Griff

If the CIC was £2 milllinon for all 160,000 St Mirren shares , and no one got shafted , then we would all be in it together and the whole CIC would have a better chance of working . I will always be a St Mirren fan , but I feel uncomfortable being part of a vehicle that will make some shareholders investment in the club be worthless , whilst at the same time other shareholders have made a considerable profit.

Gruffulo , I know what you mean regarding the crowd announcement and what we actually think the crowd is , and I feel that there are often more fans in attendance , than the actual figure , and the lower attendance figure given suggests that we don,t have a good fan base , and that we are a bad investment for potential investors. I remember a few years back chatting to a couple of Inverness directors in Pitlochry , during a wee stop on the way back from Ross County , and they actually asked about the crowd at the Ross County game and joked about the actual attendance given on the tannoy as being considerably less than waht was actually there , as if the announcement was made to wind up the Inverness fans to suggest that they had the bigger support. We actually are the opposite , and provide ammunition to those that believe we are a diddy club.

I am totally dissappointed that the 5 directors who own %52 of the club are quite happy to go down a road that will mean that the other %48 of the clubs shares will in fact become worthless , the whole process alienates a large section of the support. By contributing towards a CIC , I will be helping an Ayrshire businesman purchase shares in a football club at an inflated price , so that local businessmen can see a profit in their investment , and at the same time I will see my shares in the club become worthless.

So how does this CIC value those that hold the other %48 per cent of the shares which in effect become worthless , whilst at the same time those that own the other %52 seek to make a few bob on their shares. Would it not be fairer if the CIC were just be able to buy %52 of the club , and the other share holders own the other 48% ? For example the other %48 of shares could account for the Greenhill Road facility , which could leased to the CIC . This would provide a way back if the CIC doesn,t work , but would also mean that the majority of St Mirren shareholders haven,t been shat upon.

As a group of fans we already have a football club , some of us are shareholders and all of us contribute towards the turnover which in turn pays for the running of the club , so why should we even consider contributing extra money to pay for something we already have ? The current board deserve to make a profit from the sale of their shares , but their current valuation of the club , is a little on the high side . I hope the club can move on , but I am a little wary of the direction we are going in .

Two million quid for %52 of St Mirren FC is rather a lot , 10 years ago shares were a fiver each meaning that £416,000 gave you %52 of the club , admittedly now St Mirren are in far better shape , but I do think the asking price is a bit high . Also I think those putting the bid together may find it a bit difficult to get grants to buy property / assets off a group of businessmen , which would allow the selling group to make a %300 profit over 12 years. Which may actually be where the problem lies , a club is only worth what people are prepared to pay , and so far the only parties interested want to pay with someone elses money.

This should be on a forum about league reconstruction , but I think its quite good that we vote against whatever the Old Firm wish to propose , so that the voting structure changes , the present voting structure is a joke .

I have one , it was given to me by a neighbour , he handed it over wrapped in newspaper and said it was a wee St Mirren related present for me that his dad had about the house , I was actually expecting a 1987 glass and said a polite thank you , was totally delighted when I unwrapped the gift and bought Gibby lots of drink as a thank you. Probably worth about £75 but I wouldn,t part with mine.

Its funny the moment Falkirk offered Presley a contract ( which probably made big Elvis the clubs top earner ), Falkirk started living beyond their means.

Great Post, shame its hidden amongst his rubbish, it should be the start of a thread in itself complementing the currnet youth set up , I recently heard from a pal whose son plays for Falkirk under 13s, that Saints and the Old Firm have the best teams at that age group, so it looks like the new training facilities are a success.

Just got fed up with everyone having a go at John Potter, so I thought I,d have a wee dig at Jack Ross for a bit of fun. Thought every Saint was brilliant yesterday, and feel that all eleven players playing would be a great starting point for putting together a squad to try and make the top six. Funny thing is though, after the previous two saturdays I had no confidence at all in the squad of players St Mirren had at their disposal. Funny old game football.

Jack Ross was excellent yesterday, and is a very good right back for St Mirren, but he does make mistakes, and despite a fine performance yesterday he almost lost the ball in the second half just ouside our box when his mind seemed elsewhere, a mistake that any other team would have punished. Having said that both him and Murray were immense down the right hand side yesterday, you wouldn,t have thought it was the same two players who played on the right against Dunfermline earlier on in the season.

I couldn,t trust him not to give away a pointless penalty in the final minute, like he,s done already when he,s played against his local team. Against Motherwell he could have made a clearance before the ball hit the post in and broke to Clarkston, and also against Inverness when a goal was given for the ball not crossing the line, Jack Ross should have been positioned on the line for the cross coming in, and would have been in position to clear the ball had he been on the line. Watch the goal again, and he drops back when he realises he is out of position. With regards to the width that he offer, and in all fairness to him , he does get forward how many goals have we scored from his crosses? I, m hoping for Barron at right back tomorrow.

Ian Ross is a Falkirk fan, who gave away a soft penalty in the last minute so the Bairns could equalise at Love Street, also foolishly got himself sent off at Parkhead when we were cuffed 7 - 0, perhaps it might only have been 4 - 0 if we had another right back, and we would have also beaten Falkirk at Love Street. We wouldn,t have been bottom, our goal difeerence would have been far superior, and we would be in the running for a place in Europe under the fair play league. I,m glad Jack Ross ain,t playing on saturday.

So I wonder what Ian Hartes doing last weekend in April

When Alex Smith was manager he was promised 500k to spend on players when he took the job, I,m not too sure if the money from Stevie Clarkes transter was additional to this or the board knew that money was coming in for Stevie. Smith signed Conroy, Martin, Davis, Walker, McWalter and Dawson for about 250k, and banked a further 850k from the sale of Ferguson. So basically when Fitzy took over in 1988 we had a million in the bank and a decent squad, within 5 years we were almost bankrupt I guess the board have to take responsability.

The truth is Fitzy did waste good money on dud players, but I quite like Fitzy, so I look upon his transfer dealings as a number of swops. For example Hamilton, Cameron, Winnie, Walker, Cooper and Chalmers for Manley, Torfasson, Stickroth , Wishart , Black and Kinnaird. Which still means Fitzy spent more than he received, but at least he tried to gernerate income for his spending. Fitzys mistake was Victor and Archibald, and the effect their wages had in the dressing room. Hay then came in a squandered money on Celtic minded duds ( I wonder if he was the agent for any of his signings) But in the space of five years we went from a team that could pay big transfer fees and big wages, to a team that travelled to away games in a minibus and had a strike force of Alec Bone and some guy fro Dunipace Juniors.

I believe there is a role for a group to represent the St Mirren support, and that SMISA could have anual fees of £10 for adults £5 for students and £2 for under 16s, with a view of creating a large membership. There should still be a role for fundraising to further the aims of St Mirren Football Club, which could be sponsering a player, or making a donation to a supporters website. SMISA have also ran excellent supporters events, and worked very well with the club to do so, it would be a shame if this stopped. Small shareholders could also allow Smisa to have their proxy vote at the clubs AGM, which could enable SMISA to have a small say in how the club is run, this role could at some stage in the clubs future be hugely influential. Well done to all members of SMISA for what they have acheived over the last few years.