award can’t be kept open later than 9am Monday morning.

Trust Response To Property Company Proposals...

The Trust Board have now had time to consider their response to the information supplied by the Club at their recent Annual General Meeting. In general terms, only the most basic of information has been made available and our view is that we, and both small shareholders and fans, will require much more detail of the proposals before we can come to any firm conclusions.

At the AGM, Chairman Allan Cowan indicated that he would welcome the input of the Trust in helping to shape the proposal. We wish to take him up on this offer and have communicated that to him.

We have also outlined what we regard as our main aims in such discussions:-

• To establish that this proposal represents the best way in which both the issues of our financing and the ability of Partick Thistle to survive and prosper can be resolved.
  
• To ensure that there are sufficient safeguards in place that secure the right of Partick Thistle to continue to play at Firhill in the long term and/or ensure that any decision to leave at any point in the future will be solely driven by the needs of the football club
  
• To ensure that the proposal does allow Partick Thistle to operate in a stable and at least break-even position going forward.
  
• To encourage the club to have a full and open consultation with both small shareholders and fans to build a positive consensus around the proposal.

Player Of The Year 2008/9

This year's Player Of The Year dance will take place on Saturday May 2nd in the Aitken Suite at Firhill from 7:30pm until late.

A limited number of tickets, priced £5, are still available and will be on sale at each of the remaining home games or alternatively by e-mailing Tom Hosie. Tickets have also been made available to the Supporters Buses and may be obtainable from them.

In addition to the variety of awards made by the Supporter Buses the Jags Trust will be making two awards of our own.

There will be an award made to the player who you consider to be the overall Partick Thistle Player of the Year. You can participate in this by voting on the poll that can be found on the homepage of this site. This will remain open until Sunday April 26th.

As important as the players are to any football club the Jags Trust recognises that at the very heart of a football club lies the Club’s Supporters. As such, in addition to a Player of the Year the Jags Trust will be awarding an ‘Outstanding Achievement’ award, very kindly sponsored by Stewart Murray, which will recognise the contribution made by a Thistle supporter.

Between now and April 22nd we are seeking nominations for this award from which a shortlist will be drawn up. There will be an online poll to determine who you think should be the lucky recipient. Nominations, including why you think the individual is worthy of consideration should be sent to Tom Hosie.

Maintaining A Rivalry.......

Part of being a football fan is enjoying the rivalry with other sides, and the extra edge this brings to games between the respective clubs. For many Jags fans, Clyde would be considered to be our main rivals.

Notwithstanding the initial temptation for a wry smile when their current difficulties became public, there is a fundamental requirement for maintaining a football rivalry and that is for the teams concerned to remain in business. If there are no teams, then there can be no rivalry.

In these circumstances, some of you may feel well-inclined to support the current fund-raising efforts by Clyde which is supported by their own Trust. It would be a sad world indeed if we were unable to continue to sing our very own version of Jingle Bells in the coming years.

Notes from the AGM

Below you will find the notes from the PTFC 106th AGM, Tuesday 31st March 2009. Apoligies for the length of time it has taken to get this up and thanks, as ever, to those who helped out in the notation process.

The Trust Board will be meeting within the week to discuss this and the action to be taken going forward. Members views are of course welcome and will be taken into consideration before any action is carried out.


PTFC AGM NOTES

Attending: Allan Cowan(AC) as chair
Kieron Dempsey(KD), Grant Bannerman(GB), Ronnie Gilfillan(RG), David Beattie(DB), Tom Hughes(TH)

Apologies from Eddie Prentice (on holiday)

Report from AC:

Centenary fund currently brings in £62K, after prizes £40K a year. The club buys the cars from Citroen, but at a reduced price.
Breakdown of members: Gold -100
Silver - 120
Bronze - 384
Still in negotiations with the SRU re Warriors ground share.
Plans for a sponsor on the back of shirts which would bring in a five figure sum.
We recently had the 8000th child through the turnstiles in the ‘Kids For Free’ scheme. KD will be attending the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood re this in his role as part of his community remit.

Minutes of 105th AGM 20/03/08 Approved.

Directors report & Audited Accounts

TH announced a trading loss of £268K, but wants to keep us full time. The 500K option, PTF developments, fell through due to the ‘credit crunch’ while the Regency Homes claim was throw out by the Sherrif Court.
DB, seemingly the driving force behind the Propco/Opco idea to separate the stadia from the football club (260K loss) to be invested to be in by “Thistle minded people” who would get their money back at the end of the process and the football club would be a ‘major’ shareholder in this.


