Are You Going To Sign Up To Join #buythebuds At Smisa.net?

[foxbar_bud]

In fairness if he's putting up his own cash why wouldn't he select his own board ? I don't see anybody else rushing to put up 680k of their own cash ? He will also be donating his 8% back to SMISA ...

Anne budge will get her money back at hearts and has selected her own board and the hearts fans seem happy enough ....

has it been confirmed he's going to donate his 8%?

[gazmc83]

has it been confirmed he's going to donate his 8%?

Yep

[Lord Pityme]

Yep

ImageUploadedByBlack & White Army1461578094.818353.jpg

To be fair that article doesnt say it, and neither has Gordon ever said he is donating his 8% shareholding.

[Doakes]

£12 a month guarantees nothing except a millionaire gets his money back and the fans have to find the money to run a professional football club.

A millionaire that is making no profit from the deal.

[gazmc83]

To be fair that article doesnt say it, and neither has Gordon ever said he is donating his 8% shareholding.

The way I read that last paragraph was that he effectively was and I'm pretty sure that's they way it was communicated at the meeting ?

[Doakes]

The way I read that last paragraph was that he effectively was and I'm pretty sure that's they way it was communicated at the meeting ?

I'm sure they said at the meeting he would be retaining his 8% shareholding after the 10 years are up. They may be worth a bit more by then if the scheme works, so can't really blame him for that!

[gazmc83]

I'm sure they said at the meeting he would be retaining his 8% shareholding after the 10 years are up. They may be worth a bit more by then if the scheme works, so can't really blame him for that!

Ah ok may be my mistake then , I've just messaged George to clarify :-)

[linwood buddie]

http://www.blackandwhitearmy.com/forums/uploads/post-8844-14615780953833_thumb.jpg I wouldn't assume GLS was donating his 8% by reading this , I read it as his 8% Is separate and not included in any deal , Doakes post verifies this.

[gazmc83]

http://www.blackandwhitearmy.com/forums/uploads/post-8844-14615780953833_thumb.jpg I wouldn't assume GLS was donating his 8% by reading this , I read it as his 8% Is separate and not included in any deal , Doakes post verifies this.

Yeh my mistake it read it wrong , apologies

[garzo]

what is the current shareholding of main parties to this deal?

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

Suppose at the end of the day it's SMiSA that need to raise the money and get the fans signed up, not Gordon.

He's putting in £600K of his own cash to front this and committing to running the club for the next ten years.

I think he, as much as the selling consortium and the lender, want to be sure the fans are up for this and so he's happy enough at the moment to let the fans and SMiSA sort out who is in and who isn't.

It has only been 8 days since sign ups went live and we've nearly 400 signed up. It's very good going when you think about it!

As the days tick by you'd like to think the fans who say they will sign up but haven't got round to it yet will reduce to next to none, leaving only the undecided, the dead against it, and those that know nothing about it left. It's at that time the media campaign should ramp up IMHO. Might only get one shot at it and it's easier to say "we only need 200 more to sign up and we're there" than "we need 1,000 to sign up".

I'm confident that we'll get there.

Not sure if most folks are jaded after the 10000Hours bid and a few seasons of poor results, I signed up for 10,000 Hours and felt there was more excitement about that bid and more information... probably more opposition too.

I took a few leaflets away at the Morton game to pass on to friends and family and was disappointed when I read it... eg the final page - 10 Reasons To Sign Up, which gave the impression they could only think of 3 or 4 reasons and spun them out to make 10 by repeating the same idea with a slightly reworded 'new' reason.

Looking at the leaflet, fan ownership will result on 1,000+ fans voting for 1 fan representative on the board, and around £2,000 of extra money going into the club per month and SMISA members can vote on how that is spent. If they aren't unanimous about how to spend the £2,000 per month I could imagine the money being split a few ways, and wonder whether £2k per month would make much difference.

I also worry that this is Gordon Scott's 3rd or 4th involvement in a bid to buy the club. Some years he seems to have money to buy the club outright, other times (10,000Hrs) he wasn't putting up much of the money, this time round he's putting in most of the money with SMISA borrowing the rest? I'm concerned that if he never had money to help the club's cashflow in the past when other directors loaned the club money, can we rely on him if we need him in a year or two's time.

At the moment we are being told the board will have GLS as chairman and 1 SMISA rep... and who else?

Div I understand the point that you make about it's up to SMISA to raise the money and in that respect there is no doubting their efforts and determination to do this.

However Gordon is leading the bid and will be the Chairman should the bid be successful. Do you really think that he should take a backseat and leave this down to SMISA? If you were in Gordon's shoes and leading the bid wouldn't you be doing so from the front?

