Jump to content

John McGinn


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

SMISA funds should be used for the purposes the paying members want them to be used for. All votes have suggested aspects that benefit SMFC are the most popular. 

SMiSA members can vote for any option presented to them, and whatever the result is, the result is. I am not disagreeing with any of that. For the one millionth time, can you understand that my personal opinion, and it is only that, is that I found it unpalatable that before even asking if it was OK to access certain monies for any purpose other than what they were clearly ring-fenced for, a specific project had been discussed, and that project fast-tracked itself to the vote, completely bypassing what (again my opinion) should have been the first thing asked.

I’m not asking you to agree, and I’m certainly hoping you do not respond (for the millionth time) by saying ‘but there was a vote, do you want two votes?’.... clearly, YES, I expected two votes. First, ask if members would sanction use of monies in such a way, then, and only then, put their proposals for specific spend on the table....

All I’m asking is that even if you don’t agree with me, can you at least understand my view on it. That’s all.

Edited by pozbaird
Link to comment
Share on other sites


If we set aside the guarantee made by smisa, (and I on their behalf confirming when directly sigining up members) that your £10 or £23 subscription is absolutely ringfenced to buy the majority shares. Then they cancelled that....

observing the will of the majority over the minority is fascinating. Dont listen to anyone who tries to make you feel wrong for deciding to stop paying in, or start/carry on paying in. Its your money, not theirs! That said you can detect a common theme in others trying to suggest you are wrong for pulling out for whatever reason. And thats the feeling those suggesting "you're wrong" might not all be so certain that "they're still right"..!

it is a common human trait to want to make others see things the way you do, and make the same commitments as them, and stick with them. The fear of being the one left with the proverbial pig in the poke at the reckoning is something that can drive us all to try and get others to "stick with it" sometimes for the only reason being...."well... we said we would"

we are not all wired that way! Doesnt make one right, and another wrong. Look at Brexit, and my experience/quest of now trying to get people i know, like/love and respect who voted for it... to now explain why? Its difficult to acknowledge you may have pinned your colours to the wrong mast, and embarrassing to have to admit it,never mind actually do something about changing it!

we're only human,and get swayed by emotions, the one thing we can feel good about is making a decision. Whatever that is, and no one has a right to criticise our right to take, make, break or change our decisions..... unless of course they are picking up the tab..!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Of course" [emoji3]
I'm just plain old stupid, but I do know one thing, and that's when fan ownership is delivered I'll be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with the other 1200 or so of us who saw it through!

Dosent make you a better supporter though [emoji6]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pozbaird said:

SMiSA members can vote for any option presented to them, and whatever the result is, the result is. I am not disagreeing with any of that. For the one millionth time, can you understand that my personal opinion, and it is only that, is that I found it unpalatable that before even asking if it was OK to access certain monies for any purpose other than what they were clearly ring-fenced for, a specific project had been discussed, and that project fast-tracked itself to the vote, completely bypassing what (again my opinion) should have been the first thing asked.

I’m not asking you to agree, and I’m certainly hoping you do not respond (for the millionth time) by saying ‘but there was a vote, do you want two votes?’.... clearly, YES, I expected two votes. First, ask if members would sanction use of monies in such a way, then, and only then, put their proposals for specific spend on the table....

All I’m asking is that even if you don’t agree with me, can you at least understand my view on it. That’s all.

So your personal opinion is SMISA not  putting in two votes for ultimately the same thing merits cancelling a one-time opportunity to bring St Mirren into fan ownership? No wonder people are baffled by it and question someone throwing their toys out the pram over something that will be so long-term beneficial for the club you 'support'

Saying there should of been another vote about using the funds for another purpose is completely unnecessary. Believe it or not being told what the funds would be used for... Means people voting, knew what the funds would be used for  Do you genuinely think the outcome would be any different? Can you give a single example of someone that voted yes for this that would of voted no if there was two votes?

