The Day Fan Ownership Died!

[Guest somner9]

Since the webpage you quoted doesn't really tell you anything at all I delved a little further to find out about these pioneers. So they developed the Rochadale principles (http://en.wikipedia....dale_Principles) which are the commonly accepted list of rules of how a co-operative should work.

As far as I can see 10000hrs are following everything to the letter apart from 2 things.....

1. The third principle of economic participation. Everyone doesn't have to pay the same amount in (although the democracy isn't affected due to OMOV)

2. The fifth principle about providing education and training.

Apart from that we seem to conform to the co-op rules and principles completely. Well done 10000hrs.

Hmmm you seem to have missed out on Democracy and economic participation there. The 10000 hours BoD and exec Bod, and dealing up of the revenue generating streams have not been subject to membership consultation or approval. that means it is as Div has alluded to in fact not a co-operative, merely using the name co-operative.

If it was a co-operative then the decisions taken thus far would have been in consultation and with approval of the members. have you had your vote on these?

[BoWSaint]

Hmmm you seem to have missed out on Democracy and economic participation there. The 10000 hours BoD and exec Bod, and dealing up of the revenue generating streams have not been subject to membership consultation or approval. that means it is as Div has alluded to in fact not a co-operative, merely using the name co-operative.

If it was a co-operative then the decisions taken thus far would have been in consultation and with approval of the members. have you had your vote on these?

Economic participation is the very first point I made! Not sure how you managed to miss it since I only cited two. Rochdale rules say that everyone must contribute equally. We have the option of contributing more than a tenner if we want. Democracy was not missed out because we will have democracy. One member one vote. Doesn't get more democratic than that. And the fact that the economic participation rule doesn't hold true is a moot point because one member one vote trumps it by taking away any extra influence anyone can have by contributing more money.

If this goes through then I fully expect to vote on many things. I am completely happy with the interim board that is appointed and I would happily vote to keep it the way it is. I am certainly not going to actively stop the entire buyout because I wasn't personally asked if I wanted this interim board. That is cutting your nose off to spite your face of the highest order.

Digging into the wording of the origins of the initial concept of rules of how a co-operative should be formed is straw clutching at best. Zoom out and see the big picture that no-one here is doing any shady dealings. There is absolutely no reason to think that anyone involved in this venture wants to hurt the club in any way. And that is why I want to be a part of it.

[Guest somner9]

Economic participation is the very first point I made! Not sure how you managed to miss it since I only cited two. Rochdale rules say that everyone must contribute equally. We have the option of contributing more than a tenner if we want. Democracy was not missed out because we will have democracy. One member one vote. Doesn't get more democratic than that. And the fact that the economic participation rule doesn't hold true is a moot point because one member one vote trumps it by taking away any extra influence anyone can have by contributing more money.

If this goes through then I fully expect to vote on many things. I am completely happy with the interim board that is appointed and I would happily vote to keep it the way it is. I am certainly not going to actively stop the entire buyout because I wasn't personally asked if I wanted this interim board. That is cutting your nose off to spite your face of the highest order.

Digging into the wording of the origins of the initial concept of rules of how a co-operative should be formed is straw clutching at best. Zoom out and see the big picture that no-one here is doing any shady dealings. There is absolutely no reason to think that anyone involved in this venture wants to hurt the club in any way. And that is why I want to be a part of it.

So why don't they trust the fans/owners?

You're way off on the co-op issue. there isn't a real co-op around that wasn't formed (I.e. they had the opportunity to vote/approve the big set up decisions) with the members fully included. So thats a big no to democracy before it's born and a big no to being involved properly in the economics of the co-op.

Since you're quoting rochdale 1844 rules can you do me a favour and flag up the bit that says anyone can get a seat on the BoD if they chuck 15,000 (albeit redundant) shares at it?

[TsuMirren]

let me explain how a co-op works, it starts with the a group of people coming together for a common purpose, that naturally leads to a steering (call it what you will) group being seconded up to shape the wider groups thoughts with appropriate checks/balances/discusiion/votes by the wider group.

