GLS
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by GLS
-
-
Given the negativity around these questions today I was a bit sceptical about going through with this poll.
However, as the guy who would have been voting on behalf of the CIC members at an SPL meeting if the CIC owned the controlling interest in the club at this time I would have taken great comfort in knowing that I had the knowledge that can be been gleamed even at this early stage from the voting patterns.
If we had put up a simple yes/no vote and any of the other scenarios had raised there head what would I have done?
I know the answer is "vote no" but do you not have greater piece of mind knowing that all the fans are firmly behind a no vote no matter what and are prepared to help the club get through it?
I certainly am.
-
I guess we need to make sure the pre amble to the questions is very clear as to what we are trying to achieve as it appears that most people on here are viewing it the wrong way.
As always your input is appreciated.
-
We are looking to present the fans opinion to the board so they can take it into consideration when they make their decision.
Simple as that.
-
I dont understand the problem. 10000 hours will gain no benefit from how the questions are asked or answered. We are simply trying to present a fans opinion to the board in a way that they can consider which way the fans would have them vote under every eventuality.
If we wanted to court popularity we would simply say YES/NO and everyone would vote NO! That would be treating folk like idiots!
We have provided as much information as we have on each scenario to enable people to vote YES or No. Do you honestly think that everyone who says No to Newco would say NO if it meant St Mirren going into administration?
Is that really what you want from the people who will potentially run our football club on your behalf?
-
I do like your 3a though
-
1. Should Rangers be allowed straight back into the SPL as a Newco if it does not affect SPL revenues to SMFC for this season?
This question is innapropriate. Rangers is in liquidation and can no longer field a team as its assets have been sold to Sevco 5088 (insert correct number) and cannot therefore be re-admitted.
2. Should Rangers be allowed straight back in to the SPL as a Newco if, through their absence, SMFC face a reduction of £200k in income?
Alternate Wording
2A Should any football club operated by Sevco 5088 be granted direct entry to the SPL?
(If the board has as much information as the fans, how are we to know that a projected drop in revenue of 200K is realistic if we don't know what Sky or any of the sponsors will do, whether other club's fans will boycott or even if gate numbers will increase with the creation of a more competitive league)
3. Should Rangers be allowed straight back in to the SPL as a Newco if, through their absence, SPL commercial revenues plummet to the extent that SMFC are faced with a massive revenue shortage and indeed the possibility of administration ?
Alternate Wording
3A Should any football club operated by Sevco 5088 be granted direct entry to the SPL if the anticipated effect of their exclusion is a reduction in SPL commercial revenues to such an extent that SMFC may face cash-flow problems in meeting current contractual commitments and possibly administration?
4. In the event of SPL Commercial revenues reducing would you, working with the CIC and SMFC, be prepared to support the club through increased pledges and donations? No change but this would be subject to provision of information by the board & CIC.
Although people on this website may be aware who Sevco 5088 are the majority of our members will have no idea what we are talking about therefore it makes sense to use "Rangers" and "Newco" terminology.
There are three probable possibilities if we vote No.
Newco is voted out of the SPL and the revenues remain the same.
Newco is voted out of the SPL and the sponsors re negotiate their deals at a level that will not put the other clubs at risk. (We feel that figure for SMFC is £200k)
Newco is voted out of the SPL and the sponsors pull the plug on their contracts at which point the other clubs have to decide whether to vote Newco back into the SPL or risk the financial consequences.
A simple yes/no is a waste of time as we know the answer.
.
-
http://10000hours.or...bers-newco-vote
Second last paragraph before the questions.
"Our intended questions are as follows but we will consider changes or alternative questions prior to publication."
The board of the football club do not have any more information than you or I at this stage. This is why we are trying to cover all possible scenarios.
(The quote from the website is in " ". The paragraph afterwards, although in the same case is my input.)
-
Firstly the questions are draught questions. We are encouraging debate and input from supporters.
Secondly these are the most likely scenarios that the board of SMFC will have to take into account when they vote. That is why we have proposed these questions.
I think we all know how everyone feels about this situation so to simply ask yes/no would be a waste of time but if that is what you want we are listening!
-
To be fair to Richard he has had no contact with the other shareholders. I have spoken to two of the largest shareholders outside the consortium and both have expressed an interest in doing what I am doing if it helps make the deal more sustainable. There are no deals in place but it would have been irresponsible for us not to gauge an interest from these people before going down this route.
