civilsaint

Yet again you fail to read what was written. Why do you keep mentioning 6 weeks? No one said all will be complete in 6 weeks. The reference to "6 weeks" is the time it takes for legalities to complete once funding is in place.
Do keep up.

Yet again you fail to read what was written. Why do you keep mentioning 6 weeks? No one said all will be complete in 6 weeks. The reference to "6 weeks" is the time it takes for legalities to complete once funding is in place.
Do keep up.

Sid's a big part of the problem I reckon. He's been guilty of putting out some of the most ridiculous elements of misinformation since this whole thing started. I reckon he's just a Yul alias

It is as you say completely down to individual members to judge what part/parts of 10000 hours proposal they see as a benefit. And I firmly uphold anyone's right to chose to support it, and respect whatever reason they may have for doing so!
I don't support the proposal put forward by 10000 hours, the back to front way it has been handled, and the ongoing delay which given that the sellers want to sell, the buyers like the deal one can only assume the hold up is readies?
I've never questioned anyone's reason for supporting this, I don't think the supporters are impressionable mugs, i know and grew up with a fair few of them. I question RA and 10000 hours ability to land a deal that benefits SMFC. To date despite all their promise of "Open" and "transparent" due process nothing has been finalised (Their words not mine)
Whatever the outcome I want the buddies to emerge stronger and better for it

You mean just the way yourself and the imaginary 7 de-railed all the previous meetings? Oh, no, none of you had the bottle to let out a squeak let alone any negative reasoning (except Michelle who seemed not to even understand the concept let alone the detail).

Firstly, I have given you no abuse, though you probably deserved it, so don't come on here and play the victim card to avoid replying to my valid points. U must appreciate why people are suspicious of your motives, you have 135 negative posts in the CIC section, with only 17 other posts in the whole forum (not to mention the ones posted under the name of Yul) and expect individuals to dance to your tunes.
The fact that you expect someone from SMISA to come on to a public forum and explain the workings of the group (for a second night in a row) tells a story in itself. I'll refer you back to my points from last night; if you are a member of SMISA speak to those in positions of authority in private first, if you are not a member the workings of SMISA are no business of yours. Why are you so interested in what they do? Explain why Mr Bell (?) should come on here and explain to us all?
Why don't you ask Mr Aitkinson yourself, he has invited you numerous times with an open book approach, yet all you do is give him abuse and slander his reputation. Is it any wonder he hasn't repplied to you recently? Why not pick up the phone or fire off an e-mail?
I'd just like to re-iterate a piece of advice I gave you last night, it may go some way to explaining the rather negative reaction you get from what appear to be other "ordinary" fans:-

Aha!
Caught masturbating on a public forum!
Did Yul have a hand in this?
Haven't you and your pardner no heard? Yul go blind

Yes you are. I simply asked a few relevant questions and all I seem to get is abuse in return. God help us if this the kind of treatment ordinary (non CIC) supporters can look forward to when you and your friends have taken over the Club I have supported for over 40 years. I do not look forward to being a second class supporter.
Is is so hard for Mr. Bell to tell us all:-
If Mr. Gilmour met with SMISA and persuaded them to change their minds. A simple YES or No would do.
For Mr. Atkinson to tell us:-
Is it true that the CIC funders will not hand over the cash unless a supporter's organisation will back the bid ?
I really have to wonder if SMISA members understand that every penny of their money will simply go to Mr. Gilmour and will not financially benefit the club in any way. ?

You seem to like "stories" rather than facts. SMISA had a vote, their memebers decided to to support the CIC. Unless you are a member, the workings of SMISA are none of your business. If you are a member, take your issues or "stories" up with the appropriate members in a private forum.
You don't do yourself any favours with your mischievious posting style.

Heard an interesting story today at the game. Can St Sid or anyone else or even 1000000000 hours (the length of time this deal is taking) confirm or deny it ???
1) SMISA had first agreed to hand over their £50,000 to Richard Atkinson with unknown conditions.
2) SMISA had a change of heart and said sorry but no thanks.
3) Mr. Gilmour met with SMISA and persuaded them to change their minds again.
Is it true that the CIC funders will not hand over the cash unless a supporter's organisation will back the bid ?
Does it seems OK for Mr. Gilmour to be asking SMISA to hand over their cash to Mr. Atkinson so that he can pass it right on to Mr. Gilmour ?
Are you there Mr. Bell ? Why does the SMISA web site not work ? Is any of this true ?

