SMiSA's Latest Update

[antrin]

2 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

 

Oh FFS. Did you miss the last two referendums where either side argued about the potential outcome?

Yep, definitely. St Mirren fans are too stupid for Fan Ownership

 

The worrying revelation from your myriad posts is (thankfully) that you are too stupid to be a St Mirren fan.

[Drew]

18 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I've cancelled mine too.

Oh dear, what a shame, never mind.

Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish(ing)

[antrin]

22 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I've cancelled mine too.

 

1 minute ago, Drew said:

Oh dear, what a shame, never mind.

Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish(ing)

It's the SOLE reason he joined and boasted about how much and how many.... all so he could boast about leaving.

 

It's all always about HIM, not St Mirren.

[faraway saint]

8 minutes ago, antrin said:

The worrying revelation from your myriad posts is (thankfully) that you are too stupid to be a St Mirren fan.

Are you new to the forum then?

[bazil85]

It's the SOLE reason he joined and boasted about how much and how many.... all so he could boast about leaving.
 
It's all always about HIM, not St Mirren.

I have serious doubts he was even ever a member. Could tell he at no point had any interest in keeping it going for 10 years anyway.

If he did though remember it was £25 a month, did he mention that? £150 paid to a £3,000 commitment... what a guy

[Lord Pityme]

18 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

But you are on the SMISA committee, we're you not party to this proposal's development?

Everyone on the committee is party to it.

[beyond our ken]

So we have  members of the committee who brief against committee decisions and board decisions?

 

How can this committee work? It seems more of a cabal to me.

[TsuMirren]

My view on this was that there didn't appear to be time to run a vote and ensure that orders would go in, parts be avaliable and the work plus system testing on the USH take place prior to the Morton game. Without that time factor then the 15K loan should have gone to a vote and that was certainly discussed the last to Mondays. Maybe in the future we'll be able to run short sharp votes, though you'd also hope we won't get ourselves in this position again.

As for the £2 vote, it is a spend or save. For anyone with ideas of what the options should be next time you can drop me a PM, contact SMISA direct or even have a chat with one of us.

[Sonny]

Should this not be on the SMiSA thread or is there not a big enough audience there?

[Stuart Dickson]

So we have  members of the committee who brief against committee decisions and board decisions?

 

How can this committee work? It seems more of a cabal to me.

Committees are often split as it should be be along the lines of the members they represent. I wouldnt ever expect a committee to be totally united when presenting items such as this for members to vote on. The big problem with SMISA is they don't produce the minutes of the meetings and they won't tell you who was elected and who was co-opted and the membership can't see if their elected representative is being voted down by people placed on the committee with the intention of forcing the organisation to go one particular way. How can any member trust an organisation if its working in that way?

Its even worse when the committee takes unauthorised actions without asking the membership. And let's not forget that this is also an organisation which just last month co-opted two new members onto the committee taking the committee to an apparent 13 rather than the constituted no more than 12

[Kendo]

I'm for giving the manager additional cash to help dig us out the hole we're in. However if the members vote against it then so be it. 

What I don't get is non members on here bumping their gums about how members should spend their cash. 

 

[shull]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

 

Well what you worried about now? You don't have a say or a vote anymore on matters like this.

Daft? Says the person that thinks investing in a player budget for a team bottom of the league is a bad idea. Hahaha you actually can't script it. Oh massive £6 per person gamble, so dangerous

 

Boom Boom Baz 

This is an open St Mirren Forum and we are all equal Saints fans who are entitled to their opinion on any Club matter. 

So piss off trying to pull rank. 

You and SMISA are nothing special. 

More likely to feck the Club going down the route you are by gambling money on players. 

So take yir 12 quid and shove it. 

[shull]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Joining the, I'm sure growing number of fans that are throwing St Mirren Football Club under the bus by cancelling their memberships.  All because you don't agree with the short term vision of the people in charge of the club in the short term. Good job!

The only person who can ruin the Club is Mr 51% Gordon. 

He is in charge. 

If we get relegated and he doesn't adjust budgets correctly then we are f**ked. 

It's all down to him. 

The fans can't ruin the Club. 

Stop being thick Bazzy 

[munoz]

32 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

Committees are often split as it should be be along the lines of the members they represent. I wouldnt ever expect a committee to be totally united when presenting items such as this for members to vote on. The big problem with SMISA is they don't produce the minutes of the meetings and they won't tell you who was elected and who was co-opted and the membership can't see if their elected representative is being voted down by people placed on the committee with the intention of forcing the organisation to go one particular way. How can any member trust an organisation if its working in that way?

Its even worse when the committee takes unauthorised actions without asking the membership. And let's not forget that this is also an organisation which just last month co-opted two new members onto the committee taking the committee to an apparent 13 rather than the constituted no more than 12

I thought you had cancelled ?

