Jump to content

div

Accounts to the Year Ended May 2018

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Isn't Tony a liability? 

No denying his credibility as a former player, although never nothing much else outside the club, but, what else does he bring for the cash we pay him? 

Yes and No, Selling our beloved club. and his book is a good wee number, His opptimism and his salary are entwined in the greed mentality of individuals who would sell their grany for for a bag of snow, Least we forget Gls who was left with share's worth more than a Ten bob note till SMISA stepped in ! I bought into BTB because I believed that it was the way to go, Not to lne the pockets of asstute buisness men and a former player.

12239656_1019464488144103_3932199953080184652_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Isn't Tony a liability? 

No denying his credibility as a former player, although never nothing much else outside the club, but, what else does he bring for the cash we pay him? 

I have no idea if Tony Fitzpatrick is a liability or not.

I would like to think that part of the thinking of having him as CEO is he has been a player with a long association with the club, a manager of the club, and involved in youth football as well, and his experience in all these areas can be useful for the board and I think he is the type of character who would make time to have a friendly word or be a listening ear with the manager, backroom team, players, academy players.

I think the notion that he is a liability seems to stem from his interviews with the press and the way they are spun. My own opinion is that it is refreshing to have someone being as positive and dreaming big. One reason why he could be deployed to do interviews and make some headlines is to buy some time and take attention away from the manager and players when things aren't going well - he's tended to give interviews when managers have been nearing the end of their time with us, to try and rally the fans and club together, or throw a few crazy quotes to the press while we are recruiting a new manager. For what it's worth I don't think Robbie Neilson pulled out the running because of Tony's positivity... it's more likely to have been down to budget for players, his own salary and the timing coinciding with him still being paid off (on a bigger pay packet than what we are offering).

He also seems to be getting it in the neck for Stubbs being appointed - that was a board decision rather than his alone.

Ian Maxwell did well as CEO at Partick Thistle before moving to the SFA in the same role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Feegie Saint said:

Yes and No, Selling our beloved club. and his book is a good wee number, His opptimism and his salary are entwined in the greed mentality of individuals who would sell their grany for for a bag of snow, Least we forget Gls who was left with share's worth more than a Ten bob note till SMISA stepped in ! I bought into BTB because I believed that it was the way to go, Not to lne the pockets of asstute buisness men and a former player.

12239656_1019464488144103_3932199953080184652_n.jpg

Are we really lining the pocket of a former player if said former players is working round the clock for the club throughout the week?

No one really complained about Tony Fitzpatrick over the summer when he got 11 transfer deals over the line, followed by a few others after the window. It wasn't his responsibility to select the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:

Are we really lining the pocket of a former player if said former players is working round the clock for the club throughout the week?

No one really complained about Tony Fitzpatrick over the summer when he got 11 transfer deals over the line, followed by a few others after the window. It wasn't his responsibility to select the players.

Really? "Working round the clock"...................:lol:

It comes across from you that he has no responsibility at all.

Some gig that.

Edited by faraway saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Feegie Saint said:

Yes and No, Selling our beloved club. and his book is a good wee number, His opptimism and his salary are entwined in the greed mentality of individuals who would sell their grany for for a bag of snow, Least we forget Gls who was left with share's worth more than a Ten bob note till SMISA stepped in ! I bought into BTB because I believed that it was the way to go, Not to lne the pockets of asstute buisness men and a former player.

12239656_1019464488144103_3932199953080184652_n.jpg

You realise GLS isn't taking a penny profit in the BTB deal and is independently wealthy to the point where he doesn't need to generate any money from the deal? Everything about BTB is not for profit and no ones pockets are being lined. 

The only ones that made money off the deal are the former board and given their service to our club, the fact they saved us from the wall with their own money, who could blame them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the big issue that some are having a moan about now, in this set of accounts where we turned over £2.8 million, made an increased profit despite investing heavily in the playing squad, and have just banked the best part of a million quid via a sell on fee, is that we are paying a director/directors £35k per annum?

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 8:09 AM, bazil85 said:

Income is up, profits are up, the outgoings have went up accordingly.  The accounts for next year will include substantial increases in revenue streams from SP football and a tidy wee sum from the McGinn transfer. 