I agree with 'whydowebother' above. Just half-a-dozen league goals or something in 4 years is not good enough for us. He should do well in Div 1 though if he can stay fit (which is a big ask for him) - surprised teams like Livi, Thistle or even Morton weren't interested.

Sorry guys , would not like to see him back at Saints. He had his time , he failed as a striker which is what he was employed for.
Nice guy , plenty of endeavour , but like the other players we cleared out , he had to go.

You forgot to add
d. Start a thread on a proposed demo about it

I understand your POV on the personal insults Sid, but if there's no forum guidelines, it's verbal anarchy on any forum, and all that happens is that genuine debate on any subject goes down the pan amid unchecked insult and worse.... if last season's Neil Lennon internet postings are anything to go by.
Div will know better than anyone - we need guidelines, these days police and court action is a genuine possibility if the online 'banter' gets out of hand. I think what Feegie Saint said was out of order towards one of our club directors. If anyone thinks that makes me some sort of old fuddy duddy goody two shoes REA arse licker - that's their problem, not mine. As I said, wouldn't have mattered who it was directed at within the club, it surely isn't right.

This place is turning into dickophile heaven
Interesting though that Dicko should brandish his "I employ 400 peope " credentials as a way of impressing the natives and then seeks to portray himself as just another director when there are signs that the popular belief is that he has day to day control of the company.
Is it true that Maxi has a charge over St Mirren Football Club just now? If so, what is the exact purpose?
Have some of the loans and grants materialised already? If so, has any of that money been spent? If it has been spent then where has it gone?
Are payments already due on any loans? If so, have they all been met?
Can he not lend some of his own money to the CIC? there surely must be a way to do that without getting hit by the tax charges he mentioned at the public meetings.
Will the pitch be used as grazing or a paddock by his horsey friends?
Why ask for direct debit details when there are so many issues over share ownership to be overcome?
Some people are suggesting that the ultimate motive is for someone to get everyone else to pay for their do-gooder visions of a CIC that also happens to control a football club-not a lot is being done to dispel that notion now and the dwindling group of hangers-on who try to defend the CIC by attacking all who question it are now looking more and more like a bunch of wannabes that dream of a seat on the board and of pee-heeing with the allegedly rich and powerful of the parish (sic).
And finally, ktf. Do you fancy coming round the Tile to discuss "rancid little hovels" with myself, buddiecat, scottd and quite a few others who have serious doubts over 10000 hours intentions and ability to deliver? Or are you just another internet blowhard?

I've been out partaking in more than a few sherbets this evening, so maybe it's just me, but can anyone explain what on earth 'Feegie Saint' is on about with his insulting and inane ramblings?
Thanks in advance. Burp! Ah, Sam Adams Boston Lager.... Heaven.

Absolutely Poz. The "St Mirren in the blood" nonsense is pretty small minded but doesn't surprise me. People should be elected on their ability to better the club by legitimate means, nothing else.

He will already have the board members picked out.I just hope he does not get his hands on the club and somebody comes up with a bid to take the club over

Would I like a non St Mirren supporting businessman who is not a football fan to be the Chairman of St Mirren Football Club?
Hmmmmmmm
I'm sure there must be better candidates out there.
Would I be quite happy for him to be a board member of the CIC and remain on the BOD's at St Mirren?
Probably.

I know most regular forum users know by now that I am involved in some graphics-related jobs with RA, and would expect me to vote for him. Putting that aside, I would actually find it somewhat strange if the person who initiated the whole CIC takeover, who approached SG after seeing the Financial Times advert, who was co-opted onto the BOD for over a year, who put 10000hours team together, who has been the prime mover in dealing with the consortium, the funders, the politicians, who was the main man at the public meetings, has liased with SMiSA, who is our Commercial Director, and who frankly is the public face of the whole shooting match, wasn't elected to be new Chairman - at least initially. If he then does a crap job, the CIC model allows for the membership to shoot him in the back of the head as he drives down Deeley Plaza. Job done, swear in the new Chairman and duck back behind the grassy knoll.
Seeing as how this is all new, different and untried at this level.... if the CIC comes to fruition, I'd be quite happy to see it roll out with RA at the head of it all, his existing team behind him, Fitzy in place as a 'Presidential' figure, SMiSA representation, and also maybe SG staying on in some sort of temporary capacity to facilitate a smooth transition from consortium to CIC.

