slapsalmon
-
Posts
746 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by slapsalmon
-
-
7 hours ago, bazil85 said:7 hours ago, bazil85 said:
Some people on here just have a major issue with people that want to defend the club in light of a lack of information. Some much prefer to assume the most negative.
But likewise you have no evidence, just a hard on for the current board
7 hours ago, bazil85 said:I didn’t
Still not proof my opinion that he could do a job for an SP club is wrong.
You're a wee trooper, maybe one day your effort will pay off. Until then you can take pride in being one of the sites top trolls.
I'd say the proof is that the only 12 professional football managers in the top league in this country don't agree with you.
-
14 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
A pretty low life, poor taste and despicable post.
delete it now before it comes back on you bud, that is the lowest of the low.
To be honest I didn't get what you meant and had to think about it, so probably not intended in that way.
-
5 minutes ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:
and incapable of arriving to take training in a fit state for work
Is this one of the things that was alluded to but never mentioned? I remember a lot of it will come out soon enough type chat.
-
3 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
I corrected myself, hands up. I didn’t see the last bit, only thought you were referring to GLS. But I guarantee 99% of people wouldn’t cancel a family holiday in that level of job role. Not like we pay him millions a year.
You can't guarantee that 😂 regardless of what you believe you don't speak for everyone.
I've had to cancel annual leave due to being short staffed as have plenty of others on here I'd imagine, so. me of the junior members of my team have volunteered to cancel if they had to. Depends how much you give a f**k about your job/team I suppose.
Eta
He didn't have to cancel his holiday either. Fly back for a day, sort it, claim the flight on expenses. Boss is happy because its sorted. Not ideal but not the end of the world either.
-
Just now, bazil85 said:
So not Tony Fitzpatrick’s situation then? Cool, glad we agree
What's his job title again?
-
Just now, bazil85 said:
Hands up everyone that would have cancelled their summer holiday to address a situation in work?
For the company I owned the majority shareholding in, or was ceo of. f**king right I would
-
14 minutes ago, MenstrieSaint said:
Also the reason the group who previously took over the club chose to do so . All good guys , but I suspect it's a hard game to plau
Was that not to stop reg brearly buying the club? I can't remember if they had shares or not at that time as I was young.
Im absolutely sure GLS purchase is not bourne of benevolence or philanthropy. It's preserving the value of and protecting a previous investment.
-
6 minutes ago, pod said:
Didn't he buy them. Not very smart, if they're potentially worthless.
Yes bought out the 52% to ensure his were no longer worthless. A majority could be bought without his, his would only be needed to vote through a special resolution which requires 75%. He protected his own investment, the 52% wasn't worthless
-
Because GLS only took over the shares to protect his original investment and guarantee a return on shares which were potentially worthless and actually shouldn't be anywhere near running a football club?
-
6 minutes ago, Spam_Valley said:
Christ... Sounds like an absolute cluster f**k with GLS at the helm.
Sshhhhh. Bazil will be along to chastise you with chat like that.
-
27 minutes ago, oaksoft said:
Unfortunately I am pretty confident we are not going to be able to tell.
The extra income will be wrapped up in "Turnover" and we will be none the wiser.
In the meantime we know that Turnover will be significantly higher than in last season's accounts.
Scott and his poodle Baz will be able to continue to spin all manner of shite about how much extra we have gained.
Not going to be able to guarantee it, but anyone with any critical thinking ability will be able to look at the wages in thenext accounts and work out if 130k gross could possibly ammount to 10% of the wage budget
-
2 minutes ago, foxbar_bud said:
For info the £1.9m figure is for 43 players and 34 management and admin salaries.
He knows because he was active in the thread discussing the accounts when they came out
-
12 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
£800k a £900k on non player staff? Absolutely and easily. Look at who’s potentially included in there.
Manager, assistant & coach staff
sports scientist & medical staff
Including Club doctor & physios
several admin staff for tickets, shop, catering,
dozens if not 100s of stewards (throughout season)
other security
potentially legal teams & contractors
how much do you think non player costs are for football clubs?
As lpm said above. Most of that list aren't St mirren staff.
-
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
Let’s be honest the negativity is minimum here, you have a very small number of vocal fans on the subject.
