Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
waldorf34

SMISA Director,free tickets,free booze,free food

Recommended Posts

The Smisa designated Director is there to promote Smisa,and not to add to his company's or his own CV. It should be transparent  then that the members of Smisa know who the Director invites as his guest to the Boardroom for freebies,and why were chosen.

David Nicol (Now full Board member,and no longer Director of Smisa) and David Riley I am sure will absolutely be happy to put a list of those invited by them and the reasons for doing so.

All actions by Directors of Smisa should be transparent  and a benefit to it's members.

Edited by waldorf34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

The Smisa designated Director is there to promote Smisa,and not to add to his company's or his own CV. It should be transparent  then that the members of Smisa know who the Director invites as his guest to the Boardroom for freebies,and why were chosen.

David Nicol (Now full Board member,and no longer Director of Smisa) and David Riley I am sure will absolutely be happy to put a list of those invited by them and the reasons for doing so.

All actions by Directors of Smisa should be transparent  and a benefit to it's members.

Any directors sitting on any board in the world will have some perks. they'll likely get fed, they'll have business meetings with stakeholders, working lunches, dinners, etc. It is part of business. In the same way as I wouldn't expect the directors on Richard Branson's companies various boards to declare who they shared a cheeseboard with over lunch last Tuesday, there is no requirement of the same for any SMFC directors. SMISA elect or otherwise. What difference would it make to any of our life? What benefit? 

As for him promoting his own company (CV is irrelevant, he's more than welcome to put on his CV what he's doing) of course he shouldn't be doing that at the expense of his role. It is a matter of trust but there will also be controls in place to mitigate against this (not less bribery regulatory compliance, they would have to declare/ refuse certain offers of gifts and can't make certain offers themselves). Us finding out who he's invited to the directors lounge for a beer will not help in anyway to know if he's breached that trust. 

Edited by bazil85

Share this post


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

The Smisa designated Director is there to promote Smisa,and not to add to his company's or his own CV. It should be transparent  then that the members of Smisa know who the Director invites as his guest to the Boardroom for freebies,and why were chosen.

David Nicol (Now full Board member,and no longer Director of Smisa) and David Riley I am sure will absolutely be happy to put a list of those invited by them and the reasons for doing so.

All actions by Directors of Smisa should be transparent  and a benefit to it's members.

Have to ask, whats behind your statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If the original poster wants the Smisa director to spend all of  his/her time filling out paperwork justifying whom he has invited to where, what was consumed and by whom and of course why and lets not miss out exactly when then the original poster is right on with his/her observations.

 

Most of us would recognise though that such unimportant issues do not merit discussion and the relevant person should be free to carry out the duties bestowed upon them with the confidence and freedom afforded by the bestowing membership.  That said Smisa are entirely evil and maybe if they spent every hour of every waking minute filling out explanation forms for everything then they would have less time to carry out the evil deeds that they will inevitably enact.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:
8 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

The Smisa designated Director is there to promote Smisa,and not to add to his company's or his own CV. It should be transparent  then that the members of Smisa know who the Director invites as his guest to the Boardroom for freebies,and why were chosen.

David Nicol (Now full Board member,and no longer Director of Smisa) and David Riley I am sure will absolutely be happy to put a list of those invited by them and the reasons for doing so.

All actions by Directors of Smisa should be transparent  and a benefit to it's members.

Have to ask, whats behind your statement?

Might it be Gelussy?  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not interested in agendas. However I think it would be a great idea to have one smisa member invited to a match day. Let's members get a better understanding of what goes on after all it's the members who are bringing the club into fan ownership. Ballot members. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Not interested in agendas. However I think it would be a great idea to have one smisa member invited to a match day. Let's members get a better understanding of what goes on after all it's the members who are bringing the club into fan ownership. Ballot members. 

Was that not meant to be the SMiSA plan?Think SPS may have been invited to a game but haven't heard of anybuddie else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Not interested in agendas. However I think it would be a great idea to have one smisa member invited to a match day. Let's members get a better understanding of what goes on after all it's the members who are bringing the club into fan ownership. Ballot members. 

 

26 minutes ago, HSS said:

Was that not meant to be the SMiSA plan?Think SPS may have been invited to a game but haven't heard of anybuddie else.

Theres no chance any 'unapproved' members get invited into the inner sanctum. With the Fans Council (who actuslly opposed BtB) now running Smisa Scott has got what he wanted all along, complete control, and the ability to rifle Smisa's coffers unopposed. 

It will, as it always does, inevitably end in tears, and cries of "if only we knew sooner" or "who knew"? The thing is we ALL knew and did little or nothing to set things straight. We will get what we deserve for abdicating our responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal benefit  ,what the FCA says the Director  of a trust is NOT allowed

.gifts and hospitality, including hospitality  to connected persons ,ie spouse,business partner,siblings ,etc

. enhancing the reputation of a person or organisation (including an individual  who because of their work ,benefits from having their profile raised.

