pozbaird Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Drew each to their own and I certainly would never condemn anyone who does not join. As a St Mirren supporter I would like to see the club move forward and if contributing ten pounds a month is going to help in some small way then I am happy to do so. In all honesty I have no interest in how the club runs on a daily basis like everyone I am more interested on the on field activities. How the club is run on a daily basis though determines how things shape up on the field. The people in charge drive the economy of the club, the commerical side, decide who the manager is, when to hire and fire, how much money to give the man in the hotseat to do his job. At the time of SG and Reg, I admit to not taking too much of an interest in it. I think times have changed for all of us - not just Saints fans. r*ngers fans are rightly concerned about the off-field affairs of their club. It goes without saying Dundee and Livvy fans aren't able to just think about what happens ON the pitch, and if there are any Gretna fans left, they should be concerned that they don't even have a team on the pitch! We've all got a view on Vlad, on Killie's debt, on how the Arabs are faring post-Eddie. I think as a support, we might not be the biggest, but we know the score. We followed the stadium move and take a keen interest in the BOD and what's going on. I fully agree with you that if people choose not to get involved, fair do's. I genuinely don't think we can afford to only concern ourselves with the 90 minutes on a Saturday though. Not these days. Things were much simpler back in the day when my only concern was how to smuggle my can of Tennents into the ground down the leg of my flares, and how many Fergie's Furies were going to pump past the hapless opposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civilsaint Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've said before they need to look at what they have and show how that can be of mutual financial benefit to groups within the community and to the club. They could always build an athletics track around the car park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Drew each to their own and I certainly would never condemn anyone who does not join. As a St Mirren supporter I would like to see the club move forward and if contributing ten pounds a month is going to help in some small way then I am happy to do so. In all honesty I have no interest in how the club runs on a daily basis like everyone I am more interested on the on field activities. I'm sure they will be able to live without my tenner a month. They've lived without my ST payment for a couple of seasons now, and haven't been in touch to ask how I might be persuaded to reinvest in that respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) I don't know how minor or otherwise the influence would be. This is one of the questions that I'd imagine will be among the first to be asked. Where your analogy with general elections falls down, though, is that you are not required to pay for the entitlement to vote. We could twist that one any way we want though Drew. I'll have a go... I value my democratic right to vote. I never fail to do so. I know at the end of the day I won't personally make a big difference, but the act of voting in itself is something to be cherished. You could easily argue that far from not paying to vote - we pay after the vote, in taxes, to allow the people the majority of the electorate chose to govern the country to do their jobs. Vote now - pay later. Catchy slogan. I value St Mirren. I value that despite how utterly shite they can be most weeks, I'd miss them if they weren't there. I'd be quite happy to pay £10 a month to get my vote and play a small part with everyone else who chooses to, to try and ensure they are there for the future. Pay now - vote later. Catchy slogan. As bullshit arguments go on a forum, that one was a belter. Surely I'm due credit for such blazen bawbaggery? Edited March 30, 2011 by pozbaird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 How the club is run on a daily basis though determines how things shape up on the field. The people in charge drive the economy of the club, the commerical side, decide who the manager is, when to hire and fire, how much money to give the man in the hotseat to do his job. At the time of SG and Reg, I admit to not taking too much of an interest in it. I think times have changed for all of us - not just Saints fans. r*ngers fans are rightly concerned about the off-field affairs of their club. It goes without saying Dundee and Livvy fans aren't able to just think about what happens ON the pitch, and if there are any Gretna fans left, they should be concerned that they don't even have a team on the pitch! We've all got a view on Vlad, on Killie's debt, on how the Arabs are faring post-Eddie. I think as a support, we might not be the biggest, but we know the score. We followed the stadium move and take a keen interest in the BOD and what's going on. I fully agree with you that if people choose not to get involved, fair do's. I genuinely don't think we can afford to only concern ourselves with the 90 minutes on a Saturday though. Not these days. Things were much simpler back in the day when my only concern was how to smuggle my can of Tennents into the ground down the leg of my flares, and how many Fergie's Furies were going to pump past the hapless opposition. Football is the same no matter what level you are at. If you are on a committee at a juvenile club