Jump to content

Kombibuddie

The 3 Monthly Spend

Recommended Posts



I have emailed SMISA to ask, however I was wondering if anyone here knows why the amount available this quarter is £2700 instead of the usual £3000 (last quarter was also less at £2800 - but was topped up by money not used previously).  At the risk of reopening an old discussion I immediately thought of the £300 monthly subscription to Very Connect and hoped that this wasn't the reason for the reduction, however short of 150 members cancelling I couldn't think of any other reason.
 
 


At a guess, it's what the two options asked for.

If I remember correctly that's why we possibly had a surplus of £500 last year about this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't mean I can't be mischievous!


Point is... SMISA are making youth a PRIORITY and rightly so.

The club does... at times... But is inconsistent. Could do better.
You should have seen the rant I had typed before the penny dropped that you were at it.

Was basically about my Grandad not taking my dad, my dad not taking myself and myself not taking my son and him not taking my........... I'm to young to have grand weans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cockles1987 said:


 

 


At a guess, it's what the two options asked for.

If I remember correctly that's why we possibly had a surplus of £500 last year about this time.

 

You could be correct, the way I read the email was that there was only £2700 in the pot, I have actually asked in my email how the figures came about as while I will support both options and have already voted yes, I would not like to think that one or other actually needs more to run but there wasn't enough in the pot.  I would rather one got all they needed than both got less than they needed, if that makes sense.  Last year for example Festive Friends requested £1750 to fund the program, although they of course got a smaller donation later and obviously then needed to raise funds elsewhere.

I'm sure SMISA will explain soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should have seen the rant I had typed before the penny dropped that you were at it.

Was basically about my Grandad not taking my dad, my dad not taking myself and myself not taking my son and him not taking my........... I'm to young to have grand weans
I did say I supported the initiative.

I also voted yes.

Besides... My fishing worked a treat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:

Breaking your promise I see.
Needy?
Missing me?
Just finding it impossible to keep your word?

I see you are still regurgitating the two stands shite yet I resisted mentioning it... So why your need to reply here...

I was most certainly NOT talking to you.

NO NEED TO REPLY!

There was no new promise. Thanks for the imitation though, form of flattery and all that. Showing desperation for a win by fabricating a conversation. 🤣

As for the "two stand shite" as you put it, my take has been backed by GLS and DN. I choose not to think they are liars. 

Part in bold, you seen me mention the two stand arrangement, then went on an unrelated thread and brought it up... People can take that as they wish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hands of stone said:

Guarantee he replys..can't help himself although nobody is interested...long winded reply trying to make himself sound clever...it doesn't work..

Again, when you say this sort of comment do you think you're making a revelation? I openly admit I will.

It's almost like yo want to go 'see I told you so' for something everyone knows. What a laugh 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Hands of stone said:

I take it the forum fool answered... i think she must like last word in her house or never gets it hence being the forum fool on here!

This new guy apparently has me on ignore but is desperate for my attention. What an impact to make on such a new member :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having had a quick scan of the spend options for October it would seem smisa ( aka SMFC)have changed tactics and now only present what they want the money spent on, rather than members actually getting to choose between options they may at least have been allowed to put one forward for.
In short you are being asked to put through Scott's shopping list on the nod.
Not a cat in hell's chance you'll get to vote on TV screens in near the kiosks that might benefit actual members. The £3k is being handed to the charitable trust. End of.

Share this post


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

Having had a quick scan of the spend options for October it would seem smisa ( aka SMFC)have changed tactics and now only present what they want the money spent on, rather than members actually getting to choose between options they may at least have been allowed to put one forward for.
In short you are being asked to put through Scott's shopping list on the nod.
Not a cat in hell's chance you'll get to vote on TV screens in near the kiosks that might benefit actual members. The £3k is being handed to the charitable trust. End of.

