Greenhill Road

6. A past posting from 10000hrs mentioned that 'there are experienced people within 10000hrs' able to run the new bar. Who are these people and what is there background? Are they connected to RA in any way?

We have as part of the team ILPH's and others who have owned and operated such facilities in the past.
We just have not done it that way, but instead focused on raising the support first. 10000hours is a Community interest Company, and it was considered more important to confirm that the community was first interested than putting out more deatailed financials. If the deal concludes then the business plans will be avaliable to be fully scrutinised by the membership.
Less money in obviously means less money avaliable to support and pay back any debt elements of the 2m fund raising. However the business plan is robust and very conservative and the pledges are currently running a more than twice what the buisness plan requires.
No
In one event:
Kibble benifited by providing the food and service, they were both paid but importantly can also identify over 1000hours of training that they have provided to their user groups in the performance of the operation
One of the other organisations rasied a 5 figure sum via the event
The club took a four figure sum in bar takings
We are sorry you feel it has been poorly explained. we are happy to meet one on one if you feel you would benefit from further explanation

Would love our bar to be filled for every home game.....wouldn't it be great if we could get the away games shown live in the bar, especially midweek games. That would bring in a few punters.

I am a shareholder (a very modest shareholding) and am not miffed in any way whatsoever by the CIC or it's proposals, in fact I have pledged membership as an individual. My shareholding never gave me a true say in the running of the club with decisions always been taken at board level and in that respect I don't see that things have changed from that point of view. I am still happy to have my shares and carry on as normal, I didn't purchase them to have a say in running the club and I'm sure that's true of many of the 900.

It looks like the CIC triggers have been met and this will now proceed. The next step would be to ratify the constitution which would be decided by the members so why don't we debate some ideas regarding the constitution, membership prices and safeguards. Any guidance from 10000 hours on the type of things in the constituion would also be helpful.
Membership fees - If, as looks probable, the membership is over subscribed should the membership fees be reduced ? My feelings on thi sis the initial membership fees should be fixed for at least 2 years in order to reduce the funding as quickly as possible and after the original 2 years they would then be reviewed.
CIC Board - Should there be a maximum term that a member of the board can serve before having to step down and wait a period of time before being re-elected ? I think in order to keep things fresh there should be a maximum of 6 years service on the board and then a period of 1 year before they can seek re-election.
Concessionary memberships - Should there be concessionary memberships for unemployed/pensioners/students etc ?
Honorary memberships - Should there be honorary memberships for people who have significantly contributed to the CIC or club ? Should honorary members have the same rights as full members ? For instance Hugh Murray has been a great servant to the club, when he retires from playing should he be given an honorary membership ? There are probably many others players/fans etc that should be considered for one reason or another, what would be the criteria for honary membership ?
Childrens/Juvenile memberships - Should children's membership allow either free or reduced prices for the panda club ? What sort of incentives for juveniles ? At what age should juvenile membership cease 15 ? 18 ?

The anonymity of the internet makes it a poor medium for debate and this is obviously one of the biggest problems that the CiC will face in running the club. As a support and by the looks of this thread we cannot agree on the colour of the colour of dugs jobby, Let alone run a football club.
Believe it or not on this thread has roughly 1700 posts but only has 122 unique posters and these statistics obviously don’t take into account any aliases or other internet bawbagary that goes on.
There have been a number of good questions asked on this thread and good answers given by 10000 Hours or other posters who seem to have an understanding of what is being proposed.
However there has also been quite a lot of hostile questions and answers by pro and anti CiC posters with the odd personal insult and attack on other posters or members of the CIC…. The sort of attacks or comments that you just would not make in a face to face meeting.
My advice to anyone one reading this thread who is still not sold on the CiC is to go along to the public meetings, listen to what they are proposing I have yet to see a question on this thread that wouldn’t be answered by Richard or the team behind this.
For me I can see no reason why this shouldn’t work…… I don’t have the evidence to back it up but St Mirrens turnover especially if / when we get relegated back to the first division will not be much larger (perhaps even smaller) than some of the larger Rugby or Cricket clubs down in England who run on a similar model to the one being proposed by the CiC.
As great a job as Stuart Gilmore and the other directors have done in getting us where we are you cannot convince me that there isn’t another 5 fans who are buying into the CiC concept that could do a similar job.

I am puzzled by the comments of the likes of Animal and Yule Brynner.
These are guys who took the time to attend the public meeting, listened to all that was said, and then ran back home to type on an internet forum about how terrible it all is.
Yet they said nothing at the meeting. There was NO dissent shown other than by Michelle Evans who simply could not understand the concept being explained to her.
When Reg Brealey addressed the AGM all those years ago he spoke incredibly well and had everyone present eating out the palm of his hand with his exciting tales of massive investment and a return to European Football.
Yet at the back of that audience came some dissenting voices in the shape of Stewart Gilmour, Charlie Palmer et al.
They had done their homework, they knew of the threat that was unfolding and began to pick apart the plan with consumate ease as it happened.
Why do the dissenters to the CIC plan not do their homework ? Why not spend the time investigating in detail what is happening, go and speak to Richard on a 1:1 basis if that helps, then persuade the supporters WHY this is a bad plan that is putting the club at risk. And have the balls to stand up and say that at the public meeting.
Don't sit behind your computer screen and label eveyone else a f**kwit - do something constructive with your argument and you might get more backing.