bazil85
-
Posts
10,437 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by bazil85
-
-
spending some of the money they got for Steven Mallan would surely have that positive impact on the pitch you crave rather than emptying SMISA's coffers for the sheer f**k of it. As Tsu said, the club is in a good financial position right now so why are SMISA entertaining their requests for financial support.
Blinkered & short sighted but hey ho, the people have spoken. I can respect their choices but don't agree the choices should have been on the ballot.
I imagine some of the Mallan money was spent. Every little bit more helps the club and as you say that's the way the vote went and should be respected. For me giving SMISA money to the club is never short sighted of blinkered. Fans should have faith they'll spend it in the best interest of our club. Again it's the us and them mentality that baffles me, why on earth do some fans disagree with the clubs advice? Like they know better. Everyone's interests are aligned, or should be.
May not be popular (but let's face it I'm certainly not here for that) but I'd be completely in favour of every penny of the £2 discretion fund going to our club and then spending it as they think would benefit the club. Whether that be budgets that help the first team, youth squad or community. Our club, let them chose. SMISA, the fans and the members could engage in other fund raising community projects ad hoc. -
I would much rather have a stronger community bond and spirit and would like to see more money put into local projects, I thought the disabled basketball team was a great cause and we should have helped them out in some way be it financially or use of our facilities
Great cause and well worthy of funding. More votes went elsewhere though, that's democracy. Again St Mirren should always come first IMO. Anything that can have a positive impact on the pitch will get my vote. St Mirren do community work as well and that budget gets bigger the higher up the leagues we are. No brainer, win win. -
1 minute ago, Yardleysleftovers said:
Funny I was thinking the same reading threw some of your posts on this topic , surely a community club should give back to the community in some sense???
You saying we don't? SMISA and St Mirren have done a lot for the community. More than most clubs. The priority should always be ST Mirren FC though, a strong St Mirren allows for us to have a stronger impact in the community. Or perhaps you think that's false facts as well...
-
'One of our fans appreciates the work the board do and believes that SMISA and the board have the same goal of bettering the football club. He appreciates that they'll both make mistakes but doesn't moan and criticize them at every single turn. he must be an idiot'
What absolute weapons some St Mirren fans are!
-
2 hours ago, Yardleysleftovers said:
Is bazil85 on the board or just an idiot?.....or both?
No need for the personal comments that you clearly can't back up with facts. if you want to hate on SMISA and our club knock yourself out, no reason I should.
-
20 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
Ok.
You are being selective with my post.
I'm not going to go over it and regurgitate what has already been posted by others.So am I right in saying you have an issue with the voting structure? Too many options. The large ticket item still got over 50% of votes anyway so would of passed even if you added all the other votes together. The lower ticket item, are people really squabbling over £900 odd £? It still beat everything else.
It's funny, we had people moaning last quarter over there not being enough choice. Can't win with our St Moan fans sometimes.
-
48 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
Smisa dont have 'other' money.
£2 discretionary vote, and the rest ringfenced to buy majority shareholding in SMFC thats it mate.
I guess my main point mate is, what are your real concerns? Like really deep down about this deal? For me it was never going to be perfect and there were always going to be grey areas and learning curves but ultimately I'm delighted that SMISA has went some way to helping St Mirren football club over different aspects of the clubs wants and needs. They'll learn along the way, the votes have meant the majority of paying fans have ultimately got their way or at least the project with the most votes. I don't see why people are so down on this?
https://www.smisa.net/news-archive/5-general-smisa-news/233-smisa-agm-2017-report
For example the AGM report, they've came out and pretty much said 'hands up' about the loan. It was positioned as time sensitive and they made a call, it didn't work out that way and it wasn't fixed until later. Now I don't think that's anyone at the club pulling the wool over their eyes, I'm comfortable that it just didn't happen the way the club or SMISA expected. IMO no harm no foul. Money paid back and no big deal. The reason I believe this is because if the club knew it would be later why wouldn't they just say? I don't think anyone can deny that would of passed under the risk of the Morton game being postponed and that it was a zero risk, interest free loan.
Also the £50k credit facility, I don't see that as a negative thing in any way shape or form. In fact I think it's very positive we have that facility. If you were setting up a buy-out and your goal (as i think everyone's should be) was to have a deal with the most benefit to our football club, would you not suggest something similar? i know I would. Two more things as well 1. It looks like the deal would of struggled without it and 2. SMISA have not done anything wrong or illegal in setting it up the way they did as per the legal advice comment. Some fans might want to see every detail of the deal but for me the greater good is getting us fan owned.
-
The first line is the best, basically you want only your version of democracy... given that you continually insist that all the money should go to the club.. if the vote had gone for purely community options would you be spouting how democratically right that is?
and to be fair you more or less indicate you dont know much about what governs Smisa, how much was in the bank (still,wondering how smisa loan £15k you insist they didn't have?) or any of the detail really concerning everything else.
