Evil_Panda Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 "Us" as in over 1,000 fellow St.Mirren fans who are still involved with the bid. "Official online mouthpiece" - you mean in the same way that we have a full section of the forum purely dedicated to SMiSA then ? This is the busiest online forum for St.Mirren supporters on the internet. 10000Hours tried to set up their own forum but all the traffic related to the sale continued to be discussed here so it was mothballed and fans were enagged directly on here. The "Sale of St.Mirren Forum" has never had a single post or topic removed or edited despite some slanderous posts being made about the bid and members of the bid team, in fact anyone reading this section of the forum is far more likely to decide not to bother getting involved such is the volume of (mostly completely made up) crap that has been posted in here. Still it remains, as this is and always will be an independent St.Mirren supporters website. Personally I am right behind the fans bid for control of the club, and that is my right to have an opinion the same as anyone else I'd have thought ? 10 years I have been running this site so you will forgive me for being more than a little f**ked off when I read shit like this. For every one signed up st.mirren fan theres at least four that hasnt signed up. Why has the majorit of st.mirren fans turned their back on 10k hours. I think every fan would rather see the club in supporter ownership but 10k hours isn't convincing us. Why is that? So when the unofficial forum refers to 10k hours as 'us' then its actually representing a minority. Yes, you are entitled to your opinion as am I, even though mines is shite and yours isnt, in your opinion, of course. So, agree with 10k and you're fine, voice concern and your opinion is shit, ok, I get it. As for smisa, yes, you are correct, if they don't have their own forum and you also run their website for them. Although I have never seen you refer to smisa as us even though they are the largest independent supporters assc (again, representing a minority) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) Feel exactly the same as this. I won't cancel yet, though. I've not cancelled yet, either, but I'm rapidly losing any enthusiasm for this whole scenario. Debacle is the word that springs to mind. I'm not looking to apportion blame in this, I just feel that none of the parties involved have covered themselves in glory. Confidence and trust are arguably the two biggest prerequisites when expecting people to buy into and/or support any initiative on this scale (and this equally applies to any sale to a private individual or consortium). To be frank, I'm not sure I have either, in respect of any of those involved. Edit for typo Edited September 10, 2012 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 For every one signed up st.mirren fan theres at least four that hasnt signed up. Why has the majorit of st.mirren fans turned their back on 10k hours. I think every fan would rather see the club in supporter ownership but 10k hours isn't convincing us. Why is that? So when the unofficial forum refers to 10k hours as 'us' then its actually representing a minority. If I post on the forum I am posting as me, if I am a member of 10000Hours, which I am, then I will collectively post as "us". Is that ok with you ? On the main homepage of the site where I report news about St.Mirren you will see that I never refer to 10000Hours as "us". Not sure why you are making an issue of this ? Yes, you are entitled to your opinion as am I, even though mines is shite and yours isnt, in your opinion, of course. Can you show me where I said that please ? As for smisa, yes, you are correct, if they don't have their own forum and you also run their website for them. Although I have never seen you refer to smisa as us even though they are the largest independent supporters assc (again, representing a minority) SMiSA have had their own section here on B&W Army for many years, I was a founding member of SMiSA and contributed monthly subs to the organisation for the first few years, until the stadium was sold and the financial pressures at the club reduced. I ran all the bidding processes for the first 4 Saints Aid events and I also host the current SMiSA website at zero cost to the organisation. Admittedly the website is a bit of a shambles now but I'm up for helping out with that when I get time and if the guys there ask me to do so. I'm not currently a SMiSA member, hence I do not collectively refer to the group as "us" but same applies, always happy to publicise any SMiSA event or news story on the homepage if and when I am asked or something crops up. Seems I am not allowed to have an opinion on anything because I happen to provide the platform for everyone else to debate St.Mirren issues. That seems fair ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil_Panda Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) Can you show me where I said that please ? eh? it was only a couple of posts ago. you highlighted my post when i declared this forum as the official mouthpiece of 10k hours and wrote the following: 10 years I have been running this site so you will forgive me for being more than a little f**ked off when I read shit like this. and whilst we are clarifying points, where did i state that you were not allowed one (opinions that is)? Edited September 10, 2012 by Evil_Panda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 What