East Lothian Saint

I would have done if the vision that had been promised at the start was being delivered. I said all along the community element was absolutely vital to me remaining a member, and I warned that if the club targeted SMiSA funds for the repair of the under soil heating or for this ridiculous proposal of paying for players I would be out. 
Before the first vote I made a suggestion to SMiSA of one method of how the funds could be spent. The proposal would have seen a small outlay - not anywhere near the full £8k, a large engagement within the local community, and ultimately a return of the initial investment along with some profit that could be distributed to local good causes as SMiSA saw fit. The proposal didn't make it on to the ballot paper - and there was no explanation why not. 
Don't get me wrong I was and am delighted that the wheelchair users got their platform. I personally believe that should have been funded by the football club and not SMiSA members, but at least the money was going to a decent cause. But this months events are the last straw for me. It's a return to the last time I cancelled my SMiSA membership and the ridiculous and farcical wasting of membership money that was the t-shirts and towels saga. 
 
 

With the lack of win bonuses that been paid this season, the club should have more than enough spare cash to pay for the USH without putting the begging bowl out.

My vote was No and No. These £2 contributions (as I understood it) were to be set aside from day-to-day costs and ring-fenced towards small improvements that would make a difference in some way.
I don't really go along with the argument that these are exceptional circumstances with the team sitting at the arse end of the league table. I'm struggling to remember the last season when that wasn't the case. On the field improvement is a matter for the football club to get right. SMiSA surplus funds should be spent elsewhere. Disappointed that SMiSA members weren't offered an alternative proposal for the funds.
Just my opinion of course.

Way I see it we've got 1300 buddies pitching in £12 or £25 a month towards ensuring the club is owned by the supporters in ten years time.
In the first 5 months we've helped build a disabled platform for our fellow fans, we're now helping the club fix the undersoil heating without affecting this seasons cashflow, and we're now being asked to consider helping the manager out in January.
Meanwhile we've saved up at least £65,000 towards the share purchase.
I'm staggered anyone could treat this all as a negative

To state there would be challenges along the way on our journey to fan ownership seems already like a dim and distant little small print add on. I went into this with crystal clear vision and understanding that football clubs dont make money, they spend it, and the worst offenders spend their own and anyone elses money they can get their hands on, when it is obviously incapable of balancing its books.
So I believed and still do we could/can run the club differently, whilst meeting the challenges of cost, budget, turnover whilst involving the whole community to lift the club, town, team, and people
First thing that appealed to me in our current journey is to "live within our means", a phrase used time and again during "Buy The Buds" so I was pleasently surprised to see we had inherited a surplus at takeover with money in the bank, that I thought would be there for the unaccounted for expenses like USH repair, strengthening the squad in January, and actually building the disabled platform the previous owners abandoned after many promises.
within weeks though it seems the club board have totally abandoned the concept of "living within their means" and see whatever bank balance Smisa has as 'fair game' to plunder. First question is what happened to the surplus on the accounts?
does it currently reside in the bank accounts of messrs Rae & Farrell? Are they paid off in full, or is the club still paying them up in instalments. If ever there was a truly contradictory action to a commitment, then surely it was to say we have to live within our means, but then rack up the expense of paying off a management team, and hiring a new one after SIX league games.
Surely that was an act of folly, naivety, petulance, ego etc this club evidentially cannot afford?
Now it seems whatever the club ask for Smisa to fund... (which is bizarre when you think Smisa owes over £200k but is seen as an ethical choice to lend and seek funding from) they feel onliged to do. The whole concept of this ownership model to me was to put and keep the club on a sound financial footing, without throwing money down a pit, but it seems collectively most of us are doing, asking, suggesting that is what we do.
the club made profit in the last accounts, given where we are in the financial year a projection of end of year accounts would now be a fairly true reflection of the actuals at year end, so before we start throwing all sorts of money sticking plasters at it, should we not be asking for a full prognosis? What are the projected figures for year end, then a prudently run business can take decisions to cut costs if it is projected to miss target, or develop revenue streams to get back on track. Not pour petrol on the flames.
As a rule of thumb take a bankers approach to the club and finances, would they get a loan off a high street bank for the money they want from Smisa after full disclosure in their application???
Now the club need money seemingly just to pay wages, fix equipment etc. The Smisa members are in my opinion unfairly put in a yes/no postion in a highly evocative scenario, suggesting only their vote can "save our season"... what rot!
if Jack Ross was as billed a better manager than we sacked we would not be bottom feeding in a league with part time teams, if we need to free up funds lets start with the ageing goalkeeper who apparently is not going to play anymore, ditto the ageing centre back and the midfielder on a two year contract out on loan. Settle with them, and back the savings for essential needs. These things could 'Save our Season'...
however its a lot more easy to spend someone else's funds especially if you tweak that little think with the heart and not the head button of football fans. The vote and reasons why there even needs to be one are driven by failed business acumen, naivety, incompetence or a darker quest to control. 
The vote will be what it will be, the majority will decide, I and I suspect just about everyone lese will still be Fully paid up Smisa members, but the innocence, hope and lost belief that we are doing it differently will be damaged, and as sure as eggs are eggs they will be back for more, C'mon... why wouldn't they? The money as we are told is just sitting there.
I actully thought it was in bank acounts to pay off our debts, and buy a majority shareholding in SMFC, not to make up the wage and maintenance bill of a multi million business! Still I am sure the directors will be matching everything Smisa funds?

