Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Doakes

Link between supporters and club

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, santaponsasaint said:


More guff from someone who knows nothing about it. Fans council helped fiance the dome. Help buy new goalposts for the academy bought laptop and coaching apps for the youth coaches. Ran days for kids to come and meet the players. Organised the building of the supporters club. Yeah I would get rid of that lot. emoji53.pngemoji53.pngemoji53.pngemoji53.png

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app
 

 

Poor show Gary, poor show.... You forgot the Fan Council Golf Days... at which (ahem) yours truly was in the winning team twice, with a display of dexterity and unbridaled golfing skill that made Rory McIlroy look like a hacker doon' Barshaw Park on a pissing wet Sunday.... 

 

 

 

... Aye, OK, our winning teams drew Cheesy and Goody out the hat those years! Both about 10 handicap players and bloody good. Shhh. Don't tell anyone. Damn. Too late.

Edited by pozbaird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

As I said what is SMiSA if not a fans council? I don't see the need for a SLO to be independent of SMiSA, the functions may be required but what is gained by having them independent of each other.

Stooges for the outgoing BoD - if you're really offering to disband then that'd be your first action I'd applaud.

An SLO is a Uefa requirement as part of the Club Licence which you require to play in a European tie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you don't have an SLO, or a fan council... What system would you have? Go direct to Tony Fitz? 

Plenty of need for one or the other, if not both imo. A fan owned club needs the fans to feel engaged or it just won't work. 



What would be wrong with going directly to Fitzy? Is there a reason to put an individual in as a buffer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of having a single individual, why could all or 4-5 members of the fan council not take on the role of SLO? They travel on supporters buses, sit with the rest of the fans and are generally known either personally or from a distance. 

It would mean it could be kept voluntary, saving the club money, and would make it easier to ensure there is an SLO presence at every game. 

Regardless of who it is, it should definitely be publicised much better and the fans informed of what exactly am SLO is for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Instead of having a single individual, why could all or 4-5 members of the fan council not take on the role of SLO? They travel on supporters buses, sit with the rest of the fans and are generally known either personally or from a distance. 

It would mean it could be kept voluntary, saving the club money, and would make it easier to ensure there is an SLO presence at every game. 

Regardless of who it is, it should definitely be publicised much better and the fans informed of what exactly am SLO is for. 

The role of SLO is defined by Uefa. And also has to do with Security meetings and not just fan rep. Needs someone always around and with lots of time. Google the uefa definition and see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, steve_the_saint said:

Instead of having a single individual, why could all or 4-5 members of the fan council not take on the role of SLO? They travel on supporters buses, sit with the rest of the fans and are generally known either personally or from a distance. 

It would mean it could be kept voluntary, saving the club money, and would make it easier to ensure there is an SLO presence at every game. 

Regardless of who it is, it should definitely be publicised much better and the fans informed of what exactly am SLO is for. 

You are quite right, it could be done on a voluntary basis, if the volunteer/s had the inclination to take on all aspects of the role, and had the time to devote to it.

it is about much more than the matchday, although that is the pinnacle of the week. To ensure consistency, credibility, visibility and effectiveness there would need to be at least one person recognised as THE SLO, withnothers helping them out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 


What would be wrong with going directly to Fitzy? Is there a reason to put an individual in as a buffer?

 

I'd agree with that when it comes to the relationship between club and supporter. If the fan comes up with something that is a good idea and the club wants to introduce, the SLO would need the OK from the chief exec anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fans who did what they were told by the outgoing BoD are indeed as you say, stoogies, I'm glad you can see that now and am pleased to have helped you work it out. No need for me to write to GS.


Not one of the old board came to one meeting so yeah I can see how they told us wgat to do lol.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, santaponsasaint said:


Not one of the old board came to one meeting so yeah I can see how they told us wgat to do lol.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app
 

Yeah, they would have had to be in the room to pull your strings, that really is laughable..............

