Joint Statement By 10000Hours And Selling Consortium

[kpj]

I'm rather concerned that the club is apparently in the position that it would probably face administration if the Sky revenue vanished, shouldn't this have been a possibility that was taken into account by the club itself regardless of the Rangers situation, 52% up for sale. Are we really on such shaky ground?

Anyway the vote should be no regardless of what happens to the TV contract, it would be a disgrace for St. Mirren to accept this rigged cartel of a league when the opportunity is there to kill it.

[Stuart Dickson]

So here's how I see the debate at the moment. Fans want the board of directors to attend the SPL meeting and vote no to Newco Rangers being in the SPL. The board of directors have said that since 10000hours now have a significant number of St Mirren supporters on board they will canvass their views. 10000hours are going to organise a vote - presumably based on their draft constitution and how 10000hours will work in practice once/if the deal is concluded.

Now some St Mirren fans are angry that they are being given the responsibility of taking the vote because they believe the consequences of the no vote will put St Mirren FC into financial difficulty (something that has been obvious forever FFS).....

Take the f**king thing at face value. If a No vote is going to put the club in financial difficulty it doesn't matter whether directors take the vote under pressure from the fans, or the fans themselves do it. The outcome is still the same it's just you've got the responsibility for the choice. Vote No to a Newco and you have to live with the consequences, vote yes to a Newco and the anger and the boycotts will just look f**king stupid.

[div]

A wee bit naughty there div......I have actually been fairly clear on my psoition on this. I have no interest in waiting. The decision on scumgers is clear and easy - St Mirren should vote no - end of.

If the CIC can't happen without scumgers in the SPL then that is also an easy decision - no CIC. So why delay the decision on the SPL vote, and why not put it to ALL supporters, not just CIC members. This should be decided by the entire St Mirren community.

As I have said already, St.Mirren voting no makes hee-haw difference to the problem we, the club and the selling consortium faces which is uncertainty over this seasons SPL revenues.

Until we know what Sky are doing we are treading water. That is the long and short of it.

I'm quite alarmed you aren't understanding this. I think if I had given my 8 year old son the information I've given you today he would have understood it.

As usual you are intent on playing games and damaging both the club and the CIC at the same time.

[Stuart Dickson]

Usual petty emotive outrage that doesn't actually deal with the question. Why is it other SPL clubs are asking all of their fans - fans that don;t have to pay anything to vote....and it is all fans - not just a select few that have a vested interest in voting a certain way.

Not all fans have been gullible enough to sign up to the CIC ktf. In fact the majority of St Mirren fans have chosen not to join the CIC. Now a minority will be making a massive decision based on their willingness to pay for something they barely understand.

This vote is important enough to go the the entire St Mirren community - remember the St Mirren community ktf...the people that the CIC was supposed to be all about. Is this how the community is going to be treated moving forward?

Sid, that's not true at all. Motherwell have asked their Well Society members for their view - it's not an open vote to all fans. Aberdeen have spoken to representatives of their various supporter groups. Dundee United have spoken to an elite group of fans representatives. There is no open vote at any of those clubs. If anything 10000hours are being MORE democratic that the others by asking one third of their support to vote on the issue.

[Stuart Dickson]

Surely we are not seeing a situation where SG & Co delay the decision on the CiC just so that they can vote on the Newco.

Remember folks, No Newco = revised buying price = less £ for The Consortium.

I'm sure they will do the right thing and vote against these chancers.

All the rabid talk of "nae Sky deal".....does anyone seriously think that another broadcaster won't fill the void, albeit at a reduced rate, but if split equally, the clubs might not be that worse off. Apart from Celtic, and that's as good an argument as any.

That's the risk fans will have to take. Is a bird in the bush worth two in the hand?

[St. Sid]

As I have said already, St.Mirren voting no makes hee-haw difference to the problem we, the club and the selling consortium faces which is uncertainty over this seasons SPL revenues.

