Jump to content

bazil85

Saints
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,425

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

 Content Type 

Posts posted by bazil85

  1. The 3 Monthly Spend

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

    Simple question? Do you not also wonder why a Championship club, we are told that lives within its means, and that has pulled in around £1million pounds in transfer fees in a year needs to syphon £50k of The memberships money from a pot that was GUARANTEED to be ring-fenced..?

    wheres the million quid gone..?

    Simple question with an even simpler answer. So simple in fact it was highlighted in the comms. The club could afford this and will fund it if we vote no but it will come out of the player budget/ club running cost... Exactly where the transfer funds (£1 million) have been going. GS doesn't run the club to make profit, the money is invested back into the club.

    Also people hear terms like 'external borrowing.' and 'loans' and assume they're bad things. In reality any business is wise to utilise external borrowing to a certain extent. If the chiefs at St Mirren think £50k external borrowing then 1/3 each SMISA/ Club is best way to do it, I have faith. 

    I've said earlier, plans change. As it stands right now that money is GUARANTEED to be ring-fenced. All we have right now is a proposal to change that approach. We have a right to vote on this as members and change the proposal. It would be more of a worry for me if they didn't give us this right, that wouldn't be a democracy. 

  3. The 3 Monthly Spend

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, Graeme Aitken said:

    Withdraw support??

    I'd prefer SMISA manage the funds like they presented. They gave assurrances of what the £10 would be used for.

    Could this be a misappropriation of funds? As they are not being used for what they are intended for.

    & £25000 a season to get the SMISA name on 1 (yes one) youth teams shirts. They are having a laugh

    Things change but only at the will of the members. SMISA have proposed a change to the way they hold the £10 fund to support a financial need of our club that will benefit the team, a proposal at this stage, nothing more. If we say no let's keep it the same fine, if we vote to say yes we're happy with that, also fine. You do realise that companies, trustees, etc have got the right to change yeah? 

    If you'd prefer they stay as presented vote no. It'll pass if you're in the majority. 

  4. The 3 Monthly Spend

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

     

     

     

     

    It ŵas obvious from the outset Scott saw Smisa as his personal Cash-Cow, interfered in elections, spat the dummy out on what members chose to spend THEIR money on and insisted that Smisa was no longer independent.

    this spending proposal comes as no surprise, after spending £65k of members money on loans/cash facilities for the club WITHOUT consulting with the membership.. this is just another blatant cash grab on funds that the membership got a written, legally binding assurance from the Smisa committee that this sort of thing would never happen.

    i am sure the campaign and written assurances we all signed up to were to 'Buy The Buds'... not to 'Buy Gordon's Furniture'..?

    the other, hidden and much more sinister issue here is the delay, or even attempt to stop Smisa members taking over the club when we have accumulated the funds to buy Scott's shares. We have the legal right to buy these shares as soon as we have the funds, soon after takeover Scott let it be known he didnt want to sell for ten years, regardless of if smisa members had ammassed the required amount earlier. (Which on current projections we are on track to do)

    if this proposal goes through it will delay and possibly end the written assurances the Smisa committee made to manage the purchase of the majority shareholding of SMFC  on the members behalf. It seems this committee have lost any perspective on even trying to appear independent, and are happy to do Scott's bidding, even if it means breaking the very promise made to the members that your money is Ring-Fenced to Buy The Buds.

    shameless....

    :lol::lol::lol:

    The usual Boo brigade doom and gloom without any substance crowd are back out already #usualsuspects. Hammering what is nothing but a very positive use of the SMISA money in a proposal that in no way jeopardises buy the buds (assuming membership numbers don't fall below target which if they did it would be in jeopardy anyway) 

    1. New pitch at Ralston would be a great benefit to OUR football club 

    2. The funds are to be taken from the £2 spend over a timescale that will very likely not see the buy the buds deal concluded barring a massive increase in members meaning there is very very very little risk in this impacting any aspect of the deal negatively. 

