Jump to content

One Town, Which Team?


Lord Pityme

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

 

Don't make the mistake of thinking they all feel alienated, get the normal moaners of course but many seem to see the bigger picture. 

 

The bigger picture is families welcome unless we can sell to the OF. 

This is the real issue that will harm us in the long term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


9 minutes ago, DumboBud said:

That is some strange attempt to justify the six figure sum. 

Take both stands and assume that we will be in the same half of the league at the split as the old firm and get 4 games against them. 

This discussion is about the ‘extra’ income as a result of not having a family stand for the old firm games. 

So let’s take your figures and show where you are wrong. 

1650 x £22 (your estimated ticket price) = £36,300 x3 = £108,900 

Why 3 because that is all we are guaranteed and it makes the South Stand non OF season ticket price look very high if we are to assume that the club are banking on 4 games. 

So we have a six figure sum £108,900 on the assumption that all tickets are your full price and they all sell. Unfortunately the tax man wants his VAT and unless we want to annoy him we need to give him it. His share is £18,150. Leaving us with £90,750. 

Im sure you will agree that £90,750 is the best case figure based on your figures and that isn’t a six figure sum. 

No account taken of the £64 loss on the South Stand season book, no account of any increased stewarding, and you also mentioned that some OF fans normally buy tickets for the home end would be accommodated in the extra away stand now so these tickets wouldn’t actually be extra income as they would be substitutive. The catering is a franchise so unlikely to have extra income for the club although this does depend on the deal. 

Just because the chairman states something it doesn’t mean you need to defend it. 

There is no doubt that this decision brings in extra income but has nothing like the effect on the bottom line that many are clinging on to. 

So let's look at your claim I am wrong and rip it apart shall we? 

1. My claim is based on 'up to' four games, which perfectly justifies my maths. You have done it on three games and came to a figure just short of £100k. Okay it's best case scenario but that is my assumption also. Maybe GLS should have said 'up to' as well. Oh my days is he Lucifer himself? :rolleyes:

2. at no time did I or GLS make the claim of extra income would be Net or Gross. 

3. You've left out the catering income, not a massive source of income but income none the less. Same goes if any of them buy a program. Are they allowed in the 1877 club, pay for the car park? Members and guests. In the past I've went to these games with friends that support one of these teams, they jump in the away end, me in the home. If they see an increase in before the game pints, more income still. 

4. Family stand St Mirren fans will need to pay to come to the game (all be it at a reduced cost) that's yet more income you can add on. 

5. Stewarding cost is an expense like we have many expenses at games, GLS isn't referencing net gain, he's talking income only. Did you see anything in his statement about 'bottom line'

6. What about an indirect benefit that the extra income might get us top six and the extra games we wouldn't have? Extra TV income. All possible. Someone said £100k would only be one player, figures released this season suggest average wages of SP players are about half that for the lower level clubs. 

7. Also a less than indirect benefit that the bigger income will likely mean we finish higher up the table even if not top 6. You realise the income implications for finishing higher up the table right? 

Good effort though, as far as creating something to moan about you've done well. Not quite on LPM wavelength though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, DumboBud said:

That is some strange attempt to justify the six figure sum. 

Take both stands and assume that we will be in the same half of the league at the split as the old firm and get 4 games against them. 

This discussion is about the ‘extra’ income as a result of not having a family stand for the old firm games. 

So let’s take your figures and show where you are wrong. 

1650 x £22 (your estimated ticket price) = £36,300 x3 = £108,900 

Why 3 because that is all we are guaranteed and it makes the South Stand non OF season ticket price look very high if we are to assume that the club are banking on 4 games. 

So we have a six figure sum £108,900 on the assumption that all tickets are your full price and they all sell. Unfortunately the tax man wants his VAT and unless we want to annoy him we need to give him it. His share is £18,150. Leaving us with £90,750. 

Im sure you will agree that £90,750 is the best case figure based on your figures and that isn’t a six figure sum. 