Then when you have your draft constitution it goes to the membership (650) for approval. It is important to note however that all major decisions are given to the wider membership during set up i.e. BoD members, length of term, exec bodies, revenue generating issues etc, etc. then that goes into the draft constitution for approval. Not as some mistakenly believe the other way round.

All that said you firmly believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that there's an offer on the table and thats the best/only offer you'll get (fan ownership).

I firmly believe that we can and should expect better.

If the car you saw on ebay breaks down three times on the way over to you for a viewing/tyre kicking, don't expect it to fair better if you buy it.

How does it work if they are moving in to takeover an already well operated concern? Would an interim phase be added to your install and play setup?

The CIC was put together and, as far as I'm aware, had a meeting with the current board to go over the outline and then they went out to the wider fanbase to gauge opinion and take on board guidance and comment. I met with Richard and sent in a few thoughts, I know a few others did the same also. Whether that makes us a steering group, who knows! As the process went along fans decided to pledge their support and the social funders went about the business of deciding yes or no. Sadly, one funding stakeholder decided that the answer was no and the process took a turn, along the way it took other turns to where the model is now.

The current model has brought together every single concern that's raised it's head on here (GLS being on board, the 48% having a vehicle to get involved, running the club in the short term, the possibility of CIC in admin and fan involvement early on) and still it's questioned, poked and prodded at. I can't say I needed to vote on any of the decisions so far, I'm not the one putting my shares up, I haven't been involved in any governance discussions with external bodies and I certainly haven't spent thousands of pounds of my own money whilst setting this up or put hundreds of hours in to learning how the club runs and brining the CIC together. My voting can wait until the shaping/moulding and then running the club phases.

What we have at the moment is a very good interim process, a DRAFT (not final, for guidance, very much a working document) constitution and a FAQ that outlines a number of things about how the CIC will work (a lot of those are, again, working guidelines). Over the next six months, each of us will have a chance to turn the FAQ promises in to constitution and process reality whilst taking on board guidance from the CIC as we piece together the club board, voting and financial side of things. Some of us will start for a board, others will want to be part of a working group and a lot of members will be happy monitoring things and being as involved as they see fit (neither is wrong).

----some of you may want to prepare yourselves to be bored senseless----MYFC are now in their 4th year of running Ebbsfleet United Football Club. That project started with the gimmick of "Pick The Team" that was blocked from every side and the promise of "Own The Club" even though the 25% had veto over everything and there were third party deals in there. The playing budget leapt to around 13K per week, but even when down at around 6K per week the club was running at a major loss and fighting a constant battle that most members really didn't care about...once it was down to around 4,000 members in year 2 the members finally got representation on the club board. Every month, the club went cap in hand to sign players or add to the playing budget and really didn't care if it was sustainable or not. The Chairman put money in, the now Chairman put money in and in all honesty it was more like administration meetings than board meetings most weeks. Numbers have dwindled again and the figure stands around 1,300, the club is still in the non-leagues and the members are still paying extra on top of subscriptions to actually keep the club afloat (Fleet, afloat...get it...ach nevermind). Major decisions that were taken without the members being consulted included raising the playing budget, taking on loans against club assets and allowing the manager to speak to other clubs (He actually left for a day, but shhhhhhhhhhhhhh on that one). A number of vote results were also not acted upon, specifics fail me but I know some were centred around Pick The Team and others around ensuring the Club Board acted upon vote results. For all of this glorified supporters club features the MYFC membership paid £1.2 million and, FA Trophy win aside, the club still languishes in the Blue Square Premier having flirted with Blue Square South relegation and promotion from also.

