Brilliant Disguise
-
Posts
324 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Brilliant Disguise
-
-
6 hours ago, StanleySaint said:
Joint projects & the running of the club allow for opportunities for people in their care. Ultimately a strong St Mirren is good for the Kibble.
Yes I read the blurb too, but I'm 100% certain that a financial return is an end goal, there is nothing in the above that couldn't have been achieved in a partnership that didn't require partial ownership.
Acquiring shares in the club makes it easier to access the rights to use the clubs name and assets in your objective to squeeze more money out of a variety of 3rd party funding initiatives that become available
-
9 hours ago, antrin said:
Kibble’s prime reason for existence should (first and foremost) be providing for the young people in need of Kibble’s services - not for its employees…
…but I take your point.
Its primary existence is the young people, the fact that its employees can achieve a £230k annual Directors salary is just a bonus.
-
2 minutes ago, billyg said:
Partly because AW used his unsuccessful attempt to become part of the Smisa board to to criticise Kibble on the Smisa website , his poor showing in the vote shows that most of the membership have no time for him . The longer this drags on , and the more the mud slinging goes on , then it's less likely AW will ever get his ban lifted , in my opinion of course !
AW stood on a mandate to go for the Kibble board members. The SMISA members did not agree with his mandate. It’s dropped and we move on.
Aggrieved board members with too much money then decide to play billy big baws and go legal ego on the matter.
Just as well most other people have sensible heads and lack of funds when offended to resist from the childish “I’m going to sue you” scenario.
As started earlier this is the second legal advice on board members that have been sought. The meeting last night inferred that another board member had to seek legal advice due to an issue in the board room.
-
29 minutes ago, Warrior Saint said:
So Kibble keeps the ground up to scratch and the training ground. They do the PR, tickets, HR for club, administration. Got the club on a footing where we can get better players but Kibble have nothing to do with this? Where were we before they came in?
The same as where we are now. In the SPL.
You are giving too much plaudits to the Kibble and ignoring the people in the club and the fans who have been loyal to the club many years before they arrived.
When you’re playing well you attract more fans, better players and in theory can generate better revenue from both.
-
12 hours ago, billyg said:
As John Needham said tonight , the working relationship between Smisa and Kibble on the BOD is great , and the improvement in financial performance , turnover and the club in general is testament to that. AW is still the fly in the ointment here , because it appears that in his eyes , it's still all about him !
You have misconstrued what was actually stated last night with your evident dislike for AW
The facts are that 2 Kibble Employees/SMFC Directors have taken a legal case against AW. The said employees have cited SMISA in their legal case in some form or another. SMISA have now incurred legal costs in order to protect itself and its members. If the later had not occurred then it had feck all to do with SMFC or SMISA and was about the 3 individuals. So much so had SMISA not been mentioned then the whole issue could easily have been shut down and not discussed at all.
From the legal case and the SMISA pre meeting statement, someone has something to hide and has been less than honest from the beginning . Good luck to the three of them, they are all as bad as each other I hope they spend a fortune on legal fees trying to see who can pee the highest and who has the largest ego.
-
11 hours ago, Hendo said:
So are you not even a tiny bit concerned that two St Mirren directors are seeking legal orders against SMISA, which has led SMISA to seek legal advice? Does that sound like a harmonious state of affairs?
Buttoned.up.the.back.
What was more concerning was the admission that there has been legal advice sought twice for 2 (former/current) board directors. Also SMISA took advice to rid themselves of the Kibble ?????
Imagine putting yourself on a board to be bullied by the constant threats of legal action. That sounds like a jolly good board working effectively together.
-
2 hours ago, beyond our ken said:
None of this looks very good, the governance structure seems not to have been respected and when individuals make an application on behalf of a body they are connected with, but not appointed to represent, then the suggestion (at least) is that some people on the board see their remit as unlimited and unrestricted. If any good comes out of this, it will be around the defining of exactly who has the right and permission to do exactly what.