'Oh wait so taking the money from the ring-fence and replenishing it, means the money would be taken from the ring-fence then replenished, I didn't realise that.' 

For me cancelling because you’re unhappy with decisions people involved with the process now make, is just crazy. in 10, 30, 50, 100 years these people will be long gone and our club will likely still be in the control of the fans. Well worth £12/ £25 a month in my opinion.

Very short-sighted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

If we set aside the guarantee made by smisa, (and I on their behalf confirming when directly sigining up members) that your £10 or £23 subscription is absolutely ringfenced to buy the majority shares. Then they cancelled that....

observing the will of the majority over the minority is fascinating. Dont listen to anyone who tries to make you feel wrong for deciding to stop paying in, or start/carry on paying in. Its your money, not theirs! That said you can detect a common theme in others trying to suggest you are wrong for pulling out for whatever reason. And thats the feeling those suggesting "you're wrong" might not all be so certain that "they're still right"..!

it is a common human trait to want to make others see things the way you do, and make the same commitments as them, and stick with them. The fear of being the one left with the proverbial pig in the poke at the reckoning is something that can drive us all to try and get others to "stick with it" sometimes for the only reason being...."well... we said we would"

we are not all wired that way! Doesnt make one right, and another wrong. Look at Brexit, and my experience/quest of now trying to get people i know, like/love and respect who voted for it... to now explain why? Its difficult to acknowledge you may have pinned your colours to the wrong mast, and embarrassing to have to admit it,never mind actually do something about changing it!

we're only human,and get swayed by emotions, the one thing we can feel good about is making a decision. Whatever that is, and no one has a right to criticise our right to take, make, break or change our decisions..... unless of course they are picking up the tab..!

No they didn't, we democratically (overwhelmingly) voted to change it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I've had this from a few people before. The nature of this POV is not understanding the contractual terms. It makes very little sense for two reasons: 

1. You would need everyone else or at least a substantial majority to bail out with you at the same time to actually stop BTB from happening at the point over 25% (in your theory) are controlled. Stopping memberships for this reason if a majority didn't join you would just weaken the finances, slow fan ownership down slightly and ultimately imapct St Mirren more than any other stakeholder. It won't deliver any goal that stops BTB

2. More importantly, even if everyone pulls out at the last minute it wouldn't mean 25% or above of shares were owned by fans. The contractual terms would not be fulfilled and there would be nothing to stop a controlling party pulling the plug on the whole thing, refund SMISA the money and sell the shares to another party. 

Will deal with both points separately.

I've never said that my intention was to stop fan ownership, rather that my intention was to review whether I wished to remain part of it after the initial £380k was repaid to secure the initial 29%. I was open about this from outset and I'm aware that my attitude is in the minority regarding my point when I review. There will be several factors in my decision including affordability, but equally confidence in direction of SMISA and tangible outputs from that period. I make no bones about making a decision that suits me and where I want to be and where I see the club ownership, what I do will not be a knee jerk reaction where I don't agree with the outcome of a one-off vote and will be considered with all the facts in my possession.

Onto the 2nd point if this is truly accurate and the contract is worded in such a way that even after funding the £380k loan to secure shares then there would be no block of shares held then it is in contradiction to what is still on the SMISA site under "The Basics" and "The Finances". If the contract is opaque and the block of shares is conditional on the whole deal completing then it is clearly not what was being sold to the membership.

https://www.smisa.net/buythebuds/how-it-works

Quote

The Basics

In summer 2016, SMISA and former St Mirren director Gordon Scott saw the terms of their joint offer to buy the majority shareholding in the club accepted by the former board.

That meant Gordon became the new chairman and majority shareholder of St Mirren. At the same time, SMISA secured a 29% stake in the club and the right to elect a fan representative on to the club board.

We also have a legal option giving us the exclusive right to buy Gordon's shares within the next ten years and allow the fans to become majority owners of the club - keeping St Mirren in the hands of the community forever.

