ktf

Likewise with me. He is always happy to do so. Like I've said on here before, it's just much easier for people to spout negative pish than pick the phone and arrange to meet him...

I can't comment on the D*ndee situation... However, the scenario you describe is entirely possible with any club buy-out, either by a sugardaddy type chappy or a CiC type model. The thing about the CiC model is that this is much less likely to happen as all income raised must be invested straight back into the CiC, it can't make a profit that goes straight to someone's pocket. What happens with that money is decided by the CiC members - which is why it is vital to have fans on-board and why An*mal is probably so keen to try to put people off, because he knows that the fan support is key and he clearly has a vested interest in it not working. Once the deal is done and the money is paid and the shares are transferred, it is by far and a way one of the safest and most financially secure ways to run a football club, it will over time, generate income for the club and it will be a positive for the local community as the fans and local charities and companies will get a say in what happens with the club on and off the field. This will also be done sensibly though by having some sort of elected CiC board with representation on the club board. The tits-up scenario I hinted to was more of a, 'what about if the deal goes half way through and RA bottles it or the full funding doesn't come in or the fans don't support it...' type scenario. In that case, my understanding is that the money that is raised, that the selling consortium will have been already paid, is theirs. It was loaned to the CiC who paid it to them. The CiC goes under taking with it the liability of those loans (not that the loans are recallable anyway - see previous posts for info). The selling consortium have the cash that they got paid and still have the shares. This is particularly possible if it is done over a gradual share transfer process instead of a lump, 'here have them all in one go' type idea. All of this, of course, is just speculation and pontificating on my side. It's how I'd do it if it was me though...

It isn't. That's partly why it is such a long and drawn out process. The lenders need to scrutinise the business plan to be confident that the loans can be repaid as they don't really have a legal means of recovering it if all goes tits up.

Same thought crossed my mind...

I agree, but it wasn't an assumption. In the conversations that I've had with those involved, the word I keeps getting back is, "it's going as well as it possibly could at this stage." Ok, now that may not be 100% to plan, but it is certainly a damn sight better than the news that John has been given, the news of which he is unwilling to share his source or substantiate in any way... Boring copy, cut, paste... :blink:

Substantiate this, please... Any indication that I have received, both from out with and inside the proposal is that it is going 100% according to plan.

This is a football forum, if you want definite answers, pick up the phone, send RA an email, pop round to his office at the Maxi Group. Basically, do something effing constructive instead of being a destructive, negative wee gobshite on here. Why would there be one? You haven't contacted him! I have had word from him, but then I bothered my arse to pick up the phone and call him. You really are a prize A tosser. Proposed quota for local businesses already met. So your "suspicion" are well off! Those who don't really mind what happens have done that, those who do have spoken to RA - the offer is still there. Shall I get him to call you? PM me your details. Oh, this is a fact is it??? :blink: Substantiate please!!! They will never be in control of the club. A CiC run by fans will be in control of the club. I know this is a complicated concept to get your thick head around, but it has been explained by quite a few people on quite a few ways on here. Short of using a big book with cardboard pages, big letters and pictures of animals - like my wee one has - I'm not sure what else can be done to try to make it understandable. That doesn't even make sense. Woopdyf**kingdoo, I look forward to it!

Actually, the CiC will be run on a membership basis, let's say something like £10/month for an individual fan, £1000/year for a local charity and £10,000/year for a local business. AFAIAA the original quota of local companies and charities has already been covered. That is already a substantial amount of money coming in without individual fan membership recruitment having started. However as far as I can work out the membership fees won't necessarily be contributing to the repayment of the loans - they will be paid back by boosting the existing revenue of the club - like something close to doubling the corporate income, this will be the sort of plan that the SIF people will be looking closely at to ensure is robust enough to pay back the loans. The membership fee's will immediately be invested back into the club. However, if the membership fees do go to contributing to the loan repayment then, from a quick few sums I have done in my head in less than a minute (he figures of which I don't think I should share at present - partly because I may just have made them up), coupled with the projected increase in corporate revenue, then I reckon the loans could be paid off in somewhere between 5 and 10 years... I may be completely off with this, however if I am even close, then it seems to me like a good amount of time to have to wait to get a truly community owned-community led club.

