bazil85
-
Posts
10,429 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by bazil85
-
-
39 minutes ago, Soctty said:
And yet...
Eh?
-
15 minutes ago, Soctty said:
Pet hate of mine. It's not grammar exactly, it's actually using a word that has absolutely no place in that sentence. You've actually lengthened the word "would've" to two words which make no sense when put together...
Eye new you we're going two say this
-
46 minutes ago, Soctty said:
Have. Would *have* been nice.
Fingers crossed he goes in the summer though, as you say.
Grammar police, amazing how important it is to some people on an opinion forum
-
Doesn't seem like the John McGinn move is going to happen this window which is unfortunate. Would of been nice him going for £3/£4 million quoted. I don't imagine we'd of spent much of our cut putting us in a great position to save and bank the money. Surely he'll go though in the summer window with only one year to run on his deal.
-
19 hours ago, Ronnie said:
According to Wikipedia he has played 114 league games and has scored 12 goals not really missing out on much imo.
The fact he has played for 5 teams in 5 years maybe tells a story too ( I might be wrong here) but would think he shows some promise then doesn't live up to it so his previous teams seem happy to let him go after only 1 year.Hmm not sure about that, if Jack fancies him he's more often than not spot on. Might not be an out and out goalscorer but could of done a job. who knows
-
2 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:
Your really quite funny doing all the thinking for everyone else.
Where did say I was not happy honestly I'm more happy than I have been in a long time , times like these don't come along often so i'm grabbing it with both hands. Will I write to SMISA and complain = No Have I voted in every spend = Yes.
Came onto the SMISA forum to put over my thoughts I go along with the majority and will not spit the dummy out. Anyway I don't own a soapbox which to stand on I'm just your next fan in the coffee queue muttering away.
You clearly can't grasp someone looking at a situation and making an informed choice can you?
-
43 minutes ago, smcc said:
Even at the rate of £10 per month per member which is going towards the purchase there is still a large margin.
As in a large margin in favor or against the buyout?
31 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:Again you jump into the conclusion pool ? I'm starting to guess who you used to post under.
Have never put forward any propsals not a signal one I'm only pointing out we could save up some money for a fans day out experience to the football. Anyway who are you to pull down any proposal put forward if you don't like it don't vote for it it's really quite simple.
I assure you I have never posted under any other name apart from Bazil85 but I'd love to know who you think I used to post under.
I'm jumping to conclusions? Can you see how your second paragraph is completely hypocritical? Yet again I'll say it, common sense approach suggests that the majority of fans involved in the buyout are happy. If you want 100% stone cold unwavering evidence of this it's not available but if you feel that is the only conditions where you can make a point then I suggest you stop posting that fans are unhappy because you are self defeating your own argument.
-
8 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
You're losing me mainly by repeating you would vote for anything where the money went to the club. Fine thats your prerogative. But we aren't discussing that. We are discussing why only the club or committee members ideas get to a vote. And that is surely a bad thing as regards keeping all members whatever their voting intentions are, engaged in the medium to long term.
On another point, why do you think Smisa is way ahead of schedule..? What are you measuring that against..?
Where's your evidence that no members ideas have been taken on? Last vote there was a boys club idea the club were directly against, the entertainment one could also of been members?
SMISA have consistently said the plan was on 1,000 members paying £12 a month. They had also noted that they had factored in for a drop off in members (under 1,000) over the term of the buyout. If our member numbers are still around about 1,250/ 1,300 a month (which I'm led to believe they are) with a small percentage of them paying £25 surely that's still ahead of schedule? That also doesn't take into account the £2,500 up front packages which sold out. Purchase price is £1 million. Working out calculations of 1,250 fans paying £12 a month. that's £1.8 million ovr the 10 year plan. Nice wee margin for error I'd say.
-
8 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
I get you dont want to acknowledge that with little over half the membership voting, there is no evidence to suggest what the majority are happy with. And the reference to colt teams..? Sorry whooosh on my behalf.
if a members idea like installing the tv screens streaming saints tv, buddievision and live football. Improves the matchday experience for fans, why is it hard to understand that that also greatly benefits the club..?
i dont think any members are against the club benefitting from the £2 pot, and I dont think anyone is suggesting that the club shouldn't. What is being discussed is the fact that the options for members to vote on are only coming from the club (sometimes just to pay a regular bill) or the Smisa committee. And in the long run without effective, proactive engagement and involvement of the membership in determining where the funds are allocated smisa run the real risk of members just letting it go, drifting away, leaving it to someone else....