[shull]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

And if everyone followed your actions and cancelled memberships? Throwing your club under the bus because you're all upset that other fans might not vote the way you'd want them to. Boohoo, hope the teacher doesn't catch you on the internet during school time.  

Gordon has already cost the Club money by not doing due diligence properly. 

Hence putting the Club into debt over the USH System. 

Try and understand.... 

FANS CAN'T RUIN THE CLUB 

It's all down to the major shareholder. 

[beyond our ken]

30 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

Committees are often split as it should be be along the lines of the members they represent. I wouldnt ever expect a committee to be totally united when presenting items such as this for members to vote on. The big problem with SMISA is they don't produce the minutes of the meetings and they won't tell you who was elected and who was co-opted and the membership can't see if their elected representative is being voted down by people placed on the committee with the intention of forcing the organisation to go one particular way. How can any member trust an organisation if its working in that way?

Its even worse when the committee takes unauthorised actions without asking the membership. And let's not forget that this is also an organisation which just last month co-opted two new members onto the committee taking the committee to an apparent 13 rather than the constituted no more than 12

It's a committee and they all represent all members.  There are no consituencies in this so they should not be split in that way.   All the more reason for them to publish minutes and for members to be able to decide if they like the way the voting goes.  

I wasn't aware that the committee had a large number of co-opted members.  If they are now over the constitutional number, maybe the co-optees have a plan to get rid of at least one elected member.  That being said, I am sure that the members should be able to vet the performance of the co-optees and raise motions of support or otherwise at the AGM.

 

[elvis]

5 hours ago, Drew said:

If it helps to secure the club's future, though, I'm sure you'll be grateful to those who are at least trying to do something tangible in that regard, eh?

Smug pish like this is a hell of a lot more corrosive than a few people having a spat over how a few quid should be used. But hey, if sniping from the sidelines is your thing (as, evidently, it generally appears to be), crack on.

Being smug has got nothing to do with my comment people are arguing among themselves already can you imagine what its going to be like when in full fan ownership 

[Gruffalo]

1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:

Where to start with this personal attack?

i actually thought this was a thread to discuss:

A - a smisa vote in how the £2 pot should be spent

B - The smisa committee electing to loan the club £15k without consulting its members (quite a decision to take given the objects of the smisa constitution)

lets tackle A first, I will respect the outcome of the vote, whatever the members decide, it will be so. The wording and inference of the vote is highly evocative, and non-rational, suggesting only the Smisa members can save the season. Again complete rot! It was widely considered on here to be a squad capable of being competitive in this league even before we had outstanding youngsters stepping up to strengthen the first team squad.

the votes so far, and it would seem those to come are based solely on what the club is asking for at any given time, there is no plan being followed, no list of club-v-community competing priorities etc just whatever fire needs putting out. Many others on here are dissapointed, yet again there is no choice, just a highly evocative Yes/No.

B - Given the infancy of Smisa as is, the hope, expectation and desires of its members there is no good reason to take decisions to hand out substantial loans to businesses that appear to have a cash flow issue without first consulting those whose contributions, and interests you are responsible for representing. 

smisa, like it or not is a democratic, constitution led, independent trust, whose objects dictate that it should serve, involve and empower the community, whilst infuencing the sustainable and ethical running of the club.

Re: your first question and various other bits of your post, just to reiterate Smisa, committe and membership is a democratic, one member, one vote orginisation. i hope that is clear.

great to see you back trying to get a rise with all that GLS guff, for the record anyone that puts money into a scottish (at present) championship club needs their head examining, thats GLS, me and all the Smisa members, and wider fan base. KTF Gruffs!

Where is the personal attack. I merely asked some questions of your post none of which you answered.

Bearing in mind you made heavy inferences in your original post about the SMISA Vote, the squandering of money by the club, dud players, the club coming back to the SMISA membership for money and for Directors to cough up more dough.

I am merely a SMISA member who gets monthly emails to tell me they have taken £12 from my account and quarterly emails asking me to vote on how to spend my accumulated £6. As identified on another thread there are no minutes or notes of the SMISA meetings or the topic of discussions. I am not informed of the goings on of SMISA. For the record I don’t want to know. I pay my £12 without prejudice and expect the elected members to manage the funds appropriately.

Where as you are on the SMISA Committee I suspect you have an insight in to why there was a vote for player funds, who instigated the vote and who agreed to put it to the members. If not then who is pulling the strings to the SMISA committee and the funds. There have been emotive posts (from SMISA Committee members) on here about the club wanting to remove a 3 year old scabby sticker from a seat without consulting with the fans. Yet the hypocrisy is that SMISA have handed over £15k of their funds to the club and instigated a restricted Vote of its members without consultation of its members and I presume some of its Committee members.

As for the GLS guff. Your correct he in my opinion was mad to put money in to the club. But he was smart enough to ensure that by holding 51 % he controlled everything about the club and his Board of Directors until such times that SMISA had the hard cash to take control.

