The Day Fan Ownership Died!

[St. Sid]

truth sid?

Truths is as fleeting as time somner9 as your vlues are all about accusatory nonsense and questionable character. You would like to imply that lies have been told relating to the CIC. I disagree, we just don't have all the details available to us. The next obvious step is for those details to made available. Once they are available we can assess them and if required negotaite them. The game plan appears to have been to try and get the numbers over the line. My thoughts are that the effort to convince more fans has been so understated that the numbers are already in the bag - hence Div's comments about you going to be "seething". That could of course just be like the same as your empty-headed rhetoric. For truth I follow the Buddist path:

In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

[Guest somner9]

Truths is as fleeting as time somner9 as your vlues are all about accusatory nonsense and questionable character. You would like to imply that lies have been told relating to the CIC. I disagree, we just don't have all the details available to us. The next obvious step is for those details to made available. Once they are available we can assess them and if required negotaite them. The game plan appears to have been to try and get the numbers over the line. My thoughts are that the effort to convince more fans has been so understated that the numbers are already in the bag - hence Div's comments about you going to be "seething". That could of course just be like the same as your empty-headed rhetoric. For truth I follow the Buddist path:

In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

just checked the forecast Sid, it's all good! No seething for the foreseeable

[div]

On the subject of a private investor making a bid for the club you can see for yourself what is happening at Rangers as being a prime example of how it works.

Charles Green has bought the club for £1 and is borrowing £8.3m to throw at the creditors CVA pot which would move the club out of administration.

The loan is secured against the assets of the club and must be repaid to him, by the club, and with interest, by 2020.

So by 2020 he's got his money back, he's got interest on it and he owns a (what should be) healthy football club worth tens of millions of pounds. He will have done all of that using just £1 of his own money.

The Glaziers bought Man Utd using borrowing they secured against the club.

Craig Whyte originally bought Rangers using borrowing secured against future season ticket sales.

There is no way a private individual will ship in £1.7m of their own money without securing it against the club.

The 10000Hours model needs to be communicated better and needs refined, but it secures the majority shareholding with only a very small amount of borrowing which is not secured by the football club. In fact the reverse is true as the assets of the football club become locked.

[div]

What have you been offered div you seem to be trying to sell this scheme more than your pal Mr Atkinson

I'm going to treat that post with the contempt it deserves but I'll also give you some facts;

1) I have said from day one that I personally do not want to sit on any board at any level of St.Mirren Football Club, or of 10000Hours. I neither have the time nor the inclination to do so. You can be 100% sure that I dont want anything other than a successful team on the park and to have a couple of pints before and after the game.

2) I have spent a good few late nights working away on the 10000Hours website when I should really have been doing billable work for clients. I have asked for and received not a single penny for my work and nor do I expect it.

3) My business has pledged to be an 87 club member, as I can see benefits to the business and to St.Mirren in doing so. If the deal goes through I'll be paying my £3k the same as everyone else signing up to that membership tier.

So actually, when all said and done, I personally will probably be better off if the deal DOESN'T go through, as I'll be £3k better off and I won't need to do things for free any more.

The fact of the matter is that I can see why the fans owning the majority shareholding of the football club is a good thing. I can see why the club engaging with local community organisations and businesses is a good thing.

In actual fact the only downside I can see of fan ownership is exactly what we are seeing at the moment ie; negative bickering, in-fighting and politics.

I'm not entirely sure the support has the it in themselves to sensibly run the football club without ripping itself apart to be honest.

[buddiecat]

Truths is as fleeting as time somner9 as your vlues are all about accusatory nonsense and questionable character. You would like to imply that lies have been told relating to the CIC. I disagree, we just don't have all the details available to us. The next obvious step is for those details to made available. Once they are available we can assess them and if required negotaite them. The game plan appears to have been to try and get the numbers over the line. My thoughts are that the effort to convince more fans has been so understated that the numbers are already in the bag - hence Div's comments about you going to be "seething". That could of course just be like the same as your empty-headed rhetoric. For truth I follow the Buddist path:

In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

i tend to think you are somewhat correct in saying the numbers are already in the bag i.e if no other people pledge then the "more than a tenner" members will pile in the shortfall , and as div has stated - they will still welcome you as a cic member after the takeover "but all the sausage rolls will be eaten by then" i'd like to know what exactly he means by that, are there goodies to be shared that would not be available to a further member level "the after the fire tenner men" that sounds very commercial to me and nothing near what should be the case where you pledge to help the club via the cic, not to help yourself in any way at all.

