The 3 Monthly Spend

[smcc]

17 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Sorry Kenny you are totally misleading and misrepresenting how the £2 pot was sold in BTB (perhaps as you already know that, thats why you dont wish to be drawn into it)

all the information, leaflets, slides, presentations given were clear. "The £2 pot will be allocated to fund initiatives voted on by the members" recently this has been changed on the smisa website to "spend on the club" and this shameless attempt to re-write history and deceive the membership wont wash. There will be hundreds of people still in possesion of BTB leaflets who can check the text for themselves.

If you cant be honest with people, please dont try and insult them by trying to brow beat, ridicule or deflect from the facts. It shows extremely poor form and lack of judgement. I think a few of the leaflets etc need uploading on here to remind everyone of what they signed up to.

Have you looked at the SMISA website?

"THE FINANCES

What will my money be spent on?

Your £12 per month as a basic member will see £10 set aside to fund the share purchase and £2 in a separate pot for the members to do what they like with.

So the £10 per month will pay back the money we are borrowing to fund stage one of the deal, while at the same time building up a reserve over ten years to save up the money to buy out Gordon.

And the £2 will give the trust an ongoing income to be spent on whatever the members decide. Over the years, SMISA has invested money in the club, through interest-free loans to help fund infrastructure (such as the Airdome behind the away stand) or through our sponsorship of the club’s youth academy. This would allow us to continue to help take the club forward, while creating opportunities and facilities for the wider Paisley community.

Our plan is to spend the contents of the £2 pot every three months. The point is we will be able to spend it wherever we as a trust feel we can make a positive impact on the club and the town."

[Lord Pityme]

25 minutes ago, smcc said:

Have you looked at the SMISA website?

"THE FINANCES

What will my money be spent on?

Your £12 per month as a basic member will see £10 set aside to fund the share purchase and £2 in a separate pot for the members to do what they like with.

So the £10 per month will pay back the money we are borrowing to fund stage one of the deal, while at the same time building up a reserve over ten years to save up the money to buy out Gordon.

And the £2 will give the trust an ongoing income to be spent on whatever the members decide. Over the years, SMISA has invested money in the club, through interest-free loans to help fund infrastructure (such as the Airdome behind the away stand) or through our sponsorship of the club’s youth academy. This would allow us to continue to help take the club forward, while creating opportunities and facilities for the wider Paisley community.

Our plan is to spend the contents of the £2 pot every three months. The point is we will be able to spend it wherever we as a trust feel we can make a positive impact on the club and the town."

The bottom paragraph is also very clear and unambiguous, sadly Smisa and the club seem determined to renege on their freely entered into commitments. Is cheapens them and devalues something over 1300 bought into. Perhaps Kenny would like to comment on this, and point out why/where it doesnt mention Community?

Edited August 4, 2017 by Lord Pityme

[smcc]

4 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

 

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by smcc

[FTOF]

Yet another opinion passed off as fact............................

[faraway saint]

26 minutes ago, smcc said:

 

Enough of your troublemaking posts.

[bazil85]

Nothing wrong with the club suggesting what they want the money spent on (members suggest as well and some of the board are also paying members I noticed)! It's been reiterated countless times 'there is no point spending money on what the club neither wants or needs' so of course there's no issues with them making suggestions. The vote is there so we can say yes or no. I for one do not want every penny spent on the community I want it to benefit St Mirren and the community. I honestly don't know why fans have such a problem with the club making 'suggestion' Some fans as so pernickety it is unreal! 

e £2 pot will be allocated to fund initiatives voted on by the members"  that happens, at no point does it say the club 'can't make suggestions' it's all they are. I really wish some fans would get off their high horse and concentrate on the good points of this buyout and extra cash. 

Hopefully people continue to pay regardless of disagreements and can see it's for the greater good though. 

[TsuMirren]

The bottom paragraph is also very clear and unambiguous, sadly Smisa and the club seem determined to renege on their freely entered into commitments. Is cheapens them and devalues something over 1300 bought into. Perhaps Kenny would like to comment on this, and point out why/where it doesnt mention Community?

It mentions community right above that last paragraph.

The detail I saw before joining up stated the £2 would go on the club. Fair enough there was conflicting messages as time progressed. If I saw that then others saw that and some will have assumed. Heck a lot of people will have just joined, not care and possibly not even vote. They just want to do their bit to secure St Mirren for the fans/members.

I have raised the question about separate pots/tiers, I'm sure that will be discussed as we progress on.

Oh and Tony, you and I both have no idea exactly what 1300 bought in to aside from them buying in to Buy the Buds. This is nothing like 20000+ buying in to Own the club, Pick the team and getting nowhere near that. We support the club, whom we're in a joint venture with, whilst also providing some support to the wider community.

