SMiSA Update January 2017

[Kendo]

Good update below from them, it will be interesting to see the feedback from fellow Buddies without you know who rubbishing everything.

Welcome to our first update of 2017. The committee would like to wish a belated happy new year to all our members.

The start of the new year is a chance to look back on the last one. And while we (sadly) can’t control what happens on the park, 2016 was hugely significant for St Mirren off it.

It will forever be the year where Saints fans gave themselves the chance to take the club’s future into their own hands, when the #BuyTheBuds campaign succeeded in the summer.

SMISA started 2016 with less than 200 members, a 3% shareholding in the club and an annual income of a few thousands pounds.

By the end of it we had more than 1,300 members, a 29% stake in St Mirren, a seat on the board, income of more than £200k a year – and crucially, an exclusive option to buy the majority shareholding from Gordon Scott at a to-be-decided point within the next decade.

The process of getting there was a bit of a roller-coaster ride and a huge amount of work. You can read a detailed account of how that came together on our website.

But while majority fan ownership remains on track over the long term, the few months since the deal completed have been busy. The highlights include:

- creating a procedure to spend the £2 portions of your monthly membership, which helped fund the club’s new disabled platform, and given Jack Ross the chance to strengthen his squad in the January transfer window;

- organising the first-ever election of a director to the club board, with David Nicol chosen to serve as SMISA’s representative for the next two years;

- pulling together a squad of volunteers which has now cleaned up all four stands in the Paisley 2021 Stadium;

- loaning the club the money to fix the broken under-soil heating at the club, which should prevent any winter-related postponements;

- continuing to help support the local community through our sponsorship of the SMISA Panda Club, and a £500 Christmas donation to the local Foodbank;

- running the successful Evening with the Millennium Champions Night in December, looking back on the iconic 1999/2000 title-winning season;

- helped produce an issue of The Saint newspaper, which aims to promote St Mirren-related activity to the fanbase and wider community;

There was also a lot of work behind the scenes to put new processes in place to cope with the influx of new members and money.

Next year will see more of the same as we build on what has been achieved so far. There will be more member events, more opportunities to invest in club-related projects, and hopefully more opportunity to give our members a say in key issues relating to the running of St Mirren.

None of this has been easy – the SMISA committee is a small group of volunteers, most of whom have day jobs, and pulling off a million-pound share purchase and subsequent work in our spare time has been a mammoth effort.

We do it because we care about the club and are excited by the potential of what St Mirren fans can achieve by working together.

We are in the process of building something new here, and are proud to be doing things never done before at St Mirren.

But being in uncharted territory means we may not get everything right, which is why your continued understanding and support will be crucial over the months and years ahead.

The long-term goal of keeping St Mirren in the hands of the people who care about it most can only be achieved if we all stay with it, and we thank you for your support now and in the future.

£2 spend plans

As you know, just before Christmas our members voted to make the October to December income to the £2 pot available to the club to add to the player budget.

We are conscious this sparked a bit of discussion and that future £2 pot spends may do so again, so would like to clear up a few points and explain how we see things working in future.

Firstly, some questioned why we are spending £8,000 every quarter. Remember, #BuyTheBuds was based on the £2s going on club-related projects – so that spending was always budgeted for.

As it stands we are banking a five-figure sum each month for the eventual share purchase, which remains on track. And bear in mind investment in the club is investment in an asset we plan to buy.

However, we don’t have to spend the money each quarter. Leaving it in the pot is an option we can and will offer – as that opens the possibility of a one-off big spend at a future date.

In terms of ballot contents, we ran a member survey in September on your priorities for investment, the results of which are here. While we may do another survey in future, the results of this one will inform our decisions for the time being.

We felt – given the club’s precarious league position – spending on the playing budget would be the best use of the January money, but the survey results suggested this would split opinion.

So part of the reason there was only one option on the ballot is we knew a straight yes-or-no question would give a clear result on a potentially-divisive issue, where multiple options could have diluted the answer.

In the end, there was overwhelming support (88%) for investing the money in the playing budget.

We understand the argument made by some this maybe wasn’t ideal as a long-term use of trust funds– but if there was ever a time for short-term thinking, this was it.

The playing budget remains a possible option for future ballots – but you the members will again have the final say.

There is one other crucial point to consider when it comes to deciding what goes on the ballot – and that is the SMISA committee’s responsibility to make sure your money is well spent.

While SMISA’s money will only be spent as SMISA decides, it would be daft to spend money on St Mirren if it wasn't going on something the club actually needs and wants – thus the club’s investment priorities will remain a key factor in future ballots.

At the same time, we will only put forward projects which have been fully costed and thought through – otherwise we risk committing the trust to something that isn’t viable, or even wasting your money, which we certainly don’t intend to do.

In other words, we aren’t going to put half-baked ideas to a vote just for the sake of offering a choice. We will only ask you to vote on things we are confident will be useful.

