Kombibuddie

I am sure you are probably right on that point but hey, lets run round in circles a few more times.
The link's SD has just posted suggests 11 members. The website with "who we are" suggests 11 members to the untrained in all things SMISA but, I expect you are closer to the SMISA core and know differently. Perhaps you could have a word with the communications guy and ask that their communication improves and folk like me don't get misled into thinking someone is something they are not.
anyone got a good cure for dizziness, all this running round in circles has done me. Nurse!

I am sure you are probably right on that point but hey, lets run round in circles a few more times.
The link's SD has just posted suggests 11 members. The website with "who we are" suggests 11 members to the untrained in all things SMISA but, I expect you are closer to the SMISA core and know differently. Perhaps you could have a word with the communications guy and ask that their communication improves and folk like me don't get misled into thinking someone is something they are not.
anyone got a good cure for dizziness, all this running round in circles has done me. Nurse!

Care in the community

"Who we are" lists
David Nicol, George Adam, John White, Jim Cumming, Colin Orr, Peter Black, Tony Dorris, Tony Black, Barry Mitchell, Jim Crawford & Alan Quinn which on my abacus counts 11.
I am most definitely "not in the know" as I have lived out of Scotland for just gone 30 years and my participation is that I pay my money and trust the elected SMISA board members to act in the best interests of SMISA for it's members.
The SMISA website at best, is a bit misleading as I automatically assumed that since there are 11 men listed then these are the elected SMISA board. I expect there are a quite a few of SMISA's 1300+ members that would conclude the same.
From his posts in recent weeks, I have also thought that Kenny Morrison was now a member of the SMISA board as he appears to be responding on behalf of SMISA and not someone who was just invited to attend meetings and maybe be asked for his opinion on some things. I have no problem if he is or if he isn't, nor if SMISA want to have a board of 8 or is it 10, maybe it's 12 or 13, ach, they can have as many as they like for all I care but what I do care about is accuracy. I want to be able to decipher the information being put out there quite easily and not have to be relying on another row on BAWA to determine the facts of 10, 11 or 12 or whatever.
I want to know the people that I am entrusting £1440 (over 10 years) of my money, will provide me with accurate information. There is nothing (as far as I can see but please point it out to me if I am missing it) on the list of "who we are" that suggests 1 of those listed is not on the SMISA Board.
Transparency (4.4) !! seen that bandied about a lot recently. Accuracy, Honesty and Transparency. That is what I expect of an organisation that I am essentially gifting £1440 to. It is not transparently obvious which 10 (as you state) of the 11 men listed are the SMISA board members.

Care in the community

Care in the community

& it doesn't list 7 of them (I think) as being aboard member or director of SMISA.
The fact he is listed in the "Who we are" section suggests otherwise. If I was a newbie, looking to join SMISA, I'd see his photo and read the spiel that says
and think he is.
That, to me, interprets SMISA Board Member and I suspect many others would see it the same way. Like 7 of the other 10, there isn't a "committee title" like Chairman, Secretary or Treasurer assigned to any to distinguish what their role is but it looks from here that David Nicol is one of 11 men on the SMISA board.
As I said previously, I couldn't give a monkeys stuff who is and who isn't as long as they are acting in the best interests of the SMISA membership and ultimately, St Mirren Football Club. My expectations remain the same, I expect there to be structure, honesty & transparency and compliance with the constitution.

FFS naw he's got a pal 

quite a few of the celebrities dying young have a history of drug abuse/misuse. Coincidence?

Hollywood is shiting it in case you get another hire this year.
MGM and Disney wish you a happy holiday

"Who we are" lists
David Nicol, George Adam, John White, Jim Cumming, Colin Orr, Peter Black, Tony Dorris, Tony Black, Barry Mitchell, Jim Crawford & Alan Quinn which on my abacus counts 11.
I am most definitely "not in the know" as I have lived out of Scotland for just gone 30 years and my participation is that I pay my money and trust the elected SMISA board members to act in the best interests of SMISA for it's members.
The SMISA website at best, is a bit misleading as I automatically assumed that since there are 11 men listed then these are the elected SMISA board. I expect there are a quite a few of SMISA's 1300+ members that would conclude the same.
From his posts in recent weeks, I have also thought that Kenny Morrison was now a member of the SMISA board as he appears to be responding on behalf of SMISA and not someone who was just invited to attend meetings and maybe be asked for his opinion on some things. I have no problem if he is or if he isn't, nor if SMISA want to have a board of 8 or is it 10, maybe it's 12 or 13, ach, they can have as many as they like for all I care but what I do care about is accuracy. I want to be able to decipher the information being put out there quite easily and not have to be relying on another row on BAWA to determine the facts of 10, 11 or 12 or whatever.
I want to know the people that I am entrusting £1440 (over 10 years) of my money, will provide me with accurate information. There is nothing (as far as I can see but please point it out to me if I am missing it) on the list of "who we are" that suggests 1 of those listed is not on the SMISA Board.
Transparency (4.4) !! seen that bandied about a lot recently. Accuracy, Honesty and Transparency. That is what I expect of an organisation that I am essentially gifting £1440 to. It is not transparently obvious which 10 (as you state) of the 11 men listed are the SMISA board members.