The Finances

Gordon paid the bulk of the money needed to fund the initial share purchase but SMISA agreed to cover £380,000 of the £1m purchase price.

The income we receive from our members will pay that money back, while also saving up the money we need to buy out Gordon over the long-term.

Anyway perhaps this is best discussed in another part of the board and letting the McGinn thread run on topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, TediousTom said:

Correct and I am not

 

Any working  class person investing in something for ten years that will offer no financial return is an idiot.  Gordon Scott clearly agrees hence why he would appear to be such a canny investor (that American fund management company sponsoring our clubs shirt is for no benefit at all is it?).  Not to mention him bringing Alan Wardrop onto the board (who appears to run some sort of investment management company). ...people like Gordon look after money and thats why they have it, many of us just want our name on a wall!!!!!

 

Just my opinion though, Smisa can milk the working class man for his cash (and childrens futures, at least in part) with promises of grandeur etc whilst pissing money that really doesnt belong to them on stadium repairs.   Undoubtedly they will continue  swooning over the more wealthy premium members amongst them and I wont criticise anyone for pissing money away in such a stupid manner.  Yes your name is on a wall whilst your children inherit nothing from you except a zero hours contract because you once voted Labour but hey I would never pass judgement.   You manage your money how you like, you drink what you want, smoke if you want and spend your cash how you want.  You have nothing to worry about, you will live forever, you will win tte lottery one day and pensions will be massive before long (not that you will need it)....or your children will have to accept a council house in Greenock because you died, left them nothing except an ongoing direct debit payment to Smisa who really are brilliant and not dishonest at all.

 

Jog on Smisa, jog on indeed.

 

PS  Some John McGinn money would be lovely, just to keep it on topic y'all

Tom, Tell your kids to get aff their arses and earn a good standard of living.  Inheritance indeed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ged62 said:


Dosent make you a better supporter though emoji6.png

No, but it will make me a supporter who helped deliver fan ownership of the football club for generations to come, and that makes me feel great!

Everyone completely entitled to their opinion. My own is that the SMiSA guys have done an amazing job to date and deserve more support from the fans, not less.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but it will make me a supporter who helped deliver fan ownership of the football club for generations to come, and that makes me feel great!
Everyone completely entitled to their opinion. My own is that the SMiSA guys have done an amazing job to date and deserve more support from the fans, not less.
 

TBH I don’t know what SMISA do or don’t do. I pay my ST support the team, I don’t get involved, reading some of the stuff on this forum is enough to put you off IMO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myself my wife and son all are happy to pay our subscriptions monthly for as long as God will permit.We are happy to be involved in Fan Ownership.SMISA and our Board and Management are doing great.We have just had a wonderful season and much to look forward to.This thread has gone off the topic somewhat.I attended the AGM a few years back when Stewart clearly stated we were due a third of any subsequent transfer fee.So come on Hibs get cracking and get the best possible for Hibs Saints and John.COYS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ged62 said:


TBH I don’t know what SMISA do or don’t do. I pay my ST support the team, I don’t get involved, reading some of the stuff on this forum is enough to put you off IMO

I pay my 12 pound a month towards fan ownership as I thought it was a good concept, but I couldn't tell you much about SMISA either.

Have only even voted once, which must infuriate plenty, but I'm not really bothered where the additional goes. (Unless it's the woman's team, so I must be sexist as well as lazy)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, shetland said:

St Mirren have been Fan Owned since Gilmour arrived to save us in the 1990's. 

We are Fan Owned now with Scott in charge. 

No need for SMISA. 

No need for anybody to pay 12 quid per month. 

Gilmour didn't need 12 quid, nor does Scott. 

If we take care in the future, our Club will always be managed by fans like it has been for the previous 2 decades. 

