spirit of 77
-
Posts
157 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by spirit of 77
-
-
....remarkable that you still don't understand the CIC model.
I havent researched it and wouldnt pretend to, however i do understand a little (only a little) about company law and director's responsibilities.
You need to work on your dickophile tendencies, they are dominating your life.
-
Best to restructure your malconent ramblings into a question in the Q&A thread otherwise it just reads like malcontent ramblings.
best to mop up your incontinent dribblings and check which thread you are replying in.
-
How did you work that out?
All I have suggested is that, given the number of pledges, it looks likely that the number of individuals might well exceed the 300 mark. You, on the other hand, have opted to use figures (on what basis you have worked out your assertion is anyone's guess), so I think it is reasonable for me to come right back at you.
I was merely passing on what a mate had mentioned to me. He will definitely be signing up, and is of the view that the fee should remain at £10 meantime regardless of how many others join him. I thought it worth mentioning.
i didnt need to work anything out, it's speculation based upon the fact that there is no statement from 10000 hours as to what the expected conversion ratio will be.
Not all pledges will convert, that is a fact.
-
The CIC "is" the fans. It is effectively the fans who are buying the majority shareholding of the club, the CIC is merely the vehicle they are using to do it with.
"SMFC" won't contribute anything to servicing the CIC debt, the CIC will repay that entirely by itself. It may use St.Mirren assets to help do that (eg using a void space in the main stand as a members bar and function area) but the club doesn't lose revenue from that, and of course stands to gain from it as it will also be able to make use of that area.
Of course the quicker the CIC debt is paid off the better. There is no penalty for paying it off quicker, so the earlier the CIC becomes debt free the less interest it pays on it's borrowing and the more money it will have to invest in and around the football club (if it's members elected board decide that is what they want to do of course
)You are missing a serious point, quite conveniently for the 10000 hours people. That is the fact that any commercial enquiries to the club can, and in my opinion will, be redirected to the CIC by whatever person the majority shareholder puts in charge of day-to-day running of the club. The CIC can then decide how much it diverts to the debt, how much goes into the community projects and how much it returns to the club coffers .
I have a modest budget for events, training, etc of around £100000 per year. I am actively looking at spending as much as possible of that at SMFC by renting the function suite as a venue, however i wont go through with it if i feel any of the surplus is diverted to paying off 10000 hours debt.
-
Some of these companies might not be too keen on putting 10 grand into a first division outfit...................just as some fans. Myself, at the moment I will not pledge money if we were to go into 1st, however that may just because of the mood I am in after yesterday. So if this does happen I can see lots of problems for the CiC
Surly the 2 million pound cost of the club is for a SPL club, if we are buying out shares of a 1st Division club it will be less????......... I am sure if Mr Loadsamoney was buying the club in 1st it would be less.
I'm not saying that you personally are guilty of this, but people have to be aware that they are supporting a company that owns shares in a football club when they sign to the CIC and will not be directly supporting the club itself, they will have no direct influence over the business of the club and any indirect influence will be tempered by the views of the exec committee. None of the money gifted to the CIC (I wont say invested since that implies the possibility of a return) will find it's way into the club's coffers. It will go towards what is a pretty massive debt for a company whose only asset will be 52% of a club with no notable assets. If there is a surplus then they have to set some aside for community projects so that they can meet the legislative or regulatory requirements, they will also have to set some aside as a contingency against the possibility of diminishing membership payments.
The CIC directors have a principal legal duty, to act in the best interests of the CIC. If that means deciding to divert funds away from SMFC so that they can service the debt becasue of a dip in membership monies then they will do that or must find a way of justifying an alternative decision.
The CIC represents a good idea in theory, however the debt it will incur as it takes 52% of shares is massive in comparison to the club's income. Maybe a better solution would be for the CIC to offer to buy 50% of the consortium holding and strike a collective deal with the other shareholders.
-
Some of these companies might not be too keen on putting 10 grand into a first division outfit...................just as some fans. Myself, at the moment I will not pledge money if we were to go into 1st, however that may just because of the mood I am in after yesterday. So if this does happen I can see lots of problems for the CiC
Surly the 2 million pound cost of the club is for a SPL club, if we are buying out shares of a 1st Division club it will be less????......... I am sure if Mr Loadsamoney was buying the club in 1st it would be less.