your job is to bring in the money to keep the club running, manage the money properly to ensure you get value for money when spending it, you ensure the ethos and reputation of the club is kept intact, and you back your coaches to enable them to do the job until a point comes where the ethos or reputation of the club is being threatened. At senior level it's just the same except the stakes are bigger. Now if a club is getting in new owners I'd like to think they had ideas on how to get new revenue streams coming into the club, and an idea of how to get greater value for money for every pound spent. I suppose if you can get a couple of hundred mugs to pay £10 per month for a piece of paper and a bit of thin air then you are doing your job - it's just I would think that the mug will soon get bored of it in the same way that happened at MyFootballClub. Initially they had 31,000 mugs, now they are down to just 4,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 I'm sure they will be able to live without my tenner a month. They've lived without my ST payment for a couple of seasons now, and haven't been in touch to ask how I might be persuaded to reinvest in that respect. But it'll be we\us, not they! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 But it'll be we\us, not they! It won't be if I'm not a part of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 So if I get this right, the idea of the CIC is that they want a few hundred people to pay a membership fee to the club which then covers the finance that's needed to buy out the existing board of directors. Fair enough so far but what do the few hundred people get in return? I hope it's more than a say in what brand of strips the club will use, and admission prices. I would have thought that if this was to be successful they would need to expand far out with the Paisley boundaries. I hope they won't be allowed a say in who writes for the website Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 It won't be if I'm not a part of it How so? You buy tickets to see your team, you buy merchandise, you're a St Mirren supporter. Makes no difference if you choose to become a member of the new CIC or not. Many fans will choose not to. Jesus, the last thing we need is any more division within the support along the lines of 'ST holder = more of a fan' or 'die hard still go to away games = better than you lot who don't'. At the end of the day, aren't we supposed to be on the same side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlenburnSaint Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 I'd be happy to build you a new website Ian, that's what I do for a living these days, but I don't do it for free (although St.Mirren fans get discounts) See http://www.bigfrontdoor.com for further details DIV = St Mirrens answer to Perez Hilton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 I don't know what to make of it all. My heid is sore just reading this Thread. A lot of sensible posts written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 it's just I would think that the mug will soon get bored of it in the same way that happened at MyFootballClub. Initially they had 31,000 mugs, now they are down to just 4,000. Jesus, where to start on how ill informed that comment is? - Wtih MYFC money was taken before the club was identified or purchased. - There were never, EVER, 32,000 football fans interested in part owning Ebbsfleet United. - The use of the media, locally and Internationally, after the purchase was absolutely abysmal. - A lot of MYFC was based on Pick The Team, which was never fully implemented or even close to it. - Will Brooks was taking a wage, as were at least two others, and delivering very little...people, naturally, took exception to this. - Will Brooks has admitted PTT was a gimmick. - Decisions such as membership pricing or dropping PTT were taking without a membership majority...indeed, sometimes only around 55% of 25% of the membershp were voting. - Very early on you had EUFC fans slating MYFC, slating individual members and making ludicrous statements like "thanks for the money, now **** off". - It took an absolute age to get any non-EUFC MYFC members on the club board. - The MYFC society board were "led" by Will. - Too many people looked upon the members as regular owners who should put their hand in their pockets. - EUFC's business plan, pre-MYFC, had major flaws. - Too many third party deals. - The 25% of remaining shareholders actually had veto over any MYFC decision. - The results of member votes weren't acted upon. - Senior members of the MYFC/EUFC setup actually phoned employers to check member credentials. - It could be argued EUFC were never on board with the concept. - Decisions were made without vote. - Members were banned, some without anyone realising. There's more, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Jesus, where to start on how ill informed that comment is? - Wtih MYFC money was taken before the club was identified or purchased. - There were never, EVER, 32,000 football fans interested in part owning Ebbsfleet United. - The use of the media, locally and Internationally, after the purchase was absolutely abysmal. - A lot of MYFC was based on Pick The Team, which was never fully implemented or even close to it. - Will Brooks was taking a wage, as were at least two others, and delivering very little...people, naturally, took exception to this. - Will Brooks has admitted PTT was a gimmick. - Decisions such as membership pricing or dropping PTT were taking without a membership