Jump to content

Director Election Candidacy - Kenny Morrison


TsuMirren

Recommended Posts


12 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

LPM. Who are these actual outsiders that you consider are interfering?

I may have missed Kenny mentioning anything like that.

Outsiders (and their influence brought to bear through committee members) to smisa, but not the club. In short the club dont see Smisa as independent, although it is most definitely (legal constitution) so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, melmac said:

I personally think, given in what direction Smisa are heading (to be in charge of the club), that it's time someone professional (a CA; Solicitor etc (they could even be retired with time to spare)) is employed, even on a retainer, to oversee things - the bowling club approach needs to end.

I have been aware of Smisa from way back (having been a fan since the 1950's) and have to say that recent developments do cause me concern as I wonder why the (Smisa) committee  has not had the common sense to simply provide a statement explaining the situation.  Smisa is a wonderful concept and it would be such a shame if it became a 'closed shop'. It would seem that 'some people' think that this already happening  given that 'sausage roll brigade and Bowling club approach' are both phrases indicative of this. LOVE THE CLUB AND THE TEAM AND THE MANAGER .... BUT SUSPICIOUS IF Smisa:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, melmac said:

I personally think, given in what direction Smisa are heading (to be in charge of the club), that it's time someone professional (a CA; Solicitor etc (they could even be retired with time to spare)) is employed, even on a retainer, to oversee things - the bowling club approach needs to end.

Not just a wee bit sensible but 100% correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:
31 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
Outsiders (and their influence brought to bear through committee members) to smisa, but not the club. In short the club dont see Smisa as independent, although it is most definitely (legal constitution) so.

So the outsiders aren't St Mirren board members as they would have an influence on the club. So who are they rather than a definition?

Think you read my post wrong, there is a HUGE influence from the club, most of it unnecessary and unhealthy. When you think there are about ten or twelve people in the fans council, and you've got two or three on the Smisa committee now. This is a planned move to basically have smisa run by the club.

the original Smisa committee members still on there got themselves to close and involved with GLs. Yes it was a difficult balancing act given what both parties wanted to achieve, but at point of takeover it should have been reset, instead the influence just grew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Think you read my post wrong, there is a HUGE influence from the club, most of it unnecessary and unhealthy. When you think there are about ten or twelve people in the fans council, and you've got two or three on the Smisa committee now. This is a planned move to basically have smisa run by the club.

the original Smisa committee members still on there got themselves to close and involved with GLs. Yes it was a difficult balancing act given what both parties wanted to achieve, but at point of takeover it should have been reset, instead the influence just grew.

If there is any truth in that then alarm  bells should be ringing. Yes SMISA club is there to help the club but surly at a request to the members.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

No sure it "should concern" the majority as I suspect the majority are still comfortable with the way SMISA goes about its business.

I do agree some sort of communication to members could clear this up as many will use this situation to try to cause mischief. :rolleyes:

,If folk are happy to keep paying their monies regardless and question nothing, that's their prerogative but my slant on it is, given KM's resignation from SMISA completely, I am wondering what is wrong at SMISA. Sausage roll brigade and bowling club mentality keeps getting mooted about.

If SMISA is no longer independent, let them be honest and drop the I. Majority of folk will likely pay into SMSA anyway as fan ownership will still be realised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just FYI, and for the avoidance of doubt. In my opinion none of the people involved with/influencing smisa are as far as I know bad people, they are all saints fans trying to do what they believe is right. The problem is, as always the politics side of it always comes in, ranks close, committee's within committee's form, positions become inflexible and good people say 'f**k that for a game of soldiers'.

Smisa can and should be independent, and if so will deliver the best possible outcomes for the club. It can still be reset, but some people have followed others down roads they dont think they can turn back from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Think you read my post wrong, there is a HUGE influence from the club, most of it unnecessary and unhealthy. When you think there are about ten or twelve people in the fans council, and you've got two or three on the Smisa committee now. This is a planned move to basically have smisa run by the club.

the original Smisa committee members still on there got themselves to close and involved with GLs. Yes it was a difficult balancing act given what both parties wanted to achieve, but at point of takeover it should have been reset, instead the influence just grew.

I'm actually not sure how many elected members are left on the board, let's use the word board as the society constitution does. Off the top of my head it'd be six, with the committee being filled by six there to offer "advice". As you know Tony, the Board was divided during the bid so far as confidentiality and only a small group seeing all. I've never seen the full takeover document, but you really don't need to. 

You're correct that Gordon has some influence and I'll just touch upon process here. Basically, every option for the polls will now go past Gordon. That's not to say he will control what goes on, but he'll get a chance to comment. This started after the Panda Club, which just as a personal view the Fan Council make a great job of promoting and numbers look good. It then came to a bit of a head after the Glenvale vote where we helped them plug a gap after their Children in Need funding only covered 10 spaces for 4 to 5 year olds and it was felt worthwhile to put those 10 additional slots out as an option in the vote. Gordon released a statement at that point, we did nothing and the result was as close as you'll see over the next however many years. Requests from the club do go on the ballot, but they are challenged and I've even seen a few knocked back or reworked. 

I don't think the majority of members care too much or the Glenvale proposal would have lost by about 300 votes. Indeed,  that almost points to the possibility they don't care if Gordon has issues and releases a statement. But yes, there's definitely some control there that you could interpret however you want based on your view of how this should work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

I'm actually not sure how many elected members are left on the board, let's use the word board as the society constitution does. Off the top of my head it'd be six, with the committee being filled by six there to offer "advice". As you know Tony, the Board was divided during the bid so far as confidentiality and only a small group seeing all. I've never seen the full takeover document, but you really don't need to. 

