Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
BLF

Smisa Survey

Recommended Posts

Hi All.
As we all know, a majority shareholding in St Mirren has been up for sale for almost six years now, and the future ownership of the club remains uncertain.
In recent months, SMiSA has grown in strength - having doubled our membership in the past year to almost 200, and recruiting a number of new committee members.
In recent weeks, the committee has started work to investigate funding models through which the fans could potentially achieve either ownership or meaningful representation in the running of the club.
We would stress that things are at a very early stage - all we are doing at this stage is gathering information to shed some light on what is and isn't workable.
Of course if at some point down the line anything was to be proposed which would involve committing SMiSA funds, this would be subject to the approval of members.
With that in mind we are hoping you will fill out the following short survey, in the link below.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FWNJFJY
There are two aims - one is to establish the level of backing for the principle of fan ownership, the other is to gauge support for some of the fundraising models open to us.
Your answers will be important and we need as many fans as possible to give us their feedback - please share our posts on social media and help get the survey out there.
Thanks in advance for your participation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All.
As we all know, a majority shareholding in St Mirren has been up for sale for almost six years now, and the future ownership of the club remains uncertain.
In recent months, SMiSA has grown in strength - having doubled our membership in the past year to almost 200, and recruiting a number of new committee members.
In recent weeks, the committee has started work to investigate funding models through which the fans could potentially achieve either ownership or meaningful representation in the running of the club.
We would stress that things are at a very early stage - all we are doing at this stage is gathering information to shed some light on what is and isn't workable.
Of course if at some point down the line anything was to be proposed which would involve committing SMiSA funds, this would be subject to the approval of members.
With that in mind we are hoping you will fill out the following short survey, in the link below.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FWNJFJY

There are two aims - one is to establish the level of backing for the principle of fan ownership, the other is to gauge support for some of the fundraising models open to us.
Your answers will be important and we need as many fans as possible to give us their feedback - please share our posts on social media and help get the survey out there.
Thanks in advance for your participation!

Survey done, come on you saints fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Survey done.

Good questions, covers a lot of angles. Personally, I wouldn't be interested if it were simply to elect "a fan" onto the board.

Fan ownership, hell yeh.

Yeah, bit of a token but if done properly it could work.

A lot of people would find contributions would raise a little if fan ownership did actually go through. FO would also allow people to not join, but also be involved. For that reason, the maximum contribution would be difficult to answer for some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Survey done.

Good questions, covers a lot of angles. Personally, I wouldn't be interested if it were simply to elect "a fan" onto the board.

Fan ownership, hell yeh.

I agree, if it were to simply elect a fan rep then this board would; as now looks likely remain in place maybe with a wee shuffle and 'Welcome' the extra revenue stream a fan rep on the board would bring, whilst ensuring like King at sevco that they remain in charge and take all decisions. I think it would actually become counter productive and the cause of frustration with the support when the realisation dawns nothing has changed, except we pay more to the board for the privilege of them hanging on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how SMISA was against fan ownership when Mr Atkinson was trying for it, Double standards

I'll have a ringside seat for the fans council v smisa bout please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how SMISA was against fan ownership when Mr Atkinson was trying for it, Double standards

Gary - you will find that SMiSA were very supportive of 10000Hours and helped initiate and promote the first public meetings.

In actual fact the first meeting that Richard Atkinson and Chris Stewart held with supporters was SMiSA where he was given a serious grilling by supporters - myself included.

SMiSA was formed after a Supporters Direct fan ownership conference held in 1999, so the concept is nothing new to SMiSA.

Now I'm not a SMiSA committee member so I may not be 100% accurate, but from recollection the fall-out with 10000Hours was when the information relating to the proposals was not forthcoming/transparent and the structure of the different "memberships" of 10000Hours fell out of favour with SMiSA's "One Member-One Vote" cooperative model.

SMiSA were not the only ones who did not support the subsequent proposals - the consortium turned it down.

There were many SMiSA members that were still prepared to back the 10000Hours bid despite all these public spats, so I think your criticism is unwarranted.

Now how about the Fans Council unveiling the new strip designs?

After all it says on the Fans Council website and I quote:

Our Aims;

  • To act as an intermediary between the Club and the Fans
  • To share knowledge and best practice and to improve relationships between the various stakeholders, in particular the relationship between the Fans and the Club.
  • To provide a good communication flow, between the Club and the Fans.
  • To provide a platform for the Fans to ensure they are involved in appropriate decision making.
  • To act as the prime movers in various fund raising initiatives for the mutual benefit of the Club, the Fans and the Community.

http://www.supportsmfc.co.uk/aboutus.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now how about the Fans Council unveiling the new strip designs?

