Jump to content

St Mirren FC. Never Ending Incompetence


shull

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Hoof Hearted said:

Whit are you bumping your gums about?

 

You can still park ootside new love street between 3 and 5pm and coont the airyplanes.

 

I think we've dodged a bullet, with the absolute honking pish we are playing

we might have been on for a beating by the spunky spartans. 

Aye we will be in far better form by Tuesday night :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Just a few points.

  1. The Chairman's report mentions the USH in a list about problems at Ralston. Is there any USH at Ralston? Perhaps that doesn't work?
  2. The report is undated so he could have written it yesterday, just after the routine maintenance inspection discovered a fault in the USH.  Incidentally, both the Director's and Auditor's reports are dated 24/11/16 (or yesterday as I call it).
  3. The insurance company have been contacted about the USH problem and as we all know these chaps are first class at assessing the damage and paying out the full amount to repair or replace the insured item. So, it should all be fixed by tea-time on Monday in time to be switched on to ensure the replay goes ahead.
  4. The accounts refer to the year to 31 March 2016 so they are not in context with the Chairman's report which is talking about the current situation we fin ourselves in, probably up to about, oh, yesterday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, doonhamer said:

Rule 35 of the Competition Rules comes to mind. 

There is no rule that states you must have USH.......or even a rule that says if you have USH you have to use it.

Stop being a drama queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind, people that signed up to Buy The Buds, then chucked it after two payments for huffy reasons rather than budgetary constraints are the real diddies who could be accused of killing OUR club.

 

it's certainly not their club.

THEY are now occasional customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, antrin said:

To my mind, people that signed up to Buy The Buds, then chucked it after two payments for huffy reasons rather than budgetary constraints are the real diddies who could be accused of killing OUR club.

 

it's certainly not their club.

THEY are now occasional customers.

:lol:

Still a Shareholder and always will be.

And anyway, the Club aint worth a f*ck.

Run by Loonies

Edited by shull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, shull said:

:lol:

Still a Shareholder and always will be.

 

Shares have always been worthless.

Genuine investment currently is the Direct Debits.

 

i'm still disappointed in your hissy fit making you chuck it so swiftly.

if you can't afford it, fine.  If not...  Then boasting about your whim is not bright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, antrin said:

Shares have always been worthless.

Genuine investment currently is the Direct Debits.

 

i'm still disappointed in your hissy fit making you chuck it so swiftly.

if you can't afford it, fine.  If not...  Then boasting about your whim is not bright.

I can do what I like with my money, so f*ck your disappointment.

Admission money is more than enough. ( extortionate actually )

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shull said:

I can do what I like with my money, so f*ck your disappointment.

Admission money is more than enough. ( extortionate actually )

 

Of course, you can. :)

And I agree with you about Admission Charge.

 

Any disappointment is in the disparity between your Buy The Buds enthusiasm and relentless match day optimism... as opposed to your easy-oasy chucking it!

there's a sad shallowness there...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, antrin said:

Of course, you can. :)

And I agree with you about Admission Charge.

 

Any disappointment is in the disparity between your Buy The Buds enthusiasm and relentless match day optimism... as opposed to your easy-oasy chucking it!

there's a sad shallowness there...

 

F*ck off with your patronising pish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

 


I take it all those involved either have you on ignore or they don't post on here as they could have answered with a simple yes or no.

 

I would like to point out that quite obviously the news that the heating was broken has only come to light in the year ending May 2016 report,which has only been released today,therefore any due diligence reports which had to be done (and they had to be done before May 2016) would not have found any notice of this problem.

It will also be disappointing if it transpires that the previous board and or previous CEO never let on to anyone that this problem was being left for the new board to discover for themselves when the first serious frosty weather occurred,surely they would have given notice of this and if so why was it not acted upon.My money would be on the new board not being told,simply because they seem eager to get major things fixed and there's nothing more major than no heating in winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cockles1987 said:

 


Just checking to get timeline correct, when was the last time it was used/tested before the due diligence and was it used/tested for due diligence?

