Colin M

I would like this consultation to also cover the reports that a potential deal is being brokered involving the SPL and the SFL to relegate/parachute/dump Newco RFC into SFL1/new SPL2 as some sort of "compromise".
This is as scandalous as the notion of them "carrying on" in the SPL - if reports are true, the game will potentially be restructured entirely to accomodate them! Like most fans I am wholly supportive of changes to the structure of Scottish Fitba but it must be done for the right reasons, not as some sort of political compromise to appease a TV vendor.
Rangers cheated financially on an industrial scale to the extent that they ran themselves out of existence. They are starting again from scratch, and as such any admission of them into our game should be at the bottom of the existing structure - end of story. Anything else is rigging the game for financial gain.

I would vote
No
No
No
Yes
But with Q3/Q4 I do think that if we are literally talking about a crisis engulfing the entire sport at the top level then the players across the league would be prepared to assist, even in the short term. I am not suggesting that they do this out of the goodness of their hearts, and if it means that some are free to walk away then that is fine, but it seems that it is clubs' collective commitment to existing contracts that is the biggest issue here. It is in everybodys interest that there is some potential for negotiation there.

I would like this consultation to also cover the reports that a potential deal is being brokered involving the SPL and the SFL to relegate/parachute/dump Newco RFC into SFL1/new SPL2 as some sort of "compromise".
This is as scandalous as the notion of them "carrying on" in the SPL - if reports are true, the game will potentially be restructured entirely to accomodate them! Like most fans I am wholly supportive of changes to the structure of Scottish Fitba but it must be done for the right reasons, not as some sort of political compromise to appease a TV vendor.
Rangers cheated financially on an industrial scale to the extent that they ran themselves out of existence. They are starting again from scratch, and as such any admission of them into our game should be at the bottom of the existing structure - end of story. Anything else is rigging the game for financial gain.

I would like this consultation to also cover the reports that a potential deal is being brokered involving the SPL and the SFL to relegate/parachute/dump Newco RFC into SFL1/new SPL2 as some sort of "compromise".
This is as scandalous as the notion of them "carrying on" in the SPL - if reports are true, the game will potentially be restructured entirely to accomodate them! Like most fans I am wholly supportive of changes to the structure of Scottish Fitba but it must be done for the right reasons, not as some sort of political compromise to appease a TV vendor.
Rangers cheated financially on an industrial scale to the extent that they ran themselves out of existence. They are starting again from scratch, and as such any admission of them into our game should be at the bottom of the existing structure - end of story. Anything else is rigging the game for financial gain.

I would like this consultation to also cover the reports that a potential deal is being brokered involving the SPL and the SFL to relegate/parachute/dump Newco RFC into SFL1/new SPL2 as some sort of "compromise".
This is as scandalous as the notion of them "carrying on" in the SPL - if reports are true, the game will potentially be restructured entirely to accomodate them! Like most fans I am wholly supportive of changes to the structure of Scottish Fitba but it must be done for the right reasons, not as some sort of political compromise to appease a TV vendor.
Rangers cheated financially on an industrial scale to the extent that they ran themselves out of existence. They are starting again from scratch, and as such any admission of them into our game should be at the bottom of the existing structure - end of story. Anything else is rigging the game for financial gain.

Would the current selling group take a reduction on the asking price if the Fans are prepared to support the club with extra funding and donations?

I would like this consultation to also cover the reports that a potential deal is being brokered involving the SPL and the SFL to relegate/parachute/dump Newco RFC into SFL1/new SPL2 as some sort of "compromise".
This is as scandalous as the notion of them "carrying on" in the SPL - if reports are true, the game will potentially be restructured entirely to accomodate them! Like most fans I am wholly supportive of changes to the structure of Scottish Fitba but it must be done for the right reasons, not as some sort of political compromise to appease a TV vendor.
Rangers cheated financially on an industrial scale to the extent that they ran themselves out of existence. They are starting again from scratch, and as such any admission of them into our game should be at the bottom of the existing structure - end of story. Anything else is rigging the game for financial gain.

The bid SHOULD be dependent on the current level of income being maintained. If the business is worth significantly less in income, then why shouldn't the price be lower?

The bid SHOULD be dependent on the current level of income being maintained. If the business is worth significantly less in income, then why shouldn't the price be lower?

The bid SHOULD be dependent on the current level of income being maintained. If the business is worth significantly less in income, then why shouldn't the price be lower?

Neil Young - World on a String
Can practically taste the tequila and fags on this album

Have seen the last two times at the QM - Awesome band. YHT and A Ghost is Born two tremendous records.

The album is excellent
Listening to: Angelo Badalamenti - Laura Palmer's Theme

I know most regular forum users know by now that I am involved in some graphics-related jobs with RA, and would expect me to vote for him. Putting that aside, I would actually find it somewhat strange if the person who initiated the whole CIC takeover, who approached SG after seeing the Financial Times advert, who was co-opted onto the BOD for over a year, who put 10000hours team together, who has been the prime mover in dealing with the consortium, the funders, the politicians, who was the main man at the public meetings, has liased with SMiSA, who is our Commercial Director, and who frankly is the public face of the whole shooting match, wasn't elected to be new Chairman - at least initially. If he then does a crap job, the CIC model allows for the membership to shoot him in the back of the head as he drives down Deeley Plaza. Job done, swear in the new Chairman and duck back behind the grassy knoll.
Seeing as how this is all new, different and untried at this level.... if the CIC comes to fruition, I'd be quite happy to see it roll out with RA at the head of it all, his existing team behind him, Fitzy in place as a 'Presidential' figure, SMiSA representation, and also maybe SG staying on in some sort of temporary capacity to facilitate a smooth transition from consortium to CIC.

