Jump to content

Kombibuddie

The 3 Monthly Spend

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Yes I understand them perfectly well. I work in a risk function providing assurance for a large financial organisation. 

Mate they’ve not been breached, you’ve been shown they’ve not several times. I’m not going over it again. 

Dont worry, all your pals you’ve signed up can vote no and if they’re in the majority we’re all good to go. If not they should respect the vote like the rest of us. 

You are a piece of work!

the people i signed up came to open Smisa meetings at SMP, just ordinary buddies wanting to do their bit, complete strangers trusting me to help fill in their personal and financial details because they trusted Smisa and the clubs assurances that their money was ring fenced for one purpose. Where is the respect they are due? Are you going to explain they were to a man and woman lied too?

i get you dont care, just want to wave the flag, but promises matter, people dont forget, and Smisa & Scott have shown their true colours and will be judged on them.

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

No where in the proposal does it state the key deliverables, measures, sustainability and how the use of our Society's assets will benefit the community. Now you may not understand it, but as a process to ensure public or community based funding is not misappropriated, these kep performance indicators have to be met before funding is approved. 

you perfectly highlight there is nothing approaching even a sincere desire they are met, let alone any type of measure, or predicted outcomes at benefit the community. Your position seems to be 'i love smfc, they want it, it must be good then if they say it is'...... how would you rate your, Smisa and the clubs chances would be pitching that airy fairy nonsense to Dragon's Den..? Let alone the FCA!

Dragon: 'tell us Basil, how will this propsal make the Community more resilient, and how can we measure that.'

Basil: '????'

Easy

Direct community benefit - Youngsters from community use the facility, St Mirren in the community use Ralston, this would give them a better surface to utilise 

Indirect community benefit - St Mirren do a lot for the local community, the stronger the team is, in theory the better work they can do for the community. 

Worth pointing out it doesn't need to be both, it can be either of these for using the funds. 

You're getting way ahead of yourself as well. This is a vote on the proposal which is costed and detailed enough for members to make a decision in principle. If members vote yes to it. The proposal will be fully drafted and sent for approval by the regulator. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bazil85 said:

So you think providing a benefit to a private organisation and to a community can't be mutual? That's the beauty of the proposal. Benefits our team benefits our community.

You know who would be okay with that assurance? the FCA  

Finally you admit that the private company benefits......

Thing is the shareholders of that private company are also members of SMISA...

 

I refer you to clause 3 of the constitution which defines the Community Benefit Purpose...

 

3. COMMUNITY BENEFIT PURPOSE The Society’s purpose is to be the vehicle through which a healthy, balanced and constructive relationship between the Club and its supporters and the communities it serves is encouraged and developed. The business of the Society is to be conducted for the benefit of the community served by the Club and not for the profit of its members.

 

 

you see where the problem is now?

 

Now i admit the profit is minor but these clauses are there to stop more blatant use and development of conflicts of interest

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are a piece of work!
the people i signed up came to open Smisa meetings at SMP, just ordinary buddies wanting to do their bit, complete strangers trusting me to help fill in their personal and financial details because they trusted Smisa and the clubs assurances that their money was ring fenced for one purpose. Where is the respect they are due? Are you going to explain they were to a man and woman lied too?
i get you dont care, just want to wave the flag, but promises matter, people dont forget, and Smisa & Scott have shown their true colours and will be judged on them.
Don't you know...
They have a vote so that makes everything ok!
Silly man!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Easy

Direct community benefit - Youngsters from community use the facility, St Mirren in the community use Ralston, this would give them a better surface to utilise 

Indirect community benefit - St Mirren do a lot for the local community, the stronger the team is, in theory the better work they can do for the community. 

Worth pointing out it doesn't need to be both, it can be either of these for using the funds. 

You're getting way ahead of yourself as well. This is a vote on the proposal which is costed and detailed enough for members to make a decision in principle. If members vote yes to it. The proposal will be fully drafted and sent for approval by the regulator. 

And you expect us to believe that you actually work in 'Risk Management' ffs.... what you just gave us were aspirations, try pitching to manage risk on someones behalf purely on aspirations and see how many new clients you can sign up!

and your last line.... which regulator would this be that will approve the proposal..? You just making shit up now?

edit: re the regulator approval! Is it the Ministry Of Silly Proposals..?

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

And you expect us to believe that you actually work in 'Risk Management' ffs.... what you just gave us were aspirations, try pitching to manage risk on someones behalf purely on aspirations and see how many new clients you can sign up!

and your last line.... which regulator would this be that will approve the proposal..? You just making shit up now?

edit: re the regulator approval! Is it the Ministry Of Silly Proposals..?

Risk Management is no different from anything else when dealing with people like you. You refuse to see what's right in front of your face. Off you pop to the FCA and they'll confirm no wrong doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Don't you know...
They have a vote so that makes everything ok!
Silly man!
emoji12.png

You're right, they shouldn't be allowed to vote on any proposal, that's much fairer. SMISA should have rejected the request with zero stakeholder engagement. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, rea said:

Finally you admit that the private company benefits......

Thing is the shareholders of that private company are also members of SMISA...

 

I refer you to clause 3 of the constitution which defines the Community Benefit Purpose...

 

3. COMMUNITY BENEFIT PURPOSE The Society’s purpose is to be the vehicle through which a healthy, balanced and constructive relationship between the Club and its supporters and the communities it serves is encouraged and developed. The business of the Society is to be conducted for the benefit of the community served by the Club and not for the profit of its members.

 

 

you see where the problem is now?

