Jump to content

Chairman's statement


Liverpool Bud
 Share

Recommended Posts

The money will go where we as members vote for it to go, don't see why Gordon felt he needed to try and influence an independent supporters associations vote,he should have waited until the vote was over and then made a statement. If Glenvale get the £1800 i don't see it affecting Street Stuff that much,they are both individual organisations and some kids might not want to join in with one or the other, so helping give them an option is fine by me.

What i do find strange is selecting an individual clubs request for the vote, this was thought unacceptable when an individual club approached us for help with kit, to the extent that a variety of clubs were invited to put their names into the hat for a draw. But then again they didn't have an ex Saints player with friends on the SMiSA board as part of their heirarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, portmahomack saint said:

Well said Gordon,  and good on you for speaking out,  I had already voted no before I read this thread, I would  save the money till we have enough to fill in the corners,  one at a time if need be, spend the money on our stadium, its our home, home of the St Mirren community,,,  al vote for that

Assuming you want to fill in the corners with something worthwhile and not sheets of plywood, at £32 grand a year you're 

gonna have a long wait..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with where the Chairman is coming from on this particular option on the vote. However I think the club also need to step up and be seen to be doing more themselves to help local football clubs, coaching time from those doing badges, better access to our facilities, better support of fundraising etc but this sits at Gordon's and the board's doorstep to do. SMISA was supposed to be about the improving the club and better integrating club into the community so this option ticks neither of those boxes for me.

The whole list of options is totally uninspiring to be honest and likely to have me voting no. No toys out of pram threatening to quit etc, but the continual cash cow for basics is not what I wanted from this.

Even if there are option available for improvement of matchday experience, better integration of club into community, or funding revenue generating activities I'm of the view that there should always be a do nothing option. Given we are as solvent as we have been as a club for a long time with no 2nd management team being funded, and most of the neglect from previous board been, or being, dealt with there is no need to fund the BAU stuff around match balls and the like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every smisa member is entitled to their opinion, and its good to see them expressed on here.  If you will allow me for one minute though to take any heat out of this voting option and lets call it just for arguments sake Option 5.

so the independent supporters association comes up with five options for its members to vote on, so funds can be, or not be allocated. If the majority vote no for all options the money, by default stays in the pot. However on this occasion the football club chairman decides to intervene, and go public by issuing an official CLUB statement and influence as many members as possible to reject one of the options (5) because he does not agree smisa should be putting it forward.

some members having already voted state they would have voted differently had they seen the official club statement by the chairman first! Others disagree with his blatant attempt to influence a democratic vote.

lets move forward and assume option 5 has a majority No vote and isnt funded. The club chairman has intefered in an independent supporters association democratic process, playing a major role in influencing a vote.

so... next time the club decide to say, move a section of the support, or integrate away fans with home fans to sell a few more seats, how would the chairman, and club react if the Smisa committee issued a full public statement disagreeing with this action, and like the chairman's statement deliberately trying to influence things..?

Is this the way it is going to be now going forward? The chairnan going public, trying to put the kibosh on any smisa activity he doesn't like? Smisa retaliating when it suits them? 

The chairman as he says made his feelings known to smisa before they issued the voting options, because he didnt get his way he GOES PUBLIC, condemning smisa who own 30% of the club, and are the only shareholder investing tens of thousands of pounds into the club.

What does this say about Smisa's relationship with the chairman when he feels the need to launch a public attack on supporters, shareholders and future owners of the club..? Regardless of the fact smisa members vote for or against this or any spending option, did the chairman really need to go public condemning, and trying to unduly influence a democratic vote just because he didnt agree with it..?

It shines a light on an ill conceived sense of "listen to me, and do as i command" style of insecure leadership. Poor form.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, scrappy coco said:

Assuming you want to fill in the corners with something worthwhile and not sheets of plywood, at £32 grand a year you're 

gonna have a long wait..

Not if SMISA were to find ways to help fund such worthwhile projects like filling in the corners,  if am not mistaken the fans helped fund the new Love ST end stand in 2000,  am all for spending the £2 spend on worthwhile projects, as long as it has a St Mirren stamp on it somewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'd prefer all the surplus £2 money to be put into projects that directly benefit the people who are paying the money, ie; the supporters.

I can't really see the harm in helping out Glenvale if they are struggling though.

On the rest of the options I was very much "meh". I dont' really think the club should need us to be forking out £6K on footballs and youth academy equipment. They should really be able to cope with that themselves, especially in light of the fact we've brought in £400k in transfer money in the last year.

I ticked yes to everything on this occasion but that's the last time I'll be doing it.

I think unless a really good project comes up it's now time to start building a bank.

Seems like we are now at the stage of inventing ways to spend the money.

That's my 2p, or rather £2 worth anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, div said:

Personally I'd prefer all the surplus £2 money to be put into projects that directly benefit the people who are paying the money, ie; the supporters.

I can't really see the harm in helping out Glenvale if they are struggling though.