    3. In the short-term the £10 fund is just gathering dust and getting a very small interest rate, makes so much sense to use this for something that benefits OUR club and minimises external borrowing

    4. How does fixing a pitch benefit GS anymore than it would OUR football team? 

    5. We're still in a democracy, this proposal going through regardless of it changing any mandates previously agreed will be on the will of the members, plans change, we're on a learning curve

    6. The £65k fund was a very short-term decision that had to be made that based on all previous votes WOULD easily of passed. We have the money back now, no harm no foul and the money we'd of lost in revenue had the Morton game been moved more than justifies the decision (also it wasn't from the members £2 pot) 

    7. 'If the proposal goes through we're giving a small group of people a mandate to do whatever they want' em do you mean anything like getting a new pitch at OUR training ground that benefits OUR football club? Also no they don't it's still a vote and to suggest members won't vote for what they think is best for OUR football club is a tiny bit patronising.

    Sorry I've highlighted OUR so often but there are a lot of people that clearly miss the point in supporting a club and funding a buyout. I'm certainly not in this for any personal game, I'm in it to give OUR club the best possible financial backing we possibly can.  

  5. Scottish Football - The Pyramid System

    in Other Football

    Posted

    I don't know an awful lot about it but could they not have it similar to the way it works now (in other words not having anymore of a financial impact than they currently have at that league level) and the only issue would surely be when/ if a team got promoted to League 2? I'd probably have that level regionalised as well tbh but failing that maybe given them a better financial cushion so teams aren't put off promotion? Like I say I don't know a great deal about this. 

    My main concern is that the SPFL use this as a backdoor for the Bigot brother Colt teams to get into the senior structure. 'Lets vote on putting the juniors in and part of that will be to allow Colts all the way up to League 1/ Championship level.' I might just be a bit paranoid but given how sneaky SPFL/ SFA are it wouldn't surprise me. 

  6. What happens when The Buds is Bought

    in SMiSA

    Posted · Edited by bazil85

    13 hours ago, St.Ricky said:

    I have to say that I still don't understand :

    A The deal to buy the club.

    B The involvement  of fans in decision making now.

    C The involvement of fans in decision making post purchase.

    D Future sources of Capital for development of the ground etc.

    For these reasons,  I have still not signed up. Now some may well think that all has been made clear. However myself and my two sons each run separate businesses and have done for many years.  

    I do buy a season ticket, I have joined the 1877 Club and I like the work that has gone into St Mirren TV and Buddievision. I also like the facilities for disabled fans in the main stand and of course love the performance of the management and players right now. 

    How about an information and recruitment drive to bring on board the yet to be convinced among us?

    A - Pay our money every month at X point in time we buy out a proportion of the club at Y point we buy out Gordon Scott. All will happen within the 10 year period providing monthly commitments stay above the required level (ahead of plan currently) Not sure of exact dates but that's down to us paying ahead of plan. 

    B - None, however we currently have a SMISA representative on the board and various other people to give input. Ultimately decision making currently sits with majority shareholder, as it should do. 

    C - Post purchase I'd imagine it will be elections to the BOD sitting for set periods of time like any other multiple ownership models.  

    D - Same as every other club in the world should be doing. We spend within our means and profit gained. If any borrowing is required/ potentially beneficial to the development of the football club it would be a BOD decision and depending on the amount fans may be canvased. Most clubs these days don't have a 'sugar daddy' that can throw money at ground development/ repairs the income needs to be sourced and money needs to be saved for a rainy day (I don't think this is what the discretionary fund should be used for just FYI). We've never had a sugar daddy in our history so fan ownership won't be different. 

    I don't fully understand the concerns around raising capital that some fans have shown. Fan owned clubs are no different from firm/ individual owned clubs, for the most part. They're ran as businesses for the profit of the owners/ at cost (we'll be at cost) 

    I would love to see further recruitment drives, a proper Q&A session for example. I've heard from SMISA they apparently have done stuff like this and had sign-up forms handed out etc. I've never seen any of it and I'm a SMISA member + season ticket holder so it makes me think there are likely a lot of fans that haven't signed up that also haven't seen it. 

  7. Scottish leagues

    in General St. Mirren Discussion

    Posted

    14 hours ago, Hambud said:

    Sad thing is there's too much greed and the decision makers won't turn their back on 4 OF matches a season so it won't change.

