The Day Fan Ownership Died!

[Guest somner9]

I'd like to know how many more clubs within the club are going to be created?

Can we have any chocolate coated ones - black and white chocolate of course!

Well if you like a lot of chocolate on your sausage roll?

Join club 18 - 77 'where we're up all night' (although for vastly different physhical/ internal plumbing reasons)

[Drew]

How many £10 a month members on THE board of SMFC?

lets ignore all the other boards for a moment

None - until November 2012, when there will be an election held, whereby all members are entitled to put themselves forward. All other CIC members will then have one vote in this election to the club board *(along with the other shareholders).

You're clutching at straws here.

*Edit for clarity

Edited May 22, 2012 by Drew

[ktf]

Its what Somner dearly wants but now we are on version four of the cic it becomes an ever diluted influence in the proposed make up of 10000 hours latest go at this.

You are the very one who was against all of the previous "versions" of the fan ownership model. You have conjured up objections and imaginary obstacles and "smoking guns" at every turn. When the model has been redefined, you have found other reasons to try to hijack it. When it was redefined again - something that you had been shouting for, and there was nothing you could say against it, you turned to personal and corporate attacks on individuals and community groups involved in the process.

My great uncle - God rest him - Sanny Foulds used to say, "it isn't what a person says that shows what he truly believes. it's what a person does". You have slabbered on long enough about fan ownership and about how you are in favour of it, however all that you have practically done is work to prevent it from becoming a reality (it's a major "lol" that you've failed at that). You have refused to become involved - which is the very way you could influence the whole thing, you have refused to go to public meetings to voice your concerns (something that other, more courageous and less cowardly, people have done), all you have done is spout uneducated, misinformed, slanderous and frankly inconsequential nonsense on an internet forum - the same forum where people start threads about applying for jobs in Franky and Benny's and whether people in their gym are gay - and you expect to be taken seriously and listened to.

I hope, beyond all hope, that the community buyout goes through by the 4th July, firstly because it is simply the most secure and prosperous way forward for the club and also for the town and people to Paisley. Secondly because it will hopefully seal the end of having to read your shite on this forum. Here's to the CiC - the final nail in Somner9's coffin!

[div]

I'm amazed that a proposal that has halved the amount of borrowing, has brought the 48% of other shareholders fully on board and has put final dates on the completion of the deal is being met with such negativity !

Appreciate that many are weary with all of this, but this is it. 24 days to decide whether you are in or out.

This is our chance to ensure the club remains in the hands of the supporters. Once in a lifetime opportunity.

[Guest somner9]

None - until November 2012, when there will be an election held, whereby all members are entitled to put themselves forward. All other members will then have one vote in this election to the club board.

You're clutching at straws here.

Returning approximately how many £10 a month members to the board of SMFC?

[Miss Saint]

feck my head was hurting before reading all this!!! club, boards, boards within boards, blah blah......................

come home later and re-read Sharon!

[div]

Returning approximately how many £10 a month members to the board of SMFC?

That surely depends on now many stand for election for a start ? Then it depends on how the members vote.

[Drew]

Returning approximately how many £10 a month members to the board of SMFC?

Are you serious?

[Drew]

I'm amazed that a proposal that has halved the amount of borrowing, has brought the 48% of other shareholders fully on board and has put final dates on the completion of the deal is being met with such negativity !

Appreciate that many are weary with all of this, but this is it. 24 days to decide whether you are in or out.

This is our chance to ensure the club remains in the hands of the supporters. Once in a lifetime opportunity.

Aye, and it's a bit of a shame that most of the traffic on the forum in relation to this development is in a thread with this title.

[Guest somner9]

That surely depends on now many stand for election for a start ? Then it depends on how the members vote,

Yes and no!

Surely (and given 10000 hours track record in overlooking the big ticket items I use that word with caution) it is already known and determined how many places on the board of SMFC are availble for election to from the membership of the £10 a month club?

[Drew]

Yes and no!

Surely (and given 10000 hours track record in overlooking the big ticket items I use that word with caution) it is already known and determined how many places on the board of SMFC are availble for election to from the membership of the £10 a month club?

