Jump to content

The 3 Monthly Spend


Kombibuddie

Recommended Posts


43 minutes ago, Toots said:

Me and my mate cancelled our subs after reading through this , i thought that BtB was a great thing but now see it as a cash pot for the club . Ring fenced cash should be exactly that and not something that can be tapped into willy nilly , shame the gloss is getting taken away from this excellent season.

Just out of interest, why did you not vote No, and then wait to see what the vote result was before chucking it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

everyone has that choice. Wee bit of a shame though you haven’t waited to see if this is the appetite of the majority. Pretty short term thinking IMO, oh well. 
The short term thinking was in proposing to use ring-fenced cash in the first place.
There were options. Options that could have united the support.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah course you don’t. Democracy isn’t for everyone. Just hope the vast majority don’t think the same. That’ll only hurt the team we all support. 
Yet another cheap petty democracy dig.

You do your argument no favours with that snide approach.

The vote is yes or no to astroturf.

Where was the vote on whether it should be funded from ring-fenced money?

That was democracy denied and as you have rightly pointed out this morning, is a legitimate grievance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Smithers Jones said:

Just out of interest, why did you not vote No, and then wait to see what the vote result was before chucking it ?

We did vote "No" , I don't agree with the fact that this even got called to a vote , this should have been a straight "Can't happen this money is to buy the club and not astro turf".So i don't need to wait and see just not going to go down  this road every time the club needs money from this pot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did vote "No" , I don't agree with the fact that this even got called to a vote , this should have been a straight "Can't happen this money is to buy the club and not astro turf".So i don't need to wait and see just not going to go down  this road every time the club needs money from this pot.
Totally understand where you are coming from and your strength of feeling.

Personally I am maintaining payments and will fight for what I believe is right from within.

Don't blame you though and am not going to criticise you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Yet another cheap petty democracy dig.

You do your argument no favours with that snide approach.

The vote is yes or no to astroturf.

Where was the vote on whether it should be funded from ring-fenced money?

That was democracy denied and as you have rightly pointed out this morning, is a legitimate grievance.

Neither do the posts from some of the supporters of the other side of the coin, in relation to their argument.

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

everyone has that choice. Wee bit of a shame though you haven’t waited to see if this is the appetite of the majority. Pretty short term thinking IMO, oh well. 

Your attitude earlier in this thread towards anyone cancelling was along the lines of ‘hell mend them’ etc. For clarity, I am paraphrasing. I genuinely could not be bothered trawling through the posts where you were dismissive at best, but more like insulting towards, anyone who chooses to cancel.

More U turns than a lorry doing U turns for fun.

Incidentally, on the subject of my golf clubs.... I thought about Callaways, I thought about Taylor Made, maybe Mizuno or Cobra..... then I realised my money is Ping-Fenced.

Nearly as funny as Dundee’s top comic - Willo Flood, but not quite. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

This is damaging Smisa, and its committee, whilst Scott just lets them take the heat. Not very well thought through.

They don't see it as heat though Tony, or at least not heat they care about, we both know that. A group put the deal together, that group believe they and only they should be running this. Anything else is divisive, a few idiots complaining on a forum etc. No willing to engage, constantly making any board member who does feel like they've betrayed someone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

They don't see it as heat though Tony, or at least not heat they care about, we both know that. A group put the deal together, that group believe they and only they should be running this. Anything else is divisive, a few idiots complaining on a forum etc. No willing to engage, constantly making any board member who does feel like they've betrayed someone. 

I agree, but this time they are getting smacked with the ball full in the face. Even if the proposal is rejected they have and will continue to lose members because of their actions. There will be a reckoning... there always is!

Edited by Lord Pityme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Eh? None of that makes any sense whatsoever. We’d be voting on using the future £2 pot for this repayment. It’s exactly what the whole debate has been about. Haha bed time for you I think pal. 

Here's the quotes from you that were missing...  you don't see anything contradictory?  Gawd help us!

The additional asks for the £2 funds are always a benefit that allows the club to concentrate money elsewhere so we wouldn’t just dip in all the time. Any future time we went in we’d have to vote accordingly. 

