Yul's Back

[spirit of 77]

You are right, we will know soon enough. I think Wednesday will be quite an eye opener as to the reasons/people who stopped the final funding from being received.

Out of interest, I'd like to know the site stats for how many unique visitors and forums stats for contributors when the CiC recruitment process was in full swing. You're right, there have been very few contributors here over the last couple months and this may be an indicator of ongoing interest. However, was there really that more a few months ago when 800 people signed up? Like I said, I'd be interested to see as it may be an acid test.

To add to speculation re how to raise more finance or repay more, the other way that reborn and lochwinnoch didn't mention would be to get more people to sign up. This might be a tough one to pull off, but also, if the new proposal is improved and maybe more attractive then maybe the 800 who have signed up might increase... That might be a proposal?!

it's really not that important that we learn who pulled the plug, or indeed why. It was done by someone who had both the responsibility to account for the use of the funds and the clout to make their actions stick, no prizes for guessing that it was a Mr S of holyrood.

i think a change of proposal might generate a few more potential stakeholders, but these will be numbered in the dozens rather than the hndreds needed to keep the monthly fee down to current levels

a more radical proposal may well be forthcoming

[Guest somner9]

And in 1 statement all of the credibility that Somner9 had worked hard to build up has gone!

Another one bites the dust... The "Posse" are dropping like proverbial flies!

It's all here in Black & White! see No 4!

http://www.sesc.org.uk/images/uploads/CICBenefits.pdf

Now you've had the heads up perhaps you can influence the pre-determined charity that the assets of 10000 hours Cic would transfer to in thevent of insolvency.

So glad to be able to "inform" the "Honest Injuns" in favour of 10000 hours

[div]

The stadium would not be owned by the CIC, it will still be owned by St.Mirren FC Ltd ?

The CICs only "asset" involving the club would be the 52% majority shareholding in St.Mirren FC Ltd.

[Guest somner9]

The stadium would not be owned by the CIC, it will still be owned by St.Mirren FC Ltd ?

The CICs only "asset" involving the club would be the 52% majority shareholding in St.Mirren FC Ltd.

Which if the CiC becomes insolvent can be transferred on to a charity or another CiC! This perhaps raises a few more concerns than answers for wavering pledgers/supporters as the promise that 10000 hours won't raise debt against the clubs assets leaves them completely vulnerable to going directly to insolvency should they hit hard economic times or hurdles (Like the whole country/continent at present).

They have debts to pay off, but have nothing to secure them against so unless one of these mythical sugar daddies hoves into few wanting to throw his cash away the Cic would move swiftly to an insolvent position.

By their definition 10000 hours have nothing to fall back on and the 52% shareholding would dissapear from both their and the fans/communities control. Risky

[aldo_j]

Which if the CiC becomes insolvent can be transferred on to a charity or another CiC! This perhaps raises a few more concerns than answers for wavering pledgers/supporters as the promise that 10000 hours won't raise debt against the clubs assets leaves them completely vulnerable to going directly to insolvency should they hit hard economic times or hurdles (Like the whole country/continent at present).

They have debts to pay off, but have nothing to secure them against so unless one of these mythical sugar daddies hoves into few wanting to throw his cash away the Cic would move swiftly to an insolvent position.

By their definition 10000 hours have nothing to fall back on and the 52% shareholding would dissapear from both their and the fans/communities control. Risky

But if the CIC became insolvent then they can put their stake up for sale surely? That would then leave us in the exact same situation as we are in today. Yeah, they probably won't get £2million but I guess if the CIC was to fail it would be a couple of years down the line meaning the debt to be repaid is significantly less.

I'm guessing social funders dont quite work the same way as banks either in regards to missing payments etc.

Can't see the risk to the stadium to be honest, can't imagine the ground is worth much anyway!

[10000hours]

But if the CIC became insolvent then they can put their stake up for sale surely? That would then leave us in the exact same situation as we are in today. Yeah, they probably won't get £2million but I guess if the CIC was to fail it would be a couple of years down the line meaning the debt to be repaid is significantly less.

I'm guessing social funders dont quite work the same way as banks either in regards to missing payments etc.

Can't see the risk to the stadium to be honest, can't imagine the ground is worth much anyway!

That is a much better interpretation of what would happen than Somner9 above you.

The only assets that the CIC has would be the shares which in the first instance would either be resold to cover any debt or would be put into a new organisation still controlled by the Fans and Community. The reason for this maintaining of the asset lock to a new assest lock body is to make sure that nobody tries any legals tricks to get the assets out of the first, now insolvent CIC, and it still keeps the club in the ownership of the Community and the Assests Locked.

[Guest somner9]

But if the CIC became insolvent then they can put their stake up for sale surely? That would then leave us in the exact same situation as we are in today. Yeah, they probably won't get £2million but I guess if the CIC was to fail it would be a couple of years down the line meaning the debt to be repaid is significantly less.

I'm guessing social funders dont quite work the same way as banks either in regards to missing payments etc.