[St. Sid]

On the subject of a private investor making a bid for the club you can see for yourself what is happening at Rangers as being a prime example of how it works.

Charles Green has bought the club for £1 and is borrowing £8.3m to throw at the creditors CVA pot which would move the club out of administration.

The loan is secured against the assets of the club and must be repaid to him, by the club, and with interest, by 2020.

So by 2020 he's got his money back, he's got interest on it and he owns a (what should be) healthy football club worth tens of millions of pounds. He will have done all of that using just £1 of his own money.

The Glaziers bought Man Utd using borrowing they secured against the club.

Craig Whyte originally bought Rangers using borrowing secured against future season ticket sales.

There is no way a private individual will ship in £1.7m of their own money without securing it against the club.

The 10000Hours model needs to be communicated better and needs refined, but it secures the majority shareholding with only a very small amount of borrowing which is not secured by the football club. In fact the reverse is true as the assets of the football club become locked.

Div, this is not information about the CIC. We all pretty much know how clubs are bought. What we are looking for is detailed information on how the CIC works. If it needs refined at this point in time why? I really hope the information is being made available before the meeting. Transparency and a bit of bravery is required at the point. Not trying to manage the process in 10000 Hours favour - that is the point being made. Openness and a fair chance to digest the information and respond. We never put a deadline on this, 10000 Hours did.

[div]

i tend to think you are somewhat correct in saying the numbers are already in the bag i.e if no other people pledge then the "more than a tenner" members will pile in the shortfall , and as div has stated - they will still welcome you as a cic member after the takeover "but all the sausage rolls will be eaten by then" i'd like to know what exactly he means by that, are there goodies to be shared that would not be available to a further member level "the after the fire tenner men" that sounds very commercial to me and nothing near what should be the case where you pledge to help the club via the cic, not to help yourself in any way at all.

Sorry that was my attempt at humour. Nothing meant by it whatsoever, sausage rolls for everyone regardless of when they join !

[St. Sid]

I'm going to treat that post with the contempt it deserves but I'll also give you some facts;

1) I have said from day one that I personally do not want to sit on any board at any level of St.Mirren Football Club, or of 10000Hours. I neither have the time nor the inclination to do so. You can be 100% sure that I dont want anything other than a successful team on the park and to have a couple of pints before and after the game.

2) I have spent a good few late nights working away on the 10000Hours website when I should really have been doing billable work for clients. I have asked for and received not a single penny for my work and nor do I expect it.

3) My business has pledged to be an 87 club member, as I can see benefits to the business and to St.Mirren in doing so. If the deal goes through I'll be paying my £3k the same as everyone else signing up to that membership tier.

So actually, when all said and done, I personally will probably be better off if the deal DOESN'T go through, as I'll be £3k better off and I won't need to do things for free any more.

The fact of the matter is that I can see why the fans owning the majority shareholding of the football club is a good thing. I can see why the club engaging with local community organisations and businesses is a good thing.

In actual fact the only downside I can see of fan ownership is exactly what we are seeing at the moment ie; negative bickering, in-fighting and politics.

I'm not entirely sure the support has the it in themselves to sensibly run the football club without ripping itself apart to be honest.

I think the comment you have responded to was uncalled for. We are all Buddies and that needs to be uppermost in our minds as we work through what was always going to be a difficult process. By the same token I don't think your last two lines help matters either. We're not trying to bring down the CIC, we're trying to ensure that it is the right thing for the club and will work for ALL fans. We've already see a minority group of supporters shafted by the club this close season in terms of their tickets. Behaviour like that must be knocked on the head - charging disabled fans carers whilst handing benefits to 87 Club members and 1788 club members at the same time doesn't bode well for fan empowerment.

