The Day Fan Ownership Died!

[St. Sid]

This is getting more and more mental/entertaining with every day !

Keep it up lads, and some very well-written arguments from both points of view being set-out. This is what an independent forum is really about, and it's a credit to Div and you lot.

BTW Sid - I still have reservations, but I never thought my £10/month was going to get me a place on the Greenhill Road Politburo. I just wanted to check out that this wasn't going to be a frying-pan/fire situation if the CiC went through (as we were being confidently told it would be). I'd rather be involved than not.

If it is to be a private buyer then I'm sure SG won't sell the club down the Cart to visiting poultry traders from India. I'm also sure that a private investor group would at least be interested in securing additional funding from supporter membership schemes, not to mention increasing the use and efficiency of the stadium within the local community.

We all have Fras and I doubt anyone was ever 110% on the CIC irrespective of what flavour was on offer. We just can't be as it is an unknown entity. It hasn't been tried on this scale and it has never been develpoed or at least presented to us in its final form. At the moment no one can actually provide a lucid statement on what it actually is and how it will function. Without that information we can't assess the risk. If this was an IT contract I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole based on the information currently available. That is not a reason to reject it; however surely 10000 Hours needs to get its act together and actually present something tangible that we can properly assess at this stage in the game. It was hard enough trying to get a draft constitution and that is shit.

[Guest somner9]

Businesses and Co-operatives go through a rigorous selection process to identify the right candidate to become one of their Non-Exec directors. where as with 10000 hours it's £25K a nod and a wink. have a look at the attached link see if you think 10000 hours process stands up to scrutiny?

http://www.warrenpartners.co.uk/industry-case-studies/

[Stuart Dickson]

That was what I was implying in my post - sorry if it did not make sense. The question remains - what is their involvement with 10000Hours and this holding company?

http://www.blackandwhitearmy.com/forums/index.php/topic/33793-the-10000hours-numbers-explained/page__st__120

Post 126.

[Stuart Dickson]

http://www.saintmirren.org/forms/10000hours.pdf

Yflab, she's also mentioned in the initial launch document.

[St. Sid]

Businesses and Co-operatives go through a rigorous selection process to identify the right candidate to become one of their Non-Exec directors. where as with 10000 hours it's £25K a nod and a wink. have a look at the attached link see if you think 10000 hours process stands up to scrutiny?

http://www.warrenpar...y-case-studies/

It's a bit messy; however the 1877 club offer is for non-exec members, which is a term that doesn;t make sense to me as they don't appear to be getting CIC memberships....so their membership is basically non-exec membership of the 1877 club - does that mean their are going to be exec-members of the 1877 club.

The line about being able to become non-exec directors as part of the package is the odd bit. It doesn't appear to be excluding non-1877 club members from becoming non-exec directors, so the offr point is pretty much worthless as any cnut could become a non-exec director should a place become available and shareholders approve them.

[TsuMirren]

The role of the non-exec board would be to:

Role of the Non-Executive Director

Strategy:

Non-executive directors should constructively challenge and contribute

to the development of strategy.

Performance:

Non-executive directors should scrutinise the performance of

management in meeting agreed goals and objectives and monitor the reporting

of performance.

Risk:

Non-executive directors should satisfy themselves that financial information

is accurate and that financial controls and systems of risk management are robust

and defensible.

People:

Non-executive directors are responsible for determining appropriate

levels of remuneration of executive directors and have a prime role in appointing,

and where necessary removing, senior management and in succession planning.

Scrutinise, challenge and satisfy is fair enough, but just how does non-exectuive allow you to then actually execute any remuneration, appointment or removal? There's no way anyone in the 48%, who isn't a full CIC member or appointed member of staff should be involved in final say on any of that.

[St. Sid]

Scrutinise, challenge and satisfy is fair enough, but just how does non-exectuive allow you to then actually execute any remuneration, appointment or removal? There's no way anyone in the 48%, who isn't a full CIC member or appointed member of staff should be involved in final say on any of that.

Plenty of ways to look at it. Transparency and influence being the key areas. They will be actively involved in developing the strategy for SMFC, they will also be responsible for scrutinising the processes and decison making at SMFC. That will immediately give them more direct influence and visibility of the club than a CIC member will have, perhaps even more than a CIC Director not serving on the BoD. We don't know do we......this is just one line in a flyer that is being explored.

Remember SMFC will not be a CIC / Co-op so SMFC will continue to function as a separate company. There has been no explanation of how SMFC will function; however there does seem to be offers being made that fairly significant without reference to the CIC members. We will have an unelected BoD running for a minimum of 6 months...they will be able to define the structure of the club long before the general members get to elect anyone onto the Board, never mind have access to an as yet undefined structure to raise directions for the board through the 75% majority.

Its just a single example of no information being made available regarding decisions that could have implications on how the CIC / SMFC functions. It is taken from a single line of a flyer for the 1877 club. We are not just talking about grey areas here, we talking about being kept completely in the dark.