You're correct that Gordon has some influence and I'll just touch upon process here. Basically, every option for the polls will now go past Gordon. That's not to say he will control what goes on, but he'll get a chance to comment. This started after the Panda Club, which just as a personal view the Fan Council make a great job of promoting and numbers look good. It then came to a bit of a head after the Glenvale vote where we helped them plug a gap after their Children in Need funding only covered 10 spaces for 4 to 5 year olds and it was felt worthwhile to put those 10 additional slots out as an option in the vote. Gordon released a statement at that point, we did nothing and the result was as close as you'll see over the next however many years. Requests from the club do go on the ballot, but they are challenged and I've even seen a few knocked back or reworked. 

I don't think the majority of members care too much or the Glenvale proposal would have lost by about 300 votes. Indeed,  that almost points to the possibility they don't care if Gordon has issues and releases a statement. But yes, there's definitely some control there that you could interpret however you want based on your view of how this should work. 

Its such a shame with so much good being done, the team flying high and fan ownership growing ever nearer, that some 'advisors' cant see what they are damaging, rather than protecting.  Still its a long, long way to go yet until full FO can be achieved, Things have a habit of turning full circle over time, and that will present opportunities.

to steal one of the BAwa bard's lines... "sit tight... things are bubbling away"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a member I tend to keep informed on SMISA business mostly on here, and there website,  the only reason I joined was to help remove the old board, so that the club could move forward and progress, in Gordon and David Nicoll I felt confident this was more than possible, so far I couldn't be happier the way things have gone, Unlike me this isn't the first football venture that Kenny has been involved in,  and has came across to me as being ambitious, and looking to take a leading role in the fan ownership project, so far that hasn't happened for him,  now he has resigned and hasn't raised any major issues, END OF STORY, am sure SMISA will mention it in there next update, so get ready to put your names forward,  he has now joined a new venture Edu {that may be your reason right there} good luck with your new venture Kenny,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, portmahomack saint said:

As a member I tend to keep informed on SMISA business mostly on here, and there website,  the only reason I joined was to help remove the old board, so that the club could move forward and progress, in Gordon and David Nicoll I felt confident this was more than possible, so far I couldn't be happier the way things have gone, Unlike me this isn't the first football venture that Kenny has been involved in,  and has came across to me as being ambitious, and looking to take a leading role in the fan ownership project, so far that hasn't happened for him,  now he has resigned and hasn't raised any major issues, END OF STORY, am sure SMISA will mention it in there next update, so get ready to put your names forward,  he has now joined a new venture Edu {that may be your reason right there} good luck with your new venture Kenny,

Only joined after resigning, pure chance it was launched so close. But, thank you anyway. You may see the election process held up until the AGM, but yes put your names forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, melmac said:

It's not really a surprise what Kenny disclosed about the suggestions for the £2 pot. Alarm bells should be ringing all over the place re conflicts of interest, the £2 pot spend should really stop for now.

Will it? 

You can't stop it Neil, it's the only real engagement the members get and at least everyone is committed to facilitating it. Remove the £2 pot and the SMISA committee would have no real duty to update members. Heck, you could have a committee of about three at that point. Chairman, Secretary and a Treasurer. No £2 pot, no additional cash and it all goes very ad-hoc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, linwood buddie said:

I know mate , i know of a few who like yourself have left for whatever reason,

I also know a few who have joined since. The very nature of a membership scheme is some will leave , some will join. 

People are entitled to leave and need offer reasons to no one.

Their money , their choice ... if anyone finds a better use for their cash or another thing to occupy their time thats their call.  At the end on the day we still have 1200 committed Buds who still want to be part of this.

COYS :clapping

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

I also know a few who have joined since. The very nature of a membership scheme is some will leave , some will join. 

People are entitled to leave and need offer reasons to no one.

Their money , their choice ... if anyone finds a better use for their cash or another thing to occupy their time thats their call.  At the end on the day we still have 1200 committed Buds who still want to be part of this.

COYS :clapping

 

It seems that the focus is, predominately, on people leaving while, as you say, there's an equal chance people would join. 

The numbers seem to be fairly constant and that's important, although I think, on the back of our current team performances, I'm surprised a high profile campaign to boost membership hasn't taken place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be blunt, I'm not particularly interested in the tittle tattle surrounding SMiSA.  I do agree, however, with the earlier suggestion that someone from a professional background and with, let's just say, a more independent perspective, should be brought in to co-ordinate the overall business.

I also reckon the brakes should be put on the £2 pot spend until there is more effective oversight.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Drew said:

To be blunt, I'm not particularly interested in the tittle tattle surrounding SMiSA.  I do agree, however, with the earlier suggestion that someone from a professional background and with, let's just say, a more independent perspective, should be brought in to co-ordinate the overall business.

I also reckon the brakes should be put on the £2 pot spend until there is more effective oversight.

 

The existing committee members already fit that description almost exclusively as far as I can see, are you suggesting someone who isn't  a fan?

Its a Catch 22 scenario but the sorta dudes who will be willing to spend the time serving on a committee are, erm well, committee type dudes. 

PS - Not interested in tittle tattle - who you trying to kid? :P

 

Edited by Bud the Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

The existing committee members already fit that description almost exclusively as far as I can see, are you suggesting someone who isn't  a fan?

Its a Catch 22 scenario but the sorta dudes who will be willing to spend the time serving on a committee are, erm well, committee type dudes. 

PS - Not interested in tittle tattle - who you trying to kid? :P

 

I was thinking about someone in a Brian Caldwell Lite type of role. Wouldn't matter to me whether he was a supporter.

Link to comment
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...