As regards the orders made against SMISA, I wonder what they are. Possibly around public disclosure of things that might harm Kibble and that Kibble contest?
As I said at the very start, there is rarely anything so chaotic as a bunch of people using other people's money without any sense of accountability.
100% Shambolic.
Sounds like we have a majority board being bullied by the minority members. No way to run a company. Threats of legal action when they don’t get their way.
-
On 7/19/2023 at 6:00 PM, faraway saint said:
I heard about this earlier today.
This is an interesting move.
Suppose it sends out the message that people should learn to keep shtum when they have no concrete evidence.
If proven that AW HAS defamed these two people then is could be costly.
Where's my popcorn? 🍿
Or it could send out a message not to take on the “controlling” members of the board.
Irrespective of who is right or wrong on the facts the sentiments of the civil action is worrying.
This is not the first flex of legal muscle from the “controlling” members of the board and will certainly not be the last.
-
7 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:
You believe AW came out of that looking good? He was like a spoilt, petulant child throughout, at one point even refusing to hand over his microphone for a rebuttal to a question FFS.
The SMISA meeting is a cross section of 100 or so members and taken across lets say, very *specific* demographic of late middle aged men who seem to be on the whole, quite agitated and firmly of the belief that their way is correct and that's that. So it did appear that there was significant support for AW in that room.
However, proof of where the fan and membership interest lies in this entire situation is in the polling, so lets lay down some irrefutable facts here:
- Approx 400 members voted in the recent elections - around 1/3 of the total SMISA membership.
- There were 5 candidates to choose from to elect to the SMISA board
- Alan Wardrop's statement garnered easily the most publicity, the most traction and was the most (to quote our pal Doakie) 'explosive' of all 5 member statements. A proper blockbuster they'd have you believe.
-
Alan Wardrop's statement and campaign resulted in him finishing 5th placed among the 5 entrants and nowhere near winning a place on the SMISA board despite the publicity around it.
From that, I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of the SMISA membership either don't see this as a large enough issue to bother voting on whatsoever (because you can bet your bottom dollar that an engaged membership would have taken the time to cast a vote on such allegations if they believed there was systematic wrongdoing) and the vast majority of the 400 who did vote, decided that AW is either not to be believed and/or not worth one of the two places on the SMISA board.
That should be the end of it really. A few shouty, grumpy old men are really all that's left of this. I don't trust AW, I don't trust his reasons for doing what he's doing, I don't trust him sitting on this for several months and I don't trust the explanation given for him sitting on it since February until now. It was a cynical move to get on the SMISA BoD and it has failed spectacularly. Him and his mouthpieces now need to sit down, shut up and accept that the large majority of supporters are not interested in their noses being out of joint over minor issues and are not willing to support or back them up on this.
You obviously missed the bit I wrote
9 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:Not one member on the board and former member comes across with any credibility.
When only a 1/3 voted in the recent elections suggests that 2/3 are not that bothered. (That is the norm for anything that is SMISA related and that is a problem)
That does not however mean that 2/3rds of the membership can have you decide on their thoughts on the matter.
The few shouty grumpy old men had their opinion. Funny how no one in the room offered a differing opinion. I did not witness a single person stand up and defend the board, other than the board.
What i have taken from your post is the best SMISA members are the ones who don’t engage but keep paying their money. If you voice an opinion you are labelled one of the few shouty grumpy old men.
IMO - AW has made a tit of himself over this. Not on the content of his allegations but in the manner, the timing and the ignorance of who he was taking on. In relation to the content of his allegations I don’t care. The nub of the argument is the claim that Kibbles guys are in it for themselves. From what i observed the SMFC guys are in it also for themselves. JN hinted at other issues on the board. Who was the other Director that they took legal advice on to have removed and why.
-
6 minutes ago, Maboza said:
The St.Mirren board and Kibble want us to believe and accept that Renfrewshire Council mistakenly applied shading to point to that exact land.
What’s the timeline from that original accusation and the Kibble excuse it was the Council. Days, weeks MONTHS !!!!