On the rest of the options I was very much "meh". I dont' really think the club should need us to be forking out £6K on footballs and youth academy equipment. They should really be able to cope with that themselves, especially in light of the fact we've brought in £400k in transfer money in the last year.

I ticked yes to everything on this occasion but that's the last time I'll be doing it.

I think unless a really good project comes up it's now time to start building a bank.

Seems like we are now at the stage of inventing ways to spend the money.

That's my 2p, or rather £2 worth anyway.

I agree.... (get that set in stone)

either propose meaningful, matchday enhancing, tangible improvements.

invest in a small Smisa business

or stop diverting the £2 for discretionary spending and use it to take control of the majority shareholding sooner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ronnie said:

See our old friend Stuart Dickson is commenting on said statement on Facebook. For someone not interested in St Mirren still seems interested to me, unsurprisingly he is having a go at the club.

Takes a troll to catch a troll I suppose so well done to our chairman on that score!

Don't mind SMiSA funds, be it their reserves or the £2 spend, being used for one-off things such as the wheelchair platform or for urgent repairs such as the undersoil heating, however the cost of football for the first team and youth academy should be budgeted for and come from the club funds.

Only one I voted for was the creation of an amputee football team which is a great idea. Not that fussed about the rest. Next thing the club should be looking at, either using their own or SMiSA cash, is creating a women's team and all the various youth set-ups. Appreciate that would take time and money but could help open up the club to a large part of the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Takes a troll to catch a troll I suppose so well done to our chairman on that score!

Don't mind SMiSA funds, be it their reserves or the £2 spend, being used for one-off things such as the wheelchair platform or for urgent repairs such as the undersoil heating, however the cost of football for the first team and youth academy should be budgeted for and come from the club funds.

Only one I voted for was the creation of an amputee football team which is a great idea. Not that fussed about the rest. Next thing the club should be looking at, either using their own or SMiSA cash, is creating a women's team and all the various youth set-ups. Appreciate that would take time and money but could help open up the club to a large part of the community.

same vote as me :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoiler

 

As I said earlier it sounds like we're being asked to pay for the clubs perishables. I f we're going to be doing that then just set up a direct debit for them and be done with it.  Were these items not costed for before the start of season ?

Who decided these were the best options to be voted on ?

Where's the separate option to save the money ? Thought that was now to be included in all voting lists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

Surely by voting no to all the elements you have voted to save all the money ? Or have i picked this up wrong ?

Voting no to all options actually means all the money from this quarter will be available to add to the next spend.

I believe It is time to stop the spend and keep the money in the bank to use as a discretionary fund when we take over and have no funds to begin with.

Somebody asked if the club ask for spend options to be put to the vote - yes they do, and in my experience every request went straight onto the vote and won.

Another strange thing about this, why did Gordon know the SMiSA board were putting the Glenvale request in the vote,do they have to run everything by him now,before making their mind up. It's a bit of a joke now, i suspected the majority cabal on the SMiSA board had unwritten agreements with Gordon and that they had regular meetings without the rest of the SMiSA board, now it looks like Gordon was also being told what would be going into the vote, it explains why a number of ideas which were thought to be worthy when mentioned at SMiSA meetings were never spoken of again or were suddenly thought to be not worthy - by members who previously agreed they were.

I am voting no to every option from now on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by voting no to all or any of the items would carry each sum over in this particular vote and then show up in the next one

The suggestion of " Save the Money" was not meant to be a carry over. It was intended to be saved & kept until The Buds is Bought & act as SMISA' own rainy day fund.

Instead, the £2 pot appears to be being used as St Mirrens rainy day fund but not waiting for the rain.

Match balls for the 1st team to train with??
FFS, the game is a bogey if a full time football club cannot budget for training footballs itself.

Back to When the Buds is bought

How will 1st team match standard training balls be funded?
How will the training equipment for the Academy be funded?
How will Street Stuff be funded?

How will things like all the other projects the £2 pot has been spent on get paid for?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.stmirren.com/news/club/club-news/1271-smisa-2-quarterly-spend
what do Buds feel about Gordon's statement 
im nailing my colours to the mast and I'm in agreement ?
 I was surprised to see it in the list of options for the October spend but as Gordon rightly says it will be down to the members to decide
 

I am surprised that an Independant Supporters Association that SMISA is supposed to be, informed GLS of the funding options before making them known to its members.

As for the funding option itself, is there not enough 4&5 year olds in the Paisley area for both Street Stuff & Glanvale FC to thrive?

It was suggested elsewhere of a pecuniary interest between a SMISA board member & a senior figure at Glenvale.
If that is the case, where was this declared.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voted no to all of them, options didn’t impress me. I’m sure there are loads of local boys clubs struggling for funds. As someone stated already allow them a bucket day at the turnstiles to help out. Call me selfish but I’m for the money being paid by us the fans to improve our match day experience, stadium improvements and the like with the long term goal of not a lot needing done when GLS hands over the keys. Definitely think we should be banking some money every month.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...