So HE borrowed 600k and used that to 'buy' the club.  So He now owes the lender 600k. Take that to its logical conclusion.

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

A decent idea.
I certainly don't want any money back. I'm just happy to have contributed to setting up a facility that hopefully will be accessible to all at some point.
However, this would set Blub off into a rage filled tantrum as I'm not sure if this proposed usage of SMISA funds is "community minded" enough.
Amusing as it can be , I'm not sure any of us are ready for another hundred posts of delusional, attention seeking drivel.

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

He does that also.

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

When the SMISA/GLS model of purchasing St Mirren was unveiled, it was made clear, that GLS would not be able to inject/invest any further monies in St Mirren and it explained, that his money was being used to pay off the old board to get them out the door and new folk (GLS & his cronies, if you like) in the door.
I signed up knowing there would be no further investment from the new board and I think it is unnecessary to criticise GLS or the board for not "putting in" any more money because we were told at the outset, that would not happen. SMISA & the 1300 odd folk bought into this model of trying to achieve fan ownership on the strength of that. We got rid of a decaying old board & replaced it with a model to get the club into fan ownership within a reasonable time frame.
I don't agree with the current BOD going to SMISA and asking for financial assistance for anything. The Club should & must live within it's means. If it wants something bought, it should be budgeted for and if it wants something repaired, that should have been budgeted for too. I understand the USH was probably an unexpected cost pressure however The Club must live within it's means and for any future additional costs, commercial activity needs to improve to increase revenue. Question I would like to ask is "what new revenue streams does the Commercial Manager explore?"
I personally feel, the discretionary £2 per member SMISA pot should be spent on things/projects that the SMISA membership identify as being needed. f**k me, there's enough of us going down to the ground 2 weeks in 4, they can see what they'd like done and the money spent on. Which IMHO is far better than saying to the club every 3 months "we've got £8K, what do you want it spend it on"
It should be 'Dear members, the £2 pot has been building and it is almost time to spend it, can we have your suggestions for the spend. The SMISA committee will shortlist 3, 4 or 5 of your suggestions to be put to the membership to decide on what the money gets spent"
My suggestion for future pots would be
SMISA & The Fans Council get round a table & thrash out a plan about opening up the 1877 Club to all St Mirren supporters. The £2 discretionary pot is allowed to accumulate up to the build cost of The 1877 Club and each member is offered (some will take the offer & some will decline getting their money back) what they've paid in Founder' fee & monthly subscription fees back. This negates the  "but I helped pay for it to be built so why should it be opened to all" argument.
Obviously, more folk would use it, increasing bar takings, increasing profits and from what I understand, bar profits go directly to The Club. With a new kit supplier deal on the cards, get the kit available in the bar on match days ensuring 100% of the profit goes to The Club.
Oh aye, & get the commercial manager in for his appraisal and ask him what new idea's he is comig up with for increasing revenue (3 course sumptuous dinners don't count).

The Club has, in the recent past, given out match tickets to local schools & youth groups?
Approach those schools ( & as many other schools as you fancy) & ask that they give them to the children (put them in their school bags is the phrase used down here)
You'll be getting The Saint into many homes & hopefully, many will have a good read of it.

I said from day one that the additional monies shouldn't be used to prop up the playing budget. That my personal position (and only that).  There will always be periods when it  could be argued that a bail out is justified. Where would it end? However perilous our current situation, I don't think a precedent should be set.

Sorry fella but you will need to go back & point out where I compared us to Hibs.
wanting to see my club involved in similar initiatives and being at the forefront of such initiatives is not a comparison. As I explained, for the longevity of the Buy the Buds project and St Mirren Football Club, more engagement with the community will be valuable to the club. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to dream up simple, cost neutral things that gets the ball rolling but as you say, the current board are just in the door, so lets look to next year as it is too short notice to hastily arrange now.
There's the Fans Council, SMISA, the Buy a Brick Gang and the commercial manager who I am sure will, now that there is some discussion on the matter, start thinking about such initiatives for next and future years.
 

I left Barrhead for London in 1986. Celebrated my 30th birthday out of Scotland on 16th November.
Apart from a couple of years in Saudi Arabia (95-97) I've lived in/around Romford in East London. I used to get up the road a few times a season but parenthood put paid to the regularity of the trips and then it became an annual boys weekend with a couple of my mates. We've done Vienna's & Kilty Kilty to death so head up for away matches now and usually grab a seat on a supporters bus that has a couple of spare seats.