One Town, Which Team?

[faraway saint]

1 hour ago, ReturnOf isma is god said:

You making friends in here already 

Don't you talk, someone want's you in here already. 

Maybe best to have a wee vote, who are the forum members that are suitable for the sin bin and why?

Should members who are upset  over anything that they don't agree with maybe better off joining a knitting club?

Get the names in and the reasons why, that's important, who should be in the sin bin.

As much as there are many members who make me laugh/greet etc I don't have any on ignore or want them banished.

Life's like that, takes all types. 

[ReturnOf isma is god]

1 minute ago, faraway saint said:

Don't you talk, someone want's you in here already. 

Maybe best to have a wee vote, who are the forum members that are suitable for the sin bin and why?

Should members who are upset  over anything that they don't agree with maybe better off joining a knitting club?

Get the names in and the reasons why, that's important, who should be in the sin bin.

As much as there are many members who make me laugh/greet etc I don't have any on ignore or want them banished.

Life's like that, takes all types. 

He started it 

[ReturnOf isma is god]

7 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Don't you talk, someone want's you in here already. 

Maybe best to have a wee vote, who are the forum members that are suitable for the sin bin and why?

Should members who are upset  over anything that they don't agree with maybe better off joining a knitting club?

Get the names in and the reasons why, that's important, who should be in the sin bin.

As much as there are many members who make me laugh/greet etc I don't have any on ignore or want them banished.

Life's like that, takes all types. 

His boys in the dm’s looking for a square go 

[Lord Pityme]

10 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Says the guy that clearly hates St Mirren and has nothing but negativity for the club? 

Isnt it funny the supposed reason for being in the 'exclude & abuse' section is making multiple, similar themed posts? But then you get followed in here by people making 'multiple, similar themed posts'..?

on a different note. How does this decision to roll over for sectarian riddle supports, enhance the clubs Community & Family standing..?

Will the Smisa funded face painter, juggler, magician be out in the south stand entertaining the terrorist loving hordes? The face painter will be wanting paid up front when sevco come calling.

[bazil85]

2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

Isnt it funny the supposed reason for being in the 'exclude & abuse' section is making multiple, similar themed posts? But then you get followed in here by people making 'multiple, similar themed posts'..?

on a different note. How does this decision to roll over for sectarian riddle supports, enhance the clubs Community & Family standing..?

Will the Smisa funded face painter, juggler, magician be out in the south stand entertaining the terrorist loving hordes? The face painter will be wanting paid up front when sevco come calling.

Not everything has to have a direct community benefit.

It’s a difficult decision but one that gives us a better chance of continuing in the top flight for more than one season. I don’t expect you to understand that with your narrow, negative, hate everything and anything St Mirren related mind. 

[BuddieinEK]

Not everything has to have a direct community benefit.
It’s a difficult decision but one that gives us a better chance of continuing in the top flight for more than one season. I don’t expect you to understand that with your narrow, negative, hate everything and anything St Mirren related mind. 

How does it give us a better chance of continuing in the top flight than had we promoted, rallied and incentivised our own fans into filling the stands?

Do you honestly feel there is no scope to increase our home support?

We have gained promotion on the back of turning our stadium into a fortress.

Where is the benefit of surrendering home advantage when each league position higher is worth thousands, if not hundreds of thousands... More than enough to benefit the team even further?

[bazil85]

5 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

How does it give us a better chance of continuing in the top flight than had we promoted, rallied and incentivised our own fans into filling the stands?

Do you honestly feel there is no scope to increase our home support?

We have gained promotion on the back of turning our stadium into a fortress.

Where is the benefit of surrendering home advantage when each league position higher is worth thousands, if not hundreds of thousands... More than enough to benefit the team even further?

We won the league playing attractive football at an absolute stroll. That's increased our fanbase towards the end of last season, it's not going to mean we'll fill more than the two stands with home fans at these games, not by a long shot. Yes there's other things we can potentially do but it's been proven time and time again, nothing is more effective in increasing crowds than winning games. Any 'incentive' you can think of won't do better than winning the league but we still have scope to increase our revenue by making this decision. Like it or not money is king in this game now. 

You also don't seem to be able to grasp we're talking about a max four games. If you genuinely think a bigger home crowd (doubt very much the home crowd at these games will be larger than main and West stand capacity as I said) will give us a better chance of winning games against teams that can outspend us 20 fold then I very much worry.