To suggest someone has openly lied knowing they’ll get found out in the short term because they want to stop heat now & get it much worse later is not realistic in the slightest.
Average wage of a player at St Mirren is about £46k (apparently) squad of say 22/ 24 £1 million - £1.1 million so I’d say so yeah.
Our wages to turnover was 60% at the last pwc report.
Our last accounts showed total wages not including directors of 1.9 million.
I'm not trying to change what you believe, but those figures from the last accounts were for a season in the championship so likely lower than this year, but even using those figures would mean the non playing staff cost between 800 and 900k to a playing staff budget of 1-1.1m.
Im confident the 10% increase will be shown to be nonsense in the next set of accounts.
-
34 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
People don’t need to buy it but what that ultimately boils down to is calling our chairman, who has full access to our financial situation & doesn’t make a penny from the club or lying about the arrangement a liar.
As you’ve said about it coming out in the accounts, it also would mean him willing to run this risk which will almost certainly crystallise. Some might be comfortable with that & think that Is likely, that’s fine.
I’ve yet to hear where the benefit in GLS lying to us comes from.
The benefit is to take away some of the negativity over the current arrangement. A quick fix to get people off his back. There is a figure above of 130k max if every seat is sold at full price. This doesn't factor any costs or deductions. Do you really believe our playing budget is 1.3 million or less?
-
2 hours ago, bazil85 said:
likely what our chairman did with the 10% budget comments.
I don't buy the 10% increase in budgets.
Last set of accounts showed wage spend of just shy of 2 million. That was for a season in the championship so will be lower than this year. That includes non playing staff, but for the 10% being close to accurate we'd need to be spending as much or more on the non playing staff as we are on the playing staff. With the average salary of a player being over 45k (in an article I read on BBC sport I'm sure) that can't be the case.
I think it's safe to say when the accounts come out it'll show the 10% increase to be nonsense. I imagine it's hoped that the 10% increase statement will be forgotten about by then.
-
9 hours ago, stlucifer said:
Eh. Drugs. Knife Crime. Shootings... And more.
When was the last shooting in Paisley?
-
3 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:
Why was he frozen out?
That seems to have been a strange action to take given he had project managed the new build that became the Simple Digital Arena.
I really don't care who directs The Club as long as they learn from their mistakes, don't jeopardise The Club and take the supporters into consideration when making decisions/taking action that impacts the support.
I don't know why but that's effectively what happened when they grouped together to create the 52% that went up for sale. Potentially leaving GLS shares worthless.
IMO buying the 52 to sell on was protecting the value of the shares he already had.
-
On 5/23/2019 at 2:23 PM, Sweeper07 said:
You are either pulling my leg or very stupid. He put his money into shares - £600,000 that gives him majority rights, and until all the Smisa money is in he gets to direct the BOD's. If he had not who would have done so? Would we have a new stadium and have won the League last season etc. etc.
Call me cynical, but he was protecting his investment. Without taking on the 52% his shares were only worth what the owner of the 52 decided really. He was frozen out by the original consortium and potentially stood to make f**k all if whoever bought the 52 didn't want to get to the 75 needed for special resolutions. Shrewd and clever, but certainly not philanthropic IMO
-
On 5/1/2019 at 1:56 PM, bazil85 said:
Players wages are tax deductible on profits or we'd be paying tax twice on them so gross/ net isn't really a big factor here.
So based on all that you are saying he is lying? Why are you so afraid just to say 'GLS is lying and it isn't a 10% increase in wage budget like he clearly said'
The 54k was an estimate on W6/7 vs two stands. I assume GLS is comparing one vs two, which I did first and thought was more practical Why people wanted to compare to an arrangement when he wasn't even the chairman I have no idea but I still showed my estimate. What we do with other teams vs what we do with OF is perfectly reasonable from a comparison perspective
I never said if the £1.15 million was conservative or otherwise, why are you putting words in my mouth? I said it was based on the only figures/ numbers available to me. What has the Heaton transfer got to do with anything? It is in no way relevant to what he said.
Last bit is a contradiction. You either accept GLS is telling the truth on 10% or you're claiming someone with full access to our income and outgoings, accountants and likely others able to give financial advice is a liar.
