No fans control and club loses revenue with CIC

[pozbaird]

Totally agree with that Poz. It will be an absolutely thankless task for whoever wants to get involved and they are going to have to be extremely bloody minded and strong willed to ignore the abuse and the calls for an election every time the team lose badly. I see TSU has put himself forward....good luck to him....

Off the top of my head I can think of four or five fans who, if they stood, would IMHO have the skills to compliment the skills of the executive board.

I won't mention any names.

[Stuart Dickson]

Off the top of my head I can think of four or five fans who, if they stood, would IMHO have the skills to compliment the skills of the executive board.

I won't mention any names.

You're doing better than me cause I can't think of many at all but then maybe that's because I think many of the online St Mirren community would fall into the trap of forgetting business logic when embroiled in the emotion of running a football club. I guess that's what the checks and balances are for with the Executive Board though.

[St. Sid]

Off the top of my head I can think of four or five fans who, if they stood, would IMHO have the skills to compliment the skills of the executive board.

I won't mention any names.

You trying to make me blush.

[pozbaird]

You're doing better than me cause I can't think of many at all but then maybe that's because I think many of the online St Mirren community would fall into the trap of forgetting business logic when embroiled in the emotion of running a football club. I guess that's what the checks and balances are for with the Executive Board though.

The ones I'm thinking of don't necessarily frequent online forums - there's more to life than blatant keyboard bawbaggery!

Edited April 29, 2011 by pozbaird

[Stuart Dickson]

The ones I'm thinking of don't necessarily frequent online forums - there's more to life than blatant keyboard bawbaggery!

Ach well fair enough. I don't know many St Mirren fans offline. Paisley folk tend to be deformed, ugly and poor. They aren't really the kind of company I choose to keep

[FTOF]

Having read Richard Atkinson's information document, seen his presentation slides and read the live Tweet report from the public meeting last week, St Mirren fans should be aware of the following before deciding whether or not to give their money to the 10,000 Hours CIC company -

1. St Mirren fans and the local community will NOT be in 'control of the destiny of the club' as Mr Atkinson puts it. Despite all the PR spin and media hype, St Mirren fans will NOT be running the club.

At the public meeting and stated in the live Tweet of the meeting, Mr Atkinson said that an executive board of 10,000 Hours - made up of Mr Atkinson and 'the guys who have created the CIC' will retain control of St Mirren's 'budget' and 'significant contracts'.

This executive board is self-appointed, unelected, unaccountable and does not contain representatives of the fans paying £10 a month, community groups paying £500 a year or companies paying £10,000 a year.

The club's budget, (how much is spent on the player pool) and who is offered a 'significant contract' (manager, coaches and players) are the two most important areas that are central to the success of any football club and whether St Mirren remains in the SPL or is taken to the lower divisions.

This small band of individuals on Mr Atkinson's executive board - and not the members board of 10,000 Hours made up of fans' representatives - will effectively control the club.

2. Under the CIC proposals, St Mirren Football Club will lose out on revenue that normally would have gone directly to the club for player budgets etc. Instead of going to the club, this money will be used to repay the loans taken out to pay off the directors who are selling their shares.

Mr Atkinson says in his information document that 'it is 10000hours that is entering into any borrowing, and not the club directly.' However, he goes on to admit 'the funding to repay any debt will come from two main areas. Firstly, the enhanced trading of the assets of St Mirren FC an area all recognise as under-utilised, especially since the stadium move.

Mr Atkinson is admitting that extra revenue from 'trading on the assets' of the club will not go to the club but to pay off the CIC debt incurred to buy the shares of Gilmour and Co. While Mr Atkinson is claiming he doesn't intend to use the stadium to secure the CIC's debt, he is going to use revenue from St Mirren FC to pay off that debt.

This is confirmed in the Tweet report of the public meeting last week which says 'Richard explaining that the club has many under-utilised assets. 10000Hours intends to use these assets to generate extra revenue.'

And revealing what is going to happen to this extra revenue from the club, Mr Atkinson says in his presentation 'Most fans that are familiar with the new stadium in comparison to the old recognize that there are a number of underutilized assets. 10000hours will exploit these opportunities in order to pay off any debt element of the funding.'