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, santaponsasaint said:


Only thing laughable is you and your lack of any knowledge on the subject.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app
 

 

5 hours ago, santaponsasaint said:


Lol that's our function to impress you what a joker lol

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app
 

 

On ‎29‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 1:28 PM, santaponsasaint said:


More guff from someone who knows nothing about it.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Black & White Army mobile app
 

more quality! :lol:

did they send you on a customer relations course? :lol:

Edited by nosferatu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Sunday, July 31, 2016 at 4:19 PM, nosferatu said:

 

 

more quality! :lol:

did they send you on a customer relations course? :lol:

The fans council pisses me off, granted they do a good job with fundraising and generating cash for projects, but there are plenty of examples of people being spoken to like this by members. The main aim is to improve the communication between the fans and the club is it not? I've never seen any communication from them, and has been painted out minutes from meetings can take 6 months to be updated. New website is no excuse. It's not hard to update them on the current site and migrate the content to the new site.

Should be called the fans fundraising club.

Edited by slapsalmon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't really understand the role of the Fans Council now either. I could understand it under the previous regime when an increasingly unpopular board would have struggled to convince fans to buy scratchcards or to by memberships for a bar, but now surely that bridge isn't required any more.

In terms of communication surely they are sidelined. As I've said previously if I want to talk to the club I've got e-mail addresses for all the off field employees and I've got mobile phone numbers for a number of people in the club like Norrie, Campbell, Alan McManus, and for Tony Fitzpatrick if I want to talk to someone at the heart of the club. Then on top of that I'm a member of SMiSA so if I have something I want raised at board level and I hadn't been able to raise it with Gordon Scott or Tony Fitzpatrick directly I'd imagine I'd be able to go through the person elected to represent SMiSA. I can't see why I'd ever go through the Fans Council.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

Yeah I don't really understand the role of the Fans Council now either. I could understand it under the previous regime when an increasingly unpopular board would have struggled to convince fans to buy scratchcards or to by memberships for a bar, but now surely that bridge isn't required any more.

In terms of communication surely they are sidelined. As I've said previously if I want to talk to the club I've got e-mail addresses for all the off field employees and I've got mobile phone numbers for a number of people in the club like Norrie, Campbell, Alan McManus, and for Tony Fitzpatrick if I want to talk to someone at the heart of the club. Then on top of that I'm a member of SMiSA so if I have something I want raised at board level and I hadn't been able to raise it with Gordon Scott or Tony Fitzpatrick directly I'd imagine I'd be able to go through the person elected to represent SMiSA. I can't see why I'd ever go through the Fans Council.

There's two distinct areas of 'communication' in my book - as you describe above, the individuals within SMFC have always been approachable through the correct channels. Whether it be CK, Brian Caldwell, now Fitzy, Gary fae' the Fan Council, Norrie Jamieson, SG himself. These people weren't faceless individuals. If we wanted to communicate with them, we knew the face, the person, and where to find them. I recently communicated with a couple of the Fan Council guys about something. No problem...

 

Then there's the other type of communication, which, in my opinion, was just dreadful. I won't pour over the Sellik Shop shambles again, but it is an example of the communication that surely must be improved 100%. The communication that emanates from within the hallowed walls of the FeegieField boardroom, not the interactive communication between a fan contacting someone in the club.

 

I think it should be relatively easy for GLS/SMiSA to improve the way they put out what might be unpopular announcements or announce decisions... just look at the way the outgoing BoD did it - and don't fcuking do it like them. Easy peasy, lemon squeezy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pozbaird said:

There's two distinct areas of 'communication' in my book - as you describe above, the individuals within SMFC have always been approachable through the correct channels. Whether it be CK, Brian Caldwell, now Fitzy, Gary fae' the Fan Council, Norrie Jamieson, SG himself. These people weren't faceless individuals. If we wanted to communicate with them, we knew the face, the person, and where to find them. I recently communicated with a couple of the Fan Council guys about something. No problem...

Then there's the other type of communication, which, in my opinion, was just dreadful. I won't pour over the Sellik Shop shambles again, but it is an example of the communication that surely must be improved 100%. The communication that emanates from within the hallowed walls of the FeegieField boardroom, not the interactive communication between a fan contacting someone in the club.

I think it should be relatively easy for GLS/SMiSA to improve the way they put out what might be unpopular announcements or announce decisions... just look at the way the outgoing BoD did it - and don't fcuking do it like them. Easy peasy, lemon squeezy.

