Jump to content

Standing Area At St Mirren Park


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, buddiecat said:

Not referring to the £10 a month, one thing agreed at the AGM was, that money is ring fenced and cannot be used other than to buy the shares. Okay on the £2 spend it is up to the majority what it gets spent on, nothing wrong with me publishing my thoughts on what is prudent or not, i'm aware that murals appeal to some, but also aware they need money spent on them annually to stop them fading, and to repair any damage (accidental or otherwise). Safe standing areas cost a fortune to build and continuous costs of extra stewarding  are too high for the project to be seen as a good use of our money. Only my opinion.

I disagree about the murals but agree about the standing area due to the huge cost involved. But that is what the vote is about. You were such a strong advocate for BTB and its a shame that the £2 is the reason you have given up Board Membership. Its better to have voices of dissent within the Board to help provide an overall balanced view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


You misinterpreted the bit in bold LPM as did i when i first read it. Sounds like being involved in an alternative project " leaving others to see through the project you appeared to be really involved in." But it really means he thought i appeared to be really involved in SMiSA and couldn't have been really committed because i threatened to withdraw subs, and i have left it to others to continue it now.

I've really not meant to have caused offence or accused anyone of being involved in any alternative project so apologies if that is how my post was read.

As you say mountains seem to be getting made out of molehills over what appears to have been a couple of comments that were posted.

Bygones.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sonny said:

I disagree about the murals but agree about the standing area due to the huge cost involved. But that is what the vote is about. You were such a strong advocate for BTB and its a shame that the £2 is the reason you have given up Board Membership. Its better to have voices of dissent within the Board to help provide an overall balanced view.

Believe me on this, i am still a strong advocate for BTB and voices of dissent within the board stretch to 2 sometimes 3, now maybe 1. We need people to stand for board election. The £2 spend was not the reason i gave up being on the board.

Edited by buddiecat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Sonny said:

I disagree about the murals but agree about the standing area due to the huge cost involved. But that is what the vote is about. You were such a strong advocate for BTB and its a shame that the £2 is the reason you have given up Board Membership. Its better to have voices of dissent within the Board to help provide an overall balanced view.

And there's the thing right there. You mention "its better to have voices of dissent within the board to help provide an overall balanced view" which i get and agree with to a point, however if you firmly believe, and other board members agree, (but dont want to get involved) that your voice/opinions are balanced, considered and worthy of debate. But there is a small majority who have their own pre-set, agreed and determined agenda, you come to realise almost everything you say, suggest or debate is ignored, or indeed treated with contempt. You then decide to stop banging your head against a brick wall as its not helping anyone.

a year in on BTB smisa should have invested in a revenue generating stream (cafe, bar, laundry, shop etc) that would put them in a position to paydown the cost of acquiring the majority shareholding sooner, whilst being able to fund various initiatives for support, community and club.

why are our subscriptions not working for us? At present all they are used for is whatever is on Gordon's shopping list. The HoF boards are being replaced for what £2.5 k, when all they needed was a new decal stuck on for a few quid each. Thats an indulgent overspend of other peoples money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

And there's the thing right there. You mention "its better to have voices of dissent within the board to help provide an overall balanced view" which i get and agree with to a point, however if you firmly believe, and other board members agree, (but dont want to get involved) that your voice/opinions are balanced, considered and worthy of debate. But there is a small majority who have their own pre-set, agreed and determined agenda, you come to realise almost everything you say, suggest or debate is ignored, or indeed treated with contempt. You then decide to stop banging your head against a brick wall as its not helping anyone.

a year in on BTB smisa should have invested in a revenue generating stream (cafe, bar, laundry, shop etc) that would put them in a position to paydown the cost of acquiring the majority shareholding sooner, whilst being able to fund various initiatives for support, community and club.

why are our subscriptions not working for us? At present all they are used for is whatever is on Gordon's shopping list. The HoF boards are being replaced for what £2.5 k, when all they needed was a new decal stuck on for a few quid each. Thats an indulgent overspend of other peoples money.