i do care for is SMFC not being asset stripped by any third parties because they happen to be mates with ReA. some might say that you have just slandered Richard Atkinson again and also no doubt the Life Church and Kibbleworks again if they are the third parties you are referring to. It is OK for you to throw wild accusations around left right and centre but as soon as anyone calls you on it or throws any accusations your own way you go ape and yell slander and please censor the posts becaus eyou demand a personal apology. Do you still not see any irony in your posts and protestations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 some might say that you have just slandered Richard Atkinson again and also no doubt the Life Church and Kibbleworks again if they are the third parties you are referring to. It is OK for you to throw wild accusations around left right and centre but as soon as anyone calls you on it or throws any accusations your own way you go ape and yell slander and please censor the posts becaus eyou demand a personal apology. Do you still not see any irony in your posts and protestations? no there is no irony in my posts, I back them up with facts! Fact - ReA made two statements on this forum. One where he said the Void/bar/function area would be under the control of the CiC, only a few weeks late to state that in fact it would be as he always intended under the control of Kibble/Life church. That is a fact, he told us here. Is repeating highlighting what someone has said slander? No it isn't. What are your facts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fras Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I was sceptical, then got behind it, but when I saw one of the main players quite casually telling supporters some big fat whoppers, then I thought it was time to head for the exits. If other folk are happy to stay with a bid where the main man has been shown to openly lie to SMFC supporters, then to paraphrase the late, great SunnyFoxbarSaint, "Yer aff yer f**kin' heid". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barney Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I was sceptical, then got behind it, but when I saw one of the main players quite casually telling supporters some big fat whoppers, then I thought it was time to head for the exits. If other folk are happy to stay with a bid where the main man has been shown to openly lie to SMFC supporters, then to paraphrase the late, great SunnyFoxbarSaint, "Yer aff yer f**kin' heid". can you go into any details on what was being said? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 no there is no irony in my posts, I back them up with facts! Fact - ReA made two statements on this forum. One where he said the Void/bar/function area would be under the control of the CiC, only a few weeks late to state that in fact it would be as he always intended under the control of Kibble/Life church. That is a fact, he told us here. Is repeating highlighting what someone has said slander? No it isn't. What are your facts? It is slander to suggest that a St Mirren director would let his friends asset strip the club... something you said in your previous post. It is slander to say that SG and co trousered the Tesco money and I loved watching your climbdown on that one: to paraphrase somner when the threat on legal action was raised, 'well what i meant was that after the Tesco money had built Greenhill Road, demolished Love Street, repaid the bank and started the work at Ralston the directors got their loans to the club repaid'. It is slander to say the consortium would empty the club accounts of season ticket money and money from the SPL upon completing a sale of the club and keep that money for themselves as it is normal business practice to do this when you sell a company, or that they would have sold Mclean and / or McGowan and kept money for those sales for themselves rather than it staying in the club accounts if they accepted a lower offer than what they were looking for / expecting from the sale of the club. You are obsessed with accusing directors who don't take any renumeration from the club of looking out for opportunities to line their own pockets when a ground is sold or the club is sold or when a CIC is set up they get their friends to asset-strip the club. You've been light on evidence for those accusations and I don't remember reading that you had gone to meet SG and REA in person to offer them a profound and personal apology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 eh? it was only a couple of posts ago. you highlighted my post when i declared this forum as the official mouthpiece of 10k hours and wrote the following: Apologies for the confusion. I will clarify. Your opinion about this forum being an official mouthpiece of 10000hours IS shit, and I have already pointed out why. You may not agree, but that particular issue is, if you will excuse the pun, pretty black and white. You are entirely wrong there and are confusing my personal opinion with that of the site as a whole. If you accept that I am actually allowed an opinion then you will also accept that if I post something as me then it does not reflect the position of the entire website ? Your opinion about whether 10000Hours is shit or not is entirely up to you. I don't agree that fan ownership of the club could in any way be described as being shit, however I respect that many other fans don't like the bid or the people involved with it. Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 It is slander to suggest that a St Mirren director would let his friends asset strip the club... something you said in your previous post. Correct me if i'm wrong but gifting the money making opportunities at SMP is by definition Gifting/stripping assets away from the club whereby they can no longer consider them to be assets of the club? It is slander to say that SG and co trousered the Tesco money and I loved watching your climbdown on that one: to paraphrase somner when the threat on legal action was raised, 'well what i meant was that after the Tesco money had built Greenhill Road, demolished Love Street, repaid the bank and started the work at Ralston the directors got their loans to the club repaid'. nice of you to highlight my words exactly, however adding your spin to it detracts as you are no longer dealing in fact It is slander to say the consortium would empty the club accounts of season ticket money and money from the SPL upon completing a sale of the club and keep that money for themselves as it is normal business practice to do this when you sell a company, or that they would have sold Mclean and / or McGowan and kept money for those sales for themselves rather than it staying in the club accounts if they accepted a lower offer than what they were looking for / expecting from the sale of the club. See you've made something up about season ticket money that is not connected with me! And if you bothered to quote me directly again as above you would be highlighting me asking the question "Could!!! the sale of said players, be trousered by the Bod and not elft for any incoming majority shareholders?" I and probably most others here know what the ;ikely outcome of that would have been had the BoD accepted a lower bid with transfer money coming in, and frankly I doubt given that they have shored the club up for years many of us would object! You are obsessed with accusing directors who don't take any renumeration from the club of looking out for opportunities to line their own pockets when a ground is sold or the club is sold or when a CIC is set up they get their friends to asset-strip the club. You've been light on evidence for those accusations and I don't remember reading that you had gone to meet SG and REA in person to offer them a profound and personal apology. I don't have to accuse 10000 hours, ReA etc, they have come on here and told us they are gifting the asset of the void/bar to Kibble/Life church in exchange for 'Peppercorn rent' which could be as little as ONE POUND.... now that is an asset gifted/stripped from the club for ONE POUND Maybe they should be apologising to the fans of SMFC and members of the CiC who may not be aware of the deal they have done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I don't have to accuse 10000 hours, ReA etc, they have come on here and told us they are gifting the asset of the void/bar to Kibble/Life church in exchange for 'Peppercorn rent' which could be as little as ONE POUND.... now that is an asset gifted/stripped from the club for ONE POUND Maybe they should be apologising to the fans of SMFC and members of the CiC who may not be aware of the deal they have done? Why don't you man up and stop being an anonymous keyboard warrior and take your asset-stripping concerns at SMFC via REA / Life Church and Kibbleworks to the Serious Fraud office: http://www.sfo.gov.uk/fraud/what-is-fraud/corporate-fraud/asset-stripping.aspx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) Why don't you man up and stop being an anonymous keyboard warrior and take your asset-stripping concerns at SMFC via REA / Life Church and Kibbleworks to the Serious Fraud office: http://www.sfo.gov.u...-stripping.aspx? Loving this quote You do know it isn't illegal to asset strip? don't you??? thing is in this instance ReA et all are "GIFTING" an asset to third parties for a return of as little as ONE POUND.... now why would they do that? Edited September 10, 2012 by somner9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Loving this quote You do know it isn't illegal to asset strip? don't you??? thing is in this instance ReA et all are "GIFTING" an asset to third parties for a return of as little as ONE POUND.... now why would they do that? please tell us all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 thing is in this instance ReA et all are "GIFTING" an asset to third parties for a return of as little as ONE POUND.... now why would they do that? beacuse those third parties are footing the six figure bill to fit it out ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Loving this quote You do know it isn't illegal to asset strip? don't you??? thing is in this instance ReA et all are "GIFTING" an asset to third parties for a return of as little as ONE POUND.... now why would they do that? I'm sure REA would be failing in his duties as a director of the club if he deliberately brought his friends in to asset strip a club he is a director of? Please do tell me more oh manly one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 beacuse those third parties are footing the six figure bill to fit it out ? Indeed they are, but for rent as low as One Pound, a modern facility, with seven day access, great communication links, ample car parking and 20 odd home games with 4000 - 8000 potential customers. It's ano brainer business opportunity! It's just the profit goes to the third parties, and the club doesn't even get market rent! Sounds a bit like the business plan presented to SG et al two weeks ago, the numbers just don't add up for the club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 please tell us all! ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I'm sure REA would be failing in his duties as a director of the club if he deliberately brought his friends in to asset strip a club he is a director of? Please do tell me more oh manly one. he's the best person to ask WHY? I'm sure he'll have achat with you if you want to ask him why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Indeed they are, but for rent as low as One Pound, a modern facility, with seven day access, great communication links, ample car parking and 20 odd home games with 4000 - 8000 potential customers. It's ano brainer business opportunity! It's just the profit goes to the third parties, and the club doesn't even get market rent! Sounds a bit like the business plan presented to SG et al two weeks ago, the numbers just don't add up for the club! The club will be able to make use of the void for generating revenue for themselves, I am sure we have been over this a few hundred times already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 The club will be able to make use of the void for generating revenue for themselves, I am sure we have been over this a few hundred times already. at least a few hundred. Just the bit that the club won't have use of said void on matchdays and premium times (weekends for wedding/receptions, xmas party season etc, etc) And the third parties could be paying One Pound in rent! pretty piss poor business arrangement IMO, wonder what they would make of it in 'Dragons Den'??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSS Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 beacuse those third parties are footing the six figure bill to fit it out ? Six figure bill to fit it? Surely not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest somner9 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Six figure bill to fit it? Surely not? I've got another good question for the third parties mentioned! Why are you putting up a six-figure sum to fit out the void, as opposed to any six-figure sum going into the CiC??? I bet i know already what their answer will be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) For every one signed up st.mirren fan theres at least four that hasnt signed up. Why has the majorit of st.mirren fans turned their back on 10k hours. I think every fan would rather see the club in supporter ownership but 10k hours isn't convincing us. Why is that? So when the unofficial forum refers to 10k hours as 'us' then its actually representing a minority. You are right that the signed up don't match the figures, but I'd be more inclined to say that for every 1 there's 2 who haven't signed up. Remove the kids in the ground, remove the second parent and we're pretty much at a decent level of grabbing the fan base. IF the deal goes through then more people would come in, as the fan control (Sid and Somner9 can save the 20 paragraphs each for a moment) develops then more people would come in. A year later, we'd perhaps have a bit more promotion of the model itself across Europe and be getting (whisper) non-Saint Mirren fans from across the globe interested in joining. You also need to take in to consideration that, after paying for shirts, food and admission, some fans just don't want to pay £10 a month no matter how much they support the idea of Saint Mirren progressing under a fan ownership model. Those people could, and some will, utilise the newly fitted out area, come to events arranged at the club, spend in revamped shop operations (sorry Richard, but it'd only be worse if it was empty) and donate a little bit of cash here and there or pay for any special sessions. It won't be huge numbers, there's no gimmick such as Pick The Team, but it could be bigger if allowed to go through under the right circumstances. I mean, who's to say social funders wouldn't want to become involved in a live entity and see the benefits of engagement after it's realised instead of during the bidding process. Of course, all that said, no matter how optimistic I ever get, I'm still not sure we could ever explain this to Michelle Evans. Edited September 10, 2012 by TsuMirren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Sid Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) B&WArmy is a force for the good of St Mirren and its supporters. We've seen some great times even when the football was shit and the club was on its last legs. And yet here we all are squabbling and bickering during the most successful period we've had in many of our lifetimes. A few egos got out of control as they whored themselves in the court of would be King Richard. They will take a wee while to realise their errors and will probably never openly admit to some of the naughtiness they have been guilty of. Personal ambition being placed before respect for your fellow supporters was an error of judgement. Ralston upgringings and old grammarian bumbrainedness was clearly at play in this sorry saga. Then we had the attacks on the selling consortium from the usual suspects using 10000 hrs as a vehicles for their score settling. I would be quite happy if the 10000 hrs Boards were deleted for good. They are a sully on our otherwise excellent supporters resource. Edited September 10, 2012 by St. Sid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.