Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Kombibuddie

Empowering the SMISA Membership to begin building for the future now.

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Now that you have confessed to a lack of intellect, how about giving the abuse a rest and letting people who wish to discuss the matter in hand a chance to do so?

I actually think thats the only sensiblr thing you have said, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2019 at 5:53 PM, melmac said:

Thanks for the input. However, if someone is seeking to change smisas rules, you need to have a rule to change. You'll find there is no rule.

Are you suggesting that a rule cannot be added?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Options:
Keep all the money for future share purchase and build up reserves.
Only release funds in lieu of shares or if investment in club affairs is pro-rata to other major shareholders/ directors or offered as a loan.

Investment in non club/ community activity perfectly acceptable - voted by smisa members and allocated by smisa as a constituted body.

 

Can I vote for this?

Edited by garzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has now been evidenced the club board have failed completely to create any new revenue streams to benefit the club in three years. When i was with the Smisa committee I continually championed proposals that would see the £2 pot be used to set up and run successful businesses that would benefit the club, smisa and create job and training opportunities in the community.

the £2 pot is being frittered away on basic a maintenance and expenditure wish list. It should be used to generate additional wealth and opportunities. We Are a Community benefit society, we should insist that we are run as one.

I see Kombibuddie's proposal as step one on the journey to resetting how smisa operates, and how it actually engages with its members, as opposed to issuing Scott's Laws.

if you wait till whenever we are due to buy the majority shareholding to register your concern, it will likely be to late and the club will fall into the hands of whoever wants it.

as Secret Affair famoulsly said 'This Is The Time For Action'. We may need to consider creating 'Real Smisa' to achieve this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, melmac said:

Your probably 100% correct in what your saying re majority of those voting etc to change a rule.

What rule is to be changed though?

It's not a rule as such, Graeme has put forward a members resolution request in line with rule 26 of our governance. In a nutshell it's a change where 'save the money' will be a standing option on any future spends. The rules aren't completely clear regarding what it would take to pass (majority of voting members or a majority of members) it only states two thirds of members must vote in favour. 

If it was to pass, it would mean every vote from now on would include an option for saving the funds until BTB completes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, paul torfason said:

A think every quarter or pot spend there should be winner of 2 places at hospitality like say for a donater and a friend a d am not meaning £25 month contributes only am meaning any one that is a paid up buy the buds participant, would cost a maximum of a 700/800 pounds a season,makes sence to me

For me there is always going to be a means to incentive the larger contributors. If this changed, would there be an additional benefit for £25 members and if so would the £12 members then want it as well? Viscous cycle. I do contribute £25 and personally it wouldn't bother me but I can see why others might be a bit miffed. 

In saying that, I've won the draw for the directors lounge once and it was fantastic (bar the result). I suppose there is an argument to doing stuff like this as a way to grow member numbers. 

As for the cost, it would be dependent on St Mirren being willing to offer it and at discount.  

Share this post


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

As has now been evidenced the club board have failed completely to create any new revenue streams to benefit the club in three years. When i was with the Smisa committee I continually championed proposals that would see the £2 pot be used to set up and run successful businesses that would benefit the club, smisa and create job and training opportunities in the community.

the £2 pot is being frittered away on basic a maintenance and expenditure wish list. It should be used to generate additional wealth and opportunities. We Are a Community benefit society, we should insist that we are run as one.

I see Kombibuddie's proposal as step one on the journey to resetting how smisa operates, and how it actually engages with its members, as opposed to issuing Scott's Laws.

if you wait till whenever we are due to buy the majority shareholding to register your concern, it will likely be to late and the club will fall into the hands of whoever wants it.

as Secret Affair famoulsly said 'This Is The Time For Action'. We may need to consider creating 'Real Smisa' to achieve this?

To name but a few

£50k for Ralston pitch - improves the overall facilities and if it supports the development of another John Mcginn or Lewis Morgan, etc, it's an income stream

Pre-match entertainment - If this increases interest in younger fans and gets more through the door, it's an income stream

Summer community programs - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Kit sponsorship ladies team - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Community season tickets - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Yet more lies and the only thing 'evidenced' is your lack of understanding around the word 'evidenced' You can also insist all you want, we are a democratic organisation, if you remain in the minority, these options continue to be perfectly acceptable.

Your quite astonishingly, unwavering, blinkered approach to think you speak for any sort of majority on how SMISA should operate is commendable, I have to say.  

Share this post


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

To name but a few

£50k for Ralston pitch - improves the overall facilities and if it supports the development of another John Mcginn or Lewis Morgan, etc, it's an income stream

Pre-match entertainment - If this increases interest in younger fans and gets more through the door, it's an income stream

Summer community programs - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Kit sponsorship ladies team - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Community season tickets - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Yet more lies and the only thing 'evidenced' is your lack of understanding around the word 'evidenced' You can also insist all you want, we are a democratic organisation, if you remain in the minority, these options continue to be perfectly acceptable.

Your quite astonishingly, unwavering, blinkered approach to think you speak for any sort of majority on how SMISA should operate is commendable, I have to say.  

