Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
div

Snp Motion To "investigate Possible Takeover Of St.mirren"

Recommended Posts


Cant Believe You are allowing Me a Free Rain ! - Howz your Bud after The Support from a Democratic Elected Member of our Local Authority ?

xx

Dick Slexia is a double agent for 10000 Hours and should be ignored if you aren't ignoring it already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Councillor Brian Lawson, right, who has been a Saints season ticket holder for the last 30 years, wants the local authority to carry out a feasibility study into a deal to snap up a 52 per cent controlling stake in the Paisley club which is being sold for £1.5million by chairman Stewart Gilmour and four other directors.

His radical plan would see the council become the club’s majority shareholder, with revenue then being generated for the public purse through the hiring out of facilities such as the leisure pitches at St Mirren Park and the training base in Ralston.

http://www.paisleyda...87085-31259200/

Apart from the simple fact that sport and politics shouldn't be mixed and the council having far more important things to spend £1.5M of our money on, do we really want SMFC used as a political football ?

Hopefully this ridiculous idea is voted out by the council. The council (labour and SNP) have let Renfrewshire become run down over the last 30 years, I can just imagine how the club would be run under them.

The first thing would be the double booking of the park at 3 pm on Saturday afternoons, closely followed by the pitch only having potholes repaired when there is a written complaint (in triplicate) by one of the players. A squad of 3 men will be sent (each on consecutive days) to look at it, take some photos and send a written report to the parks department who will send another squad to verify the state of the pitch to then hand it over to a work squad and it will then take a minimum of 6 months before the repair is scheduled in order to put traffic diversions and temporary traffic lights in place. Due to the wrong tools being brought, the actual repair will take 4 weeks to complete. After complaints from the neighbours a 'No ball games allowed' sign will be placed on the centre spot.

Other teams will brand us as Renfrewshire Football Club. The council will have to undertake frequent fact finding missions to Barcelona, the European Championships, World Cup etc.and council budget cuts would mean the club having to pay to use their own facilities.

(Edited for some simple spelling mistakes that made me look as if I'm a council employee)

Edited by bud77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done the PDE for providing more clarity that the efforts of the DR and ET.

Anyone know where and when this meeting will take place on Thursday.......it'll probably be a square between wee Brian and that bawbag Sharkey.....do they both no represent the Ralstonians? If the meeting is open to the public I will attend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Usual Suspect ? snore.gif CIC - Cockwombles In Clothes ! Debt of £ 1,5 million - Take Your Perversions Elsewhere ! thumbdown.gif

You sound like you're either an SNP councilor or a council worker.

If Renfrewshire council were to take over St Mirren, I'd take my support elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They(politicians) are disgusting creatures. Lets face it, they are third rate people with first rate egos and are almost to a man and woman, financially illiterate morons with no experience of business. I REALLY don't want these utter dangerous failures anywhere near our club.

I have absolutely no idea about the chicanery that went on with the first model CiC, but I did hear the rumours, no idea whether they are right or wrong, but it kind of makes sense now.

Absolutely disgusting people, they should be swinging from the lamp posts.

Coisty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Not Far Wrong M8 ? - You Do Know that Bridge Street Public Toilet's Are Closing Down ? Rent Boy's are required to save this Service ? snore.gif Unlike SMFC ? punk.gif

Well at least it will keep you off the streets and you can earn some money, although don't look for me being one of your customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who sees the litter strewn across the streets every single morning in Paisley will have the exact same worries as I do in regards to how these people would be able to run or contribute to the club if they can't get the basics right. Sort the bloody town then spend the extra on your wee trinkets that get you awards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather reduced expenses and salaries for these councillors - last year just under £800,000.

I wonder how many sausage rolls were included in that tidy sum?