In a nutshell, the fans are being asked to fund the 10,000 Hours purchase of the consortium's majority shareholding along with over £1 million in loans. Money that would normally benefit the club through its own commercial activities will instead go to pay off the debts taken on by the CIC to buy a majority shareholding.

And while all this is going on, the real power and influence in how the club is being run - control of the club's budget, who the manager is and which players are signed – lies with Mr Atkinson and his friends on the executive committee with no input from fans or community.

You should have called yourself bellender.

Much more appropritate.

[Stu]

While I share some of the concerns about the executive committee, the points about the fans paying off the debt don't cause me undue concern. If someone had decided to buy the club in the normal fashion, the cost of doing that would have been punted on to the club and we'd all be paying for it anyway!

My main concern is that there is still no concrete plan for what happens to the membership fees etc after the loans are paid off. If this has been properly explained, can someone provide the answer or point me to the thread that has it.

[JM1]

While I share some of the concerns about the executive committee, the points about the fans paying off the debt don't cause me undue concern. If someone had decided to buy the club in the normal fashion, the cost of doing that would have been punted on to the club and we'd all be paying for it anyway!

My main concern is that there is still no concrete plan for what happens to the membership fees etc after the loans are paid off. If this has been properly explained, can someone provide the answer or point me to the thread that has it.

Pretty sure its basically up to members. If they vote that membership fees are to be abolished then they can. If they decide the fees can still be used for an appropriate purpose that serves Saints or the local community then they can vote to do that too.

Edited April 29, 2011 by JM1

[pozbaird]

Pretty sure its basically up to members. If they vote that membership fees are to be abolished then they can. If they decide the fees can still be used for an appropriate purpose that serves Saints or the local community then they can vote to do that too.

I'll stick my neck out and make a prediction - the elected CIC board will not abolish membership fees, nor will they vote to significantly reduce them. The way I see it, it's already pitched at a good, fair price - £10 per month is £2.33 a week. As I keep saying, I bought a bottle of Budweiser at the first public meeting - cost? £3. £2.33 a week to be part of this and give it a fighting chance of succeeding seems fair to me. Let's say the CIC plan gets off the launch pad, and by the time it gets rolling along, the number of individual, community, and corporate members is very healthy, and has exceeded the business plan start-up figures of 300, 24, and 12. We all get into it, we all pay our fees, and it is doing well. The fees help to keep the debt segment repayments on track, and to allow the CIC to do good work in expanding their social enterprises. We see that the CIC is really helping people, the club are seeing the benefit, and we can see our membership fees working for the good of the club and community through the projects run by the CIC. Why then vote to abolish or significantly decrease the membership subs? Freeze them by all means - but don't reduce them. Surely IF it is going well at the £10, £500, and £10,000 levels, it would be to the detriment of the CICs ability to continue with that work if we reduced their income? If I can see that my £10 pm is doing good - I'm happy to keep paying it.

[bingboy]

I'll stick my neck out and make a prediction - the elected CIC board will not abolish membership fees, nor will they vote to significantly reduce them. The way I see it, it's already pitched at a good, fair price - £10 per month is £2.33 a week. As I keep saying, I bought a bottle of Budweiser at the first public meeting - cost? £3. £2.33 a week to be part of this and give it a fighting chance of succeeding seems fair to me. Let's say the CIC plan gets off the launch pad, and by the time it gets rolling along, the number of individual, community, and corporate members is very healthy, and has exceeded the business plan start-up figures of 300, 24, and 12. We all get into it, we all pay our fees, and it is doing well. The fees help to keep the debt segment repayments on track, and to allow the CIC to do good work in expanding their social enterprises. We see that the CIC is really helping people, the club are seeing the benefit, and we can see our membership fees working for the good of the club and community through the projects run by the CIC. Why then vote to abolish or significantly decrease the membership subs? Freeze them by all means - but don't reduce them. Surely IF it is going well at the £10, £500, and £10,000 levels, it would be to the detriment of the CICs ability to continue with that work if we reduced their income? If I can see that my £10 pm is doing good - I'm happy to keep paying it.

Fair enough. My take on it is that if I still need to pay a CIC membership fee once the debt is cleared then I want to see all the money going to the football club. If it's not then I'd probably cancel my membership. If the CIC is successful it should be generating income of its own anyway.