Why would or, indeed, should, this be the case? Surely people should be entitled to vote in who they want. Isn't that democracy?

[St. Sid]

Don't think you have read or a least understood this John.

The non exec tier grants a seat on a non exec board, not the football club board.

Div, to be fair...we've had a few seconds to review this. The 1877 club was not mentioned at the last public meeting. What we need now is specifics, not trickle feed information when it suits 10000 Hours. The entire shooting match has changed significantly since the original request for direct debits. With each change a new one page, back of a fag packet - poorly designed - pdf is fired out, with a potential fifespan of validity of about 5 minutes as the goal posts get shifted to accommodate objections.

Put a bit of effort into this and actually present a document that nails exactly what it is we are getting ourselves into. Make it absolutely specific and clear.

There can be absolutely no route to the Board for non-St Mirren supporting businesses through the backdoor. It would render the entire exercise pointless. The idea of doing this is to delver fan ownership and a club that is all about the fans and the community predominantly. The 1877 club is a worrying development - made more worrying by the fact that it has previously been unmentioned at any of the previous meetings.

The interim BoD is also too small. Why not have fan representation on the BoD now - as it stands we have three business people. Is there anything to stop the other two places being taken by a member from SMiSA and perhaps one of the bus conveners?

We need transparency, not secrecy.

[div]

Yes and no!

Surely (and given 10000 hours track record in overlooking the big ticket items I use that word with caution) it is already known and determined how many places on the board of SMFC are availble for election to from the membership of the £10 a month club?

There is no quota on the football board for membership tiers.

There are three membership categories of the CIC; Individual, 87 and Non Exec.

Those members receive different benefits but from a member point of view they are all equal. Anyone can stand for election to the football club board from within the three tiers, and the entire membership will vote on a one member one vote system in those elections.

Since individuals are the largest member group it stands to reason that they will have more say in who gets elected.

[Guest somner9]

Why would or, indeed, should, this be the case? Surely people should be entitled to vote in who they want. Isn't that democracy?

The avenues available to be elected onto any company board are set out before it's formed, but could be amended by a vote. So yeas you can vote in who you want if you have a vote! The £10 a month members of the Cic don't appear (as far as this new brochure states) to have a direct vote as to who sits on the board of SMFC. or if they do then it's one individual?

[div]

How do you work that out?

Have you read the brochure and the details on the new voting structure ?

[Guest somner9]

Div, to be fair...we've had a few seconds to review this. The 1877 club was not mentioned at the last public meeting. What we need now is specifics, not trickle feed information when it suits 10000 Hours. The entire shooting match has changed significantly since the original request for direct debits. With each change a new one page, back of a fag packet - poorly designed - pdf is fired out, with a potential fifespan of validity of about 5 minutes as the goal posts get shifted to accommodate objections.

Put a bit of effort into this and actually present a document that nails exactly what it is we are getting ourselves into. Make it absolutely specific and clear.

There can be absolutely no route to the Board for non-St Mirren supporting businesses through the backdoor. It would render the entire exercise pointless. The idea of doing this is to delver fan ownership and a club that is all about the fans and the community predominantly. The 1877 club is a worrying development - made more worrying by the fact that it has previously been unmentioned at any of the previous meetings.

The interim BoD is also too small. Why not have fan representation on the BoD now - as it stands we have three business people. Is there anything to stop the other two places being taken by a member from SMiSA and perhaps one of the bus conveners?

We need transparency, not secrecy.

What we need Siddley is a 10087 Club!!! where you get a game each week, and your own body weight in sausage rolls

[St. Sid]

There is no change. The CIC owns 52% of the shares in SMFC. It will work on a one man vote system. The 1877 shares are shares in the football club not the CIC.

The only change to the CIC is that it has halved its monthly payments in return for engaging the other shareholders if 75% of the members don't vote for a particular resolution.

Thanks GLS, happier hearing it from you than the happyclappy baldy crew.

[GLS]

I am unsure if people are commenting on this after reading the herald article.

I would recommend you visit 10000hours.org where this is explained in full.