That lethargy has been the death knell of so many similar organisations, all you hear is "well thats just the way of it" we cant afford to let that creeping grip of doom become the vision for smisa. No sports scientist in the world will be able to do a 'magic sponge' on that.
Do you genuinely believe there is no evidence that the majority are happy? Like actually sticking to that there is ZERO evidence at all to confirm that? The Colt team reference was people on here arguing that we don't know if fans would be happy to have Colt teams in the league because there hasn't been official fan engagement. I was using it as an example of a common sense approach which you seem not willing/ able to grasp.
Your second sentence, I would completely agree with you. Again would I vote for it over giving the required money to my football club? Probably not. Evidence as I quoted in the recent votes would suggest there's a big pool of paying members of that opinion also. Maybe not/ maybe so. I'm going purely on the evidence we do have.
Your third paragraph relies very heavily on your point that members aren't happy which we've established in no fact.
Your fourth paragraph. Name one organisation that's been in a similar position (two years through a 10 year plan, way ahead of schedule, no clear evidence that a big member drop-off is going to happen) has ended up failing?
-
Just now, Lord Pityme said:
Sorry.... what evidence? On most votes less than half the membership are casting a vote in favour of any option. Now if you were responsible for membership engagement, recruitment and stability, and you know almost half of them aren't voting..! You should be very concerned as to how that may manifest itself in membership turnover/drop off.
if you are only engaging with half of them... guess what the other half may decide, or just let happen?
Again you have zero evidence these fans are not happy in the same way I don't know for sure they are. Educated guess would say since they aren't speaking out, aren't cancelling their membership and not using their vote to annotate negativity to the voting options... They're more than likely pretty content
You realise how it sounds when you suggests there are a majority of fans that aren't happy at the discretionary fund benefits SMFC right?
-
Just now, Lord Pityme said:
Ah... I see you have canvassed "The Vast Majority" again to back up your opinions. You have asked all the people you say you have..? Havent you?
As I've stated on several occasions, evidence would suggest the majority are happy. There's certainly nothing that suggests most people don't like what's currently happening.
95% of members that chose to vote, voted in favour of the suggestion that literally wrote the club a cheque.
80% a donation to the woman's team and
72% for a entertainment that we can only speculate will be a benefit.
Now I know that is not clear cut 100% the majority are happy but in the same way as it's pretty bloody obvious fans are against Colt teams, I'd say it's pretty bloody obvious St Mirren fans are happy when proposals benefit St Mirren football club. Would love to know what goes on in your head.
-
1 minute ago, Lord Pityme said:
Oh you like a split hair....
there are as any Smisa member knows..! A number of voting options on each ballot that eliminates the 'either, or' scenario you wrongly reference and feel you speak for "The Majority" on, above. You seem to not know the process?
All evidence points to majority of members are happier with SMFC benefit proposals. It all points towards fans being relatively happy with how things are going. Can see that in small drop off numbers and limited feedback.
-
24 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
Whatever the current level of membership Smisa needs to re-chart its course. Theres a long, long way to go before smisa members take over the majority shareholding in the club, and buds that have followed the saints for more than a season or two know for every high we have savoured, we seemed to spend five or more years enduring lows.
this isnt Smisa committee bashing, this is a clear belief and understanding gained from years of similar experience, that is if you fail to fully and effectively engage, represent and involve your stakeholders (smisa members etc) then interest and commitment will fall away. Take a scenario most of us have witnessed, a fantastic promotion winning season, followed by automatic relegation and dire, dull ugly football that almost leads to oblivion for the club.
imagine the potential impact that may have on membership, and the financial position of the club! The current model and set up might not be able to deliver or sustain smisa's fan ownership goals.... what then?
