Jump to content

The Club Buy Out - 10000 Hours


Recommended Posts

Can you convince me that you actually understand this bold statement you have made ?

I heard it mentioned at the public meeting but the explanation was very brief. I think some one in the audience mentioned - as an example 'a reduction in debt for every drug addict we take off the streets'. I think the gentleman from Kibble seemed to confirm this very vague, fairly inappropriate, and far too glib explanation.

Do you actually know how this would really work ? What is the critera ? What other 'community benefits' would count ? How would the discount be worked out ? Do you have any guarantees from the lenders as to any of this ?

It was mentioned at the meeting that the CIC have committed to provide 10000 hours of certain socially beneficial programmes, so it is really as simple as helping people lose weight right up to rehabilitating people. I didn't catch the numbers required, but then I doubt it's as simple as a 10 or 5 minute discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Can you convince me that you actually understand this bold statement you have made ?

I heard it mentioned at the public meeting but the explanation was very brief. I think some one in the audience mentioned - as an example 'a reduction in debt for every drug addict we take off the streets'. I think the gentleman from Kibble seemed to confirm this very vague, fairly inappropriate, and far too glib explanation.

Do you actually know how this would really work ? What is the critera ? What other 'community benefits' would count ? How would the discount be worked out ? Do you have any guarantees from the lenders as to any of this ?

I realise this concept is beyond you animal, but why not put your question onto the Q&A thread where it will be answered by 10,000 hours.

As this is an unofficial thread I will give you an unofficial answer for you.

I do know how this will work. The criteria will be defined by the business plan. f'k'n stoopit question. Whatever has been agreed in the loan T&C's. The f'k'n loan agreement stoopit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do know how this will work. The criteria will be defined by the business plan. f'k'n stoopit question. Whatever has been agreed in the loan T&C's. The f'k'n loan agreement stoopit.

I was asking jimdickloyal for his input as he implied he knew the answer. Not you St Atkinson. I see you have resorted to your usual abusive language. Is that all you can manage ?

Edited by animal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was asking jimdickloyal for his input as he implied he knew the answer. Not you St Atkinson. I see you have resorted to your usual abusive language. Is that all you can manage ?

I have better things to do.

Why don't you

a) stick your question in the appropriate thread

or

B) go to tonights meeting and ask your question

B is the best option for whatever your question was again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have better things to do.

Why don't you

a) stick your question in the appropriate thread

or

B) go to tonights meeting and ask your question

B is the best option for whatever your question was again.

So I can safely assume you don't really understand your own bold statement ""with each "social inclusion target" or whatever they are called that the CIC meet the interest/amount outstanding will also reduce.""

You see that is the basic problem.

There are lots of, in the main, well meaning folk on here who are willing to support, financially and in kind, a scheme that they clearly do not understand the detail of in the hope it will help their football team. The fact is they are paying the interest on money borrowed by an unelected board who will really run their club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I can safely assume you don't really understand your own bold statement ""with each "social inclusion target" or whatever they are called that the CIC meet the interest/amount outstanding will also reduce.""

You see that is the basic problem.

There are lots of, in the main, well meaning folk on here who are willing to support, financially and in kind, a scheme that they clearly do not understand the detail of in the hope it will help their football team. The fact is they are paying the interest on money borrowed by an unelected board who will really run their club.

No the problem is you keep yacking on and on.

RussellVI answered you extemely well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "social return on investment" aspect was explained at some length at the meetings that have taken place so far, I'm sure it will be again tonight :)

Tonight was no different - in fact probably more time was spent clarifying it. After the explanation no one asked any clarification questions. animal must have had a previous engagement pulling wee lassies pigtails. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tonight was no different - in fact probably more time was spent clarifying it. After the explanation no one asked any clarification questions. animal must have had a previous engagement pulling wee lassies pigtails. :P

I think that everyone in the audience was bamboozled by the 'simple' example about pensioners lunch clubs.

Wasn't sure myself whether the CIC were suggesting free pies for the over 65's at half time…

Although how that would cut down on the number of visits to the doctor is anybody's guess!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that everyone in the audience was bamboozled by the 'simple' example about pensioners lunch clubs.

Wasn't sure myself whether the CIC were suggesting free pies for the over 65's at half time…

Although how that would cut down on the number of visits to the doctor is anybody's guess!!

I thought it was quite simple.