-
25 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:
Just watched part 3 of the video from the AGM.
Could be wrong, though it looked like it conveniently ran out of recording space as AW was given a platform.
Episode 2 is the real action. It’s the most cringeworthy watch you will ever see. Not one member on the board and former member comes across with any credibility.
Needham gets pulled up for making faces at the people asking questions. (We wasn’t alone the entire board was doing it) Disgraceful actions from a so called chairman.
Paul M got the wrong end of the stick when he was appointed to the board. He looked like he was appointed to be bored.
Dia Station on the board needs to get some anger management training.
-
35 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
Forgot one
The directorship (including the Kibble) lead St Mirren to their highest league finish in almost four decades & put them in touching distance of European football
With the current run in form I would suggest getting them in the team on Saturday. One may have a conflict of interest.😂
-
2 hours ago, bazil85 said:
I’ll be accused of a bunch more things over the year, I’m sure. It’s the mentality of people like you to try & make it us Vs them. Be that the Kibble, SMISA, the club chairman or whatever the hot topic of the time is.
You simply crave controversy & discontent at the club. St Moan loyal.
I like many others just want a club that is run by professionals. The backstabbing and bickering should be done at board level not in public. AW, JG and JN have washed the clubs dirty underwear in public. Some and possibly all have lied to the supporters and the Fans Owned Club.
-
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:
Yep, as I said. I never claimed if the Kibble directors had lied it would be trivial.
The whole topic did, does & I am confident will remain ‘trivial’
Thanks for sharing to confirm my point but I don’t know how necessary it was. 👍
Time will tell. !!
Keep brushing. But that carpet will soon become a hill.
-
On 5/11/2023 at 7:32 PM, bazil85 said:
If it is true, why has he not been able to provide a shred of evidence?
Once again, all information points to a trivial point, blown up by someone/ multiple people with an anti-SMFC agenda.
-
34 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
My Kibble mask 😂😂
Over the years I’ve been…….. ………. a kibble employee………… It’s embarrassing.
Because it’s been utterly blown out of proportion by AW. He’s a bitter, little man that’s put his ego ahead of the football club.Thats all i read from your post. 😏
The last sentence is your opinion. AW obviously doesn’t think it’s been blown out of proportion. Maybe he did put his ego first, however is the basis of his argument not that others on the board are serving their paymasters interests ahead of the football club.
Hypothetically if the Kibble board members have been found to have lied, is that a trivial matter that has been blown out of proportion.
-
10 hours ago, bazil85 said:
Exactly this.
That statement from Wardrop is utterly pathetic & very petty. As well as the independent supporters club nonsense.
Asking fans to individually email to send over their personal details. Asking them to moan to the chairman on his behalf. Looking for a pat on the back for things he’s chosen to pay for. 🤦♂️
Telling he sent that rubbish after the SMISA vote closes. Has he not tried to do enough damage to our preparation for one of the biggest run of league fixtures in years?
Your Kibble mask is slipping more every day. Now going for the full on personal assault on AW. Strange how you have not been subjective and critical of any other board members on the handling of this.
Your last sentence WTF. Yes Flynn pushed the Hearts player on Saturday as he looked across at the land the Kibble wanted to build on and went this whole episode is getting to me. The players don’t care what’s going on in the board room.
-
13 hours ago, billyg said:
I suspect he resigned in order to join up with his mates and make an assault on Kibble from the outside , it makes perfect sense !
That makes no sense at all. He leaves the inner sanctum of the board to join up with his mates to throw stones at the board to try and get back into the inner sanctum of the board. All seems a bit convoluted to me. Why not just stay then leak the troubles to his mates like others do.
-
31 minutes ago, doakie said:
I'd add the caveat that there is a second important question that remains unanswered i.e. why did Mr. Gillespie then say in his e-mail to Smisa that the council made an error in producing plans showing the development was taking place on St.Mirren owned land only to have, according to the Herald, the council contradict that statement.
The club's relationship with Kibble is supposed to be open, transparent and honest but the evidence suggests something else.