Start of questions on accounts:

1. Who was responsible for setting and controlling the club budgets?
The budget was previously set by the whole Board of Directors(BOD) however this year has been set by four members of the board, AC, TH, DB, EP when they were in Spain.

1.1 Would the BOD consider this to be poor financial control?
TH - Yes. The options are stay full time or play part time. The BOD want us to stay full time, trying to raise £250K from property asset, gate receipts.
DB - Property deal fell through, the Bank is due £200K

1.2 What steps of recovery have been taken?
DB - decimate the player budget. Last year Keyhaven would have helped, this is part of the thinking behind Propco/Opco.

2. Is the club currently breaking any banking covenants and have the bank given any indication of how long the monthly meetings will continue?
DB - Yes, the fact that McMaster has left the BOD was a break of one of the covenants.
AC - Not exceeding the debt, no default.

2.1 Is there a deadline for reducing the debt?
DB - the bank are looking for answers
TH - Stated that we are High risk as far as the bank are concerned, but we are operating within our facility.

2.2 What is the Future Strategy?
There is a going concern that we are currently £70K adrift.
TH - The operating overdraft could be called in “on demand”, reduce losses - the pay off for D Campbell was £150K
DB - advised there is now an order placing system which means all transactions have to be approved before they can happen.

3. Minimum share holding regarding Propco/Opco
The club haven’t decided on any figures yet for this. The council have been involved over the past 2 years, but don’t want in just now. Talks about stadium development and surrounding areas upgrade, (Council and Waterways)

4. Net asset was valued at £4.7M - what is it now?
TH - How long is a piece of string. Valued at £6.6M last year as a going concern, the break up of which couldn’t give a true value.
BD - Not officially valued again.
TH - Figure of debt is £1.65M (£1.1M loans and £500K overdraft facility)

5. Does the Propco have a name and who are the investors?
DB - currently called Newco, but this is just a working name. DB also stated it would be “unfair” to name names at this point. But they are ‘Thistle minded people’ with NO exit strategy just now.

5.1 What information will be given to the public?
None. This would involve getting a prospectus out which would be too costly to make it worthwhile.

5.2 Have any of the directors intimated that they will invest in this?
DB - Yes, he is the driving force behind the idea.
TH - yes, but only a small amount - circa £20-30K
No other directors answered this question.
The club is looking to have a ‘major’ share holding in this though what level is dependant on how much investment there is from outside.

5.3 Preservation of footballs side of investment in Newco?
Will not be known till it’s known.
TH - Hugh risk but a Manchester Asset Management company have shown continuing interest.
Also a small amount of personal investment.

5.4 How will assets/liabilities be apportioned after the Propco/Opco split?
This is not clear at the moment though the intention is to clear the debt.

5.5 Will the BOD call an EGM to discuss the Propco/Opco with shareholders?
The BOD announced that they didn’t think it was necessary to have an EGM. They did state that they would attempt to work with the Jags Trust and keep them in the loop.

5.6 Is there an exit strategy for investors?
DB - None at present. Hopes to develop the City End in a few years and use profits from this.
TH - CAN’T get their money out. There is also an open invitation to anyone including the Trust.

5.7 What would happen if investors sold the stadium from under the club?
AC - Would look to secure a long term lease (100 years) to play football as in the Dundee model. Also stated that they had talked about this with McMaster 9 years ago.


Accounts agreed


Re-election of BOD
Question - Clarification re re-election of current Chief Exec, EP.
Poll Voting Form circulated to share holders prior to meeting with Directors named does not include EP.
AC “Not using form circulated”
Query competency of motion?
TH – Error. E Prentice (who was not present) was standing for re-election

Re-election agreed


Question on Brown McMaster’s shares -Breach of SFL Rules?
The BOD said that they were confident no rules had been broken during his transfer to Stenhousemuir Football Club Board of Directors as he transferred his shares to family members.

Question: Does McMaster retain any influence on the PTFC BOD?
The board stated the BM has no influence at PTFC.