Great, then why not just vote no then? The fans are very clear on the fact that SMFC should vote no - why all the bollox about the cost to the club having to be weighed up by 10000 Hours members only?

[St. Sid]

Sid, that's not true at all. Motherwell have asked their Well Society members for their view - it's not an open vote to all fans. Aberdeen have spoken to representatives of their various supporter groups. Dundee United have spoken to an elite group of fans representatives. There is no open vote at any of those clubs. If anything 10000hours are being MORE democratic that the others by asking one third of their support to vote on the issue.

That's not true Stu....all of the above club have consulted with all fans and guess what the understanding is brutally clear - no vote. And you can add Caley to that list too. SMFC should stop fannying around and vote no.

[div]

I'm rather concerned that the club is apparently in the position that it would probably face administration if the Sky revenue vanished, shouldn't this have been a possibility that was taken into account by the club itself regardless of the Rangers situation, 52% up for sale. Are we really on such shaky ground?

Again at the risk of repeating myself the problem is not just the prospect of Sky revenues vanishing, its the fact that they could potentially vanish THIS SEASON.

We have players who are contracted for THIS SEASON.

We have to pay those players THIS SEASON.

If the Sky money disappeared overnight we still have to pay those players, we still have a cost base to support and suddenly we could be hundreds of thousands of pounds short.

Nobody could have forseen this coming last summer when we were dishing out 2 year contracts.

The players will have relegation clauses built into their contracts but they don't have a clause that protects us from the biggest media company in Europe suddenly invoking a clause in it's broadcasting contract to walk away or renegotiate the terms because a certain club has ceased to exist !

Let's not get too carried away on the administration point. I don't think Sky will be going anywhere, the whole point I am trying to make is about the uncertain situation the club finds itself in today.

[Stuart Dickson]

I'm rather concerned that the club is apparently in the position that it would probably face administration if the Sky revenue vanished, shouldn't this have been a possibility that was taken into account by the club itself regardless of the Rangers situation, 52% up for sale. Are we really on such shaky ground?

Anyway the vote should be no regardless of what happens to the TV contract, it would be a disgrace for St. Mirren to accept this rigged cartel of a league when the opportunity is there to kill it.

I agree with you - and you'd have to look at the financial management of the selling consortium if it is the case the club could be forced out of business if Rangers aren't in the league. But all that has really happened is that now the gun has been loaded the members of 10000hours have been handed it and told they can choose to shoot Rangers Newco if they want, but there's a serious risk that there could be a ricochet which will kill you too.

[saint in exile]

Usual petty emotive outrage that doesn't actually deal with the question. Why is it other SPL clubs are asking all of their fans - fans that don;t have to pay anything to vote....and it is all fans - not just a select few that have a vested interest in voting a certain way.

Not all fans have been gullible enough to sign up to the CIC ktf. In fact the majority of St Mirren fans have chosen not to join the CIC. Now a minority will be making a massive decision based on their willingness to pay for something they barely understand.

This vote is important enough to go the the entire St Mirren community - remember the St Mirren community ktf...the people that the CIC was supposed to be all about. Is this how the community is going to be treated moving forward?

So you're saying that anyone NOT signed up is against the CIC? Bollox! Many can't afford it in these times, many are kids who can't do it, and very few families would have multiple DDMs. Once again, your bias is showing.

[div]

I agree with you - and you'd have to look at the financial management of the selling consortium if it is the case the club could be forced out of business if Rangers aren't in the league.

Rangers being in the league is not what this is about. Jesus christ am I talking to myself here.

This is about Sky, it's got nothing directly to do with Rangers. One home game next season, potentially two, would be all we would lose if Sky were still at the table.

The club can deal with that without any real problem.

Take 60% of our revenue away overnight with 23 players contracted to be paid based on that revenue for the next year, then you have a big problem.

[kpj]

Nobody could have forseen this coming last summer when we were dishing out 2 year contracts.

