Guest TPAFKATS Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 THE CLUB WON'T HAVE ANY DEBT AS A RESULT OF THIS TAKEOVER! There's no need to shout! We dont have any debt at the moment but would seem to be planning on creating debt elsewhere in order to buy out the current board, or at least some of them. At the moment I dont see this as a wonder cure, more of a placebo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 There's no need to shout! We dont have any debt at the moment but would seem to be planning on creating debt elsewhere in order to buy out the current board, or at least some of them. At the moment I dont see this as a wonder cure, more of a placebo... The debt isn't on the club though, this was explained quite a few times. It's the old "Get out Gilmour, get out!" - "Do you want to do it?" - "Whit...eh...eh...eh?" I can see why people look at it funny, but I think that the territorial aspect will kick in for community and corporate members...indeed, they're more likely to use the space for a function than the fans are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If it wasn't for the fact that our baldy webmeister has f"k'd off to the pub the general member pledges would be sitting at over 300. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If it wasn't for the fact that our baldy webmeister has f"k'd off to the pub the general member pledges would be sitting at over 300. I haven't and they are ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 I haven't and they are ! 320....feels like the planning permission day all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 There's no need to shout! We dont have any debt at the moment but would seem to be planning on creating debt elsewhere in order to buy out the current board, or at least some of them. At the moment I dont see this as a wonder cure, more of a placebo... If I wanted to buy the club and borrowed £2m to do it, you would be none the wiser as to where my money came from. I would be £2m in debt and I would own the club. The club itself wouldn't be in any debt. Same applies here. In this case the CIC carries the debt. None of that debt is secured against anything the club owns. If it can't repay it then worst case scenario is that it has to sell the 52% shareholding to someone else to raise the cash it needs to get out. Since only £1.2m maximum is repayable then I can't see much risk myself ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I heard some reference made last night to newspaper people being in attendance. Does anyone know if they were there in an official capacity, and something appeared in today's papers, or were they there as interested individuals who just happened to work for a newspaper? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I heard some reference made last night to newspaper people being in attendance. Does anyone know if they were there in an official capacity, and something appeared in today's papers, or were they there as interested individuals who just happened to work for a newspaper? The chap from the Herald is a big time Saints fan. Michell Evans is a bhigot fan I think as her Real Radio profile has her greatest moment being a one-to-one interview with wee strachan. Her inability to grasp an answer provided to her three times would back that up. I think she is still part of the RR news team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Zo Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I heard some reference made last night to newspaper people being in attendance. Does anyone know if they were there in an official capacity, and something appeared in today's papers, or were they there as interested individuals who just happened to work for a newspaper? The chap macpherson was solely there as an avid saints fan and to get away from the wife for a couple of hours. Griff and millport discovered him while he was writing match reports and the likes for saints quarterly. He'll like that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoopydoo1987 Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 If I wanted to buy the club and borrowed £2m to do it, you would be none the wiser as to where my money came from. I would be £2m in debt and I would own the club. The club itself wouldn't be in any debt. Same applies here. In this case the CIC carries the debt. None of that debt is secured against anything the club owns. If it can't repay it then worst case scenario is that it has to sell the 52% shareholding to someone else to raise the cash it needs to get out. Since only £1.2m maximum is repayable then I can't see much risk myself ? Tell that to your pal. My previous post about The St Mirren share material was fact. Fact #2. At the meeting last night it was said that St Mirren FC were not borrowing the £1.2 million so would not be liable for any debt. I agree with that fact. However, what are the assets of the CIC that the bank/lender will have control of if it all goes pear shaped? Thats right, 52% of the ownership of St Mirren football club. They will effectively control the running of the club. The bank/lenders duty is to try and recoup the money they are owed by the CIC by using that asset in whichever way they see fit. Options? Sell the 52%? I don't see there being any more interest in a few years time than there is now so although this is an option but it wont happen quickly. Liquidate the assets of the club to get there money back? They own 52% so who can stop them if they decide to do this? This is very unlikely but cannot be ruled out. The most likely situation is that the club is run along the same guidelines as r*ngers are just now until a buyer can be found. No speculation, just the facts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 The chap from the Herald is a big time Saints fan. Michell Evans is a bhigot fan I think as her Real Radio profile has her greatest moment being a one-to-one interview with wee strachan. Her inability to grasp an answer provided to her three times would back that up. I think she is still part of the RR news team. Is that not the one where Strachan made an Andy Grayesque comment about child birth after we'd turfed them out the cup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidg Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 If I wanted to buy the club and borrowed £2m to do it, you would be none the wiser as to where my money came from. I would be £2m in debt and I would own the club. The club itself wouldn't be in any debt. Same applies here. In this case the CIC carries the debt. None of that debt is secured against anything the club owns. If it can't repay it then worst case scenario is that it has to sell the 52% shareholding to someone else to raise the cash it needs to get out. Since only £1.2m maximum is repayable then I can't see much risk myself ? I asked this question on the Q&A thread. What happens if they don't find someone to buy the shares or can't get the £1.2m back required? Didn't get a clear answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I asked this question on the Q&A thread. What happens if they don't find someone to buy the shares or can't get the £1.2m back required? Didn't get a clear answer. That's a pretty extreme scenario and an almost impossible one to imagine happening. From the meeting last night it was pretty clear that £1.2M would be the maximum in soft loans. The figures mentioned were £800K to £1.2M. If the pledge as they stand are borderline correct in terms of conversion to membership then that will be quite a lot of income being paid towards the loans. Just checked and we are up to 394 pledges. I have spoken to people that have not pledged yet, but are almost certain to sign the membership forms when they become available. Pretty sure it was mentioned that some of the corporates have commited to three years membership rather than just the one. So the corporates alone even