No account taken of the £64 loss on the South Stand season book, no account of any increased stewarding, and you also mentioned that some OF fans normally buy tickets for the home end would be accommodated in the extra away stand now so these tickets wouldn’t actually be extra income as they would be substitutive. The catering is a franchise so unlikely to have extra income for the club although this does depend on the deal. 

Just because the chairman states something it doesn’t mean you need to defend it. 

There is no doubt that this decision brings in extra income but has nothing like the effect on the bottom line that many are clinging on to. 

I broadly agree, however all our income is taxed so costs such as stewarding are defrayed (i think)

Bazil speaks about catering, however that is franchised out and I believe a  figure for the season is payable by the franchisee up front and they then seek to make it profitable.  i don't see the club getting a guaranteed percentage of additional or potential additional income there.

Also, unless i am thick and missed something, the guarantee of home games against the OF is only two.  and there is no post split guarantee of even one home game against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So let's look at your claim I am wrong and rip it apart shall we? 

1. My claim is based on 'up to' four games, which perfectly justifies my maths. You have done it on three games and came to a figure just short of £100k. Okay it's best case scenario but that is my assumption also. Maybe GLS should have said 'up to' as well. Oh my days is he Lucifer himself? :rolleyes:

2. at no time did I or GLS make the claim of extra income would be Net or Gross. 

3. You've left out the catering income, not a massive source of income but income none the less. Same goes if any of them buy a program. Are they allowed in the 1877 club, pay for the car park? Members and guests. In the past I've went to these games with friends that support one of these teams, they jump in the away end, me in the home. If they see an increase in before the game pints, more income still. 

this is extra income for the caterers, who bid up front for the franchise-I dont see it coming to the club.  And extra beer?  there is a limit on the number of people who can attend the 1877 and on busy days that is almost exclusively saints fans.

4. Family stand St Mirren fans will need to pay to come to the game (all be it at a reduced cost) that's yet more income you can add on. 

Many will stay away

5. Stewarding cost is an expense like we have many expenses at games, GLS isn't referencing net gain, he's talking income only. Did you see anything in his statement about 'bottom line'

6. What about an indirect benefit that the extra income might get us top six and the extra games we wouldn't have? Extra TV income. All possible. Someone said £100k would only be one player, figures released this season suggest average wages of SP players are about half that for the lower level clubs. 

You wrote about extra income increasing the chances of finishing in the top 6.  Presumably, on the back of having a better standard of player.  So these better players are going to be happy with bog-standard wages?  TV income is split across the entire league on a prescribed formula, are you saying we get extra because i don't think that is the case

7. Also a less than indirect benefit that the bigger income will likely mean we finish higher up the table even if not top 6. You realise the income implications for finishing higher up the table right? 

Good effort though, as far as creating something to moan about you've done well. Not quite on LPM wavelength though. 

I was bored-feeling better now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Why do you even bother? Your hatrid of all things St mirren is so clear. Why not just patch it and go support the juniors? :lol: Give us all peace. 

Now that's a daft post about someone who has supported the club for 50 years and who gave up their own time to help set up the BtB campaign.  Someone who shipped his entire family up from the south coast for many games and who has appeared in the fans matches several times over the years.   it's clearly personal with you and your "likees"

Who is hatrid? seems to remind me of a Harry Potter character

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So let's look at your claim I am wrong and rip it apart shall we? 

1. My claim is based on 'up to' four games, which perfectly justifies my maths. You have done it on three games and came to a figure just short of £100k. Okay it's best case scenario but that is my assumption also. Maybe GLS should have said 'up to' as well. Oh my days is he Lucifer himself? :rolleyes:

2. at no time did I or GLS make the claim of extra income would be Net or Gross. 

3. You've left out the catering income, not a massive source of income but income none the less. Same goes if any of them buy a program. Are they allowed in the 1877 club, pay for the car park? Members and guests. In the past I've went to these games with friends that support one of these teams, they jump in the away end, me in the home. If they see an increase in before the game pints, more income still. 

4. Family stand St Mirren fans will need to pay to come to the game (all be it at a reduced cost) that's yet more income you can add on. 