Doakie there lies the problem. They have used the clubs name and land in order to feather their own nest. When challenged they have deflected from the truth and blamed others. Furthermore they have claimed it doesn’t matter, it never got passed stage 2 anyway. (The Kibble lackey says for goodness sake it was only a Well-being Centre) Lack of honesty is a terminology being used by some however if verges on corruption. If you do something wrong at least have the integrity to take ownership of it.
The Kibble connection was supposed to bring honesty, collaboration, cohesion and governance, amongst other corporate bullshit. The actions of the board and AW have hindered the reputation of St Mirren and i now suspect the Kibble. The Council are less likely to assist them if they know that they are going to get thrown under a bus and used as scapegoat when things go wrong.
-
On 5/13/2023 at 11:00 AM, billyg said:
Wardrop has been waiting his chance to get back into the club and execute his anti-Kibble agenda. He thought this was the chance he'd been waiting for , but he's f**ked up , and is now proving he is an arsehole who's in it for himself. "Mr St Mirren" ? 🤣😆😂
That makes no sense at all. Wardrop was already on the board and resigned. If he wanted to spout anti-kibble stuff and sit with his own agenda surely staying on the board would have been an easier place to be.
-
26 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:
If, if, if........
It’s like a Machiavellian plot from a bad game of Cluedo.
AW blames the Kibble, The Kibble deny it, Kibble blame the council, Council say it wisnae us it was the Kibble. Kibble say it disnae matter we failed. AW goes full Julian Asante and refuses to go in to witness protection. Fred the Shred is engaged to get rid of the evidence and bans any talk of it.
What next. News breaks that SMISA have bought a 2 man tent from Amazon and got 2 guys to deliver it during lockdown.
It’s embarrassing and farcical.
-
19 hours ago, gorgo said:
The cause SMISA, Bod and Kibble.
With the captain John Needham at the wheel
Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk
This whole shit show should have been played behind closed doors. The fact that it was played so openly lies at the door of AW. For that reason he should never again be a Director of the Club. (On the presumption that is his agenda)
IF and it’s a big IF, JG has lied about the use of the name and the land in the application then he must also go from the Board as must his henchman MM. (Renfrewshire Council denial of the inclusion of the land points to this)
Finally John Needham is the Chairman of the club and put there by SMISA. If he was party to the banning of AW from the club with the knowledge that the Kibble had lied, complicit in their lies or failed to do due diligence on the matter then he also should resign or be removed from the board. By being part of the fighting in the background then to ban a fellow SMISA member for raising concerns suggests that he is not being openly objective.
-
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
It is a ‘typical response’ because these topics are practically ALWAYS blown way out of proportion. And typically, this is no different.
I get we still have the St Moan loyal, gagging for some bad news linked to the club (always more telling when we are doing well on the park) but this ain’t it.
Needless drama & moon howling.
Unless you are in the know then you are speculating on the outcome of this. It is evident that someone is lying. You have just decided its AW where as others are asking why it has got to this stage. AWs background from what i know would suggest he us not an idiot. Why is he making such a fuss. He could have kept quiet and stayed on the board
-
2 hours ago, Brilliant Disguise said:
Whether you like AW or not the moronic comments about him on social media detract from anyone else putting their name forward to do this role. End result we end up with people on the board who are incapable of running a business and making business decisions for the greater good of the club and not their ego, self interest or incestuous connection to other businesses.
2 hours ago, billyg said:Bollocks. Wardrop is dragging the clubs name through the mud for selfish reasons. He thought he could resign from the board , and then call them out , and everyone would swallow it. Trouble for him is , everyone who has seen how he operates knows he's an arsehole , a dangerous arsehole at that.
Exactly !!! Why would you bother get involved when there are so many self proclaimed experts. Is he wrong on his assertions. Thats what i want to know irrespective whether he is as you claim an arsehole
New ads LED boards
in General St. Mirren Discussion
Posted
FFS i did not realise that VAR now extended to Safety Managers.
Everyone is an expert from viewing a photo