Still at least they get a significant discount on Renfrewshire Leisure Club membership to burn those calories off.

fcs-MembersPublicRecord-2011-12.pdf

Source: http://www.renfrewshire.gov.uk/ilwwcm/publishing.nsf/Content/Navigation-cs-RegisterOfCouncillorsInterestsHomePage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some pish poor stuff on this thread regarding the cnutcillors. I am not a fan of any cnutcillor, and certainly not the cnutcil; however if they have proposals that might be to the benefit of St Mirren they should be heard. We thought hard so that a non-St Mirren fan could be heard by the support. Are we really going to turn on fellow St Mirren fans before they have even had the chance to outline their plans?

Personally I think it will be a lot of shite; however we cannot be sure of that until we get to see the information. We went to great lengths to give 10000 Hours a platform to provide us with information and they have chosen to abuse that with scaremongering and hiding behind confidentiality whenever it suits them.

We should keep an open mind on both proposals. The one we do have information on appears to be grossly underfunded at this point in time and the fan empowerment is pish poor. Both bids want their respective organisations to have BoD representation along with fan representation.

Like others I would rather keep the cnutcil and cnutcillors are far away from the club as possible. However, St Mirren's well being should come first in this and surely we owe it to the club to let Brian and Kenny's proposals be heard.

Using the same scaremongering employed by 10000 Hours, if their CIC bid fails then the cnutcil might be the one thing standing between us and the mooted foreign bidders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather reduced expenses and salaries for these councillors - last year just under £800,000.

I wonder how many sausage rolls were included in that tidy sum?

Still at least they get a significant discount on Renfrewshire Leisure Club membership to burn those calories off.

fcs-MembersPublicRecord-2011-12.pdf

Source: http://www.renfrewsh...terestsHomePage

And yet 10000 Hours have clauses in their constitution that allow for remuneration never mind expenses without any controlling clauses. I remember REA stating at more than one public meeting....that he was shocked that the Directors of SMFC took nothing out of the club - I think the specific example was having to buy his own St Mirren suit / tie. Two wrongs don't make a right - however we are not being given the opportunity to amend the constitution 10000 Hours will be acting on until after the deal goes through - they also have plans to alter the SMFC constitution. Fans have zero control over that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When is the public presentation? Is there any information that they can share in advance to gather support from their electorate? Always willing to listen, but I'm not comfortable with this buy-out becoming a political football (sic).

Keep politics and football away from football. That includes spending public money on adverts around the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some pish poor stuff on this thread regarding the cnutcillors. I am not a fan of any cnutcillor, and certainly not the cnutcil; however if they have proposals that might be to the benefit of St Mirren they should be heard. We thought hard so that a non-St Mirren fan could be heard by the support. Are we really going to turn on fellow St Mirren fans before they have even had the chance to outline their plans?

Personally I think it will be a lot of shite; however we cannot be sure of that until we get to see the information. We went to great lengths to give 10000 Hours a platform to provide us with information and they have chosen to abuse that with scaremongering and hiding behind confidentiality whenever it suits them.

We should keep an open mind on both proposals. The one we do have information on appears to be grossly underfunded at this point in time and the fan empowerment is pish poor. Both bids want their respective organisations to have BoD representation along with fan representation.

Like others I would rather keep the cnutcil and cnutcillors are far away from the club as possible. However, St Mirren's well being should come first in this and surely we owe it to the club to let Brian and Kenny's proposals be heard.

Using the same scaremongering employed by 10000 Hours, if their CIC bid fails then the cnutcil might be the one thing standing between us and the mooted foreign bidders.

Pretty balanced Sid, and all fair enough. Simply because of the nature of their job though, I'd be very wary of councillors being involved in our club. I have already stated my reasons why but maybe the key one of those is that, it might be "Brian and Kenny" today, but it could be "Walter and Billy" or "Finbar and Shaemus" next year. The year after that it could be "Morag and Sheila". None of whom is likely to care too much about the club and may just wonder, when there is zero finances available to do up the town centre or host a fireworks display of fill in pot holes ( :lol: ), why do the council part own a private football club that is a huge drain on public resources. What may then happen to the club, no-one knows.

