alwaysabuddy

mmm Quoting chairman "substantial losses made in year to May 22, measures in place for 22/23 and hope to break even, budget for 23/24 under way with a break even expectation, there will be player trading in January" Player trading ? - could mean anything - fringe players sold/loaned out, could mean likes of Dylan Reid sold or could even mean bid expected for one of our 1st teamers. Whichever, to achieve break even player(s) will be leaving. As for Mr Gilmour being quiet it was openly stated that he would be meeting SMFC reps next week to discuss/understand the current financial position. Until that meeting has been held what would you have expected him to say ?

Decent guy he may be but, I still find it strange that smisa members are asked to confirm his appointment without knowing who the other candidates were.

Result from Friday Club Academy Scotland U18 League Cormack Park Aberdeen 9 St Mirren 0 Yes there are problems at the academy and I have also heard that coaches are leaving. Worrying when you add that we are not entering the reserve league

From Official site "Tony Fitzpatrick Family Stand season ticket holders can still move their seat to the Main or West Stand and will still be able to get them at the reduced price of £10 for adults and £5 for concessions if purchased before 2pm on Tuesday 21st December." Does this mean that season ticket holders must pay £10/5 for the privilege of being tossed out their seat and moving to an alternative stand ?

And here is the real question. It would appear that SMFC are appointing companies that not only have Kibble connections but are family related. We don't know if the tender process was above board and fair but coincidences like this will invite legitimate questions.

It looks like a whole raft of recent appointments throughout the club would appear to be Kibble associates/staff. Were these positions advertised or tendered for ? If as suspected the answer is no then we have our answer as to why Kibble are involved. Whether the appointments are good or bad for the club remains to be seen.

same for me

mmmm - wrong as previously confirmed GLS shareholding with the Kibble proposal will be well under 1% under the original deal he would retain 8% therefore he will be selling over 7% more via the new proposal and to quote div many pages ago "he ain't giving them away" So yes he will gain from the proposal as apart from getting his cash early (and I have no real issue with that) he also gains by selling more shares

How can it not be a benefit to get "his capital" returned early and in addition get a little extra on top

So GLS gets cash for his minority 8% shareholding yet the remaining circa 20% of mainly supporter held shares get nothing. I have no agenda against GLS and have not yet decided which way to vote, just pointing out that GLS not only gets his cash earlier than planned but actually gets more.

I've been part of a few boards where I didn't agree with a lot of a BP's content. Funnily enough the major shareholder had the final say and 27% of the shareholding certainly couldn't veto it !!

Div - re the 8% shareholding By selling his shares to Kibble either GLS will actually be receiving more cash that he would be under the current proposal where he is left with the 8% OR He is receiving the same money in total therefore effectively either SMISA or Kibble are paying nothing for them, which begs the question of who gets the "free" shares ? .