div

That's why the members are being asked to approve it I guess? If the SMiSA members don't want it to happen, then it won't. They are the folks who have put up a 10 year commitment to pay for the majority shareholding of the club so that seems fair enough to me.

End of the day it's good to have constructive debate on this as it's a big deal. My question I guess would be what is the difference between SMiSA owning 71% as opposed to 51%? Apart from having two Kibble directors on the board, what is the actual material difference to what BTB promised? I'm open to be persuaded either way but it's difficult for me to see a downside in this as it stands right now?

The members of SMiSA will get to appoint 75% of the directors who sit on the board once the takeover is complete. "Sidelined" indeed.

So what you are saying is that it's your opinion that a 27% shareholder, with a quarter of the seats on the board, will be running the club as opposed to the shareholder with 51% and three quarters of the seats on the board. It's important to differentiate your own opinion from facts that are written down on the website.

Kibble will get two places on the club board, starting in the interim phase and continuing thereafter. Under the terms of the legal agreement if the board was to expand in future the number of directors would reflect the percentage shareholdings – so Kibble will always have at least a quarter of the board and SMISA at least half. Kibble are making a substantial investment in St Mirren – both financially and in terms of staff time – so their board reps will oversee how that is managed. We see this as a positive – Kibble are a massive Scotland-wide organisation for whom good governance is crucial. They can bring substantial skills, experience and contacts to St Mirren’s boardroom. Whoever Kibble choose to fill those places would have to be mutually agreed with SMISA. So, erm, it doesn't say they will be running the club then?

Can you point out the bit where it says Kibble will be running the club please? Much obliged, I must have missed it!

They are a non-profit making organisation, That just means any profits they do make are re-invested back into the organisation rather than paid out to shareholders.

To put the Kibble investment into context, at around £300K...... Two years ago they spent £3m setting up a Go-Kart track in Hillington.

SMiSA will own the majority shareholding of the football club. 51% is a majority shareholding. Maybe you missed that bit in the proposal.

So a shareholder (SMiSA) with 30% has had no input, and this is the basis of your argument that a shareholder (Kibble) with 27% will have "effective control" of the club? Well, that sure makes sense!

Are you still a Smisa member? Left the Smisa commitee Have a read through the 10000Hours archive and show me how you "saw it through"

For an opening post this is quite an incredible mis-reporting of what is being proposed by the way. Gordon isn't going anywhere. Kibble aren't taking over. Kibble are merely buying shares from Gordon that SMiSA don't need to complete fan ownership of the club. That brings fan ownership into reality 5 years earlier than planned and brings us the expertise of a 160 year old Charity who have a turnover 10 times that of St.Mirren.

Run that effective control part past us. I'm intrigued by how a shareholder with 27% will have "effective control" whereas the trust, with 51% will apparently have none. Spin that record for me!

Hates SMiSA. Hates Gordon Scott. Hated 10000Hours. Surprised to see LPM being opposed to this. Very surprised.

Beyond grateful to everyone who first of all pledged to join in and then dug deep to donate, especially just three days before Christmas. We've got a truly amazing group of supporters, who all have the right values and right priorities. The 5 point tally gave us a pledge total of £13240 and as you can see we've already smashed it. JustGiving is showing £13464 donated already. Quite incredible. Donations continue to come in. Totally overwhelmed! THANK YOU! https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/12pointsofchristmas

There always someone looking for a negative angle on things. i genuinely made a bit of a fun post on Monday challenging the team with the hope of raising a few quid for the FoodBank. Ive done this before with goals meaning donations to the NorthBank. The donation was made on behalf of the website, not me personally. The site raises a wee bit every month through advertising and this is me giving back. I didn’t ask anyone else to join in, but it completely blew up and before we knew it 500 had joined in and pledged. After getting spanked on Weds night with the wind taken out our sails a wee bit I opted to just go ahead and open the donations page early. A few days on and £2K already guaranteed in donations. Im proud of that, and desperately hope we get thousands more. I’ve spoken to Ian today as I’ve been very surprised by some of the stuff that’s been written about this. He’s someone I know well and I’ve always found him to be a really nice bloke so I’m not entirely sure where this has all come from tbh! Hopefully I’ve clarified things with him and put his mind at ease. This was never supposed to be anything but a positive but you know, negativity is never far away.