majority...indeed, sometimes only around 55% of 25% of the membershp were voting. - Very early on you had EUFC fans slating MYFC, slating individual members and making ludicrous statements like "thanks for the money, now **** off". - It took an absolute age to get any non-EUFC MYFC members on the club board. - The MYFC society board were "led" by Will. - Too many people looked upon the members as regular owners who should put their hand in their pockets. - EUFC's business plan, pre-MYFC, had major flaws. - Too many third party deals. - The 25% of remaining shareholders actually had veto over any MYFC decision. - The results of member votes weren't acted upon. - Senior members of the MYFC/EUFC setup actually phoned employers to check member credentials. - It could be argued EUFC were never on board with the concept. - Decisions were made without vote. - Members were banned, some without anyone realising. There's more, obviously. Right, so whats to say the exact same thing isn't happening here. Fans are being asked to pay £10 per month for "a say in the running of the club". One man, or a select few individuals, will be running the whole thing. And are you seriously telling me that members of the CIC won't be questioning where their money has gone when the manager tells the press there is no money for new signings. I know SMISA have successfully managed to encourage some fans to part with money to buy players t-shirts and towels in the past - is that what this business model is based on? I hope the plan is better developed than has been revealed so far because all I've read is that they want to get the same fans to part with a bit more money so that Gilmour et al can get their £2m and head off into the distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Jesus, where to start on how ill informed that comment is? A shocking accusation considering who the poster was. Must admit I'm surprised why a self-proclaimed non-Saints fan has taken the trouble to come onto a Saints site to take great interest in a takeover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 How so? You buy tickets to see your team, you buy merchandise, you're a St Mirren supporter. Makes no difference if you choose to become a member of the new CIC or not. Many fans will choose not to. Jesus, the last thing we need is any more division within the support along the lines of 'ST holder = more of a fan' or 'die hard still go to away games = better than you lot who don't'. At the end of the day, aren't we supposed to be on the same side? If I don't become a member of the CiC then there will be no 'us' from my perspective. Of course I'll still be a St Mirren supporter, but I'll be no more a part of the club than I am now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktf Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Jesus, where to start on how ill informed that comment is? - Wtih MYFC money was taken before the club was identified or purchased. - There were never, EVER, 32,000 football fans interested in part owning Ebbsfleet United. - The use of the media, locally and Internationally, after the purchase was absolutely abysmal. - A lot of MYFC was based on Pick The Team, which was never fully implemented or even close to it. - Will Brooks was taking a wage, as were at least two others, and delivering very little...people, naturally, took exception to this. - Will Brooks has admitted PTT was a gimmick. - Decisions such as membership pricing or dropping PTT were taking without a membership majority...indeed, sometimes only around 55% of 25% of the membershp were voting. - Very early on you had EUFC fans slating MYFC, slating individual members and making ludicrous statements like "thanks for the money, now **** off". - It took an absolute age to get any non-EUFC MYFC members on the club board. - The MYFC society board were "led" by Will. - Too many people looked upon the members as regular owners who should put their hand in their pockets. - EUFC's business plan, pre-MYFC, had major flaws. - Too many third party deals. - The 25% of remaining shareholders actually had veto over any MYFC decision. - The results of member votes weren't acted upon. - Senior members of the MYFC/EUFC setup actually phoned employers to check member credentials. - It could be argued EUFC were never on board with the concept. - Decisions were made without vote. - Members were banned, some without anyone realising. There's more, obviously. Right, so whats to say the exact same thing isn't happening here. Fans are being asked to pay £10 per month for "a say in the running of the club". One man, or a select few individuals, will be running the whole thing. And are you seriously telling me that members of the CIC won't be questioning where their money has gone when the manager tells the press there is no money for new signings. I know SMISA have successfully managed to encourage some fans to part with money to buy players t-shirts and towels in the past - is that what this business model is based on? I hope the plan is better developed than has been revealed so far because all I've read is that they want to get the same fans to part with a bit more money so that Gilmour et al can get their £2m and head off into the distance. Or simply put, you're right, I'm wrong. I know nothing about what I speak and I will come up with a pile of wanky pish to try to dig myself our of a hole. You're welcome :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 If I don't become a member of the CiC then there will be no 'us' from my perspective. Of course I'll still be a St