Meeting on Thursday Confirmed

[pozbaird]

Sniff, sniff... that smells like the tentative steps in a political campaign

I'm sure i read somewhere Sarah Palin making the same "Sausage roll thief" quote as she limbered up to be vice president of the US of A

Read into it what you will. I thought Sid was maybe thinking about getting involved - I was wrong, then a normal forum to-and-fro discussion ensued.

Spin that any way you choose!

[Guest somner9]

Sure there's a youtube of Barack Obama at a fund raiser for his campaign making a b-line for his missus who had sidled up to the buffet. the audio went "Ho wummin are ye mad? get them sasuage rolls back oot yer haunbag.... here stick this drink in there insteed"

Seriously though if it's what you feel the call to do then you have to develop a thick skin and ignore the jibes.

(come to think of it a regular intake of snaffled s-rolls would thicken anyones skin... and arteries)

I find by far the best approach is political manouvering! If you think the charge of "S-Roll Snatcher" could be thrown at you simply bring your influence, power and distorted decision making authority to bear and insist catering get them wee pies in that they do in morrisons. Then sit back and laugh heartily, sneering at your detractors as you type away on a fans internet forum shuffling pie No 6 into your gob making the point "Lies...... damn lies.... there wasn't a sausage roll in the building"

[Guest somner9]

Read into it what you will. I thought Sid was maybe thinking about getting involved - I was wrong, then a normal forum to-and-fro discussion ensued.

Spin that any way you choose!

it is/was a joke.... scheez they say i'm paranoid

Have to say sometimes it's a bit like debating with a room full of daily Mail readers who sit around waiting to be offended.

cheery bye

Edited August 26, 2011 by somner9

[pozbaird]

it is/was a joke.... scheez they say i'm paranoid

Have to say sometimes it's a bit like debating with a room full of daily Mail readers who sit around waiting to be offended.

cheery bye

Erm, I didn't take offence. I just said spin it any way you want!

I'd share a sausage roll with Michelle Obama any day by the way.

[St. Sid]

Sure there's a youtube of Barack Obama at a fund raiser for his campaign making a b-line for his missus who had sidled up to the buffet. the audio went "Ho wummin are ye mad? get them sasuage rolls back oot yer haunbag.... here stick this drink in there insteed"

Seriously though if it's what you feel the call to do then you have to develop a thick skin and ignore the jibes.

(come to think of it a regular intake of snaffled s-rolls would thicken anyones skin... and arteries)

I find by far the best approach is political manouvering! If you think the charge of "S-Roll Snatcher" could be thrown at you simply bring your influence, power and distorted decision making authority to bear and insist catering get them wee pies in that they do in morrisons. Then sit back and laugh heartily, sneering at your detractors as you type away on a fans internet forum shuffling pie No 6 into your gob making the point "Lies...... damn lies.... there wasn't a sausage roll in the building"

You must be a c"ntcillor.

[St. Sid]

Have to say sometimes it's a bit like debating with a room full of daily Mail readers who sit around waiting to be offended.

prexactly.

You'd think some of these sausage roll thieve's were bought and paid for on line assassins.

[chico]

I've certainly nothing more to add on the subject, it's pointless going over the same ground again.

When it is done it is done, and hopefully at that point everyone can either get right behind the new ownership model, or at least give it a fighting chance to succeed.

Take your inspiration from the dressing room wall of the first team, these statements say it better than any corporate presentation ever will;

Brilliant.

[slapsalmon]

I reckon someones hacked st sids account with all this sensible shite he's posted in the last 2 pages. Either that or atkinsons told him to pipe down

Someone mentioned about the jd deal earlier, was there any mention of the sponsorship change?

[Dibbles old paperboy]

No mention of sponsorship at last night's meeting unless it happened in 1 to 1s after the main meeting finished.

[BLF]

Oh it's going to happen. Why will it be detrimental to the club? The club will carry on regardless of what the CiC gets up to. The club will at least be operating under the same income streams as it is at this moment in time.

There is a concern that commercial revenue that was previously spent direct with the club may now be spent with the CIC - in some ways this is an inevitability - but SMFC just have to be aware of it and ensure the amount being ‘lost’ is not too significant. I have been told this has already happened on some level but I don’t know any other detail.

I am interested in how profits from events organised by the CIC will be distributed.

Will profits from the bar be fed into the CIC or the club?

will the CIC pay any sort of rent for the bar area?

The CIC will organise events using SMFC's facilities - eg corporate events - will this be done in the same way it is now with the club getting the money direct but the CIC negotiating a discount or will all money from the booking go to the CIC?

These are not leading questions by the way!