Thank you for highlighting the club board have only shown they are able, like any fool to spend money! They dont know, or care about making money and as a consequence creating real job and training opportunities for the community.

massive failure!!

soz, forgot to add, all your examples above (apart from summer community programme) are what smisa members paid for, and none of them are income streams.

The summer community programme is either 'Street Stuff' paid for by the council, or the Club soccer camps where the parents pay a whacking sum. In either case they both pre date this board, so again...

this board have not in three years created One additional revenue stream. Time for them to move on and let some wealth creators in!

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


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

Thank you for highlighting the club board have only shown they are able, like any fool to spend money! They dont know, or care about making money and as a consequence creating real job and training opportunities for the community.

massive failure!

I highlighted only your error. The board did not okay any of these options, voting, paying members did.

As I have 'evidenced' a number of options that have passed, are more than designed to increase revenue. Contrary to your incorrect post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bazil85 said:

I highlighted only your error. The board did not okay any of these options, voting, paying members did.

As I have 'evidenced' a number of options that have passed, are more than designed to increase revenue. Contrary to your incorrect post. 

None of the Smisa member funded options do, or were ever promoted as additional revenue generating schemes. None. I dont know if you are trying to convince yourself, or others differently?

Here's a thought, ask posters here if they think any of your examples are Club initiated ADDITIONAL (new) revenue streams?

Share this post


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

None of the Smisa member funded options do, or were ever promoted as additional revenue generating schemes. None. I dont know if you are trying to convince yourself, or others differently?

Here's a thought, ask posters here if they think any of your examples are Club initiated ADDITIONAL (new) revenue streams?

As has been proven time and time again, options that benefit the club financially win by clear majorities (only exception being the murals). Fortunately many of these options are mutually beneficial in increasing revenue. Until that changes you'll just have to accept it. Is it a power trip for you to get your wee, destined to fail options on the voting slip? 

Why would we ask a question that everyone knows the answer to? Extra fans come to the ground because of sponsorship, children events or if the better quality pitch helps generate better players we could sell in the future... You're saying none of that is new income? It isn't worth a discussion, you're simply wrong (as usual)   

Share this post


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

To name but a few

£50k for Ralston pitch - improves the overall facilities and if it supports the development of another John Mcginn or Lewis Morgan, etc, it's an income stream

Pre-match entertainment - If this increases interest in younger fans and gets more through the door, it's an income stream

Summer community programs - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Kit sponsorship ladies team - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Community season tickets - again if this increases interest it could create an income stream

Yet more lies and the only thing 'evidenced' is your lack of understanding around the word 'evidenced' You can also insist all you want, we are a democratic organisation, if you remain in the minority, these options continue to be perfectly acceptable.

Your quite astonishingly, unwavering, blinkered approach to think you speak for any sort of majority on how SMISA should operate is commendable, I have to say.  

not one of your items has a predictable return, not one.  They would be considered optional spends by any business.

You couldn't identify a projected return for any of that expenditure and not one item could be highligted as a clear contributory factor in any revenue increase, past or present.

 

We had an excellent chief exec who had some very clear ideas on how to invest in the infrastructure to generate more income of reduce expenditure.  Ideas such as rainwater harvest, ground source heating and other renewable energy products could be a boon to both the club and near neighbours.  Our proximity to the airport is a potential winner as a conference and business space hub.  Why are none of these happenning?  Could the SMISA money do it?  We could look at a community combined heat and power facility to save us money and create income, rainwater harvest would slash the water bill.  In some cases, you only need some seed money to access community and business funding and SMISA COULD do this if the club doesnt want to or cant.

Edited by beyond our ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beyond our ken said:

not one of your items has a predictable return, not one.  They would be considered optional spends by any business.

You couldn't identify a projected return for any of that expenditure and not one item could be highligted as a clear contributory factor in any revenue increase, past or present.

 

We had an excellent chief exec who had some very clear ideas on how to invest in the infrastructure to generate more income of reduce expenditure.  Ideas such as rainwater harvest, ground source heating and other renewable energy products could be a boon to both the club and near neighbours.  Our proximity to the airport is a potential winner as a conference and business space hub.  Why are none of these happenning?  Could the SMISA money do it?  We could look at a community combined heat and power facility to save us money and create income, rainwater harvest would slash the water bill.  In some cases, you only need some seed money to access community and business funding and SMISA COULD do this if the club doesnt want to or cant.

Sorry where is the requirement that members are not allowed to democratically vote on proposals unless they have a complete predictable return detailed? Every one of those options have a high likeliness of financial return (we are a business after-all). also lets not hide from the fact, if you have a business proposal that has a completely predictable return, why aren't you a millionaire? These plans aren't easy or everyone would be doing them.  

Can you name a community benefit options that would have clear projected returns attached? I think that would be very challenging on our quarterly budget. You could likely correlate income from, say the children entertainment but a lot of other proposed projects would end up equally speculative. This isn't a bad thing, the £2 spend was always attached as an added benefit. To expect it to be used as a completely clear, revenue generating and equally community beneficial stream of income is very idealistic thinking to say the least. 