What a hypocrite. Moaned when the Christmas meals when it came up against a more popular option, moaned when SMISA made a further gesture to vote through a lump sum and now moans when they don’t put a charitable idea up against anything bar a no. 

LPM showed it last year and he is showing again, he has zero care about the actual community & his only goal is to talk down all things SMISA. 

I predict this becoming more and more frantic as BTB approaches completion & the realisation he can’t stop it really sets in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, cockles1987 said:


 

 


At a guess, it's what the two options asked for.

If I remember correctly that's why we possibly had a surplus of £500 last year about this time.

 

I received a reply from SMISA confirming that you were correct, the £2700 is what the two parties requested and the email should have perhaps not said that "there is £2700 available this quarter" but instead "the projects chosen this quarter require £2700".  They also allayed my other concern that even if approved, the projects would not be fully funded as it is their understanding that any other funding required is already in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, buddiekev said:

I received a reply from SMISA confirming that you were correct, the £2700 is what the two parties requested and the email should have perhaps not said that "there is £2700 available this quarter" but instead "the projects chosen this quarter require £2700".  They also allayed my other concern that even if approved, the projects would not be fully funded as it is their understanding that any other funding required is already in place.

You're far too sensible to post on this thread. Imagine e-mailing someone and getting the facts.

The preferred option on here seems to be to ignore the people with the facts and figures and make up stuff yourself. Then you can bore the rest of the forum shitless with your endless fabrications .🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



I received a reply from SMISA confirming that you were correct, the £2700 is what the two parties requested and the email should have perhaps not said that "there is £2700 available this quarter" but instead "the projects chosen this quarter require £2700".  They also allayed my other concern that even if approved, the projects would not be fully funded as it is their understanding that any other funding required is already in place.


I agree regarding the wording and had just presumed that my guess was correct when I initially read it.

Was a quick reply, possibly down to the new system we've bought freeing up some time for folk on committee to deal with it so promptly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites





I agree regarding the wording and had just presumed that my guess was correct when I initially read it.

Was a quick reply, possibly down to the new system we've bought freeing up some time for folk on committee to deal with it so promptly.
New system?
Email.. or simply responding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New system?
Email.. or simply responding?
You can imagine my surprise when I got a notification you quoted me.

That surprise changed to astonishment when I noticed you asked not 1 but 2 questions.

Did you forget that I and others are waiting on a reply to questions you were asked?


LPM will have left the building as he doesn't do accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can imagine my surprise when I got a notification you quoted me.

That surprise changed to astonishment when I noticed you asked not 1 but 2 questions.

Did you forget that I and others are waiting on a reply to questions you were asked?


LPM will have left the building as he doesn't do accountability.
Au contraire...
I've counted loads of COUnts on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full update below, fair bit of additional information in it.

October £2 spend ballot

Last month there was £2700 in the pot for the quarter and we asked you to consider the merits of two projects. Thanks to the 851 members who took the time to vote.

The first project that we proposed was for a continuation of the pre-match family entertainment that takes place outside the stadium on a matchday.

This has proved to be a very popular venture run by Colin Bright, AKA Paisley Panda, and jointly backed by SMISA, the club’s Supporters Liaison Officers (SLOs) and the Fans Council.

The entertainment has grown year on year since it first started with Bung a Baw back in 2016. The aim from the outset has been to encourage the kids of today to attend matches regularly and in turn become the paying adult fan of tomorrow. Feedback has been incredibly positive both from home and away fans.

The organisers want to continue to grow the project and requested £1500 to do so.

Members voted in huge favour of this project: 88% (747 members) gave your support, something that will make a huge difference to Colin and everyone else involved in organising it. 

The second project voted on involved the St Mirren Charitable Foundation and their Festive Friends Christmas dinner.

On Christmas Day last year the Foundation, in conjunction with the SPFL Trust and the Salvation Army, opened the stadium to provide a meal, company and entertainment for a number of local elderly people.