Compare the above to Saint Mirren...The CIC would have control, the club runs at even just now (fair enough, cashflow requires 100K to deal with peaks and troughs), the club is in the SPL, the SPL currently has a TV deal, the ground is a new all seater instead of a falling apart ground "with character" and we're looking for 700 or so to pay off the £1.5 million. Imagine if we had 1,300 members and voted to put the extra 600 members fees towards the club (not just on the park). MYFC was a global target, but Saint Mirren's CIC could also be targeted at football fans around the world. Even if we only get 100 non-Saints fans in year one it'd be worth it. I don't believe the CIC would work outwith it's own promises and there'd be uproar if vote results weren't actioned. There also really shouldn't be a lack of trust amongst us, we all want a succesful Saint Mirren and we should be intelligent enough to look at debt levels around the SPL and realise it's not the way to go.

Edited June 6, 2012 by TsuMirren

[BoWSaint]

So why don't they trust the fans/owners?

You're way off on the co-op issue. there isn't a real co-op around that wasn't formed (I.e. they had the opportunity to vote/approve the big set up decisions) with the members fully included. So thats a big no to democracy before it's born and a big no to being involved properly in the economics of the co-op.

Since you're quoting rochdale 1844 rules can you do me a favour and flag up the bit that says anyone can get a seat on the BoD if they chuck 15,000 (albeit redundant) shares at it?

They trust the fans/owners enough to give them overriding control of the whole thing! If you don't like the way it has been set up but like the general idea then there is nothing stopping you joining up and voting to change it all. Make it however you want.

[Guest somner9]

They trust the fans/owners enough to give them overriding control of the whole thing! If you don't like the way it has been set up but like the general idea then there is nothing stopping you joining up and voting to change it all. Make it however you want.

The decisions and dishing out of Bod Seats and perks has already taken place, as far as I'm aware none of that was ever put to the people servicing the debt. So if i'm not allowed to be fully involved, then that is by design of the proposers

[St. Sid]

From a brilliant post earlier to one of the worst you have ever made on here.

Ranting and raving about potential season ticket boycotts on one thread and outraged that some fans would "encourage" others not to renew (when there wasn't one post doing so) to this post above, where you are clearly inciting fans not to sign up to be part of fan ownership and governance and claiming that if they do they are not real fans and don't care about the community or the club.

Downright f**king shameful, John. Hypocritical, brazen-faced and shameful.

You may feel like you need more info.

You may believe that 10,000 Hours are up to something sneaky

You might think that the whole thing is an elaborate way for REA to own the club at our expense

You might have spat the dummy out cos you weren't invited to a bum-in

You may have been left out of a piece of information

You may think you have been misled

That is no reason for you to encourage honest, smart and SMFC-loving fans not sign-up. You are deliberately trying to hurt the club, the town and the fans. And, unlike those not renewing their season tickets, your crusade to not get people to sign up to the CiC will hurt the long term future of the club - not just for one season but possibly forever. To use your own expression against you, it is bawbaggery of the highest possible order.

If people truly care about the club (and/or the town) and can afford, by hook or by crook, £10 per month, then they should be signing up for this. Every bit of uncertainty will be able to ironed out at a later date.

It is abhorrent that Sid is trying to encourage people not to sign up, deliberately trying to hurt the future of the club.

ktf, quality meltdown Buddie.

What I have been saying is simply that a fans group who have seen more information than any of us have raised concerns about the CIC. They have asked all fans to investigate the CIC properly. In order to be able to do that we ned to see the information. It is proviing to hard to get that information. It is being drip fed under pressure, rather than presented to us in a formal written document that we can take time to review.

We had to fight to get visibility of the draft constitution. I bleive it was Somner9 that leaked the SMiSA request; however I had also been requesting it and other fans were also keen to see it. We got the document - which is shit - and we provided our comments as requested.....what has happened to the doc as a result of our feedback? Where is the updated draft constitution amended based on the feedback. Not one sentence has been corrected - I don't think they've enver corrected all the typos that must has sent bluto into a panic attack.

To address your own bizarre list of concerns not mines:

You may feel like you need more info. - I don't "feel" I need more info. I know I need more info and so does everyone else. I can tell the lack of understanding of the CIC and the constitution from reading people's posts and from speaking to people. And this is irrespective of whether they support the CIC or not.