If you have 100 pensioners getting meals on wheels and regular visits from the docial work department there is a cost for it. If 50 of those pensioners got a lunch club at the CIC the cost to the social work department is reduced by less meals on wheels and less visits by the scoial work department as well as the pensioners getting out of the house and meeting people, which can have a health benefit.. That 50% difference in cost to the social work department is the SROI which is offset against the balance of the funding. If you then add in Kibble staff operating the kitchen and serving the meals, there is an added SROI because the boys and girls from Kibble are being trained to work in hospitality and as they have been through the care system. The community benefits in various ways, pensioners get meals, Kibble staff get training and hopefully get full time work because of the experience. The CIC benefits because the debt is reduced and the club benefits because they hire out the facilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that everyone in the audience was bamboozled by the 'simple' example about pensioners lunch clubs.

Wasn't sure myself whether the CIC were suggesting free pies for the over 65's at half time…

Although how that would cut down on the number of visits to the doctor is anybody's guess!!

The point of SROI us that u don't have to just throw money at something to fix it. Spending less to provide a service/ training will reduce the overall cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a tad presumptions perhaps and although there was no direct mention this evening just some vague hints, was in Angelo Massone that approached the current BoD with an offer?

That's who I thought of and I got the impression the 'significantly' higher bid was at least £4M.

For the benefit of some people who think this is a retirement fund for the consortium, Stuart Gilmour stated they had refused a 'significantly' higher bid from an Italian consortium partly because the funds would have been raised against the club's assets - Greenhill Road and Ralston, it wouldn't have been in the best interests of the club and would have set us back years in terms of finance. Also he said the current board will still have to live in the area after the sale and when the Italian takeover went wrong, the fans know where the current board live. The 'significantly' part was stressed quite a few times, so if this is all about money in the consortium's pocket why didn't they just take the higher offer and move out of the country ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of todays pledges the club will earn 158,000 a year or 1.58 million over the course of the ten years which i think is how long we have to pay back the 1.2 million loan. (barring any mistakes in my maths)

It all looks pretty solid to me and after ten years we will be gaining extra income through this.

Also there has been no more corporate pledges for a while with the total remaining at 9. I think we are after 12 but an extra 83 individual pledges contribute roughly the same ammount as a corporate pledge and it looks like there will be over 500 of them so we don't really need anymore corporate pledges.

So it looks like we're sorted :D

My only worry is people losing interest before the loans have been paid off which would put us in a pickle.

Please remember that many of the individual pledges will not be converted to paid-up memberships and that many who actually go through the process will default at some point.

I dont know what the benchmark is for this type of initiative, but the uptake could be less than 50% of the amount pledged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re "The 2 Million Pound Question" - The bottom line is that the shares are the consortium's to sell and in purely business terms (ie the worth of the shares taking into account the value of the assets) I am quite happy to accept that it is a "cheap" enough deal.

I totally accept the points made that they are making a return on what they paid but I think the comment that "they haven't earned it" last night was a pretty cheap shot - it is indisputable that under Gilmour's stewardship the club has taken great strides and it's arguable that on two occasions he/they have either saved or at least safeguarded the very existence of the club. I do not doubt that they have made mistakes (we will all disagree over the footballing side, that's the nature of the game) but I have no doubt that they have always operated with the club's best interest in mind, sometimes at personal sacrifice.

Of course from the club and the CIC's point of view, the less debt the better, and it is a valid question for fans (future members?) to ask "why that price". Maybe someone could squeeze the price a little - but again I think we must defer to Richard Atkinson who at the end of the day is the man who has come up with the idea and put the work in. I was impressed by his presentation and seeming open approach last night. If we're going by gut feel then mine is that this guy has done his homework and would not be doing all this if he wasn't sure it would work. To my mind it will work if we make it work.