if there are just 9 would account for at least quarter of a million in the first three years worst case scenario. I'm not convinced there is any great risk for us to be sweating over. The numbers being supplied are very conservative in my opinion; however that is how it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidg Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Couldn't make the meeting but looking forward to the next one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil_Panda Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 wasnt at the meeting although curious as to why michelle evans (i assume) is coming in for some unfair comments and abuse on various threads? Is it purely sexist attacks by the fuds on here or does she deserve the abuse? what did she do that was so offensive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 (edited) wasnt at the meeting although curious as to why michelle evans (i assume) is coming in for some unfair comments and abuse on various threads? Is it purely sexist attacks by the fuds on here or does she deserve the abuse? what did she do that was so offensive? I didn't know who it was at the time. Richard Atkinson said right at the beginning of the presentation that if anyone had any questions as he went along, to raise their hand. About 30 seconds into proceedings she asked a question, which was answered. She asked the same question again, it was answered again. She kept asking it. Jim Mullan of Kibble answered it too. She wasn't for giving up though, and kept going. It was almost like a deliberate act to railroad the proceedings - maybe she was wired for sound, and Yul Brynner up the back, possibly baldy and serious looking in his pastel green T Shirt, was pulling her strings. Nothing would surprise me anymore. Edited April 23, 2011 by pozbaird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSS Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 wasnt at the meeting although curious as to why michelle evans (i assume) is coming in for some unfair comments and abuse on various threads? Is it purely sexist attacks by the fuds on here or does she deserve the abuse? what did she do that was so offensive? Typical St Mirren Supporters.If they're not slagging players they're slagging fellow fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmurray24 Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Asked a question...............got an answer............she didnt like/understand it..............Richard started to speak again got half a dozen words out...............she asked the same question slightly diff words...again got an answer................again she didnt understand/like reply...............Richard started to speak again got a dozen more words out and yet again same question was asked....and again she got an answer explained in a diff way.............again didnt like/understand reply.. To be fair I think she got what she deserved..............basically stopping the flow of the presentation. and I aint no sexist, my wife agrees with this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 wasnt at the meeting although curious as to why michelle evans (i assume) is coming in for some unfair comments and abuse on various threads? Is it purely sexist attacks by the fuds on here or does she deserve the abuse? what did she do that was so offensive? It was a cringeworthy performance from her. She clearly hadn't done her homework - not unusual for a journalist. RA answered her question and I think everybody else in the room understood the answer. She kept asking the question and fair play to RA he let her ramble on a bit. A member of the audience who I have to say demonstrated some comedy genius got to ask the next question....Richard would it be possible to move on to the next slide...or something along those lines. The room burst out laughing and there was a supportive round of applause. Another very good moment to be a Saints fan. It didn't stop her having another go later. Not sure why she was there - there seemed to be a double act with some other dafty. At one point the two of them were having a rant duet without asking any question. Amateur hour journalism and really made an arse of herself. I felt a wee bit sorry for her at the time but after the presentation had finished she hung around a while seemingly oblivious to the fact that she'd dropped a bollock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil_Panda Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 fair enough, i gather she is real radios version of annie mcguire then, a cheaper unfunny version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 fair enough, i gather she is real radios version of annie mcguire then, a cheaper unfunny version. It definitely wasn't sexism, it definitely wasn't a case of not wanting to let her speak - it's just like the others have described. I could hardly get to sleep when I went home at night, I still had the phrase "Buuut I don't understand what that's got to do with St Mirren FC....buuut I don't understand what that's got to do with St Mirren FC....buuut I don't understand what that's got to do with St Mirren FC...." ringing in my ears. Took me two days to shake it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Zo Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 I thought the other chap down the front was gordian mothersole? Michelle Evans made a bit of an arse of herself and seemed to go into the meeting with some sort of agenda. Was very disappointed in the way she conducted herself on the night. She was completely oblivious to her almost rude line of questioning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Sanchez Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 It should be stressed that, before he started, Richard Atkinson had clearly stated that he would take some questions during the presentation (as opposed to just a Q&A at the end) but that he wanted the presentation to flow, and therefore didn't want to get bogged down in questions. You could see why that was the case because, in some instances, people were asking questions about topics that were part of the presentation, but that hadn't come up yet. i.e. questions that would have been answered simply by listening to the rest of the presentation. Michelle Evans, and the bald/grey haired guy near her, undoubtedly did interrupt the flow of the presentation, just as we were requested not to and, as others have pointed out, it was with repeat questions that had already been answered. The guy Sid referred to put his hand up to seemingly ask a genuine question and said "Can I ask that we don't have any more questions?", earning a round of applause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 The guy Sid referred to put his hand up to seemingly ask a genuine question and said "Can I ask that we don't have any more questions?", earning a round of applause. There was another classic comedy moment when some herbert started going on about a Harvard study, rattling off a massive spiel that he'd clearly copied off the Internet. RA, "don't agree with that!" Audience all gut it and start applauding. Quality entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdickloyal Posted April 26, 2011 Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 I thought the other chap down the front was gordian mothersole? Michelle Evans made a bit of an arse of herself and seemed to go into the meeting with some sort of agenda. Was very disappointed in the way she conducted herself on the night. She was completely oblivious to her almost rude line of questioning. Spot on. I didn't think either of them were listening to the answers or (more likely) did not llike the answer about the debt as they were unable to criticise. Yes, I felt an agenda was being served. I also thing the conduct of the two of them was very poor indeed. 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.