I'm paying the £10 per month so we can buy the club and have a say in it. Once we've bought it we shouldn't need to keep paying to have a say. I'd be perfectly happy to pay the money direct to St Mirren FC though.

I might feel differently once we've been through all this and the community benefits from the CIC are there for all to see but it's all about St Mirren FC for me.

[pozbaird]

Fair enough. My take on it is that if I still need to pay a CIC membership fee once the debt is cleared then I want to see all the money going to the football club. If it's not then I'd probably cancel my membership. If the CIC is successful it should be generating income of its own anyway.

I'm paying the £10 per month so we can buy the club and have a say in it. Once we've bought it we shouldn't need to keep paying to have a say. I'd be perfectly happy to pay the money direct to St Mirren FC though.

I might feel differently once we've been through all this and the community benefits from the CIC are there for all to see but it's all about St Mirren FC for me.

A perfectly fair point of view. As Fitzy said though - it's all "ifs buts and maybes" - so is any guess on how it all pans out.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Once the debt is repaid we could use our £10 a month to fund the filling in of the corners of the stadium and increase the capacity of the stadium to cope with demand... or build safe standing areas at the corners.

[ds10]

That is going to be one of the biggest challenges for us - finding people prepared to put themselves forward who aren't sausage roll thief c"ntcillor types looking for a power trip to boost their small nob complexes.

I'd be quite happy to do it!! Think I'd fit the bill perfectly and I've always had a soft spot for sausage rolls.

Think the whole process with the CIC will be a lot more transparent. Apart from anything else the type of people who are likely to be involved are the type of people who probably post on here. Will make it much easier to come on here to gauge opinion. Or even to come on here and explain the reasons behind any controversial decisions.

After all I think listening to Stewart Gilmour the other night he was quite willing to explain the club's stance on the 10 team SPL. If he felt able go come and do that about some issues it may well help stop a lot of the abuse which has been aimed at the current board.

[Liverpool Bud]

Ach well fair enough. I don't know many St Mirren fans offline. Paisley folk tend to be deformed, ugly and poor. They aren't really the kind of company I choose to keep

Thankyou for making me chuckle - ive just given my first green dot!

[Guest somner9]

Having read Richard Atkinson’s information document, seen his presentation slides and read the live Tweet report from the public meeting last week, St Mirren fans should be aware of the following before deciding whether or not to give their money to the 10,000 Hours CIC company -

1. St Mirren fans and the local community will NOT be in ‘control of the destiny of the club’ as Mr Atkinson puts it. Despite all the PR spin and media hype, St Mirren fans will NOT be running the club.

At the public meeting and stated in the live Tweet of the meeting, Mr Atkinson said that an executive board of 10,000 Hours - made up of Mr Atkinson and ‘the guys who have created the CIC’ will retain control of St Mirren’s ‘budget’ and ‘significant contracts’.

This executive board is self-appointed, unelected, unaccountable and does not contain representatives of the fans paying £10 a month, community groups paying £500 a year or companies paying £10,000 a year.

The club’s budget, (how much is spent on the player pool) and who is offered a ‘significant contract’ (manager, coaches and players) are the two most important areas that are central to the success of any football club and whether St Mirren remains in the SPL or is taken to the lower divisions.

This small band of individuals on Mr Atkinson’s executive board - and not the members board of 10,000 Hours made up of fans’ representatives - will effectively control the club.

2. Under the CIC proposals, St Mirren Football Club will lose out on revenue that normally would have gone directly to the club for player budgets etc. Instead of going to the club, this money will be used to repay the loans taken out to pay off the directors who are selling their shares.

Mr Atkinson says in his information document that ‘it is 10000hours that is entering into any borrowing, and not the club directly.’ However, he goes on to admit ‘the funding to repay any debt will come from two main areas. Firstly, the enhanced trading of the assets of St Mirren FC an area all recognise as under-utilised, especially since the stadium move.

Mr Atkinson is admitting that extra revenue from ‘trading on the assets’ of the club will not go to the club but to pay off the CIC debt incurred to buy the shares of Gilmour and Co. While Mr Atkinson is claiming he doesn’t intend to use the stadium to secure the CIC’s debt, he is going to use revenue from St Mirren FC to pay off that debt.

