civilsaint

Your obsession with the budgets of other teams is misguided. SMFC projected income is "X", therefore SMFC should budget to having outgoings not exceeding "X". End of discussion. That's how business works and SMFC is a business. 
 
P.S. Forgot to say, if you genuinely think that 50K is the cost to employ of a decent first team SPFL player, then you are majorly misguided. 

Borrow? Who said anything about the club having to borrow money? I thought there was enough money available in the budget? 
Your position seems to be rather confused to say the least.
 

That’s exactly what you’ve been saying. Many times, in many posts. You’ve regularly said you cannot understand people having concerns about this because there’s a vote you can simply say ‘no’ to.
To humour me, can you tell me what you think my concern has been, and if you do indeed think it is valid?

With all due respect, that really is quite a pathetic and counter productive attitude.
I seriously hope your views do not reflect the views of those involved in the management of SMISA, the second that kind of attitude is adopted the game is up. 

NO,NO, NO. That is not what I'm saying. In fact it is the complete opposite. HELP!
Sorry to burst your bubble but it is just like any old business. If the business fails there is no football club. Business should be at the centre of every decision taken, the emotional side needs to be separated or things will go wrong - think Fergus McCann. He didn't make them successful by doing what the fans wanted.

With all due respect, that really is quite a pathetic and counter productive attitude.
I seriously hope your views do not reflect the views of those involved in the management of SMISA, the second that kind of attitude is adopted the game is up. 

That's the problem. Right there.  Acknowledging and recognising the concerns being raised and robustly disagreeing is one thing. Failing to even recognise the perceived issue, despite being spelled out by numerous independent posters does nothing for your position.  Is it blindness or is it an  unwillingness to open your eyes? 
As for the reasoning for requiring additional funding, that in itself is quite concerning. Businesses, clubs, individuals can ALWAYS 'justify' that extra bit of cash for a new computer, or new car, or new office. But that doesn't make it right. Businesses which fold often do so because they made bad decisions in the good times, giving them no room for error in the bad times (New Look is probably the most recent example but there are many, many more).

With all due respect, that really is quite a pathetic and counter productive attitude.
I seriously hope your views do not reflect the views of those involved in the management of SMISA, the second that kind of attitude is adopted the game is up. 

NO,NO, NO. That is not what I'm saying. In fact it is the complete opposite. HELP!
Sorry to burst your bubble but it is just like any old business. If the business fails there is no football club. Business should be at the centre of every decision taken, the emotional side needs to be separated or things will go wrong - think Fergus McCann. He didn't make them successful by doing what the fans wanted.

That's the problem. Right there.  Acknowledging and recognising the concerns being raised and robustly disagreeing is one thing. Failing to even recognise the perceived issue, despite being spelled out by numerous independent posters does nothing for your position.  Is it blindness or is it an  unwillingness to open your eyes? 
As for the reasoning for requiring additional funding, that in itself is quite concerning. Businesses, clubs, individuals can ALWAYS 'justify' that extra bit of cash for a new computer, or new car, or new office. But that doesn't make it right. Businesses which fold often do so because they made bad decisions in the good times, giving them no room for error in the bad times (New Look is probably the most recent example but there are many, many more).

http://www.rhcontracts.com/projects/maxwellton-paisley/
 

The SFA  are protecting their own arses and,as shull says above,the Clubs are shiting it.
Hopefully the Crowd Funding action works.The Clubs may be scared to rock the boat but the Fans aren't.
In an ideal World this would go all the way to UEFA who would have to act.
Scottish football is finished if no action is taken.

Precisely. 

Aye, you, as per, see only what you want to see, ya nugget.

Reading what's been reported, and I don't know how accurate that is, I'm surprised it went to court. He was never seen by the authorities getting into or out of the vehicle. Their was no real proof he had a drink in the pub and he was sat at home when the police came a calling. Add to that the fact he had circa, 44 mg in his system AFTER having a drink at home, he was never going to be found guilty.

Interestingly our shirt is featured in this Joma promotional video.
OR IS IT?
Because that guy walking about with a Joma St. Mirren shirt, isn't wearing the shirt we're selling. It appears to be the template catalogue shirt with a St. Mirren badge ironed on.

"Can you contact the club..." *face plant*

I don't understand the abuse Paolo gets on here.Is it because he's a Sellic fan or is it that people are jealous of a local boy doing good?Similar to the abuse Cheesy got.

Indeed, a pathetic statement from the SMFC CEO. 
 First he says he "doesn't know why we are on the list", then says he does know why we are on the list, the says again he doesn't know why we are on the list. Not to mention the complete lack of empathy or apology on behalf of the club.
 
Is this the best leadership we can get?

Smisa don't need to reply to anyone about anything unless it is a smisa member contacting smisa thorugh proper channels.  As a non smisa member I have absolutely no business questioning smisa and smisa would have no obligation to give me an answer to a question I am never going to ask!
I do reserve the right to use this forum in order to share my views on smisa however.  An example would be my rather sharp critique of smisa's half witted decision to differentiate between beloved premier members and the poor (probably housing assocation dwelling) peasant members.  The wealthier football fan who can spare over £25  a month is no better a fan than the student struggling to pay say £15.  I will re-iterate that the low income fan struggling to pay the lower amount is the better fan as his/her sacrifice is greater.  In any case to differentiate between the premier and the peasants tells me that this organisation is not one I will be a part of.  That is my view, smisa sycophants will disagree with me and that is fine.  
 
Also I wonder who the next owner of my club will be.....I do not think it will be smisa!
 
 
 

I am only posting the link as I assume all FFFs can access the Official website    http://www.stmirren.com/news/club/club-news/572-chairman-s-update
What a difference it makes being kept informed on what is going on.

Love Steve Bruce's approach to Toss McCormacks piss taking.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/21/steve-bruce-drops-aston-villa-ross-mccormack-missing-training

That could almost sound like judging the victim!!

While I do not agree to the tone the point is valid. The SMISA section is on this forum there is nothing that states there is no connection between the forum and SMISA. The fact the SMISA used this media format to convey information on the buyout I think it is a fair request or assumption that they could provide a response on this forum. Seems to me they are following the St Mirren way of communication as being selective

Successful community groups usually achieve such success by going on the charm offensive and engaging at every opportunity. If answering questions in a dedicated section of the primary social media platform of the club is too much effort, then I don't hold much hope. 
Hopefully your response isn't reflective of SMISA though.