[Lord Pityme]

41 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Yet another opinion passed off as fact............................

And the £2 will give the trust an ongoing income to be spent on whatever the members decide

Our plan is to spend the contents of the £2 pot every three months. The point is we will be able to spend it wherever we as a trust feel we can make a positive impact on the club and the town

you mean these facts on the Smisa website?

[Lord Pityme]

3 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 

It mentions community right above that last paragraph.

The detail I saw before joining up stated the £2 would go on the club. Fair enough there was conflicting messages as time progressed. If I saw that then others saw that and some will have assumed. Heck a lot of people will have just joined, not care and possibly not even vote. They just want to do their bit to secure St Mirren for the fans/members.

I have raised the question about separate pots/tiers, I'm sure that will be discussed as we progress on.

Oh and Tony, you and I both have no idea exactly what 1300 bought in to aside from them buying in to Buy the Buds. This is nothing like 20000+ buying in to Own the club, Pick the team and getting nowhere near that. We support the club, whom we're in a joint venture with, whilst also providing some support to the wider community.

 

As someone who physically signed people up to BTB i am very clear what they bought into was what we presented to them and made an undertaking to promise to deliver on their behalf. I take my commitments, promises and responsibilities seriously, professionally and transparently. What people signed up to Kenny is there in Black& White... no ifs, no buts... 

it is amusing you stating "you and I both have no idea exactly what 1300 bought into" but in the previous paragraph you lost numerous reasons you state as fact. If Smisa have decided to fail to honour what 1300 signed up to then Smisa need to seek the membership's permission to vote to change what they promised. Its shameful it took a matter of months to fall apart.

[Smithers Jones]

2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

Sorry Kenny you are totally misleading and misrepresenting how the £2 pot was sold in BTB (perhaps as you already know that, thats why you dont wish to be drawn into it)

all the information, leaflets, slides, presentations given were clear. "The £2 pot will be allocated to fund initiatives voted on by the members" recently this has been changed on the smisa website to "spend on the club" and this shameless attempt to re-write history and deceive the membership wont wash. There will be hundreds of people still in possesion of BTB leaflets who can check the text for themselves.

If you cant be honest with people, please dont try and insult them by trying to brow beat, ridicule or deflect from the facts. It shows extremely poor form and lack of judgement. I think a few of the leaflets etc need uploading on here to remind everyone of what they signed up to.

Just checked back on last years emails and the one headed " Congratulations, you just #BoughtTheBuds " states,

"At the same time, we have already started work on a procedure through which our members can vote to choose how the £2 portion of their monthly membership will be spent on the club.
Once we have firmed up arrangements for both of these issues, we will put the details before members. " Sent 21/07 2016.

[TsuMirren]

As someone who physically signed people up to BTB i am very clear what they bought into was what we presented to them and made an undertaking to promise to deliver on their behalf. I take my commitments, promises and responsibilities seriously, professionally and transparently. What people signed up to Kenny is there in Black& White... no ifs, no buts... 
it is amusing you stating "you and I both have no idea exactly what 1300 bought into" but in the previous paragraph you lost numerous reasons you state as fact. If Smisa have decided to fail to honour what 1300 signed up to then Smisa need to seek the membership's permission to vote to change what they promised. Its shameful it took a matter of months to fall apart.

The community SMISA serves is the St Mirren support (as stated by Supporters Direct...who have their own means by which you can engage with them on that) and the main commitment was to buy the buds. If you want to highlight the ways in which SMISA are failing to honour that commitment then you can feel free to do so.

For me, £2 on the club as decided by the members was in black and white on the promotional items I saw. Even if it didn't say club, we absolutely have supported the wider community via the recent votes.

[Lord Pityme]

30 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 

The community SMISA serves is the St Mirren support (as stated by Supporters Direct...who have their own means by which you can engage with them on that) and the main commitment was to buy the buds. If you want to highlight the ways in which SMISA are failing to honour that commitment then you can feel free to do so.

For me, £2 on the club as decided by the members was in black and white on the promotional items I saw. Even if it didn't say club, we absolutely have supported the wider community via the recent votes.

 

No one has said that there hasnt been a small amount of community(outwith SMFC) support. The facts you and smisa tre trying to re-engineer is that there was Never any commitment to the community beyond SMFC and that is an untenable position. Read smisa website, leaflets, presentation etc... what can't talk, can't  lie..

So are you suggesting getting 1300 people to sign up to a set of commitments is ok, but that smisa can move the goalposts whenever they like?