This is confirmed in the Tweet report of the public meeting last week which says ‘Richard explaining that the club has many under-utilised assets. 10000Hours intends to use these assets to generate extra revenue.’

And revealing what is going to happen to this extra revenue from the club, Mr Atkinson says in his presentation ‘Most fans that are familiar with the new stadium in comparison to the old recognize that there are a number of underutilized assets. 10000hours will exploit these opportunities in order to pay off any debt element of the funding.’

In a nutshell, the fans are being asked to fund the 10,000 Hours purchase of the consortium’s majority shareholding along with over £1 million in loans. Money that would normally benefit the club through its own commercial activities will instead go to pay off the debts taken on by the CIC to buy a majority shareholding.

And while all this is going on, the real power and influence in how the club is being run - control of the club’s budget, who the manager is and which players are signed – lies with Mr Atkinson and his friends on the executive committee with no input from fans or community.

and those my friend are again the points those running down to ayrshire with their direct debits don't get!

as a direct result of the CiC ..... NO MONEY is going into SMFC

yes there has been a vague aim of a 20% increase in budget within two years or so. but thats based solely on the premise that a bar under the stand will operate at full capacity (52 weddings a year plus) and when the CiC's debt payments and Kibble's six figure bill! have been met then and only then will any leftovers go into the club.

and what they refuse to answer at 10000 hours is " what happens if your money spinning bar doesn't generate enough to pay the debt"?

[steve_the_saint]

and those my friend are again the points those running down to ayrshire with their direct debits don't get!

as a direct result of the CiC ..... NO MONEY is going into SMFC

yes there has been a vague aim of a 20% increase in budget within two years or so. but thats based solely on the premise that a bar under the stand will operate at full capacity (52 weddings a year plus) and when the CiC's debt payments and Kibble's six figure bill! have been met then and only then will any leftovers go into the club.

and what they refuse to answer at 10000 hours is " what happens if your money spinning bar doesn't generate enough to pay the debt"?

Ah, it makes perfect sense now....westender IS somner9!

Edited April 30, 2011 by steve_the_saint

[Reynard]

Ah, it makes perfect sense now....westender IS somner9!

Looks like it.

He has gone from forensic questioning and some reasonable points into self parody and coming across as being a bit dim even after the questions he asks get answered.

It's a bit sad, but I guess he will keep coming back for more. He has painted himself into a corner and unless he decides to just diasapear and come back with another alias he is pretty much doomed on here.

Nae luck. There were plenty of reasonable questions asked at first that were answered. But now it has all got a bit pathetic.

I guess he will have to be outside the tent pissing in from now on.

[bingboy]

and those my friend are again the points those running down to ayrshire with their direct debits don't get!

as a direct result of the CiC ..... NO MONEY is going into SMFC

yes there has been a vague aim of a 20% increase in budget within two years or so. but thats based solely on the premise that a bar under the stand will operate at full capacity (52 weddings a year plus) and when the CiC's debt payments and Kibble's six figure bill! have been met then and only then will any leftovers go into the club.

and what they refuse to answer at 10000 hours is " what happens if your money spinning bar doesn't generate enough to pay the debt"?

I actually started typing an answer to this until I realised that if you don't know the answer by now you're just choosing not to read or understand the replies or failing to understand them. Your first sentence is laughable, you should cringe every time you read it.

You clearly have some kind of agenda but you're wasting your time as enough people can see the benefits of this scheme to make it a success.

[St. Sid]

and those my friend are again the points those running down to ayrshire with their direct debits don't get!

as a direct result of the CiC ..... NO MONEY is going into SMFC

yes there has been a vague aim of a 20% increase in budget within two years or so. but thats based solely on the premise that a bar under the stand will operate at full capacity (52 weddings a year plus) and when the CiC's debt payments and Kibble's six figure bill! have been met then and only then will any leftovers go into the club.

and what they refuse to answer at 10000 hours is " what happens if your money spinning bar doesn't generate enough to pay the debt"?

In somners world 52 weddings a year will mean capacity in a 365 day year.......he must have attended the same accountacy classes as animal...

[spirit of 77]

I don't mind people being against this whole thing.

I do mind them refusing to take their concerns to the public meetings and letting the folk that might give them answers a chance to explain themselves.

