TsuMirren Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 That's one way of reading it, another is that by having a skills database the CiC may be able to put you in touch with relevant contacts that may boost your business revenue in ways you haven't contemplated yet. When I was at the SEN conference in June one of the avenues that was discussed was the potential for having a trades skill bank which would allow you to set up a trading arm that would submit bids for local authority contracts. Our football club investigated that further with one of our main sponsors who happens to be an electrical contractor. We discovered that there was a squeeze on companies who traditionally have held contracts with local authorities but that one of the tick boxes for the buyers hiring in those contractors was based on community support. If the Community SEN had a trading arm bidding for these contracts using properly accredited tradesmen then there was every chance that the local authority would award the contract to them despite not being the cheapest bidder. This creates the potential for the trading arm to win the contract, deduct a "management fee" and then sub contract the work out.....in our case to our main sponsor. We followed this up using existing SEN contacts to get advice on whether this was legal, ethical, and likely to succeed and to my utter amazement - cause the whole thing seemed ridiculously simple - the advice came back that it would on all three counts and that in practice we'd probably fail with the first few bids but that once we became a familiar name with the council it's likely that they would use us more and more. It's one of many ideas that came to light when we started seriously discussing the potential of becoming an SEN and there are loads more. At Ebbsfleet/MYFC there was fighting...sorry discussion...about a skills database and members being utilised for over a year. The guy running things, who took a salary, couldn't be bothered and didn't want to give up power in certain areas. Eventually, we got a database sorted and small jobs were done for free, new items added to the shop, new advertising coming in, assistance with finances, a new accountant and I believe even the current Chairman came via this avenue. Did it lead to people wanting to over more funding, well yes obviously as they were engaged and it wasn't even their primary club. Lord forbid a prospective funder decides not to offer the money because he's worried of being slagged on here...as if! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Somner, I don't know what is holding back the funding but it's noticeable that 10000hours haven't met their targets for Community or Corporate Memberships. They wanted at least 24 Community Members, they've only got 23, and they wanted at least 12 Corporate Members and they've only got 10. Maybe it's that shortfall that is holding back the funders. So far as the funders will be concerned the Individual Membership figure is probably the least important of the lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civilsaint Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) A lot of saints fans have got behind this, I,ve always maintained (The 10000 hour proposal not CiC/SeN's in general) its wrong for the club, and would therefor be wrong for the community as it hasn't persuaded the funding bodies yet, let alone the community. But you've yet to give a valid reasoning for your stance. What makes you assume that longer timescale = funding bodies not convinced? Do you know the finite details of the process? If so, spill.... As for the community not being convinced, you do not = community. You = one individual opinion. I think the numbers signed up for the scheme tell their own story, especially as you point out, the scheme is at a very early stage. All these people/businesses/organisations who have signed up must see some glimmer of positivity. Edited August 25, 2011 by civilsaint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 But you've yet to give a valid reasoning for your stance. What makes you assume that longer timescale = funding bodies not convinced? Do you know the finite details of the process? If so, spill.... As for the community not being convinced, you do not = community. You = one individual opinion. I think the numbers signed up for the scheme tell their own story, especially as you point out, the scheme is at a very early stage. All these people/businesses/organisations who have signed up must see some glimmer of positivity. Far be it for me to create Somners case for him but I think in fairness it has to be said he has given valid reasoning on the other thread. He cited that he felt that in principle it was wrong for the CiC to sign up members without being able to guarantee them benefits. He had other reasons to but that's the one that sticks out in my head because it wasn't the first time I'd heard that criticism, only last time I heard it it came from people that really did know their stuff. I answered at the time that I agreed with him, as did Richard Atkinson when he phoned me about a post I'd made on it that the whole deal was being constructed back to front from necessity because £2m was needed to buy the 52% stake in the club. Somners concerns are valid, it's just that most of us have been happy to accept it's just been part of the process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civilsaint Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 He cited that he felt that in principle it was wrong for the CiC to sign up members without being able to guarantee them benefits. That, however, is not a valid reason for being anti-10000hours. That is a reason for not wanting to join the cic at this present moment in time. There is a fundamental difference. Everyone has the choice