It is therefore in the Trusts interest that a register is kept of all gifts and hospitality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 10:12 AM, HSS said:

Was that not meant to be the SMiSA plan?Think SPS may have been invited to a game but haven't heard of anybuddie else.

Think a couple of the BTB London Saints were also invited.  Dunno if they accepted tho I do know they have been to hospitality at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personal benefit  ,what the FCA says the Director  of a trust is NOT allowed
.gifts and hospitality, including hospitality  to connected persons ,ie spouse,business partner,siblings ,etc
. enhancing the reputation of a person or organisation (including an individual  who because of their work ,benefits from having their profile raised.
It is therefore in the Trusts interest that a register is kept of all gifts and hospitality. 
So it's legal if a Director of St Mirren isn't a Director of SMISA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 11:07 AM, waldorf34 said:

The Smisa designated Director is there to promote Smisa,and not to add to his company's or his own CV. It should be transparent  then that the members of Smisa know who the Director invites as his guest to the Boardroom for freebies,and why were chosen.

David Nicol (Now full Board member,and no longer Director of Smisa) and David Riley I am sure will absolutely be happy to put a list of those invited by them and the reasons for doing so.

All actions by Directors of Smisa should be transparent  and a benefit to it's members.

This was always one of my worries about the SMiSA takeover and 10000hours before - the appropriation of the goodwill that rightly belongs to the club, although I suppose it is little different to what goes on in the traditional set-up. Thanks waldorf34 for letting me know I'm not in a minority of one! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ffs, someone has their knickers in a twist about nothing.

 

Football directors always invite guests into the boardroom / directors box for games.

 

Don't St. Mirren also have a separate directors lounge where I believe St. Mirren fans / smisa members are invited?

 

AFAIK, the folk on the guest list for freebies to SMP will include managers coaches of our rivals, out of work managers and coaches, ex players some of whom may be agents or pundits and whoever the opposition board invite with them. This will be no different to any other club.

 

What is the insinuation here - Dave(s) Nicol and Riley are gaining professionally or personally by inviting people to the shitfest of a season that we are having?

 

Do you really think its fair to publically name individuals who may or may not have a connection to smisa/St. Mirren just because they got a free wine/soup/pie/coffee/cake etc? What if publically naming them affects their private or professionally lives?

You would also need their permission first BTW

Oh, and lastly surely you only declare gifts received not invites handed out

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 10:43 AM, Lord Pityme said:

 

Theres no chance any 'unapproved' members get invited into the inner sanctum. With the Fans Council (who actuslly opposed BtB) now running Smisa Scott has got what he wanted all along, complete control, and the ability to rifle Smisa's coffers unopposed. 

It will, as it always does, inevitably end in tears, and cries of "if only we knew sooner" or "who knew"? The thing is we ALL knew and did little or nothing to set things straight. We will get what we deserve for abdicating our responsibility.

1. He's not unopposed, members still have to vote, this hasn't changed since the last time you were wrong about it. 

2. Sorry have I missed several fan buyouts for you to use the term 'as it always does, inevitably end in tears' 

3. We are still miles ahead of plan with potentially three years getting shaved off BTB. Once the shares are bought, GLS won't be involved, he has openly said that and it's literally in the contract, that he must sell his controlling shares. 

Do you get a buzz when wrong, is that why you make such outlandish claims that are so easily proven incorrect? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 5:27 PM, waldorf34 said:

Personal benefit  ,what the FCA says the Director  of a trust is NOT allowed

.gifts and hospitality, including hospitality  to connected persons ,ie spouse,business partner,siblings ,etc

. enhancing the reputation of a person or organisation (including an individual  who because of their work ,benefits from having their profile raised.

It is therefore in the Trusts interest that a register is kept of all gifts and hospitality. 

This is related to anti-bribery and corruption legislation and there is no evidence such gifts that fall under the criteria are not being registered/ refused. They have no requirements to make such offers public knowledge to shareholders. I'd probably say if you have a suspicion something untoward is happening, you would need to either evidence it or whistle-blow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. He's not unopposed, members still have to vote, this hasn't changed since the last time you were wrong about it. 
2. Sorry have I missed several fan buyouts for you to use the term 'as it always does, inevitably end in tears' 
3. We are still miles ahead of plan with potentially three years getting shaved off BTB. Once the shares are bought, GLS won't be involved, he has openly said that and it's literally in the contract, that he must sell his controlling shares. 
Do you get a buzz when wrong, is that why you make such outlandish claims that are so easily proven incorrect? 
I thought I seen a interview with him saying he'd like to do more than 10. I'm trying to remember the reason, something about a anniversary. I might be mistaken though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

I thought I seen a interview with him saying he'd like to do more than 10. I'm trying to remember the reason, something about a anniversary. I might be mistaken though. emoji106.png

I personally have no issue with the man staying on at all. He’s done our club a great service and think he’s doing a standup job. I think LPM could very likely burst a blood vessel if that happened though. 

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...