TsuMirren

The committee occasionally visit pubs, there is no vehicle for discussion, engagement via this forum is frowned upon and they'd prefer individual contact from members via email.

The club had already spent a fair bit relaying one of the grass pitches, the second was to follow. It was my understanding that Jack would prefer to not train on the 4G, obviously certain factors could make it acceptable over and above any preference.

Yes, the recent Camps didn't use Ralston though possibly due to the state of the 4G. That's not offering it for hire though, which I do still believe isn't allowed under condition of the lease.

Ah vote, where there's an obvious change to procedure, rules or promises made as a result of a yes should first involve a vote to alow that change. Even if it does cost £90 to run one.

David?

It's a decent suggestion, no real mechanism for it at the moment. I was going to say no appetite, but I can't 100% say Gordon would say no or that SMISA's board wouldn't try. I have never seen the takeover agreement documents (how can you operate as a board member, etc...yes I know) and I forget the exact ins and outs of the various %'s. Really obvious issue would be that the 50K would, most easily, be for Gordon's shares and therefore not actually paid to the club so not available to cover the 1/3rd portion of the quote. Other option is to make another 50K of shares available, but does that then make all other shares less valuable just by the fact everyone then has a lower % of the overall value...I'm no expert on that. So, ultimately it is the intended use of the funds though it's to pay Gordon for his shares and not to finance the club. SMISA can release community shares, but again not entirely sure the value of them or even the point. Other football club aligned societies have done it.

The danger of not voting on foregone conclusions is, of course, that approval of options seems higher and that gives support to the belief that everything is okay. If the plan was target 1,000 and buy in ten years, then hitting 1,300 should have seen a revisit of the plan or at least a semblance of an appetite to do so. But, that's another debate from the one around use of the £10 and the £2 funds. 8K to vote on is a very powerful tool, we've already seen that and opinions aside it has seen a wide range of uses. The process was well and truly tested during the Glenvale option vote (I'll avoid digging in to that again just now), which was all a healthy and necessary part of the overall process. Just picking up every request from the club and going "how can we fund that from what we have to hand" isn't healthy. Even the sponsorship options don't make sense on this 50K request as they're basically freebies. The 50K goes to the club, it pays for 1/3rd of the quoted price for the 4g park replacement...so what's paying for the sponsorship? That's surely sponsorship that could be sold by the club and is potentially taking money away from the club and away from the overall budget. Plus, if it is actually community benefit and meets the community benefit that a CBS should be providing then surely SMISA therefore finally are able to display the necessary credentials to qualify for community funding from community lenders. 50K for 4g, club can maintain the academy operations, local youth players can, through their own boys club, aspire to get on to that pathway and as such it leads to more determined players, possibly fitter and healthier players, wanting to play better and progress. The St Mirren community gets better players, but the wider community should see more players with a drive and passion to progress. That won't only see benefits to St Mirren, it'll possibly see the local clubs progress as their squads develop and more kids not in teams want to join. SMISA could even use slots at Ralston to offer training, not drop-in sessions, to some age levels having also paid for a few SMISA members to get coaching badges. But, what do people like me know?

Yup, my understanding of the lease is certainly that the club can't hire the Ralston pitches out. So, the community benefit is to the academy kids, the youth setup beyond under 16, the club and potentially the women's team should they ever use it.

Ronnie, Great bus, great journey, great job. Thanks to you, your "assistant" and your driver.

There's no detriment of any great concern coming from SMISA not having my £25 a month. It's also been highlighted, by a vocal minority, that I'm not needed and SMISA is stronger without me. Fair enough, makes them happy I'd imagine.

Someone like me? Someone with a varying opinion you mean? I'm not trying to make anyone's mind up for them, just having a discussion and raising some views based on or built around facts/my experiences. "Agendas", you've got an agenda, you've got to have an agenda, just accept stuff and move on, etc. Of course it'll be carried, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THAT ALREADY! Just so I know, let's make this a learning tree and sit under the branches of your wisdom, what do you perceive my agenda to be? I've no intention of joining again, don't want back on the committee, don't want the deal to fall apart, feel no need to bask in praise and certainly don't want the club to struggle. So, let's say I'm intrigued by this side show you've created. Or do you, like so many people in society today, just not know? Anyway, come on Morton!