Do your own research. Have a look at the Official Club Statement that was issued ages ago. No-one would be able to answer why Richard is doing this except him. Pick up the phone, send him an email etc and ask him. Asking people who don't know that answer in a football forum is not the way to find the answer. Keep looking before excitedly posting... Ok, here goes, as best as I understand... The CiC obtain the loan/grant money, from the SIF, and use it to buy 52% of the shares. The said CiC effectively own the club as it has the majority share-hold. The CiC is owned and run by members - fans, local charities and companies, probably based on a vote type system but those details will be ironed out in due course. Therefore the fans, local charities, companies effectively run the club. One person, one vote - I'd assume. The whole reason that the SIF (lenders) are making sure that it viable and returnable is because it is soft. They want to make sure that it will be paid back and they will only invest it to groups who can prove that they have a good enough plan in place to return it. I'm not sure what's hard to understand about that... It's good stewardship - if they are going to loan something, they want to ensure that the debtor is able to pay back - especially because it can't be legally enforced if it is defaulted on. The CiC are the debtor, it is used to pay for the shares that are being sold - the club won't own the debt, the CiC will. Only the CiC can default on it, not the club. If they do it can't be recalled legally (as far as I am aware) and so this is why the lenders (SIF) want to make sure that the borrowers (CiC) have a good enough plan in place to generate the finance to pay back. I've said the same thing twice in two ways, hopefully it makes sense now. God, it is rather complicated when you look at it - but brilliant if it works!

Can I nominate this for Post of The Year? I know it's only early Feb, but I don't see one that could be better... I was there too - as an unofficial SMiSa non-member... The one I was at Richard did turn up to and so did Chris (at the end). Richard did a brilliant job of explaining the whole thing and then fielded some really tough and probing questions very well. Don't remember the ins-and-outs of what they (the CiC organising people) are putting in but I'm sure all of this will come to be clear in due time. Spot on! I have had several phone calls and email conversations with Richard and I am more than confident that the deal is in good hands and that, if it goes through, it will be a really positive thing for St Mirren and will be part of insuring that the club last out for my children and theirs. Again, sensible - glad this thread is getting this way now :-) I'll confirm this.

Biters prerogative!!!

Sid, I completely agree with everything that you have said on this thread to date. I think that calling for respect, patience and some semblance of calm on this matter is entirely justified and the correct thing to do. However, only two weeks ago you gave me a hard time for saying a similar thing in someone else's ridiculous thread: here. : The truth of the matter is that the questions that people need answered are all researchable and the information on all of the subjects is obtainable if people could be bothered getting off their backsides and doing so. The problem is, it is just so much easier to post negative shite on an internet forum than make some effort to find out. Sid is correct, this is a critical time and others are also correct in saying that they need to know what it going on. The issue is that asking stupid questions sullied by negative, cynical, phobic undertones on a football forum is not the way to get that info and potentially jeopardizes the whole process. Questions like, "who will the debt belong to if it all goes tits up" would be a valid one if it hadn't been answered by me twice, Div and Sid on separate occasions. Not only can people not be bothered picking up a phone, sending an email or doing some online research, they clearly can't be bothered looking through this thread to find the answers to their questions. How about those who are interested and worried put in some effort to find out for yourselves, because clearly you don't believe what has been posted on here. And then, instead of appearing ignorant and negative you will have something constructive to add to the discussion...

Great point Drew. It's a good thing to be Atkinson-skeptic, questions are good. The problem is, some are Atkinson-phobic...!!!

It'd not really in my nature to say this and would, if it weren't for the intended target, go against the grain. But - what an absolute cockjockey this man is. A more self-righteous, self-absorbed person I have never had the displeasure of witnessing. Consumed by his own self-importance I wouldn't be surprised if he had a shrine to himself in his spare-room and if he went in there once a day and cracked one off to a life-size commissioned portrait of himself. He is detestable beyond belief and I do hope that he decides that he is too superior to grace these forums again. In fact, let me point one thing out and make one request: no-one cares and get tae, ya fud.

I musta missed or skimmed the bit where Div wrote that. Tax, to my knowledge, isn't a benefit of a CiC. But there are many others ***edited to say, from the recesses of my mind (and I'll check up later) there may be advantages in terms of tax breaks due to some of the activity that the company may be involved in that the club, as a football club, wouldn't be. Community projects, funding things etc... That of course if a difference thing from tax status or exemption.

Don't mean to be rude, but I'm not sure what your point is here... The CiC idea isn't fox tax reasons, there is no benefit in that way as there wouldn't be for any company. It is about a whole host of other benefits that would be good for the club. Things like a CiC being asset-tied, being able to apply for grants/SIF loans, being member-owned/led. There is no automatic right to loans/grants, no - but there isn't automatic rights to just about anything for any company. However, if it wasn't a CiC then the thing wouldn't work as a standard company can't apply for SIF loans/grants. The whole reason the thing is taking so long is that the CiC folks (Richard Atkinson etc) are putting in all the effort and working closely with SIF to ensure that everything is in place to secure the loans to but the shares. Div, Sid and, to some extent, I have tried to explain it as much as can be. People should read over what has been written as all this half-knowledge is just clouding the matter and bring a whole lot of confusion...!

