The Club Buy Out - 10000 Hours

[davidg]

10,000 hours is the length of time it would have taken to score against 9 men r*ngers in the Cup Final.

[Gruffalo]

Can i ask you serious question mate..and im not gettin at you or owt..but why are you pissed off at the wrong attendance being given...just curious..coz you hear howls of derision when its read out.

The reason it gets me is that it just assists others in debates that we are a diddy club with a diddy support.

By not accurately reporting the attendance figures (I am not suggesting the club are deliberating practising this) insults the fans who have made the effort to attend. There was a recent game (not the Aberdeen game, maybe the hibs game) where they filled their allocation and when you did the sums it looked like they would have had just as many fans as us.

[Seaside Nipper]

Some press activity at the club just now it would seem....

I'm board with this, why do we always do our laundry in public

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

The club will be run by the 48% shareholders and the 52% CiC

The CiC will be run by the supporters and local businesses.

The club will only be a 52% run CiC.

Basically is you are one of the 48% shareholders then your shares are worthless. After all who is going to buy shares in a club that you will never be able to have an overall majority. It appears that the 52% shareholders are taking a combination of charity, supporters and local businesses money in order to get their pay off.

Your confused, my head hurts every time I have to try and explain to someone what our club are doing. I now just give them the truth, I don’t know.

Cheers mate.You also make valid points in your posts

[Griff]

I am totally dissappointed that the 5 directors who own %52 of the club are quite happy to go down a road that will mean that the other %48 of the clubs shares will in fact become worthless , the whole process alienates a large section of the support.

By contributing towards a CIC , I will be helping an Ayrshire businesman purchase shares in a football club at an inflated price , so that local businessmen can see a profit in their investment , and at the same time I will see my shares in the club become worthless.

[Griff]

Gruffulo , I know what you mean regarding the crowd announcement and what we actually think the crowd is , and I feel that there are often more fans in attendance , than the actual figure , and the lower attendance figure given suggests that we don,t have a good fan base , and that we are a bad investment for potential investors.

I remember a few years back chatting to a couple of Inverness directors in Pitlochry , during a wee stop on the way back from Ross County , and they actually asked about the crowd at the Ross County game and joked about the actual attendance given on the tannoy as being considerably less than waht was actually there , as if the announcement was made to wind up the Inverness fans to suggest that they had the bigger support.

We actually are the opposite , and provide ammunition to those that believe we are a diddy club.

[TsuMirren]

Gruffalo,

The CIC can't see a profit, all profit has to go back in to the club. Also if an investor came in then the 48% would be just as valued as it will be under the CIC and indeed as is now. I'd imagine the vast majority of shareholders saw no wish to own a majority share, plus I don't think the 5 consortium members would have sold individually.

Should the CIC go ahead I'd certainly like to see the 48% represented on the club board, how they'd coordinate group involvement would be up to them. You can't just alienate, but it's also nonsense to say there's a major shift in their status. Surely a more successful club makes any shares worth more.

Edited March 29, 2011 by TsuMirren

[div]

Gruffulo , I know what you mean regarding the crowd announcement and what we actually think the crowd is , and I feel that there are often more fans in attendance , than the actual figure , and the lower attendance figure given suggests that we don,t have a good fan base , and that we are a bad investment for potential investors.

I remember a few years back chatting to a couple of Inverness directors in Pitlochry , during a wee stop on the way back from Ross County , and they actually asked about the crowd at the Ross County game and joked about the actual attendance given on the tannoy as being considerably less than waht was actually there , as if the announcement was made to wind up the Inverness fans to suggest that they had the bigger support.

We actually are the opposite , and provide ammunition to those that believe we are a diddy club.

In the age of computerised turnstyles and ticketing systems I think any notion that we deliberately read out false attendances is surely utter nonsense ? I'd imagine any audit would spot check attendances versus declared gate receipts ?

Is it not the case that the masses of free tickets given out are not actually counted in the official attendance ?

[div]

The Scottish Sun are running a story on the sale tomorrow

[ktf]

The club will be run by the 48% shareholders and the 52% CiC

The CiC will be run by the supporters and local businesses.

The club will only be a 52% run CiC.

Basically is you are one of the 48% shareholders then your shares are worthless. After all who is going to buy shares in a club that you will never be able to have an overall majority. It appears that the 52% shareholders are taking a combination of charity, supporters and local businesses money in order to get their pay off.

Your confused, my head hurts every time I have to try and explain to someone what our club are doing. I now just give them the truth, I don’t know.