There is another angle that is perhaps less significant but a point worth making - by insisting the price is as low as possible, are people devaluing the club itself? Given the price is (we're told) "significantly" less than they could get for it, why would the very lifeblood of the club (the supporters) be so insistent that we get it for cheap? While it is important to me and to the CIC that the club is seen as central to the community, we should not forget that the club itself is also a terrific asset to the community and shouldn't just be flogged to anyone. I accept that "cheaper is better" in most respects here, but if at 2 million quid buying price this can not only work but potentially transform the club for the better, we (the future CIC) should be prepared to show that we are serious about this. St Mirren is worth more than 2 million quid to many of us - it's priceless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was really pleased to see SG at the meeting last night. I am also glad he did comment on some of the malicious bile that is doing the rounds. He also mentioned that his son reads the forums as you would expect a Saints fan to. The next time someone starts slabbering shite about SG or the board members tell them to back it up with evidence or shut the f"k up. These guys saved the club, not only that they have secured its long term future. They could take more out of the club by selling it into a debt scenario, but instead have been true to their mantra about believing themselmes to be guardians of the club and ensuring the owners (US!!!!) will look after the club with the same care and passion that they have. They have brought in people with a completely fresh approach to running a football club and put us at the heart of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up front I should say that I am warming to the CIC idea and I think it can work but when you get behind the emotional hype that is going on at present, a few fundamental points need to be clearly put down in black and white so that we all know exactly how this is going to protect St Mirren and the fans

RA formally owns 10000hrs CIC company, the set up of the Executive Board is at present a bit wooly, there are 100 shares in 10000Hours owned by Christopher Stewart - these are the facts about how the CIC was set up. RA did however state that the St Mirren purchase part of it will be ringfenced within anything else that he does. That would need to be very clear in any Constitution, Company rules. I for one want to know my money is kept in St Mirren and not part of a wider social experiment, certainly in short / medium term. There may be wider benefits long term but let's make sure our own house is in order first.

I agree with coments elsewhere in posts, long term if after debt is paid off and membership fees are continuing, then I would be happy to keep paying them if above applies. Then I knew any monies raised either through membership fees or earnings was put back in to the St Mirren CIC, in turn to SMFC. (always remebmer we got in to having a majority consortium as fans never put their money where their voices were on past two share issues which were undersubscribed and dug out by SG, GC, BMcA and JP etc.)

A membership which gets you access to a bar only is not really that much of an attraction to many, but as long as the "company rules" clearly indicate about voting rights, limitations on Exec Board and the St Mirren part stays in St Mirren fans's wider controls then it should work.

The whole subject of fan ownership gets very emotive, get the juices flowing and is easy for Richard to put a spin on it as we all love thought that we wil be in control. We will get the chance once a year to elect half the board and hopefully pick folks we think are smart enough to run our club. That is in reality the control we all talk about. I do not see there being any more day to day control, but I and many fans do not really expect any more. Maybe a few social events or a "fashion show" night once a year where the strip manufacturer shows strip options for following year and we, the wider membership gets to choose it.

Is there a company secretary / law expert out there in our membership who clearly understands this whole set up, who is not part of 10000hours, that can look at this and assure us all it is 100% kosher. If so, please tell us it works and we will flock to the cause.

Let's get through the hype, get some clear proposals and if all well and good, get behind the buyout, it could be exciting times ahead for the Club we all love.

On a slightly different thread was at a dinner last night and chatted to many St Mirren fans who are blissfully unaware all of this is going on. That is a bit worrying at this stage if RA is as close to closing deal with funders as he indicated on Thursday.

Edited by bonzoboys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We favour the 14 team option apparently.

There's comment on it on a thread on the offical site forum.

On page 6 here -

http://www.saintmirren.org/forum/index.php?topic=2878.100

You'd imagine with that and three other club strongly opposing the 10-team format then it's as good as dead in the water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howdy again…

Firstly thanks to all who have sent us telegrams of support. Some from far off haciendas many days ride away, special thanks in particular to you at the ole double (you know the letter) Ranch.

As we sat round the campfire after the ride east to the Hibees Hacienda, five of us trailblazers discussed what is likely to happen next. In the wagon on the trail home back seat 7er had suggested that, at the up and coming pow-wow at SMP, Bossman Gilmour would say that demotion wouldn’t be so bad as there would be more pesos from el SPL banco if Saints were demoted. This led to a heated discussion that lasted until we crossed the Rio Cart in town. Eventually all five agreed that the promise of dollars would be used to make relegation under the CIC more financially acceptable to the fans. Later in the saloon it was pointed out that with Saints ham-strung by the CIC project that the club would have to accept its place as it would not be able to raise cash like a normal commercial business. This would, to use a popular phrase, ‘asset lock’ St. Mirren into the First Division with no prospect of funding our way back to the top league – indefinitely. Season ticket sales would then drop. Gate charges would drop to First Division levels and fewer fans would visit. The CIC has stated that we would have to live within our means. That would mean First Division income only - as the CIC would be unable to contribute due to its debt level. The fans would be busy paying that back. We would be by-standers as the street cleared and the likes of Morton, Dundee, or Hamilton decided to shoot it out for promotion. As the fans then get fed up they drop by the wayside, CIC income drops. It would be a vicious circle. So being beholden to the CIC will severely limit our ambitions sure as sun-up follows sun-down.