The best chance we have is looking at the bigger picture and maximising our income (player squad) and worrying about 38 games not 2/4 

[BuddieinEK]

We won the league playing attractive football at an absolute stroll. That's increased our fanbase towards the end of last season, it's not going to mean we'll fill more than the two stands with home fans at these games, not by a long shot. Yes there's other things we can potentially do but it's been proven time and time again, nothing is more effective in increasing crowds than winning games. Any 'incentive' you can think of won't do better than winning the league but we still have scope to increase our revenue by making this decision. Like it or not money is king in this game now. 
You also don't seem to be able to grasp we're talking about a max four games. If you genuinely think a bigger home crowd (doubt very much the home crowd at these games will be larger than main and West stand capacity as I said) will give us a better chance of winning games against teams that can outspend us 20 fold then I very much worry.
The best chance we have is looking at the bigger picture and maximising our income (player squad) and worrying about 38 games not 2/4 

Why so short sighted?
Why not aim yo maximize support for ALL the games.

You are correct... Nothing brings fans back like a successful team.

You lack faith in our ability to do well this coming season all of a sudden?

Are you only positive whrn it suits you or when the chairman tells you to be?

Rhetorical question. I'd actually rather you didn't answer... ANY of my posts. EVER.

You are the debating equivalent of a three wheeled supermarket trolly!

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

We won the league playing attractive football at an absolute stroll. That's increased our fanbase towards the end of last season, it's not going to mean we'll fill more than the two stands with home fans at these games, not by a long shot. Yes there's other things we can potentially do but it's been proven time and time again, nothing is more effective in increasing crowds than winning games. Any 'incentive' you can think of won't do better than winning the league but we still have scope to increase our revenue by making this decision. Like it or not money is king in this game now. 

You also don't seem to be able to grasp we're talking about a max four games. If you genuinely think a bigger home crowd (doubt very much the home crowd at these games will be larger than main and West stand capacity as I said) will give us a better chance of winning games against teams that can outspend us 20 fold then I very much worry.

The best chance we have is looking at the bigger picture and maximising our income (player squad) and worrying about 38 games not 2/4 

It's not 2/4 games out of 38. Stop treating people like idiots. It's 3 or 4 matches out of 18 to 20 home games covered by season ticket holders who are going to be asked to spend probably £280 and will then be asked to sit in the West stand formthese games, probably at one side of the pitch with inferior views to the one they paid for.

It's potentially more than 20% of all home matches.

Don't downplay this.

Edited May 6, 2018 by oaksoft

[BuddieinEK]

We won the league playing attractive football at an absolute stroll. That's increased our fanbase towards the end of last season, it's not going to mean we'll fill more than the two stands with home fans at these games, not by a long shot. Yes there's other things we can potentially do but it's been proven time and time again, nothing is more effective in increasing crowds than winning games. Any 'incentive' you can think of won't do better than winning the league but we still have scope to increase our revenue by making this decision. Like it or not money is king in this game now. 

You also don't seem to be able to grasp we're talking about a max four games. If you genuinely think a bigger home crowd (doubt very much the home crowd at these games will be larger than main and West stand capacity as I said) will give us a better chance of winning games against teams that can outspend us 20 fold then I very much worry.

The best chance we have is looking at the bigger picture and maximising our income (player squad) and worrying about 38 games not 2/4 

One last point... Again... No reply needed.

 

You say our best chance is to maximize our income.

 

When I said that in the other three wheeled supermarket trolly debate of yours you shouted me down and said the best bet was to spend now!

 

 

[stlucifer]

14 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's not 2/4 games out of 38. Stop treating people like idiots. It's 3 or 4 matches out of 18 to 20 games.

It's potentially more than 20% of all home matches.

Don't downplay this.

Although it is 2-8 games as it would only be two if we finish below  7th and the rangers and celtic end up above that or we end up 6th or better and we beat both on the way to the two cups.

 

ETA. Or any combination of the above. 

Edited May 6, 2018 by stlucifer

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:

Why so short sighted?
Why not aim yo maximize support for ALL the games.

You are correct... Nothing brings fans back like a successful team.

You lack faith in our ability to do well this coming season all of a sudden?

Are you only positive whrn it suits you or when the chairman tells you to be?

Rhetorical question. I'd actually rather you didn't answer... ANY of my posts. EVER.

You are the debating equivalent of a three wheeled supermarket trolly!

There’s no point in me answering your questions. The concept of ‘sense’ seems lost on you. 