[Dibbles old paperboy]

http://www.paisleydailyexpress.co.uk/renfrewshire-sport/renfrewshire-football/renfrewshire-football-st-mirren/2011/08/29/atkinson-hopes-deal-is-near-87085-29318869/

[glen]

Any one think it odd that Gordon Scott has appeared just as Yule seems to have disappeared ?

[Drew]

Any one think it odd that Gordon Scott has appeared just as Yule seems to have disappeared ?

[bluto]

http://www.paisleyda...87085-29318869/

Ah.... thank goodness....

...a deadline headline at last!

Atkinson hopes deal is... er... near

[davidg]

GLS supports CIC

Just spat my drink all over the keyboard.

I am not sure if this is already in the public domain but if I was Ken Mcgoech or Gordon scott I would be well pissed off!

The following is a breakdown of where the £2million selling price would have went in 2008 and as of todays date.

2008

Stuart Gilmour 24,259 shares £403,912

George Cambell 21,209 shares £353,129

Alan Marshall 7,670 shares £127,705

Evelyn Purvis 12,842 shares £213,479

Brian McAusland 21,722 shares £361,671

Gordon Scott 15,224 shares £253,479

Ken McGeoch 17,154 shares £285,614

In late 2008 George campbell bought 4,284 additional shares and Brian McAusland bought 5,701 shares. This allowed them to sell a controlling interest in the club without including Scott and McGeoch thus ignoring the gentlemens agreement between all board members that if they ever sold they would sell as a group.

If the sale goes through as proposed the breakdown is as follows.

Stuart Gilmour £496,581

George Cambell £521,841

Alan Marshall £157,004

Evelyn Purvis £262,875

Brian McAusland ££561,348

Lets examine the two offers for the club that we are aware of from Gordon Scott and the CIC

CIC £2 million to the selling group. £1.2 million of debt to the CIC as confirmed at the meeting last night.

Scott is more speculation but I believe his offer was around £800k for the club with a plan to invest £200k

So in other words the selling group are £1.2 million pounds better of with going with the CIC option and the club are £1.2 million worse of and back at the same debt level as when the present board took control.

You can make your own assumptions from this info but is all factual!

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!

[St. Sid]

GLS supports CIC

Just spat my drink all over the keyboard.

Put it down to the menopause.

GLS did very well at the meeting. If we only get one vote then he'll be getting mine.

[reborn saint]

Read most of the posts and now as we are certain to become a CIC I think it's time to move forward. If you are against it which I think a small minority are.....let it go and see if your concerns are realised. If you are for it get involved and support it as much as you can. There are a majority who are supporting the team and don't care who owns the club. When the plubicity starts to flow on completion most of the fans will be able to see the true potential of the club and many will get involved. As we hear the funding bodies can defer up to £500,000 of the loan to grant and also delay repayments for up to 5 years we now have to remove the biggest barrier of joining the CIC. I am taking Sids point on here that we should never have a divided support. I have 4 mates who would not be in a position to sign up for £120 per year and are more worthy fans than me. The £15 levy for season ticket holders or the like MUST BE BROUGHT IN AT THE START and I would still be willing to honour my DD if it is. Although some posts on here belittle the new bar how would it feel to you if you had supported the club for 40 years and couldn't get in? it would be a disgrace!....One Town One Team.....One support with amenities and votes for all!......NO CIC "I HAVE MORE ACCESS THAN YOU" Fuc*witts!

Edited September 1, 2011 by reborn saint

[Stuart Dickson]

Read most of the posts and now as we are certain to become a CIC I think it's time to move forward. If you are against it which I think a small minority are.....let it go and see if your concerns are realised. If you are for it get involved and support it as much as you can. There are a majority who are supporting the team and don't care who owns the club. When the plubicity starts to flow on completion most of the fans will be able to see the true potential of the club and many will get involved. As we hear the funding bodies can defer up to £500,000 of the loan to grant and also delay repayments for up to 5 years we now have to remove the biggest barrier of joining the CIC. I am taking Sids point on here that we should never have a divided support. I have 4 mates who would not be in a position to sign up for £120 per year and are more worthy fans than me. The £15 levy for season ticket holders or the like MUST BE BROUGHT IN AT THE START and I would still be willing to honour my DD if it is. Although some posts on here belittle the new bar how would it feel to you if you had supported the club for 40 years and couldn't get in? it would be a disgrace!....One Town One Team.....One support with amenities and votes for all!......NO CIC "I HAVE MORE ACCESS THAN YOU" Fuc*witts!

Oh for god sake....