Another telegram then came in telling us that there seems to be problems with some of the investors. That is to say there have been some very recent knock-backs. We’ll keep you posted but this comes as no surprise to us.

What we expect to see as a result is an increase in attempts to find more dollars from the fans. Greedy eyes are being turned to cash stashed away by some fans’ groups according to one of the seven who is acting as lookout elsewhere. Getting some of this booty will perhaps help fill yet another one of the business £10k places. This will no doubt be heralded as a triumph but if it does come to pass will just be yet another chip-in from WITHIN the club or from businesses associated with the whole project. We now wonder how odd the promoters of the CIC amongst the fans will find it when the list of 12 is finally pinned to the tree in the village square and is made up so. We laughed at the Stranger’s explanation as to why 12 – because there’s 12 unused seats in the directors’ box.

At the Thursday pow wow at the big house, before the Stranger spoke the Bossman suggested that Saints fans may prefer to play Falkirk and Morton rather than struggle against Killie and Aberdeen in the SPL, that the football might even be better. He also in effect said that r*ngers and c*ltic had to be considered at each and every turn. He said that without TV money we would all be in the brown stuff and they would take the huff. This would lead to them appealing to UEFA and trying to get into the league in England. If as he suggested we might be happier playing Falkirk and Morton there would be no real TV money anyway. Well I’ll be darned, of course, the club would receive an extra fistful of dollars if relegated. So why bother then with r*ngers and c*ltic at all? In every explanation the Bossman included the words r*ngers and c*ltic, they seemed to be the ever present factor whether with league set up, the number of games, the TV money. If his argument is that the football would be better without them and acceptable to the fans, where’s the problem?

Soon he hopes we will have a CIC.

The club then lives within its means, this presumably means that if relegated we accept our mid-table place in the First Division. The Executive Board won’t interfere in decision making, unless that is it feels it has to interfere! The fans fund the buy-out. The Stranger is chairman, well he said it was ‘kind of inevitable’ at the pow wow.

Local churches pay £500 a year to use SMP, that’s £10 per week. The club takes the bar profit, what a barrelage deal we must have with the brewers. The CIC members sit in the CIC bar and spend their cash with the CIC happy in the knowledge that The Kibble Kid’s Kibble Kids (trainees) are serving meals at some events in the club’s own restaurant, thereby depriving some catering staff of paid employment, not very community minded there. No point hurting one section in order to help another.

On another track one of our 7 is insistent that I point out to all and sundry that comments that state that - ‘if the project fails it will be the fault of the fans or the community’ are as far off of the bulls-eye as it is possible to get. It has been stated by many posters that the ordinary villagers are no hot-shots in business. This is a reasonable assumption and no insult is intended we are sure. Whereas the ‘Consortium’ (basically the Mysterious Stranger and his faithful sidekick - his paid accountant) are experts who have studied the project and claim to know all that is necessary - and the grants and loans as we have been told are in place. They cannot surely place the burden of success on fans they have already stated do not have the necessary business acumen.

So if the CIC experiment fails it will be THEIR fault and theirs alone.

By then that won’t matter as they will have saddled up their ponies and headed west, leaving St. Mirren lying in the dust, the fans who placed their trust in this adventure ambushed and the whole ‘CIC and caboodle’ at the mercy of the lenders. Ok, we know there is only lottery and Government taxpayers’ dollars so let’s just say public money rather than lenders money. I think at least we can all agree on that.

The Mysterious Stranger has now successfully taken us into May as he works away panning for taxpayers’gold and hoping that if it is not forthcoming that the fans will provide the paydirt required.