5. Stewarding cost is an expense like we have many expenses at games, GLS isn't referencing net gain, he's talking income only. Did you see anything in his statement about 'bottom line'

6. What about an indirect benefit that the extra income might get us top six and the extra games we wouldn't have? Extra TV income. All possible. Someone said £100k would only be one player, figures released this season suggest average wages of SP players are about half that for the lower level clubs. 

7. Also a less than indirect benefit that the bigger income will likely mean we finish higher up the table even if not top 6. You realise the income implications for finishing higher up the table right? 

Good effort though, as far as creating something to moan about you've done well. Not quite on LPM wavelength though. 

Just when I thought your arguement could get anymore ridiculous this little gem comes along. 

1. No competent business person would work on the basis of income from 4 games when 3 are guaranteed and the fourth unlikely. 

2. No competent business person would ignore the VAT issue. 

3. The catering is a franchise no one out with the club and the franchise holder know the details. 

4. You are right that the family stand season ticket holders will need to pay in but by making the season ticket £64 less the club are already foregoing that guaranteed income in favour of the possible income if they decide to pay on the day. That £64 is lost income for each season ticket holder (less VAT!)

5. I’ve never attempted to quantify what if any increased costs there would be, whether for stewarding or other reasons. 

6. Extra income in your words ‘might’ get us top 6. With extra games??? Each team in the league plays the same number of games. Extra TV income? There is no extra money for hosting a tv match in the league. 

7. Extra income means finishing higher in the league. I’ve not disputed that this plan in the short term gives extra income. I agreed that more to spend on the playing squad increases your chances of doing well. But it undoubted values OF fans higher than the families that we have encouraged to come over several seasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bazil85 said:

There will be bumps on the way, that was always going to happen. GLS is only here a short time in the grand scheme and the good he's done massively Outweighs any potential errors in judgement. Have you ever said anything remotely positive for  the St Mirren fan that put up his own cash to move our club into long-term fan ownership? That doesn't appear to be profiting from the deal for the club he loves? 

You're Mr Moan himself, all doom and gloom for something that in 10, 15, 20 years won't matter. Try looking at the bigger picture for once. 

And no I don't know what fan consultation took place but knowing everyone in the boardroom and on the SMISA committee are St Mirren fans, knowing they don't personally gain from this decision, I have faith they've done this in the best interest of SMFC.  That's enough for me and fortunately the cast majority of fans. You yet again can't see you're in a wee exclusive club of serial moaners. 

You actually believe the vast majority of st mirren fans are happy being lied to by the chairman??? Ffs you actually believe the stuff you post!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DumboBud said:

Just when I thought your arguement could get anymore ridiculous this little gem comes along. 

1. No competent business person would work on the basis of income from 4 games when 3 are guaranteed and the fourth unlikely. 

2. No competent business person would ignore the VAT issue. 

3. The catering is a franchise no one out with the club and the franchise holder know the details. 

4. You are right that the family stand season ticket holders will need to pay in but by making the season ticket £64 less the club are already foregoing that guaranteed income in favour of the possible income if they decide to pay on the day. That £64 is lost income for each season ticket holder (less VAT!)

5. I’ve never attempted to quantify what if any increased costs there would be, whether for stewarding or other reasons. 

6. Extra income in your words ‘might’ get us top 6. With extra games??? Each team in the league plays the same number of games. Extra TV income? There is no extra money for hosting a tv match in the league. 

7. Extra income means finishing higher in the league. I’ve not disputed that this plan in the short term gives extra income. I agreed that more to spend on the playing squad increases your chances of doing well. But it undoubted values OF fans higher than the families that we have encouraged to come over several seasons. 

