St.Ricky Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, bazil85 said: A direct response from a guy that’s very clearly said because of me he won’t join SMISA... or maybe I’ve gotten his take on it wrong, for some reason I think he thinks I’m some kind of spokesperson for them. Suggest you stop acting as an apologist and leave it to those in elected or coopted positions. Were I one of those then at this point I would be begging you to stop. Think it through. I know nothing of your professional experience but I guess that goes both ways. Edited May 1, 2018 by St.Ricky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuD Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 1 minute ago, bazil85 said: A direct response from a guy that’s very clearly said because of me he won’t join SMISA... or maybe I’ve gotten his take on it wrong, for some reason I think he thinks I’m some kind of spokesperson for them. Yeah, in fairness to him Bazil that appears to be the role you've taken on here. I've took you on your word that you aren't involved in SMISA but I've got to admit that time and time again I've found myself wondering as the discussions have gone on and it appears that Lord Pityme and TsuMirren feel there is more to you than you are letting on. It would be good though if someone from the SMISA board would take their Independent Supporters Association pledge more seriously though. After all they are supposed to be representatives of the support putting forward the views of the support and the local community to the club board rather than the other way round as it seems to be working right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 7 minutes ago, St.Ricky said: Suggest you stop acting as an apologist and leave it to those in elected or coopted positions. Were I one of those then at this point I would be begging you to stop. Think it through. I know nothing of your professional experience but I guess that goes both ways. This is a discussion website. Did I miss the part where you could only post if your POV was in the extreme minority of paying members? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, StuD said: Yeah, in fairness to him Bazil that appears to be the role you've taken on here. I've took you on your word that you aren't involved in SMISA but I've got to admit that time and time again I've found myself wondering as the discussions have gone on and it appears that Lord Pityme and TsuMirren feel there is more to you than you are letting on. It would be good though if someone from the SMISA board would take their Independent Supporters Association pledge more seriously though. After all they are supposed to be representatives of the support putting forward the views of the support and the local community to the club board rather than the other way round as it seems to be working right now. Appreciate you taking my word on it because I assure you it’s correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuD Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 13 minutes ago, bazil85 said: Well as you’ve already said recently it’s ‘low risk’ vast majority of paying members look happy/ indifferent to take that risk. Possibly because of the risk/ reward relationship in this. Done now, FCA will sign it off soon enough and it’s over. Somethings just don’t go the way you might want. Suggestion to you both, why not sign up for BTB then you can have a vote on such issues? Oh I won't be signing up for SMISA - not again. I've been screwed over and mislead twice already by the same group. I'm not stupid enough to do it for a third time. Last time I signed up it was "#Buy The Buds". If they were being really honest it should have been "Buy The Buds A .................." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St.Ricky Posted May 1, 2018 Report Share Posted May 1, 2018 Over and out guys. Enough nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 Oooooft, this has escalated hasn't it. Two quick things: One, I do indeed feel there is more to Bazil. Far too much feels like information where you either had to be in the room or you know someone who is. Two, the results of the recent SMISA Survey really are being used to push some borderline questionable things whilst querying other legitimate community engagement. Had that survey included the question "should SMISA look to conclude the BTB deal sooner" it would have been very different and seen results that those in charge would not have liked. But, heaven forbid the members are allowed involvement to that degree. Not to mention, as said before, fundraising was an obvious option and so easy to facilitate if you are either not lazy or aren't functioning under influence from elsewhere. The SMISA survey also never asked a single question about opening up the £10 pot for other uses. Yet, because it's discussed at a joint SMISA/SMFC board meeting, where no doubt it was basically pre-decided anyway, SMISA bypass the actual part about asking if the principle is okay. "It's time bound", yes and it was manufactured very well to be so. I say very well, but really I mean as well as the Sport Scientist being hired pre-vote or the Panda Club option not being stand-alone or the club not going "oh, £7,150 or so, can we get circa £800 worth of