oh Hello :P :lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no idea if Tony Fitzpatrick is a liability or not.
I would like to think that part of the thinking of having him as CEO is he has been a player with a long association with the club, a manager of the club, and involved in youth football as well, and his experience in all these areas can be useful for the board and I think he is the type of character who would make time to have a friendly word or be a listening ear with the manager, backroom team, players, academy players.
I think the notion that he is a liability seems to stem from his interviews with the press and the way they are spun. My own opinion is that it is refreshing to have someone being as positive and dreaming big. One reason why he could be deployed to do interviews and make some headlines is to buy some time and take attention away from the manager and players when things aren't going well - he's tended to give interviews when managers have been nearing the end of their time with us, to try and rally the fans and club together, or throw a few crazy quotes to the press while we are recruiting a new manager. For what it's worth I don't think Robbie Neilson pulled out the running because of Tony's positivity... it's more likely to have been down to budget for players, his own salary and the timing coinciding with him still being paid off (on a bigger pay packet than what we are offering).
He also seems to be getting it in the neck for Stubbs being appointed - that was a board decision rather than his alone.
Ian Maxwell did well as CEO at Partick Thistle before moving to the SFA in the same role.
I don't know if he's a liability either. He's always a nice guy though.

For what it's worth, Brian Caldwell had none of the attributes that you give Tony in the 2nd paragraph of your post

Share this post


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

And what about Bank of Smisa propping them up to the tune of £150k so far? and counting.

maybe you arent bothered they just spend all unbudgeted income, and we are left with nothing left to show for it, but others believe that going diwn that route will lead to the club failing sooner, rather than later.

FYI, smfc in specific and football clubs in general in Scotland cant borrow a cent from banks. Banks will not even consider a loan as they dont want the fan fury when the administrators step in to recover their debt.

As I said no need for bank borrowing as SMISA are a supporters group and not a commercial bank ! What bit don't you get, nothing has changed and the club are running to the same plan (and succeeding to meet it's aims financially) as it has done for some considerable time.  There is nothing sensational or new in these accounts it's "as you were" so to speak. Whether anyone thinks it's the correct business plan is a different matter but the club are 100% achieving their intended financial goals and these accounts confirm that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Seriously?

That is a ridiculously small salary for an entire board of directors to take for running a multi million pound business.

I cant believe this is even being raised.

 

It’s half of the total amount of profit we made so it’s a big sum! 

Gilmour and Co didn’t take any money out they were all putting there own money in. 

Every single board member has a full time job bar Gordon Scott as per his last thing saying he wasn’t making any money. 

 

Why should they be taking 35k after having there cars paid for, free tickets to games, fancy dinners and events all for free? 

Its okay though any shortfall can just ask SMISA 

Share this post


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

So the big issue that some are having a moan about now, in this set of accounts where we turned over £2.8 million, made an increased profit despite investing heavily in the playing squad, and have just banked the best part of a million quid via a sell on fee, is that we are paying a director/directors £35k per annum?

:blink:

No, the big issue is we are running on an unsustainable business model. Question has been raised many times above; what happens the season we don't sell someone?

35k is going to be a drop in the ocean of shit we would be in at that point.

I'd be delighted for someone from the club to explain why this is nothing to worry about, and I'll stop worrying about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Suggestion said:

It’s half of the total amount of profit we made so it’s a big sum! 

Gilmour and Co didn’t take any money out they were all putting there own money in. 

Every single board member has a full time job bar Gordon Scott as per his last thing saying he wasn’t making any money. 

 

Why should they be taking 35k after having there cars paid for, free tickets to games, fancy dinners and events all for free? 

Its okay though any shortfall can just ask SMISA 

One of the board members full time jobs is working for the club. Where that salary is placed in the accounts will very much be led by the accountants and for very specific reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Really? "Working round the clock"...................:lol:

It comes across from you that he has no responsibility at all.

Some gig that.

He took on Brian Caldwell's job and before he left SMFC Caldwell did a video of a typical working day as CEO - lots of background jobs before matchdays which had him working long hours... and then transfer windows are busier as well between dealing with players, agents, other clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As SMiSA have 34% of shares they can access the accounts.

They should do so as they will be running the club very soon.

They can do a forensic audit,ie look at the detail of looking where every penny going out of the club goes,why,and where.

Your average accountant /auditer only  looks at the order/delivery line/invoice, not that the club is buying 100light bulbs for £5 from a directors wife's company!Not that I believe that kind if detail.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As SMiSA have 34% of shares they can access the accounts.
They should do so as they will be running the club very soon.
They can do a forensic audit,ie look at the detail of looking where every penny going out of the club goes,why,and where.
Your average accountant /auditer only  looks at the order/delivery line/invoice, not that the club is buying 100light bulbs for £5 from a directors wife's company!Not that I believe that kind if detail.
 
100 bulbs for a fiver, nothing wrong if the directors wife is giving that sort of service.

Share this post


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

No, the big issue is we are running on an unsustainable business model. Question has been raised many times above; what happens the season we don't sell someone?

35k is going to be a drop in the ocean of shit we would be in at that point.

I'd be delighted for someone from the club to explain why this is nothing to worry about, and I'll stop worrying about it.