1. Didn’t say he would. He at no time says he’ll budget for four games. It’s a breakdown of potential income 

2. See above, again no mention of what the business strategy will be. You seem to be reading into things that aren’t there to push your negative agenda 

3. A franchise that’s fees are determined based on perceived income. I’ll let you work out how bigger crowds strengthen our negotiation position 

4. Yep it might very well but again we’re working on potential income. Once again hell mend GLS for not saying ‘up to.’ Lol  

5. There’s plenty of positives you don’t want to quantify either. Wonder why? 

6. So you’re saying games in the top six will result in the same or less income than the bottom six? Tv money isn’t set in stone before the season starts. Additional games on TV are factored in throughout the season. For example a game that wasn’t planned for TV but became very important being put on TV would result in increased TV income. Top six TV games are also set after the top six is decided (obviously) 

7. Glad we agree on one point about the additional income. I imagine a good number of fans (from seeing plenty of comments) value given SMFC the best chance of doing well in the league over having a different seat for up to 4 games a season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

Now that's a daft post about someone who has supported the club for 50 years and who gave up their own time to help set up the BtB campaign.  Someone who shipped his entire family up from the south coast for many games and who has appeared in the fans matches several times over the years.   it's clearly personal with you and your "likees"

Who is hatrid? seems to remind me of a Harry Potter character

God can you imagine being in a car with him all the way up from the South Coast? Constantly nipping your ear about how bad GLS is for moving our club to fan ownership. 

Oh sorry I’m on a phone, sometimes the autocorrect works in funny ways (for example oh turning to Mph for some reason) and my fat fingers dont always type what I want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Can the moon man not answer A question without all the avoidance crap. Obviously not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You've again actually quoted my response to your post where i sought to clarify my original one thats got you all het up. Sorry if you dont like the answer, or cant work an angle on it. Can i ask you again are you happy the chairman lied to the support? Yes or no will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

You actually believe the vast majority of st mirren fans are happy being lied to by the chairman??? Ffs you actually believe the stuff you post!

You’re the one making it about being lied to. I think the vast majority are happy with the situation we find ourselves in an tolerate decisions like the ticket one that benefit our team on the park. No one is saying it’s not a tough call  

We get it you hate GLS, you hate St Mirren, you hate SMISA. No one cares, things are going along nicely, let it go.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have other posters realised with the information, thinking, long winded, contorted justifications given by Smisa in their annual report that the vote they put to the members Re: £50k for the astroturf is now null & void as they intend to fund it in a completely different way to that, they set out in the vote info..!

what an absolute clusterf**k that was wholly avoidable..? Looks like either the FCA have called it in, or Smisa have realised its imminent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

You’re the one making it about being lied to. I think the vast majority are happy with the situation we find ourselves in an tolerate decisions like the ticket one that benefit our team on the park. No one is saying it’s not a tough call  

We get it you hate GLS, you hate St Mirren, you hate SMISA. No one cares, things are going along nicely, let it go.  

Is it ok for the chairman to lie to the support? Simple enough question, do you need me to paste his broken promises on here too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Is it ok for the chairman to lie to the support? Simple enough question, do you need me to paste his broken promises on here too?

Will the chairman never make a mistake in his life? And does the good he's brought massively outweigh the bad? Some more simple questions. 

Could he have done better this time, spoke more with fans, did a survey? Yeah possibly. Would the outcome be the same? More than likely. 

Should fans hold it against him and slaughter him through online forums? Some will think so :rolleyes:

My days LPM, do you remember the last time you said something positive about the team you 'support' :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Have other posters realised with the information, thinking, long winded, contorted justifications given by Smisa in their annual report that the vote they put to the members Re: £50k for the astroturf is now null & void as they intend to fund it in a completely different way to that, they set out in the vote info..!

what an absolute clusterf**k that was wholly avoidable..? Looks like either the FCA have called it in, or Smisa have realised its imminent?

Or it looks like nothing you've said is true? :rolleyes:

Mr Moan ladies and gentlemen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Will the chairman never make a mistake in his life? And does the good he's brought massively outweigh the bad? Some more simple questions. 

Could he have done better this time, spoke more with fans, did a survey? Yeah possibly. Would the outcome be the same? More than likely. 

