Jump to content

Unnamed American


mikesmfc

Recommended Posts


Ok go on then; quote here the horrendous personal abuse you say I have directed at REA or indeed any individual. We all want to see it!

You will find countless examples of me calling 10000 hours on their approach, methods, vanishing acts and lack of communication. But normal people will see that is not personal abuse. So lets see the evidence to back you wild claims.

Here to help and for all to see:

There speaks the voice of reason and sense!

Shame the ol' cic charge of the shite brigade can't see the bigger picture too.

The above quote is just a few posts after you asked for proof.

I cannae be arsed looking through you multitude of previous posts on this subject, but I recall plenty of abuse directed at REA and many of us 'fools'(which latterly included yourself), who decided that they would back possible fan ownership of our Club for a princely £10 per month.

People are sick of your and Sid's constant sniping. Can't you see that not many of your self-named and completely ficticious 'CIC Shite Brigade' even bother to argue with you any more? I imagine as they see who the posters are and don't read the diatribes?

I believe you and Sid are good Saints fans, but you both do yourselves no favours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

Here to help and for all to see:

The above quote is just a few posts after you asked for proof.

ha , ha thats really your best effort?

I cannae be arsed looking through you multitude of previous posts on this subject,

(Internet forum speak for"They don't exist, but i'll keep digging myself into a hole")

but I recall plenty of abuse directed at REA and many of us 'fools'(which latterly included yourself), who decided that they would back possible fan ownership of our Club for a princely £10 per month.

Like Me! but 10000 hours unless i'm missing something can't make it happen, so is it not time to accept that

People are sick of your and Sid's constant sniping. You see thats where your post goes even further astray,

I don't snipe, but the peeps that have sworn allegiance to REA et al snipe continually, which, given they are supposed to be saints fans too makes you wonder why?

Can't you see that not many of your self-named and completely ficticious 'CIC Shite Brigade'

I just called them the Shite Brigade, you added the CiC

even bother to argue with you any more? I imagine as they see who the posters are and don't read the diatribes?

Then just ignore them, its that easy

I believe you and Sid are good Saints fans, but you both do yourselves no favours.

So i require 'favours' or permission from the continual snipers on here to be a saints fan? Ffs listen to yourself. If everyone listened to the continued negative abuse aimed at anyone that calls 10000 hours on their shocking inability to close any deal then the'd be no SMFC and no support.

I'm St Mirren till I die, can REA and his pals say that too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannae be arsed looking through you multitude of previous posts on this subject, but I recall plenty of abuse directed at REA and many of us 'fools'(which latterly included yourself), who decided that they would back possible fan ownership of our Club for a princely £10 per month.

People are sick of your and Sid's constant sniping. Can't you see that not many of your self-named and completely ficticious 'CIC Shite Brigade' even bother to argue with you any more? I imagine as they see who the posters are and don't read the diatribes?

I believe you and Sid are good Saints fans, but you both do yourselves no favours.

Your £10-a-month is not the issue. It is what it allows 10000 hrs to do. Without it they have no funding to progress a bid that many fans - even those subscribing, fear will put the club at risk.

You are quite correct that the CIC Shite Brigade are not presenting an argument in support of their "£10-a-month" punt with the future of the club - they don't have a positive argument to make - hence all the naughty abusive posts towards posters that dare ask questions regarding 10000 hrs financial capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You asked for proof of abuse ... just one piece of proof... I gave you it. Oh! and it was your 'best effort'

Why would I want to find and re-post much abuse that you know you made?

Anyway, off to Carlisle now. COYS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your £10-a-month is not the issue. It is what it allows 10000 hrs to do. Without it they have no funding to progress a bid that many fans - even those subscribing, fear will put the club at risk.

You are quite correct that the CIC Shite Brigade are not presenting an argument in support of their "£10-a-month" punt with the future of the club - they don't have a positive argument to make - hence all the naughty abusive posts towards posters that dare ask questions regarding 10000 hrs financial capacity.

There is no point debating with both of you anymore, as its just points scoring bye1.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your £10-a-month is not the issue. It is what it allows 10000 hrs to do. Without it they have no funding to progress a bid that many fans - even those subscribing, fear will put the club at risk.

You are quite correct that the CIC Shite Brigade are not presenting an argument in support of their "£10-a-month" punt with the future of the club - they don't have a positive argument to make - hence all the naughty abusive posts towards posters that dare ask questions regarding 10000 hrs financial capacity.

John,

I must protest at the way you have served to hijack this thread about "The un-named American" to further state your opinion regarding the 10000hrs proposal. Your position is made less credible by the very fact that this fine forum is littered with many, many threads where you could properly discuss or express your yourself.

You are, what one may refer to as a "seasoned poster" (a forum user who, by the amount of posts and variety of discussions entered into may be considered by the responsible forum user as someone who has used the forum in an above average usage) and as such you really should know better.

This is not a 10000hrs discussion.