I bothered to find out about the CIC because it affects the football club I support. I had concerns, I asked the questions, I got answers.
I went to the public meeting, I heard other peoples concerns, I noted the answers and even put them on a public website verbatim to try and communicate them to fans who couldn't attend.
I made my own mind up about the CIC and whether it was good for the club or not because I COULD be bothered.
I have said before I will be joining the CIC as an individual member, nothing more. I am not "getting" anything out of the CIC any more than any other St.Mirren supporter who wants to see the club try something different. If it doesn't work it doesn't work, the club goes back up for sale and is sold to someone else who may or may not be good for the club.
You can make your own mind up about "Yul" and "Animal", both the same person, and their agenda about trying to de-rail the CIC. Ask yourself why they attended the public meetings yet said NOTHING, why they refused a 1:1 offer from Richard and the team to address their concerns in person, why they ignored a request to attend a public debate, them versus the CIC to air all their concerns in public ?
Why would they continue to hide ? What is it they are trying or hoping to achieve ?
They may well have very valid concerns and if they do I'd love to hear them but all I am hearing is bitching about not being able to buy a scarf.

Yul's posts have been made on a forum that 10000hours voluntarily signed up to to answer questions (or the questions that they choose to answer, rather than the difficult ones). Don't think it's asking too much to expect 10000hours to make some sort of response to those posts, even if it's to say it's a load of rubbish and here's why. I saw rea was reading this thread earlier so he knows about the posts.
I know if someone was making similar posts about some project I was involved in on a site I was a member of I'd be looking to do the same. As it happens, I agree with a number of Yul's points and can't be bothered asking the questions contained within because I've already asked other questions and not had an answer.

For 10000hrs to reply to.
Thank you for your reply.
You have confirmed that you are able to provide a business plan however decided not to provide one for public scrutiny for reasons only fully known to CIC and/or RA....this is a concern. If you have complete confidence in your proposal then why not give everyone, not just the funding organisations, the freedom to study the business plan before investing in the CIC?
To the question of who will run the new bar. I have asked this question twice and have asked you 'who' they are and are they connected to RA in any way. Twice you have replied yet refused to provide a straight YES or NO. I will break the question down for you one more time as I am sure there will be a few fans interested in your answer.
You have confirmed that you know who will be running the new bar....I am asking you if it is anyone connected to RA, a family member or friends etc? The answer is a simple YES or NO.

Dear Mr. A,
I attended one of your presentations. I am clear that I already fully understand the scheme. I would have perhaps attended the shareholder's meeting but my invitation arrived on the day of the meeting ! I am sure you have many PROJECTIONS and ESTIMATES in your business plan. I have written many similar documents over the years and I am sure I could prove virtually any end result I wished.
I see no real point in meeting you. My opposition to this scheme is fundamental. I am opposed to the use of some £2,000,000 of taxpayers cash to buy out the directors of a limited company, even one that I have supported for over 40 years. You appear to have convinced a number of the Club's supporters to pay off the loan part of this scheme. I find this unacceptable.
It seems that you have managed to persuade some of my fellow supporters to give you their hard earned cash for what appears to me, very little return. I do not wish to be involved in any way especially with this part of your scheme. Some of them can ill afford to contribute.
I have another difficulty - in the use of Kibble's resources, including some very vulnerable children in this venture.
If this scheme comes to fruition, you and some of your business colleagues will form the 'executive board' and will be able to run every aspect of the Club. The CIC board and the SMFC board will be virtually powerless. You and the executive board will control a £4,000,000 company without spending very much.
I sincerely hope I am wrong but I fear that I may well be proved right.

My kids are happy enough with the odd trip to Xscape and a new DS game every now and then...