if you want a seemingly small, but telling example of Smisa simply not being proactive in engaging with the members then the fact the committee have in place an agreed position of not participating/boycotting any comment on this forum should set off alarm bells. Yes ffs the one fans forum with a decent/regular audience is being shunned. Main reason for that is simply you..! Are too real for them to handle.
the lack of foresight in proactively engaging with the members, and working with them to build and improve Smisa is the main reason i stopped working with them. Still a member, and barring catastrophe, always will be. But in the words of Hugh Cornwell "something better change"
All very doom and gloom Pityme. As someone already stated if last season doesn't have a great impact on member numbers I doubt anything major enough is going to happen in the next eight years to detriment this plan. Every month that passes with 1,250/ 1,300 members (a number of which paying £25) we move even closer to being completely fan owned. We also move further ahead of schedule with numbers being over target.
The main point to note is yourself and a few others excluded, the vast majority of people are perfectly happy with this set-up. You say often that things have to change but I would say it's been pretty well established that you can't get your head round the fact you're in the minority that are against the position we're currently in.
I fully appreciate the point that all ideas and plans should be considered and costed. But again, common sense approach if they're not going to be close to as popular as plans already in the pipeline... Should we be spending too much time on them?
-
2 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:
Only person mentioning a new stand or East wing at Ralston is ( you ) then you go on to laugh at yourself ? All of us have said the extra cash has been used for important causes and should continue to but does the cash have to be burnt up in one go every month ? Everyone will have ideas. We have had problems and complaints with the PA why not help to upgrade the PA after all it is part of the fans match day experience. Having heard good PA systems at other clubs it does help to lift the atmosphere for fans in turn lift the atmosphere for the players as fans vocally get behind the team. How about painting the inside of stand public areas. I'm sure other fans have their own ideas. In other words let's help improve the fans match day experience. Yes continue to help those who need help but let's also help improve things for fans after all we are going to own the club.
I'm assuming those ideas have been presented and rejected then based on your response? Too be honest I agree with them and think they'd be appropriate. Would I vote for it over the analyst and sports scientist? Not a chance and I feel the majority would likely feel the same based on this season.
-
20 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:
So you think its a sustainable approach to just let the club pay whatever bills they like with our money, and members (AKA Owners) should simply know their place..?
yeah they seem to favour that model of fan/member/owners participation down the Paisley Road, and look how well it has worked out for their new club.
I think if the majority of paying fans were against it then no it would not be sustainable. The fact of the matter is, all evidence suggests the majority of paying members are more than happy for the money to go to SMFC to allow them to spend funds in other areas. Not sure what's so difficult to grasp about that?
I do not understand your second point at all, it seems completely irrelevant to the debate. St Mirren are spending well within their means (other club wasn't and was breaking the law) and this is a ring fenced additional fund that provides a very small item of support. If it wasn't there the aspects covered would either be easily funded or easily stopped.
-
11 minutes ago, pod said:
Yes.
Smashing...
-
What happened to the foreign striker we were liked to a few weeks back? Was he Greek or something...
-
35 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
I think given my experiences in life, and no doubt those of a fair few on here! If Smisa cant find a way/ways to effectively engage the membership so that The Members are getting to vote on options put forward by other members. Then interest will wane. At the moment if you were to take a purely cynical overview of what options get put to a vote, and who puts them forward it looks mainly like uninspiring cash grabs by the club out of the Smisa lucky bag.
its no use the Smisa committee simply saying every time a member puts an idea up that "it has to be fully costed and any impact on the club known and approved". The Smisa guys should be engaging with members and helping them flesh these ideas out with the club. Surely that is the main reason we decided to Buy The Buds? So that fans/members could play their part in improving all aspects of their club.
and if the Smisa committee dont think their 'reason for being' is to be that link between club and member, then what on earth is it?
I'd say there has to be an awareness from members (and non-members) that money to St Mirren is always going to be the popular vote for St Mirren fans. Money to the club always seems to be the option to win most comfortably. We can say about new ways to do this and XY&Z but realistically do any of us think there is a single option anyone could have put forward for the club and costed and rubber stamped and all the rest, that would of been voted yes over say the sports scientist and analyst money? I think a common sense approach says no chance.