Should fans hold it against him and slaughter him through online forums? Some will think so :rolleyes:

My days LPM, do you remember the last time you said something positive about the team you 'support' :lol:

So you are happy for the chairman to lie to the other major shareholders in the company, and the wider support. Says everything about your motivations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being realistic,  I can't envisage a position where everyone would agree with every decision made by a board (that includes board members themselves as well).  What I can envisage and welcome is a place,  forum if you like, where people put forward suggestions backed by argument showing expected up and downsides leading to outcomes.  This requires early highlighting and discussion and improved communications and decision-making in my experience.  What we seem to have at present is reactive rather than anticipatory leadership and management but signs are that this will improve.  We concentrate our comments on the playing and stadium side of things.  Perhaps more resources are needed in the marketing and adminside of the club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

God can you imagine being in a car with him all the way up from the South Coast? Constantly nipping your ear about how bad GLS is for moving our club to fan ownership. 

Oh sorry I’m on a phone, sometimes the autocorrect works in funny ways (for example oh turning to Mph for some reason) and my fat fingers dont always type what I want. 

3 things

He doesn't live on the south coast but his adult family do.  But I suppose that was an ideal opportunity to ramp up the agenda a little further.

 GLS moved the majority shareholding to himself, not the fans.  it is for SMISA to deliver an element of "fan ownership".   Which will actually be a majority shareholding and not full ownership-if and/or when it happens.  in actual fact, in many senses, the club has been owned by the fans for a long long time.

Secondly, cant you take a joke? You certainly roll your sleeves up when trying to get a laugh at other's expense but got awfy defensive when a really funny typo popped up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

So you are happy for the chairman to lie to the other major shareholders in the company, and the wider support. Says everything about your motivations.

Clearly you don't have the capacity to reason my comment beyond a negative outlook. Hope I never grow to be so bitter about SMFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

3 things

He doesn't live on the south coast but his adult family do.  But I suppose that was an ideal opportunity to ramp up the agenda a little further.

 GLS moved the majority shareholding to himself, not the fans.  it is for SMISA to deliver an element of "fan ownership".   Which will actually be a majority shareholding and not full ownership-if and/or when it happens.  in actual fact, in many senses, the club has been owned by the fans for a long long time.

Secondly, cant you take a joke? You certainly roll your sleeves up when trying to get a laugh at other's expense but got awfy defensive when a really funny typo popped up.

So GLS shouldn't be thanked for anything he's done in stumping up a large value of money to help get to majority fan ownership? This a LPM second account? :lol:

I can take it as a joke, I don't think my response was overlay defensive. A wee bit of banter about auto-correct lost on you? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So GLS shouldn't be thanked for anything he's done in stumping up a large value of money to help get to majority fan ownership? This a LPM second account? :lol:

I can take it as a joke, I don't think my response was overlay defensive. A wee bit of banter about auto-correct lost on you? 

He should be thanked for any and all success he delivers

He should be paid for his shares should he deign to sell them to SMISA at some point

You just got defensive about your defensiveness.  Now that is both inventive AND funny.

Step away from the spade!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

He should be thanked for any and all success he delivers

He should be paid for his shares should he deign to sell them to SMISA at some point

You just got defensive about your defensiveness.  Now that is both inventive AND funny.

Step away from the spade!

I'd say more defensive about sheer negativity. Do you ever remember him posting something of a positive nature... Like even once? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So to summarise the positions 

Bazil85: If we chuck the kids out of the family stand we will reach top six have 4 games at home against the OF. They will have both stands, which will all sell out with full price tickets, they will all buy a pie and a coke and park their cars in the car park, TV will take all the games and despite not being required to will pay us extra, the VAT man decides he doesn’t want his cut and we can all celebrate European football next season. 

Mine: Won’t somebody think of the children!

ok I may have exaggerated Bazil85 position slightly but there is little point in using reason anymore. 

Hopefully we can move forward and the next bright idea coming out of the Boardroom is a good one that takes a long term view that we can all get behind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I'd say more defensive about sheer negativity. Do you ever remember him posting something of a positive nature... Like even once? :lol:

Many times, on player performance and on the matchday thread.

Jeez, you really have it bad, you could just stop.  I think it might be good for you.  You are just so... well, personal about the whole thing. 

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...
×
×
  • Create New...