bud77 Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 It looks like the CIC triggers have been met and this will now proceed. The next step would be to ratify the constitution which would be decided by the members so why don't we debate some ideas regarding the constitution, membership prices and safeguards. Any guidance from 10000 hours on the type of things in the constituion would also be helpful. Membership fees - If, as looks probable, the membership is over subscribed should the membership fees be reduced ? My feelings on thi sis the initial membership fees should be fixed for at least 2 years in order to reduce the funding as quickly as possible and after the original 2 years they would then be reviewed. CIC Board - Should there be a maximum term that a member of the board can serve before having to step down and wait a period of time before being re-elected ? I think in order to keep things fresh there should be a maximum of 6 years service on the board and then a period of 1 year before they can seek re-election. Concessionary memberships - Should there be concessionary memberships for unemployed/pensioners/students etc ? Honorary memberships - Should there be honorary memberships for people who have significantly contributed to the CIC or club ? Should honorary members have the same rights as full members ? For instance Hugh Murray has been a great servant to the club, when he retires from playing should he be given an honorary membership ? There are probably many others players/fans etc that should be considered for one reason or another, what would be the criteria for honary membership ? Childrens/Juvenile memberships - Should children's membership allow either free or reduced prices for the panda club ? What sort of incentives for juveniles ? At what age should juvenile membership cease 15 ? 18 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdickloyal Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Take a green dot. At last we something constructive about the takeover that is GOING to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud77 Posted May 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Take a green dot. At last we something constructive about the takeover that is GOING to happen. Green dots are all good and well but what about some ideas, give people something to think about how the membership should operate. You never know we might come up with some good ideas. I think the child/juvenile membership is important as not only are they the fans of the future but also the future of the CIC so they should have their own say to gain the experience for becoming full members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 I would rather have the CIC members board weighted towards general members. I would also like to see some representation on the CIC exec board, sooner rather than later. I would like to see a point in the constitution relating to OF scumbaggery being an immediate get to f"k out of it just in case we get any OF bawbags sitting in the board seats as a result of the corporate / community memberships. I would like to see belt and braces stuff around the 52% shareholding and who they can be sold to - that would keep us in the position that we are in now, well even better actually. I would like to see very clear deifinitions of when the Exec Board can apply its veto, and perhaps some form of appeals process in place - maybe even to an externa body - a form of St Mirren fans Caesar aka St Sid. There should also be a ban on politicians holding any form of office at St Mirren - especially c"ntcillors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbarton_bud Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 I would rather have the CIC members board weighted towards general members. I would also like to see some representation on the CIC exec board, sooner rather than later. I would like to see a point in the constitution relating to OF scumbaggery being an immediate get to f"k out of it just in case we get any OF bawbags sitting in the board seats as a result of the corporate / community memberships. I would like to see belt and braces stuff around the 52% shareholding and who they can be sold to - that would keep us in the position that we are in now, well even better actually. I would like to see very clear deifinitions of when the Exec Board can apply its veto, and perhaps some form of appeals process in place - maybe even to an externa body - a form of St Mirren fans Caesar aka St Sid. There should also be a ban on politicians holding any form of office at St Mirren - especially c"ntcillors. Completely agree!!! Don't want the CIC or the club becoming someone's political tool in the future..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdickloyal Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Green dots are all good and well but what about some ideas, give people something to think about how the membership should operate. You never know we might come up with some good ideas. I think the child/juvenile membership is important as not only are they the fans of the future but also the future of the CIC so they should have their own say to gain the experience for becoming full members. Yes they are. Considering the green dot was given because the original poster was giving ideas and giving people something to think about makes me wonder why you felt the need to type the first line of your post. Personally I would liken the membership fee's to remain, even after the original loans have been paid off. Its all money that is going straight into the club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Sid. Are you really saying that you'd want to put a line in your club constitution that would exclude people from membership based on the grounds of what football team they support? If that were in the constitution I'd find it impossible to contribute to such a bigoted organisation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Sid. Are you really saying that you'd want to put a line in your club constitution that would exclude people from membership based on the grounds of what football team they support? If that were in the constitution I'd find it impossible to contribute to such a bigoted organisation. You are being a little naughty there Stu - true to form. You need to think of it in terms of Josh Horne versus Kenny McLean. Kenny McLean is an OF fan as is his miguided right - he shows the club respect