The reservations I have and others have that I have spoken to is the long term 10 year viability of the members staying the course. I honestly don't think that this has properly been answered. I find myself explaining the bid to others and the first question is what if people leave?

How can that be answered Kendo how can we possibly know who will stay and go. This is a long term plan roughly the cost of a pint a week it is sustainable in my book for 10 years. Is your worry that after a bad run some will want the manager out and will leave SMISA if he is not sacked. I could see a handful taking the huff not the vast majority . It's the only way forward. Only question I would like to know is what salary if any will the board take. This one area where new owners out with a SMISA bid can take money effectively hitting the player budget.

[oaksoft]

I'm genuinely not seeking to be divisive, here, or to engage in a tit for tat exchange with anyone.

I'd be interested to hear from those who aren't signing up whether they support the general concept of fan ownership, but not this specific model, or whether they don't think fan ownership is desirable and/or sustainable.

I think this would be helpful to hear, and appreciate if anyone is interested in putting forward a view.

You have my thoughts on this on another thread.

I don't currently support the idea of fan ownership because IMO they can't be trusted to make good business decisions as they are too emotionally involved.

Having said that I don't particularly want to be accused of trying to derail this by posting negatively because if enough fans want this then it is right that it happens in the absence of any other viable option. For that reason I'll probably post very little on these buythebuds threads.

Edited April 25, 2016 by oaksoft

[div]

You have my thoughts on this on another thread.

I don't currently support the idea of fan ownership because IMO they can't be trusted to make good business decisions as they are too emotionally involved.

Having said that I don't particularly want to be accused of trying to derail this by posting negatively because if enough fans want this then it is right that it happens in the absence of any other viable option. For that reason I'll probably post very little on these buythebuds threads.

I think that's a shame. It's good to to have alternative view points.

For me the "fan ownership" title can be a bit misleading.

If you think about it the club is actually fan owned right now. The guys in the boardroom are all St.Mirren fans.

Here we will have pretty much more of the same. Instead of Stewart Gilmour you'll have Gordon Scott. Insread of George Campbell, Bryan McAusland and co you'll have some other St.Mirren minded business people. And you'll have the SMiSA fans rep.

So from day one it isn't going to be massively different than it is right now, but crucially we'll have new people with new drive and energy and ideas and we will have at least a voice on the board representing the supporters.

Moving forward over 10 years, which is a long time in football, the fans will raise enough money to buy all the majority shareholding and will then take control and elect their own board. I'd be surprised if that board wasn't made up of more of the same eg; St.Mirren minded business men and women who have the time and expertise to run a business. At the end of the day although it's a slightly wacky one, it is a business after all.

The fans don't get to vote to pick the team, the fans don't vote to sack the manager, the fans don't really get to do much to be honest but the one thing they DO get to do is to elect/re-elect the board. If they don't like what the board are doing, they can get them replaced. Much in the same way we elect our local councillors I guess.

As for what happens if people get dis-interested and cancel the direct debits en masse?

The loan SMiSA are taking out is around £360K. With 1000 members paying £12 a month it would be repaid in just over 3 years. If people come and go and that takes a wee bit longer I can't see it being a problem. I can't imagine a scenario where hundreds of fans all get pissed off and decide to put the club at risk by withdrawing all at one time.

And longer term, once the loan is paid off, if the membership really drops off and they don't have the money to buy Gordon's shares then we just end up exactly where we are now, with Gordon putting his 50.1% on the open market and SMiSA owning 28% or whatever it is.

I really don't see much risk in this model.

[Lord Pityme]

I think that's a shame. It's good to to have alternative view points.

For me the "fan ownership" title can be a bit misleading.

If you think about it the club is actually fan owned right now. The guys in the boardroom are all St.Mirren fans.

Here we will have pretty much more of the same. Instead of Stewart Gilmour you'll have Gordon Scott. Insread of George Campbell, Bryan McAusland and co you'll have some other St.Mirren minded business people. And you'll have the SMiSA fans rep.

So from day one it isn't going to be massively different than it is right now, but crucially we'll have new people with new drive and energy and ideas and we will have at least a voice on the board representing the supporters.

Moving forward over 10 years, which is a long time in football, the fans will raise enough money to buy all the majority shareholding and will then take control and elect their own board. I'd be surprised if that board wasn't made up of more of the same eg; St.Mirren minded business men and women who have the time and expertise to run a business. At the end of the day although it's a slightly wacky one, it is a business after all.