I'm not saying that you personally are guilty of this, but people have to be aware that they are supporting a company that owns shares in a football club when they sign to the CIC and will not be directly supporting the club itself, they will have no direct influence over the business of the club and any indirect influence will be tempered by the views of the exec committee. None of the money gifted to the CIC (I wont say invested since that implies the possibility of a return) will find it's way into the club's coffers. It will go towards what is a pretty massive debt for a company whose only asset will be 52% of a club with no notable assets. If there is a surplus then they have to set some aside for community projects so that they can meet the legislative or regulatory requirements, they will also have to set some aside as a contingency against the possibility of diminishing membership payments.
The CIC directors have a principal legal duty, to act in the best interests of the CIC. If that means deciding to divert funds away from SMFC so that they can service the debt becasue of a dip in membership monies then they will do that or must find a way of justifying an alternative decision.
The CIC represents a good idea in theory, however the debt it will incur as it takes 52% of shares is massive in comparison to the club's income. Maybe a better solution would be for the CIC to offer to buy 50% of the consortium holding and strike a collective deal with the other shareholders.
-
Some of these companies might not be too keen on putting 10 grand into a first division outfit...................just as some fans. Myself, at the moment I will not pledge money if we were to go into 1st, however that may just because of the mood I am in after yesterday. So if this does happen I can see lots of problems for the CiC
Surly the 2 million pound cost of the club is for a SPL club, if we are buying out shares of a 1st Division club it will be less????......... I am sure if Mr Loadsamoney was buying the club in 1st it would be less.
I'm not saying that you personally are guilty of this, but people have to be aware that they are supporting a company that owns shares in a football club when they sign to the CIC and will not be directly supporting the club itself, they will have no direct influence over the business of the club and any indirect influence will be tempered by the views of the exec committee. None of the money gifted to the CIC (I wont say invested since that implies the possibility of a return) will find it's way into the club's coffers. It will go towards what is a pretty massive debt for a company whose only asset will be 52% of a club with no notable assets. If there is a surplus then they have to set some aside for community projects so that they can meet the legislative or regulatory requirements, they will also have to set some aside as a contingency against the possibility of diminishing membership payments.
The CIC directors have a principal legal duty, to act in the best interests of the CIC. If that means deciding to divert funds away from SMFC so that they can service the debt becasue of a dip in membership monies then they will do that or must find a way of justifying an alternative decision.
The CIC represents a good idea in theory, however the debt it will incur as it takes 52% of shares is massive in comparison to the club's income. Maybe a better solution would be for the CIC to offer to buy 50% of the consortium holding and strike a collective deal with the other shareholders.
-
I believe it to be the opposite. If we go down as a non-CIC club we will have only one option.....slash the wage bill to meet the reduced income. With the off field income that the CIC model brings with it we will be better funded to protect us from a fate like f'k'rk.
Dont give me that pish about off-field income. Any extra, which will be 20% max, will be funnelled into paying the debt off or diverted to community projects
-
Sorry Div,
I think if relegation should befall us, the circumstances in which it would have come about WILL impact on the CIC scheme. Richard Atkinson is doing a good job of creating a bit of a buzz and a feelgood factor around the whole concept. I find it hard to believe that the scheme is in a bubble, and is immune to any possible on-field collapse.
i have a different fear, if we ever slip into relegation as a CIC-owned club then i fear we will never re-surface. Downhill all the way to oblivion.
-
-
You seem to have an issue with the concept of pledging.
It seems to me to be a sensible arrangement whereby all genuinely interested parties are afforded an opportunity to assess just how viable the project appears prior to making a formal (and financial) commitment. I can't imagine that many corporate and community organisations would make a pledge (and be happy for this to be made public as in this case) unless they had given the initiative and their prospective membership a great deal of consideration.
The other factor that you omit to mention is that arrangements aren't quite in place to translate the pledges into membership just yet, so what would you have people - and organisations - do, and how else would you propose gauging progress thus far?
What gave you that idea? i am simply of the opinion that an unknown number of pledges will not materialise as memberships. Will this consortium follow through if the venture is unfeasible or if planning is not obtained? it would be a very charitable act if they did.