If nothing else, at least with 10000 Hours we know that in 5,10, 15 years time, the ownership will still be in the hands of the people who care most about the club.

One of the main issues here over the last month or so has been that BII have a clause meaning that GLS, REA need to stay on the CiC and club boards for a period of time - as if this is actually a bad thing! However what we do know is that when that period of time is up, both boards will be democratically elected by the CiC membership from the CiC membership. With a council-run model, we may have some Saints fans on the BoD to start with but in a few years time, we will have no guarantee who will be on the BoD - like I said before, it could be anyone. The joy shown over this council "bid" shows that, even though folks have been able to see the bigger picture and think long term when it come to R*ngers, there is still a terminal and chronic case or short-termism when it comes to the ownership of the club.

If course of all this is based on surmise and guesswork and it's just my opinion - we need to hear officially form the council, maybe if it get the go-ahead ( :lol: ) we wil... But until we do, I remain very skeptical and see no reason to think anything other than very cynically about this.

Edited by ktf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the main issues here over the last month or so has been that BII have a clause meaning that GLS, REA need to stay on the CiC and club boards for a period of time - as if this is actually a bad thing! However what we do know is that when that period of time is up, both boards will be democratically elected by the CiC membership from the CiC membership. With a council-run model, we may have some Saints fans on the BoD to start with but in a few years time, we will have no guarantee who will be on the BoD - like I said before, it could be anyone. The joy shown over this council "bid" shows that, even though folks have been able to see the bigger picture and think long term when it come to R*ngers, there is still a terminal and chronic case or short-termism when it comes to the ownership of the club.

The paragraph quoted exemplifies the issues we are currently facing in terms of bollox being spouted. We have Balfy rightly asking for more information. Within a heartbeat we have the nutter above posting assumptions about how the CIC will work and assumptions about how the mystery cnutcil bid will work. And yet he has absolutely zero evidence to base either of his assumptions on.

We have very little information on how the CIC will work and it changes on a daily basis. No assumptions can be made about what will happen after the deal is approved as 10000 Hours haven't actually committed to anything. Currently the only legal document fans have had visibility of is their direct debit mandates. All we have is ill-informed Internet nutters backing 10000 Hours like it was a St Mirren cup run.

Constitution should always be in play before any financial transactions are made. 10000 Hours are pushing through a draft constitution that fans have had no influence over. They asked for comments and they were provided - and yet no revised constitution is being provided prior to the shareholding being bought. The process is f"k'd. If it was cnutcillors trying to push this through I wonder if ktf would be so blinkered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The paragraph quoted exemplifies the issues we are currently facing in terms of bollox being spouted. We have Balfy rightly asking for more information. Within a heartbeat we have the nutter above posting assumptions about how the CIC will work and assumptions about how the mystery cnutcil bid will work. And yet he has absolutely zero evidence to base either of his assumptions on.

We have very little information on how the CIC will work and it changes on a daily basis. No assumptions can be made about what will happen after the deal is approved as 10000 Hours haven't actually committed to anything. Currently the only legal document fans have had visibility of is their direct debit mandates. All we have is ill-informed Internet nutters backing 10000 Hours like it was a St Mirren cup run.

Constitution should always be in play before any financial transactions are made. 10000 Hours are pushing through a draft constitution that fans have had no influence over. They asked for comments and they were provided - and yet no revised constitution is being provided prior to the shareholding being bought. The process is f"k'd. If it was cnutcillors trying to push this through I wonder if ktf would be so blinkered.

Ah, I see! My opinion is bollocks because I have zero evidence to base it on. Yours is perfectly valid because you have... Oh let's see... Zero evidence to base it on.

What I have stated above is just as likely a every attempt at inducing fear that you have posted. Without the information we can't possibly tell, but restoring to rubbishing other posts as "bollox" is simply another way to scaremonger and try to make others look small in the hope that you will somehow look bigger. For all your dislike of councillors, you have a lot in common...

