Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Lord Pityme

Save Smisa

Recommended Posts


Just now, Yflab said:

LPM - are you planning on raising these concerns at the AGM on Saturday?

Yes. Hopefully others will feel it necessary to raise them too so that we get Smisa reset, to inform and consult with the membership. 

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


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

 

 

The issue is not smisa lending the club, the issue is that is for the membership (the people whose money it is) to decide. Not a committee just giving Gordon whatever, whenever. We have a constitution and governing legislation to protect trusts like Smisa and its members.

respect the membership, if its a good idea i have every confidence they would see it as such. If you take away the members influence there is little reason to subscribe to something if others keep giving your funds away as the wish.

My understanding upon signing up was that the club would have limited access to a "pot" of money for interest free loans etc. Don't recall being told I could vote on every issue. Although I do agree that setting conditions on a loan to the club would be beneficial - so that we do know where our money is going. 

Hope to hear this raised at the meeting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am intrigued (& it is not a criticism) but a month or so ago, LPM suggested 'all would be revealed" (or words to that effect) at the SMISA AGM and indicated 'all was not quite right'

I am intrigued as to why have you posted all this now? What is your motive and what do you hope to achieve?

I recall Stuart Dickson being vilified for questioning SMISA' conduct, stated he was reporting them t some body and got laughed at when he decided against, I think he said something like it would cost him £500 or so to proceed (I may be wrong on that but it seems to ring a bell). If I am understanding what LPM has said reasonably well, it looks like SD may have had quite a valid point. I may be well off the mark with that but have I said, I am intrigued with LPM's motive for bringing this up now (& not before when he first identified/suspected any anomalies)

hmmmmmmm

 

Share this post


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

I am intrigued (& it is not a criticism) but a month or so ago, LPM suggested 'all would be revealed" (or words to that effect) at the SMISA AGM and indicated 'all was not quite right'

I am intrigued as to why have you posted all this now? What is your motive and what do you hope to achieve?

I recall Stuart Dickson being vilified for questioning SMISA' conduct, stated he was reporting them t some body and got laughed at when he decided against, I think he said something like it would cost him £500 or so to proceed (I may be wrong on that but it seems to ring a bell). If I am understanding what LPM has said reasonably well, it looks like SD may have had quite a valid point. I may be well off the mark with that but have I said, I am intrigued with LPM's motive for bringing this up now (& not before when he first identified/suspected any anomalies)

hmmmmmmm

 

For the record so there are no misunderstandings I brought the issue up at the smisa committee meeting where the proposal to buy our shares from the selling comsortium was voted on. I.e. As soon as I was aware of it. And have been bringing it up in that forum fir the best part of a year.

'my motives' as you say are simply to ensure the committee fully inform and consult with the membership, particularly in light of the fact this would now total £70k they have agreed in one way or another to give/lend/make available to the club. On top of that I, and I am sure many others would want to know what a loan/favility of this size will be secured against should the club be unable to meet the repayments? 

We will have a stronger Smisa if the committee see sense and inform and consult the membership.

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The issue is not smisa lending the club, the issue is that is for the membership (the people whose money it is) to decide. Not a committee just giving Gordon whatever, whenever. We have a constitution and governing legislation to protect trusts like Smisa and its members.
respect the membership, if its a good idea i have every confidence they would see it as such. If you take away the members influence there is little reason to subscribe to something if others keep giving your funds away as the wish.

Alas, the issue really is lending to the club, there is no provision that allows it so anything previously agreed will be ultra vires. The suggested revisals will probably cover it but alas, it's after the fact. There is no real merit in this being made into a huge issue but people need to hold their hands up and do the right thing. Checks and balances need to be put in place re how much is paid out and what needs a majority of members to agree and what needs three quarters approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one seems able to confirm the USH was fixed?
If not, where did the money go?


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed. For me, the learning for SMISA on the USH loan is that we need a process for snap votes and members need to be prepared for these votes. The timing of the request meant there was little time for messing around, an order had to be placed and parts therefore had to be available(the timing of the request etc was outside of SMISA's control). That may not be repeated, there may not even be a need in future for snap votes, but a process should still be there.

Share this post


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

 


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed. For me, the learning for SMISA on the USH loan is that we need a process for snap votes and members need to be prepared for these votes. The timing of the request meant there was little time for messing around, an order had to be placed and parts therefore had to be available(the timing of the request etc was outside of SMISA's control). That may not be repeated, there may not even be a need in future for snap votes, but a process should still be there.

 

That's something, although the time taken to report this seems on the unnecessarily long side?

Anyhow, I'll drop out, you have enough to worry about, cheers for the reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed. For me, the learning for SMISA on the USH loan is that we need a process for snap votes and members need to be prepared for these votes. The timing of the request meant there was little time for messing around, an order had to be placed and parts therefore had to be available(the timing of the request etc was outside of SMISA's control). That may not be repeated, there may not even be a need in future for snap votes, but a process should still be there.

 

Just in time for Saint For A Day, and close season. Perfect!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's something, although the time taken to report this seems on the unnecessarily long side?
Anyhow, I'll drop out, you have enough to worry about, cheers for the reply.

To be fair, it's only Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TsuMirren said:

 

 


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed.

