bazil85

Happy to discuss you through a DDI if you genuinely feel cheated, however the chat would likely be very short giving the simplicity of DDI. I’d also air on the side of caution that if SMISA feel they have taken the money legally and can back-up such claim, they’ll request the account is recharged in full.

Scott, nice to meet you (First person that's ever asked me directly what my name was, no hiding at all). I sit in W1 and I'm more than happy to have a chat face to face/ over a pint (Not a threat by the way, I've seen a number of people jump to that ridiculous conclusion on here in different circumstances when someone has suggested this) My username (Bazil) is what the majority of my close friends called me when I first joined here. You'll excuse me not putting my second name on an internet forum of course, your choice to do so but I would never recommend it to anyone. Hindesight is a wonderful thing and as much as data protection wasn't as much on peoples radar when B&Warmy was launched, it's certainly not a great idea in 2018. On your big long post about getting your money back. I have to say for someone that's hinted at being pretty switched on with regulation and legal issues, it's a bit surprising you didn't just follow a DDI claim. I'm also surprised if you followed all the steps you claim to have followed, not one person you spoke to suggested it.

We know your thoughts, you've said it over several usernames.

Nope not over any of that, over the results of a vote not going certain peoples way.

Bar paying my monthly DD I have no further direct dealings with SMISA. Have to say a lot of this does sound like sour grapes.

There has been previous votes with varied options and we continually see that options that benefit the club are generally the best supported. This vote was possibly the most one sided we’ve had so far based on casted votes.

Fingers crossed, I know he said previously he'd love to sign back up. I'd sign Mac for another season and bring in another center back in the summer. Liam Smith will be tough to replace at RB and with at least Irvine going and possibly Stelios we need some new blood for sure.

I would be surprised if you were more familiar with it than I am. If you are you must know it very very well, which makes an FCA complaint even more curious.

How long before Stuart Dickson is on his 1,568th different B&Warmy username.

We have all heard the rumours about how your last complaint to the FCA got on, how about firing in another one? If Bazil85 is indeed incorrect then SMISA are looking at a rather hefty fine. I'll just wait here until that materialises... In the meantime I'm sure we'll get some 'FCA don't care' comments. A regulatory body that aren't bothered about imposing fines? What a time to be alive!

Saints main training facility is based in the East End of the town and was opened in 2009.They are currently the only club outwith the Old Firm to own outright, their own custom built training facility. Maybe LPM can report this one to the FCA as well.

Nope you're right, it should be at the will of the majority of members. Voting has shown the majority of members seem to favor mutual club/ community or club only benefits.

2&3. We own the training facilities with no debt. Sounds like you're talking about the lease on the land, which is not uncommon. My understanding is it's on very favorable terms. Just splitting hairs, St Mirren own our training facilities. 5. Not sure what that sentence is supposed to mean.

Never at anytime did SMISA publish the funds were coming from the £10 pot they also have other funds outside this. They don't just have one account for the £10 and one for the £2 over their history they have provided finance for many other projects. Although if you have some actual evidence that this money came out of the £10 pot I'll stand corrected. My understanding of the lending facility was that it formed part of the original BTB deal. My understanding was it was to be made up of the £2,500 premium memberships. We know you hate SMISA but there is nothing causing the majority of us any concern and your comments haven't raised any further alarm bells. You've also been shown that the constitution isn't broken based on the community benefits of the spend. Round in circles.

1. Okay so we are in a fantastic situation of having the very best facilities in the world for a club our size. What a positive aspect for our club, there is zero negativity that even the St Moan loyal can take from that surely? Fortunately we have no rent or borrowing costs against the training facility so it must go a long-way to covering the running costs and maintenance. 2. Yes we do http://www.stmirren.info/id393.html 3. See above link 5. It's not Us Vs Them, we're all in this together and all for what's best for SMFC. It's curious that people have got issue with our football club benefiting from funds that would otherwise sit gathering dust for close to a decade.

What are the other two occasions? As you've been told several times the USH cost wasn't from the £10 pot so will be interesting to know. Mind you it's not like you listen, how's the letter to the FCA going?

Are you suggesting to me St Mirren are the only team on this planet with our rough income and club size that have a training facility like ours? Baffling. You also seem to be hinting at this being a bad thing. Here's a few question for you, if we can't afford to replace the pitch in X number of years what's the worst case scenario for the club with an owned training facility with no borrowing against it? Do you agree a number of clubs at our level don't have the luxury of owning outright a training ground? Do you think any of these clubs will have rent/ borrowing and other costs that exceeds £150k over a 10 year period? What about clubs like Dunfermline, Dundee United, Kilmarnock that have much bigger older stadiums than us with similar crowds and income? How do they fund stadium upkeep? You're hinting that £150k would be an issue, it won't be. It'll come out of our budget like any other expense would do. We have used an opportunity to save £50k from the budget, it is in no way an indication that we won't be able to cover it in the future. As for your second paragraph, I'll refer you back to my previous point. We are going into a league where the majority of teams will have bigger budgets than ours. This money saved give us a wee bit extra for next season. That is all, it's a bonus that we wouldn't have if BTB wasn't currently happening. We won't have that in the future but like we've been fine for the last 140 years we'll be fine in the future as expenses come our way.

It was a very clear landslide, no matter what way you look at it. 88% Vs 12% members that cast a vote. 44% V 8% including members that didn't cast a vote. If a political party won an election by such margins do you think landslide would feature in the subsequent news stories? I've never heard someone say a vote isn't a landslide because some people haven't cast a vote

No idea but we certainly won't be the only ones. Are you suggesting it's a bad thing having such good facilities?

We all have the same goal, the continual running and growth of St Mirren football club. What wouldn't they have a 'cosy' relationship. The number of people that see it as us and them is really staggering.

Same provisions as almost any other club at our level with the same kind of pitch. Very few clubs have a rich chairman or benefactor now that can fund such purchases, we'll cover it out of our running costs. The only difference this time is we've had the opportunity to support through SMISA contributions. It's in no way an indication that it would not be affordable otherwise or in the future. In fact the proposal said as much. It clearly stated in the event of a no vote the club would pay for it out of its budget. Will be same in 8-12 years as required.

Interesting use of numbers. If only 8% voted against, why didn't you note the percentage who voted for it? Roughly 44% voted for (or 88% of the voting population) with the remaining not voting at all for I'm sure various reasons. The main reason is very likely to be indifference though. (I've spoken to three paying members that didn't vote and all of them just weren't really bothered, I know that's a small number but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the general theme from those that didn't vote)

Very clear that the overwhelming majority of paying members support this or are indifferent. Time for everyone to move on for the good of our football club.

It wasn’t just a victory it was a landslide with the no side getting less than 8% of the overal members. Very disappointing you’re throwing your toys because people have a different opinion to yourself. The funds remain ring fenced as the plan to pay the money back is very sound as long as people continue to pay. The irony is if more people think like you then that’s put at risk.

I didn’t win the SMISA raffle for a place at the POTY dinner. That’s it membership cancelled hahahaha