If the vote had been in the favour of community in the same democratic manner I would of been fine with it. Wasn't my choice and I think this is the best for the club but I wouldn't of had any issue with it.
Smisa have other money outside of the £12 a month spend. Could it of been from that? Don't see any reason why not. Why does it bother you so much? Interest free loan that's been paid back. Can't you just let it rest and look at the positive side of what SMISA money is doing for our club? -
46 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
Democratic vote? You seem to have omitted other posts regarding how vote is structured.Over 50% voted for the big ticket item = democratic.
More voted for small ticket item than anything else = democratic
As i said above, fans were moaning last quarter because of lack of options, now moaning when there are too many options. St Moan
-
6 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
Lets break it down for you then line by line....
You highlight there was a democratic vote, but then go on to attack people for exercising their democratic right to do as they wish.
The £15k loan was of course from Smisa members subscriptions, where else did you think it came from? The magic money tree?
You say it was a time sensitive, difficult choice. Considering the work wasnt carried out for four months, please explain why that was too time sensitive a window to consult those money it is?..l. Do you think the bill was paid four months before the work was done?
Smisa have to consult their members for any spend above £500 that hasnt already been voted on. The £2 spend is voted on, any other expenditure over £500 has to go to the members. This they have not done for the £15 k and £50k.
The last available info on how the £50k loan would be structured stated it would be a Revolving Credit Facility, in essence the club could still owe the balance of it to smisa on the day the majority shareholding transfers to smisa and say "yeah... youve owe yourself £50k there"
when you ask "what annoys me" you are missing my point. If Smisa within months breaks all its rules, is seen to be a glove puppet of the club board, reneges on any promise to work for the community, and ignores half of its members wishes then it will start to implode and our club will be thrown into turmoil the like seen at sevco.
i dont want that, nobody wants that whether smisa member or not. We need smisa to not only operate within its constitution and the relevant legislation, but be seen to be doing this too...
If you can show me a leaflet, slide or any other document made available to potential Smisa members during BTB that states there will be a £50k RCF made available to the club from all the £12 & £25 subscriptions I will owe you a pint!
I'm not attacking anyone for their democratic vote, I'm critical of people who are not happy with the results and wanting to tamper with future options.
I'm not sure how the £15k could be subscriptions? There wouldn't of been £15k in the pot at that point. My understanding was they wanted to do it for the Morton game, if that isn't the case then fine but the bottom line is it's done. Money paid back no harm or determent to either side, I'd say let it rest IMO. i also fully think if it went to a vote it would of overwhelmingly been a yes
I look at this another way, the £50k is a positive, it gives our club a bit of wiggle room for it's budget. Anything that benefits SMFC is fine by me. It's not like the money is being spent of Gordon Scott's Paisley nights out.
I think fans very much have to come together and look at the positives in the fan buyout and where we're sitting. SMISA has been able to fund items that benefit our club, have provided vital repair money for USH and a credit facility that makes our financial position as a club that bit more liquid. All positive. Fans whinging about constitutions and this, that and the other? What's the big deal? it isn't SMISA vs St Mirren! Everything that helps the club is a big plus for me.
Your point about half the fans not voting for and being ignored. Over 50% voted for the big ticket item so can't see how anyone can moan. To moan about the smaller amount, is just counter productive, it still got more votes than anything else. People were moaning last quarter about lack of choice and now other people are moaning about too much choice.
-
3 minutes ago, shull said:
Cheaper my way.
Cheap admission prices for just terracing.
Does it for me.
Don't imagine it would be cheaper. ripping out a few seats and putting in rails or ripping up a full stand.
-
Its astounding how much you dont actually know. Try reading Smisa's constitution.
Why don't you sum it up for me? Also you can let me know why the USH loan annoys you... even though we've had the money back and it's almost a full blown guarantee if it went to a vote it would of passed... it was over eight months ago, let's move on. -
There are (or should be as that is what we were sold and voted on) only two pots of money that smisa manage.
£2 from every members subscriptions for the 3monthly vote (Ross already knows the outcome before the vote.)
and all other monies are ringfenced to buy the majority shareholding in SMFC (although as we know the committee broke that constitutional and legislative binding rule by lending £15k for the USH without consulting the members, and the other £50 k they are lending to the club, again without consulting the members).
Agree that the way the £2 vote is set is purely to funnel money into the club, it is quite disgusting really the haste with which the club board are grabbing and spending smisa members subscriptions before/without consulting them.
we can all see smisa members are ploughing hundreds of thousands into the club... what we cant see is the people spending it (club board members/major shareholder) matching or indeed adding anything to that, as the line we are fed goes "investing in something we are going to inherit"....
Smisa's moral compass, purpose and accountability needs to be reset before significant numbers believe its not worth the bother of voting as it only ends up going to what Gordon wants, and then deciding its not worth continuing to fund something you feel doesn't represent your wishes. Out of 780 votes
Three hundred and forty eight people DIDN'T vote to pay a club employees wages...