[Guest somner9]

We are not just talking about grey areas here, we talking about being kept completely in the dark.

yes it's been very Mushroom-esque from day one! Kept in the dark and fed on shit!

[St. Sid]

yes it's been very Mushroom-esque from day one! Kept in the dark and fed on shit!

Made me giggle - that is like a classic Bill Lees post from the old web wars.

[Stuart Dickson]

That document has been pulled from the 10000Hours website as it is no longer current. I emailed REA and asked if a new document will be produced that reflects the recent changes. A week later no response.

Aye true, but the point I was making was she was in right at the start. She may or may not be involved now but it was the reason she was named as a Douglas Street Director

[BoWSaint]

Plenty of ways to look at it. Transparency and influence being the key areas. They will be actively involved in developing the strategy for SMFC, they will also be responsible for scrutinising the processes and decison making at SMFC. That will immediately give them more direct influence and visibility of the club than a CIC member will have, perhaps even more than a CIC Director not serving on the BoD. We don't know do we......this is just one line in a flyer that is being explored.

Remember SMFC will not be a CIC / Co-op so SMFC will continue to function as a separate company. There has been no explanation of how SMFC will function; however there does seem to be offers being made that fairly significant without reference to the CIC members. We will have an unelected BoD running for a minimum of 6 months...they will be able to define the structure of the club long before the general members get to elect anyone onto the Board, never mind have access to an as yet undefined structure to raise directions for the board through the 75% majority.

Its just a single example of no information being made available regarding decisions that could have implications on how the CIC / SMFC functions. It is taken from a single line of a flyer for the 1877 club. We are not just talking about grey areas here, we talking about being kept completely in the dark.

With regards to the Rangers situation you are campaigning for fans to trust the BoD to make the right choice without making threats or demands. Take some of your own medicine and trust that the BoD want to sell to 10000hrs for all the right reasons. Sign up now and have some faith in your BoD.

[St. Sid]

With regards to the Rangers situation you are campaigning for fans to trust the BoD to make the right choice without making threats or demands. Take some of your own medicine and trust that the BoD want to sell to 10000hrs for all the right reasons. Sign up now and have some faith in your BoD.

I have already signed up stoopit.

My concern is that fickle bawbagz don't know what it is they have signed up to and the first time they don;t get what they want from the CIC they will storm off in the huff - and let's not forget that the latest key investor has already stormed off in the huff very publically.

It is important that everyone knows what they are getting involved in and understands what happens if they take the huff in 6 months if they don't get the fan empowerment they were expecting........NEXT!!!!

[BoWSaint]

I thought your finger went from hovering over the cancel button to pressing the cancel button on your direct debit a few days ago?

By your logic we shouldn't need or ask for information. We need to trust the board. They will look after us. A tenner a month is a lot less than a season ticket so the financial stakes here are a lot less.

Only a real fan would join10000hrs......................................

[St. Sid]

I thought your finger went from hovering over the cancel button to pressing the cancel button on your direct debit a few days ago?

By your logic we shouldn't need or ask for information. We need to trust the board. They will look after us. A tenner a month is a lot less than a season ticket so the financial stakes here are a lot less.

Only a real fan would join10000hrs......................................

Which has pretty much been the argument presented to us previously. The difference is that currently we don't default on a loan if some fans don't renew their season tickets we just adjust the business plan. The CIC is a debt situation...if fans don't keep feeding the debt monster then the debt owns the club, not the fans.

[Stuart Dickson]

Only a real fan would join10000hrs......................................

Tsk....take that back ya bastard

[Bud the Baker]

I find it difficult to understand why some St.Mirren fans could be so opposed to the club being controlled by a community interest company that is in turn owned equally by it's members - the St.Mirren supporters.

Hopefully enough Saints fans will see past the trolling and get over the apathy of what has been a long and complex process and appreciate that the fans WILL own the majority shareholding of the club in this model. Fan ownership of St.Mirren is 100% real and there to be had, IF we want it.

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.

In my case it's not so much that I'm opposed to fan ownership it's that I've never been convinced that the CIC can attract new money that firstly doesn't affect the clubs revenue and secondly will allow them to repay the £1.75M we reckoned it was gonna cost in the Numbers Explained thread last month and now there's the additional money to be paid to GLS when the original debt is paid off.

As time has moved on and the various incarnations of the CIC/Co-op have evolved my scepticism has increased and I find it hard to see how the audience (& their disposable income) being targeted by the 87/1877 initiatives won't affect the money these groups/people have to spend on the club itself and if that's trolling so be it.

Hopefully as you hinted earlier today there is still room for further movement from the consortium as I can't see the numbers currently committed to the CIC being enough to finance the deal at the sum mentioned above.