-
I think maybe I understand now where the confusion is. The funding is now pretty much 50/50 between the 1877 buyers and the CIC. We have halved the monthly CIC payments required by doing this and the CIC will still have 52% of the club shares and thus will have control.
The only concessions made from the original CIC plan is that it now requires 75% of the members to vote for a resolution for it to carry the full 52% of the shares it owns and the board will now be made up of a mixture of successful businessmen, who will most likely be fans as well, along with a majority of board members appointed by the CIC.
The new deal empowers the whole St Mirren support, CIC, old share holders and new share holders all of whom are fans of the club.
That is it, plain and simple.
If people preferred the old model then that is their prerogative but this is the deal that the people behind the bid think is most sustainable and best for all the fans of St Mirren football club who have supported them in the past and will support them in helping make this happen.
-
Perhaps, come November, you can lobby for a vote on this courtesy of your CIC membership.
Correct
-
Would you (and Tony and Richard) be open to representations on the part of other CIC members prior to the AGM. Basically, what I'm getting at is would the interim CIC board be happy to liaise with other members should the latter have questions, concerns, or suggestions, and, if so, what might be the forum/means to facilitate this?
Most certainly. The whole ethos of this is engaging the fans. I see that as much a part of what we are doing now as after we get control.
-
It is important the initial 5 man board has the required experience to help us set this up properly. There is no point in bringing people on for the sake of it.
As per our statement on the website Tony and I will ensure continuity on the football side of things till the AGM and Richard will deal with getting the CIC side of things organised.
Do we need anyone else? If the right person comes along that can help us then I would like him on board. If not I am happy to run with 3 until the AGM.
Small point but both Tony, Richard and I are all CIC members.
-
But it is now ready for the race.
-
I am unsure if people are commenting on this after reading the herald article.
I would recommend you visit 10000hours.org where this is explained in full.
-
I will be a creditor of the the CIC but will have no recourse to get any of my money back until the CIC has cleared all its other debts and is cash positive to the tune of £100k. After the consortium have received all their money I will become the main creditor of the CIC meaning that if it defaults on paying back the loan then I will be the biggest creditor and in a very strong position along with the members to ensure the assets of the CIC are not at risk. One of the big concerns was what would happen if the CIC fails. With this as the worse case scenario hopefully it gives people even more comfort to support our cause.
-
They are coming from the shares I am committing to the CIC. In other words not part of the 52% the CIC is purchasing.
-
By using this model - which has not been presented to the people that have signed up to 10000 Hours making the entire process possible. We have now shifted from the big sales pitch, which was OMOV to a back door route for "business" investors. That for me is a very, very big breech of trust. 10000 Hours credability is now very much in the shitter.
There is no change. The CIC owns 52% of the shares in SMFC. It will work on a one man vote system. The 1877 shares are shares in the football club not the CIC.
The only change to the CIC is that it has halved its monthly payments in return for engaging the other shareholders if 75% of the members don't vote for a particular resolution.
-
Your first line there GLS what does that look like in actual numbers if say the board comprises 5,7,9, or 11 individuals?
#
We have stated in our release quite clearly that the initial board will consist of 5 members up till the first AGM. At that point I would see us recommending a number that we think is workable. The CIC will always have the majority.
-
By using this model we have halved the amount required each month to service the CIC debt and still maintained its control of the club. It means that instead of servicing a debt for 10 years we will now be in a position where some of the money pledged will go towards pushing the club forward rather than just paying down loans.
-
The fans will own 52% of the shares and have the majority of members on the Football club board. If that is not fans control I am not sure what is?
The non executive board idea was formed to make the whole thing more sustainable by attracting business investment similar to the German model.
The Non exec board will work in tandem with the CIC board to ensure that the board of the football club runs the club in a fit and proper manner.
By buying 1877 shares it does not guarantee you a place on the club board.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I will be a creditor of the the CIC but will have no recourse to get any of my money back until the CIC has cleared all its other debts and is cash positive to the tune of £100k. After the consortium have received all their money I will become the main creditor of the CIC meaning that if it defaults on paying back the loan then I will be the biggest creditor and in a very strong position along with the members to ensure the assets of the CIC are not at risk. One of the big concerns was what would happen if the CIC fails. With this as the worse case scenario hopefully it gives people even more comfort to support our cause.
"no To Newco" Vote
in 10000Hours Archive
Posted
From the joint statement issued by 10000hours and the selling consortium.
"It has therefore invited 10000Hours to gather opinion and comment from it's members with regards to the Newco proposals as they become clearer and to pass those thoughts formally onto the Board."
Which part of what we set out to achieve have we failed in?