[div]

Div, this is not information about the CIC. We all pretty much know how clubs are bought. What we are looking for is detailed information on how the CIC works. If it needs refined at this point in time why? I really hope the information is being made available before the meeting. Transparency and a bit of bravery is required at the point. Not trying to manage the process in 10000 Hours favour - that is the point being made. Openness and a fair chance to digest the information and respond. We never put a deadline on this, 10000 Hours did.

10000hours did not put a deadline on this either, the selling consortium did and to be honest I'm glad they did, I wish they had done it sooner to be honest.

Here's a suggestion. Stop posting in here for ten minutes and write a very simple email asking all your questions to the [email protected] address. Richard will answer those questions and I will make sure the answers are published for everyone to see on the 10000Hours FAQ.

I'd implore everyone to do the same. Ad the FAQ grows so people should have fewer questions.

Sound reasonable ?

[buddiecat]

I'm going to treat that post with the contempt it deserves but I'll also give you some facts;

1) I have said from day one that I personally do not want to sit on any board at any level of St.Mirren Football Club, or of 10000Hours. I neither have the time nor the inclination to do so. You can be 100% sure that I dont want anything other than a successful team on the park and to have a couple of pints before and after the game.

2) I have spent a good few late nights working away on the 10000Hours website when I should really have been doing billable work for clients. I have asked for and received not a single penny for my work and nor do I expect it.

3) My business has pledged to be an 87 club member, as I can see benefits to the business and to St.Mirren in doing so. If the deal goes through I'll be paying my £3k the same as everyone else signing up to that membership tier.

So actually, when all said and done, I personally will probably be better off if the deal DOESN'T go through, as I'll be £3k better off and I won't need to do things for free any more.

The fact of the matter is that I can see why the fans owning the majority shareholding of the football club is a good thing. I can see why the club engaging with local community organisations and businesses is a good thing.

In actual fact the only downside I can see of fan ownership is exactly what we are seeing at the moment ie; negative bickering, in-fighting and politics.

I'm not entirely sure the support has the it in themselves to sensibly run the football club without ripping itself apart to be honest.

This was my concern from the start, i was interested in the idea to begin with but that was my heart talking and i usually follow that up with a bit of listening to my head,pledging to this has become even harder for me to consider an option since it was made public that 75% of cic members need to agree on a proposal for it to be adopted via the 52% holding, given what we all know about the differing opinions on here then i can hardly see any proposal getting 75% backing from cic members. I also can't get round the fact that a cic member paying £3k or more only has the same voting influence as a £10 member, the other benefits must be really good for those paying £3k, and i know it's only a very small part of the whole plan - but the idea that i could be queue jumped at a bar because someone had more money to invest than me is very off- putting

[buddiecat]

Sorry that was my attempt at humour. Nothing meant by it whatsoever, sausage rolls for everyone regardless of when they join !

accepted - was hoping it might be the case

[bud77]

I think the comment you have responded to was uncalled for. We are all Buddies and that needs to be uppermost in our minds as we work through what was always going to be a difficult process. By the same token I don't think your last two lines help matters either. We're not trying to bring down the CIC, we're trying to ensure that it is the right thing for the club and will work for ALL fans. We've already see a minority group of supporters shafted by the club this close season in terms of their tickets. Behaviour like that must be knocked on the head - charging disabled fans carers whilst handing benefits to 87 Club members and 1788 club members at the same time doesn't bode well for fan empowerment.

You can't blame that on 10000 hours, it's the current board that decided the price structure for next season. If 10000hours do succeed in taking the club over and you decide to become a member you could bring it up at an AGM or EGM and do something about it. If 10000hours don't succeed then it would be for whoever owns the majority shares to decide whether to do anything or not and no amount of moaning on here will change that.

[St. Sid]

10000hours did not put a deadline on this either, the selling consortium did and to be honest I'm glad they did, I wish they had done it sooner to be honest.

Here's a suggestion. Stop posting in here for ten minutes and write a very simple email asking all your questions to the [email protected] address. Richard will answer those questions and I will make sure the answers are published for everyone to see on the 10000Hours FAQ.