From a personal point of view (because i'm not experienced in the agreement of contracts and all that entails) it would be down to Gordon Scott as the main purchaser to do due diligence on the likes of stadium maintenance and the state of the USH system along with all other plant/machinery/electrics and internal heating (much like anyone would do if they buy a house,first thing you should do is to get the boiler etc.,inspected before the time elapses for claiming back the cost of repairs/replacements) The time for SMiSA to do that would be when they are becoming the major shareholder,and this is indeed a strong reminder that before the money is paid for the majority shares,then all plant/machinery/heating/electrics etc., should have a certificate from an appropriate source to show that all is well.

However having not been a part of the negotiating group for the purchase of shares,mainly because i know nothing about the legalities of drawing up contracts/agreements and what should be in them.It was those who do know about these things who conducted that side of the business.So as to who should have or did get everything checked out,I can't truly say,all i do know is that there is an agreement/contract which states there were no known financial problems or debtors at the time of sale,i expect that would include this problem and that it's covered by an insurance/maintenance policy with the installers of the USH, because if not then it would have been a known financial problem.Just like i take out a maintenance/breakdown policy with Scottish gas for my heating and gas appliances i expect ,but don't know,that similar would be in place for everything that needs maintained in the stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, buddiecat said:

I would like to point out that quite obviously the news that the heating was broken has only come to light in the year ending May 2016 report,which has only been released today,therefore any due diligence reports which had to be done (and they had to be done before May 2016) would not have found any notice of this problem.

It will also be disappointing if it transpires that the previous board and or previous CEO never let on to anyone that this problem was being left for the new board to discover for themselves when the first serious frosty weather occurred,surely they would have given notice of this and if so why was it not acted upon.My money would be on the new board not being told,simply because they seem eager to get major things fixed and there's nothing more major than no heating in winter.

One thing I don't understand for this heating system you need maintenance just like a car needs maintenance.  If you don't they break down.  Agree with Tedious Tom . Use SMISA money to get everything fixed then extend the time period for buying the club. However that fixes now we also have to think of the future.  Going buy loans paid out buy the old board there needs to be a fund layer aside for future problems. I can see the club shrinking further we can't keep spending what is not there. Due diligence sorry to say but it looks like important issues have been ignored.  

Edited by Isle Of Bute Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand for this heating system you need maintenance just like a car needs maintenance.  If you don't they break down.  Agree with Tedious Tom . Use SMISA money to get everything fixed then extend the time period for buying the club. However that fixes now we also have to think of the future.  Going buy loans paid out buy the old board there needs to be a fund layer aside for future problems. I can see the club shrinking further we can't keep spending what is not there. Due diligence sorry to say but it looks like important issues have been ignored.  

What a car crash of a post!

1. Why the f**k should SMiSA members pay for maintenance work on the under soil heating? The club just produced annual accounts showing a £2.1m turnover. Let the business pay for its own maintenance.

2. Why the f**k is USH suddenly a priority. The club didn't want it when the SPL forced it on them. It's probably been used and worked less than 10 times over its lifespan. And it's sole purpose is to try to get matches played on days when it's uncomfortably cold to sit in a plastic seat, outside, for 2 hours in sub zero temperatures watching low grade football.

3. Why would not having USH mean the club is shrinking?

The apparent lack of maintenance of plant is clearly a concern. A far bigger issue would be if the AHUs in the four buildings failed and it would obviously be prudent to have that serviced ASAP. However the priorities should not be changing. Keep the team up, and focus on expanding the club to the local community. The club needs to monetise every corner of every asset they've got even if that means cutting back on academy hours to accommodate pitch lets that bring in money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, STGBuddy said:

I think GS  and the BOD are getting stick on this thread are they not ? 

Not sure what this has got to do with the fowler issue ? 

Because someone was giving Fowler pelters for placing an add for players out of contract on line . My point is that the guy is at least taking responsibility for his job and using his initiative . If GS had done the same then the match may have been on tomorrow.

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...