That's PR though Poz, not communication. You've got a situation which could and will rise again in the future i'm sure. The board of directors had an offer on the table, they considered it, voted to take the money to let Celtic host the matches in Paisley and to allow them to do a temporary re-brand of the stadium in return for a presumably appropriate fee. Now whether you agree with that decision or not the fact is that it had been made and no amount of noise - phone calls, e-mails or people talking to Gary from the Fans Council - was going to change that decision. What the club ACTUALLY needed wasn't more contact points, it was someone with the skill to spin what was essentially a negative story into something a bit more positive. 

As I say this will arise again. The new board is going to have to make decisions that weigh commercialism against upsetting their customer base. It happens in any business. The idea that the board will put any deal on hold whilst it asks the customer base for their opinion is fanciful. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuart Dickson said:

That's PR though Poz, not communication. You've got a situation which could and will rise again in the future i'm sure. The board of directors had an offer on the table, they considered it, voted to take the money to let Celtic host the matches in Paisley and to allow them to do a temporary re-brand of the stadium in return for a presumably appropriate fee. Now whether you agree with that decision or not the fact is that it had been made and no amount of noise - phone calls, e-mails or people talking to Gary from the Fans Council - was going to change that decision. What the club ACTUALLY needed wasn't more contact points, it was someone with the skill to spin what was essentially a negative story into something a bit more positive. 

As I say this will arise again. The new board is going to have to make decisions that weigh commercialism against upsetting their customer base. It happens in any business. The idea that the board will put any deal on hold whilst it asks the customer base for their opinion is fanciful. 

 

PR / Communication / Common Sense / 

 

Whatever way you put it, make it better than the outgoing BoD. Unpopular decisions will always need made. Sellik shops, giving up part of the WB, the Sevco getting the South Stand, the JD Sports ongoing pish-fest with an August 22nd release now!?

The club have a website. Use it. Sweeten the blow, for want of a better expression, explain your decision, engage a bit with the support at large... You did, when you wanted them outside the Council offices for the stadium vote.

Anyway, I am sure - given that 1300 people, mostly Saints fans, have signed up to back the bid - that the new leadership of GLS/SMiSA will improve PR / Communication towards those 1300 and beyond, by using a bit of the aforementioned common sense. If ra' Sellik are setting up shop again, then at least the new owners will, in advance, utilise their very own website to explain a few things to the St Mirren support. If I'd read about what was happening in regard to ra' Sellik branding, with a few paragraphs from the BoD explaining the deal was a good one and far from being a hostile takeover it was a beneficial partnership... then fair do's. A wee bit of thought, information, wouldn't have cost a penny.

Edited by pozbaird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What to expect in future is a discussion between SMiSA and the board on behalf of its members and wider support to come up with a few contingencies that could be put to SMiSA members to decide which are the more palatable in the event of situations like the final game last season, and if A.N. other wants to rent the stadium and re-brand etc.

that after all was all we wanted last season, to be involved, to be part of the decision, to understand the economic reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

What to expect in future is a discussion between SMiSA and the board on behalf of its members and wider support to come up with a few contingencies that could be put to SMiSA members to decide which are the more palatable in the event of situations like the final game last season, and if A.N. other wants to rent the stadium and re-brand etc.

that after all was all we wanted last season, to be involved, to be part of the decision, to understand the economic reality.

I know most others don't see it as much of a problem, but I'm concerned. See, I've got a number of e-mails from people at SMiSA from just a few weeks ago assuring me that a key part of the bid to buy the club was developing closer links with the local community. One even went so far as to tell me that "it's fair to say that the community will be a crucial area going forward as the social lenders we've been in discussion with will be looking for us to demonstrate impact in that area before agreeing to fund us". Yet here, with pretty much one of the first operational decisions being made it looks like the new owners have taken the decision to move work out of Paisley to the West Midlands. 

I appreciate there was probably an economic reality to this that wasn't run by SMiSA members because it was seen as trivial but I would have thought that establishing the principle of using local contractors and supporting local businesses would have been seen as of reasonably high importance. 

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...