footballs added". Possibly even as well as not being sure the women's team are official even though there was an official press release and photo shoot. Or as well as setting a target of 1,400 members and doing nothing, literally nothing, to drive it..."which pub this month?" I assume the Buddievision piece on SMISA is coming soon and that Gordon will mention them in interviews... I can't wait to see how 3K will fund the sport scientist, the Panda Club and all manner of other things come the next vote. There's bound to be a schedule based on club priorities, it'd be madness to not have a pre-determined schedule for the next 2 years considering you've slashed 5K from each pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, TsuMirren said: Oooooft, this has escalated hasn't it. Two quick things: One, I do indeed feel there is more to Bazil. Far too much feels like information where you either had to be in the room or you know someone who is. Two, the results of the recent SMISA Survey really are being used to push some borderline questionable things whilst querying other legitimate community engagement. Had that survey included the question "should SMISA look to conclude the BTB deal sooner" it would have been very different and seen results that those in charge would not have liked. But, heaven forbid the members are allowed involvement to that degree. Not to mention, as said before, fundraising was an obvious option and so easy to facilitate if you are either not lazy or aren't functioning under influence from elsewhere. The SMISA survey also never asked a single question about opening up the £10 pot for other uses. Yet, because it's discussed at a joint SMISA/SMFC board meeting, where no doubt it was basically pre-decided anyway, SMISA bypass the actual part about asking if the principle is okay. "It's time bound", yes and it was manufactured very well to be so. I say very well, but really I mean as well as the Sport Scientist being hired pre-vote or the Panda Club option not being stand-alone or the club not going "oh, £7,150 or so, can we get circa £800 worth of footballs added". Possibly even as well as not being sure the women's team are official even though there was an official press release and photo shoot. Or as well as setting a target of 1,400 members and doing nothing, literally nothing, to drive it..."which pub this month?" I assume the Buddievision piece on SMISA is coming soon and that Gordon will mention them in interviews... I can't wait to see how 3K will fund the sport scientist, the Panda Club and all manner of other things come the next vote. There's bound to be a schedule based on club priorities, it'd be madness to not have a pre-determined schedule for the next 2 years considering you've slashed 5K from each pot. Excellent point Kenny! the wider membership may not be aware at the current rate of subscriptions they could acquire the majority shareholding in the club years before the ten year deadline (it would be even quicker with 1400 members). However that isnt the club chairman's plan, he has made it known he wont be going before ten years, and the best way to facilitate that is to "divert" the smisa members ringfenced share purchase fund as frequently as possible (after all its just sitting there, isnt it?), thereby continually pushing back the date when the fans takeover. Indeed if enough members opt out along the way then smisa may never be in a financial position to complete the purchase, meaning the chairman can stay in control, leave it in his will, sell to whoever he likes etc.. etc... You would think the organisation set up to represent the best interests of its members would be putting forward vote options on taking the majority shareholding on as soon as thebfunds are raised? Wonder why they have never put that option to the members? Gord Knows why not.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smcc Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 16 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said: Excellent point Kenny! the wider membership may not be aware at the current rate of subscriptions they could acquire the majority shareholding in the club years before the ten year deadline (it would be even quicker with 1400 members). However that isnt the club chairman's plan, he has made it known he wont be going before ten years, and the best way to facilitate that is to "divert" the smisa members ringfenced share purchase fund as frequently as possible (after all its just sitting there, isnt it?), thereby continually pushing back the date when the fans takeover. Indeed if enough members opt out along the way then smisa may never be in a financial position to complete the purchase, meaning the chairman can stay in control, leave it in his will, sell to whoever he likes etc.. etc... You would think the organisation set up to represent the best interests of its members would be putting forward vote options on taking the majority shareholding on as soon as thebfunds are raised? Wonder why they have never put that option to the members? Gord Knows why not.... It is patently obvious that you have no love for the chairman. He has, of course, put up several hundred thousand pounds of his own money, without which the bid would never have got off the