You may believe that 10,000 Hours are up to something sneaky - I don't beleive anything of the sort. I have stated that there is not enough information available to fans - that has been admitted by REA and grudgingly acknowledged by some of the 10000 Hours "fan-rallying team".

You might think that the whole thing is an elaborate way for REA to own the club at our expense - "might think", what the f"k does that actually mean? I do not have enough information currently to assess what might happen after the 52% shareholding transaction happens. No one does. REA's interest is and always has been controlling 10000 Hours - not that the venture has been restructured that is worth looking at again. What does his control of 10000 Hours now mean for the running of SMFC?

You might have spat the dummy out cos you weren't invited to a bum-in - you couldn't be more wrong on this one. I was invited into the 10000 Hours "bum-in" early on. Not being a bummer the offer was wasted on me. I have zero interest in using St Mirren FC as a networking vehicle. St Mirren is more than a mere short-term business opportunity for me. St Mirren have shown me the greatest hospitality and invited me into their community. I have shared to many good times with too many good St Mirren fans to trade that all in for some old grammarian networking bum-in. You have to remember that all the networking bollox is second nature to some of the key players in 10000 Hours. It is there, it just doesn't sit well with me personally to be potentially compromised by it. Hence my personal rejection of it. I'll leave all that nonsense for the "fan-rallying team".

You may have been left out of a piece of information - I have very little information on the new CIC structure. To be honest I had very little information on the previous CIC structure. What I did have was a better understanding of the previous process. The CIC never got anywhere near to being at the stage were we should have been fretting over the detail. During the previous structure / process I had the reassurance that SMISA were involved and supportive. That has clearly changed. I doubt that change has happened on a whim.

You may think you have been misled - no, I don't think we have been misled. I do believe that current behaviours do not reflect the original and necessary values of the CIC. I suspect that you may not uindersatnd what I mean by that - more than happy to expand on any point as always.

We are fast approaching a deadline that fans did not request. It has been forced on us. What I would have expected to see is 10000 Hours put together a sign up drive based on clear information. Instead we are seeing a push based on rumours of foreign buyers. We are seeing supporters groups like SMiSA having their integrity questioned without any basis for that whatsoever.

SMISA are being pressed for information. From my understanding of the last public meeting, SMISA have been put in a very difficult position. They have seen the information that we haven't. They couldn;'t even pass the information they have seen onto their own general membership as they are under some form of confidentiality agreement. That is my take on what I have heard at the public meeting, and that was what I picked up from their exchanges with REA, who did not offer to remove them from their commercial in confidence position. I find it extraordinary that none of the "10000 Hours fan-rallying team" haven't helped fans understand this as they should certainly be aware of it.

This now needs to open communication, not communication / information that suits agendas or entrenched camps.

My biggest issue is the deadline and the lack of information being made available. Throwing SMISA's words of warning and current withdrawal of support I am more than comfortable in recommending that fans challenge the deadline and request more time to study the detailed information on the CIC when it is made available.

There are no wild accusations in that - it is just a very fair appeal to common sense. We need time to review information that has as yet not been delivered to us. You might not like that - but that is just tough titties.

[buddiecat]

Fair enough.

You have surmised why you think SMISA have acted the way they have. SMISA should tell us all EXACTLY why they have withdrew their support. You have to ask...Why the secrecy and were their members consulted about this decision?

I have re-confirmed my DD and I look forward to perhaps influencing the future running of our Club, as a fan, as best I can. All for the price of 30 cigarettes (or 3 pints) a month.

I'll start by listening to (and asking) a few questions at the meeting on Thursday night. You coming along? It might be informing/interesting.

I don't know Dick either Peter, but I supect he is the same Bud who uses question marks at the end of almost every sentence... whom you should know!

Anyway, who is Somner?

going out for my birthday tomorrow night so won't be at any meeting, i'm not intersted in signing up so i'm putting a stop on posting in this topic, too easy to get involved in debate i shouldn't be in, AS for dick slexia , sorry i just thought you new him since he called you colin, i've no idea who dick is at all, and you'll need to ask somner for his own identity, i don't think somner and dick atre the same person

[Vambo57]

going out for my birthday tomorrow night so won't be at any meeting, i'm not intersted in signing up so i'm putting a stop on posting in this topic, too easy to get involved in debate i shouldn't be in, AS for dick slexia , sorry i just thought you new him since he called you colin, i've no idea who dick is at all, and you'll need to ask somner for his own identity, i don't think somner and dick atre the same person

Definitely not!

