What "information" Is It That People Want ?

[St. Sid]

SMISA have had just as long as REA has had................and to date I dont think I have had any information as to their take over or even plans to do anything.

We have not had the information that is required to make a choice

Personally I'd prefer it both orgs were working together, rather than it being an either or.

[Guest somner9]

Personally I'd prefer it both orgs were working together, rather than it being an either or.

Perhaps if the stonewalling continues tonight could well be the tipping point for Smisa to seek the consensus of the support and approach the BoD to set out a proper process and timeframe for real fan ownership?

Could see a groundswell of support if they did so, as we know it would be in keeping with how they've conducted themselves up till now.

[St. Sid]

Perhaps if the stonewalling continues tonight could well be the tipping point for Smisa to seek the consensus of the support and approach the BoD to set out a proper process and timeframe for real fan ownership?

Could see a groundswell of support if they did so, as we know it would be in keeping with how they've conducted themselves up till now.

I don't think that is in SMiSA's game plan. I would imagine they would still like fans representation on the SMFC Board, and would want to continue down that path. I don;t beleive for a second that SMISA want control of the club. They just want it to be in safe hands run properly and ideally have fan representation on the BoD. They were previously supportive of the CIC, now they are not. Their concern must lie within the "safe hands" aspect of their aims.

SMiSA appear to see a threat to the club whereas 10000 Hours sales pitch has always been that the CIC structure would protect the club. I expect there will be a lot of what if? scenarios covered tonight. I think under scrutiny the CIC does offer some risk the club. There is no 100% guarantee that it won't fall into the hands of foreign ownership within the first 6 months. I would hope it would be highly unlikely, but the minute you introduce £1.5Million of debt into the equation the club is at risk. Debt = risk. We need to understand the extent of the risk in detail, and that is what we should hope to have demostrated tonight - however, it should also be backed up with detailed information in Black & White that 10000 Hours is going to underwrite. Until the CIC becomes a legal entity and the constitution is formally agreed then I don't see how the fans / the club should be the ones at risk. If the fans decide it is shite and can't agree to the constitution then the deal should be able to be reversed and everyone's money refunded. Any resulting losses should be the responsibility of the interim BoD / 10000 Hours team.

[Stuart Dickson]

When the 10000 hours epic is pronounced deed! and all the flak has cleared, could well have paved the way for a Smisa iniative??? Theres obviously an appetite for real fan ownership, time for them to up their game and seek consensus from the support?

Yeah possibly Somner, but the problem could be the funders. If they've already wasted a lot of time on the first bid, they might not be so keen to tie up the funds and put in the hours on a second one - especially if there wasn't enough support to make the first application viable.

You've also got to remember that SMiSA have had 13 years to capture fans imagination and to get organised to buy the club and at the end of that period they have 3877 shares and £50k in cash. Nowhere near enough to get 52% control of the club. I don't think their track record would inspire much confidence.

[TsuMirren]

looking at the info available. it seems that the CIC model is very similar to the existing Smisa model, i.e an IPS working under the rules of supporters direct, with similar objectives... However...

Why has a board been elected without proper legal, elections taking place?

the current "board" in effect should be known a a steering commitee, and once everything is approved, an open election should be held where members can run for election.

IT is also worth noting that as per rule25.2 of the draft constituition, the current CIC board can remain in place for 3 years. and as per rule 25.4, on that 3rd year's AGM, they can be reappointed, without going through the election process.

Infact, open elections to the CIC board don't seem to have been mentioned at all.

reading through everything, it seems that the CIC is in actual fact another Supporters trust, just with a bigger share than usual.

it is all very well having 52% of the shares... what happens if people are elected onto the Club Board without contributing money and purchasing shares, as has happenned at Firhill?

what has happenned there is the Trust in effect no longer have 10% of the vote via shares, as many people voting in the board room, don't own shares, but still have a vote a director.

The FAQ states that three CIC members will be elected on to the board. I don't think it'd be possible to be elected on to the CIC places without being a paid up member. Firhill situation is pretty much impossible, just like we won't sell a stand for housing or whatever that nonsense was.As for the draft constitution, it's draft and we'll all get a chance to feed in to it. Personally, I think 2 years is the maximum anyone should be on unchallenged...that'd be for the first say 1 or 2 through the election. So, say we elect 7 then the 1 or 2 getting the most votes have two years and that drops down to say 1 and a half, 1 and even 6 months depending on how many votes the 7 get. The board have been elected to give continuity alongside confidence to the funders...I'll avoid the whole debate of time and money given to the project to date.