Can't see the risk to the stadium to be honest, can't imagine the ground is worth much anyway!

You don't get to sell your assets if you are an insolvent CiC they are transfered to a charity or another cic.

If it (CiC) is wound up under the Insolvency Act 1986 any residual assets, after

satisfying its creditors will be transferred to another asset locked body, such as,

a charity or another CIC.

Edited November 29, 2011 by somner9

[jens]

You don't get to sell your assets if you are an insolvent CiC they are transfered to a charity or another cic.

If it (CiC) is wound up under the Insolvency Act 1986 any residual assets, after

satisfying its creditors will be transferred to another asset locked body, such as,

a charity or another CIC.

I thought the 'asset lock' was to help protect the assets of St. Mirren? So really - the ground can be sold to anyone for any amount as can the players. In actual fact St. Mirren can be stripped of all it's assets as these aren't actually 'locked'?

If this is the case, what's the inherent benefit of the CIC owning St. Mirren?

[ktf]

I thought the 'asset lock' was to help protect the assets of St. Mirren? So really - the ground can be sold to anyone for any amount as can the players. In actual fact St. Mirren can be stripped of all it's assets as these aren't actually 'locked'?

If this is the case, what's the inherent benefit of the CIC owning St. Mirren?

In actuality, what Somner9 is saying is not what 10000hrs have said will happen. There has been no constitution circulated, which I assume will be ratified by members, and therefore he is scaremongering. The very thing he accused me of last week!

The asset lock and it's details will need to be written into the constitution which will need to be ratified by the members, so it is beneficial for the club in that way. Also, fan governance is a big plus as we will all (if we sign up) have a say in the running of the club. There will also continue to be no paid board members which is vital to the smooth running of the club, there will be no borrowing secured on the club's assets or borrowing that the club in itself will be accountable for. There is also a huge benefit for the community of Paisley and Renfrewshire generally as we'll have a load of charities and community groups coming together to be part of the process.

[jens]

In actuality, what Somner9 is saying is not what 10000hrs have said will happen. There has been no constitution circulated, which I assume will be ratified by members, and therefore he is scaremongering. The very thing he accused me of last week!

The asset lock and it's details will need to be written into the constitution which will need to be ratified by the members, so it is beneficial for the club in that way. Also, fan governance is a big plus as we will all (if we sign up) have a say in the running of the club. There will also continue to be no paid board members which is vital to the smooth running of the club, there will be no borrowing secured on the club's assets or borrowing that the club in itself will be accountable for. There is also a huge benefit for the community of Paisley and Renfrewshire generally as we'll have a load of charities and community groups coming together to be part of the process.

Fan Governance: I can't get my head round that either. For the life of me, I cannot understand how 805 people can be involved in the day to day running of the club. From what I understood is that fans can vote for Board Members and a fan on the Exec Board. A point I have made previously is: as much as a fan will have tw best interests of the club at heart, we all have differing opinions on what's best. Some may want to sell Carey, or McGowan etc some may not. And who decides how much we get? If we think the board have done a poor job, can we oust them and put someone else in place easily enough?

[Guest somner9]

In actuality, what Somner9 is saying is not what 10000hrs have said will happen. There has been no constitution circulated, which I assume will be ratified by members, and therefore he is scaremongering. The very thing he accused me of last week!

The asset lock and it's details will need to be written into the constitution which will need to be ratified by the members, so it is beneficial for the club in that way. Also, fan governance is a big plus as we will all (if we sign up) have a say in the running of the club. There will also continue to be no paid board members which is vital to the smooth running of the club, there will be no borrowing secured on the club's assets or borrowing that the club in itself will be accountable for. There is also a huge benefit for the community of Paisley and Renfrewshire generally as we'll have a load of charities and community groups coming together to be part of the process.

You need to read this bud, theres no ambiguity or personal take/scaremongering

http://www.sesc.org.uk/images/uploads/CICBenefits.pdf

And just to underline my belief in CiC's the document is titled "CiC Benefits"

[jens]

So, in short:

The 'asset lock' protects the assets of the CIC. Not St. Mirren, so the St. Mirren assets aren't protected anymore than they are at the moment.

Fan Governance: to get on the St. Mirren board, you need to be voted on by the CIC board, which to get on, you need to be voted on by the fans? And after all that the 805 people who want a say in the club, won't actually have a say in how the club is run?

As much as a fan will have the best interests of the club at heart, we all have differing opinions on what's best. Some may want to sell Carey, or McGowan etc some may not. And who decides how much we get? If we think the board have done a poor job, can we oust them and put someone else in place easily enough?

Can people on the Exec Board be sacked?

[St. Sid]

somner9 appears to be getting a tad hysterical for someone so convinced that the CIC is dead.

The beauty of jens and somner9's hysterics is that when you compare it to traditional bids they are in fact arguing in favour of the CIC.

The CIC clearly provides genuine fan involvement in the running of the club. Traditional ownership offers none of that....mibbae a token numpty like dimdee had.