I wrote to SMiSA yesterday to ask for more flexibility on the £2 spend. At the moment we are presented with a list and a yes/no solution and no prior warning as to what is being proposed. I suggested that if people approve a project in principal but would like caveats then those caveats should also be considered by the SMiSA board. Maybe not go as far as having yet another vote of the whole membership but if people come up with good ideas as amendments then the Board should consider them and not write them off because they were not on the original voting wording.

The HoF boards are a good example. The vote was either 'complete replacement yes or no' however most comments were that there were cheaper solutions. If many think cheaper solutions should be tweeked to the proposal then that should then be considered by the board if the vote is carried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sonny said:

I wrote to SMiSA yesterday to ask for more flexibility on the £2 spend. At the moment we are presented with a list and a yes/no solution and no prior warning as to what is being proposed. I suggested that if people approve a project in principal but would like caveats then those caveats should also be considered by the SMiSA board. Maybe not go as far as having yet another vote of the whole membership but if people come up with good ideas as amendments then the Board should consider them and not write them off because they were not on the original voting wording.

The HoF boards are a good example. The vote was either 'complete replacement yes or no' however most comments were that there were cheaper solutions. If many think cheaper solutions should be tweeked to the proposal then that should then be considered by the board if the vote is carried.

I do get the impression that Gordon looks on the stadium as if it were his own living room and wants it to be filled with fine things, (i want brand spanking new fancy HoF boards) when a decal covering the existing JD logo would have sufficed at a tenth of the cost. Just my opinion though and based on wanting to save money.

I would agree totally on your idea that options being proposed should be subject to debate before being set and would be interested in the reply you receive from the Board. Or even better i'm going to write and ask that all emails/letters to the board be featured on a "your letters" section on the SMiSA website, that way we could all send in suggestions and have them open for discussion, doesn't need to be restricted to comment on the £2 spend.

 A comments section could also be included as could a poll section where members can vote on £2 spend or any other subject at all, this could possibly save money on survey software being purchased and we could all see how the vote is progressing.

Edited by buddiecat
edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...

Through work I was in Headingley Stadium today, both the cricket & rugby stadiums ( they are joined for those maybe not aware ) and I was looking at the rugby side plans and the 2 new stands going up facing each other are similar to the Carnegie stand as in the standing area is the lower half of each stand & thus making the rear section all seated.

 

Looks good & really brings it home ( to me at least) that terracing/ safe standing has it’s place in football, I’d love to see it return.

 

 

996cbff6bcb5a17ef7f8950de4bd3468.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced. I genuinely don't think the sanitised "safe standing" would be anything like the old days. 

It wasn't just about standing up. It was all about the togetherness and those amazing big swells and surges in the crowd, none of which to the best of my knowledge ever killed anyone. 

Having everyone standing up in neatly penned off rows is not the same thing. For me that's just standing up for the sake of standing up. 

Edited by TPAFKA Jersey 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
I do get the impression that Gordon looks on the stadium as if it were his own living room and wants it to be filled with fine things, (i want brand spanking new fancy HoF boards) when a decal covering the existing JD logo would have sufficed at a tenth of the cost. Just my opinion though and based on wanting to save money.
I would agree totally on your idea that options being proposed should be subject to debate before being set and would be interested in the reply you receive from the Board. Or even better i'm going to write and ask that all emails/letters to the board be featured on a "your letters" section on the SMiSA website, that way we could all send in suggestions and have them open for discussion, doesn't need to be restricted to comment on the £2 spend.
 A comments section could also be included as could a poll section where members can vote on £2 spend or any other subject at all, this could possibly save money on survey software being purchased and we could all see how the vote is progressing.

Ffs, don't mention HoF boards...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
I'm not convinced. I genuinely don't think the sanitised "safe standing" would be anything like the old days. 
It wasn't just about standing up. It was all about the togetherness and those amazing big swells and surges in the crowd, none of which to the best of my knowledge ever killed anyone. 
Having everyone standing up in neatly penned off rows is not the same thing. For me that's just standing up for the sake of standing up. 

I get your point about the swells and surges, however you could argue Hillsborough had both?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
And neither caused the disaster. Bad policing and fences caused that. 

Yeah, but yknow they're all associated. I say this having enjoyed the surging and swelling (over, missus) on the terracing and a concert field in at Donnington.
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...