On one point we do agree - there needs to be more information. We need to know a plan, preferably in the form of a timeline, from 10000 Hours on how the first 5 (?) years of their ownership will be mapped out. And it needs to be presented as an agreed upon and voted in documents that is then legally bound. We also need to see guarantees and methods of adjustment or exceptions to certain clauses of the constitution. This also should be presented and voted on. There also probably needs to be more clarity as to what is a quorum of membership for a valid vote and what carries a vote in terms of percentage - it should probably differ for different levels of decisions.

I still believe in the fan ownership concept and I still believe that 10000 Hours can deliver it. But I'm far from completely satisfied with what we currently have. However, I'm almost certain that we'll have more influence this way than with a dark and dingy council making clandestine decisions behind closed door whilst patting each other's backs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I see! My opinion is bollocks because I have zero evidence to base it on. Yours is perfectly valid because you have... Oh let's see... Zero evidence to base it on.

On one point we do agree - there needs to be more information.

What an odd response.....I am posting that we should allow Brian and Kenny an open platform to present their information. You rant that I have no evidence to that opinion on.........and then agree that there needs to be more information.

Me thinks you need an enema. bangin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an odd response.....I am posting that we should allow Brian and Kenny an open platform to present their information. You rant that I have no evidence to that opinion on.........and then agree that there needs to be more information.

Me thinks you need an enema.bangin.gif

No... You have done nothing but rant on and on about how there will be no fan involvement, how we will be stuck with a BoD that we didn't vote for, how we won't be able to away the process or shape the constitution etc, etc. You have as much evidence for that as I have for my opinions on the SNP nonsense move. The only difference is, I have said that mine is an opinion, you're trying to pap yours off as fact, and in the meantime convincing dafter forum members to go along with your hearsay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No... You have done nothing but rant on and on about how there will be no fan involvement, how we will be stuck with a BoD that we didn't vote for, how we won't be able to away the process or shape the constitution etc, etc. You have as much evidence for that as I have for my opinions on the SNP nonsense move. The only difference is, I have said that mine is an opinion, you're trying to pap yours off as fact, and in the meantime convincing dafter forum members to go along with your hearsay.

More "its no fair" nonsense.

I have provided quite a lot of factual evidence including posting extracts from the constitution that contradict the information supplied in FAQs. That is hardly opinion. That's evidence based posting. Through me pushing we got information on how the interim BoD would be constructed and how the Chariperson would be decided - the next day we were told that GLS would be the interim Chairperson. We have also had it confirmed that REA and GLS would be Bii's reps on the BoD until Bii no longer have financial control of the CIC and the club through their loan. REA told us at the public meeting that the draft consitution would be submitted by Chris Stewart and would be the constitution used after 10000 Hours took control of the club....there would be a process of ratifying it up until the AGM (at least 6 months into 10000 Hours ownership).

To date you know f"k all about what Brian and Kenny may be proposing other than what is in some shitty press articles. You are rubbishing it just in case it might actually pose a threat to 10000 Hours. St Mirren fans should be exploring all the options, garner as much information as possible and then make their own decision. Already we are seeing you pushing your own agenda on something you know hee-haw about based on what appear to be personal political prejudices.

We should act and behave in a way that will allow the best possible outcome for St Mirren Football Club. Personal relationships, political leanings, religion and all the other bollox being thrown around at the moment should be set aside. We need bare facts and as much information as possible. All we are getting is noise and personal attacks....and some dafties like you have the brass neck to shout about keeping politics out of football. The personal politics in this nonsense is unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More "its no fair" nonsense.