It might not be my place to say so but if the Consortium can do better elsewhere then maybe they should just exercise their prerogative.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Bud the Baker

[BoWSaint]

Tsk....take that back ya bastard

You can't hide from the truth Stuart.....................

Anyway, my last couple of posts have been more tongue in cheek than anything. I just tend to use Sandman-esque lines of dots instead of smilies...........................................................

[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.....

And still no one wants to pick up on this? Would be interesting to hear how 10000 hours intend to square this circle having prevented any type of member involvement in all the decision making

[St. Sid]

I might be reading Div's facts list wrong; however it looks like the purchase of the shares can happen based solely on the direct debit mandates. That would be disastrous.

[davidg]

http://www.paisleydailyexpress.co.uk/renfrewshire-sport/2012/05/31/late-bidders-make-their-move-for-saints-87085-31080317/

Story from Fitzy in the PDE today also, not online yet though.

[St. Sid]

http://www.paisleyda...87085-31080317/

Story from Fitzy in the PDE today also, not online yet though.

Rather than PDE fairy stories would 10000 Hours time not be better spent actually providing real details on what they are proposing? I wouldn't be overly unhappy about seeing what the other bids involve at this stage.

The consortium have the chance to have fans pay a 7-figure sum over 10 years, whilst they get to continue running SMFC.

Just tell the fans what it is we are actually looking at for the future of SMFC and stop trying to manipulate them with bullshit.

[glenburn ed]

More scaremongering

[div]

Rather than PDE fairy stories would 10000 Hours time not be better spent actually providing real details on what they are proposing? I wouldn't be overly unhappy about seeing what the other bids involve at this stage.

What have 10000Hours got to do with the stories that have appeared in the PDE ?

The truth of the matter is that the selling consortium have put a deadline on the submission of the 10000Hours bid. I think that's a positive move to be honest as the deal has dragged on long enough and it's time to close it one way or the other.

The fact they HAVE put a closing date on it would suggest to me that there may be other bids on the table which is what Andy is alluding to in his article.

It's not up to 10000Hours to ferret out details of who those bids are from and how they are constructed.

I am interested to know about them as well. If they represent a better deal for St.Mirren then great, let's be hearing about them.

AT the end of the day we should all want what is best for the club and it's long term future.

[animal]

Bon jour mon amis,

Its been a while I know, but I have been keeping an eye on things over the past few months while I, Kermit, Piggy and the gang were promoting the film. Now here at Cans in the South of France. Weather really warm - especially if you have this much hair !

Well things have moved on a little. Version 4 a of the CIC is the latest. Gordon Scoot has joined the CIC gang.

St. Sid has seen the light ! He now is more against the CIC than I ever was. Others have noticed that they will be paying their hard earned cash to have Mr. A and co run the Club via an Executive Board.

Yet another public meeting- the last I hope. I might manage back in time - have to get my new season ticket - my real investment into the club.

The PDE run stories of boogy men waiting in the wings to asset strip the Club. The gates of Hell await us unless we cough up our £10 a month or £3,000 or £25,000 if you have the cash.

No real control of anything for your £10. Can't belive anyone is daft enough to spend £25,000 for the prospect of a seat (maybe) on one of the many, many boards.

So sad to see Tony Fitz is still part of this scheme - a real nice guy, but please don't give him a third shot at managing the team via some Board.

Gordon Scoot involvement is a strange thing. Call me a cynic (I know you will) but at present he has a bundle of worthless shares (part of the 48%). I forget the exact number he was putting into the CIC but I think it is enough for 9 or 10 daft bu*gers to pay £25,000 for blocks of 1877.

I assume this might raise about £250K to help pay off the CIC debt burden. Tell me if I am far off the mark.

If the CIC fails (even if it does not) he becomes a creditor - so he goes from having a bundle of worthless shares to being a creditor in something - to be honest I'm not sure what the something is - CIC or club or what.

Aurivwar.

PS. Maybe some of the CICers could confirm how many home games Mr. Atkinson attended last season ?

a) 1

2

c) 3

[St. Sid]

What have 10000Hours got to do with the stories that have appeared in the PDE ?

The truth of the matter is that the selling consortium have put a deadline on the submission of the 10000Hours bid. I think that's a positive move to be honest as the deal has dragged on long enough and it's time to close it one way or the other.

The fact they HAVE put a closing date on it would suggest to me that there may be other bids on the table which is what Andy is alluding to in his article.

It's not up to 10000Hours to ferret out details of who those bids are from and how they are constructed.

I am interested to know about them as well. If they represent a better deal for St.Mirren then great, let's be hearing about them.

AT the end of the day we should all want what is best for the club and it's long term future.

There is no truth yet Div, just pish sales documents and chinese whisper bollox. 10000 Hours were continuing to ask for direct debits whilst negotiating with corporate investors to completely shift the goalposts. What's it going to look 6 months down the line when we've already bought the shares and are are too far down the line to reverse things. Why should the fans trust what we will be told verbally at a meeting in June?