Jump to content

div

Smisa & Gordon Scott Submit Bid

Recommended Posts


All of the above perfectly fair and sensible IMO.

So is there a bid from an English Consortium which you reported or not .I myself believe this would be the better option if there is money available to spend on improving the team .I just don't see any difference to what is there just now with the SMISA bid theres not going to be any money to move the team or club forward unless I'm missing something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is there a bid from an English Consortium which you reported or not .I myself believe this would be the better option if there is money available to spend on improving the team .I just don't see any difference to what is there just now with the SMISA bid theres not going to be any money to move the team or club forward unless I'm missing something

That's what I read from it also ,the only way to move the team forward would be building debt, fundraising from fans won't get us any decent level of player. And the current BOD have given interest free loans on a few occasions ,where would these emergency funds come from if this goes through ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope the news of this bid attracts the attention of a consortium with more cash to invest than the smisa/scott partnership.

You can hope all you want but there is no such consortium. If there was, it would have come along a long time ago.

Really, what can smisa offer. No discernable business expertise and no business plan on the table. Any money generated will initially go to recompense GLS. Once he has recovered his cash he is gone. At that point we are extremely vulnerable.

Even the status quo is preferrable to what smisa can deliver

I disagree entirely. What did Gilmour and co have to offer when they first came along? Nothing - they didn't even want to take over the club. Certainly they've learnt a lot on the job, but there is no reason why fan representatives can't do the same. As you say Gordon Scott, who does have experience as a director, will be around for a little while to keep a steady hand on the tiller, so I have no concerns. Sure, the fans on the board might get things wrong, but so will anyone who takes over, and so have Gilmour and co. As for a business plan, I am quite sure there is a business plan on the table, and on the table is where it should be rather than in the public domain at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can hope all you want but there is no such consortium. If there was, it would have come along a long time ago.

I disagree entirely. What did Gilmour and co have to offer when they first came along? Nothing - they didn't even want to take over the club. Certainly they've learnt a lot on the job, but there is no reason why fan representatives can't do the same. As you say Gordon Scott, who does have experience as a director, will be around for a little while to keep a steady hand on the tiller, so I have no concerns. Sure, the fans on the board might get things wrong, but so will anyone who takes over, and so have Gilmour and co. As for a business plan, I am quite sure there is a business plan on the table, and on the table is where it should be rather than in the public domain at the moment.

So you don't think that the people expected to fund an arrangement should be party to the business plan?

Interesting!

Bottom line is that fan ownership for saints = zero working capital + zero borrowing facility.

This is not smelling good.

A great idea but show me a place where it has been seen to work in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be thousands of pounds of legal and accounting costs.

There was at Hearts in just writing the contract between Bidco and Fanco.

Does each party pay there own costs or do they all go into a big repayment pot.

There will also be stamp duty and lots of sundry stuff.

A takeover even of thus scale will cost thousands if not tens of thousands.

SMISA have already spent thousands on the finance report via SD

You speak for Smisa now, and are happy to divulge their business through your involvement in SD..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there still fans out there who believe that the best thing for St Mirren would be for us to go into debt?

Really?

Indeed

I cannot believe some fans want new owners to immediately splash lots of cash on the playing squad.

Bloody suicide.

Got to live within our means at all times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You speak for Smisa now, and are happy to divulge their business through your involvement in SD..?

That information is on the SMiSA website;

http://www.smisa.net/news-archive/183-latest-on-the-club-bid

So far, we have been able to do so without having to dip into trust funds, however we wanted to notify members we now require to spend £2,000 on financial advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You speak for Smisa now, and are happy to divulge their business through your involvement in SD..?

I dont Speak from SmiSA and i dont Speak for SD on this matter, all of the above is in the public domain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there still fans out there who believe that the best thing for St Mirren would be for us to go into debt?

Really?

What fans believe that? I know I don't ,but I believe we will end up in debt through loans being taken to run the club If this takeover happens , If fans who sign up for the monthly debit for the buyout decide to stop paying it who takes up the shortfall ?,Or if the standard of player we can only sign is lower than present due to less money being available how many stop going to games meaning less turnover.

IMHO I don't see how this can work unless decent money is invested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What fans believe that? I know I don't ,but I believe we will end up in debt through loans being taken to run the club If this takeover happens , If fans who sign up for the monthly debit for the buyout decide to stop paying it who takes up the shortfall ?,Or if the standard of player we can only sign is lower than present due to less money being available how many stop going to games meaning less turnover.

IMHO I don't see how this can work unless decent money is invested

I would assume not the way it would be structured.