The fans don't get to vote to pick the team, the fans don't vote to sack the manager, the fans don't really get to do much to be honest but the one thing they DO get to do is to elect/re-elect the board. If they don't like what the board are doing, they can get them replaced. Much in the same way we elect our local councillors I guess.

As for what happens if people get dis-interested and cancel the direct debits en masse?

The loan SMiSA are taking out is around £360K. With 1000 members paying £12 a month it would be repaid in just over 3 years. If people come and go and that takes a wee bit longer I can't see it being a problem. I can't imagine a scenario where hundreds of fans all get pissed off and decide to put the club at risk by withdrawing all at one time.

And longer term, once the loan is paid off, if the membership really drops off and they don't have the money to buy Gordon's shares then we just end up exactly where we are now, with Gordon putting his 50.1% on the open market and SMiSA owning 28% or whatever it is.

I really don't see much risk in this model.

I agree, the only real risk would be to not take this golden opportunity to get the club driving forward, and see A. N. Other take over and run the club with no opportunity for fans to influence exactly how it is run.

The club will be sold, two other bidders are apparently waiting in the wings to buy at a much reduced fee to that originally asked. We've got first dibs to take responsibilty to shape our club forbthe support and the community.

[dancindan]

personally hope I'm proved wrong but dont fancy the idea of "fan ownership".

majority of people on here cant agree on a starting line-up, what happens when a number of the fans signed up to the model decide they don't like the way things are going on and cancel the direct debit payments? would we need to open up again and ask for other investors?

The idea may sound good to people in the first instance, however after a year... I just find it difficult to put my trust in this style of investment.

Like I said, if it goes through I hope I'm proven wrong and it goes onto be successful just cant see it..

[Kendo]

How can that be answered Kendo how can we possibly know who will stay and go. This is a long term plan roughly the cost of a pint a week it is sustainable in my book for 10 years. Is your worry that after a bad run some will want the manager out and will leave SMISA if he is not sacked. I could see a handful taking the huff not the vast majority . It's the only way forward. Only question I would like to know is what salary if any will the board take. This one area where new owners out with a SMISA bid can take money effectively hitting the player budget.

You're probably correct, however can you really guarantee your money for the next 10 years. Do you know how long you've got on this earth?

[Kendo]

I think that's a shame. It's good to to have alternative view points.

For me the "fan ownership" title can be a bit misleading.

If you think about it the club is actually fan owned right now. The guys in the boardroom are all St.Mirren fans.

Here we will have pretty much more of the same. Instead of Stewart Gilmour you'll have Gordon Scott. Insread of George Campbell, Bryan McAusland and co you'll have some other St.Mirren minded business people. And you'll have the SMiSA fans rep.

So from day one it isn't going to be massively different than it is right now, but crucially we'll have new people with new drive and energy and ideas and we will have at least a voice on the board representing the supporters.

Moving forward over 10 years, which is a long time in football, the fans will raise enough money to buy all the majority shareholding and will then take control and elect their own board. I'd be surprised if that board wasn't made up of more of the same eg; St.Mirren minded business men and women who have the time and expertise to run a business. At the end of the day although it's a slightly wacky one, it is a business after all.

The fans don't get to vote to pick the team, the fans don't vote to sack the manager, the fans don't really get to do much to be honest but the one thing they DO get to do is to elect/re-elect the board. If they don't like what the board are doing, they can get them replaced. Much in the same way we elect our local councillors I guess.

As for what happens if people get dis-interested and cancel the direct debits en masse?

The loan SMiSA are taking out is around £360K. With 1000 members paying £12 a month it would be repaid in just over 3 years. If people come and go and that takes a wee bit longer I can't see it being a problem. I can't imagine a scenario where hundreds of fans all get pissed off and decide to put the club at risk by withdrawing all at one time.

And longer term, once the loan is paid off, if the membership really drops off and they don't have the money to buy Gordon's shares then we just end up exactly where we are now, with Gordon putting his 50.1% on the open market and SMiSA owning 28% or whatever it is.

I really don't see much risk in this model.

Very good points and well thought out it's hard to disagree with any of the points. I'm almost certain to sign up but I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of leadership driving this bid since the launch.

That gives me concern on the overall leadership going forward.

[div]

personally hope I'm proved wrong but dont fancy the idea of "fan ownership".

majority of people on here cant agree on a starting line-up, what happens when a number of the fans signed up to the model decide they don't like the way things are going on and cancel the direct debit payments? would we need to open up again and ask for other investors?

The idea may sound good to people in the first instance, however after a year... I just find it difficult to put my trust in this style of investment.

Like I said, if it goes through I hope I'm proven wrong and it goes onto be successful just cant see it..