One suggestion that is particularly out of order is to put £10 on the cost of a season ticket in due course to ‘spread the load’ according to the Stranger. This would be outrageous. Fans wishing to pay directly into the CIC should do so that is fine. If season tickets are priced up in order to TAKE EVEN MORE MONEY FOR THE CIC FROM THE FANS the club will suffer. Those not wishing to contribute may choose not to buy season tickets. Football is expensive enough. How ironic would it be that the CIC costs Saints money by effectively imposing a CIC levy - which is exactly what this would be - on those who do not believe this to be the way forward, so much for community. This can only be opt in not opt out. How presumptuous to even think this appropriate, even at this stage. At the meeting he announced that it would probably now be August before things hot up. How long will the Bossmen at the Big House give him to find the dough if that four month deadline comes and goes? Gawd only knows what this uncertainty will do for the planning for the new season. But again football and the football team were not mentioned unless a point was raised from the floor by a football supporter.

What did impress the three of us in attendance was the willingness of the fans to support their club. Unfortunately some of the conversation in an extremely long (like this post) evening suggested that there is some kind of crisis at St. Mirren. There is not. Comparisons were actually made with r*ngers, no not the Texas version. Now they ARE in financial crisis. All we face is a majority shareholding being put up for sale. WE DON’T HAVE TO DO THIS.

As the tumbleweed rolls by and the whistling of the wind replaces detail, timelines, information, any semblance of real transparency, any word of real progress and the secret funders and secret companies on the list remain just that - a secret - after TWO public meetings, we hope the CIC doesn’t ultimately stand for Cowboy Investment Company!

£120 per season to help a Mysterious Stranger experiment on your club, it’s amazing what well meaning villagers will buy from a travelling salesman from the coast. His suggestion, (apart from the three board set-up) that the other 48% of shareholders gang together will split the club in the true sense. It would also create a fifth or even sixth group within the club. 52%, 48%, Exec board, CIC Board, SMFC board then the rest of the fans. Divide and rule stuff right enough.

The only thing that matters is our FOOTBALL club. It’s been kicking about since 1877. It deserves better than this. If the directors have had enough then we suggest they resign from the board, ask the other major and indeed smaller shareholders to hold an EGM and then appoint a new board. Then just put your shares up for sale in the normal way. Despite what the Kibble Kid disgracefully said at the first public meeting you have done a fantastic job over the past 10 years or so. It’s banding together to form a group sale that is hindering the sale of any of the shares at all. IT IS THIS THAT IS PUTTING THE CLUB AT RISK - together with the experiments of the Stranger.

WELL that’s aS FAR as we GO for the moment. The stage is pulling out.

To be continued…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was quite simple.

If you have 100 pensioners getting meals on wheels and regular visits from the docial work department there is a cost for it. If 50 of those pensioners got a lunch club at the CIC the cost to the social work department is reduced by less meals on wheels and less visits by the scoial work department as well as the pensioners getting out of the house and meeting people, which can have a health benefit.. That 50% difference in cost to the social work department is the SROI which is offset against the balance of the funding. If you then add in Kibble staff operating the kitchen and serving the meals, there is an added SROI because the boys and girls from Kibble are being trained to work in hospitality and as they have been through the care system. The community benefits in various ways, pensioners get meals, Kibble staff get training and hopefully get full time work because of the experience. The CIC benefits because the debt is reduced and the club benefits because they hire out the facilities.

I'm afraid you know very little about lunch, clubs, social work, or pensioners.

Many receive 'meals on wheels' as they are unable or unwilling to travel. If they did suddenly decide to go GHR the Social Work department would have to PAY to bus them there and back home. The Council already has a similar scheme in place (called ROAR). It is very very subsidized and is struggling to find unpaid volunteers to run it, even without transport costs, and in free of charge Council facilities.

So there will be NO financial benefit to the Social Work department to pass on to the CIC from this idea.

I find your reference to the Kibble children a bit patronising and insulting. They should not be used as a source of cheap labour to help fund the CIC scheme.

Another so called income stream to the CIC bites the dust - you will have to do a fair bit of drinking at the new bar to make the books balance - about 20 pints each visit I reckon.

Dream on.

Edited by animal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pensioners thing is nothing to do with the CIC.

It was used as a way of trying to explain the social return on investment. The St Mirren CIC will not be holding a pensioners lunch thing.

(Unless i'm completely mistaken. :blink: )

And the Kibble kids will not be used as a source of cheap labour. Personally i find that a bit patronising and insulting. They will be getting trained on various jobs, including hospitality. Hopefully this will benefit the kids in getting decent jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...