-
Was out with a mate last night who is 100% signing up as an individual member. He made an interesting point when he noted that, should there (as looks likely) be more than 300 individual members, he hoped a decision wouldn't be made to reduce the monthy cost (say, if 600 sign up as looks possible) the payment isn't reduced to £5 p/m. Was this option discussed last night?
How did you work that out? We might need over 1000 pledges to have a good chance of converting 300 members.
If the payments change, then the only direction will be upwards, the floating of familly memberships as an option is an indication of this
-
It's a pledge, not a membership.
You have to wonder, will all corporate pledges start with a contract at the club?
I have to ask, are SMFC buying and running the solar generation equipment or are they being paid a fee for someone else to locate it at the stadium?
-
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.
The thing you need to understand is that many fans live well outwith the paisley locale and were already otherwise engaged for the short-notice public meetings. It seems that for those who attended the meetings RA was very convincing and was able to persuade people in person, however for those of us who have concerns and only have either the written comments or the rabid mob rantings of the dickophile tendency for information there still seems to be an element of uncertainty. No one is ever going to be 100% sure how the 10000 hours team will perform and people who need to be convinved have to process the information in their own way, using their own intellect and experience. The way that the mob continues to round on people who are obviously catching up on events & airing concerns is sickening and, for me, exemplifies why a club led by a group of fans is going to have some serious unity issues to deal with.
i was one of the first few dozen to pledge and, despite my misgivings, will be prepared to sign over my 120 p/a in the hope that things will work out despite my experience of how quickly behaviours deteriorate whenever money is concerned. Not all of my concerns have been adressed but for now i am in, however i respect the opinions of those who still have to be convinced.
How about some respect for the viewpoint of some posters who are still to be convinced? if we dont have that then the whole venture is doomed before it truly starts.
-
As of todays pledges the club will earn 158,000 a year or 1.58 million over the course of the ten years which i think is how long we have to pay back the 1.2 million loan. (barring any mistakes in my maths)
It all looks pretty solid to me and after ten years we will be gaining extra income through this.
Also there has been no more corporate pledges for a while with the total remaining at 9. I think we are after 12 but an extra 83 individual pledges contribute roughly the same ammount as a corporate pledge and it looks like there will be over 500 of them so we don't really need anymore corporate pledges.
So it looks like we're sorted
My only worry is people losing interest before the loans have been paid off which would put us in a pickle.
Please remember that many of the individual pledges will not be converted to paid-up memberships and that many who actually go through the process will default at some point.
I dont know what the benchmark is for this type of initiative, but the uptake could be less than 50% of the amount pledged.
-
My questions seem to have been missed in the post bank-holiday rush.
I always aim to be helpful so i've added them once more.
10000 hours, i have 2 questions.
1 if anyone signs on as a member, falls on hard times and defaults on their £120 pa commitment, will you then call on credit management companies to take action and recover the funds owed?
2 If the model fails to deliver the necessary income required to pay off the loans, then what does "going back to the funders" really mean? Would that be a request for more voluntary contributions or would the members be legally liable for a portion of the debt?
Come to think of it, there is a third question.
3 If public funds are sought then these will be in the gift of governmental and non-governmental organisations, which are usually headed up by former politicians, civil-servants etc. What happens when we default on the payments ? Am i right in thinking that the creditors can then take ownership of the shares and then try to sell them off to recoup their outlay?
-
Glad to see.
Hopefully the fact that smisa support it will quieten some of the dissenters who clearly have not been to any of the meetings!
do i detect a note of criticism of those who are not yet 100% behind the scheme just because they cant make some meetings at quite short notice?
If you read the first post, you'll see SMISA's backing is still conditional on more detail coming forward.
-
Finally a fair point. 
Unfortunately the repsonses seem to be coming not from 10000 hours but from the group known as "every other idiot". Which is not much more helpful than writing it on this thread.
-
what percentage of pledges do you expect to be successfully converted into memeberships of th cic? I am assuming that you have conducted some research and identified how many will sign up per hundred pledges
many people seem to assume that everyone who pledges support will automatically become a fully paid-up member, this will not be the case.