But theyre quite happy to take the money, assisted by a pliant SMiSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There does seem to be a view that if you decide to withdraw from the scheme, then you’re a moaner who chucked it at the first sign that you weren’t getting things your own way. If that’s the way I am personally being looked at, frankly, I will not be losing one iota of sleep over it. Anyway, I thought having a seat-specific ST made me a better fan than the next guy, apparently not. There’s some in the Buy the Buds scheme way above me, by the looks of things.  [emoji14]

Are the 1200 who are buying into the club better that the 3000 that didn’t, I don’t think so . I didn’t buy into the club because I didn’t think it was right for me & if it would work. Only time will tell. I’ve put plenty money into the club for 40 years more than enough [emoji6]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me its about stopping outside influences coming in to run the club potentially putting the club into debt ending up with the club gone forever. It almost happened before and can again in the future. So what can stop it ? 51% of fan ownership means no one but the fans will have a final say for our future. What is hard to grasp about that all for what is cheaper than one pint a week.  But there is always going to be persons who don't agree on silly small things , buying balls , helping a girls team. Money being loaned to the club. These things have always happened with no problem. St Mirren social club loaned our club to bring Jack Copland. The money is paid back , it's money in the bank doing nothing , it will be paid back what's the problem ?  You want a safe forever St Mirren join SMISA let your children  see what St Mirren meant to you when your gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the 1200 who are buying into the club better that the 3000 that didn’t, I don’t think so . I didn’t buy into the club because I didn’t think it was right for me & if it would work. Only time will tell. I’ve put plenty money into the club for 40 years more than enough [emoji6]
That's fine, ged, no-one has an issue with that and it doesn't make you any less of a fan than anyone who is a member nor are they any better than anyone else, we're all buddies. The issue is with people who aren't members criticising smisa's actions.

Anyway, getting back on topic (ish), how about using some of the smisa funds to buy wheelbarrows to bring all the cash back from Embra?

:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's fine, ged, no-one has an issue with that and it doesn't make you any less of a fan than anyone who is a member nor are they any better than anyone else, we're all buddies. The issue is with people who aren't members criticising smisa's actions.

 

Anyway, getting back on topic (ish), how about using some of the smisa funds to buy wheelbarrows to bring all the cash back from Embra?

 

default_smile.png

As I said I don’t know much about the SMISA set up so I’ll leave that discussion to those who do. I’m not criticising the fans who have bought into the club either I love my wee team like every other person on this forum.

 

Anyway I thought this topic was about John McGinn [emoji23][emoji23]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they didn't, we democratically (overwhelmingly) voted to change it. 
No we did not.
That was never an option to br voted on.
It happened by default.

I haven't been on here for a helluva long time... Eventually come back for a browse and see the same people regurgitating the same old mantras.

Unfeckinbelievable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ged62 said:

Are the 1200 who are buying into the club better that the 3000 that didn’t, I don’t think so . I didn’t buy into the club because I didn’t think it was right for me & if it would work. Only time will tell. I’ve put plenty money into the club for 40 years more than enough emoji6.png

No one fan is better than any other. We all want a successful St.Mirren, surely?

Opting not to get involved in fan ownership is entirely your call. The club WILL become fan owned though, with or without you.

Every single member makes us stronger though, and it's never too late. Join in and make history!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

No we did not.
That was never an option to br voted on.
It happened by default.

I haven't been on here for a helluva long time... Eventually come back for a browse and see the same people regurgitating the same old mantras.

Unfeckinbelievable.

Well that isn't true though is it? SMiSA members were polled on whether or not to lend the club £50K.

I voted on it. So did 659 others.

smisa-poll.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ged62 said:

As I said I don’t know much about the SMISA set up so I’ll leave that discussion to those who do. I’m not criticising the fans who have bought into the club either I love my wee team like every other person on this forum.

 

Anyway I thought this topic was about John McGinn emoji23.pngemoji23.png

Heard his papa had something to do with Sellik and he's not as good as his brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:

 The issue is with people who aren't members criticising smisa's actions

Is that right? I think Teresa May and Boris Johnson are a pair of cnuts. Do I need to be a member of the Conservative Party?

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...