 

The repayment of the £50k is from future £2 pots so in no way would it be us over budgeting 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The £2 fund has definitely been overused in matters that are associated with running the club, from the sports scientist to new balls. Ideas that I don't really feel the £2 pot was supposed to be about. I was sold it was about community projects, something that would boost St. Mirrens profile off the pitch and make us a hub for the communities around Renfrewshire, from late night youth football to supporting local sports teams that have not had links with the clubs.

The £10 pot is for buying the club, and that alone, no money should be taken out of this apart from the purchase of shares.

Buy the Buds isn't a vehicle to support the club on the pitch or in the background. It's about a group of supporters taking over a business, we have to treat it accordingly, so we can shape the club how we see fit. Too many people understandably can't or won't be able to separate the business from the club they support. That in the long run will make things difficult when we do hit sticky patches. When this AstroTurf needs relayed under our ownership it'll be rightly be coming out the playing budget, if we don't want to do that, we don't have an AstroTurf field.

People signed up for buy the Buds because the felt the old ownership was stale and had a fear of a rogue businessperson running the club into the ground. It feels now that Smisa is just giving the fans the option to vote for poor future management with the constant club bowl being passed around.

I'm still awaiting to hear back from SMISA, but to be honest depending on what they say and future votes I'll be seriously reconsidering my membership of a project that clearly isn't on the right track and may not be able to correct itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Toots said:

So how does it hurt the team , the subscriptions are not for the team or in that matter for the club they are intended to ultimately achieve fan ownership so your statement is a bit confusing. 

If fan ownership falls apart because we don’t have enough paying members to complete the BTB you don’t think that’ll have any impact on the club? Strange 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

The short term thinking was in proposing to use ring-fenced cash in the first place.
There were options. Options that could have united the support.

What option would be better than letting the members decide with a straight up vote?  Could put in a whole bunch of steps before it, this is the ultimate decision. Yes or no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gc_SMFC said:

The £2 fund has definitely been overused in matters that are associated with running the club, from the sports scientist to new balls. Ideas that I don't really feel the £2 pot was supposed to be about. I was sold it was about community projects, something that would boost St. Mirrens profile off the pitch and make us a hub for the communities around Renfrewshire, from late night youth football to supporting local sports teams that have not had links with the clubs.

The £10 pot is for buying the club, and that alone, no money should be taken out of this apart from the purchase of shares.

Buy the Buds isn't a vehicle to support the club on the pitch or in the background. It's about a group of supporters taking over a business, we have to treat it accordingly, so we can shape the club how we see fit. Too many people understandably can't or won't be able to separate the business from the club they support. That in the long run will make things difficult when we do hit sticky patches. When this AstroTurf needs relayed under our ownership it'll be rightly be coming out the playing budget, if we don't want to do that, we don't have an AstroTurf field.

People signed up for buy the Buds because the felt the old ownership was stale and had a fear of a rogue businessperson running the club into the ground. It feels now that Smisa is just giving the fans the option to vote for poor future management with the constant club bowl being passed around.

I'm still awaiting to hear back from SMISA, but to be honest depending on what they say and future votes I'll be seriously reconsidering my membership of a project that clearly isn't on the right track and may not be able to correct itself.

That was what I gathered also , I was also under the impression that the £2 pot was for the community projects and helping out local groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Yet another cheap petty democracy dig.

You do your argument no favours with that snide approach.

The vote is yes or no to astroturf.

Where was the vote on whether it should be funded from ring-fenced money?

That was democracy denied and as you have rightly pointed out this morning, is a legitimate grievance.

Can spin my words all you want, it doesn’t change facts. Anyone with half a brain will know voting to use the funds from the ring fence means... using the money from the ring fence. see previous point on valid arguments and slandering the club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Toots said:

We did vote "No" , I don't agree with the fact that this even got called to a vote , this should have been a straight "Can't happen this money is to buy the club and not astro turf".So i don't need to wait and see just not going to go down  this road every time the club needs money from this pot.