ground. As for his diverting funds to push back the date of the takeover you seem not to realise that the £50K will have been restored in 2 years time, albeit at the expense of a reduced amount available to be dispensed at each quarter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, smcc said: It is patently obvious that you have no love for the chairman. He has, of course, put up several hundred thousand pounds of his own money, without which the bid would never have got off the ground. As for his diverting funds to push back the date of the takeover you seem not to realise that the £50K will have been restored in 2 years time, albeit at the expense of a reduced amount available to be dispensed at each quarter. Yes the chairman has bought the majority shareholding which he has a written guarantee from smisa to buy these off him. It will take two and a alf years to pay back our own money IF current membership is maintained. Should it drop, then how much longer will it take..? what some may not have picked up is all these vote options are positioned from the clubs perspective, not the members! why did we not have a vote along the lines of... A. You can vote to give the club £50 k from our ringfenced share purchase fund (they state they have the money themselves) that you the members will have to make good to stay on course to achieving the majority shareholding in ten years? B. You can vote to keep the ringfenced funds secure, and conclude the deal to purchase the majority shareholding sooner than the ten year deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyg Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 1 hour ago, TsuMirren said: Oooooft, this has escalated hasn't it. f**k yes , there are 4 people with agendas now as well as you ! Meanwhile , for the other 1,274 of us , everything's just fine ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 51 minutes ago, smcc said: It is patently obvious that you have no love for the chairman. He has, of course, put up several hundred thousand pounds of his own money, without which the bid would never have got off the ground. As for his diverting funds to push back the date of the takeover you seem not to realise that the £50K will have been restored in 2 years time, albeit at the expense of a reduced amount available to be dispensed at each quarter. Gordon has indeed put money up, but just to balance that out a bit he is getting that back and it's significantly less than the offer he made when the club was initially up for sale. That money, he wouldn't have gotten back. The 50K will have been restored, but what about the lost interest? Not a substantial amount, bit it is still lost. I think Gordon has done a great job, in comparison to other Chairman running a standard club. St Mirren have SMISA though and, frankly, he still has a bit to learn with regards working alongside them. Tony's also right that it's in no plan, within the core group, to complete the deal early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, billyg said: f**k yes , there are 4 people with agendas now as well as you ! Meanwhile , for the other 1,274 of us , everything's just fine ! I, for the last time, don't have an agenda. Mention it again and I may finally actually offend you, call you a big poo for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyg Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, TsuMirren said: I, for the last time, don't have an agenda. Mention it again and I may finally actually offend you, call you a big poo for example. I've been called far worse on here , in fact people used to claim I had an agenda , against Gus and Danny ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 2 hours ago, TsuMirren said: Oooooft, this has escalated hasn't it. Two quick things: One, I do indeed feel there is more to Bazil. Far too much feels like information where you either had to be in the room or you know someone who is. Two, the results of the recent SMISA Survey really are being used to push some borderline questionable things whilst querying other legitimate community engagement. Had that survey included the question "should SMISA look to conclude the BTB deal sooner" it would have been very different and seen results that those in charge would not have liked. But, heaven forbid the members are allowed involvement to that degree. Not to mention, as said before, fundraising was an obvious option and so easy to facilitate if you are either not lazy or aren't functioning under influence from elsewhere. The SMISA survey also never asked a single question about opening up the £10 pot for other uses. Yet, because it's discussed at a joint SMISA/SMFC board meeting, where no doubt it was basically pre-decided anyway, SMISA bypass the actual part about asking if the principle is okay. "It's time bound", yes and it was manufactured very well to be so. I say very well, but really I mean as well as the Sport Scientist being hired pre-vote or the Panda Club option not being stand-alone or the club not going "oh, £7,150 or so, can we get circa £800 worth of footballs added". Possibly even as well as not being sure the women's team are official even though there was an official press release and photo shoot. Or as well as setting a target of 1,400 members and