SMISA would have an obligation to purchase from GS for £x per share, if less money comes in then it just takes longer to buy the shares.

This budgeting process is entirely separate from the Club budgeting, which is based on not spending more then you receive in income.

The Club over the last few year (with the exception of the dome which WAS paid for by fans, so probably prove the opposite of your point) has never taking in any cash as a long term investment, only as cash flow cover (something which will still need to happen IMHO).

So less money being available has nothing to do with SMiSA direct debits etc, less money will be available if the new owners and directors make a mess of the business, a risk no matter who owns it under any model.

Now you could argue that the lack of "investment" (e.g more than 1 year debt) has led the Club to its current league position, but i personally believe that in the long term it is better to be relegated and remain solvent than to go into debt and risk insolvency. No Structural debt means you are in control of your own destiny, maybe i am just a control freak but that would be my preference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume not the way it would be structured.

SMISA would have an obligation to purchase from GS for £x per share, if less money comes in then it just takes longer to buy the shares.

This budgeting process is entirely separate from the Club budgeting, which is based on not spending more then you receive in income.

The Club over the last few year (with the exception of the dome which WAS paid for by fans, so probably prove the opposite of your point) has never taking in any cash as a long term investment, only as cash flow cover (something which will still need to happen IMHO).

So less money being available has nothing to do with SMiSA direct debits etc, less money will be available if the new owners and directors make a mess of the business, a risk no matter who owns it under any model.

Now you could argue that the lack of "investment" (e.g more than 1 year debt) has led the Club to its current league position, but i personally believe that in the long term it is better to be relegated and remain solvent than to go into debt and risk insolvency. No Structural debt means you are in control of your own destiny, maybe i am just a control freak but that would be my preference

Not trying to make a case for going into debt mate, only asking what would happen if fans decide to stop paying the debits or change their minds altogether and decide to not pay at all . Also if we were to have further relegations do you not think it would hit the club financially bigtime with lower attendances ,I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for positive efforts and a plan when it's matched with a committed pro active plan

If I understand this whole buy out thing correctly, it is essentially dependant on a continued flow of 'promised funding' in order to cover the immediate cash demand or purchase price shortfall. Did the last proposal fail to convince or demonstrate to the selling party that future funds were reliable to meet their selling price. If so, what's changed now ?

Devils advocate here, but if I was selling an asset I'd want my price met immediately. You can't sell something on a promise, despite good will on all sides. So, taking this a step further, does this term payment plan mean loans are required to meet a selling price ? In terms of risk is GS taking on a risk then that over a term he will be satisfied and his holding settled, or does he not care, it's a kind of win win for him ,assuming St mirrens fortunes take a turn for the better in the period.

Genuinely don't like deals that are multi layered and have caveats and promises. I'm not sure I like the sound of a fan buy out as proposed here, I'd have fears about generating funding and its continuity. It seems to me a really fragile kind of business model but to be positive about it, if it's the only show in town, if it sparks change , then saddle up for the ride, cos the current state of play is doing nobody any favours.

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trying to make a case for going into debt mate, only asking what would happen if fans decide to stop paying the debits or change their minds altogether and decide to not pay at all . Also if we were to have further relegations do you not think it would hit the club financially bigtime with lower attendances ,I do.

My point is that the two things are not related.

The purchase of shares by SMISA from GS with 200 or 2000 members has no impact on what the Club has, they are two different legal entities.

I agree the team performance and either relegation or promotion will have an impact on Club revenue but that is no different than today, and the impact of relegation today appears to have be the need for slightly more short term lending by the board to the Club for Cash Flow reasons only.

IMHO it is then this issue, Cash Flow Bumps, which needs addressed.

You are replacing a board of 6, of which at least 4 contribute to the cash flow lending with potentially a board that has far fewer people who are able to lend upto £250K (this is the highest recently i think ) for these cash flow bumps. This is the first key financial point that would need clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for positive efforts and a plan when it's matched with a committed pro active plan

If I understand this whole buy out thing correctly, it is essentially dependant on a continued flow of 'promised funding' in order to cover the immediate cash demand or purchase price shortfall. Did the last proposal fail to convince or demonstrate to the selling party that future funds were reliable to meet their selling price. If so, what's changed now ?

Devils advocate here, but if I was selling an asset I'd want my price met immediately. You can't sell something on a promise, despite good will on all sides. So, taking this a step further, does this term payment plan mean loans are required to meet a selling price ? In terms of risk is GS taking on a risk then that over a term he will be satisfied and his holding settled, or does he not care, it's a kind of win win for him ,assuming St mirrens fortunes take a turn for the better in the period.

