Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
HSS

David Nicol To Stand Down..........

Recommended Posts


22 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Smisa isnt his only option!

if they cant fulfill their obligations when they come due he can sell to whoever he wants.

OK agree but lets say it is the preferred option and if it came to it I wonder if he would sell.

 

Share this post


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

It is written into his agreement with Smisa. I suppose if the members wanted to they could challenge it as a shareholder with over 25%.it would be messy.

It won't happen so so it won't get messy. 

29 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Smisa isnt his only option!

if they cant fulfill their obligations when they come due he can sell to whoever he wants.

They will be able to meet their obligation though, it's a non-issue

Just saying :rolleyes:

Share this post


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

It is written into his agreement with Smisa. I suppose if the members wanted to they could challenge it as a shareholder with over 25%.it would be messy.

SMiSA also has a veto built into the contract as has GS buts not on the election of an individual  board member its about who is chairman of each business.

It's time members had full information  at their grasp before elections and AGM s if they are to run the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

SMiSA also has a veto built into the contract as has GS buts not on the election of an individual  board member its about who is chairman of each business.

It's time members had full information  at their grasp before elections and AGM s if they are to run the club.

What information don’t we have that we require at this time? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

SMiSA also has a veto built into the contract as has GS buts not on the election of an individual  board member its about who is chairman of each business.

It's time members had full information  at their grasp before elections and AGM s if they are to run the club.

The influence Scott has over Smisa is almost dictatorial. You will find interviews where he states that "its good prospective smisa club board candidates have to spend time on the Smisa committee before being elected"

basically that is saying the next smisa club board rep is already picked, and is currently on the smisa board. Regardless of the fact much more better, equipped, knowledgeable, connected and business savvy potential candidates are not on the Smisa committee.

what this does, and its wholly intentional is put people, not on the Smisa committee off ever considering standing to be the fans board rep. And that is the biggest carve up in this whole sorry tale. Anyone electing  to put themselves forward now, who isnt on tne Smisa committee will be taking on the same odds as they would if they decided to go toe to toe with Putin in the Russian election.

 

Share this post


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

The influence Scott has over Smisa is almost dictatorial. You will find interviews where he states that "its good prospective smisa club board candidates have to spend time on the Smisa committee before being elected"

basically that is saying the next smisa club board rep is already picked, and is currently on the smisa board. Regardless of the fact much more better, equipped, knowledgeable, connected and business savvy potential candidates are not on the Smisa committee.

what this does, and its wholly intentional is put people, not on the Smisa committee off ever considering standing to be the fans board rep. And that is the biggest carve up in this whole sorry tale. Anyone electing  to put themselves forward now, who isnt on tne Smisa committee will be taking on the same odds as they would if they decided to go toe to toe with Putin in the Russian election.

 

It's not uncommon, in fact it's very regular that serving directors have to spend times on committees and in set roles before taking up positions in a company. SMFC are a business and is run as such. To call it dictatorial is pathetic. In saying that, we are weeks away from the election, can you name someone GLS has given an unfair advantage to? Your whole argument weighs on that. I can't even name one person wanting to stand. 

He specifically notes desired qualities when talking about the nomination period. Not going to mention that? 

The election process is one member one vote. Anyone who is a SMISA member can run and put together a campaign, there is zero evidence of GLS or anyone else hampering a campaign for anyone in the previous election and the same goes this time. Your negativity is completely unfounded. 

You are one of the worst kinds of supporters that see it as SMFC Vs SMISA. They are both one and the same, with a common goal. Once you appreciate that, you'll see how daft comparing a democratic election of paying members is to a dictatorship or Putin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 8:40 AM, bazil85 said:

I think you might be talking about Non Executive Directors (NED) 

Directors can be employees of the company and be salaried. Not saying it is the case at the club but they can be. Like I say, we know GLS and DN do not take an income from the club and no one else takes profits currently. I imagine the £40k is very likely the way they do TF salary. It's been well commented on and never denied which it usually would be. 

No I'm not. it relates to all board appointed directors whatever their role. whether Executive or Non executive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Radar said:

No I'm not. it relates to all board appointed directors whatever their role. whether Executive or Non executive.

A NED is an independent member of the board that can't hold any other position within the company to avoid conflict of interest. They can be remunerated  for their time but not draw a salary. A director on the BOD can hold a salary paying role (for example TF position at the club) 

This is what has led to many believing the £40k reflects TF wage. 