Edited June 6, 2012 by Vambo57

[Guest somner9]

The death of fan ownership was confirmed at approx 19:20pm 7 June 2012 by the following tweet:

"As of tomorrow morning, anyone who wishes to run for election to the CIC board can email [email protected] and ask to be considered."

So 10000 hours version of democracy goes a bit like: "you pay for us to put ourselves on the BoD, then we decide which of you we want on the wee BoD"

You couldn't f**ken make it up!

Liked all the tweets emphasising we are now being propped up by the 'Big Issue' that must mean I've already got a membership for all those £'s over the years.

Especially interested in the tweets that kept repeating there is no debt to the club (which as a parent org they confirmed in other tweets there is) followed by the less than startling revelation that they hadn't sold any £25k memberships!!! So the great GLS masterplan to halve the debt hasn't worked, will he keep his directorship based on this shocking level of performance???

Oh the reason it (10000 hours)hasn't been successful apparently is because we (SMFC) are so successful (Shull did you get that wan). Although SG in todays Herald insists we haven't moved on at all off the park.

They did at least confirm:

A - it's not a co-operative, and didn't seem to want to discuss that

B - there is no eveidence of Member democratic control (the self elected board choose who sits on the wee board, and the exec board just get in because)

C - they didn't want to talk about who and why they have promised certain groups the club's revenue generating opportunities?

D - and the reason people, community groups, businesses haven't got behind it is mainly down to the cheek of SMFC fans who discuss it at length on their fan forums

add to that the selection of scare story slides, the amount of times they repeated the selling consortium's THREAT! that they will sell to whoever before August, and the now ritual slating of Smisa and or anyone who dain to challenge their proposal.

Nothing changed, it's not democratic by their own admission. And if 10000 hours refuse to accept it hasn't been widely supported because they haven't been able to make a plan last until lunchtime then more fool them.

Come on other bidders let's be 'Aving you!

Edited June 8, 2012 by somner9

[ktf]

The death of fan ownership was confirmed at approx 19:20pm 7 June 2012 by the following tweet:

"As of tomorrow morning, anyone who wishes to run for election to the CIC board can email [email protected] and ask to be considered."

So 10000 hours version of democracy goes a bit like: "you pay for us to put ourselves on the BoD, then we decide which of you we want on the wee BoD"

You couldn't f**ken make it up!

Liked all the tweets emphasising we are now being propped up by the 'Big Issue' that must mean I've already got a membership for all those £'s over the years.

Especially interested in the tweets that kept repeating there is no debt to the club (which as a parent org they confirmed in other tweets there is) followed by the less than startling revelation that they hadn't sold any £25k memberships!!! So the great GLS masterplan to halve the debt hasn't worked, will he keep his directorship based on this shocking level of performance???

Oh the reason it (10000 hours)hasn't been successful apparently is because we (SMFC) are so successful (Shull did you get that wan). Although SG in todays Herald insists we haven't moved on at all off the park.

They did at least confirm:

A - it's not a co-operative, and didn't seem to want to discuss that

B - there is no eveidence of Member democratic control (the self elected board choose who sits on the wee board, and the exec board just get in because)

C - they didn't want to talk about who and why they have promised certain groups the club's revenue generating opportunities?

D - and the reason people, community groups, businesses haven't got behind it is mainly down to the cheek of SMFC fans who discuss it at length on their fan forums

add to that the selection of scare story slides, the amount of times they repeated the selling consortium's THREAT! that they will sell to whoever before August, and the now ritual slating of Smisa and or anyone who dain to challenge their proposal.

Nothing changed, it's not democratic by their own admission. And if 10000 hours refuse to accept it hasn't been widely supported because they haven't been able to make a plan last until lunchtime then more fool them.