Question: Is the BM shareholding significant?
His share was 1M shares, equating to about 10%

Auditors re-elected

Open Question and Answer Session

Q.1 - The Board & 40 share holders were shown a copy of the Amsterdam METRO paper.
The speaker showed “Football Cult Tours” – Firhill and asked if anyone was aware of this or were we actively participating in it?
No was the answer.

Q.2 - Are the Board against going part-time for a period of time (5yrs?) then return to full-time?
AC - threat of relegation; loss of income & support
TH - Did it with T Bryce needed J Lambie to rescue

Q.3 – Explain the comment in the letter from AC regarding share deal “For legal reasons there will be no invitation to the public”.
What legal reasons?
Cost of smallest share investment?
How many shareholders does Partick Thistle have? 3 responses about stadia/club &/or shares out of how many?
AC – cost of developing a prospectus & excess costs
smallest share investment = £1000
TH – think Thistle has 4 or 5 hundred shareholders

Q.4 – Will there be an SPL enlargement not SPL 2?
Costs - Consideration been given to Managers pay off? Or put on gardening leave?
Income – Greaves guaranteed annual income of more money than the club had ever made in the past running the shop themselves. Also better quality/supply of stock.

Q.5 – Shares – Obama won using “lots of little”
Suggestion – share scheme that lets fans pay in over 10 months and the shares issued at Xmas?
This suggestion was met by some in the room with applause.

AC – Minimum £1000 remains due to reasons given; increase costs for mailing (paper &/or email); fans pay into Centenary Fund; fans pay through Jags Trust
It was pointed out to the Chairperson that he and the Board missed the point – fans want to personally own part of their club.
TH - £50 shares could be a starter.
JA – "It cost Rangers Trust £60,000 to register their share scheme with the FSA”
KD – reminded all about Port Vale

Q.6 What is Plan B? If resistance to the split stadia/football club
AC – Only sell the silver once = need to cut back

Arrival of Jim Alexander was viewed as positive, improved match-day experience.
Have the disenfranchised fans been contacted?
Database? Those who used to buy season tickets/ club shops etc
Directors intimated that hadn’t really thought about asking back fans in a formal way.
Outreach – Press Officer in place Kids go Free


Q.7 Buy season ticket – seats not marked reserved!
TH – should be reserved & marked. Created our own problems now by dividing the JH seater stand into specific group areas. I.E The Shed and Kids area.

- Fund Raiser – permanent plaque on seat?

Q.8 Those in & out of contract?
- High number of players are under contract season 2009/10
- Out of contract - JR & KMcK

Q.9 Most businesses have completed or are completing budget planning for 2009/10. Potential lapsed or lost for getting extra revenue. When does Thistle do their marketing?

AC - fixture list does not come out until July making it impossible to plan for corporate match days.

DB – go up Xmas comes
TV £95,000 PT v Rangers

Try to use facilities outwith Saturday (fortnight) – weddings, funeral, auction sales, most Saturday evenings there is a function on.

Develop a restaurant? – Any suggestions possible

Observations
– No longer have season ticket because could not pay in lump sum
- No longer able to participate in Golden Thistle type events as need to pay in lump sum
- Kids for Free really positive it will continue regardless of league.

Q.10 Will the Golden Thistle be replaced?
Tried – D McParland suite but little take up (see comment under observations)

Q.11 B McMaster left the club – could/should his 1m “free” shares come back to the club?
TH – Feels that BM earned the shares due to his work at the STJ era and afterwards.
DB – Difficult to take back
AC – In trust – family members, they weren’t sold

Q.11.1What if he dies? Protect club – could be sold
AC – SFL rules if required.
- Was the SFL told or not told?

TH – There are “A” shares which could be sold in less than £1000.
** Query by MF previous Jags Trust chairperson & Board rep, Distributed “A” shares to all “B” share holders”?

Q.12 Colour of shirt for season 2009/10?
AC – Pink/grey shirt – oh my God!
DB – Most successful ever launched!!

Community Outreach – KD explained that a number of community groups were reviewing the possibility of using the facilities for their service users.
** Query re-breach of Disability Discrimination Act” = no ramp or lift access. Not only restricts groups but also anyone who wished to attend hospitality in the Alan Rough lounge and the whole Jackie Husband Stand
KD stated that the matter of the lift was also under scrutiny – costing, grants etc.

Q.13 Youth System U17 & 19?
Coach John Henry to present paper to the Board

Meeting closed.