Mirren supporter, but I'll be no more a part of the club than I am now. To be fair, drew, unless you play or somehow participate in the management/running of the club, then you should never have used 'us' or 'we'. You've always only been someone who parted with hard-earned shekels to watch professional football being played. There has been no tangible ownership or identification ('us' or 'we') other than that. Yes, we football supporters might be partisan and hope that the home town/national team is successful, but I've never been able to understand this 'us' or 'we' affectation. I first heard it in the 70s in engerland. It was never part of my growing-up vocabulary. I was surprised and mildly disappointed when it infected scotland. Occasionally, I've almost been drawing into using it as a shorthand when writing of St Mirren, (esp. on here) but I doubt I've ever succumbed. Normally I quickly correct myself. THAT is my uninformed and irrelevant addition to the many such posts on this thread. It's an interesting development but it won't affect me. And I won't impact on it. It's never been 'us' or 'we'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktf Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 To be fair, drew, unless you play or somehow participate in the management/running of the club, then you should never have used 'us' or 'we'. You've always only been someone who parted with hard-earned shekels to watch professional football being played. There has been no tangible ownership or identification ('us' or 'we') other than that. Yes, we football supporters might be partisan and hope that the home town/national team is successful, but I've never been able to understand this 'us' or 'we' affectation. I first heard it in the 70s in engerland. It was never part of my growing-up vocabulary. I was surprised and mildly disappointed when it infected scotland. Occasionally, I've almost been drawing into using it as a shorthand when writing of St Mirren, (esp. on here) but I doubt I've ever succumbed. Normally I quickly correct myself. THAT is my uninformed and irrelevant addition to the many such posts on this thread. It's an interesting development but it won't affect me. And I won't impact on it. It's never been 'us' or 'we'. Semantics... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaside Nipper Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Semantics... intense pedantry , maybe leading to an ocd affliction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 To be fair, drew, unless you play or somehow participate in the management/running of the club, then you should never have used 'us' or 'we'. You've always only been someone who parted with hard-earned shekels to watch professional football being played. There has been no tangible ownership or identification ('us' or 'we') other than that. Yes, we football supporters might be partisan and hope that the home town/national team is successful, but I've never been able to understand this 'us' or 'we' affectation. I first heard it in the 70s in engerland. It was never part of my growing-up vocabulary. I was surprised and mildly disappointed when it infected scotland. Occasionally, I've almost been drawing into using it as a shorthand when writing of St Mirren, (esp. on here) but I doubt I've ever succumbed. Normally I quickly correct myself. THAT is my uninformed and irrelevant addition to the many such posts on this thread. It's an interesting development but it won't affect me. And I won't impact on it. It's never been 'us' or 'we'. I think a throw-away comment I made earlier in the thread has been taken a bit out of context. I only highlighted the fact that 'they' (the club) hadn't seemed unduly concerned when I gave up my ST, so I don't think the new they (the CiC) will be unduly concerned if I don't become a member and pay my tenner each month. If I joined, then I might reasonably refer to we/us. So you see, I did refer to the club as they. I will, however, happily talk of to 'we' inasmuch as this indicates my affiliation - as in 'we are playing Hamilton at the weekend'. I don't think it is an affectation, to be honest. Simply a sense of belonging, and shared outlook and purpose. No harm in that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 A shocking accusation considering who the poster was. Must admit I'm surprised why a self-proclaimed non-Saints fan has taken the trouble to come onto a Saints site to take great interest in a takeover. are Motherwell not interested in going down a similar CIC route post-Boyle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 are Motherwell not interested in going down a similar CIC route post-Boyle? I've assumed as much from the statements Boyle made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 If the CIC was £2 milllinon for all 160,000 St Mirren shares , and no one got shafted , then we would all be in it together and the whole CIC would have a better chance of working . I will always be a St Mirren fan , but I feel uncomfortable being part of a vehicle that will make some shareholders investment in the club be worthless , whilst at the same time other shareholders have made a considerable profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellV1 Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 heard something about a website being launched tomorrow morning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidg Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 Anyone else lost track/interest in all of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.