Come on other bidders let's be 'Aving you!

There are more holes, inaccuracies, false statements and downright lies in this post than I can even attempt to address right now, on my phone.

It's hardly surprising but still astounding that you attempt to give an account of a meeting that you didn't even go to.

[Guest somner9]

There are more holes, inaccuracies, false statements and downright lies in this post than I can even attempt to address right now, on my phone.

It's hardly surprising but still astounding that you attempt to give an account of a meeting that you didn't even go to.

So sorry about that, got my info from Div's tweets so that should be your first port of call for in your words: " holes, inaccuracies, false statements and downright lies"

Hope your not driving and beelin?

[David Mc]

So sorry about that, got my info from Div's tweets so that should be your first port of call for in your words: " holes, inaccuracies, false statements and downright lies"

Hope your not driving and beelin?

It appears you now have a choice. A level of involvement however distasteful or two unknown buyers. Which would you rather have and why?

[Guest somner9]

It appears you now have a choice. A level of involvement however distasteful or two unknown buyers. Which would you rather have and why?

In 10000 hours model their is no level of involvement other than paying for the self elected board to lord it, however if your face fits you might get a seat on the junior board, which is a bit like a school pupils board (No scissors, or matches)

Lets see who the fit and proper bidders the selling BoD have selected are!

[ktf]

So sorry about that, got my info from Div's tweets so that should be your first port of call for in your words: " holes, inaccuracies, false statements and downright lies"

Hope your not driving and beelin?

Neither driving nor "beelin". Your attention-seeking nonsense doesn't emotionally affect me in the slightest. Thanks for considering my well-being though.

I'll recount Div's tweets at some point today. However it is worth considering that he was typing as it was being spoken, which often leads to missing clarity and the inability to retract something that hasn't been accurately communicated, and, he only has 140 characters to get the message across. You should watch the live Sky news subtitles to see what I mean.

Perhaps though, to save yourself from looking like a tit, you should leave the summary of meetings to those who were in attendance... Although this wouldn't help push your agenda, would it?

[ktf]

In 10000 hours model their is no level of involvement other than paying for the self elected board to lord it, however if your face fits you might get a seat on the junior board, which is a bit like a school pupils board (No scissors, or matches)

Lets see who the fit and proper bidders the selling BoD have selected are!

That was addressed last night and explained fully. What you have just stated us 100% untrue.

If you had been there you would have known. However ignorance allows you to further your agenda.

[Guest somner9]

Neither driving nor "beelin". Your attention-seeking nonsense doesn't emotionally affect me in the slightest. Thanks for considering my well-being though.

I'll recount Div's tweets at some point today. However it is worth considering that he was typing as it was being spoken, which often leads to missing clarity and the inability to retract something that hasn't been accurately communicated, and, he only has 140 characters to get the message across. You should watch the live Sky news subtitles to see what I mean.

Perhaps though, to save yourself from looking like a tit, you should leave the summary of meetings to those who were in attendance... Although this wouldn't help push your agenda, would it?

Now come on are you suggesting Div would intentionally edit the tweet-feed? Look forward to your in depth analysis later when we've moved on.

[dave.j]

In 10000 hours model their is no level of involvement other than paying for the self elected board to lord it, however if your face fits you might get a seat on the junior board, which is a bit like a school pupils board (No scissors, or matches)

again, complete and utter rubbish and not how it will work at all.

[Guest somner9]

again, complete and utter rubbish and not how it will work at all.

Who decides which individuals get even a chance at the junior board? The self elected 10000 hours board, unless div mistyped that whole tweet???

[dave.j]

what junior board?

the 4 folk on the board just now are there to steer the CIC upto and through the elections. spaces are available. upto another 11, i believe. to be filled by CIC members.

Those running for election will be subject to the members. the membership will vote and the membership will decide who takes up these places.

any Junior board as you call it, will only be required if the elected main board decide that a sub board is required, based on a project they may work on... the sub board will be made up of CIC members, probably with skill sets or an interest in helping.