And considering all of the above, if in future we feel there is one project which for whatever reason stands out above all others at that time, we will again put it forward as a straight yes-or-no question.

However the September survey saw a number of specific ideas which could be viable options but which due to workload pressures we haven’t yet managed to fully explore.

We are revisiting that list and hopefully will be able to present some of those ideas in the April and/or July ballots. Any further feedback or suggestions can be emailed to [email protected]

Lastly, it’s important to remember this is a new process and – like the director election – we’ve had to create our own path here. The way we spend the £2 pot will probably evolve over time and will be dictated by circumstances.

We don’t know of another trust in Scotland giving their members the chance to directly influence spending on the club in this way – we are proud of that and you should be too.

Hopefully this email makes clear the number of factors we have to consider as we continue to try to do what is right for all involved, as well as the level of thought which has gone into this.

We would ask members to trust the committee to balance all of the above and to be assured we will always make the decisions we feel are best for the organisation. As always, we are grateful for your support and understanding.

The SMISA Committee

[Doakes]

Great update. Really enjoyed the improvement in communication between fans and the club.

Just need to improve on the park now!

[div]

Yes good update. Interesting to see talk of "income of more than £200k per year".

1300 members would generate £31K per annum in the "additional funding" (1300 x £2 x 12) so that would mean we are saving up more than £170K per annum towards the buy out.

My simple arithmetic says we should hit £1m within 6 years at that rate?

[Kendo]

Isn't it wonderful that this thread gets a couple of likes and positive comments. Unlike the last SMiSA update that got 35 pages of negatives from a chap who was first in the sin bin. 

I like the sin bin.

[Bud the Baker]

When will we see another one?

[faraway saint]

2 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

When will we see another one?

Another what, Dickson?

Someone who generated more discussion that will probably ever be seen about SMISA?

Now it seems a "couple of likes" and positive comments is pleasing.

[Bud the Baker]

StuD's dead baby, StuD's dead..................

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by Bud the Baker

[Bud the Baker]

40 minutes ago, antrin said:

I dunno....

Was that you being... Like... Uhm....  A baby cuddler?

Loose talk erm, rides bikes?

[Bud the Baker]

No February update then.

Will we see one in March?

[Stu]

Must be about time for another members' vote for how the £2 contributions should be spent.

[buddiecat]

11 hours ago, cockles1987 said:

 

I'm guessing that two options for the fund will be the HoF panels and a Youth Academy payment.

You can add requests for inclusion by emailing [email protected] the £2 spend vote will be in April. news of it will be in the March update.

[buddiecat]

56 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

 

Just me adding 2+2 and getting 5. Possibly

Not really, the academy idea on another thread is new, the HoF boards is a long ongoing saga and in my view too expensive for what they give us back, buying paint to brighten up the walls would be better than HoF boards. Others tend to think they brighten the place up, but i'm of the opinion that they can hardly be seen in the west stand because of the  lack of space and overcrowding in the area under the stand, mainly due to half the toilet facilities and catering stalls being closed off for a very small away support to be accommodated, it costs too much to steward the away end according to the club, seems a bit silly to cough up for boards that don't aid the team performance and complain about other costs in the same breath.

Save the £2 pot money until it's large enough to put to the beginning of financing elite status for our academy, is my idea of the way forward.

Edited March 7, 2017 by buddiecat

[pozbaird]

8 minutes ago, buddiecat said:

Not really, the academy idea on another thread is new, the HoF boards is a long ongoing saga and in my view too expensive for what they give us back, buying paint to brighten up the walls would be better than HoF boards. Others tend to think they brighten the place up, but i'm of the opinion that they can hardly be seen in the west stand because of the  lack of space and overcrowding in the area under the stand, mainly due to half the toilet facilities and catering stalls being closed off for a very small away support to be accommodated, it costs too much to steward the away end according to the club, seems a bit silly to cough up for boards that don't aid the team performance and complain about other costs in the same breath.

Save the £2 pot money until it's large enough to put to the beginning of financing elite status for our academy, is my idea of the way forward.

A car crash of a post.

[Kendo]

5 minutes ago, buddiecat said:

Not really, the academy idea on another thread is new, the HoF boards is a long ongoing saga and in my view too expensive for what they give us back, buying paint to brighten up the walls would be better than HoF boards. Others tend to think they brighten the place up, but i'm of the opinion that they can hardly be seen in the west stand because of the  lack of space and overcrowding in the area under the stand, mainly due to half the toilet facilities and catering stalls being closed off for a very small away support to be accommodated, it costs too much to steward the away end according to the club, seems a bit silly to cough up for boards that don't aid the team performance and complain about other costs in the same breath.

Save the £2 pot money until it's large enough to put to the beginning of financing elite status for our academy, is my idea of the way forward.

The problem with this idea is how many 3 months pots would this use up? And if a bigger more short term issue arises while saving up for the elite status then do we have another vote or just keep saving up?