Members from SMISA and the St Mirren women’s football team also pitched in to help make it a day to remember for all involved.

Gayle Brannigan from the Foundation is looking to host Festive Friends again this year and asked if SMISA members could contribute £1200 towards the costs involved. 

Again this was supported in massive numbers: 91% (771 members) voted to support the plan to give a Christmas meal to those most in need.

Our next quarterly ballot will take place in January and any members wishing to forward projects for consideration can do so by email at [email protected]

Members should note that the next ballot will be run using Very Connect and we would urge you to register if you have not yet done so.

Very Connect update

Firstly, we thank all 520 of you who have so far registered on our new member system.  Some of you have also added optional information (including photographs in some cases!) to your profiles, which will help us build a picture of the make-up of our membership.

According to VeryConnect this is an unusually high percentage of total members to register in the early days of new systems. However, to be fully effective, we need ALL of you to register as soon as possible and ensure that your contact details are correct.

And, as mentioned above and in the October email about the £2 Spend ballot, we are planning to use the in-built polling function for the January £2 Spend ballot. This will require you to be registered on VeryConnect to be able to place your vote.

We are aware that some members received their Election Runner voting link before they had received the SMISA email which explained the spend options. This was due to the mail service treating our VeryConnect email account as a new user, with no previous reputation track record with the service.

The server sent out the emails in batches to allow the service to monitor results and start to build our good “reputation” before sending the next batch.

So apologies for any inconvenience this caused. But having seen the full results of the October mailing the server will hopefully be happy with our reputation now. We will nevertheless be watching the sending out of this email for any delays.

Youth Academy Dinner

The St Mirren youth academy is hosting an annual dinner and awards night at the Glynhill Hotel in Renfrew on November 29.

SMISA, as a keen supporter of the academy for many years, will be represented at two tables at the dinner, one of which will be filled free of charge by Plus and Premium members fortunate enough to have their names pulled out of the hat.

Members in those categories also enjoy other benefits such as being included in a draw for a place for them and a guest in the directors’ guest lounge at every home game, as well as the chance twice a season to win a place at matchday corporate hospitality.

Anyone looking to upgrade to either tier of membership can find out more information HERE.  

Regards,

The SMISA committee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No vote, oversight or justification on buying two tables at the youth academy thingy! One table for the "better" members and another table for??? All paid for courtesy of you the members cash. 

Meanwhile the Foundation of Hearts just announced they have ammased £9million, the Well society become almost debt free having paid off previous owners, and the Fakes have over a million in their rainy day fund whilst Smisa have???

Share this post


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

No vote, oversight or justification on buying two tables at the youth academy thingy! One table for the "better" members and another table for??? All paid for courtesy of you the members cash. 

Meanwhile the Foundation of Hearts just announced they have ammased £9million, the Well society become almost debt free having paid off previous owners, and the Fakes have over a million in their rainy day fund whilst Smisa have???

Foundation of Hearts - Also has a reward scheme based on amount pledged. Given extra benefits for bigger contributors isn't new or unique to SMISA. £9 million is great for them but it's all relative in comparison to the size of the clubs. 

The Well Society - Great almost debt free, want to have a guess at a club that is debt free and recorded profits every single season since their fan buyout started? 

Fakes rainy day fund - I already pointed out to you that their 'rainy day' fund is down by over £700k following one bad season and massive losses. I wonder how far it'll fall if this season pans out with them in a relegation fight. Why anyone would rather we were in a loss making position is beyond me. 

SMISA - Best guess, over 30% ahead of target for the fan buyout, every month it gets closer and being so massively over target it allows us to accommodate the risk of relatively small spending 

Yet again LPM negativity is so easily debunked. Obviously needs to believe his post due to his hatred towards all things SMFC/ SMISA but it's just noise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:

No vote, oversight or justification on buying two tables at the youth academy thingy! One table for the "better" members and another table for??? All paid for courtesy of you the members cash. 