The season we don't sell someone, we have less to spend. Result - we spend less money. Simple. 

I'd understand your panic if we were in huge debt, or had players on 5 year contracts without any get out clauses, but since that's not the case I'm not concerned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

As I said no need for bank borrowing as SMISA are a supporters group and not a commercial bank ! What bit don't you get, nothing has changed and the club are running to the same plan (and succeeding to meet it's aims financially) as it has done for some considerable time.  There is nothing sensational or new in these accounts it's "as you were" so to speak. Whether anyone thinks it's the correct business plan is a different matter but the club are 100% achieving their intended financial goals and these accounts confirm that.

Why do you insist on praising the club for not getting something (a bank loan) that no bank would even consider a request for from a scottish football club? Can you name one scottish football club with a current bank loan? Or even an overdraft facility?

and if you think blowing all the transfer money to overpower the likes of Brechin and Falkirk (sometimes) is "as you were", then pray tell where the club are going to get the funds to be "as you were" next season, or the season after that?

this board are ransacking any additional funds and smisa members ringfenced funds at an eye watering rate, whilst helping themselves to an extra 20% increase in "Expense Claims" of £35k... ffs what expenses are individual board members racking up to justify that?

it will all end in tears, in football it always does. You have to get more, the more you spend, and if the team aren't delivering then the downward cycle accelerates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WeeBud said:

One of the board members full time jobs is working for the club. Where that salary is placed in the accounts will very much be led by the accountants and for very specific reasons.

Wrong!

two of the board members full time jobs are working for the club. And in the accounts it clearly states the £35k is Directors Expenses, not anyone's wages. Its a feckin gravy (or asst sliders)  train!

Share this post


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

Wrong!

two of the board members full time jobs are working for the club. And in the accounts it clearly states the £35k is Directors Expenses, not anyone's wages. Its a feckin gravy (or asst sliders)  train!

Pray tell (just before you wank yourself into a total frenzy), where did "I" mention anything different??

Share this post


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

It’s half of the total amount of profit we made so it’s a big sum! 

Gilmour and Co didn’t take any money out they were all putting there own money in. 

Every single board member has a full time job bar Gordon Scott as per his last thing saying he wasn’t making any money. 

 

Why should they be taking 35k after having there cars paid for, free tickets to games, fancy dinners and events all for free? 

Its okay though any shortfall can just ask SMISA 

You are attempting to use a relative measure to prove that an absolute measure is too high. :lol:

There is an easier way to win this argument Josh.

Go and find another competent board of directors who would do that job for less money or for free and report back to us and we'll take it from there.

We have only made £77k of profit because we have substantial outgoings which we would not have been able to support without having sold a couple of players.

£35k is nothing in comparison.

Ccomplaining about a £35k expense when we would have lost £600k without selling two players is not the action of someone who understands finance.

Of course we both know why you are attempting to attack the board over this.

Behave yourself.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


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

Why do you insist on praising the club for not getting something (a bank loan) that no bank would even consider a request for from a scottish football club? Can you name one scottish football club with a current bank loan? Or even an overdraft facility?

and if you think blowing all the transfer money to overpower the likes of Brechin and Falkirk (sometimes) is "as you were", then pray tell where the club are going to get the funds to be "as you were" next season, or the season after that?

this board are ransacking any additional funds and smisa members ringfenced funds at an eye watering rate, whilst helping themselves to an extra 20% increase in "Expense Claims" of £35k... ffs what expenses are individual board members racking up to justify that?

it will all end in tears, in football it always does. You have to get more, the more you spend, and if the team aren't delivering then the downward cycle accelerates.

Jesus Christ, moaning about £35k a year for the full BOD of a football clubs expenses. If only that was a new low for you but we know you have sunk much lower. 

Imagine someone praising a club that's turned a healthy profit, a profit up on the previous years profit, how dare he! 

Your ultimate fantasy of St Mirren getting into financial difficulty remains in your head, no luck. 

Share this post


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

Here's a clue, its the difference between one.... and two....

btw? That activity you mention, is that the state you achieve, or aspire to personally?

Just so I know we are on the same page LPM, who are the two board members whose "full-time" jobs are with St Mirren??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Jesus Christ, moaning about £35k a year for the full BOD of a football clubs expenses. If only that was a new low for you but we know you have sunk much lower. 

Imagine someone praising a club that's turned a healthy profit, a profit up on the previous years profit, how dare he! 

Your ultimate fantasy of St Mirren getting into financial difficulty remains in your head, no luck. 

Exactly.

I personally wouldnt touch a job like that for £35k for myself never mind sharing it with the rest of the directors.

There is a very good reason why company directors typically earn 6 and 7 figures per year.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...