I wouldn't stress about it right now. The club should (hopefully) be making an announcement in the next week or two and people should be able to make a more informed decision from there.

I don't think that he is taking unfair abuse at all. He clearly has his own agenda. All of his questions and any point he has made has been written in such a way as to influence negatively on the CiC model. Others who have simply stated fact, he has claimed have been in support of the model, even though there was no evidence of this. This is to make people doubt the credibility of posts from the likes of Div and therefore think that there is something sinister afoot. He has a very clear agenda to make fans think that the idea is bad and is doing it quite cleverly. Probably because he knows the whole scheme relies on the fans to make it work. Also, comments like "I'm away to do my own company accounts" are an attempt to make him look more clued up and worth listening to than he actually is. And, honesty, is just pure bawbaggery. He isn't taking unfair abuse at all, he has an obvious agenda to see the scheme fail and is trying to infiltrate that agenda to anyone who will listen. If he'd rather the club went to the likes of Brearly, then he obviously isn't a true St Mirren fan and probably shouldn't be listened to.

Everything that can be said has been, as far as I can see, from Div and Sid. However, it is probably worth adding that any loans that are taken on (most of the money from the Scottish Investment Fund is loan money as far as I'm aware) are loans to the CiC, not loans to St Mirren and therefore the club would remain debt-free. The SIF money is 'soft' and can't be recalled if defaulted on, that is partly why it is taking so long, the SIF people need to know that the infrastructure, facilities and plans are all in place to make the investment viable and able to return the loans. It is a good thing it is taking so long as it is evidence that if it goes through it will likely work. However, if it doesn't, the worst case scenario is that the club ends up in the same position that it is now, debt-free with 52% of the shares for sale. The CiC, made up of fans mainly, will own the shares and have the right to say who buys them. Hope that helps...

To be honest, I am not the best at recalling information, stats, specific occasions etc, and so I will take what you say to be true... What I am quite good at though is remembering how I, and I am sure many others, felt at the time. I guess, perception has an interesting way of influencing reality! What I mean is, I don't remember any interviews in which Gus stated that the fans were the '11th man' or that he was 'proud of the traveling support and that performance was for them', or that he 'appreciated that the fans are passionate about the club and so are understandably voicing their opinion' or anything like that. I may be wrong and you may be able to provide numerous examples - if so, again I will eat humble pie - I enjoy that taste :-) And so the the perception that I got from last season was that Gus really found the fans an irritation, as opposed to Danny's method of, at least, weekly interviews on the 'fishal site, Q&A sessions and a very open managerial approach, which I think most fans really appreciate. Like I said though, my impression of Gus and last season could well have just been my perception.

Definitely at the wind-up! You gave it away with this post - the irony of which is probably completely lost on you! One of the main reason, I reckon, that so many turned on him in the last few months was that he clearly stated that he couldn't stand the St Mirren fans and him and Andy Millen had absolutely no respect for the people who were, ultimately, paying their wages. Some of the "go to the pictures, then" comments were the final straw, imo!

Not looked this thread until now. Taking a quick read over the pages, I am totally astonished by the amount of absolute cack that some people are posting. I've seriously not read so much utter mince since putting S*lent M*jority on 'ignore'! Danny Lennon is, what, seven matches into the SPL season, the team played the best that we have seen them so far on Saturday. Yes, the result was extremely disappointing and we'll have to see a change in defensive lineup and some better results coming our way pretty soon. But get an effing grip, Danny is the club manager and as St Mirren 'supporters' we should be 100% behind him, not harking back to previous managers and coming up with ridiculous suggestion like asking them to come back, when the season is only 7 matches old. It is pathetic and shows a complete lack of support, bottle and common-sense. It would also make us the laughing stock of Scottish football, which we aren't at present, despite what many of the new-knicker-wetters/gusophiles are suggesting. If you have to ask people why it is a stupid suggestion, when it is hinted at in more than two or three posts why it is a stupid suggestion and you still don't get it, then it's time to have a serious re-think about your status as a St Mirren fan. Bring back gus after 7 matches... FFS, what a ludicrous idea!

No, missing players are the key. Gus was shite/average/good season after season - that's why excuses/reasons/praise never came in this form. He had a bigger wage budget - fact. He had Setanta money - fact. He was given time - fact. Danny Lennon has been in charge for 6 proper matches. He has a drastically reduced wage budget. He has no TV money to spend. People are calling for his head already. Gary Blues, you were so desperate for Gus to stay after a long time in charge in which there was no real improvement. Now you are so keen for Danny to go after no time at all. You make no sense whatsoever.

Brilliant! What a bunch of wanks!!! :

2 absolutely brilliant posts! Flanders for president!!!