[St. Sid]

Yeah possibly Somner, but the problem could be the funders. If they've already wasted a lot of time on the first bid, they might not be so keen to tie up the funds and put in the hours on a second one - especially if there wasn't enough support to make the first application viable.

You've also got to remember that SMiSA have had 13 years to capture fans imagination and to get organised to buy the club and at the end of that period they have 3877 shares and £50k in cash. Nowhere near enough to get 52% control of the club. I don't think their track record would inspire much confidence.

I don't think that is right Stu. I was trying to work out shen SMiSA started the other day and am pretty sure they launched it on this web site. So it must have been around 2003 at the earliest. They guys involved in setting up SMiSA did organise the first Q&A way back when Hendrie was on gardening leave and I think that's when the first seeds were sown. They were invovled in buying Kean in Dec 2004 though, so they must have raised a few bob by then?

[St. Sid]

The FAQ states that three CIC members will be elected on to the board. I don't think it'd be possible to be elected on to the CIC places without being a paid up member. Firhill situation is pretty much impossible, just like we won't sell a stand for housing or whatever that nonsense was.As for the draft constitution, it's draft and we'll all get a chance to feed in to it. Personally, I think 2 years is the maximum anyone should be on unchallenged...that'd be for the first say 1 or 2 through the election. So, say we elect 7 then the 1 or 2 getting the most votes have two years and that drops down to say 1 and a half, 1 and even 6 months depending on how many votes the 7 get. The board have been elected to give continuity alongside confidence to the funders...I'll avoid the whole debate of time and money given to the project to date.

The FAQ in the online equivalent of shite-paper and a draft constitution is only slightly better - both are trumped by ppt blah, blah at meetings. The FAQ's are contradicting the draft constitution. Organisations will often have rules and not abide by them - not something I would hope we will see the CIC / SMFC doing too often. However, having a draft constitution contradicted by FAQs on how an org not yet formed is going to work is embarrassing.

[Stuart Dickson]

I don't think that is right Stu. I was trying to work out shen SMiSA started the other day and am pretty sure they launched it on this web site. So it must have been around 2003 at the earliest. They guys involved in setting up SMiSA did organise the first Q&A way back when Hendrie was on gardening leave and I think that's when the first seeds were sown. They were invovled in buying Kean in Dec 2004 though, so they must have raised a few bob by then?

Nah it's got to be back further than that Sid. 2003 was when I sold my business. SMiSA was up and running long before I did that. I'm also pretty certain that had anyone at the club set up anything during the period Tom Hendrie was on garden leave I wouldn't have been in the slightest bit interested in joining up - and I did join SMiSA right at the start.

ETA - found this

http://www.stmirren-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/smisa_launches_39072/index.shtml

It was 2002.

Edited June 7, 2012 by Stuart Dickson

[TsuMirren]

The FAQ in the online equivalent of shite-paper and a draft constitution is only slightly better - both are trumped by ppt blah, blah at meetings. The FAQ's are contradicting the draft constitution. Organisations will often have rules and not abide by them - not something I would hope we will see the CIC / SMFC doing too often. However, having a draft constitution contradicted by FAQs on how an org not yet formed is going to work is embarrassing.

Yup, can't argue with that although maybe there hasn't been time to amend the draft constitution...I dunno.

I know that at Ebb...erm, a wee club down South...I made a point of ensuring that rules were abided and that the processes were followed. It's one of the things that got me elected on to the board and one of the things that ended up with the club vice-chairman saying I was dishonest and lacked integrity. I think this was because I dared to engage with the MYFC members and would let them know exactly how decisions were made. That said, he also wasn't happy that I questioned signing new players when there was a 300K shortfall in the budget. Anyway, I'm sure that I won't be alone in checking that rules are in place etc. On here alone I think we see a number of people who aren't idiots, you'll certainly want to make sure things are run properly, and that as a group we can make this a success. I can't remember the % figure in earlier presentations, but if we can build the membership base and add to the budget then great. SMISA will also take a lot of credit along the road for planting the fan involvement seed in our minds for the past however long it's been...has it been a decade yet?

As they're the only two real documents available, I'm more inclined to go with the FAQ for now and trust that as a group we can mould to suit going forward. I do understand all the "gaaah, f**k sake, ya bastards..." but most of it is misplaced, especially as changing it is within the hands of the person complaining.

Edited June 7, 2012 by TsuMirren

[St. Sid]

Nah it's got to be back further than that Sid. 2003 was when I sold my business. SMiSA was up and running long before I did that. I'm also pretty certain that had anyone at the club set up anything during the period Tom Hendrie was on garden leave I wouldn't have been in the slightest bit interested in joining up - and I did join SMiSA right at the start.