After all it says on the Fans Council website and I quote:

Our Aims;

  • To act as an intermediary between the Club and the Fans
  • To share knowledge and best practice and to improve relationships between the various stakeholders, in particular the relationship between the Fans and the Club.
  • To provide a good communication flow, between the Club and the Fans.
  • To provide a platform for the Fans to ensure they are involved in appropriate decision making.
  • To act as the prime movers in various fund raising initiatives for the mutual benefit of the Club, the Fans and the Community.

http://www.supportsmfc.co.uk/aboutus.html

The Lets' have a Raffle Council....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were against his proposals, not fan ownership if I remember rightly...?

Ironic, as you may find that SMISA will need to embrace corporate support in favour of considerations in order to get any ownership model over the line. I suppose the fact they felt information was slow in coming forward probably clouded the waters. I can't believe they were totally against the various forms of membership, more a case of wanting to ensure people didn't get more than one vote. That said, bit difficult to admin a company having a vote due to donating say 20K then all their employees, if members, not being able to vote as their company vote is seen as a group thing. A lot more to it obviously, for both sides, but I always just felt it was more lack of info/transparency rather than trying to engage with corporate groups. Basic premise for that being that surely to hell over 1,000 St Miren fans could always out vote a small group of non fans. Or, was there a veto proposal for the main overseeing board? That board wouldn't have lasted long if so.

Edited by TsuMirren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary - you will find that SMiSA were very supportive of 10000Hours and helped initiate and promote the first public meetings.

In actual fact the first meeting that Richard Atkinson and Chris Stewart held with supporters was SMiSA where he was given a serious grilling by supporters - myself included.

SMiSA was formed after a Supporters Direct fan ownership conference held in 1999, so the concept is nothing new to SMiSA.

Now I'm not a SMiSA committee member so I may not be 100% accurate, but from recollection the fall-out with 10000Hours was when the information relating to the proposals was not forthcoming/transparent and the structure of the different "memberships" of 10000Hours fell out of favour with SMiSA's "One Member-One Vote" cooperative model.

SMiSA were not the only ones who did not support the subsequent proposals - the consortium turned it down.

There were many SMiSA members that were still prepared to back the 10000Hours bid despite all these public spats, so I think your criticism is unwarranted.

Now how about the Fans Council unveiling the new strip designs?

After all it says on the Fans Council website and I quote:

Our Aims;

  • To act as an intermediary between the Club and the Fans
  • To share knowledge and best practice and to improve relationships between the various stakeholders, in particular the relationship between the Fans and the Club.
  • To provide a good communication flow, between the Club and the Fans.
  • To provide a platform for the Fans to ensure they are involved in appropriate decision making.
  • To act as the prime movers in various fund raising initiatives for the mutual benefit of the Club, the Fans and the Community.

http://www.supportsmfc.co.uk/aboutus.html

Ouch... That's a 'Bitch-Slap' right there!

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taken from smisa.net:


SMiSA has contributed well in excess of £100K to the club by way of purchase of shares, loans and donations over 12 years. These funds have been raised in the main from members monthly subscriptions. The membership comprises Saints Supporters who have chosen to do a bit extra for the club over and above their expenditure on attending matches and purchasing club merchandise. The most recent contribution was the sum of £50K to enable the construction of the air dome to proceed.


In the past, the trust has acquired shares directly from the football club but this avenue is no longer available and the trust members have voted to use their funds to buy shares from other shareholders.


Trust members are disappointed that their funds will not go for the benefit of the club as originally intended but they consider it vital at this time to look to maximise their shareholding in the club.


The current attempt by 5 shareholders to establish and sell a majority shareholding thereby creating a new single owner of the club will eliminate any influence on the affairs of our community football club by the remaining minority shareholders who own shares in the club but are not represented on the board. It is the aim of the trust to ensure that St. Mirren remains truly a community football club and avoids the fate which has befallen so many other clubs with single owners.


The trust is aware that there are several hundred shareholders in the club many of whom may have acquired the shares through inheritance for example and have no allegiance or indeed interest in St. Mirren. The trust is giving them the opportunity to dispose of these shares safe in the knowledge that they are passing into the hands of a long established properly constituted trust which is required to hold the shares in perpetuity and is prevented from disposing of them by its trust deed.

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...