Share this post


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

The influence Scott has over Smisa is almost dictatorial. You will find interviews where he states that "its good prospective smisa club board candidates have to spend time on the Smisa committee before being elected"

basically that is saying the next smisa club board rep is already picked, and is currently on the smisa board. Regardless of the fact much more better, equipped, knowledgeable, connected and business savvy potential candidates are not on the Smisa committee.

what this does, and its wholly intentional is put people, not on the Smisa committee off ever considering standing to be the fans board rep. And that is the biggest carve up in this whole sorry tale. Anyone electing  to put themselves forward now, who isnt on tne Smisa committee will be taking on the same odds as they would if they decided to go toe to toe with Putin in the Russian election.

 

I  have never intended sitting on the committee of either the fans council or Smisa due to constant bickering and backbiting by people who claim to have the best interests of the club at heart.I often despair listening to members of both belittling each other and even worse the splits in their own camps.The position of board member puts you up there to be shot at and i applaud anyone who takes this position as they will be branded Gordons puppet from the outset.I do not think for a minute that the position can or will be Gordons decision overall but i,m sure he would not allow the appointment any old muppet.Thats why i,m not running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, northendsaint said:

I  have never intended sitting on the committee of either the fans council or Smisa due to constant bickering and backbiting by people who claim to have the best interests of the club at heart.I often despair listening to members of both belittling each other and even worse the splits in their own camps.The position of board member puts you up there to be shot at and i applaud anyone who takes this position as they will be branded Gordons puppet from the outset.I do not think for a minute that the position can or will be Gordons decision overall but i,m sure he would not allow the appointment any old muppet.Thats why i,m not running.

Hopefully at least one guy will!

IMG_1727.GIF

Share this post


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

I  have never intended sitting on the committee of either the fans council or Smisa due to constant bickering and backbiting by people who claim to have the best interests of the club at heart.I often despair listening to members of both belittling each other and even worse the splits in their own camps.The position of board member puts you up there to be shot at and i applaud anyone who takes this position as they will be branded Gordons puppet from the outset.I do not think for a minute that the position can or will be Gordons decision overall but i,m sure he would not allow the appointment any old muppet.Thats why i,m not running.

I'm not a member of SMISA for much the same reasons as you don't want to put your name forward for election.  It is what it is though and barring some currently unforeseen events then SMISA will assume ownership.  As a non member I don't expect to be listened to but would like to see greater moves towards closer working to develop the infrastructure and further develop the community use of the stadium and it's grounds.  A director with expertise in  these areas would perhaps be worth backing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Pityme said:

Only one poor soul willing to put their head above the parapet. David Riley finished way behind The chairmans choice last time. Caveat to this is the line highlighted! Were there other potential candidates that smisa/club ruled out???

Dear SMISA member

As you know, SMISA is currently electing our next representative on the St Mirren board – we are writing to you with the latest news on that, as well as a couple of other updates.

SMISA committee member David Nicol has done this role since 2016 but his two-year term as the SMISA representative is coming to an end.

This role is of crucial importance for St Mirren and SMISA – the successful candidate will be the key link between the club and the trust, while representing SMISA and the wider fanbase in major boardroom decisions.

At the same time, helping ensure a successful St Mirren is fundamental to what we do – so it is imperative we as a membership elect someone capable of working with the rest of the board to help take the club forward.

Last month we invited any members interested in the role to come forward. The deadline has now passed and we only received one eligible application, from David Riley.

David ran in the last election, and while he lost out to David Nicol at that time, he has stayed involved with SMISA over the past two years and has assisted the committee in our work.

We are required to hold a confirmation ballot for members to approve David’s election. If a majority do so, he will be elected. If not, the rules state a member of the SMISA committee will fill the role temporarily until such time as a fresh election can be arranged.

On our website, we have printed David’s 500-word election statement in which he details why he wants the job and believes he is qualified for it. There is also a short video where you can hear from David.

Your link to vote via secure online ballot will follow in a separate email but before you do so we recommend you read David’s statement and other election information on our website via this link.

 

Share this post


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

Only one poor soul willing to put their head above the parapet. David Riley finished way behind The chairmans choice last time.

Dear SMISA member

As you know, SMISA is currently electing our next representative on the St Mirren board – we are writing to you with the latest news on that, as well as a couple of other updates.

SMISA committee member David Nicol has done this role since 2016 but his two-year term as the SMISA representative is coming to an end.

This role is of crucial importance for St Mirren and SMISA – the successful candidate will be the key link between the club and the trust, while representing SMISA and the wider fanbase in major boardroom decisions.

At the same time, helping ensure a successful St Mirren is fundamental to what we do – so it is imperative we as a membership elect someone capable of working with the rest of the board to help take the club forward.