and is in fact a credit to the club. Josh Horne by contrast indulged in OF scumbaggery. What I am talking about is wanting to avoid corporate or community members using their board seats to attend games and behave like...well...OF supporters. We suffered from a couple of OF supporters howling racial abuse in the past. A cheeky wee clause would leave any OF interlopers coming through the corporate / community memberships that any OF scumaggery will not be tolerated. Having seen your posts regarding the singing of the Hello, Hello, How do you do song I am surprised that you would rally against that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 You are being a little naughty there Stu - true to form. You need to think of it in terms of Josh Horne versus Kenny McLean. Kenny McLean is an OF fan as is his miguided right - he shows the club respect and is in fact a credit to the club. Josh Horne by contrast indulged in OF scumbaggery. What I am talking about is wanting to avoid corporate or community members using their board seats to attend games and behave like...well...OF supporters. We suffered from a couple of OF supporters howling racial abuse in the past. A cheeky wee clause would leave any OF interlopers coming through the corporate / community memberships that any OF scumaggery will not be tolerated. Having seen your posts regarding the singing of the Hello, Hello, How do you do song I am surprised that you would rally against that. There is a difference between banning someone who can't behave, or banning someone because they happen to support the Old Firm. You do make a good point though - St Mirren fans are going to have to realise that there will be members or their guests who may well want to applaud an Old Firm goal. I'd hope the fans around that would learn to accept that instead of acting like a bunch of f**king morons, running to the police in a bid to get them arrested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 There is a difference between banning someone who can't behave, or banning someone because they happen to support the Old Firm. That's what I just posted ya fat delinquent. There should be clear communication in the constitution that racist / sectarian behaviour will result in a CIC membership being terminated and you don't get yer cash back of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 (edited) That's what I just posted ya fat delinquent. There should be clear communication in the constitution that racist / sectarian behaviour will result in a CIC membership being terminated and you don't get yer cash back of course. I'm glad you clarified that cause I was pretty sure you said you wanted a line in the constitution that referred to "Old Firm bawbaggery" rather than racist or sectarian behaviour of any kind - regardless of what team you support. If that is what you meant then I'd back that so long as it was worded in the grown up, mature manner that I've suggested Edited May 2, 2011 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 I'm glad you clarified that cause I was pretty sure you said you wanted a line in the constitution that referred to "Old Firm bawbaggery" rather than racist or sectarian behaviour of any kind - regardless of what team you support. If that is what you meant then I'd back that so long as it was worded in the grown up, mature manner that I've suggested You're doing it again lawstud....arguing about nothing - I think its great though.....quality post building technique without contributing anything to a good thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud77 Posted May 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Yes they are. Considering the green dot was given because the original poster was giving ideas and giving people something to think about makes me wonder why you felt the need to type the first line of your post. Personally I would liken the membership fee's to remain, even after the original loans have been paid off. Its all money that is going straight into the club! It wasn't meant as a dig at you, perhaps I could have phrased it better. I appreciate the green dot but would really like to hear thoughts about what others would like to be in the constitution. I agree that some sort of fee should remain in future. I also agree with Sid that there should be a code of conduct for members although I don't see how politicians can be excluded from what should be an all inclusive membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 I don't see how politicians can be excluded from what should be an all inclusive membership. If the SNP hoarding rumour is true then there may in fact be regulations in play stopping political parties from sponsoring football clubs. We might not even need it in our constitution; however if we can put in in there then we should. I would even go far c"ntcillors, their relatives, general hingers on, henchmen and political party members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 If the SNP hoarding rumour is true then there may in fact be regulations in play stopping political parties from sponsoring football clubs. We might not even need it in our constitution; however if we can put in in there then we should. I would even go far c"ntcillors, their relatives, general hingers on, henchmen and political party members. ` More prejudices from you St Sid. You'll need to be careful. You might land up excluding yourself from membership under your own version of the constitution... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 ` More prejudices from you St Sid. You'll need to be careful. You might land up excluding yourself from membership under your own version of the constitution... Don't be silly Stu. Prejudice would only apply if I were recommending a specific party be banned.....all politicians are c"nts is a perfectly reasonable and perjudice free statement. You will also find that FIFA and UEFA agree with me. Political sponsorship is banned for player and referee kits at a minimum. Still trying to find a ruling on other forms of club sponsorship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds10 Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Would also like to have a clear definition of the role of the CIC executive board. Also we may have to set a limit on the number of times we sack a manager every season! Presumably the elected board will be meeting to discuss that every time we lose!