whether to sign up now or wait and see how it pans out, nothing wrong with that. Holding reservations and being anti-10000hours are two totally different concepts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) He cited that he felt that in principle it was wrong for the CiC to sign up members without being able to guarantee them benefits. He had other reasons to but that's the one that sticks out in my head because it wasn't the first time I'd heard that criticism, only last time I heard it it came from people that really did know their stuff. Isn't it down to the members who sign up to also consider for themselves what they believe to be any benefit accrued? It's a bit condescending to suggest that people would blindly sign up for something without having given this any consideration? I wouldn't wish to speak for those who have signed up, but perhaps some believe that membership alone is a benefit. Perhaps they believe they are contributing something, and that is sufficient reason to invest a tenner a month for now (ETA: or however much other forms of membership cost). If people are prepared to take a punt and sign up for this, I don't think it is for Somner or anyone else to effectively suggest that they are impressionable mugs for doing so. They weren't coerced into signing up as far as I'm aware. Edited August 25, 2011 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Isn't it down to the members who sign up to also consider what they believe to be any benefit accrued? It's a bit condescending to suggest that people would blindly sign up for something without having given this any consideration? I wouldn't wish to speak for those who have signed up, but perhaps some believe that membership alone is a benefit. Perhaps they believe they are contributing something, and that is sufficient reason to invest a tenner a month for now (ETA: or however much other forms of membership cost). If people are prepared to take a punt and sign up for this, I don't think it is for Somner or anyone else to effectively suggest that they are impressionable mugs for doing so. They weren't coerced into signing up as far as I'm aware. It is as you say completely down to individual members to judge what part/parts of 10000 hours proposal they see as a benefit. And I firmly uphold anyone's right to chose to support it, and respect whatever reason they may have for doing so! I don't support the proposal put forward by 10000 hours, the back to front way it has been handled, and the ongoing delay which given that the sellers want to sell, the buyers like the deal one can only assume the hold up is readies? I've never questioned anyone's reason for supporting this, I don't think the supporters are impressionable mugs, i know and grew up with a fair few of them. I question RA and 10000 hours ability to land a deal that benefits SMFC. To date despite all their promise of "Open" and "transparent" due process nothing has been finalised (Their words not mine) Whatever the outcome I want the buddies to emerge stronger and better for it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 It is as you say completely down to individual members to judge what part/parts of 10000 hours proposal they see as a benefit. And I firmly uphold anyone's right to chose to support it, and respect whatever reason they may have for doing so! I don't support the proposal put forward by 10000 hours, the back to front way it has been handled, and the ongoing delay which given that the sellers want to sell, the buyers like the deal one can only assume the hold up is readies? I've never questioned anyone's reason for supporting this, I don't think the supporters are impressionable mugs, i know and grew up with a fair few of them. I question RA and 10000 hours ability to land a deal that benefits SMFC. To date despite all their promise of "Open" and "transparent" due process nothing has been finalised (Their words not mine) Whatever the outcome I want the buddies to emerge stronger and better for it Fair enough. I was extrapolating from Stuart's post so perhaps misrepresented you. Apologies if that is the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 It is as you say completely down to individual members to judge what part/parts of 10000 hours proposal they see as a benefit. And I firmly uphold anyone's right to chose to support it, and respect whatever reason they may have for doing so! I don't support the proposal put forward by 10000 hours, the back to front way it has been handled, and the ongoing delay which given that the sellers want to sell, the buyers like the deal one can only assume the hold up is readies? I've never questioned anyone's reason for supporting this, I don't think the supporters are impressionable mugs, i know and grew up with a fair few of them. I question RA and 10000 hours ability to land a deal that benefits SMFC. To date despite all their promise of "Open" and "transparent" due process nothing has been finalised (Their words not mine) Whatever the outcome I want the buddies to emerge stronger and better for it The hold up is obviously readies, but the funding bodies will no doubt have their own financial approval calendars and processes that the CIC will have no control over. They may have been made promises of meetings or signatures, but the funding bodies won't have been the first organisations to move dates or not have people available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Fair enough. I was extrapolating from Stuart's post so perhaps misrepresented you. Apologies if that is the case. None required Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Isn't it down to the members who sign up to also consider for themselves what they believe to be any benefit accrued? It's a bit condescending to suggest that people would blindly sign