Clubs survive in Leagues One and Two with Crowds of less than 500.
Good housekeeping is the key. 
Including Part Time wages. 

Bad Management hurts the Club. 
Not fans. 
SMISA could empty their Bank Account and hand it all to Ross who employs 2 or 3 Alan Gow types. 
Ta ta St Mirren Football Club. 
Do not gamble the SMISA FUNDS. 
And lose your Superfan SMISA default fud attitude. 
Dafty 

Hallelujah. 
Got it at last. 
You're correct. 
THIS ISN'T A RAINY DAY
So keep the funds in the SMISA Bank till it's pishing cats n dugs. 
PLEASE DO NOT GAMBLE THE FANS MONEY. 
Ross will save the Team with ease without spending. 
Sorry for my tone, but you deserve it. 
FFS 

^^ This.
Pro-rata investment in accordance with share %. It's just business.
We are saving to buy out another shareholder.
This should be the purpose of SmisA, not diluting funds.
Just a thought ;-)

SMISA sooper dooper fans are showing true colours. Bad enough before when the likes of Calum abusing punters asking relevant questions while Buy The Buds campaign was going on. 
The bottom line is this type of fans money must not be gambled.
Rainy day only.
If Jack Ross is incapable of saving our Club without new players, he should be booted out the door now.
We haven't fabulous players but they are better than most in our league.  

Jack Ross has turned things round. We will not be relegated. The present Team is good enough without any additional money thrown at it. 
It is not a rainy day. 
The lunatics are taking over. 

And here is the very definition of short term thinking. A behaviour that equates to the guy who passes all his wages away on the 20/1 three legged donkey running in the 3.30 on pay day.

The club currently pays out in excess of £1.2m per annum in wages and associated costs. As a result of their recruitment policy St Mirren have got and are paying the likes of Jamie Langfield and Kyle Hutton not to play. They've got Andy Webster - another of the top earners and with 28 international caps often left out of the squad. Yet you think chucking an extra £2k per month at the team will solve all its problems.

Community initiatives will raise money, will bring positive PR and will deliver more interest in the club from local people. That's a long term vision, not short term. It's not even a gamble. Yet sadly those chumps on the SMISA committee won't even put the easiest and most secure of options that I put forward on the ballot paper.

Democracy my arse. There's more democracy in a Tibetan election.

Can you just imagine the clusterf**k of a meltdown on here if the money is released for a player, JR signs said player, and the latter either proves to be dross or picks up an injury in training?
This is one point that folk seem to be missing. As soon as the SMiSA money is used to fund squad additions, we could have 1300 people thinking they should be able to chip in their tuppence worth about who should and shouldn't be signed (note I say 'could', and not 'would'). It's a recipe for chaos, dummy spitting, and threats of cancelled DDs every time a player misplaces a f**king pass.
God help us!
 

Total over-reaction by people as usual, the whole point in democracy is that everyones opinion and vote counts. So if you don't think the money should be spent on players.. vote no.
Although I do agree that more alternative options should have been given rather than a simple yes/no.

So what happens to this months pot if the members vote against giving the money to the playing side?There's not another option as what to do with the cash.

You didn't and it doesn't.

For me, SMISA investment should be in things that guarantee a return on our investment.

Otherwise, we could have turns each month on Bet365 to see if we could help the club.

And how does rainy day money being spent on players guarantee this?

The Squad at the moment, under the Management of Jack Ross is more than capable of finishing eighth in this League.
Build the SMISA funds for more important things in the future.

Absolutely delighted I cancelled my Direct Debit to SMISA.
Feel totally vindicated now.
Farcical and disgraceful that, what should be " rainy day money " is getting gambled on players.
It's bad enough over the years that generally our Admission Money is given willy nilly to undeserving overpaid shite players.
IF THE CLUB HAS NO MONEY PRESENTLY THEN NOT A FECKING PENNY SHOULD BE SPENT ON PLAYERS IN JANUARY.
This is fecking lunancy which we will regret.
NO GAMBLING PLEASE.

Totally agree Drew.

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.

I signed up for putting the club at the heart of the community, not ripping off some hard pressed fans to put even more money into the hands of people who are managing to fritter their way through £2.1m per annum. This is utter madness.

Dancin bears, Charles Green and the circus. Wow! you guys know how to go off at a tangent. while I only joined a couple of days ago I have been following your antics for a few months now while I tried to make sense of the SMISA elections. I've noticed a few things. Does Shull live here? He always seems to be online no matter what time it is. To qualify as a true St Mirren fan is it necessary to be more Anti-Rangers than Pro St Mirren (seems most of the election propaganda seemed to centre on that fact) and now Jack Ross has got some league points will the webmasters finally accept he is OUR manager. 5 League games into his tenure the answer to the what is the surname of the current St Mirren manager anti robot question was still Rae for new members joining the site.
The site is brilliant and some of the nonsense threads about Paisley pictures and malt whisky are excellent but I still haven't been through them all yet. I'd need to spend as much time as Shull on the site to achieve that.  Keep going off on tangents guys and may the resurrection continue with a resounding or even narrow victory over Raith Rovers on Saturday.
Come on ye Saints

Okay That's Christmas sorted now. I don't want a St Mirren top, I want a Jack Ross Cardy. I think the cardigan era is definitely coming back.

only took 2 hours but I get the joke now