This is a red herring. The 10% isn't a comparison of any allocations of stands. It's a direct comparison of last years playing staff budget compared with this year's. The breakdown of the stands is irrelevant. It doesn't matter wther it's 2 stands 1 stand or 3 stands.
The comparison he mentions is playing budget year on year.
-
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
You haven't though and my points tell you why.
Your doing now exactly what you've done all through the thread. I was trying to give you a insight into why there isn't a single poster on this thread agreeing with you. Your points above aren't telling me anything.
I'm pointing out from an outsider to the threads point of view what it appears like. Do with that what you will, but I have 0 desire to get into a conversation with you because I've seen 20 odd pages here of how that goes.
-
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:
Take your paragraphs one at a time.
1 & 2. The away crowd stats aren't available for a lot of our games. I have evidenced we had more away fans for Celtic than we did for Killie (both weekday fixtures) we also had more in one mid-week Celtic game than a recent Saturday home game against Livi. My point is some figures are available, others are not. I don't necessarily need to see evidence, a high level explanation of how it is possible to have record crowds, season ticket sales, no clear dip in fans yet still not make decent money (based on away fans and ticket prices) would be enough. I don't think it could be provided (again I don't need the fact, I doubt they exist tbh).
3. Without numbers it is speculation correct, however we have some of the numbers which I have evidenced. I have also made some massively reserved calculations on crowds and income. My point here is common sense should prevail. If people still disagree, I simply ask what's their basis for that? Do they think my figures aren't reserved enough? Do they think the Motherwell away crowd was way lower than my estimate? Do they think GLS and SMFC are lying about attendances?
4. Again, I'm not looking for people to be proven right or wrong, just an explanation of how they arrived at it. It is a discussion forum after all. No one has been willing to provide reasoning yet.
5. Where have I painted opinion as fact? I have stated where details are known and clearly referenced where it is estimates.
6. I think it is based on likelihood, absolutely. Is this maybe peoples issue here? They aren't willing to admit my information is all very likely? Some people seem to proud to admit this and choose instead to twist my words as if I'm stating everything as fact, something I have never claimed.
I couldn't care less about the numbers etc, I'm only pointing out why this thread is going round in circles. You've painted a lot of your opinion as fact and that is exactly what people are getting at from what I've read.
Most of the comments are about you calling the things your having a go at interpreting facts.
-
On 4/12/2019 at 4:49 PM, bazil85 said:
It isn't my fault the figures aren't available but applying a little common sense will tell us all evidence points to home crowds being up. Are you saying GLS has lied in saying season tickets are at record high numbers?
Evidence?
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:-this arrangement makes us considerable money. I have shown evidence for this in calculations of away fan numbers.
- we don’t see a considerable reduction in home fan numbers to make point one invalid (in fact there’s evidence that home crowds could even be slightly up on comparable fixtures)
Against my better judgement and not getting involved in any of the details of the argument, your top post says the figures(which would be evidence) isn't available, yet you ask for evidence from others.
The second post then claims you have shown evidence of the numbers you previously said weren't available, followed by saying there's evidence that numbers "could" be up.
Without the numbers it's all speculation. What you have referenced in the second post is an opinion you have formed. Not evidence. If it had been evidence it would show either way and not what the numbers "could" be.
Wether your opinion is right or wrong, or based on likely scenarios, it is still just an opinion. A guess, not the evidence you're claiming.
Your posting style is very off-putting and you consistently paint opinions as fact. Same on the BtB threads to the point where it out me off wanting anything to do with it.
You'd do yourself a lot more favours if you just said that it was your opinion based on likelihood rather than using words like fact or evidence all over the place.
This thread would give an aspirin a sore head!
-
The only times we've looked like creating anything have been with the ball at feet running at them. McAllister for Jackson's shot and nazon just there.
It's like were trying to play on the counter but when we break were stopping before the half way line instead of just driving at them.
David Riley Q&A
in SMiSA
Posted
Interesting to note he said the old firm getting the family stand was worth 2 players in January.
Were those 2 players (for 5 months ish each} worth 10% of the seasons playing budget?