WeeBud

Thought Springsteen was absolutely amazing last night and probably one of my "all time favourite gigs". Big up for the guy that caught "Lumpy Hazel" as she tumbled off the stage trying to help her pal up for a cuddle with The Boss!!

Well DMC, being from Greenock, you'll know very well what happens when "the Easdales" don't get there way!! Your wish may very well come true!!!

One among many!!!!

I agree that Imrie got plenty opportunities to shine but didn't. I don't think DL was responsible for him not being good enough and certainly not worth the "transfer fee" we paid for him but he was sure as hell responsible for signing him!!

The irony being that the authorities/fans/media would have taken exactly the same stance for "the other cheek of the same arse".

That is one of my favourite days out at the footy..................rattling old "football special" from Gilmour Street, Broomfield with it's odd little stand in the corner, two baying sets of supporters seperated by police holding a rope stretching from the back to the front of the terracing, non-paying punters climbing (and getting cheered over the wall), and a Billy Stark hat-trick in a 5 - 0 win. Fabulous stuff to a spotty teenager!!

"couldn't help but notice the constant inference to Craig whyte re this bid by DW. poor form indeed gentlemen." Explain the poor form on my part, I didn't for a second suggest DW was in any way shady or anything other than a successful businessman. The only point I made was that, at the moment, we know the square route of nothing with regards to this guy and/or his bid. To use "SG" and the board's opinion on him as a reference is a bit odd as they've, to date, been happy to give the same reference to REA. You're constant need to belittle REA (in particular) and 10,000 hours (in general) does the credibility of your arguement no favours whatsoever.

The company we use for PR at work would say anything I wanted them to say about me as long as I paid them enough!!! In fact if you looked hard enough you'd find some rhetoric that would make Craig Whyte sound like Warren Buffet. That doesnt mean Dave Wares isn't the "real deal" but maybe let's wait a while and see what he's got to say before championing him as a great alternative to REA and 10,000 hours. A bit like Drew, I've been in favour of "a fan model" taking a majority stake in the club if possible. In the current climate I'd be a bit suspicious of any indivdual, who didn't have some affilliation to the club, taking the majority shareholding. Good businessmen don't spend money for a laugh and a jolly

He disappeared as I was typing but I'm sure Div will be back later

What's to ask the fans??? I thought that was one of the reasons that the CiC was of interest to many supporters, to have our voices heard after being provided with "the facts". Being a supporter on the outside and praising/criticising directors is easy when decisions don't rest on your shoulders. Being members of the CiC and tabling votes, on major issues, based on "collective decisions" have to be taken by "asking the fans/members"!!

Hi Div I think I agree with most of what you stated above but just for clarification are you saying irrespective of whether CiC goes through the club would possibly be in administration in 4/5 months time without any "Sky" money?? If that is the case and with the likliehood that it is going to be "no to NewCo" irrespective of what we (SMFC and 10000hours) decide, is it a scenario where the funder is saying no to funding us without sufficient income streams coming into the club (SMFC) through commercial contracts,or, is it purely down to the possibility that we are buying 52% of something that is about to change shape and may not be worth as much as we were originally going to bid??

Div or 10000hours, Is there any indication on how they are going to gather opinion? Is it going to be a gut feel on comments people make or are they going to e-mail CiC membership with some sort of yes/no/don't know response mechanism?

What though would have to change to make it right for you??

This is the bit I don't quite get about you...........when you cut through the "bullshit" and "smart-arse" stuff you have a lot of things to say that are quite worthwhile listening to/reading!! Even more reason for you to be involved (even as just a member) as with numbers we have strength when guided in the right directions. The guidance is driven by constructive debate and evolving direction to shape what we "the fans/members", "community groups/members" want the CiC to look like to help benefit SMFC and the community surrounding it.

If you listen (metaphorically) to others on this site instead of just shouting loudest you will find that "my" position is one common to most who have taken the time to try and understand what is going on with the "CiC" project. Within the CiC "one memeber one vote" is what it says on the tin!!

Nonsense I have been intereted in the idea of the CiC, albeit with concerns, from day one and have read as much as the next person, attended meetings and shared dialogue with others on the matter. At no point was I confused as to whether I was entitled to a vote on CiC issues as opposed to a "direct" vote in all things SMFC. Where I believe the influence will be is with the power of the 52% block vote on the SMFC Board. If it's one member on vote within the CiC then the 52% influence will be determined by the majority.

I accept that's not what you were debating, what I can't see is whether you have a concern about people having a shareholding in SMFC and being a member of the CIC or if you're just trying to discredit the CIC on any basis??

Is that not true for anyone who already has shares and is also becoming a member of the CIC??

Not really an alternative to the CiC, more a poll of who is and who isn't in favour of the CiC. This is always an issue when there is change in the Boardroom at football clubs, there will always be people for and people against whatever the changes are going to be (see r*ngers, c*ltic and Hearts for examples) however change has to happen at St Mirren as the current BoD feel they have gone as far a they can. Asking fans what they want is all well and good but shares have to be paid for somehow and at St Mirren we have a history of fans not taking up allocations of shares when they are offered. This time over 700 have registered and interest in financing a change in direction (don't know the numbers of DD forms returned) which would suggest that a fair percentage of the fans are pro CiC. I'd be amazed if there is another club in Britain with as high a percentage of fans financially supporting or contributing to changing the direction of their club other than through season-ticket sales.

Not disagreeing DavidG however i think if the funding organisations agree the funding package then by and large the business plan must have stood up to scrutiny. However I would hope that the business plan will be available to those wanting to know the ins and outs before too long. What I couldn't give two hoots about is whether the guy "running" the bar is already known to Richard Atkinson or any other CiC or Board Member so long as he has the necessary experience and expertise.

If the consortium wanted to nett £2m then the amount paid over would be £2m + tax by any ordinary buyer. Although you may be correct that it could be in the CIC's interest to make this claim, it would be easy enough for someone to prove the figures as incorrect and therefore a pretty niaive claim to make if untrue!! In the current economic climate I would think that there would be a fairly heavy tax burden on £2m although I don't know for sure.

Your info may be more up to date than mine as I haven't seen "the plan" and only relying on figures quoted by the CIC. If, however, Kibble or anyone else is having offices in the void area then they will presumably be paying rental to St Mirren for the use of the space thus raising funds for the club. Must be pretty big offices though if they are going to take up two thirds of the available space.

If the only reason for joining/becoming a memeber of the CIC is to have access to a bar then I would seriously consider whether your £10.00 per month spend was worthwhile. with that said I think the "void" area has room for around 600 standing, 350 seated and there was another figure mentioned for "theatre set-up". I may be wrong but I'm sure I read that somewhere or heard it at one of the meetings.

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.