[Guest somner9]

I am unsure if people are commenting on this after reading the herald article.

I would recommend you visit 10000hours.org where this is explained in full.

What the article with this first line?

"IT has been tinkered with and adjusted more often than a Formula One car"

[GLS]

But it is now ready for the race.

[Drew]

What the article with this first line?

"IT has been tinkered with and adjusted more often than a Formula One car"

This brings what to the current discussion?

[Guest somner9]

This brings what to the current discussion?

Your so-ooo right, maybe this is more worthy of debate.

From 10000 hours doc released today:

'One vote within the CIC Company Structure which will own 52% of SMFC.' is what a £10 a month member gets

'A route to the club board. If a non executive St Mirren Football Club board

position becomes available then any Non Executive board member interested

in joining will be able to put themselves forward for consideration by all the

club shareholders.

• Use your 1877 shares to vote at the club AGM and any other shareholder meetings.'

Is what a 1877 member gets

two different members and two different votes

[Drew]

Your so-ooo right, maybe this is more worthy of debate.

From 10000 hours doc released today:

'One vote within the CIC Company Structure which will own 52% of SMFC.' is what a £10 a month member gets

'A route to the club board. If a non executive St Mirren Football Club board

position becomes available then any Non Executive board member interested

in joining will be able to put themselves forward for consideration by all the

club shareholders.

• Use your 1877 shares to vote at the club AGM and any other shareholder meetings.'

Is what a 1877 member gets

two different members and two different votes

Perhaps I'm missing your point, here.

• Use your 1877 shares to vote at the club AGM and any other shareholder meetings.'

For the purpose of the CIC (ie - membership), this still only constitutes one vote.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Drew

[div]

Obviously we've not had as much time to digest this as you have.

"By November the CIC and non executive boards will have been formed and at the AGM the shareholders will vote members of both onto the club board."

That does not imply that all shareholders are fully on-board with this take-over as per your statement.

In advance of the votes - will every shareholder receive an Election Manifesto and Background details?

I look forward to that.

I was more alluding to the fact that the 52% majority shareholding will now only be used as a block vote if 75% of the CIC members vote in favour of an issue relating to the football club. if the CIC is split on an issue then their shareholding will be split proportionately.

The means the 48% (it will be less than that now as GLS is no longer part of that group) would then also have a direct influence over key decisions. In short their vote would count.

See the member brochure for details.

Each shareholder with 1877 share or more (ie including SMiSA) will also be given non executive member tier benefits.

Ps; I only saw the documentation on this last night for the first time.

[pozbaird]

What the article with this first line?

"IT has been tinkered with and adjusted more often than a Formula One car"

True. Since REA first approached SG and the BOD the CIC plan has probably underwent a million tweaks and alterations - 99% of which won't even have been made public. I wonder how many tinkers and tweaks the Blue Knights tried with their bid(s) for Rangers. This isn't a simple matter, if this 'version' of the deal could have been nailed down ages ago, it would obviously have been to everyone's benefit. Unfortunately it isn't that simple.

One of the concerns I saw people voicing was the amount of debt being required to buy out SG & Co, and how long it would take to repay it. Another concern was that guys like GLS who we could trust, had been frozen out by the consortium forming in the first place, so what about GLS and the disenfranchised '48%'?

GLS is now on board in a big way, and yes, there is a new membership category announced, and yes, it will be to help the bid over the line, no doubt about it. If it wasn't designed to do that, there was no point at all in the big anouncements today both online and in downloadable documents to explain it all.

I still believe the bid is the best way forward, I am still happy with what my £10 a month gets me, and to be honest, if I am in any way representative of the 'ordinary £10 a month' membership - then I am actually happy that guys like GLS, REA, Fitzy, and others will be there from the off to tie the whole thing together and see continuity and stabliity as we move from the long stewardship of the outgoing BOD.

Is it perfect? Almost certainly not. Do I have concerns about some aspects of how it has come together? Yes, but not enough to contemplate cancelling my DD mandate, not by a long way. Now, about this vote to save a corrupt and debt-dodging institution from the gallows....