Meanwhile the Foundation of Hearts just announced they have ammased £9million, the Well society become almost debt free having paid off previous owners, and the Fakes have over a million in their rainy day fund whilst Smisa have???

No “vote, oversight or justification” needed beyond the original well-publicised offer to buy the buds which clearly stated that such benefits would be par for the course for those who wished for PREMIUM benefits in return for paying in PREMIUM subscription fees.

i see no problem with that.  And as I believe you’re not paying any level of fee, I can’t see why you should be so exercised by it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, antrin said:

No “vote, oversight or justification” needed beyond the original well-publicised offer to buy the buds which clearly stated that such benefits would be par for the course for those who wished for PREMIUM benefits in return for paying in PREMIUM subscription fees.

i see no problem with that.  And as I believe you’re not paying any level of fee, I can’t see why you should be so exercised by it...

And the second table? And all other tables smisa buys for 'club' nights? Who is getting those jolly's?

but you are right why should i care about those buds i signed up BtB whom I Assured that there £10 or £23 was ringfenced to buy the majority shareholding n the club. Several explicitly asked for that assurance.

Share this post


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

And the second table? And all other tables smisa buys for 'club' nights? Who is getting those jolly's?

but you are right why should i care about those buds i signed up BtB whom I Assured that there £10 or £23 was ringfenced to buy the majority shareholding n the club. Several explicitly asked for that assurance.

They should have read the not really “small” print, and not simply listened to you - as you seem to be negatively reinterpreting every aspect of the deal.

I am one of those who would rather every penny went directly into amassing a sum to get the deal done....   and not frittered away on other schemes that should be funded from other sources.

The premium benefits for premium founders is part of the ring-fencing.

 

 

Share this post


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

They should have read the not really “small” print, and not simply listened to you - as you seem to be negatively reinterpreting every aspect of the deal.

I am one of those who would rather every penny went directly into amassing a sum to get the deal done....   and not frittered away on other schemes that should be funded from other sources.

The premium benefits for premium founders is part of the ring-fencing.

 

 

Re your last line. No it isnt. Its an ongoing cost to members that could end up costing more than they actually contributed!

a £12 member who stays the course for 10 years contributes £1440.00 and gets SFA in jolly's compared to a £25 a month member who will actually contribute more than a premium member!

and if they are getting £100 worth of benefits once or twice a season its actually the £12 members who are paying for their freebies! To keep giving them these freebies doesnt add up, unless you are SMFC and getting all this extra cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is ring-fenced, in the way you deployed it.  You are wrong - you know that, of course.

if such benefits were in the initial offer, then they are part of the deal you/we bought into.

obviously I am well aware of the annual costs.  We can all do the arithmetic.

although your final para makes me wonder as you extrapolate from a lucky few getting occasional, planned bonuses to it being ALL Premium payers getting such things all the time.

IF they are getting........ benefits....”

Edited by antrin

Share this post


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

Re your last line. No it isnt. Its an ongoing cost to members that could end up costing more than they actually contributed!

a £12 member who stays the course for 10 years contributes £1440.00 and gets SFA in jolly's compared to a £25 a month member who will actually contribute more than a premium member!

and if they are getting £100 worth of benefits once or twice a season its actually the £12 members who are paying for their freebies! To keep giving them these freebies doesnt add up, unless you are SMFC and getting all this extra cash.

More baseless nonsense.

I am a £25 member and have been since day one. So far I have had one directors box invite and a badge pin. Let's see if you can now justify the "£100 worth of benefits once or twice a season" or break with tradition and actually admit you are wrong on one of the many subjects you've been wrong on. 

Personally I don't want or need anything extra for the membership, I'd be happy to pay the higher amount for nothing extra. Given extra incentive for more money though is near universal. You finding negative in it shows you're bias towards SMISA. Can only imagine your frustration at having absolutely no power to stop BTB. 

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...