I'm not having a go, I'm broadly in favour of 10,000 hours and glad they're exercising caution. But Sky obviously factored something like this into their contract if they have the option to renegotiate/pull out immediately. That is something that SMFC should have had a contingency for.

[Stuart Dickson]

That's not true Stu....all of the above club have consulted with all fans and guess what the understanding is brutally clear - no vote. And you can add Caley to that list too. SMFC should stop fannying around and vote no.

They haven't Sid. They have consulted with representatives of the fans groups. The fact is that those representatives have been perfectly capable of passing on the fans verdict which has been as clear cut as it has been on here but they have not asked all fans for their opinions. Letters have not gone out to season ticket holders asking for a view, no-one has invited views from fans in the local press, and there has been no significant information made to all those fans to allow them to express an informed choice.

10000hours are going to canvass a wider opinion and I hope that they will clearly outline the arguments for and against so fans can make an informed choice. I can't see me changing how I would vote - which would always be to protect sporting integrity regardless of any short term financial pain St Mirren may face but I can't speak for everyone else. However what I do appreciate is that those members are going to have to face up to the consequences of what might happen depending on how they vote. I think that is a very mature way to handle the issue and frankly - for a person who has roundly be disgusted by the way St Mirren board have handled almost everything for the last 13 years - I am impressed at the way the consortium have handled this.

[St. Sid]

I agree with you - and you'd have to look at the financial management of the selling consortium if it is the case the club could be forced out of business if Rangers aren't in the league. But all that has really happened is that now the gun has been loaded the members of 10000hours have been handed it and told they can choose to shoot Rangers Newco if they want, but there's a serious risk that there could be a ricochet which will kill you too.

It is 10000 Hours that have put in a conditional offer. It is not a conditional acceptance from the consortium. The driver in this is 10000 Hours. I'm sure the consortium will be happy enough to play along though.

[St. Sid]

Rangers being in the league is not what this is about. Jesus christ am I talking to myself here.

This is about Sky, it's got nothing directly to do with Rangers. One home game next season, potentially two, would be all we would lose if Sky were still at the table.

The club can deal with that without any real problem.

Take 60% of our revenue away overnight with 23 players contracted to be paid based on that revenue for the next year, then you have a big problem.

Div SKY is all about scumgers. If you are trying to say it is not then you'd be as well talking to yourself.

[div]

I'm not having a go, I'm broadly in favour of 10,000 hours and glad they're exercising caution. But Sky obviously factored something like this into their contract if they have the option to renegotiate/pull out immediately. That is something that SMFC should have had a contingency for.

The clause was put there by Sky because they felt it was possible that Rangers and/or Celtic could leave the Scottish League and go and play in England or in some madcap Atlantic League.

It wasn't put there because one of them might get liquidated and cease to exist.

[div]

Div gives up again and retires to the bar.

[David Mc]

Sid you do realise you are doing a fantastic job of highlighting the case for the CIC with your wild anti-propaganda. If you really feel so strongly get out from behind the computer and make it happen,

[St. Sid]

They haven't Sid.

They have Stu - they have consulted with their fans and taken on board all views presented to them not just the fans groups.

There's a thread on the fishal site covering the topic of the fans vote and there's more than one fan not happy that they will be excluded from the vote and that includes SMFC shareholders. (that points not just for you Stu - I am expecting the usual "you're no a real fan anyway" bollox type post to arrive any time soon.....it usually come after accusations of trying to divide the support, which ironically were made when I supported the CIC too.

[MikaelRenfrum]

Killie are putting it to their fans......aberdeen are consulting with all of their fans as have Dundee United. They have not restricted it to a single organisation and especially not one that has just put in a conditional offer to take a controlling interest in the club, that have already started making noises about the business implications and how it could impact their bid progressing.

All fans should get a vote on this.