Genuinely don't like deals that are multi layered and have caveats and promises. I'm not sure I like the sound of a fan buy out as proposed here, I'd have fears about generating funding and its continuity. It seems to me a really fragile kind of business model but to be positive about it, if it's the only show in town, if it sparks change , then saddle up for the ride, cos the current state of play is doing nobody any favours.

Good luck.

All about context.

i suspect that the structure deal 10000hours offered will be broadly similar to SmiSA/GS.

However when 10000hours offered a £1.25m package there was still others showing interest (eventually buying into Dundee) and it was SPL with some good young assets showing promise....whereas now a number of other shows have been and gone as well as SPL football so now a similar structured deal, for a fair bit less money, now appeals, but that is 20:20 hindsight for you, and will probably have cost the consortium at least £250K in their pockets, but on the bright side it will cost the fans a heck of a lot less upfront to buy it, and they will outlive any consortium, and with that lower price tag it is a much simpler deal to sell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That information is on the SMiSA website;

http://www.smisa.net/news-archive/183-latest-on-the-club-bid

Again... Really?

The guy making these posts alienated a good deal of the support against fan led buy outs by presiding over a protracted shambolic process that the sellers deemed unfit for purpose. Now you are jumping in, having a go at me, whilst he deems fit to be seen as 'the fans advisor' on all things regarding other proposed bids....

Can't you see the irony, futility and possible damage to the Smisa bid by facilitating and participating in his continued interference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again... Really?

The guy making these posts alienated a good deal of the support against fan led buy outs by presiding over a protracted shambolic process that the sellers deemed unfit for purpose. Now you are jumping in, having a go at me, whilst he deems fit to be seen as 'the fans advisor' on all things regarding other proposed bids....

Can't you see the irony, futility and possible damage to the Smisa bid by facilitating and participating in his continued interference.

we could always put it to a vote.....you to stop changing the subject on Fan Buy out posts or me to stop posting on fan buy out posts...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that the two things are not related.

The purchase of shares by SMISA from GS with 200 or 2000 members has no impact on what the Club has, they are two different legal entities.

I agree the team performance and either relegation or promotion will have an impact on Club revenue but that is no different than today, and the impact of relegation today appears to have be the need for slightly more short term lending by the board to the Club for Cash Flow reasons only.

IMHO it is then this issue, Cash Flow Bumps, which needs addressed.

You are replacing a board of 6, of which at least 4 contribute to the cash flow lending with potentially a board that has far fewer people who are able to lend upto £250K (this is the highest recently i think ) for these cash flow bumps. This is the first key financial point that would need clarification

The last paragraph of this post is the point i'm trying to get across mate , like I said you know more about these things than I ever will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again... Really?

The guy making these posts alienated a good deal of the support against fan led buy outs by presiding over a protracted shambolic process that the sellers deemed unfit for purpose. Now you are jumping in, having a go at me, whilst he deems fit to be seen as 'the fans advisor' on all things regarding other proposed bids....

Can't you see the irony, futility and possible damage to the Smisa bid by facilitating and participating in his continued interference.

Erm, can you point out the bit where I "had a go" please. Darling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question I asked Div earlier has still not been answered is there another bid from an English consortium or not .Or was it as some have suggested a ploy for SMISA to show there hand.

I don't think anyone knows that except the selling consortium mate.

Could be that I was fed a line to get that story out there to put some pressure on SMiSA, could be that there IS another bid and that has put pressure on SMiSA, could be a total coincidence that the SMiSA story came out the day after, could all be a load of utter bollocks.

Only time will tell I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone knows that except the selling consortium mate.

Could be that I was fed a line to get that story out there to put some pressure on SMiSA, could be that there IS another bid and that has put pressure on SMiSA, could be a total coincidence that the SMiSA story came out the day after, could all be a load of utter bollocks.

Only time will tell I guess.

I think thats fair enough.

It has however been very disappointing to see so many people be disrespectful of our BOD/Staff/Players & of course other Saints fans.

It has been a while, it has been disappointing to see the on field matters be in decline, however, we will improve, the club will be sold, we will move on as a fanbase & club.

Things will take as long as they take, no amount of abusive posts will change it.My personal opinion is simple, when it is sold, we will be told.

At that point the new owners can outline their 'vision' for the club and there will be plenty of time to put our questions to the club as I am sure they will want a meeting once they have 'settled in'.

In the meantime, I hope we can get back to supporting the BOD/Staff & team throughout this uncertain period.

COYS!

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...

×
×
  • Create New...