I'm not bitter, genuinely don't see what there is to be bitter about. I had the chance to represent the members and did so. Besides, trolling usually involves posting lies or making things up. f**k, I don't even resent SMISA. I do have very little respect for some people involved, but SMISA is about more than just them. Bitter that I'm no longer wasting my week researching things for no real reason...yes, that must be it. Continue spouting pish about me on social media though, your self importance in believing I'll give a f**k is blah waffle blah yawn etc blah. I wasn't to insult you, having not actually done so, then you post the above...genius!

How about a justgiving page? Isn't that what usually happens when the club can't fund something? You've all given the club a fantastic lift up, time for them to look after their own fundraising. 3K per vote going forward, when the club evidently want to syphon as much on to the pitch as possible. So, come July it's Panda Club or Sport Scientist. October will be something else missing from the budget, Academy funding perhaps. January, oh Sport Scientist again. April, the women's team may come back in. Next July, Panda Club or... So, very little room for anything that ensures SMISA ensure they meet their obligations as a CBS. No TVs at outlets, no additional facilities for the disabled. Is the hall of fame board replacement money still there, is it ring fenced? Of course, if numbers stay as they are then there's about £288K of share purchase money that could dipped in to before 2026 and the shares could still be bought in time. (It's okay lads, I've not stored any spreadseets) But, it's fine as you've elected the guys to make the decisions for you haven't you. You've elected a board member to declare conflict of interest or, at worse, not fully inform the society board. If there's no appetite for something at the club, then it shouldn't be progressed isn't that right. In the long run, it's all fine...club request, vote yes, repeat.

He's clearly either on it or being fed by someone who is. Maybe fed, as my understanding was that we're not as well off as he makes out. Balls, no money for the women's team, "without the Morgan money, things were tight". We've also very evidently pushed the boat out on the playing budget.

There have been Board, Committee and Secretary resignations over the past 12 months or so. Basically leading up to the last AGM and since. To be honest, I was elected without an actual election and there wasn't even a show of hands at the last AGM. So I'm fully aware of the malaise around involvement beyond voting and just accepting stuff.

Finally removing me from the Trello cards, well done lads! (I've not had the app since I resigned, but could see the text in the notification emails "!") You'll be contacting me to officially accept my resignation next then informing the membership. Oh and fantastic idea Poz, problem being Gordon wants his money back and our support didn't trust a single other one of the potential new owners. Seven years and the closest ones we know of were 10,000 Hours, the English group and the Argies. They'll do this, they'll do that etc and who knows how much of that was justified or would have been proved right. It'd need all sorts of constitutional changes, the asset lock also means the money collected for the purpose of the club purchase must be used for that purpose...wait, hang on, the asset lock states that..hmmmm...

When members voted against the Panda Club things got interesting, you then had the press release regarding the Glenvale option. All that will be like a children's picnic compared to what could happen if this doesn't go through. They've put together a proposal knowing the majority don't care about constitutions etc, but do care about the club. Vote against it and there will be pressure to revisit, they may even come out and run another vote with it as a loan.

It's additional Tony, the 50K overdraft facility has only just been finalised and is being built up in installments.

That'll be the same levels of intelligence that go in to...no, it's too easy!

It's all very lazy, to not even try any fundraising whatsoever. We're about to win league, you can't tell me an engaged fanbase wouldn't want to contribute. You may even have found individual SMISA members wiling to contribute a decent amount. Donation buckets at corporate, outside pre-match, on buses, in the members bar, get donation links up online. But no, instead it's this...the lazy option. How will you reach 1,400 members? Certainly won't be by treating 1,257 (7 down, 1 up this month) like idiots. How you can not be comfortable putting a 16K across 8 votes for the women's team option to members, yet put this vote out is beyond me. To be "uncomfortable paying for running costs" from the £2 pot, yet be comfortable replacing ring-fenced funds. Here's the text for your next recruitment drive: "SMISA would like your money." It's short, sweet, open, honest and transparent.

I'd have thought your SMISA board contact would have told you how it actually works. If you contact the FCA, they'll send you to Supporters Direct Scotland. They'll do nothing as SMISA are their flagship trust. Andrew Jenkins may ask David Nicol, David will fix his glasses with his right hand, smile and say "it's fine...I can't really get too worked up about it".

I suppose this means the SMISA committee will now drop any proposal to only have two £2 votes a year instead of four.

Ah, probably not then.

On that, the academy teams make heavy use of it so it is needed. My main issues are the method of going about it and the sitting on this for months...since just after the Panda Club vote.

I get the feeling I've sat in meetings with you.