Bet no one will find this ‘underhanded’ making a democratic vote in something you’re both choosing to not support going forward... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

If fan ownership falls apart because we don’t have enough paying members to complete the BTB you don’t think that’ll have any impact on the club? Strange 

Whose fault will that be? When the support was asked to stand up, they did so in numbers. Now as you can see by the overwhelming majority of posts on here those same people who stood up feel they've been betrayed. You have your opinion, but costantly banging on about why you feel this, and you feel that isnt addressing the issue of broken trust that so many are highlighting.

this is a time more than ever where leadership is required to be honest, transparent, admit mistakes and seek to unite, maintain and grow the membership. Not take snidy shots about not liking democracy.... which is the right to chose without fear of intimidation. You might if you really want smisa to have a future want to consider that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

If fan ownership falls apart because we don’t have enough paying members to complete the BTB you don’t think that’ll have any impact on the club? Strange 

If we want to keep up the level of paying members , Stop using the members as a Cash Cow , its really that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, pozbaird said:

Your attitude earlier in this thread towards anyone cancelling was along the lines of ‘hell mend them’ etc. For clarity, I am paraphrasing. I genuinely could not be bothered trawling through the posts where you were dismissive at best, but more like insulting towards, anyone who chooses to cancel.

More U turns than a lorry doing U turns for fun.

Incidentally, on the subject of my golf clubs.... I thought about Callaways, I thought about Taylor Made, maybe Mizuno or Cobra..... then I realised my money is Ping-Fenced.

Nearly as funny as Dundee’s top comic - Willo Flood, but not quite. 

How is it a u turn are you actually serious? I said in earlier posts it would be cutting their nose off to spite their face. Because I’ve said it a bit nicer in using the epression ‘shortterm’ that’s a U turn? 

Never mind the golf clubs, sounds like you’ve had a morning in the 19th. 

Edited by bazil85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

What option would be better than letting the members decide with a straight up vote?  Could put in a whole bunch of steps before it, this is the ultimate decision. Yes or no. 

Running a proper fundraising campaign focused on the target of 50K for the purpose of contributing to the new 4G pitch surface. The club, SMISA board and SMISA committee have known about this for at least 9 months. Plenty of time to put the work in, plus if it truly does have community benefit then SMISA could have gained some funding. There may have been marquee contributors waiting out there, but we'll never know because "we're all volunteers". Far easier to sit it out and put this vote out at the last moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Vambo57 said:

Here's the quotes from you that were missing...  you don't see anything contradictory?  Gawd help us!

The additional asks for the £2 funds are always a benefit that allows the club to concentrate money elsewhere so we wouldn’t just dip in all the time. Any future time we went in we’d have to vote accordingly. 

 

The repayment of the £50k is from future £2 pots so in no way would it be us over budgeting 

 

No, it’s in no way contradicting itself. You do realise if it’s a yes vote st Mirren will not need to take £50k out the budget and if it’s a no vote they will. No one is adding money to the budget. My days it’s hard going. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Whose fault will that be? When the support was asked to stand up, they did so in numbers. Now as you can see by the overwhelming majority of posts on here those same people who stood up feel they've been betrayed. You have your opinion, but costantly banging on about why you feel this, and you feel that isnt addressing the issue of broken trust that so many are highlighting.

this is a time more than ever where leadership is required to be honest, transparent, admit mistakes and seek to unite, maintain and grow the membership. Not take snidy shots about not liking democracy.... which is the right to chose without fear of intimidation. You might if you really want smisa to have a future want to consider that.

I didn’t even read beyond the first sentence. It’ll be the people that cancel its fault. Smisa do everything as a democratic vote. If people throw their toys out the pram as we’ve seen at least two people do today, they’re to blame. Btb was always for the long term good of the club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
We've got a league to win and a squad to strengthen over the next couple of months. Right now , I couldn't give a f**k about whether Smisa uses ring-fenced money or not. By the time the club is in the supporters hands I could be dead anyway. Smisa guys can do what they want , they'll still get my monthly subs no matter what !
When you look at the numbers who actually vote in the smisa £2 spends, I'd suggest you are probably in the majority Billy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Bet no one will find this ‘underhanded’ making a democratic vote in something you’re both choosing to not support going forward... 

Why would you use the phrase "underhanded" , Has it been said previously in this thread ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...