 

Now i admit the profit is minor but these clauses are there to stop more blatant use and development of conflicts of interest

 

What members are making profit? The money is going directly for the purchase of an asset (Not to St Mirren) that has a community benefit as previously stated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

You are a piece of work!

the people i signed up came to open Smisa meetings at SMP, just ordinary buddies wanting to do their bit, complete strangers trusting me to help fill in their personal and financial details because they trusted Smisa and the clubs assurances that their money was ring fenced for one purpose. Where is the respect they are due? Are you going to explain they were to a man and woman lied too?

i get you dont care, just want to wave the flag, but promises matter, people dont forget, and Smisa & Scott have shown their true colours and will be judged on them.

Where is the respect other members are due that might be in favor of doing this? It's almost like we should have a vote or something... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

What members are making profit? The money is going directly for the purchase of an asset (Not to St Mirren) that has a community benefit as previously stated. 

Eh, the money will be going to the Club....

 

The Club will buy the asset.

 

do you agree?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rea said:

Eh, the money will be going to the Club....

 

The Club will buy the asset.

 

do you agree?

 

 

So where's the profit? Asset £150k club funding £100k, we're giving £50k, the full £150k payable to the company. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bazil85 said:

So where's the profit? Asset £150k club funding £100k, we're giving £50k, the full £150k payable to the company. 

Really...do you know what a balance sheet is?

So you agree that SMISA is loaning the money directly to the Club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rea said:

Really...do you know what a balance sheet is?

So you agree that SMISA is loaning the money directly to the Club?

I know what a balance sheet is.

You're really struggling with your point here. The money is to buy an asset, the money is from future discretionary pot payments, the money has a direct and indirect benefit to the community, community benefits do not have to be completely detached of club benefits. Still waiting on you showing me where the members profit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

I know what a balance sheet is.

You're really struggling with your point here. The money is to buy an asset, the money is from future discretionary pot payments, the money has a direct and indirect benefit to the community, community benefits do not have to be completely detached of club benefits. Still waiting on you showing me where the members profit?

Members profit because the value of their shares bump due to the benefit to the balance sheet of the company.

 

Just as you have a Discretionary fund you also have a Restricted Fund, you should not lend from a Restricted Fund one and fund the lending from the other

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, rea said:

Members profit because the value of their shares bump due to the benefit to the balance sheet of the company.

 

Just as you have a Discretionary fund you also have a Restricted Fund, you should not lend from a Restricted Fund one and fund the lending from the other

Well that's not necessarily true. The details on the balance sheet will show a credit and a debit. The funds don't require to sit for any length of time. We also have no set information that's the way they'll do it. SMISA could pay the money to the company direct.

Also even if the money was transferred in and sat for any length of time, realistically what profit would our shareholders make off £50k. It would be absolutely minimal. What do you think the FCA would say if someone complained that St Mirren Shareholders made enough to buy a mars bar out of this deal? :lol: Weakest argument yet, do you know what a risk acceptance is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

Well that's not necessarily true. The details on the balance sheet will show a credit and a debit. The funds don't require to sit for any length of time. We also have no set information that's the way they'll do it. SMISA could pay the money to the company direct.

Also even if the money was transferred in and sat for any length of time, realistically what profit would our shareholders make off £50k. It would be absolutely minimal. What do you think the FCA would say if someone complained that St Mirren Shareholders made enough to buy a mars bar out of this deal? :lol: Weakest argument yet, do you know what a risk acceptance is? 

Yeah i know what risk acceptance is...it is very little to do with risk to the Funds, but the appropriateness of using money in a different way than what the money was raised for, and as to the rules as to if and how the members can change the uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rea said:

Yeah i know what risk acceptance is...it is very little to do with risk to the Funds, but the appropriateness of using money in a different way than what the money was raised for, and as to the rules as to if and how the members can change the uses.

I don't see it as having very little to do.

You've identified a risk that if St Mirren shareholders are shown to make a profit then we're (potentially) breaching regulations. Breaking down the risk, even if they did make a profit the overwhelming likeliness is that the FCA would consider it nominal and not fine or impose any sort of sanction. Therefore (if it's even being discussed which I doubt) the decision of any sensible company would be to accept that risk. I know it would be my recommendation that's for sure. 

You also make several assumptions

1. This is the way the company will be paid

2. Funds will sit with St Mirren long enough to influence the share price (Don't even think we're quoted) 

3. Members will sell based on this share increase or we're paying dividence which I'm not even sure we do

4. Even if we did pay dividence, it could be proved this £50k positively influenced it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and my mate cancelled our subs after reading through this , i thought that BtB was a great thing but now see it as a cash pot for the club . Ring fenced cash should be exactly that and not something that can be tapped into willy nilly , shame the gloss is getting taken away from this excellent season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Toots said:

Me and my mate cancelled our subs after reading through this , i thought that BtB was a great thing but now see it as a cash pot for the club . Ring fenced cash should be exactly that and not something that can be tapped into willy nilly , shame the gloss is getting taken away from this excellent season.

everyone has that choice. Wee bit of a shame though you haven’t waited to see if this is the appetite of the majority. Pretty short term thinking IMO, oh well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

everyone has that choice. Wee bit of a shame though you haven’t waited to see if this is the appetite of the majority. Pretty short term thinking IMO, oh well. 

Unfortunately i don't need to wait if this is the way that Simsa intend to work i will just keep my money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Toots said:

Unfortunately i don't need to wait if this is the way that Simsa intend to work i will just keep my money.

Yeah course you don’t. Democracy isn’t for everyone. Just hope the vast majority don’t think the same. That’ll only hurt the team we all support. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

everyone has that choice. Wee bit of a shame though you haven’t waited to see if this is the appetite of the majority. Pretty short term thinking IMO, oh well. 

You can't keep basing things on the appetite of the majority, you need to at some point live up to your promises and stop being so reactive. Just going "800 have voted, the rest are applauding" isn't the road to go down. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...