[St.Ricky]

5 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

Although it is 2-8 games as it would only be two if we finish below  7th and the rangers and celtic end up above that or we end up 6th or better and we beat both on the way to the two cups.

I am with Oaksoft on the arithmetic. Taking possible cup games our of it (they may not be covered by these arrangements anyway ). Out of 20 games then 4 is 20%.

The way to change it is not to moan on here....but by all means do express your views either way...but is to get out and buy up sufficient season tickets to cause the board reason to reconsider. 

It's in our hands to pay up and turn up in numbers . If we don't. ...then don't blame the board for looking after the finances of the club to help ensure we can compete on the park.

So what are you going to do?

Talk a good game on here or pay up and turn up? To those who do both. Great

[bazil85]

17 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

One last point... Again... No reply needed.

 

You say our best chance is to maximize our income.

 

When I said that in the other three wheeled supermarket trolly debate of yours you shouted me down and said the best bet was to spend now!

 

 

Again ‘sense’ completely absent. 

[bazil85]

24 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's not 2/4 games out of 38. Stop treating people like idiots. It's 3 or 4 matches out of 18 to 20 home games covered by season ticket holders who are going to be asked to spend probably £280 and will then be asked to sit in the West stand formthese games, probably at one side of the pitch with inferior views to the one they paid for.

It's potentially more than 20% of all home matches.

Don't downplay this.

Oh well, done now. Fortunately it seems the majority of fans again see the benefit in this. Not saying they like it (I certainly don’t) but I can understand fully why this has happened. Wonder if the ones moaning were also moaning when it was W6/7... 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Although it is 2-8 games as it would only be two if we finish below  7th and the rangers and celtic end up above that or we end up 6th or better and we beat both on the way to the two cups.
 
ETA. Or any combination of the above. [emoji14]

Nope, will be a minimum of 3 games...2 against one of the cheeks, 1 against the other. If we manage to finish in the top 6 then we could have 1 more home game against either.

[BuddieinEK]

Oh well, done now. Fortunately it seems the majority of fans again see the benefit in this. Not saying they like it (I certainly don’t) but I can understand fully why this has happened. Wonder if the ones moaning were also moaning when it was W6/7... 

When it was W6 and W7 initially, nobody was displaced from their allocated season ticket seat.

That said, I was never personally in favour of sharing the main home support stand and impacting our own supporters by halfing the available facilities.

Not really sure if you have a point never mind what it is.

Just more mind numbing shit stirring!

[St.Ricky]

The logic remains the same. Unless you have other positive suggestions.

1 Sell out Main and West Stand Season Tickets plus South Stand. 

Clearly the posters on the forum do not think this likely. Possibly helping to fulfill their own prophecy. 

2 Create a family section and singing section plus the rest of us in the West Stand. No one then has to move seats.

Then sell "game" tickets on a game by game basis for the South Stand. 

Using the lowest number of games for the OF this leaves the space for Saints Fans in 90% of the league games.  So..if we are going well there is space for casual fans to attend. 

Any other ideas out there? 

[oaksoft]

 

ccc

Edited May 7, 2018 by oaksoft

[Kombibuddie]

Some folk actually prefer being behind the goal when supporting their team.
I expect our family stand has a fair few season ticket holders whose choice is behind the goal.

The bigot pound means more than the Buddie pound in this instance.

Short term profit over long term gain.

I'd like my club to be the one that says to the bigot brothers, we're not putting up with your sectarian shite. North stand & north stand only.

[Lord Pityme]

Two things to be concerned about in the Smisa annual report.

1. Membership has dropped by thirty in the last two weeks. (Since the astroturf vote)

2. What a absolute cock up the funding for the astroturf has become! Given that smisa are now saying its being funded from the £50k loan facility and £2 pot would infer what they stated, and asked the membership to vote on was indeed illegal, and there has been some desperate back peddling since the AGM to try and be compliant.

incidentally, the spiel about the 'contracted' £50k loan facility with the club is another smokescreen because smisa never put setting up that facility to the membership, to vote on, and again where does the money for that facility come from..? Yes you guessed it from the ringfenced funds to buy the shares.

so whatever way they spin it they are still rifling the ringfenced funds despite assuring everyone who joined they were locked, and only there to buy shares.