Kenny it is in the leaflets, on the website and was part of the presentation that the £2 pot could be spent as the members decided. And it specified for the benefit of the club and town. Rather than continually leaving yourself open, Perhaps it would be best if you brought this up with the committee and they issue a statement to clarify if they intend to change/have changed the commitments they made. Then the membership can decide what they want to do about it.

1300 were told the £2 pot was for them to decide how it was spent on the club and the town, are you actually suggesting that never happened inspite of all the freely available facts that it did?

[TsuMirren]

No one has said that there hasnt been a small amount of community(outwith SMFC) support. The facts you and smisa tre trying to re-engineer is that there was Never any commitment to the community beyond SMFC and that is an untenable position. Read smisa website, leaflets, presentation etc... what can't talk, can't  lie..
So are you suggesting getting 1300 people to sign up to a set of commitments is ok, but that smisa can move the goalposts whenever they like?
Kenny it is in the leaflets, on the website and was part of the presentation that the £2 pot could be spent as the members decided. And it specified for the benefit of the club and town. Rather than continually leaving yourself open, Perhaps it would be best if you brought this up with the committee and they issue a statement to clarify if they intend to change/have changed the commitments they made. Then the membership can decide what they want to do about it.
1300 were told the £2 pot was for them to decide how it was spent on the club and the town, are you actually suggesting that never happened inspite of all the freely available facts that it did?

I've only read the first few lines of that cover version of every other post you've made recently.

Of course there's a commitment to the community, we're bound to that by the society regulations. Every committee member knows that. But, it is the wider community that some people persist to discuss and it is not the primary commitment that SMISA has made or that SMISA is bound to serve. The regulating statements basically state that any society shouldn't ignore the wider community, so some consideration should be given to it.

If SMISA's committee had suddenly become all about funding the club, whether by approving things then spinning a vote or not then I wouldn't be on it and I'm pretty sure other members wouldn't be on it. It'd also be obvious because, you know what, there'd be no other options on the votes. I'd also have a lot more free time as I wouldn't be suggesting community items, working on any or going through the forum picking any out. There'd be no season tickets, no youth kit, no food bank donation earlier in the year and basically every penny would have went to the club.

I will admit I've never ever seen anything about it being spent on the town (not in those words). But, again people from Paisley will use the tickets, they applied for the youth kits, the food bank is in Paisley, the club is in Paisley. The inclusion of the wider community will obviously mean money is spent on/in Paisley. If members have options then submit them. It'll then be a democratic vote if the options go on and I've already stated that how we deliver community items to a vote will be discussed.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:

As someone who physically signed people up to BTB i am very clear what they bought into was what we presented to them and made an undertaking to promise to deliver on their behalf. I take my commitments, promises and responsibilities seriously, professionally and transparently. What people signed up to Kenny is there in Black& White... no ifs, no buts... 

it is amusing you stating "you and I both have no idea exactly what 1300 bought into" but in the previous paragraph you lost numerous reasons you state as fact. If Smisa have decided to fail to honour what 1300 signed up to then Smisa need to seek the membership's permission to vote to change what they promised. Its shameful it took a matter of months to fall apart.

How has it failed to honor? because it's taken suggestions from the people that run the club we aim to own?  This is exactly what I signed up for a democratic vote on how the money will be spent. i didn't see anything saying the club would be barred from telling us what would benefit them.

It amazes me some fans can turn something as positive as bringing the club into fan ownership into a negative. 

[Lord Pityme]

20 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 

I've only read the first few lines of that cover version of every other post you've made recently.

Of course there's a commitment to the community, we're bound to that by the society regulations. Every committee member knows that. But, it is the wider community that some people persist to discuss and it is not the primary commitment that SMISA has made or that SMISA is bound to serve. The regulating statements basically state that any society shouldn't ignore the wider community, so some consideration should be given to it.

If SMISA's committee had suddenly become all about funding the club, whether by approving things then spinning a vote or not then I wouldn't be on it and I'm pretty sure other members wouldn't be on it. It'd also be obvious because, you know what, there'd be no other options on the votes. I'd also have a lot more free time as I wouldn't be suggesting community items, working on any or going through the forum picking any out. There'd be no season tickets, no youth kit, no food bank donation earlier in the year and basically every penny would have went to the club.

I will admit I've never ever seen anything about it being spent on the town (not in those words). But, again people from Paisley will use the tickets, they applied for the youth kits, the food bank is in Paisley, the club is in Paisley. The inclusion of the wider community will obviously mean money is spent on/in Paisley. If members have options then submit them. It'll then be a democratic vote if the options go on and I've already stated that how we deliver community items to a vote will be discussed.