To bring this back on subject

Do any of my fellow forum user's have any new and interesting news about this apparent bid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

I must protest at the way you have served to hijack this thread about "The un-named American" to further state your opinion regarding the 10000hrs proposal. Your position is made less credible by the very fact that this fine forum is littered with many, many threads where you could properly discuss or express your yourself.

You are, what one may refer to as a "seasoned poster" (a forum user who, by the amount of posts and variety of discussions entered into may be considered by the responsible forum user as someone who has used the forum in an above average usage) and as such you really should know better.

This is not a 10000hrs discussion.

To bring this back on subject

Do any of my fellow forum user's have any new and interesting news about this apparent bid?

Nope. Haven't a scooby. 'Traditional club ownership' served us well under SGs tenure, so if this ex-pat bid is real, I look forward to hearing all about it...

Who is the main man behind the bid?

Who else is involved?

What is your motivation for doing this?

Where is the money coming from to fund the purchase of the 52%?

Any borrowing against club assets involved?

Aside from funding the initial takeover, what are your long term plans?

What are your plans (if any) to have supporter involvement?

If an ex-pat, continuing to live abroad, who will visibly be here in charge?

Any plans to engage with SMiSA?

Any thoughts on involving any of the current BOD?

Plans to fit out the void as a supporters bar?

Plans to include a St Mirren museum section?

Just off the top of my head. I'm all ears, ready to give anyone a fair go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

You asked for proof of abuse ... just one piece of proof... I gave you it. Oh! and it was your 'best effort'

Why would I want to find and re-post much abuse that you know you made?

Anyway, off to Carlisle now. COYS!

Yeah thats what we all thought, it doesn't exist, but its good to throw mud and see if it sticks. Only this time its blown back in your face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

Can we expect any developments in this front this week?

Does anyone have a sniff?

v quiet, which personally i think is good, then perhaps we'll only get updates when somethings actually happened. Or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just spent time reading through the whole thread , not an easy task trust me.

I would be suspicious of a takeover from an outside source, First question would be why buy a SPL club when Scottish football is in melt down ?

Next question would be why three year instalments of 500,000 ? Who is going to fund this takeover in the long term , The club ?

Next thing I think of is Yanks that own clubs down south are not popular at all. Why ?

Lastly call me paranoid if you want but for sure Mr Green dose not have the funds to get newco through the season the numbers just don't add up.

There is only one party can look after St Mirren's best interests. You and me the fans.

Edited by Lochwinnoch Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just spent time reading through the whole thread , not an easy task trust me.

I would be suspicious of a takeover from an outside source, First question would be why buy a SPL club when Scottish football is in melt down ?

Next question would be why three year instalments of 500,000 ? Who is going to fund this takeover in the long term , The club ?

Next thing I think of is Yanks that own clubs down south are not popular at all. Why ?

Lastly call me paranoid if you want but for sure Mr Green dose not have the funds to get newco through the season the numbers just don't add up.

There is only one party can look after St Mirren's best interests. You and me the fans.

I'd imagine that Gilmour and co would insert some sort of buy back clause into any agreement which would allow them to take the club back should there be any nefarious activity on the part of the new owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd imagine that Gilmour and co would insert some sort of buy back clause into any agreement which would allow them to take the club back should there be any nefarious activity on the part of the new owners.

Not on his own he couldn't. All five members of the consortium would need to agree to buy it back in those circumstances, and it would mean all five retaining cash reserves to be able to action on the clause. I doubt that they are all in that position. They've been trying to sell their club for three years so I think the idea they would be willing to buy it back again is fanciful in the extreme.

No secret but I'm completely sold on a Social Enterprise Business model for all Scottish Football clubs. It makes complete sense from every single perspective - including revenue raising and cost savings. Selling 52% ownership of the club to a single owner would put your clubs future more at risk than at any other time in the clubs history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not on his own he couldn't. All five members of the consortium would need to agree to buy it back in those circumstances, and it would mean all five retaining cash reserves to be able to action on the clause. I doubt that they are all in that position. They've been trying to sell their club for three years so I think the idea they would be willing to buy it back again is fanciful in the extreme.

No secret but I'm completely sold on a Social Enterprise Business model for all Scottish Football clubs. It makes complete sense from every single perspective - including revenue raising and cost savings. Selling 52% ownership of the club to a single owner would put your clubs future more at risk than at any other time in the clubs history.

No it isn't. I'm sure the consortium would like to safeguard the club from being transported lock stock and barrel to Govan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it isn't. I'm sure the consortium would like to safeguard the club from being transported lock stock and barrel to Govan.

Hmm....

I don't doubt that the consortium would want to safeguard the club, but I'm a bit puzzled as to how they would arrange this.

It seems a bit far-fetched to hope that some kind of clause could be incorporated into any sale. That would be a bit like me selling my house to you with a clause built in that if I didn't like who you invited to the house-warming party, I could step in and buy it back off you. I'm not convinced that you'd be signing up to that one, somehow.

Link to comment
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...
×
×
  • Create New...