[div]

I'd like to see the club explore converting W1 into a Safe Standing area (I can't think of any other suitable area) even just to see if it is feasible and if so how much it would cost.

Whether or not that would be a good use of the discretionary funds or not is up for debate but it's worth exploring IMO.

It would, without question (in my opinion) improve the matchday experience both for those choosing to stand in that area, but also for the general atmosphere in the stadium on a matchday. Like them or loathe them it's beyond doubt that The Green Brigade have ensured there is an atmosphere at Celtic Park every game.

[TsuMirren]

I'd like to see the club explore converting W1 into a Safe Standing area (I can't think of any other suitable area) even just to see if it is feasible and if so how much it would cost.
Whether or not that would be a good use of the discretionary funds or not is up for debate but it's worth exploring IMO.
It would, without question (in my opinion) improve the matchday experience both for those choosing to stand in that area, but also for the general atmosphere in the stadium on a matchday. Like them or loathe them it's beyond doubt that The Green Brigade have ensured there is an atmosphere at Celtic Park every game.

Problem there Div is that I believe it'd need to become an isolated self contained area. Certainly, the building standards people wouldn't want fans migrating from seating to safe standing. Fencing to isolate, without taking welfare/refreshment in to consideration, cuts W2 - W5 to 1 vomitory if away fans are placed in the W6 & W7. Again, four sections having one exit would be challenged.

The green brigade have an area which has its own facilities, exits, turnstiles and migration control. That took 3 years of negotiation. Most other rail seating areas I've seen appear to also be a self contained section. Best bet for it at SMP would appear to be behind a goal, but even then if it needs to be self contained that also limits what you can do with the seating around it.

[notabuddie]

Why W1? For our size of support the standing area should be above the exit for W3.. Should be simple enough to convert.

[div]

1 minute ago, notabuddie said:

Why W1? For our size of support the standing area should be above the exit for W3.. Should be simple enough to convert.

Assuming that it would be a whole section rather than a part of one but fair enough point.

[div]

11 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

Problem there Div is that I believe it'd need to become an isolated self contained area. Certainly, the building standards people wouldn't want fans migrating from seating to safe standing. Fencing to isolate, without taking welfare/refreshment in to consideration, cuts W2 - W5 to 1 vomitory if away fans are placed in the W6 & W7. Again, four sections having one exit would be challenged.

The green brigade have an area which has its own facilities, exits, turnstiles and migration control. That took 3 years of negotiation. Most other rail seating areas I've seen appear to also be a self contained section. Best bet for it at SMP would appear to be behind a goal, but even then if it needs to be self contained that also limits what you can do with the seating around it.

I'll take your word for it as it sounds like you've already looked into this. There are however two sections of the safe standing area at Celtic Park that split sections down the middle so I'm not sure how that would be possible?

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, pozbaird said:

A car crash of a post.

Constructive as ever Poz.

[shull]

I would make the whole of our Family Stand a standing area.

 

[div]

Celtic Just have a barrier between conventional and safe standing areas.

Taken from the case study;

https://www.fercoseating.com/assets/fsfcasestudycelticsafestandingrailseat.pdf

 

[Lord Pityme]

1 hour ago, Kendo said:

The problem with this idea is how many 3 months pots would this use up? And if a bigger more short term issue arises while saving up for the elite status then do we have another vote or just keep saving up?

Choices!

i dont think the finances are such that we would need to save up for elite status, the club currently run an academy, there would be an increase in head count required so its about bridging that wage budget gap, to secure the increased funding from the SFA.

the question is would the members prefer to back a long term project that will deliver new players to the first team squad, with the option of selling on and making the club profit, or a selection of short term 'fixes' that the club comes up with, or agrees with what the members suggest?

we could truly build for the future, our future as majority shareholders! 

[TsuMirren]

I'll take your word for it as it sounds like you've already looked into this. There are however two sections of the safe standing area at Celtic Park that split sections down the middle so I'm not sure how that would be possible?

Yeah, admittedly I making a lot of assumptions regarding the isolated areas on the back of reading the Celtic case study.

The split sections appear to have a rail down the full length to stop migration, that saw the walkways extended either side of the original walkway to offer space for the rail and maintain a compliant walkway either side. My other assumption is that the seated area above can be accessed from the sides and any possible access to/from below is restricted. The migration control formed part of the building standards discussions so the natural assumption is that Celtic also had to include welfare/refreshment provision in that also.

Some the above assumptions could be shite, I've no idea if the club have discussed it in detail with Celtic in any shape or even how strict our Council would be regarding any certificate requirements.

[Lord Pityme]

A safe standing area sounds like a great thing, but to spend a packet of everyones subscriptions, on one area only a few will use doesnt quite siit right with me. Better idea would be to add the conversion price of creating a safe standing seat to the ST price, perhaps over a couple of seasons?

then you cover the costs, plus get buy-in to actually put bums.... err.. near seats, if you see what I mean?