It was fishily launched in February 2002. Found a press release on Gingy Stu's site - his footy-mad thing is actually starting to become a useful wee resource now its a few years old:

SMISA (St. Mirren Independant Supporters Association) has officialy launched, with the aim of raising enough funds to gain a seat on the board.

The Paisley Daily Express today reports the official launch of SMISA, which stands for the St. Mirren independant Supporter's Association. Their aim is to raise the necessary £100,000 to gain a seat on the board so as to have a say on how any other monies they raise should be spent.

Chairman of the fund iain Crawford said this to the PDE A group of us got together for a couple of meetings because we were concerned about the way things are going both on and off the field.

"We did a bit of work looking into starting a supporters' trust and as a result on February 13 we formed an independent supporters association, with no links to the club whatsoever, called the St Mirren Independent Supporters Association.

"Basically we're a group of St Mirren supporters who are concerned for the welfare of the club.

"Out of courtesy to the club chairman Stewart Gilmour, we met with him last week to let him know what we were doing.

"He told us he was very excited at the idea and that we'd have to raise £100,000 to buy the shares to get ourselves a seat on the board.

"A number of us, including myself are shareholders, but shares that have already been issued are of no use to us, we need new ones.

"But Mr Gilmour said that if we raised the money the club would issue shares for that amount and that would allow us a seat on the board.

"Being independent allows us to raise funds to get ourselves a seat on the board and because we are independent and have no connection to the club, we have the power to decide how the money we raise is spent."

Gilmour said in the same article "Anything they're going to do can only be for the club and they have come up with a lot of positive ideas.

"Like everybody else, if they want a seat on the board they will have to come up with the required money. We can't guarantee them a seat, although the likelihood is that they'll get one."

[Stuart Dickson]

It was fishily launched in February 2002. Found a press release on Gingy Stu's site - his footy-mad thing is actually starting to become a useful wee resource now its a few years old:

Yeah found the same article Sid and linked to my original post. I still thought it was further back than that, but all the same 10 years and they didn't manage their stated aim of member representation on the board, never mind get anywhere near close to a 52% shareholding.

[div]

I was a member of SMiSA from day one and was excited by the prospect of what the organisation could achieve, much in the same way as I am of 10000Hours today.

I left SMiSA once Love Street was sold as I couldn't really see where the organisation was going to go after that.

No doubt that the team there have done some great things but I'm disappointed that they and 10000Hours couldn't work together on the current bid.

[aldo_j]

I don't mean this as any disrespect to the SMISA guys, but are we paying too much attention to what is now a small group of fans?

Undoubtedly they have achieved some fantastic things in the past but if they really wanted to mount a takeover then they would have when the club went up for sale.

The reality, as Div said, is that they are a small group of fans and we probably have travel clubs of a bigger size.

[St. Sid]

Perhaps if the club BoD had looked at a method of "co-operative" ownership as part of the Season Ticket purchase a great deal of benefits could have been provided that may have appealed to a larger group whereby a portion of the money supplied by the supporter could have been channelled to other areas to support the club in the long term (Youth Development) and supporters initiatives such as a co-operative ownership fund.

The £10 on the season ticket approach would be an even tougher sell to the tin foil hat brigade. Imagine the BoD coming up with....we're putting up your season ticket; however none of that cash will be invested in the club. We're going to save it up for ten years, then walk away with all the cash.

[St. Sid]

I don't mean this as any disrespect to the SMISA guys, but are we paying too much attention to what is now a small group of fans?

Undoubtedly they have achieved some fantastic things in the past but if they really wanted to mount a takeover then they would have when the club went up for sale.

The reality, as Div said, is that they are a small group of fans and we probably have travel clubs of a bigger size.

I don't think we have got that much to go on though aldo_j. There'll be another ppt presentation tonight and perhaps a Q&A stramash. SMiSA appear to be the only people outside of those with vested interests that have had any real visibility of the proposals that are made up of umpteen agreements. The fact that they have expressed concern does require some consideration.

[div]

I don't mean this as any disrespect to the SMISA guys, but are we paying too much attention to what is now a small group of fans?

I think it's symbolic more than anything else.

The fact that SMiSA aren't supporting the bid has led to all sorts of wild conjecture about why they aren't supporting it.

There is little doubt that some people are being put off getting involved because of the statements that SMiSA have been making.

I don't really know what has gone on between the two organisations but the very last thing we need is for the two of them to go head to head and get involved in a slanging match.