As I said above I think there is a misunderstanding of what fan ownership really means.

The fans don't get to decide on the day to day running of the club. The fans "own" it and they get to stand for and elect the board of directors but at the end of the day it's the responsibility of the board to then make the decisions as to how the club is run.

In the ten year period where we are raising the money to pay back Gordon the club will be run almost identically to the way it's been run over the past 20 odd years.

At the end of the ten year period if the fans have all fallen out and hate each other and there is not enough left to raise the money to buy Gordon's shares then Gordon sells on the open market same as the current consortium are doing.

The risk to the club here is pretty small. Imagine a scenario in the next 3 years where hundreds of St.Mirren fans all collectively want to act together to try and put the club out of business!!

The whole point of a model like this is that the risk is spread over 1000 people and not just on one or two wealthy individuals.

Fans will leave, other fans will join. Fans will die, fans will be born. SMiSA is talking about initially borrowing £360K. That's a lot of money in isolation but in the grand scheme of things, split over 1000 fans, it isn't really.

[faraway saint]

You're probably correct, however can you really guarantee your money for the next 10 years. Do you know how long you've got on this earth?

There are lots of reasons people could stop paying, popping your clogs being only one.

The aforementioned "dummy spitting", change of circumstances (work, family commitments to name but two) and people slowly deciding that the money,however small, is showing no signs of improvement in the clubs circumstances.

On the other hand there could be new support coming through to counterbalance some of the above.

Is there, for the umpteenth time, a figure that would have an effect on the model if they dropped out?

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

personally hope I'm proved wrong but dont fancy the idea of "fan ownership".

majority of people on here cant agree on a starting line-up, what happens when a number of the fans signed up to the model decide they don't like the way things are going on and cancel the direct debit payments? would we need to open up again and ask for other investors?

The idea may sound good to people in the first instance, however after a year... I just find it difficult to put my trust in this style of investment.

Like I said, if it goes through I hope I'm proven wrong and it goes onto be successful just cant see it..

All I would say to that mate is what percentage of the Saints support post on here on a regular basis. Also would say things have been explained further up on this thread.

[Kendo]

There are lots of reasons people could stop paying, popping your clogs being only one.

The aforementioned "dummy spitting", change of circumstances (work, family commitments to name but two) and people slowly deciding that the money,however small, is showing no signs of improvement in the clubs circumstances.

On the other hand there could be new support coming through to counterbalance some of the above.

Is there, for the umpteenth time, a figure that would have an effect on the model if they dropped out?

I agree, I think that the aim should be for 2,000 members. This would guarantee the future and allay most concerns, I worry that when they reach 1,000 it will be looked on as job done and well done's all round. The sights need to be set much higher and it needs to be clear that 1,000 is a minimum starting figure.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

You're probably correct, however can you really guarantee your money for the next 10 years. Do you know how long you've got on this earth?

None of us know Kendo however I don't bleaive this is how you live your life don't do anything in case this is the last day.

[div]

Is there, for the umpteenth time, a figure that would have an effect on the model if they dropped out?

I guess that is all going to depend on the initial funding of £360K and the terms of that loan as those details haven't yet been published.

That is really the money that counts here. Gordon is taking all the rest of the risk with his £600K. The members have to raise the cash to pay back the £360K first and foremost. Once that is paid the security on the stadium is gone, and the rest of the time is raising money to pay back Gordon.

If the fans don't raise enough cash to pay back Gordon, then he puts his shareholding up for sale on the open market I guess. Or he waits another couple of years until the money is there.

[magnus]

£12 a month to help secure the future of the team my dad supported; the team my best mates support; the team that has given me the absolute best of times and a huge dollop of agony over decades. No brainer and a big thanks to everyone at SMiSA for giving us this opportunity. COYS.

[div]

I agree, I think that the aim should be for 2,000 members. This would guarantee the future and allay most concerns, I worry that when they reach 1,000 it will be looked on as job done and well done's all round. The sights need to be set much higher and it needs to be clear that 1,000 is a minimum starting figure.

The SMiSA guys will confirm but I think the figure of 1000 is already in excess of what they actually need to service the loan.

What excites me most is the prospect of getting the likes of 2000 signed up. That would initially mean £4K (2000 x £2) a month for SMiSA to bank and invest in the football club right from day one. That could make a significant difference in a number of areas of the club.

Then look further ahead, to a time where we've paid back all the borrowing. Imagine those 2000 fans kept paying their £12 a month anyway. That would be £24K a month we could invest in the club. Just think of the possibilities!!

All a bit simplistic but you get the idea. Many people making small payments generate potentially big results.