up for something without having given this any consideration? I wouldn't wish to speak for those who have signed up, but perhaps some believe that membership alone is a benefit. Perhaps they believe they are contributing something, and that is sufficient reason to invest a tenner a month for now (ETA: or however much other forms of membership cost). If people are prepared to take a punt and sign up for this, I don't think it is for Somner or anyone else to effectively suggest that they are impressionable mugs for doing so. They weren't coerced into signing up as far as I'm aware. Drew, I'm playing devils advocate here, but there is a danger in what is happening. Expectations of the membership are all over the place. Some signed up on the basis they were getting a members bar. Some signed up expecting to be consulted on every decision affecting the football club. Some signed up because they expect St Mirren FC will get more money to spend on players. And loads more have other differing reasons ranging from well informed and possible to downright mental and ludicrous. It's not just individual members either. I know Sid will come back again with his every community and corporate member will have an MoU in place, but if my experience is typical you are still left with a rather large leap of faith in the end over whether the CiC will actually be able to deliver benefits that will be worth your membership fee. Now we've done this before on another thread but the individual member can walk away whenever they want. They aren't tied to a full year. If they don't believe 10000hours is living up to their expectations they can cancel tomorrow without repercussions, yet those expectations have never been properly managed. I'm not saying that anyone signing up is an impressionable mug either - after all I've signed up - but I think it's wise to see the dangers. One of the frustrations I've had as we've followed this whole thing is the lack of discussion and ideas emerging from the potential membership through the forums. Perhaps everyone is keeping something up their sleeve for some sort of election campaign but the buy in seems particularly poor up till now despite the membership numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Somner, I don't know what is holding back the funding but it's noticeable that 10000hours haven't met their targets for Community or Corporate Memberships. They wanted at least 24 Community Members, they've only got 23, and they wanted at least 12 Corporate Members and they've only got 10. Maybe it's that shortfall that is holding back the funders. So far as the funders will be concerned the Individual Membership figure is probably the least important of the lot. Even that's better than I'd imagined. Tho I assume most (if not ALL) of those sharing out the £2m community payout sorry buy-out have been 'persuaded' to be Corporate Members at least for a year or ten? Is Fred Goodwin at all involved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) Drew, I'm playing devils advocate here, but there is a danger in what is happening. Expectations of the membership are all over the place. Some signed up on the basis they were getting a members bar. Some signed up expecting to be consulted on every decision affecting the football club. Some signed up because they expect St Mirren FC will get more money to spend on players. And loads more have other differing reasons ranging from well informed and possible to downright mental and ludicrous. It's not just individual members either. I know Sid will come back again with his every community and corporate member will have an MoU in place, but if my experience is typical you are still left with a rather large leap of faith in the end over whether the CiC will actually be able to deliver benefits that will be worth your membership fee. Now we've done this before on another thread but the individual member can walk away whenever they want. They aren't tied to a full year. If they don't believe 10000hours is living up to their expectations they can cancel tomorrow without repercussions, yet those expectations have never been properly managed. I'm not saying that anyone signing up is an impressionable mug either - after all I've signed up - but I think it's wise to see the dangers. One of the frustrations I've had as we've followed this whole thing is the lack of discussion and ideas emerging from the potential membership through the forums. Perhaps everyone is keeping something up their sleeve for some sort of election campaign but the buy in seems particularly poor up till now despite the membership numbers. Oddly enough, the lack of clarity as to what benefits might or might not be accrued is the very thing that suggests to me that those who have signed up have not done so on the basis of expecting a great deal from their membership. I appreciate that this sounds a bit counterintuitive, but bear with me. I could see the danger that you describe had 10000Hours made all kinds of wild claims as to what members might expect in return for their subscription. It seems that RA and colleagues have effectively played down the prospect of any individual benefit in favour of promoting the community element of the proposal, and that's hardly surprising given the nature of the beast. I suspect a considerable majority of those who have signed up have been motivated to do so based onthe perception that they are doing the right thing (whatever that means is subjective but I hope you get where I'm coming from). I hear what you are saying in toerms of community and corporate members, though, but I suspect a similar scenario applies. For corporate members, it is good PR to be seen to be involved in a project where the emphasis is on community development as opposed to profit and corporate gain. Good