buddiecat

Don't know, did it ?

Seriously ! if i were you i'd wait until LPM posted comments about safety nets before slating him on them. Very strange post.

Yes i get that, he is a pest, i thought (possibly wrongly) that trolling was carried out in an abusive manner.

I agree on the misuse of the word trolling on this forum. I'd say you are a businessman who sees things mainly from a business point of view, others (like me) would like to see business and community mixed together in this deal. SMiSA have indeed spent on the community in general, but i for one can see this being put in jeopardy by having a two tier vote and having major club spending options in both tiers, the club spending will almost certainly always win. Incidentally the season tickets bought for community use benefits both the club and the community.

Fair enough, though i wasn't to know they hadn't been paid the full amount, you did say "the accelerated payment has been paid" and i took it as one payment based on what the club received for Stevie Mallan, so i'm guessing they didn't get the full amount for Mallan upfront. However I'd like to know how much was paid and what we still owe, not an unreasonable question i'm sure you'll agree, so i'll email it over to the board.

I'd say the accelerated payment being made is hardly run of the mill weekly meeting news. The consortium have now been paid and we owe them no more money, i for one would have been glad to hear that news. I am a wee bit disappointed that you have now seemingly fallen into line with the "they don't need to know" group. It would have been recieved equally as well by other fans i'm sure and by letting us know, the SMiSA board could have started fulfilling their promise to be more open, that in my opinion seems now to have been a spur of the moment false promise because of the questioning at the AGM. If the board hold all this kind of news until the next AGM they will have the same scenario as this years debacle to contend with again, do they never learn. Not passing on small news items is in general fine by me, but a major step in the purchase of the club is not small news.

Preferably a £3 per match discount.

Quite laughably SMiSA funding was paying the £54 on top of your sons season ticket in previous seasons and therefore the same seat was being paid for twice, there is no SmiSA funding now - see the post above.

The SMiSA board held a vote for the July quarterly £2 pot spend and stated the Panda club sponsorship had to be paid from the £2 pot but only if it won in the vote, it didn't win and there is no sponsorship by SMiSA this year and never will be again unless it wins votes in future seasons. So the Panda club have obviously been caught unawares and season tickets had been sold before they found out there would be no funding from SMiSA. In the past the SMiSA funding was covering seat costs for kids who had already got free season tickets and the organiser wanted to get things sorted by making better use of the sponsorship, unfortunately he will not get any funding from SMiSA at all now.

Any reserve money probably went on making the early repayment to the Douglas street consortium, that is if we have made that payment yet, if we have i would have expected to be told in the recent update. So either it was paid without us knowing or money is being held in reserve to pay it. The Panda club payment was usually paid from the cash held before the bid started, that money has probably all gone now. The recent update stated that the Panda club payment would have to be reliant on being voted for in the £2 spend pot along with any academy funding, no other explanation just "it has to be". The guy who runs the Panda club said the annual funding was not used in the best way, (some kids having season tickets and being covered by SmiSA funding as well) Tsu said they were having a meeting with him to sort it out, bet he didn't think it would mean zero funding after a vote, but that's how all spending will be decided now.

It always has been weighted in favour of the club (especially the weights for the gym) Putting the vote into two tiers with a spend request from the club in each tier was a sure way of getting Jack the two things he wanted. If there is a way to set the choices in favour of club requests it will be done that way. Sad to see that the Panda club suffers at the request of the club though, no more "The SMiSA panda club" and the wider community who could benefit from funds and the possible knock on effect of that benefitting the club are not likely to get a look in.

Looks like whenever there are items in the vote that would give straight to the club, then those choices are always going to win, can't say i'm against anything that enhances the product on the park, but i am disappointed that we don't get much of a chance of helping the commuinity in general. It was one of the selling points of the bid after all. Maybe a vote which is free of any requests from the club every so often could address that.

A shop in Ayr. Apparently they have tons of them.

On yesterdays showing, he is a wee bit lazy and didn't impress me at all, we have enough players of his height as it is and they all worked much more than he did yesterday.

Piss poor performance, Thistle just walked past us. You know you are in serious trouble when your manager comes out and states his players did not do what he asked them to. Jack is very good at talking, but not very good at managing i'm afraid.