doing nothing, literally nothing, to drive it..."which pub this month?" I assume the Buddievision piece on SMISA is coming soon and that Gordon will mention them in interviews... I can't wait to see how 3K will fund the sport scientist, the Panda Club and all manner of other things come the next vote. There's bound to be a schedule based on club priorities, it'd be madness to not have a pre-determined schedule for the next 2 years considering you've slashed 5K from each pot. 1. It's just not true, don't know what I'd get out of lying if you can enlighten me? Plus there are people on here that know me personally that I'm sure would call me out. Would also be interesting to know what you think I'd need to be 'in the room for' to comment on? 2. Funding the park will not mean SMISA deal is concluded later, the funds will be replaced way before it could ever hope to. The rest of your post seems to more or less cover personal opinion on what you would like to see and what SMISA can do better. They've always said they're learning as they go along and for fans to be patient with them given they run on a volunteer basis and have never done something like this before, so who knows what'll happen. With the member numbers, sports scientists, Panda club we'll see. Good thing is as always, if the last two are coming out of the £2 fund, we'll vote and agree as members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said: Excellent point Kenny! the wider membership may not be aware at the current rate of subscriptions they could acquire the majority shareholding in the club years before the ten year deadline (it would be even quicker with 1400 members). However that isnt the club chairman's plan, he has made it known he wont be going before ten years, and the best way to facilitate that is to "divert" the smisa members ringfenced share purchase fund as frequently as possible (after all its just sitting there, isnt it?), thereby continually pushing back the date when the fans takeover. Indeed if enough members opt out along the way then smisa may never be in a financial position to complete the purchase, meaning the chairman can stay in control, leave it in his will, sell to whoever he likes etc.. etc... You would think the organisation set up to represent the best interests of its members would be putting forward vote options on taking the majority shareholding on as soon as thebfunds are raised? Wonder why they have never put that option to the members? Gord Knows why not.... How is that in the best interest of its members? We don't have a financial gain in it, what's best for the members = what's best for SMFC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 1 hour ago, TsuMirren said: Gordon has indeed put money up, but just to balance that out a bit he is getting that back and it's significantly less than the offer he made when the club was initially up for sale. That money, he wouldn't have gotten back. The 50K will have been restored, but what about the lost interest? Not a substantial amount, bit it is still lost. I think Gordon has done a great job, in comparison to other Chairman running a standard club. St Mirren have SMISA though and, frankly, he still has a bit to learn with regards working alongside them. Tony's also right that it's in no plan, within the core group, to complete the deal early. yes it will be absolutely pennies. I'd maybe say taking over a club in a stronger position with good facilities makes up for that wee bit lost money. Who knows the £50k back in the budget could be the difference between taking over an SP club or a Championship one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 If you are referring to Smisa members then they do own almost 30% of SMFC, and aim to become the majority shareholder. Yip, minority shareholder. Same as many others just their minority is a wee bit bigger as its collective.So they get to use their shares to influence same as other shareholders.At the moment GLS owns the majority and as such makes the big decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 7 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said: Yip, minority shareholder. Same as many others just their minority is a wee bit bigger as its collective. So they get to use their shares to influence same as other shareholders. At the moment GLS owns the majority and as such makes the big decisions. A thirty per cent shareholder in a company has a significant influence. Sadly Smisa are playing poodle to Gordon's every whim, including rifling our ringfenced share purchase funds. who else is putting money into SMFC other than Smisa..? I have not heard of one penny being put up by a single board member, but hey... why should they when they can rifle our funds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 How is that in the best interest of its members? We don't have a financial gain in it, what's best for the members = what's best for SMFC. A number of members are only in this to get the club bought and will then chuck it. Others will stop paying in due to a need to spend the 12 quid a month elsewhere.Some will pass away.The financial gain is in buying the club quickly as possible with as many members paying in.Another financial gain would be having an extra 50k in the pot when