Lets face it, there will be concerns about how the club operates regardless of the set up. If the consortium flogged their shares to some random who is to say THEY would have run the club the way we might like? I was a shareholder when Lewis Kane hit the gamble button and I had no say in the matter as we racked up a debt that had us in the poorhouse for near enough two decades.

We get all these folk coming on here with their concerns. Do they actually go to the public meetings and ask these questions there? Or are they just happy to gripe away on the sidelines?

There ARE questions to be asked. Some of the long winded posters have asked a few good questions on the thing. Some have been answered of course.

You get the impression that even if every single fear these people have about the CiC were allayed they would STILL be grumbling away on the sidelines.

Personally I waited to see what was said by Atkinson, and especially Gilmour as I wanted to hear what he thought of it. I like the idea of the CiC, its now up to us lot to either back it or decide we want a conventional owner to buy the club and run it as he sees fit.

I'm in.

The thing you need to understand is that many fans live well outwith the paisley locale and were already otherwise engaged for the short-notice public meetings. It seems that for those who attended the meetings RA was very convincing and was able to persuade people in person, however for those of us who have concerns and only have either the written comments or the rabid mob rantings of the dickophile tendency for information there still seems to be an element of uncertainty. No one is ever going to be 100% sure how the 10000 hours team will perform and people who need to be convinved have to process the information in their own way, using their own intellect and experience. The way that the mob continues to round on people who are obviously catching up on events & airing concerns is sickening and, for me, exemplifies why a club led by a group of fans is going to have some serious unity issues to deal with.

i was one of the first few dozen to pledge and, despite my misgivings, will be prepared to sign over my 120 p/a in the hope that things will work out despite my experience of how quickly behaviours deteriorate whenever money is concerned. Not all of my concerns have been adressed but for now i am in, however i respect the opinions of those who still have to be convinced.

How about some respect for the viewpoint of some posters who are still to be convinced? if we dont have that then the whole venture is doomed before it truly starts.

Edited April 30, 2011 by spirit of 77

[bingboy]

The thing you need to understand is that many fans live well outwith the paisley locale and were already otherwise engaged for the short-notice public meetings. It seems that for those who attended the meetings RA was very convincing and was able to persuade people in person, however for those of us who have concerns and only have either the written comments or the rabid mob rantings of the dickophile tendency for information there still seems to be an element of uncertainty. No one is ever going to be 100% sure how the 10000 hours team will perform and people who need to be convinved have to process the information in their own way, using their own intellect and experience. The way that the mob continues to round on people who are obviously catching up on events & airing concerns is sickening and, for me, exemplifies why a club led by a group of fans is going to have some serious unity issues to deal with.

i was one of the first few dozen to pledge and, despite my misgivings, will be prepared to sign over my 120 p/a in the hope that things will work out despite my experience of how quickly behaviours deteriorate whenever money is concerned. Not all of my concerns have been adressed but for now i am in, however i respect the opinions of those who still have to be convinced.

How about some respect for the viewpoint of some posters who are still to be convinced? if we dont have that then the whole venture is doomed before it truly starts.

I certainly have respect for people who remain to be convinced. I hope they can be won over because the more members the CIC can call on the better. There are no guarantess in life never mind a new scheme like this and some people may feel that it's not for them. That's fine.

I don't have any time however for posters like somner9 and westender who are against the proposals because of nothing more than ill-founded suspicion, an apparent lack of understanding, or worse still some sort of agenda that makes them take comments out of context and distort the facts in an attempt to scupper the CIC before it gets off the ground.

Even today somner is still making posts that show a basic lack of understanding of the whole thing, whilst at the same time suggesting that the people who are signing up don't understand it. Unbelievable. There's only so many times you can repeat the same thing in a different way to try and help people understand before you lose patience with them.

Edited April 30, 2011 by bingboy

[JM1]

I fully accept some people may have concerns and may not be fully convinced on the CIC. The fact they can ask questions on here, via email or face to face with the CIC founders is a great thing.

However, I can imagine some people coming on here (maybe even for the first time) to try and find out details of the takeover and may be completely put off by a topic called "No fans control and club loses revenue with CIC". A header (and original post) which is completely factually inaccurate.

