All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
-
-
Wow. Ok. So really LPM is right. The concept of Fan Ownership at St Mirren is dead. There's no real point in SMISA or Buy the Buds, because Gordon Scott owns the club, controls the club, etc, etc. I guess SMISA are just really there to hand over cash whenever Gordon Scott demands it, and they are there to guarantee that Gordon Scott gets his money back when he's bored and walks off in 10 years time. Maybe it's time SMISA updated that website of theirs to show the truth. It's not really a Community Benefit Society at all cause the Community isn't benefiting. It's not really about getting the fans a voice on the board because Gordon Scott will dictate who gets onto the board and he'll decide what's said, and what SMISA's funds gets spend on. And the member benefit section needs a re-write too since it's promised that your £12 membership makes you "eligible to run for director of SMFC" - not eligible if Gordon Scott likes you and you have what Gordon Scott believes is the appropriate skills and experience - or if you've served enough time on the SMISA committee to be part of the carve up. Well it's good they got the pretence out of the way. Might as well scrap SMISA and just have all the direct debits paid straight to the clubs bank account ,
- Today
-
Am naebody's alias ya eejit. Some o yous seem tae be obsessed by a these claims o aliases. Just cause yi dinnae like a wee post wi some hame truths. Paisley, shite wan day, even worse the next..... St Mirren, shite wan week, even worse the next..... Aw these folks living ootside the toon urnae 'Paisley' folk, they avoid it like the plague. Nae wunner. Pity, It used tae be a nice place so am telt. (before ma time - pre 1960s)
-
Симон Темплар> Ес?
-
-
The short answer is because he owns the club, but would or could there be a reason why HE would care, as I said earlier HE 'controls' the club, how HE does it, whether subtly or overtly is immaterial, HE da boss, HE runs things, HE directs play. just so we know HE IS IN CHARGE. OK so what is your problem, given that he does not have to play ball with SMISA, but fairly obviously wishes to, .............. Listen to the man when he speaks about St Mirren, to me he is genuine; otherwise why plough his cash into a failing club. If HE wishes to make sure that whoever SMISA elect to the club board, is competent; what is the problem, if you have a problem please refer to all the HE's. And just to answer your BIG question 'Why should the football club Chairman be allowed to restrict the choice of who the membership can elect? And this is me speaking, nobody else, but my response would be because it belongs to him, is his, has control, be da boss. Get it please say you do. just as an aside and no disrespect to you specifically intended here; more an open response to all other individuals who feel similarly: but just what makes you think that you have better ideas than the bloke who put up his cash to save your club, honestly; give the man some respect, he has done more in 18 months than anybody else who previously was in charge of this club. Or did you all forget that. And by the way I am just a supporter like yourself and whilst I enjoy the debate and perhaps taking the mick out of some of you who get so embroiled in fantasies, i am not nasty as some others are, I reuse to stoop to that level. at least ........................ so far
-
Totally agree with your comment. Let’s put ourselves in GS shoes for a moment. Going by the article to which he’s put in a £700.000 of his own cash, I’d also want to vet and approve any candidate proposed by SMISA, especially as he’s doing this with no financial gain to himself. It’s his cash and his risk. He (and the board) have a ten year plan and as far as I can see, they’re doing a fantastic job so far. I’m pretty sure the SMISA members come from all different backgrounds. My point being. If SMISA were to propose a candidate with no business background all because that person had put his hat in the ring and had some other individual had seconded him/her then GS (in my opinion) has the right to say yae or nae. I’ll probably get shot down for this but it’s just my take on it.
-
In the 1970's Coventry City tried to change their name to Coventry Talbot as part of a sponsorship deal. The Football League blocked it. I don't think the Tiger thing was anything to do with sponsorship at Hull, it was just that their Chairman preferred the name "Tiger" to "City" - feckin weirdo that he is. Anyway that was blocked by the FA.
-
-
- Yesterday
-
I would say no. It's my house and I've paid for it, I've fought for it, and I've had to pay for it again so I wouldn't be letting anyone have any control over anything to do with my property. To me that is a no brainer. Having your house renamed in such a commercial and tacky manner - even if it was only for a short designated period - would have a detrimental effect on the value of the property. A football stadium though? Even if the name sticks long after the naming deal has ended it's not going to matter. St Mirren are quite right to take the money. At least this time round it's not taxpayers money that could have been much better utilised.
-
-
Men at work. Oh that was Overkill!!🤪
-
-
Gordon Scott clearly is running scared though Jaybee. If he wasn't he wouldn't be trying so hard to control SMISA. SMISA owns a 30% stake in the club. As such the membership is entitled to elect one of their members to represent them in the club board. Why should the football club Chairman be allowed to restrict the choice of who the membership can elect?