I'd implore everyone to do the same. Ad the FAQ grows so people should have fewer questions.

Sound reasonable ?

DIv, I can phone REA anytime I fancy it...just in the same way I or any other fan can if they want to. In the same way as we can contact SG about the SPL vote or Campbell about the price of beer in hospitality. I could write a f'k'n book on the questions I've got and that would be just around the constitution. I am not looking for answers to questions. I am looking for 10000 Hours to provide detailed information on what the CIC is, how it will function, the decision making processes, how it will function with SMFC, how the BoD places at SMFC will be resolved.....that's some pretty basic information that for some reason hasn't made its way to the St Mirren community.

Once they provide that I am sure we will all have questions. Without the basic information how the f"k are we supposed to form meaningful questions? SOme questions have been asked on here and none of the most ardent CIC supporters have even attempted to answer them. We need to get beyond this blind positivity and see some detail on how this all works before we can start to form the questions that need to be asked.

[div]

I have questions outstanding for a week. SMiSA have had questions outstanding for months. The FAQ that was there should be updated by 10000Hours and previous correspondence updated accordingly so that we are not going over the same questions.

Sound reasonable ?

What email address did you send your questions to and I will follow up for you and find out what has happened.

FAQ was reset after the iteration of the CIC model, most of it did not apply now and would only have confused,

Let me know where you sent your questions to. I will also pin a topic outlining the process to follow to ask questions nd to get answers that will be published on the FAQ for everyone to see.

[St. Sid]

FAQ was reset after the iteration of the CIC model, most of it did not apply now and would only have confused,

Div, no further information has been provided - so yes we're confused.

Dear 10000 Hours, we huvnae got a f'k'n clue what this CIC thing is all about any more? Please provide an overview document that outlines how it will work + a risk assessment.

[glenburn ed]

Seems you like to throw out snidy comments div but you don't like to get them back. I have never believed that this cic nonsense would work, I have been consistent in my criticism of the various schemes that have been produced every few months nothing has lasted more than a few months/weeks before it's changed,in my opinion it was poorly presented from the very start.

[div]

Seems you like to throw out snidy comments div but you don't like to get them back.

What snidy comment did I make ?

I certainly don't like to be accused of being corrupt, in fact I find it pretty f**king insulting if you want me to be blunt about it.

[St. Sid]

Div, I have seen you make an apology on the pinned post you made regarding questions. You have absolutely nothing to apologise for. You have provided Boards on here for the CIC to be discussed - I believe the fishal site went read only last year. You have also put up the 10000 Hours web site and been the vehicle for what little information has been afforded us.

We have you and ktf valiantly fighting the CIC corner. Although it reminds me of the scene from godfather one, when Al Pacino is being prep'd to shoot the police captain and Sonny comments something along the lines of - I don't want my brother coming out with just his dink in his hand.

You should not be taking the grief for the lack of information being provided. You have provided the communication tools. PozBaird has provided the pretty colours on the CIC collateral and you have both done excellent jobs. What isn't your job is to try and defend the lack of content being provided in the documents and online.

The requests for information have been made. If they are ignored then it will be a poor start to the meeting in June and will just be more ammunition for those looking to criticise the CIC on the night. I will defend the CIC if I have the information; however I will not defend information being held back for whatever reason.

[Big Fras]

Some quite amazing posts on this thread. Until a few weeks ago, any questioning of the CiC was greeted with partisan derision by a group of posters.... occasionally going a bit OTT.

I was slaughtered by "some poster" on here for my views, but at least I made them.

There was a period when anyone (and not just the manic ramblings of Yul) who raised queries/concerns about facets of the CiC, were ripped apart by the same clique-ish pack of arrogant oxygen thieves.

I took the trouble to research what was going on before making a decision, and found myself backing the CiC model.

I did/still do worry about the potential for in-fighting, and the possible lack of a decent management structure. These are not exactly insurmountable issues.