Last month we invited any members interested in the role to come forward. The deadline has now passed and we only received one eligible application, from David Riley.

David ran in the last election, and while he lost out to David Nicol at that time, he has stayed involved with SMISA over the past two years and has assisted the committee in our work.

We are required to hold a confirmation ballot for members to approve David’s election. If a majority do so, he will be elected. If not, the rules state a member of the SMISA committee will fill the role temporarily until such time as a fresh election can be arranged.

On our website, we have printed David’s 500-word election statement in which he details why he wants the job and believes he is qualified for it. There is also a short video where you can hear from David.

Your link to vote via secure online ballot will follow in a separate email but before you do so we recommend you read David’s statement and other election information on our website via this link.

I'm not a member but don't quite understand what you are getting at. If you are a member then it seems that you were free to put your name forward but didn't.

The rules seem to be clear:

"We are required to hold a confirmation ballot for members to approve David’s election. If a majority do so, he will be elected. If not, the rules state a member of the SMISA committee will fill the role temporarily until such time as a fresh election can be arranged."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, St.Ricky said:

I'm not a member but don't quite understand what you are getting at. If you are a member then it seems that you were free to put your name forward but didn't.

The rules seem to be clear:

"We are required to hold a confirmation ballot for members to approve David’s election. If a majority do so, he will be elected. If not, the rules state a member of the SMISA committee will fill the role temporarily until such time as a fresh election can be arranged."

That's not a rule I remember from the constitution. May be an agreed by a few, seen by a few rule. "We are required..." is f**king poor language, like a band putting out a contractually required album. David is a more than worthy candidate and will do a great job. He did lose last time, but then Gordon was interviewed on BBC Alba and gave David Nicol his public backing. 

Edited by TsuMirren

Share this post


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

That's not a rule I remember from the consituation. May be an agreed by a few, seen by a few rule. "We are required..." is f**king poor language, like a band putting out a contractually required album. David is a more than worthy candidate and will do a great job. He did lose last time, but then Gordon was interviewed on BBC Alba and gave David Nicol his public backing. 

That's why I said Seem. 

 

Share this post


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

 

Was wondering how you could make this negative. 

- can’t say it’s favouritsim from GLS.

- can’t say they are promoting or hindering a single candidate. 

- cant claim the individual is simply a puppet giving he ran last time and lost. 

In a now familiar LPM claw clutch ‘what if there were other candidates that should have been put up?!’ 

Another clear contradiction from a person that only last week was putting process above vulnerable members of our community.

If they didn’t meet the detailed eligibility as per our process, surely they should be ruled out? Are you actually suggesting we change our process for this but not to support elderly members of our community in need!?

Amazing how you so openly change your viewpoint to continue the futile anti-SMISA campaign :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Was wondering how you could make this negative. 

- can’t say it’s favouritsim from GLS.

- can’t say they are promoting or hindering a single candidate. 

- cant claim the individual is simply a puppet giving he ran last time and lost. 

In a now familiar LPM claw clutch ‘what if there were other candidates that should have been put up?!’ 

Another clear contradiction from a person that only last week was putting process above vulnerable members of our community.

If they didn’t meet the detailed eligibility as per our process, surely they should be ruled out? Are you actually suggesting we change our process for this but not to support elderly members of our community in need!?

Amazing how you so openly change your viewpoint to continue the futile anti-SMISA campaign :rolleyes:

Yawn...

the valid question given the membership are being given no option, no choice is were there any others that applied, and if so, on what grounds were they deemed unacceptable?

I am sure the majority of Smisa members would want to know if there is/was anyone else, they! As the membership may want to consider to be their representative on the board.

you dont like this democracy thing do you? Scweaming fir a new vot because you didnt like the last one, and wanting to keep,it hushed if smisa are keeping info on potential candidates from the membership.

still i suppose it very possible no one else wanted anything to do with them, save David R, hence the growing apathy towards the whole set up, and its warped decision making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yawn...
the valid question given the membership are being given no option, no choice is were there any others that applied, and if so, on what grounds were they deemed unacceptable?
I am sure the majority of Smisa members would want to know if there is/was anyone else, they! As the membership may want to consider to be their representative on the board.
you dont like this democracy thing do you? Scweaming fir a new vot because you didnt like the last one, and wanting to keep,it hushed if smisa are keeping info on potential candidates from the membership.
still i suppose it very possible no one else wanted anything to do with them, save David R, hence the growing apathy towards the whole set up, and its warped decision making.

Looks like he was the only one who gained enough backing of 10 seconds or proposers.

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...