Look for all your good intentions, in the real world you have to give something to the members that the non members don't get. If you don't do that what is the point of membership.

Frankly I couldn't give a shite about a bar - I hardly ever visit Paisley never mind go to matches, and if I do go to games the last place I'd want to go would be a place that's full of St Mirren supporters of any description but if you build a "members bar" that members can't get into because non members are getting equal rights how the f**k is that going to look.

The fact is St Mirren already has different levels of supporters. It's got club directors, those in hospitality, those who pay for padded seats, those who just pay for a match ticket, and those who sit in the cheaper family seats.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Stuart Dickson

[marrez]

Oh for god sake....

Look for all your good intentions, in the real world you have to give something to the members that the non members don't get. If you don't do that what is the point of membership.

Frankly I couldn't give a shite about a bar - I hardly ever visit Paisley never mind go to matches, and if I do go to games the last place I'd want to go would be a place that's full of St Mirren supporters of any description but if you build a "members bar" that members can't get into because non members are getting equal rights how the f**k is that going to look.

The fact is St Mirren already has different levels of supporters. It's got club directors, those in hospitality, those who pay for padded seats, those who just pay for a match ticket, and those who sit in the cheaper family seats.

And of course, they could get into a bar if they wanted, simply by joining the CIC.

I think reborn saint has a vision of 60's london with "no irish, no blacks, no non cic members" sign hanging on the door of the members bar.

[Guest somner9]

IT's often been said that despite all our many, many superb qualities, "A Saints fan/fans could start a fight in an empty room"

Now we seem to have beat our personal best and have started one over a bar that hasn't even been built yet

Won't be long before the PDE carries the headline "Man Sausage'd Rolled in Street" :

[St. Sid]

"Man Sausage'd Rolled in Street" :

: RosstheBoss will be loitering his nut off hoping for that kind of action.

[reborn saint]

And of course, they could get into a bar if they wanted, simply by joining the CIC.

I think reborn saint has a vision of 60's london with "no irish, no blacks, no non cic members" sign hanging on the door of the members bar.

My point really isn't that controversial. There is a barrier to joining the CIC which is financial. REA has already recognised this by suggesting £15 from 3000 season ticket holders(which we don't have yet). You are in the same position as me as i can choose to join which i have done. What about the fans who would like to join but have pushed the boat out to buy a season ticket in the first place? Or some i know who can no longer buy one due to the recession. It might seem paltry to a rich guy like you Marrez but to some finding an exta £120 per year is a no go no matter what they think of a CIC!

[Dibbles old paperboy]

My point really isn't that controversial. There is a barrier to joining the CIC which is financial. REA has already recognised this by suggesting £15 from 3000 season ticket holders(which we don't have yet). You are in the same position as me as i can choose to join which i have done. What about the fans who would like to join but have pushed the boat out to buy a season ticket in the first place? Or some i know who can no longer buy one due to the recession. It might seem paltry to a rich guy like you Marrez but to some finding an exta £120 per year is a no go no matter what they think of a CIC!

I never have a spare £300 in my account in the summer so have never bought a season ticket. Find it hard to believe ther are lots of ST holders who had the money to buy a ST in one installment but can't pay £10 a month to the CIC.

Maybe if you could pay your season ticket by DD in monthly installments we'd have lots more season ticket holders?

[Stuart Dickson]

My point really isn't that controversial. There is a barrier to joining the CIC which is financial. REA has already recognised this by suggesting £15 from 3000 season ticket holders(which we don't have yet). You are in the same position as me as i can choose to join which i have done. What about the fans who would like to join but have pushed the boat out to buy a season ticket in the first place? Or some i know who can no longer buy one due to the recession. It might seem paltry to a rich guy like you Marrez but to some finding an exta £120 per year is a no go no matter what they think of a CIC!

Not controversial? You want 800 odd people to pay £10 per month to join a club that you want to admit others to for £15 per year, or worse...for free...and you want to afford them all the same benefits to the extent that there is every likelihood that paying members won't be able to access the very thing they thought they were paying for.

Are you sure that your wee episode of trying to sabotage the CIC is really over?

[St. Sid]

Not controversial? You want 800 odd people to pay £10 per month to join a club that you want to admit others to for £15 per year, or worse...for free...and you want to afford them all the same benefits to the extent that there is every likelihood that paying members won't be able to access the very thing they thought they were paying for.

Are you sure that your wee episode of trying to sabotage the CIC is really over?

It isn't controversial at all. In fact SMiSA have already implemented a lower cost membership for the purposes of inclusion. For something that is supposed to be about community then all of the St Mirren community should have the opportunity to get involved, not just those that can afford to.