I have provided quite a lot of factual evidence including posting extracts from the constitution that contradict the information supplied in FAQs. That is hardly opinion. That's evidence based posting. Through me pushing we got information on how the interim BoD would be constructed and how the Chariperson would be decided - the next day we were told that GLS would be the interim Chairperson. We have also had it confirmed that REA and GLS would be Bii's reps on the BoD until Bii no longer have financial control of the CIC and the club through their loan. REA told us at the public meeting that the draft consitution would be submitted by Chris Stewart and would be the constitution used after 10000 Hours took control of the club....there would be a process of ratifying it up until the AGM (at least 6 months into 10000 Hours ownership).

To date you know f"k all about what Brian and Kenny may be proposing other than what is in some shitty press articles. You are rubbishing it just in case it might actually pose a threat to 10000 Hours. St Mirren fans should be exploring all the options, garner as much information as possible and then make their own decision. Already we are seeing you pushing your own agenda on something you know hee-haw about based on what appear to be personal political prejudices.

We should act and behave in a way that will allow the best possible outcome for St Mirren Football Club. Personal relationships, political leanings, religion and all the other bollox being thrown around at the moment should be set aside. We need bare facts and as much information as possible. All we are getting is noise and personal attacks....and some dafties like you have the brass neck to shout about keeping politics out of football. The personal politics in this nonsense is unbelievable.

Sid....I just wanted to exempt myself from your rant. I don't really care about the outcome for St Mirren although it would be nice if it was positive. My main concern is about the community element of the bid. From reading what is in the public domain the SNP appear to be proposing that Renfewshire Council buy 52% of the shares paying approx £1.2m - £1.5m and they are supposed to get their revenue back from letting out the three tiny pitches in the club car park. Now given that a full sized 3g pitch would cost approx £500k and that Renfrewshire Council could lay three of them for the same cost I fail to see how this offers value for money to the council tax payer.

This is nothing more than a vanity project by a couple of St Mirren supporting councillors who probably know their motion is utterly ridiculous but who are not beyond using the football club for their own ends. Seriously for the SNP councillors - the very same who nearly closed grass roots football completely in Renfrewshire - to submit proposal that the council bid for a senior professional football club....well they should be seen for what they are and simply punted right out of office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we are getting is noise and personal attacks....and some dafties like you have the brass neck to shout about keeping politics out of football. The personal politics in this nonsense is unbelievable.

I've never at any point said that politics should be kept out of football. I don't even know what that phrase is meant to mean - same as saying religion and football don't mix, I'm not really sure what a person means when they say that. All I have said is that I don't trust politicians, that I think it's bonkers that some people are more excited about this "bid" than one that we have 3 years worth of info on and that I don't see at this stage this it is sustainable or viable. Everything else I have said is opinion.

At least I have the common courtesy to admit I am working on opinion and making the rest up.

Guess what... I looked through the constitution too. I also found a lot of issues with it. I have raised the ones that I feel are relevant with the appropriate people in the relevant manner. I have chosen not to bitch about it on here - and for that my views are suddenly less important or informed than yours? Get over yourself - frankly, - I'm embarrassed for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess what... I looked through the constitution too. I also found a lot of issues with it. I have raised the ones that I feel are relevant with the appropriate people in the relevant manner. I have chosen not to bitch about it on here - and for that my views are suddenly less important or informed than yours?

So would you like to share the feedback from 10000 Hours on your comments on the draft constitution? It would seem that it is 10000 Hours that don't think your views are important. I actually take the trouble to read and respond to your mince. tongue.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at the very least Renfrew council can look at the partnership model between wirral bourgh council and tranmere rovers who have been sponsored by the council for 20 plus years and who as a council rallied round when tranmere's finances went tits up when they stopped being Peter johnson's plaything!

Interesting times indeed

I'm (not really) surprised that Liverpool Bud's helpful and relevant suggestion has been ignored in the rush to bash the politicians and suggest that a takeover by Bashr Al-Assad would be preferable to any council involvement.