Thanks to everyone who has supported the campaign!

Love how your rant about the accounts then just descends into your own wee fantasy land where you've got Goody getting sacked and the gates collapsing 🤣 On the last point, I don't personally expect Tony Fitzpatrick to work full time for nothing, do you?

All fair comment.

Would it not also be fair to say that with the money in the bank from McGinn the board gambled a (big) bit of it to ensure we stayed in the division. A gamble which ultimately paid off? The wage bill rose absolutely in line with our turnover which suggests they are setting and sticking to their budget just as we would expect. Of the £900K operating loss £350K came from depreciation, we paid off two management teams and we laid a new astro pitch. I'd contend that whilst it is a bit concerning I don't think it's quite as bad as it looks.

Available to download here if you are interested; https://www.blackandwhitearmy.com/downloads/accounts-may2019.pdf Summary Turnover up to £4.1m from £2.8m Showing the value of Premiership football over Championship. The extra £1.3m was made up of c£500K in gate receipts, c£600K in prize money and increased advertising and commercial income. Over and above that turnover increase we also got £1m from the sale of John McGinn from Hibs to Villa as our sell on. We've since had another £330k from that deal, which was a third of the £1m kick that Hibs got when Villa got promoted. That money is NOT in these accounts. Our wage bill went up pretty much exactly in line with our increased turnover (point 1). We spent £3m on wages as opposed to £2m in the previous season. That's probably to be expected in the top flight but it does represent a wages to turnover ratio of about 75% which is well above the widely recommended level of 60%. The settlement of Alan Stubbs and Darren Jackson will be in there along with the paying off of all Stubbs duds. Not sure if the Kearney settlement is in there or not. I'd suggest not. The wages of £3m were included in an over all "Admin Expenses" total of £4.5m. That combined with a cost of sales of £500K meant we spent £5.0m last financial year. The income of £1m from John McGinn, plus the turnover of £4.1m meant we brought in £5.1m, spent £5.0m, so thus recorded a £100K profit. We also invested a chunk of money in the new pitch at Ralston and other projects such as the new lighting, the sound system and other bits and pieces. In short we've spent the £1m we got for John McGinn on exiting the Alan Stubbs debacle, repairing and rebuilding the squad, a new pitch and some lights. That £1m offset what would have been a £900K loss. £310K of the operating loss was a depreciation charge Our transfer income last financial year ending May 18 was £728K (Mallan & Morgan), ending last financial year May 19 was £1m and as I said we've actually already banked £300K this financial year. Ralston has delivered. We had £700K in the bank at the end of May (up from £500K previous year) We had 38 players and 36 staff last year (total 74). Previous year was 43 players and 34 staff (total 77) I don't know what prepayments and accrued income is but we had £600K of that this year as opposed to £140K last year. Think that is all the big points. I'll leave everyone to make their own mind up. For me it's certainly a worry that we have spent £1.8m in transfer income and not really have a whole lot to show for it other than being in, and retaining, a place in the Premiership which is not to be sniffed at. The real concern is that there's no obvious assets left now. Magennis isn't going to go for big money and Vaclav will walk for nothing so we're going to need to need to stop sacking managers and rebuilding whole squads in January.

There are actually St.Mirren "supporters" who WANT our team to fail. Let that sink in. How fucking sad is that!

Vaclav will be free to sign for any club on a pre-contract in January and he will leave us at the end of the Summer. Can't see anyone offering us the sort of money that would tempt us to allow him to leave any earlier than that.

No, it's not. The behaviour of the two of you is not healthy. Far Away has already been warned, so he's out. You can spend some time in the bin.

Absolutely nothing in this whatsoever, but the most remarkable thing about it is that it is Hamilton FC who have got in touch with the compliance officer to ask her to review the incident. That was apparently because some Hamilton fans got in touch with the club and complained about it. What a minter of a club. 😂😂