If you were one of the other 48% shareholders, your shares would have been even less than nothing if Reg Brearly had taken over the club. It makes no difference if Roman Abramovich, Osama Bin Laden, Jimmy Saville or every old woman in Paisley contributing a fiver each buys the 52% shares, the 48% become worthless. They 52% are up for sale as a single item and there is bugger all that you can do about that. So you can hardly blame the CiC for that. Besides, if someone bought shares in St Mirren, Ab*rdeen, R*ngers or Ch*lsea and thought that they would make a profit from them then they need a full frontal lobotomy!!! Shares in football clubs are nothing more than a badge of honour, whether you are a millionaire and own a majority or a pleb and own one.

I am totally dissappointed that the 5 directors who own %52 of the club are quite happy to go down a road that will mean that the other %48 of the clubs shares will in fact become worthless , the whole process alienates a large section of the support.

By contributing towards a CIC , I will be helping an Ayrshire businesman purchase shares in a football club at an inflated price , so that local businessmen can see a profit in their investment , and at the same time I will see my shares in the club become worthless.

The whole CiC model seems to have escaped you and you should probably take a re-read of this forum, or better still pick up the phone and speak to said Ayrshire businessman... He will not own the shares. He will have no leading say in the running of the CiC. However if you do decide to actually have an open mind and embrace the idea of contributing to the CiC then you will have the chance of election to the CiC board and form there a possibility of nomination to the board of the football club. Only by throwing the toys out the pram and storming off in the huff will you be handing the say over to someone else. If you actually contribute, then you give yourself a say.

[Stu]

The Scottish Sun are running a story on the sale tomorrow

They had one today, as did the Herald.

[Gruffalo]

Gruffalo,

The CIC can't see a profit, all profit has to go back in to the club. Also if an investor came in then the 48% would be just as valued as it will be under the CIC and indeed as is now. I'd imagine the vast majority of shareholders saw no wish to own a majority share, plus I don't think the 5 consortium members would have sold individually.

Should the CIC go ahead I'd certainly like to see the 48% represented on the club board, how they'd coordinate group involvement would be up to them. You can't just alienate, but it's also nonsense to say there's a major shift in their status. Surely a more successful club makes any shares worth more.

So if the CiC which is not the club makes a profit it puts that profit back in to the Club. How does that work.

Is that in the form of a donation or a purchase of further shares. If the CiC pump money into the club does the other 48% shareholders have to match that contribution like a reverse dividend.

The consortium deliberately teamed up to sell their shares off as the majority shareholding. Why did they not include others and rap it all up to 100% when it became a CiC, thus allowing existing shareholders to transfer their shares to the CiC.

The 48% shares are worthless, simply because no one is going to buy them. I cannot imagine someone coming along and buying Gordon Scotts shares just so they can watch the club being run by a CiC, afterall no matter who you teamed up with you would always be overruled by the CiC.

Football shares are not like shares in Blue chip companies unless you are the likes of Man U Liverpool etc.

[Gruffalo]

In the age of computerised turnstyles and ticketing systems I think any notion that we deliberately read out false attendances is surely utter nonsense ? I'd imagine any audit would spot check attendances versus declared gate receipts ?

Is it not the case that the masses of free tickets given out are not actually counted in the official attendance ?

Why not announce that the attendance is XXXX however the official attendance is YYYY. Also why does a free ticket not count as a bum on seat.

[div]

They had one today, as did the Herald.

Did they ?

Oh yes;

** Herald Link **

** Sun Link **

They Sun will have another piece tomorrow, an interview.

Edited March 29, 2011 by div
Edited to add links

[Gruffalo]

If you were one of the other 48% shareholders, your shares would have been even less than nothing if Reg Brearly had taken over the club. It makes no difference if Roman Abramovich, Osama Bin Laden, Jimmy Saville or every old woman in Paisley contributing a fiver each buys the 52% shares, the 48% become worthless. They 52% are up for sale as a single item and there is bugger all that you can do about that. So you can hardly blame the CiC for that. Besides, if someone bought shares in St Mirren, Ab*rdeen, R*ngers or Ch*lsea and thought that they would make a profit from them then they need a full frontal lobotomy!!! Shares in football clubs are nothing more than a badge of honour, whether you are a millionaire and own a majority or a pleb and own one.

Reg Brearly did not take over the club, who knows what would have happened if he had. Also the Brearly issue resulted in a release of a share issue. Basically the Brearly thing is a red herring to the debate.

The whole shareholding issue appears to have escaped you. People who contributed to single shares purchased them for the love of their club and to buy a part of the club. (A bit like being in the CiC which will have a running in the club). However guys like Gordon Scott made substantial share purchases and probably did so to allow them to be able to make a difference to the club. In boardroom discussions/votes that purchase would have allowed him to find allies who shared his opinion and form a team to make a majority vote. (it now makes sense why GS is allegedly so annoyed by being left out of the 52%)

You make reference to the word profit. Please clarify what your would define as a profit in this instance. Is it selling for more than you purchased or selling for more than you purchased index linked. If its the former then the sellers in this instance are making a profit. If its the later then probably not.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Gruffalo

[Stu]

Did they ?