i actually lost count of the committee meetings they tried shouting me down in, with people walking out to try and deflect from the issue i raised time and again that the membership needed to be consulted on the £50k loan facility, it was contrary to the constitution, and was being funded by ringfenced funds. The committee dodged, ducked and aboided dealing with it at every turn as they knew they hadnt gottten the appropriate legal advice when drawing up the contract with Scott, and felt more obliged to keeping hom sweet than the members and the constitution.

what a complete and totally avoidable f**k up..?

edit: just to make it crystal... regardless of what smisa say in their annual report "Smisa has a legal obligation to make £50k lending facility available to the club" it doesnt..!

their is a document/contract drawn up between Scott & Smisa to create/make a £50k lending facility, but as Smisa have now shown by completely changing the terms of what they asked the membership to vote on, it is illegal to acesss the ringfenced funds for anything other than their sole purpose.

in short you can sign a contract with who you like, for whatever you like. But that contract becomes void if it requires either party to do something illegal. In this case access funds that are for one ringfenced purpose.

I hope this demonstrates the absolute mess Smisa has gotten itself into, despite having someone at the table (me) who has over twenty years experience in co-ops, mutuals and com ben society's. Who told them time and again it was wrong, it needed changing, it had to stop. Instead they would rather commit to breaking the constitution, and infringing the relevant legislation, instead of upsetting Scott for five minutes.

Edited May 8, 2018 by Lord Pityme

[bazil85]

37 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Two things to be concerned about in the Smisa annual report.

1. Membership has dropped by thirty in the last two weeks. (Since the astroturf vote)

2. What a absolute cock up the funding for the astroturf has become! Given that smisa are now saying its being funded from the £50k loan facility and £2 pot would infer what they stated, and asked the membership to vote on was indeed illegal, and there has been some desperate back peddling since the AGM to try and be compliant.

incidentally, the spiel about the 'contracted' £50k loan facility with the club is another smokescreen because smisa never put setting up that facility to the membership, to vote on, and again where does the money for that facility come from..? Yes you guessed it from the ringfenced funds to buy the shares.

so whatever way they spin it they are still rifling the ringfenced funds despite assuring everyone who joined they were locked, and only there to buy shares.

i actually lost count of the committee meetings they tried shouting me down in, with people walking out to try and deflect from the issue i raised time and again that the membership needed to be consulted on the £50k loan facility, it was contrary to the constitution, and was being funded by ringfenced funds. The committee dodged, ducked and aboided dealing with it at every turn as they knew they hadnt gottten the appropriate legal advice when drawing up the contract with Scott, and felt more obliged to keeping hom sweet than the members and the constitution.

what a complete and totally avoidable f**k up..?

It's really easy to see how you get confused and spout absolute nonsense all the time.

'At the 2017 AGM we had 1287 members – we now have 1,257' so numbers have fallen 30 in roughly one year not in two weeks.  At that rate we would still be over 1,000 members come the end of the 10 years. 

Rest of your post (as with the vast majority of them) isn't even worth reading, it is complete, unfounded garbage. 

[Lord Pityme]

39 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

It's really easy to see how you get confused and spout absolute nonsense all the time.

'At the 2017 AGM we had 1287 members – we now have 1,257' so numbers have fallen 30 in roughly one year not in two weeks.  At that rate we would still be over 1,000 members come the end of the 10 years. 

Rest of your post (as with the vast majority of them) isn't even worth reading, it is complete, unfounded garbage. 

Ahhh, in Basil speak when you say "unfounded" it actually means you got jack shit..!

[portmahomack saint]

16 hours ago, Graeme Aitken said:

Some folk actually prefer being behind the goal when supporting their team.
I expect our family stand has a fair few season ticket holders whose choice is behind the goal.

The bigot pound means more than the Buddie pound in this instance.

Short term profit over long term gain.

I'd like my club to be the one that says to the bigot brothers, we're not putting up with your sectarian shite. North stand & north stand only.

Exactly. this was the perfect time to push on as a club, to show how ambitious we are, to build our home support, everything was in place, the perfect storm so to speak,  if we are serious of being a top 6 team 5000+ home fans should be a target that's achievable, the fan base is there go get them,  instead of sitting down discussing how many old firm fans we should let in and counting the cash and sending out the wrong message, we should have been exploring all avenues and initiatives to fill the seats with our own fans FIRST, and not biting off the hand that feeds you.

Edited May 8, 2018 by portmahomack saint
oops

[bazil85]

28 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Ahhh, in Basil speak when you say "unfounded" it actually means you got jack shit..!

Correct, you do have Jack s*it LPM. Finally something we agree on.