It really is worth looking at the highly successful relationship between Wirral Borough Council and Tranmere Rovers. As Liverpool Bud says, the borough council pumped essential funding into Rovers that kept them alive in return for a long-term sponsorship deal. To this day, 20 years on, "Wirral" is the only name that appears on Rovers' shirts, and not some commercial sponsor, a source of tremendous pride to my Rovers-mad friend, and thousands of other Rovers fans on the Wirral peninsula. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement whereby the borough council benefits from the sponsorship exposure, and the club benefits from a local authority genuinely investing in what's important to local people. There is no council involvement in the management of the club beyond the funding and sponsorship.

So before you kick off on a predictable anti-council rant, why not have a look at what the district council is proposing, and see whether it may be worth looking at with the Tranmere model in mind? Seems to me it could be well worth looking at.

Edited by Crispian Crunchie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian Lawson takes a roasting off the cnutcil leader in the PDE:

Renfrewshire Council St Mirren plan is “irresponsible” claims council leader

Jun 27 2012 by Alison Rennie, Paisley Daily Express

THE leader of Renfrewshire Council last night showed the red card to calls for the local authority to launch its own takeover bid for St Mirren Football Club.

Yesterday, the Paisley Daily Express revealed how SNP stalwart Brian Lawson, who has been a Saints season ticket holder for the last 30 years, wants the council to carry out a feasibility study into a deal to snap up a 52 per cent controlling stake in the Buddies which is being sold for £1.5million by chairman Stewart Gilmour and four other directors.

His radical plan would see the council become the club’s majority shareholder, with revenue then being generated for the public purse through the hiring out of facilities such as the leisure pitches at St Mirren Park and the training base in Ralston.

Councillor Lawson had stressed that the local authority would “keep its nose out” of football operations at Saints – but would be represented on the club’s board of directors.

His plans are to be debated at a council meeting tomorrow – but will almost certainly be booted into touch.

Council leader Mark Macmillan insists a takeover bid makes no sense in the current financial climate.

The Labour man told the Express: “I can understand and appreciate the merits of true fan ownership of a football club. However, in the present circumstances of the dire lack of public finances to run vital services for the people in our communities and the swingeing cutbacks from the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition being passed on to local authorities by the SNP Government in Holyrood, it would be irresponsible for us, as custodians of the public purse, to spend taxpayers’ money on buying a football club.

“Here we have Councillor Lawson suggesting that we use the hard-earned money of the people we represent to buy a football club at a time when Scottish football is in a perilous state over the crisis at Rangers FC.”

Councillor Macmillan also challenged Councillor Lawson, who is a former leader of the council, to explain where the money to buy Saints would come from.

He added: “Labour are restoring the school buses that Councillor Lawson axed and we are removing the charges imposed by Councillor Lawson on some of the most vulnerable members of our community for travel to adult day services.

“In recent weeks, he has been extremely vocal in challenging our decision to do this by asking where the money is coming from and what services are going to be cut to pay for this.

“I would now ask Councillor Lawson to tell the people of Renfrewshire where he thinks the money is coming from and what services he proposes to cut so we can spend taxpayers’ money on buying a football club?”

The selling consortium at St Mirren have been waiting for almost three years for a takeover deal to be completed.

They have been in talks with a community interest company, known as 10000Hours, which is trying to push through a fan-backed bid for the club.

10000Hours would hand control of St Mirren over to the supporters – but is struggling to meet the £1.5million asking price.

They tabled an offer for Saints last week after around 1,000 supporters pledged funds for the bid but the Express understands the 10000Hours cash pot could be as much as £250,000 short because it has failed to attract enough investors for executive membership packages worth between £3,000 and £25,000 each.

Further talks between the selling consortium and 10000Hours are expected to take place once the uncertainty caused by Rangers’ financial meltdown – and the impact this might have on the SPL’s television deal with satellite giants Sky – is resolved.

If 10000Hours fail to complete a takeover bid, there are two “seriously interested” parties waiting in the wings who are ready to pounce and the Express understands there are also a number of other groups watching developments.

It looks the two foreign bidders have been reduced to "interested parties" again.

Edited by St. Sid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...