If I were part of SMISA, and this money is being invested entirely in the club, then one condition I'd ask for would be that the SMFC Board would control how the 50K is allocated. I'd question whether 86 members is justification for a guaranteed seat on any board, especially as come election time at least one SMISA member is all but guaranteed getting voted in anyway. Not really sure what other controls you would have once you've voted the 50K in to the budget, you'd need to assign it within the original vote (that'll be the complicated micro stuff that so many seem to be promising yet not actually want to provide).
As for your comment above about just letting people get on with it post election...NO. This whole process needs proper processes, you also can't go out to the International media and sell fan involvement with the "decide where the scraps go" tagline. Especially as, at least in the meetings I went to, we've been told by very high up members of the CIC that they don't want to run the club as it's our club.

The chap to the right of Mr Atkinston has a touch of the Jack Nicholsons about him, while McQuade looks like a stunt double for Eraserhead.

I don't mind people being against this whole thing.
I do mind them refusing to take their concerns to the public meetings and letting the folk that might give them answers a chance to explain themselves.
Lets face it, there will be concerns about how the club operates regardless of the set up. If the consortium flogged their shares to some random who is to say THEY would have run the club the way we might like? I was a shareholder when Lewis Kane hit the gamble button and I had no say in the matter as we racked up a debt that had us in the poorhouse for near enough two decades.
We get all these folk coming on here with their concerns. Do they actually go to the public meetings and ask these questions there? Or are they just happy to gripe away on the sidelines?
There ARE questions to be asked. Some of the long winded posters have asked a few good questions on the thing. Some have been answered of course.
You get the impression that even if every single fear these people have about the CiC were allayed they would STILL be grumbling away on the sidelines.
Personally I waited to see what was said by Atkinson, and especially Gilmour as I wanted to hear what he thought of it. I like the idea of the CiC, its now up to us lot to either back it or decide we want a conventional owner to buy the club and run it as he sees fit.
I'm in.

I am writing this on the assumption that the CIC bid will succeed.
In one of the other threads, Div has touched on what is THE critical area for this whole CIC business, and its validity whether you are for/against expanding the numbers of supporter involvement.
Why ?
*RA has said that the whole thing depends upon the backing of the fans. Fine.
*What we have is a target of 300 10% of the regular support. For one in ten regular fans to be all that is required to rubber stamp supporter backing is a ridiculously low level the sort of mandate that even Nick Clegg may wince at.
*If we have 1,000+ fans signed up, then the financial benefits to the club are obvious.
*If we have 1,000+ fans signed up, then this represents a serious voice ie. the first sign of any buggering about / unfulfilled promises / etc. then 700-800+ cancel their direct debits within a 1-2 month period. I think youll find that gets results, and the Executive Board will really pay heed to supporter involvement, beyond the lower tier board position(s) that are available.
Beyond the above what are the benefits ?
Given that this project has been on the go now for 12 months, the incentives for the individual membership are very disappointing thus far, and dont appear to have had much thought put in. This is at best surprising.
All I know so far is that:
*Well get access to a bar. Mowell did this a while back, and within a short period of time, it (Davie Cooper Bar ?)was open to non-members due to a series of complaints and general bad PR within the club. Id wager similar will happen at SMP. Also, not exactly a pulse-quickener for exiled Buds who must represent a decent target market for the individual memberships (ie. get a chance to get involved from a distance)
*Fitzy says we can help choose the strips.
*Other benefits will be voted for by the fans (once the bid is through). Surely something as simple as % discount on merchandise would have been easy enough to offer right here & now ? Im sure the business partners will see good benefits for fans using theior services, but that is AFTER the event. Lets try and offer some bunce to bring in as many Individual Members as possible.
Im probably missing something, but if the above is all that is on offer as incentives, it doesnt really tally with the stated intentions of supporter backing being the key. We dont appear to be trying too hard to win over as wide an audience as possible.
If a non-online campaign is cranked up to recruit as many as possible, then this is highly commendable:
*We have enough good contacts in the press to make this happen
*I am not the only one to be left scratching my head at why the bar was set so low (10%) for supporter backing, and it doesnt really help the festering bad vibes that many have about the project.
*Divs feedback about non-net users wondering what the hell is going on is a concern, and clearly the CIC bid is not yet being communicated as well as could possibly be the case.
Having done an Aber on Bannatyne, I may well be IN again.....if I see a decent campaign to recruit as many people as possible. Having 1000 fans signed up is achievable, and does represent a decent mandate for saying the supporters back the CIC bid. It also provides the fans with a loud enough threat to keep the whole thing on the straight & narrow.
Div you made a great post. Now do the hard bit and go and get them to make it happen in real life.