 

All good, but why do you persist in insisting that the £2 pot was never intended for anything outside Smfc, when clearly it always was?

just to add thanks again for starting your reply with a needless personal dig. Either you want to debate smisa issues on here, with members who will have their own views, or you dont. If not then either ignore, or say so. The personal stuff is poor form.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Lord Pityme

[bazil85]

4 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

All good, but why do you persist in insisting that the £2 pot was never intended for anything outside Smfc, when clearly it always was?

just to add thanks again for starting your reply with a needless personal dig. Either you want to debate smisa issues on here, with members who will have their own views, or you dont. If not then either ignore, or say so. The personal stuff is poor form.

There's a few of them that get personal on here... usually when they start losing arguments I find. 

[BuddieinEK]

Wider scope in the narrowest sense. £25 x 10 every second week is not gonna cut the mustard but if you can save the club money every day, it mounts up. A more strategic view is required and not chucking it away on bags o sugar for the players to use as weights​.

Sorry but I disagree.

I see that as small minded penny pinching.

Why stop at 10?

We should be maximising income ahead of cutting expenditure which, lets face it, can't have much fat left to trim off after the last boards "wise stewardship".

They continually cut expenditure rather than working to build the fanbase and maximise income.

Look where that got us.

In the future, when tv cash dries up, clubs will be desperate for fans to return but by then it will be too late for many.

Think bigger... There is so much potential at this club, much of it untapped.

Austerity Mirren no more! [emoji12]

[HSS]

Have records been kept on how many of the "Community" season tickets have been used at each game since the scheme was introduced?

[TsuMirren]

All good, but why do you persist in insisting that the £2 pot was never intended for anything outside Smfc, when clearly it always was?
just to add thanks again for starting your reply with a needless personal dig. Either you want to debate smisa issues on here, with members who will have their own views, or you dont. If not then either ignore, or say so. The personal stuff is poor form.

Hardly personal. You do make a lot of posts that are mostly the same and so look like a cover version. There's debate and then there's prolonged repetition.

My reading was that it was club related, but it's obvious community aspects would be funded. The blurb I read had "...which will be spent on the club..." an that is an undeniable fact. As late as November part of the site still stated that, didn't mean I didn't think community projects wouldn't be included. Again, I'm now my own cover version as I've stated that numerous times before...I'll have a wee chat with myself about it later.

[bazil85]

3 minutes ago, HSS said:

Have records been kept on how many of the "Community" season tickets have been used at each game since the scheme was introduced?

Not had any season ticket eligible games yet mate. Cup games weren't on tickets. 

[BuddieinEK]

There's a few of them that get personal on here... usually when they start losing arguments I find. 

Do you realise that the ladt umpteen replies you have made were adressed to people who were not talking to you but directly to another poster?

Trust me, your feelings on the matter are extremely clear and need no further clarification.

How about letting others debate and discuss without continually wading in?

[BuddieinEK]

Have you looked at the SMISA website?

"THE FINANCES

What will my money be spent on?

Our plan is to spend the contents of the £2 pot every three months.

The point is we will be able to spend it wherever we as a trust feel we can make a positive impact on the club and the town."

Very clear points there.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:

 

Do you realise that the ladt umpteen replies you have made were adressed to people who were not talking to you but directly to another poster?

Trust me, your feelings on the matter are extremely clear and need no further clarification.

How about letting others debate and discuss without continually wading in?

 

It's an open forum. 

[melmac]

Sorry but I disagree.

I see that as small minded penny pinching.

Why stop at 10?

We should be maximising income ahead of cutting expenditure which, lets face it, can't have much fat left to trim off after the last boards "wise stewardship".

They continually cut expenditure rather than working to build the fanbase and maximise income.

Look where that got us.

In the future, when tv cash dries up, clubs will be desperate for fans to return but by then it will be too late for many.

Think bigger... There is so much potential at this club, much of it untapped.

Austerity Mirren no more! [emoji12]

I'm not talking penny pinching. I had mentioned this on another thread i think, why couldn't for instance, solar panels be put on the roofs to generate electricity which could, in theory, power the ground, offices, lights, ush etc. I'm sure someone somewhere must know if such a configuration could work and whether it could save money.

[BuddieinEK]

I'm not talking penny pinching. I had mentioned this on another thread i think, why couldn't for instance, solar panels be put on the roofs to generate electricity which could, in theory, power the ground, offices, lights, ush etc. I'm sure someone somewhere must know if such a configuration could work and whether it could save money.

Yup... Totally agree... Maybe we see it differently in that I see that as a creative way of increasing our income... One of a multitude of options open to us.

I would love us to always work within our budget but to get away from the mindset of cut cut cut save save save.

Budgets are critical to our sustainability.

Improving income streams has to be our priority.