Very few folk make money out of buying football clubs at anything beyond the "magical indicator of insolvency"...... £1.00, so there will always be the eyes of suspicion on a deal that pays out almost £2m....but SG said several times that they wouldn't sell to anyone who could endanger SMFC, so I'll hold him to that.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Big Fras

[reborn saint]

Some quite amazing posts on this thread. Until a few weeks ago, any questioning of the CiC was greeted with partisan derision by a group of posters.... occasionally going a bit OTT.

I was slaughtered by "some poster" on here for my views, but at least I made them.

There was a period when anyone (and not just the manic ramblings of Yul) who raised queries/concerns about facets of the CiC, were ripped apart by the same clique-ish pack of arrogant oxygen thieves.

I took the trouble to research what was going on before making a decision, and found myself backing the CiC model.

I did/still do worry about the potential for in-fighting, and the possible lack of a decent management structure. These are not exactly insurmountable issues.

Very few folk make money out of buying football clubs at anything beyond the "magical indicator of insolvency"...... £1.00, so there will always be the eyes of suspicion on a deal that pays out almost £2m....but SG said several times that they wouldn't sell to anyone who could endanger SMFC, so I'll hold him to that.

Yes and that must change now.....The first CIC model made sense if all the payback funding was in place. Now that It's not the price HAS to fall by half to make it viable. The Idea of a £2Million sale to 10000hrs is quite simply laughable. REA has been there for over 2 yrs and has made 2 apologies...not good enough for me. Our club is in safe hands with SG and fan ownership is the way ahead but not with REA.

[saintargyll]

its taking too long

no signed deal as yet and the wonderings of "waiting to see what happens 6 miles down the road" is beginning to be a whole lot scary

it might sound crazy...but not impossible

[div]

Yes and that must change now.....The first CIC model made sense if all the payback funding was in place. Now that It's not the price HAS to fall by half to make it viable. The Idea of a £2Million sale to 10000hrs is quite simply laughable. REA has been there for over 2 yrs and has made 2 apologies...not good enough for me. Our club is in safe hands with SG and fan ownership is the way ahead but not with REA.

There has been movement on the price but clearly 10000Hours don't want to go public with what has been agreed with the selling consortium as they are in a competitive situation so could yet be gazumped by another bidder.

The selling consortium WANT to sell to the fans, because it gives them the peace of mind that they have passed over control to a large group of people who care passionately about the club, whilst at the same time knowing exactly where the funding is coming from to pay for it all and knowing that none of that is secured against the football club.

10000Hours will submit a final bid on June 15th, and the size of that bid will be dependent on the numbers who have pledged and completed their direct debit forms.

If the bid isn't good enough it will be rejected, 10000Hours will walk away, and the club will almost certainly be sold to a private bidder.

I trust them to do the due diligence on any private bidder and that could well turn out to be a positive move for us but equally they could easily be duped and sell to someone who sees a way to make a quick buck by buying a healthy SPL club at a knock down price, using money secured against the assets the club owns.

The outgoing board are offering the supporters the chance to own the majority shareholding of the club, if the fans don't want that then they can walk away from the club knowing that they at least gave the fans ample opportunity.

The fans can own the majority shareholding of the club if they want to, it is THAT simple.

[BoWSaint]

10000Hours will submit a final bid on June 15th, and the size of that bid will be dependent on the numbers who have pledged and completed their direct debit forms.

I was unaware of this. I thought that a fixed price had been agreed and the June 15th deadline was the date that the full amount of pledges must be secured by i.e. the numbers in their email is the line in the sand. It would be good if there was some wiggle room on the price as it would be a shame for this all to fall through due to being just a few pledges short.

[St. Sid]

don't want to go public with what has been agreed........it is THAT simple.

If it is that simple why do we keep getting excuses about the lack of information being available as it's too complicated.

Yesterday we were getting told the club would be taken over by Massone in an attempt to pressure fans into signing rather than explain the current deal on offer. Now we're back to vapid reassurances. Why can't we just be given a document detailing what the offer actually is, how it wors, what the risks are, what safeguards are in place......instead we keep getting unsubstantiated reassurances from people not equipped with the information to provide them.