The majority of a whopping five hundred and seven people wanted to see the tier 2 vote go to community based projects.
When over half the vote dont feel their wish matters it can only end in tears down the line, ask Theresa May.
Democratically, fans voted and the two options passed, simple as that. If fans walk away off the back of this then they're extremely shortsighted and IMO it's sour grapes. Already seen a fair few fans falling into this bracket.
As for the £15k, it was an interest free loan. Not paying members money, it was time sensitive and a difficult choice SMISA made, the loan has been paid back already (and legally were allowed to, it wasn't from the £2 spend) the £50k was part of the buyout deal and has zero impact on our membership fees or the time in transferring shares to SMISA under fan ownership. Just another thing for fans to moan about.
-
It has been 30 years.
Could be at least another 30 years.
Not worth installing ludicrous Rail Seating.
Maybe they will bring back the Intertoto Cup especially for Lower League duffers like us.
RAIL SEATING
My point is if we do it, why do it one way (terracing) when you can do it another way that's equally suitable and won't have any attendance issues in the future? -
I am sure we could borrow Ibrox for one European Match.
You'd Moan about that as well. -
I'm pretty shocked with some of the comments on here, basically what I'm reading is: 'Majority of paying members want the money to go to helping St Mirren FC on the park and in development in anyway it can... so lets take that option off future votes.'
Am I the only one that sees a democratic flaw in that?
I'm all for some money going to community projects, no issue with that and happy that it's happened previous months, at no point did SMISA stipulate that would be all the funds or even what percentage it would be. For me though I will always vote for the good of our club first. A strong St Mirren anyway will mean a stronger community presence, lets not forget the club have a budget for this as well. I don't get why some fans are so against helping the club. 'take it out the player budget.' How about no we don't...
What I would say though is everyone is entitled to their opinion on how they want the money spent. This post is directed at those wanting to manipulate the democratic will of the majority of voting members.
-
9 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:
Nothing from the £2 going to the community, all going to pay club bills. Thats not how it was sold in BTB. Another promise broken.
Democratic vote so no promises broken. The paying members made the choice on what the money would be spent on. SMISA have been completely honest from day one that the spending of the money would be the paying members choice. Also at no point did SMISA say every penny would go to community.
-
10 hours ago, shull said:
There wont be major Group stages Europe for Teams like us.
Wont matter what stadium we have when we are playing in the 10th Qualifying round .
I'm not talking about European group games, to my knowledge the qualifiers are also no standing. You would 100% moan if half our stadium had to be empty if St Mirren got into a qualifier. Although you'd probably blame St Mirren for UEFA rules.
-
Sports Scientist will make them fitter so they can play shite at full throttle for 90 minutes.
Buy them a ball each to fecking practice with.
Probably what the sports scientists at Manchester United, Liverpool, Real and Barca all recommend eh? Get them oot playing fitbaw on the road as well. Shirts for goalposts [emoji23] -
Where do you buy hours from ?
We'll let you work that one out for yourself. Exactly what I voted for and IMO best option for the club. Money going towards benefiting the team will always get my vote. COYS -
We cannae get out a fecking League Cup Group two years in a row
There will not be Euro Tournaments for the likes of us in the future
Unless we have to play 10 qualifying rounds.
Get back to posting dots, Baz
We can't get out of the league cup two years in a row so that means there is no chance of any of us ever seeing European football in Paisley? Aye alright, get to yer bed little Miss sunshine. -
Why do we need Rail Seats ?
It's not illegal to have Terracing in Scottish Football.
Somerset , Cappielow and many others.
Just pick a Stand or two at St Mirren Park
Rip the Seats out and put a few Barriers up.
Sortit.
Fecking Rail Seats when we get 3k Crowds in a 8K Capacity Stadium.
When the Stadium was built it should have been a larger copy of Forthbank in Stirling.
Two 3000 capacity Stands
Covered Standing Terraces behind each Goal.
For me it's more about forward thinking, terracing isn't allowed in Europe and could possibly go in the top flight one day. Now I'm not saying we're going to be a regular European competitor but it's not out of the realms of possibility it could happen a couple times in my lifetime. How shit would it be if we had to have quarter/ half the stadium empty? The safe standing sections can be converted to seats for occasional European nights. -
Shrewsbury Town have set up a crowd funding page. Trying to raise £75000 for 550 rail seats to be installed.
We have a starter for 10 of £136 per rail seat if we were ever to consider saving for such a project.
I expect the costs could vary depending on a number of factors but as i said, it is a starter for 10 :-)
I'd be up for that, would make the stadium look great. -
Just now, faraway saint said:
Oh, the excitement, like the Eurovision Song Contest.
Only with way more divas
The 3 Monthly Spend
in SMiSA
Posted
Because the majority of paying fans clearly have more interest in supporting club projects. Why would we remove something that the majority of paying members support?