I (and I imagine a lot others) would be perfectly happy for every penny of this fund to go to St Mirren and them to decide how to spend it, whether that be on balls, entertainment, community or air fresheners for the gym locker room. I genuinely would not bat an eyelid if it all went to St Mirren. I know some fans wouldn't be happy with that and might want to try other approaches and money going on different things. But IMO fand like yourself Lordy have to come to a realisation that regardless of what's costed, all evidence suggests fans of St Mirren football club would rather see money go to... St Mirren football club.
SMISA members not fleshing ideas out... Is that not likely because it would be pointless up against an option that will be more popular with members every day of the week? Again I'm speculating but from a common sense approach, club benefit seems to always win. (and again IMO rightfully so)
-
1 hour ago, Drew said:
I'm pretty sure that used to be listed as an option. It certainly was on occasion.
Might be an idea to bring it back to keep everyone happy.
-
2 hours ago, Drew said:
Aye, I'm certainly coming round to this way of thinking.
Most of the suggestions are reasonable and several have been laudable, but I very much agree that we shouldn't be spending money for the sake of it. The disabled platform was a fantastic (if long overdue) initiative, but others have seemed a bit less, let's nust say, strategic.
Perhaps SMiSA could run a wee poll to see what members think about this. I would welcome any plan to put money aside for a more ambitious project such as one that would enhance the stadium as suggested previously.
Following on from my previous post, if people aren't happy with the vote no option then we could possibly look at doing it a bit different. I know some fans want longer term benefits, others are happy with short-term and the majority don't overlay have an opinion and know the main priority is the £10/ £23 commitments.
Maybe in the interest of innovation they could shake up the voting structure a bit and have an option saying 'carry the money for more expensive future projects' 'Put money to buy-out' The way that would work for me is only fans voting no to both of those options would get the option to vote on the small ticket items. If a majority have voted in favor of putting money to buy-out/ expensive future projects - then that would be the option that would pass over the small ticket items. Or is that possibly overkill?
-
On 1/25/2018 at 1:37 PM, melmac said:
Not sure about anybody else, but the 3 monthly spend is becoming a chore and completely uninspiring.
Whilst I appreciate the SMISA guys are trying to do their best, what about aiming for something higher than knee height?
Gawd help us when we own the majority of the shares "this 3 monthly spend, what type of rubber bands should we get?"
ideas have got to be costed and achievable. In the grand scheme the money we get every quarter is pocket change and as such should be treated that way. Sports scientist and analyst by all accounts seem to have had a profound impact on the team so I really don't see the issue there. Supporting the woman's team is a very nice gesture from fans at the club that will no doubt help the local community. The children entertainer idea will result in no financial impact for the club but may increase revenue, again what's the issue?
Are some fans wanting us to use the roughly £8k to build a new stand or maybe add an East wing to Ralston
Fans will say we can save the money for bigger ticket items. Not only is that an option by voting no, even saving the money for say a year isn't going to be a massive value compared to the running of a football club.
-
4 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:
Two words come to mind...
Awwww diddums!
You are like a pair of one armed waiters!
You can dish it out but you cannae take it!
A wide range of people have simply highlighted your absurdities and inconsistencies.
Enjoy your new found band of brothers self help group!
The sheer irony of you two ganging together against claims of people ganging together is one of the funniest things on the forum yet.
Comedy gold.Just can’t let it go proving the point haha
-
Would be good if we could just drop this now and all move on. Anyone is welcome to go back and look over my posts if you’re so stubborn and petty minded to do so. But you’ll only find opinions which we’re all entitled to.
The thought that any st Mirren fan would be less than delighted at how Jack Baird has performed this season is completely absurd. I’m delighted for the boy and long may it continue to what will hopefully be a title winning season. COYS
-
11 hours ago, Sweeper07 said:
It should be worth noting that the only support you are getting is from Shull..
That would be enough for me to give in....
Shull and I don’t always agree like with other people on the page but no one can argue with him that there are people on here that are so petty and so small minded that they’re only happy when putting others down.
Even more disappointing that they use lies and claims of abuse to do it.
January 2018 Transfer Window
in General St. Mirren Discussion
Posted
What a cock...