-
Good to see that a couple of posters have taken their questions out of this thread and put them into the pinned Q&A thread. Leaving them there for the CIC will gaurantee an informed response from 10,000 hrs. Let's keep this thread for trading insults. That spirit of 77 character doesn't half post some shite.
to be fair, you havent set the bar that high yourself.
-
10000 hours, i have 2 questions.
1 if anyone signs on as a member, falls on hard times and defaults on their £120 pa commitment, will you then call on credit management companies to take action and recover the funds owed?
2 If the model fails to deliver the necessary income required to pay off the loans, then what does "going back to the funders" really mean? Would that be a request for more voluntary contributions or would the members be legally liable for a portion of the debt?
Come to think of it, there is a third question.
3 If public funds are sought then these will be in the gift of governmental and non-governmental organisations, which are usually headed up by former politicians, civil-servants etc. What happens when we default on the payments ? Am i right in thinking that the creditors can then take ownership of the shares and then try to sell them off to recoup their outlay?
-
When I first read the comment I assumed he meant the consequence would be that he would make himself look even more stupid than he Already has. Is that bullying?
Yes, and youve just joined in by belittling the guy (or girl).
-
I'm guessing you didn't go to the meeting as it was explained then.
They won't make more money in the above scenario. The above scenario can happen now, it didn't need the cic to make it happen.
The club will make more money AS A RESULT of the cic being in place. The example used was the church using the facilities for their meetings. Births, weddings and deaths are all associated with churches. People also have parties for such occasions. Why not have the party where the church group meets every week? The club won't make much off the actual hiring of the hospitality suite, its from the bar sales at these events that the club will make money. The more of these events that are held, the more potential of the guests seeing the facilities and spreading the word that st. Mirren is a good place for these events to happen. No additional commercial staff are required, its all free publicity. Through various streams it was stated at the meeting that club could make up to 20% more purely by being involved with the cic and these are conservative figures.
All these streams are out their now and the club currently has as much access to them as the CIC does. The CIC does not guarantee an extra penny for the club, it will also divert a portion of what it makes to other causes. You and i wont have the authority to prevent that or to even act to keep a reasonable balance, the executive board will retain that right and will do as they see fit.
-
That's exactly what will happen as an ultimate consequence of the cic collapsing but this will be after trying to find viable ways of paying off the loan - possibly increasing the members fees is one avenue but will more likely involve extending the loan period.
So why is it almost certain to fail?
I would say its almost certain to succeed.
It will only fail if the majority want it to fail, ie, stop being a member, whereas if the majority want it to succeed ( u can't tell me u don't WANT it to succeed?) Then it will prosper and grow - success breeds success.
It's almost certain to fail because it relies on the ability of people with access to limited funds to continue to find extra cash year after year in the face of conflicting demands from the mortgage, power company and feeding the kids, or in the case of business members paying their employees and creditors.
People will commit and then disappear like snow off a dyke when conflicting demnds arise.
We still dont know how big the debt will be, grants for anything rarely amount to more than 20% of outlay, so it's not unreasonable to think that the debt could be 1.6 million. how long do you think it will take a CIC with the proposed membership to pay that off, even if they all stay the distance, which they wont?
How would you like it if your boss said he couldnt pay you a rise this year but found he had invested 10K in 10000 hours for no real return? i know that will be shot down by some of the dafties on here who always try to brandish their supposed business credentials, but ignore them, most business people i know have an element of honesty and decency about them as well as genuine business sense. Most will want to give any cash they can spare direct to good causes such as kid's clubs and sporting initiatives direct as opposed to handing it over to mixed bag of soccer fans and unknown quantities to distribute as they see fit.
Another Corporate Member Added
in 10000Hours Archive
Posted
Umpteen meetings? and you call me ill-informed.
i would have thought that your wealth of business acumen would have left you in the position to be able to commit £10000, combined with your love of St Mirren and your enthusiasm for the 10000 hours then you are surely one of the corporate members?
Then again, there will probably be a requirement for corpies to only enter into the online debate under the 10000 hours banner. So we've ruled out that option.
this leaves us the option that you are simply an online fantasist who is on a quest to build your own lunchtime legend by being controversial in a way that you would never dare in real life
Stand up and be counted, Stuart Dickson. nah, come to think of it, you cant be him. He makes more sense.