     

    14 hours ago, Dave The Buddie said:

     


    Also the TV broadcasters want 4 Old Firm games.

    Me personally would have two leagues. 18 top flight would be ideal.

     

     

    4 hours ago, shull said:

    The two Glasgow Bigots must be removed from Scottish Football.

    Otherwise it is business as usual , no matter what League format is being used.

    We must have a Top League where all teams have a chance to win it.  Not just two.

    1985 was a long time ago.

    Yep, yep and yep. 

    Wish we had people in charge of our game with a wee bit more backbone that would crack down on these horrible teams, shown for generations they stand for bigoted, sectarian, self-preservation rubbish.  The 11-1 vote rule is a perfect example of the pathetic yellow streak that exists in our game, the Glasgow lovers able to vote together to stop any real beneficial change. 

    Recent chat about the Colt teams, I'd love nothing more than England doing us a favor and allowing them to put Colt teams in the lower English leagues then them both buggering off in a few years. Would be the best thing for Scottish football as a sport. Too many people think sport/ financial gain are the same thing.  Although in saying that, why on earth would England want these football clubs and the trouble they bring. 

  9. What happens when The Buds is Bought

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    If anyone is feeling just a wee bit too happy with their life I suggest they have a read through this thread. We don't get the St Moan reputation from nothing after all :lol:

    All the items discussed face every club not just in the country but in the world. SMISA/ Fan ownership running the club is not fundamentally different from GS , SG or anyone else running the club. All clubs should live within their means, spend what they make on the running (and also the growing of the club) Yes decisions will have to be made in the future about potential loans of funds, savings of funds and activity that could increase the standing of St Mirren football club but that's part and parcel of football. It's not doom and gloom situation, we'll have a plan in place for a board and a chairman going forward to make our decisions (in partnership with fans which is the main fundamental difference of fan ownership) as we do now. 

    In regards to the £2 and fans financial commitments over and above the BAU (tickets/ merch, etc.) That's all a bonus  above the normal running of a club, if fans are willing to continue it great, if not it'll be same situation as vast majority of other clubs. 

    Chill! 

  11. St Mirren v Brechin Sat 24th Feb

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    It's a bit of a strange one Saturday. I don't think I've ever experienced a St Mirren victory that's left me feeling so uneasy. On one hand it's job done, on the other we looked out of ideas and nonclinical (If that's even a word) with the ball going forward. 

    In the interest of trying to remain positive I guess this time last year grinding out victories like that would of done the job for us fans. Hopefully this wee bad spell will be out our system come Friday. 

  13. St Mirren give Barnsley permission to speak to JR

    in General St. Mirren Discussion

    Posted

    A lot of opinions back on forward on if he will or if he wouldn't go. Personally I'm really not sure. Can see him possibly holding out for a better club since it's very likely his reputation will increase further after the title is confirmed. On the other hand it's kind of stick or twist. Things could start to go wrong, another job offer might not come, he could still be here next season and lose his first 10 SP games. It's all ifs and buts right now. 

    What I would say to the people saying it's probably rubbish from the Sun. No smoke without fire, I think now it's been widely reported it's likely Barnsley have made an approach. Agreeing to let them talk to him also suggests at least some interest from JR. 

    Does anyone know if we'll 100% get comp? Do some of these contracts not have wave compensation agreements for certain level clubs? 

  17. The 3 Monthly Spend

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    49 minutes ago, shull said:

    Steak bakes instead of sausage rolls and I may show an interest. 

    Steak bakes! As in plural? Crazy talk.

    I'd say one a quarter taking out of the discretionary fund should do it. I'll email to add it to the next vote.  

  19. The 3 Monthly Spend

    in SMiSA

    Posted

    21 hours ago, melmac said:

    I see St Mirren Women’s team have a just giving page, looking for £3k to help buy kit, secure training / playing facilities.

    Is this not what we just gave them money for?

    I think this is some additional stuff. They'll likely need a good bit of funding to hit the ground running. Best of luck to them and hopefully they get some success on the park 

×
×
  • Create New...