Jump to content

jens

Saints
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

jens's Achievements

Baby Crew

Baby Crew (1/14)

  1. No not in hysterics. Just don't really understand and I'm looking to understand as much as possible before tomorrow night. :S
  2. So, in short: The 'asset lock' protects the assets of the CIC. Not St. Mirren, so the St. Mirren assets aren't protected anymore than they are at the moment. Fan Governance: to get on the St. Mirren board, you need to be voted on by the CIC board, which to get on, you need to be voted on by the fans? And after all that the 805 people who want a say in the club, won't actually have a say in how the club is run? As much as a fan will have the best interests of the club at heart, we all have differing opinions on what's best. Some may want to sell Carey, or McGowan etc some may not. And who decides how much we get? If we think the board have done a poor job, can we oust them and put someone else in place easily enough? Can people on the Exec Board be sacked?
  3. Fan Governance: I can't get my head round that either. For the life of me, I cannot understand how 805 people can be involved in the day to day running of the club. From what I understood is that fans can vote for Board Members and a fan on the Exec Board. A point I have made previously is: as much as a fan will have tw best interests of the club at heart, we all have differing opinions on what's best. Some may want to sell Carey, or McGowan etc some may not. And who decides how much we get? If we think the board have done a poor job, can we oust them and put someone else in place easily enough?
  4. I thought the 'asset lock' was to help protect the assets of St. Mirren? So really - the ground can be sold to anyone for any amount as can the players. In actual fact St. Mirren can be stripped of all it's assets as these aren't actually 'locked'? If this is the case, what's the inherent benefit of the CIC owning St. Mirren?
  5. Would it be the fans or the elected board on behalf of the fans? If it were every member casting a vote then things would take a long time. Eg. Someone puts in a bid for Carey at the 11th hour on deadline day, who decides if he goes? Who decides if the price is enough? If its the elected board, they could act with their best interests and get it wrong. Just like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron: they all want the best for the country but their views are different. The same could happen with the elected board. Who decides??
  6. That's what I don't understand. Reading about the 'asset lock', assets CAN be sold: stadium and players, just like any other business. But what can't happen is the money to leave through dividends etc. So we could sell the stadium for market value, and spend the proceeds on new players. That would be deemed OK, according to what I read last night online.
  7. We have heard that KMG is interested. He was part of the consortium back when SG took over and has been part of the board "everyone is very happy with".
  8. Never understood this CIC, specifically the 'asset lock'. If St. Mirren isn't a CIC, how are it's assets locked? Who would all need to agree before it's assets are sold?
×
×
  • Create New...