[div]

I feel as though I have to respond to this.

It was my fear that in a fast moving meeting, limited by the restrictions of Twitter that someone, probably Somner, would pick it apart.

The death of fan ownership was confirmed at approx 19:20pm 7 June 2012 by the following tweet:

"As of tomorrow morning, anyone who wishes to run for election to the CIC board can email [email protected] and ask to be considered."

So 10000 hours version of democracy goes a bit like: "you pay for us to put ourselves on the BoD, then we decide which of you we want on the wee BoD"

You couldn't f**ken make it up!

Those interested in standing for election were asked to note their interest to 10000Hours. They would then be asked to submit a one page summary of why they thought they should be considered. ALL of those summaries would then be published by 10000Hours and the members asked to vote for who they wanted to sit on the board. That is exactly how it was described last night, my apologies if my Tweet was misleading.

Liked all the tweets emphasising we are now being propped up by the 'Big Issue' that must mean I've already got a membership for all those £'s over the years.

You can read all about Big Issue Invest on their website http://www.bigissueinvest.com. Not sure what is wrong with it ?

Especially interested in the tweets that kept repeating there is no debt to the club (which as a parent org they confirmed in other tweets there is) followed by the less than startling revelation that they hadn't sold any £25k memberships!!! So the great GLS masterplan to halve the debt hasn't worked, will he keep his directorship based on this shocking level of performance???

There is no debt to the club. The £500k being borrowed is being borrowed by 10000Hours, not St.Mirren.

Oh the reason it (10000 hours)hasn't been successful apparently is because we (SMFC) are so successful (Shull did you get that wan). Although SG in todays Herald insists we haven't moved on at all off the park.

What was meant by that is that the general concensus of the fans is that the outgoing board have done a good job, and that the vast majority would be quite happy for them to stay on doing what they are doing. Except they don't want to !

Can't really be bothered with the rest but just wanted to put the record straight on the above.

[ktf]

There are two main shareholding groups: 10000 Hrs (majority shareholding) and 1877 (minority, made up of anyone with 1877 shares or more). Each will have an elected board, which in turn can put up for election a proportional (per shares or the group) number of people onto the club BoD. 10000 Hrs, having the majority shareholding, will always have the majority of places on the club BoD.

The 1877 board has been referred to as the non-executive board, simply because it has the minority of shares and so has no real power to act, except to put up for election a minority of members to the club BoD (which is still a good proposal IMO).

The CiC elected board will have the power, along with being able to put up for election members of the club board, to make decisions, as the CiC members see fit, on the running of the football club and the CiC.

All of the above process is done democratically with elections, votes and, if group members disagree with the decisions of thier elected board, the process of AGM/EGM, where decisions can be made on board membership, the constitution and other major decisions.

There is nothing hidden, nothing sinister and no "junior" or otherwise board.

[St. Sid]

what junior board?

the 4 folk on the board just now are there to steer the CIC upto and through the elections. spaces are available. upto another 11, i believe. to be filled by CIC members.

Those running for election will be subject to the members. the membership will vote and the membership will decide who takes up these places.

any Junior board as you call it, will only be required if the elected main board decide that a sub board is required, based on a project they may work on... the sub board will be made up of CIC members, probably with skill sets or an interest in helping.

We're not allowed to talk about process now, it gets in the way of CIC momentum.

[Guest somner9]

We're not allowed to talk about process now, it gets in the way of CIC momentum.

As Craig Whyte once said, "if it wasn't me it'd be someone else"....

The process driving the 10000 hours bus has broken down three times on the way to pick up the faithfull, if the faithful pay their subs, and the 10000 hours bus breaks down on the way to the game it should'nt be a surprise.

[div]

At least John has the balls to turn up at the meetings, listen to what's being said, and articulate his concerns.

On the other hand Somner you just come across as someone who doesnt really have anything better to do than troll this online. You aren't really interested in the detail and you seem to be treating it as some sort of game.

Pretty high stakes to be playing games with IMO.