PR can be lucrative in its own way, though, so, again, we're not dealing with mugs here. For community groups, well, I'd imagine they are interested in reinforcing their community credentials, and might see benefit to be had from forging links with other groups and developing influential networks etc. I'm not qualified to say for sure, but for £500? Maybe it's worth a punt, even when the benefits aren't crystal clear just now. The biggest issue I had in my earlier post was the notion that there was something being done wrongly in principle. I could see the veracity in that position if folks were being misled, but it seems to me that there are plenty of people and groups who are willing to suck it and see, and I suspect that they would acknowledge that they are taking a punt. This tends to temper the worst excesses of expectation in my experience. Edited August 25, 2011 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted August 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 A lot of speculative jobbytalk from the usual suspects - but mainly StuDick as usual. The meeting is tonight, why not wait for the update and then discuss it from an informed position. StuDick yet again belittles the support. Many supporters have engaged with REA already. SMiSA have been working closely with REA since the very early days. REA has been supplied with shedloads of ideas and has already implemented some of them as the CIC wasn't required to make them happen. There's plenty of talent in the St Mirren support. The CIC will allow the club to benefit from that. The only sure thing that can be taken from all the blah, blah from Stu is that he is a nob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Know what Sid, sometimes you talk sense, while at other times you spout drivel. Occasionally you are quite amusing, but at other times you are just a bit of a fanny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 With regards to making suggestions it really is a little tough to do so without seeing what's on the table. There's no point discussing possible votes if we're all intended to just vote people in and let them get on with it with the only back up being "eh, well, you know, you can vote them off again"...which, by the way, could lead to a revolving door, people being put off from standing, members leaving due to a lack of real involvement and more time being spent on arranging elections than actual work. We've also yet to see the club accounts or balance sheets and don't fully understand how the club works at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Sid's a big part of the problem I reckon. He's been guilty of putting out some of the most ridiculous elements of misinformation since this whole thing started. I reckon he's just a Yul alias Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 I still voice concern over who will have the free time,energy and desire to take the reigns at our club.The present board have people within their organisations who can run their company in their absence but im struggling to find anyone who fits the bill within our support. What about someone who has already got a proven track record of devoting massive amounts of time & energy to the club, and who no longer has their own company to worry about ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) What about someone who has already got a proven track record of devoting massive amounts of time & energy to the club, and who no longer has their own company to worry about ? The Return of the Scott?!?! ETA: if it is GLS, then this would be tremendous news, IMO. Edited August 25, 2011 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted August 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Sid's a big part of the problem I reckon. He's been guilty of putting out some of the most ridiculous elements of misinformation since this whole thing started. I reckon he's just a Yul alias Well done Stu you to managed to make a post without mentioning "When I was at the SEN conference in June....blah, blah...Saints fans are all idiots....blah, blah....its no fair...blah, blah..." It's quite simple really: CIC = good Stuart Dickson = malcontent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Due to work commitments in a far off land I wont make it tonight so maybe some nice person will pm or post what was said at the meeting. Appreciated. As for the Audit. I will not be filling it in , have always said I would be a silent member. My time with the family is important to me when I'm home. Anyway Stu Sid and Stuart Dickson have plenty to say if not on behalf of us all but enough to keep the rest of us at bay Gordon Scott - Yes please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Well done Stu you to managed to make a post without mentioning "When I was at the SEN conference in June....blah, blah...Saints fans are all idiots....blah, blah....its no fair...blah, blah..." It's quite simple really: CIC = good Stuart Dickson = malcontent Ach Sid, you constantly prove my point.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted August 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Ach Sid, you constantly prove my point.... How is calling you a malcontent misinformation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 The Return of the Scott?!?! ETA: if it is GLS, then this would be tremendous news, IMO. Gordon Scott, yes, someone like him. Someone exactly like him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted August 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Gordon Scott, yes, someone like him. Someone exactly like him That is excellent news. Delighted that something has been sorted out there. The final dampener on the CIC has pretty much gone. Well done GLS!!!! 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.