Oh yes;

** Herald Link **

** Sun Link **

They Sun will have another piece tomorrow, an interview.

I take it that's with Richard Atkinson? Bit pointless having another one with Fitzy.

Always a good idea to release things like that just after an international weekend as the sports sections are often desperate for stuff

[RussellV1]

Stewart Gilmour is on sportsound at some point tonight to talk about the takeover talks

[BLF]

I'm quite satisfied with the ins and outs of the CIC and what it will mean for St Mirren. There are a lot of positives and not so many negatives (although I'm not convinced they will get the backing of local businesses that they are expecting).

If it stops one individual being in control of the club then I'm quite happy.

The only unanswered question so far is what's in it for Richard Atkinson and Chris Stewart?

That and where does the money for the initial £2m investment come from?

how will it be paid back (if at all)?

How many local businesses are expected to join the CiC and what would their investment level be?

Edited March 29, 2011 by BLF

[BLF]

SG on sportsound now.

Some key quotes:

'funding package now in place'

'Completed by end of the season'

'Club in limbo for last 6 months - we now know where we are going'

'The right way forward'

Chick Young - 'News on Thursday night.'

Edited March 29, 2011 by BLF

[St. Sid]

I suspect I am on the right track when all you can offer in return is personal abuse.

How can an anonymous alias be personally abused.

You have no track, you have no facts, you have no clue.

[Stu]

Chick Young effectively guaranteed there would be more news on Sportsound on Thursday night. This is all very well, but did Eoin Jess ever sign for r*ngers

[TsuMirren]

I like Chick, he's a Ginger journalist who knows his stuff. I suppose for every one who does there's one who doesn't...eh Stu, eh eh

Also good to see the quotes from Stewart Gilmour, I dod have a few doubts and I'm interested to find out which local companies/groups are involved.

[Murray7]

I'm sure Tony Fitz's company Kan-Do will be involved one way or another.

[St. Sid]

A lot of tension in this thread. Some of it posters raising good points for RA & Co to capture and address at the meeting. Some of it posters having a go at Div for trying to pour cold water on way off the mark wild allegations. Some of it posters greeting their face aff and threatening to storm out off in the huff. Then there's animal - he's just a nob.

According to some this was never going to happen, RA would never get enough interest from the business community, RA would never be able to raise the required funding.....blah, blah, blah. That was a mile wild of the mark and yet the wild speculation about how we are going to get ripped off and it is all doomed to failure still rages on.

Have a wee bit of days for a few days. Then armed with the facts you have been craving for so long and with an open mind consider what is being done. If you still have reservations about the plans at that point then there will still be the opportunity to vent your bile as fast as your discontented fingers can manage. But why post your bile at this juncture - are you hoping to garner support for your own irrational perspective based on rumour and made up nonsense.

Park the agendas about attendances, etc, for a few days...along with conspiracy theories about the BoD. By all means ask questions - they will be welcomed as the BoD will appreciate an understanding of the concerns they need to address. However, leave out the accusations, the emotion and the general bawbaggery. Div certainly doesn't deserve it and as you will soon find out neither do the BoD.

The tone of some of the hysterical posts is really letting some ordinarily very good posters down badly.

[Roswell]

A lot of tension in this thread. Some of it posters raising good points for RA & Co to capture and address at the meeting. Some of it posters having a go at Div for trying to pour cold water on way off the mark wild allegations. Some of it posters greeting their face aff and threatening to storm out off in the huff. Then there's animal - he's just a nob.

According to some this was never going to happen, RA would never get enough interest from the business community, RA would never be able to raise the required funding.....blah, blah, blah. That was a mile wild of the mark and yet the wild speculation about how we are going to get ripped off and it is all doomed to failure still rages on.

Have a wee bit of days for a few days. Then armed with the facts you have been craving for so long and with an open mind consider what is being done. If you still have reservations about the plans at that point then there will still be the opportunity to vent your bile as fast as your discontented fingers can manage. But why post your bile at this juncture - are you hoping to garner support for your own irrational perspective based on rumour and made up nonsense.

Park the agendas about attendances, etc, for a few days...along with conspiracy theories about the BoD. By all means ask questions - they will be welcomed as the BoD will appreciate an understanding of the concerns they need to address. However, leave out the accusations, the emotion and the general bawbaggery. Div certainly doesn't deserve it and as you will soon find out neither do the BoD.

The tone of some of the hysterical posts is really letting some ordinarily very good posters down badly.

but apart from that, what have the romans ever done for us?