They appear to be trying to argue that the CIC is in some way flawed due to it having an asset lock. Traditional ownership offers no asset lock whatsoever.

Where traditional ownership puts the club at risk is in the way the club is "bought"....basically because it isn't actually bought in the way that a fisherman pays Faraway Saint for 15 mins of perversity. Instead they either raise debt against the assets (effectively the club SMFC).......mibbae they will rob the operational budget to fund their purchase of the club. They are actually arguing that the CIC is safer than traditional ownership.

[jens]

No not in hysterics. Just don't really understand and I'm looking to understand as much as possible before tomorrow night. :S

[Dibbles old paperboy]

In the history of CIC's how many have been made insolvent by social funders chasing up late payments?

[Guest somner9]

In the history of CIC's how many have been made insolvent by social funders chasing up late payments?

Who knows how many but it does happen.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/05/23/kensington-community-interest-company-on-the-brink-of-insolvency-councillor-warns-100252-28743864/

[St. Sid]

Who knows how many but it does happen.

http://www.liverpool...00252-28743864/

The interesting points in that article actually show our CIC in a better light.....no one will be getting paid £40K per year - and as per the email from 10000hrs there will be no paid board members - and there will also be no share dividends. The legal fees to the solicitors is also an interesting one - 10000hrs has paid their legal fees out of their own pockets and are not looking to be remunerated by the CIC.

Have you been saving up these pearls of scaremongering for your official panic day?

[buddiecat]

i don't see it as scaremongering by somner9, he has posted a link which i assume to be official rules for a cic, what i take from it is that if a cic is declared insolvent then it has to have it's assets taken up by another cic or charity, the only asset 10,000 hours would have will be 52% of smfc shares, they would not own the stadium or players outright, does this mean that no single person will ever be able to buy a controlling share of smfc if a cic hold the majority ? and if that cic goes insolvent does it mean another cic would have to be set up or does it mean an existing cic has to take over. and what would they have to take over - debts of the insolvent cic, can,t see a charity or cic wanting to take on debt. or maybe i need to find out more about share ownership.

as it stands at the moment we do not have a cic who own any shares in smfc , a single buyer or group could buy up the shares and we have to rely on sg and co, when and if it comes to the stage where they need to decide on any shares being sold - they own the shares and have the right to sell to whom they wish, i would trust them to make the right choice.

Edited November 29, 2011 by buddiecat

[Guest somner9]

i don't see it as scaremongering by somner9, he has posted a link which i assume to be official rules for a cic, what i take from it is that if a cic is declared insolvent then it has to have it's assets taken up by another cic or charity, the only asset 10,000 hours would have will be 52% of smfc shares, they would not own the stadium or players outright, does this mean that no single person will ever be able to buy a controlling share of smfc if a cic hold the majority ? and if that cic goes insolvent does it mean another cic would have to be set up or does it mean an existing cic has to take over. and what would they have to take over - debts of the insolvent cic, can,t see a charity or cic wanting to take on debt. or maybe i need to find out more about share ownership

The Cic would have to name a charity/other cic when it is registered to transfer any remaining assets after creditors have been paid in the event of insovency. Shame a few others can't stick to fact

[reborn saint]

I see one thing hasn't changed.....10000hrs, Ken McGeoch or the 3rd bid needs £2Million. Stewart Gilmour is a hard nosed buisness man (nothing wrong with that).......But it will be interesting to see how we GUARANTEE £700,000 as it would have been the funding body losing out if there was a shortfall... or more likley being paid over a longer time in the origional plan..I will be interested to see how 10000hrs achieve this.

[buddiecat]

The Cic would have to name a charity/other cic when it is registered to transfer any remaining assets after creditors have been paid in the event of insovency. Shame a few others can't stick to fact

so the cic have to register a charity or alternative cic to transfer assets to in the event of it becoming insolvent, so do we know who 10,000hours would be registering as their chosen cic/charity

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Who knows how many but it does happen.

http://www.liverpool...00252-28743864/

Any ideas on what percentage of CIC's become insolvent?

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Did the CIC in Kensington in Liverpool actually ever become insolvent? The story from 6 months ago is based on a local councillor saying that if Liverpool City Council pulled the funding it had agreed to pay the CIC each year then the CIC could become insolvent. It would seem that Liverpool City Council had agreed to pay the CIC £200k a year and had not kept to their side of the bargain... all of which is very different to 10,000 Hours being given the funding to buy the 52% shareholding and then later struggling to meet the repayment deadlines to the funders over 10 years.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Here's a link to some CIC's that were wound up due to fraud and did become insolvent... probably has no relevance to how 10,000 Hours would be running as a CIC looking after St Mirren FC: https://nds.coi.gov.uk/Content/detail.aspx?NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=422022&SubjectId=5

[buddiecool]

so the cic have to register a charity or alternative cic to transfer assets to in the event of it becoming insolvent, so do we know who 10,000hours would be registering as their chosen cic/charity

Kibble by any chance ?