Fair enough if you have concerns, but someone who doesn't have the time to read through the whole thread and/or isn't used to the concept of an online forum/the internet in general could get influenced by the topic header alone.

[Stuart Dickson]

I fully accept some people may have concerns and may not be fully convinced on the CIC. The fact they can ask questions on here, via email or face to face with the CIC founders is a great thing.

However, I can imagine some people coming on here (maybe even for the first time) to try and find out details of the takeover and may be completely put off by a topic called "No fans control and club loses revenue with CIC". A header (and original post) which is completely factually inaccurate.

Fair enough if you have concerns, but someone who doesn't have the time to read through the whole thread and/or isn't used to the concept of an online forum/the internet in general could get influenced by the topic header alone.

Do you know what? This is often the problem with the online St Mirren community and I know it only too well from experience.

The reality is that some people will never be convinced for whatever reason. They may have a valid concern. They may understand something about the club that others aren't privy to. They must just be ill informed. Or they might just be daft cunts trying to get an argument going. But whatever they are it is good to have an alternative opinion on line, to have the debate, and to not try to bloody hard to shut up the opposition or to force a complete consensus.

JM1 you aren't the only one, Bingboy on this thread said much the same thing, but it would be far healthier if you could also respect the opinions of people who are not behind Richard Atkinson and it would be healthier if you could understand that for someone visiting the forum for information it is much, much better if they see the debate, get a proper rounded picture of what is happening and then make up their own minds. It's certainly better than have them visit and see thread after thread of propaganda stating that everyone thinks it's a brilliant idea and us all gushing about Mr Atkinson.

FWIW, again, I want to see 10000hours succeed, and I want to see the CIC come to fruition. I've stated my reservation and I've accepted the answer that I didn't want to hear. But it is good to see the alternative opinion and although Somner 9 is guilty of repetition, so are the many posts who back the bid.

[Fraser G]

I understand the bit about the CIC making money from currently under utilised assets at St. Mirren Park in order to repay the debt. The ground has assets that the club currently doesn't use and without the CIC they probably never would. Atkinson & Co have ideas to generate money and the CIC will be able to raise capital that the club can't. All seems reasonable.

The bit that I haven't seen answered yet is what the priority of the people running the club and the CIC (ie the same people, Atkinson & Co) will be? There is surely some conflict of interest here?

If someone contacts Atkinson in order to see if the club can host a large money spinning conference for example, which way will it go? Will Atkinson & co decide to put it through the CIC as their firts priority is to repay Gilmour & Co or do they put it through the club?

Also, the other thing I don't understand is, what is in it for Mr Atkinson & Co?

It seems like a choice between the CIC or the status quo and the status quo is heading nowhere IMO. But these questions still interest me.

[Reynard]

Do you know what? This is often the problem with the online St Mirren community and I know it only too well from experience.

The reality is that some people will never be convinced for whatever reason. They may have a valid concern. They may understand something about the club that others aren't privy to. They must just be ill informed. Or they might just be daft cunts trying to get an argument going. But whatever they are it is good to have an alternative opinion on line, to have the debate, and to not try to bloody hard to shut up the opposition or to force a complete consensus.

JM1 you aren't the only one, Bingboy on this thread said much the same thing, but it would be far healthier if you could also respect the opinions of people who are not behind Richard Atkinson and it would be healthier if you could understand that for someone visiting the forum for information it is much, much better if they see the debate, get a proper rounded picture of what is happening and then make up their own minds. It's certainly better than have them visit and see thread after thread of propaganda stating that everyone thinks it's a brilliant idea and us all gushing about Mr Atkinson.

FWIW, again, I want to see 10000hours succeed, and I want to see the CIC come to fruition. I've stated my reservation and I've accepted the answer that I didn't want to hear. But it is good to see the alternative opinion and although Somner 9 is guilty of repetition, so are the many posts who back the bid.

I don't think anyone has a genuine problem with punters deciding that the CiC is not for them. That's fine and it's up to them. I just think the bulk of people find it a bit tedious to hear the same posters regurgitating the same lines over and over again. They have asked their question, been given an answer, and all they do is then ask the exact same question worded marginally differently. It's tiresome and frankly you can't really blame some folk from getting tense. Not everyone suffers fools gladly.