[pozbaird]

4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

 

Attention seeker. Does everyone know he pays £25 oh maybe he'll stop paying it. By the way he spends £25 a month. But he might stop, pay attention to him. You know why? he pays £25 but he can stop it anytime.

Did I mention he pays £25 a month?

 

Don't forget he voted to hammer the Sevco no matter what in the boardroom that night too. Did he ever mention he voted to hammer the Sevco no matter the circumstances? I might need to search back to see if he ever mentioned that. The high horse he is still on in regard to that night must be touching the sun.

Having read through the thread though, I see StuDick being attacked for 'not respecting the democratic vote' on this SMiSA issue. I might be wrong, but it doesn't seem to me that is correct. It isn't the result of the vote he's complaining about - it's the nature of what he's being offered to vote 'yes or no' on in the first place that he's complaining about, and isn't happy about the way it has been handled. Surely he is well within his rights to voice his opinion on that?

In regard to the money being spent on the playing budget at this juncture, as we are in a particularly precarious position. I put this viewpoint forward merely as an idea for discussion - why not take a deep breath and put trust in Jack Ross and the current squad to avoid relegation without the addition of a SMiSA-funded free agent or two next month. They are hardly likely to be Messi, Christ, they're hardly likely to be Isma. Anyway, he / they are tasked with being the difference makers between Jan-May that will ensure our safety while the current squad cannot? No pressure lads. Best of luck. Hope you are the messiahs and not merely naughty boys.

Anyway, I was supposed to offer up an idea, nearly forgot. Relegation is clearly bad news if it happens. Where will we be then in regard to our ability to assemble a half-decent squad in the third tier? Who would we be able to keep, who would we be able to entice to join a third-tier club, and how could we realistically bounce straight back to the second-tier? Why not keep the SMiSA 'float' from now until the end of the season and don't spend it on anything. IF relegation happens, utilise it towards the playing budget ahead of season 2017/18 and it might help pay the wages of a new-look squad that was equipped to win the division.

As I say, not for me to get involved in the thought processes of GLS, SMiSA, or the SMiSA membership. Just wondering if the money might be able to make a real difference in the event of relegation, rather than the notoriously difficult January window, where I fear any newcomers are more likely to be Sanoupe and less likely to be genuine difference makers.

Edited December 15, 2016 by pozbaird

[Ayrshire Saints]

If nothing else it seems we are gradualy weeding out the fantacists and the dreamers leaving those that are in it for the right reasons to get on with it. Always knew there were a few lurking just waiting for the opportunity to make their big stage entrance (and subsequent swift departure).

[shull]

5 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

If nothing else it seems we are gradualy weeding out the fantacists and the dreamers leaving those that are in it for the right reasons to get on with it. Always knew there were a few lurking just waiting for the opportunity to make their big stage entrance (and subsequent swift departure).

A post that only you understands. 

What are on about? 

[bazil85]

Boom Boom Baz 
This is an open St Mirren Forum and we are all equal Saints fans who are entitled to their opinion on any Club matter. 
So piss off trying to pull rank. 
You and SMISA are nothing special. 
More likely to feck the Club going down the route you are by gambling money on players. 
So take yir 12 quid and shove it. 

Says the guy that called me daft for voicing my opinion earlier today. [emoji849][emoji849]

[bazil85]

The only person who can ruin the Club is Mr 51% Gordon. 
He is in charge. 
If we get relegated and he doesn't adjust budgets correctly then we are f**ked. 
It's all down to him. 
The fans can't ruin the Club. 
Stop being thick Bazzy 

So if every fan cancelled their membership today that wouldn't impact our club. My god I'm the thick one... really.

[bazil85]

Can someone also remind Shull what the fans are trying to achieve over the next decade. I think he's forgot with his 'fans' can't hurt the club chat. Someone please go over fan ownership with him... slowly

[div]

28 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

If nothing else it seems we are gradualy weeding out the fantacists and the dreamers leaving those that are in it for the right reasons to get on with it. Always knew there were a few lurking just waiting for the opportunity to make their big stage entrance (and subsequent swift departure).

This. The constant threats of withdrawal of direct debits started almost as soon as the deal was done. It's absolutely no surprise to me or to anyone else who reads this forum regularly that the same voiciferous few who take every single possible opportunity to attack the club are the first ones to jump ship.

The vast majority of members are, I am sure, quite happy to know that their monthly contributions are making a positive difference to the club in the short term and in the longer term ensuring that the club will be owned by those that cherish it the most.

As I said earlier, look at the 5 months gone and what has been achieved.  Over £80K in funds raised by the supporters, helping fellow supporters, helping the football club, now possibly helping the manager. That's why I signed up to buy the buds, and speaking to many of my fellow buddies I know that's why they joined too.