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds10 Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Also as was mentioned at the meeting, I think there should be three representatives of the individual and three from the corporate on the club board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdickloyal Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 (edited) Its very healthy to encourage this type of debate. Hopefully with the numbers involved in the CIC then we will have no shortage of good ideas. A fellow drinker in the Bull Inn last night suggested this for one of the corners. A St Mirren physio centre that can be utilisied by the playing squad, members if the public (fee paying of course or reffered by the NHS) and other community organisations. Could we revisit a gym? This may be more difficult since much of the would be membership quite rightly followed the last venture to Seedhill. Edited May 3, 2011 by jimdickloyal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 Why have the last two posts been given red dots? Has somner9 finally lost the plot altogether. I would like to add that there should be confirmation of the clarity relating to expenses, etc. Essentially anyone voted onto the BoD should pay their own way - no free sausage rolls, club ties, lap dances, rent boys or doocotes. There should also be no "gifts" from corporate members, community members, sponsors or anyone contracting or hoping to contract with St Mirren. The CIC should not be an opportunity for the Ralston mafia old grammarian bum felching brigade to run off with brown paper bags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 Its very healthy to encourage this type of debate. Hopefully with the numbers involved in the CIC then we will have no shortage of good ideas. A fellow drinker in the Bull Inn last night suggested this for one of the corners. A St Mirren physio centre that can be utilisied by the playing squad, members if the public (fee paying of course or reffered by the NHS) and other community organisations. Could we revisit a gym? This may be more difficult since much of the would be membership quite rightly followed the last venture to Seedhill. Rather than building on to the stadium I think the first priority should be to make use of every space that the club has already but I agree with you, there is certainly scope for a physio practice - possibly at Ralston - if the club has access to a full time physiotherapist, or at least one who would be happy to set up his practice there. These kind of things can tap into the community element of the membership. For example if you had a hockey club on the books then why not have them access the same physio services at prices cheaper than that of the private practices elsewhere. Also rather than set up another gym in competition to others already established in the area, why not utalise the gym at Ralston along with other facilities there to create a sports science centre which would not only benefit the various St Mirren squads, but which could again be used and probably paid for in full by the community membership to enhance their training programmes for their various sports too. And perhaps those two practices could be used to attract a corporate business member or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 Rather than building on to the stadium I think the first priority should be to make use of every space that the club has already but I agree with you, there is certainly scope for a physio practice - possibly at Ralston - if the club has access to a full time physiotherapist, or at least one who would be happy to set up his practice there. These kind of things can tap into the community element of the membership. For example if you had a hockey club on the books then why not have them access the same physio services at prices cheaper than that of the private practices elsewhere. Also rather than set up another gym in competition to others already established in the area, why not utalise the gym at Ralston along with other facilities there to create a sports science centre which would not only benefit the various St Mirren squads, but which could again be used and probably paid for in full by the community membership to enhance their training programmes for their various sports too. And perhaps those two practices could be used to attract a corporate business member or two. ....and how are you going to phrase this in the constitution ya trumpet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 Absolutely no soft loans or draw down from club to CIC, in very VERY very plain English. It's a very important monkey to remove from the back, just kick it out the room and in to the Cart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 Why have the last two posts been given red dots? Has somner9 finally lost the plot altogether. I would like to add that there should be confirmation of the clarity relating to expenses, etc. Essentially anyone voted onto the BoD should pay their own way - no free sausage rolls, club ties, lap dances, rent boys or doocotes. There should also be no "gifts" from corporate members, community members, sponsors or anyone contracting or hoping to contract with St Mirren. The CIC should not be an opportunity for the Ralston mafia old grammarian bum felching brigade to run off with brown paper bags. There is scope under the CIC regulation for executive board members to take a reasonable and regulated salary St Sid, and to be honest I would have no problem with that. A professional football club should be run by people who can do a professional job, this idea of directors not taking money from the club just means you land up with a bunch of amateurs doing the best they can whilst having to focus on earning money elsewhere. If someone can boost the income of the club by £1m per annum what exactly would be wrong with paying him/or her a £100,000 salary? I agree with you when it comes to gifts and brown paper bags but that's only because the CIC should be completely tranparent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 3, 2011 Report Share Posted May 3, 2011 ....and how are you going to phrase this in the constitution ya trumpet. Sid - you've been around the internet for years now. I would have thought that the fact I quoted someone prior to my post, you might have realised that I was repsonding to their comment. Yes it's off topic - but I didn't take it there.... 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.