Sid, I will be part of the new CIC and therefore will have a vote if it comes to it. I don't even think the fans' vote will be taken on board, as at the end of the day it all comes down to money. And, there is really no need for fans voting as every club's fans would vote No.

I am not entirely bothered about Rangers and couldn't care less about what happens to them. I am fully focused on St Mirren. Therefore, my vote will be your vote. So shall I vote 'no' for you? Will that stop you going ape? lol

[Stuart Dickson]

Rangers being in the league is not what this is about. Jesus christ am I talking to myself here.

This is about Sky, it's got nothing directly to do with Rangers. One home game next season, potentially two, would be all we would lose if Sky were still at the table.

The club can deal with that without any real problem.

Take 60% of our revenue away overnight with 23 players contracted to be paid based on that revenue for the next year, then you have a big problem.

Oh FFS Div, the only reason Sky would walk away this season is because there aren't going to be four Old Firm matches. There's no point in pulling the wool over anyones eyes here. I understand the concern about the uncertainty of the financial situation the club could be facing and I applaud 10000hours for the way they've handled this.

[Drew]

Take 60% of our revenue away overnight with 23 players contracted to be paid based on that revenue for the next year, then you have a big problem.

Had we been relegated last season, how would we have honoured these contracts? Would the parachute payment have been sufficient, or do the contracts have clauses to allow players/club to opt-out in the event of relegation?

[St. Sid]

Sid you do realise you are doing a fantastic job of highlighting the case for the CIC with your wild anti-propaganda. If you really feel so strongly get out from behind the computer and make it happen,

I'm not David Mc......the CIC is a disaster waiting to happen. This latest nonsense is indicative of the bollox that will get a lot worse once it is up and running. We have 99% of the support SCREAMING!!!! for SMFC to make a statement that they will vote no.

What do we get.......a lotta f'k'n nonsense whataboutery from people that are supposed to be leading fan ownership. The fans are absolutely clear on what they want the club to do. They have backed fan ownership to the tune of £1.5million of debt - wrongly in my humble opinion.....and they get whataboutery scaremongering about SKY. Why are these other clubs with large debts able to take fans views at face value and commit to a no vote? Why are they not spreading rumours about going into administration in 4/5 months? Fuxake, 10000 Hours appear to be arguing that 4 or 5 of these clubs will also be in administration....whilst these clubs appear to be committing to destroying themselves by voting no.

Smell the shite coming from 10000 Hours. We had to take the imaginary two bidders at face value. Now we appear to have a different view from the rest of the SPL on the outcome of the a no vote.

We get lots of shite scaremongering and yet no detail such as - how many 1877 club members are signed up.

[div]

Had we been relegated last season, how would we have honoured these contracts? Would the parachute payment have been sufficient, or do the contracts have clauses to allow players/club to opt-out in the event of relegation?

Players have relegation clauses built in to their contracts.

[St. Sid]

Sid, I will be part of the new CIC and therefore will have a vote if it comes to it. I don't even think the fans' vote will be taken on board, as at the end of the day it all comes down to money. And, there is really no need for fans voting as every club's fans would vote No.

I am not entirely bothered about Rangers and couldn't care less about what happens to them. I am fully focused on St Mirren. Therefore, my vote will be your vote. So shall I vote 'no' for you? Will that stop you going ape? lol

Apologies for the confusion MR. I don't think there should be a vote at all. It is brutally obvious that the club should vote no. All this fannying around with votes is pointless. What I am not happy about is 10000 Hours starting to rally fans to vote YES.

If the chances of failure for 10000 Hours are so high as we are hearing this morning then we shouldn't be touching it with a barge pole. I wanted to better understand the risk to the club. The information was not forthcoming, hence I opted out. The news this morning confirms that the risks are very real indeed. We should be given the detail of the risk of the CIC irrespective of what happens with SKY / scumgers. And the detail should be given to ALL fans and a vote taken by ALL fans on this "punt" as so many of its supporters keep referring to it.