I hope SMiSA members are present tonight and can articulate their concerns in front of everyone and I equally hope that 10000Hours can answer those concerns with positive responses.

I know that Gordon spent some time with SMiSA a couple of weeks ago once he had got fully involved with the bid, but that meeting doesn't seem to have changed the outlook of the SMiSA guys.

A real shame and at the end of the day we will never get anywhere with any bid unless we are all pulling in the same direction.

[St. Sid]

I think it's symbolic more than anything else.

The fact that SMiSA aren't supporting the bid has led to all sorts of wild conjecture about why they aren't supporting it.

There is little doubt that some people are being put off getting involved because of the statements that SMiSA have been making.

I don't really know what has gone on between the two organisations but the very last thing we need is for the two of them to go head to head and get involved in a slanging match.

I hope SMiSA members are present tonight and can articulate their concerns in front of everyone and I equally hope that 10000Hours can answer those concerns with positive responses.

I know that Gordon spent some time with SMiSA a couple of weeks ago once he had got fully involved with the bid, but that meeting doesn't seem to have changed the outlook of the SMiSA guys.

A real shame and at the end of the day we will never get anywhere with any bid unless we are all pulling in the same direction.

Sort of agree; however if 10000 Hours and now GLS have met with SMISA and understand their concerns why can they state what SMISA's concerns are and explain why we shouldn't be concerned. Both parties have left a shooty inny for all sort of wild conspiracy theories for the the tinfoil hat brigade. We have seen some specific concerns expressed in the SMISA website articles around the constitution (or was that from Balfy) and the SPL rules. I don't think it is a huge leap to make that their concerns about the financial viability of the CIC and the implications for SMFC should the CIC fail.

[dave.j]

can somene clear up all the relevant abreviations?

smisa.... yup got that.

CIC... yup got that too.

10kh... another name for CIC?

REA... not sure on this one.

RA... richard atkinson... director of st mirren/CIC

SG.... the big dog.

GLS.... nope, not got that.

[St. Sid]

can somene clear up all the relevant abreviations?

smisa.... yup got that.

CIC... yup got that too.

10kh... another name for CIC?

REA... not sure on this one.

RA... richard atkinson... director of st mirren/CIC

SG.... the big dog.

GLS.... nope, not got that.

10Kh...10,000 Hours - a brand for the kick but really REA & Chris Stewart - not St Mirren fans.

REA is RA...Richard Edwina Atkinson...

GLS is Gordon Scott aka HungryHippo/animal/yul brynner allegedly. I've only met GLS a couple of times - once at a CIC meeting and once at Saints Aid - very creepy when davidg was rubbing liniment into GLS's legs in the changing rooms. They seem to have a Mr Burns / Smithers thing going on.

[Guest somner9]

The night Smisa broke ranks and saved fan ownership???

[Hambud]

Which "thread" or website is best for me to read up on the structure of the co-op/cic and buying gls shares?

[BoWSaint]

Which "thread" or website is best for me to read up on the structure of the co-op/cic and buying gls shares?

This one http://www.10000hours.org/

[St. Sid]

Which "thread" or website is best for me to read up on the structure of the co-op/cic and buying gls shares?

There isn't any structure published. There is a draft constitution; however it has already been conceded that it is shite and purely temporary but not up for discussion or amendment until after the shares have been procured.

[Hambud]

There isn't any structure published. There is a draft constitution; however it has already been conceded that it is shite and purely temporary but not up for discussion or amendment until after the shares have been procured.

ok , so from my understanding you get into 1877 club by buying 1877 shares for £25k or 87 club by spending £3k on 20 shares, presumably its only GLS shares that are up for sale? Is that correct? Where do existing shareholders that are members of the CIC (other than GLS) stand in the proposal? Just a shareholder that gets to go to Saints AGM and vote in CIC issues presumably? Will CIC members get to go to Saints AGM's?

[St. Sid]

ok , so from my understanding you get into 1877 club by buying 1877 shares for £25k or 87 club by spending £3k on 20 shares, presumably its only GLS shares that are up for sale? Is that correct? Where do existing shareholders that are members of the CIC (other than GLS) stand in the proposal? Just a shareholder that gets to go to Saints AGM and vote in CIC issues presumably? Will CIC members get to go to Saints AGM's?

No point in asking me I'm sorry to say Hambud. I wouldn't commit to anything on behalf of 10000 Hours as their version of what it actually is, how it is funded and how it will work is subject to change. Jeremy Paxman couldn't get a straight and dependable answer out of them.