-
-
It disnae matter what you or me call it.All that matters is every time the BBC,Radio Clyde or even newspapers report on our games the SDA will be mentioned.Thousands of people will Google to find out more about it and some of those thousands will use the Sponsors product. Easy,effortless money for the Club. Still can't believe the roofs ain't sponsored.
-
-
-
The Simple Digital Arena
SaintGlenburn replied to RossCSmfc's topic in General St. Mirren Discussion
If someone came n chapped my door n said.. "Ill pay your Mortgage for 4 years if you let us call it Simple Digital house instead of 15 xxxxxx Grove" Id sign up right away. Would any of you honestly say no? Any business wants naming rights on my pad for cash its a no brainer. Tampax Tower, BrewDog Bungalo, Coke a Cola Cottage... Wouldnt give a toss. Its literally free cash. Other than if your getting a chinky delivered for half time or a taxi will you ever need to use the words Simple Digital. Maybe not even then. -
There are multiple threads in SMiSA chats. No more needed. There were less threads in Paisley when the mills were open. I canny keep up. (With the threads)
-
The Simple Digital Arena
Callum Gilhooley replied to RossCSmfc's topic in General St. Mirren Discussion
Exactly this . people will call whatever our ground is named whatever they wish to call it. Its a "hame game," its twenty twenty wan , its The Nou feegie, Its The Grun , its whatever and if people want to give us £100000 + for us to continue to say this then who gives a f**k ? -
For fcuk sake don’t start one.
-
I just call it ‘the ground’, or refer to us having ‘a home game’. For example, back in the day, if Mrs Poz asked me ‘where are St Mirren playing next week’, I’d reply ‘Love Street’. The exact same question these days is answered ‘it’s a home game’.
-
What a waste of a phonecall that was then. Lol
-
Cheers Renton I think you need to phone the Samaritans my friend. Sorry SaintGlenburn this was meant for helpmaboab apologies
-
As long as GS owns 51 per cent he is the majority shareholder and what he says goes as far as the planning and running of the club. I have no quibble with that. Keep getting it "right" and he is a hero. Get it "wrong" and he is everything bad. That comes with the territory. I have no criticism of SMISA either. What I do sense is that we are all, including the Club Board and SMISA trying to work out how to work together in terms other than football. I don't find this too surprising but look forward to SMISA developing and sharing a vision, strategy and implimentation plan to sit alongside that of the club. This is a topic for another thread.
-
Cheers Renton I think you need to phone the Samaritans my friend.
-
And Moi
-
I just refer to it as going to Paisley. A benefit of being an exile.
-
Yep. I have done that!
-
Sorry sincere apologies ....... In my humble opinion of course
-
No-one HAS to pay attention to me. They / you could easily put me on ignore or simply pay me no heed at all. However you don't and I suspect the reason for that is because you might think I have a point. Gordon Scott appears to have taken two years to come up with a plan that sees future growth of the club now being dependent on non match day revenue. A few of us pointed that omission out when the stadium was built in the first place. I applaud him on his speed of thought and I hope he gets it right. It doesn't take much of a search to understand that in immediate area of the stadium there are already a number of office blocks that have been vacant for a number of years. Widen the search out and you see loads of "office space" advertised along the M8 corridor as being either immediately available or available for development. I suppose Gordon Scott must believe that office space in Ferguslie Park on a corner plot of a football stadium, with a shared car park that will be difficult to gain access to on match days is highly sought after. I guess it's useful, as a back up, for the Chairman to be able to hand pick his fans representative on the St Mirren board as a useful patsy to ensure that if he continues to need to dip SMISA funds it continues to happen with no objection. God help him if there happened to be someone represent the fans interests who actually had a spine. Why would I put you on ignore and allow the gibberish you spout to go unanswered, you say 'God help him if there happened to be someone represent the fans interests who actually had a spine. I say: when you put up somewhere around 800K to buy a controlling interest (note the word controlling) then you might be listened to, might! but personally I very much doubt it; especially if you were spouting the same drivel as currently. The chairman; who I know nothing o;f other than he owned a building firm called Laidlaw Scott, put in his money and insisted on a controlling interest .in other words he owns more than anyone else and what he says goes. Is that how he operates; I think not, otherwise you would have nothing to moan about would you? Just how long he and his BOD take to formalise a 'long-term' plan for the club is 'how long it takes' .............see controlling interest. I am sure your sarcasm and wit might terrify him into ...... well" laughing out loud I would imagine. The sad fact is my friend that he is a successful businessman who knows a thing or two about how to generate a profit and given that, I would much rather that his ideas were given credence than yours, especially since he owns the club and you seem to be simply a NUMPTY.
-
It was someone who was wise enough to know that at every corner everybody would look at the clock on the scoreboard to see where we were in the 90 minutes, and couldn’t find out because a bloodly Big Front Door was in the way.