 

That's a bit random! End of April, 1 home match to play & we get informed, the USH is fixed??? What prompted the club to confirm it was fixed so late in the season??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

For the record so there are no misunderstandings I brought the issue up at the smisa committee meeting where the proposal to buy our shares from the selling comsortium was voted on. I.e. As soon as I was aware of it. And have been bringing it up in that forum fir the best part of a year.

Is there any reason why the minutes of SMISA committee meetings aren't distributed to the SMISA ,membership?

5 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

my motives' as you say are simply to ensure the committee fully inform and consult with the membership, particularly in light of the fact this would now total £70k they have agreed in one way or another to give/lend/make available to the club. On top of that I, and I am sure many others would want to know what a loan/favility of this size will be secured against should the club be unable to meet the repayments? 

since less than a handful of folk expressed interest in joining the SMISA committee, how confident are you that we will see the SMISA membership informed of such matters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a bit random! End of April, 1 home match to play & we get informed, the USH is fixed??? What prompted the club to confirm it was fixed so late in the season??


I'm going to guess someone just asked because of mischievous posts on here and the club replied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

Is there any reason why the minutes of SMISA committee meetings aren't distributed to the SMISA ,membership?

since less than a handful of folk expressed interest in joining the SMISA committee, how confident are you that we will see the SMISA membership informed of such matters?

Answer: they dont want to distribute the minutes, and it will take a vote by the membership to get them released.

supremely confident in the membership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TsuMirren said:

 


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed. For me, the learning for SMISA on the USH loan is that we need a process for snap votes and members need to be prepared for these votes. The timing of the request meant there was little time for messing around, an order had to be placed and parts therefore had to be available(the timing of the request etc was outside of SMISA's control). That may not be repeated, there may not even be a need in future for snap votes, but a process should still be there.

 

This is just plain daft, what on earth are "snap votes" in the context of an association designed to generate long-term funding for the purchase of shares and development of the club?

 

"Messing around", you mean the inconsequential matter of asking the people who actually raise the money what they think?  What a shameful turn of phrase.

 

How can you have a "snap vote" ?  Every member is entitled to vote and that means allowing sufficient time for them to be informed, consulted and to consider their position

 

SMISA are not meant to be a crisis loan provider-they have their own programme for the use of the funds they generate (or should have).  If there is a proposal to hand over 50k to the club then it should be done in the form of a share purchase.  If those asking for the cash don't like the terms then they can look elsewhere

 

In my view, anyone who thinks the introduction of a "snap vote procedure" is a necessity is not competent to sit on a committee that disburses other people's money.

 

This all smacks of a committee within a committee and the attitude that they know best so the rest of the idiots should just get on with raising the money so that said inner committee members can get on with the serious task of acting like a big shot who is bankrolled with other people's money.

Edited by beyond our ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

That's a bit random! End of April, 1 home match to play & we get informed, the USH is fixed??? What prompted the club to confirm it was fixed so late in the season??

The club have not confirmed the USH has been fixed, one person asked another what the status of the repair was and was told it has been tested and works, there is no official confirmation of this though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not so naive that I put complete undying trust in the SMISA Buddies.

but they ARE Buddies and so until I have firm evidence of maladministration then I am happy to go with the flow, trusting that we are all in this for the long haul to help the club survive and thrive. They are doing their best for all of us and our club.

i've observed the poor buggers who follow sevco shovelling their hard-earned into the current bottomless Ibrox pit via the weirdly named Club 1872.

From what I read, that 1872 Club is diverting their funds into pockets for which it was never intended.  If St Mirren had 40,000 gates and yet still managed to make losses of £10m year on year on year, I would not continue funding SMISA.

i'd wait till genuine, honest Buddies were in place.  I believe that already to be the case with SMISA. :)

and yet...

There IS disquiet so genuine open-ness and clarity must be observed and maintained to counter any of the qualms such as those LPM may have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TsuMirren said:

 


It was reported to the committee on Monday that the USH has indeed been fixed.

 

 

1 hour ago, buddiecat said:

The club have not confirmed the USH has been fixed, one person asked another what the status of the repair was and was told it has been tested and works, there is no official confirmation of this though.

This is confusing and concerning.

Share this post


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

I am not so naive that I put complete undying trust in the SMISA Buddies.

but they ARE Buddies and so until I have firm evidence of maladministration then I am happy to go with the flow, trusting that we are all in this for the long haul to help the club survive and thrive. They are doing their best for all of us and our club.

i've observed the poor buggers who follow sevco shovelling their hard-earned into the current bottomless Ibrox pit via the weirdly named Club 1872.

From what I read, that 1872 Club is diverting their funds into pockets for which it was never intended.  If St Mirren had 40,000 gates and yet still managed to make losses of £10m year on year on year, I would not continue funding SMISA.

i'd wait till genuine, honest Buddies were in place.  I believe that already to be the case with SMISA. :)

and yet...

There IS disquiet so genuine open-ness and clarity must be observed and maintained to counter any of the qualms such as those LPM may have.

All we ask if for proper information and consultation. Lets take everyone on the journey!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

 

This is confusing and concerning.

I believe Buddiecat was alluding to the fact that Official Confirmation of the repairs by The Club has not been given.

I would have thought some statement in the Club News on the Official site informing of such and thanking SMiSA for their input will be forthcoming.

Share this post


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

I  didn't say it was the club who made the report. It was a committee member who spends a lot of time at the club who reported it to is. 

I think it should be an official club statement to announce where the USH is at. That way it avoids mixed messages.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...