you take over running the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said: A thirty per cent shareholder in a company has a significant influence. Sadly Smisa are playing poodle to Gordon's every whim, including rifling our ringfenced share purchase funds. who else is putting money into SMFC other than Smisa..? I have not heard of one penny being put up by a single board member, but hey... why should they when they can rifle our funds? What don't you get about this being wrong SMISA aren't doing anything of the sort. It's members are voting to agree what they request. You might not agree with the vote but it is what it is. You can't seem to grasp the majority of members would be more annoyed if SMISA said no to GLS requests without consulting us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said: A number of members are only in this to get the club bought and will then chuck it. Others will stop paying in due to a need to spend the 12 quid a month elsewhere. Some will pass away. The financial gain is in buying the club quickly as possible with as many members paying in. Another financial gain would be having an extra 50k in the pot when you take over running the club. 1. New members will also join (come of age) as existing members die, others canceling and falling out, more fool them. members dropping out because they can't afford £12 will be an extreme minority 2. The £50k has no impact on when the club will be bought as there is no way it'll be bought in 30 months without an extra couple thousand members 3. There is no £50k extra in the pot, the £50k used would be sitting gathering dust until the buyout happens and will be repaid long before then. 4. Only time there would be £50k left in the pot when we takeover is if the £2 discretionary funds were always voted to be carried over, which from experience we can see is not popular opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smcc Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said: What some may not have picked up is all these vote options are positioned from the clubs perspective, not the members! why did we not have a vote along the lines of... A. You can vote to give the club £50 k from our ringfenced share purchase fund (they state they have the money themselves) that you the members will have to make good to stay on course to achieving the majority shareholding in ten years? B. You can vote to keep the ringfenced funds secure, and conclude the deal to purchase the majority shareholding sooner than the ten year deadline. Does it not occur to you that those of us paying our monthly subscription think of ourselves as part of the club? It seems pretty obvious that you do not think along these lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 Just now, smcc said: Does it not occur to you that those of us paying our monthly subscription think of ourselves as part of the club? It seems pretty obvious that you do not think along these lines. Everyone is entitled to think of themselves as they please. Smisa is not the club, and vice versa. Smisa is a Community Benefit Society whose first responsibilities are to its members and the community, not a limited company like SMFC. To expand your thinking towards the club board, will our chairman and board be making available ringfenced funds in their investments, pensions etc to help part fund Smisa projects..? I mean we are all in it together as you say, arent we..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsuMirren Posted May 2, 2018 Report Share Posted May 2, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, bazil85 said: 1. It's just not true, don't know what I'd get out of lying if you can enlighten me? Plus there are people on here that know me personally that I'm sure would call me out. Would also be interesting to know what you think I'd need to be 'in the room for' to comment on? 2. Funding the park will not mean SMISA deal is concluded later, the funds will be replaced way before it could ever hope to. The rest of your post seems to more or less cover personal opinion on what you would like to see and what SMISA can do better. They've always said they're learning as they go along and for fans to be patient with them given they run on a volunteer basis and have never done something like this before, so who knows what'll happen. With the member numbers, sports scientists, Panda club we'll see. Good thing is as always, if the last two are coming out of the £2 fund, we'll vote and agree as members. 2, I never said it would. Missed the point completely. They could have paid the entire 150K and still make the 10 years. A group of scouts could make the 10 year deadline at this point. Although they might not take well to being told to stop being so keen. Problem with the Panda Club and sport scientist is they'll both meet to come from the same 3K or draw from a future spend. Then you'l have the "SMISA wish to have less spend polls in order to have a larger available pot" consultation. So everyone will have even less say. Though, maybe most have missed it, SMISA could just come out and say "this phase is primarily about buying the club" to get through limiting the level of engagement. Edited May 2, 2018 by TsuMirren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.