[Guest somner9]

It's a funny old world?

The biggest set of issues for me and to varying degrees for other posters here is really quite fundamental, and something that should have been dealt with last May. That being 10000 hours have kept any fan involvement in their scheme at 'Barge Pole' length.

They would quite happily take Smisa's £50K, but will not enter into meaningful discussion with them, I wonder if Smisa in disguise pledged for a SRTB £25K membership today how much bending over, and oral gratification the incognito member would receive in comparison to the rubber ear Smisa have had so far.

The same is true for any supporters club, and individual fans! None of these bodies was involved or party to any of the agreements and decisions that 10000 hours have already made. Now I suspect that their tenuous link at a co-operative could yet fail to be recognised by the co-operative movement if they decided to investigate the complete lack of evidence that shows how the individual members have come together to form and shape this supposed co-operative.

Smisa have highlighted this as well, and the co-operative movement won't let their reputation or their principles be ridden over roughshod. I attach two principles and ask you to read them, look at what I've highlighted and ask the question has/is this happening?

2nd Principle: Democratic Member Control

Co-operatives are democratic organisations controlled by their members, who actively participate in setting their policies and making decisions. Men and women serving as elected representatives are accountable to the membership. In primary co-operatives members have equal voting rights (one member, one vote), and co operatives at other levels are also organised in a democratic manner.

Where has the 'Active' participation from members been when deciding to let a few organisations take control of revenue streams at SMP that will not benefit SMFC? Has there been a vote/consultation with members over the ever changing make-up of an interim board? Co-ops do not come into existence with a raedy to go board membership! otherwise what is the point of joining one if the BoD is made up of people who have put themselves there, or people who seemingly have bought themselves onto it?

3rd Principle: Member Economic Participation

Members contribute equitably to, and democratically control, the capital of their co-operative. At least part of that capital is usually the common property of the co-operative. Members usually receive limited compensation, if any, on capital subscribed as a condition of membership. Members allocate surpluses for any of the following purposes: developing their co-operative, possibly by setting up reserves, part of which at least would be indivisible; benefiting members in proportion to their transactions with the co-operative; and supporting other activities approved by the membership.

The CiC starts with a debt mountain, warm words about the debt being halved with the introduction of a £25K membership are just that. How many £25K memberships have/will be sold? And what of establishing a reserve from the membership contributions to see the football club through the ineviatble cashflow issues it has to deal with each season? 10000 hours gives us absolutely no indication they even intend to attempt this.

I believe that their are still some pledgers that haven't yet grasped the fact that none of their membership contribution will go to SMFC, and their are no plans to do so.

In this real scenario if ST/matchday sales drop as a consequence of dissaffectment towards the rangers situation. How will the club manage that shortfall? it will be down to the CiC and it's members to meet this as the majority shareholders and custodians. But without a reserve (like the Well Society) and with all the revenue generating opportunities given away to a few organisations that will not return any profit from their activities, how will the cashflow issues be managed?

I know this will be met with a few 'Why don't you go and see Richard and talk to him about this' calls, and yes 10000 hours are big on cosy fireside chats.

But that flies in the face of co-operative values of :Honesty, openess and self responsibility. these critical issues should have been openly debated and decided upon by the membership! the co-op should have be formed a year ago, giving any interested individual the chance to join and shape it from the ground up.

it is simply not good enough to expect members of a co-operative to sit back and wait until a chosen few have decided how things will be, dished out lucrative business opportunities to their friends, then cry wolf when it seems likely that the people who haven't been involved reject the way they've handled things.

So I definetly don't think it's Div's responsibility to plead on behalf of 10000 hours complete lack of involvement or adherence to the values and principles of a co-operative. And I know from many years of experience co-operatives are not founded on Cosy fireside chats, or shockingly blatant examples of serving self/friend interest.

If (And I don't think they do or it would have been on the table from day one) 10000 hours suddenly want to get serious about this at the end of the eleventh hour then it should be Open, transparent, and be up for challenge, re-design with full membership participation. Not the fait accompli served as take it or leave it they have produced so far.

Debate.....