I'll take the airport/ conference space and address it separately. The other ideas, as fantastic as they sound, would likely be way above the pay grade of the £2 spend. Not saying they aren't good ideas but if they were as practical as you elude to, every club would be doing them. The tech required to do it is very new and whoever takes the first step will be taking massive risks that it doesn't pay off. 

Using the airport links, conference facilities, other business uses and even using the stadium for concerts is all in discussion stages. The club (likely in discussion with SMISA) are looking at opportunities to build our income streams through this. Last I heard we were looking to discuss with other clubs that had used their grounds for concerts. The thing about this is, it is not magic wand stuff, it is time consuming, it costs money and has attached risks. I think what a lot of fans fail to realise, is we're in the middle of a club purchase. The timing is not ideal at all for wide-swept innovative changes.

As is so common with the modern day, everyone wants the world and they want it yesterday. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bazil85 said:

As has been proven time and time again, options that benefit the club financially win by clear majorities (only exception being the murals). Fortunately many of these options are mutually beneficial in increasing revenue. Until that changes you'll just have to accept it. Is it a power trip for you to get your wee, destined to fail options on the voting slip? 

Why would we ask a question that everyone knows the answer to? Extra fans come to the ground because of sponsorship, children events or if the better quality pitch helps generate better players we could sell in the future... You're saying none of that is new income? It isn't worth a discussion, you're simply wrong (as usual)   

Again you draw ridicule on yourself by failing to list ONE additional revenue stream that the current board have created. Are you Theresa May in disguise, continually presenting the same failed proposition again and again and again?

Share this post


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

Are you suggesting that a rule cannot be added?

I see baz has had a spare several hours to comment on everything.

A rule could be included but it would never get the required votes to carry it. Smisa deliberately didn't include a rule as that would impinge on them doing essentially what they want with what is nothing more than surplus funds. Read the rules, it's interesting to understand what they're doing, not doing and should be doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

It's not a rule as such, Graeme has put forward a members resolution request in line with rule 26 of our governance. In a nutshell it's a change where 'save the money' will be a standing option on any future spends. The rules aren't completely clear regarding what it would take to pass (majority of voting members or a majority of members) it only states two thirds of members must vote in favour. 

If it was to pass, it would mean every vote from now on would include an option for saving the funds until BTB completes. 

So, you're suggesting someone waste their time proposing a resolution to change the rules but which there is no rule to change? Smisa are operating their own internal procedures / arrangements re the 3 monthly spend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, melmac said:

So, you're suggesting someone waste their time proposing a resolution to change the rules but which there is no rule to change? Smisa are operating their own internal procedures / arrangements re the 3 monthly spend.

This!

as evidenced by Smisa communicating Kombiebuddie's proposal, accompanied by a shameless, withering rejection of a member's consider proposal, shamelessly trying to ensure a member cant influence how smisa operates.

ffs they put forward an idea to fund hand dryers, championing it as a credible members proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, melmac said:

So, you're suggesting someone waste their time proposing a resolution to change the rules but which there is no rule to change? Smisa are operating their own internal procedures / arrangements re the 3 monthly spend.

It seems to me that an additional rule constitutes a change to the rules, and what makes you think that it has no chance of success?

Share this post


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

It seems to me that an additional rule constitutes a change to the rules, and what makes you think that it has no chance of success?

Because it involves members having to think for themselves. If it is to change the rules, it needs to be an extraordinary resolution and not less than 75% of those voting need to vote in favour of the resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it involves members having to think for themselves. If it is to change the rules, it needs to be an extraordinary resolution and not less than 75% of those voting need to vote in favour of the resolution.

There are no doubts, it is a challenge.

SMISA' constitution states 2/3rds of the vote (including proxy's)

 

however, better to fail trying than failing to try.

 

Some will agree with me and some won't but at least the opportunity to ask the question is there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, cockles1987 said:


 

 

 


Regarding the ground source heating and rainwater harvesting.

2 suggestions that should have been looked at.

Do you know what the outlay costs and expected return or savings are? emoji106.png

 

 

Costs on the rainwater harvest are around 150,00 to install a diverter, holding tank (around 70,000 litre should be sufficient) and a pump.  The real cost is in the excavation work as the hardware is relatively cheap.  it would collect enough water to provide pitch watering and all toilets throughout the complex which are two major contributors to what i understand is a high water rate bill.  The costs could escalate depending on the location of the holding tanks as they may need to be below ground for planning reasons and if there is a restriction on their footprint then there could be additional piping.  Brian Caldwell mentioned it was a realtively low outlay so he must have had some sort of feasibility study carried out but a huge saving on our outlay, he reckeond it was one of our biggest fixed costs.

As for the ground source heating, that all depends on the scale, a system that would supply the main stand would be equal to around 10-15 domestic systems at  10-15k per pop (including all indoor piping, controls etc) but the main issue would again be positioning, under the pitch would be the cheapest option but the initial outlay would be higher if the heat collection units had to go under the car park.  Two big money saving bonuses for that idea would be pre-heated water for the pitch heating system and a heating matrix for the dome inflation system.

The club COULD form a community company to set up a larger scheme that benefitted the wider locality and that would open up public money.  Knock-ons from that could be an opportunity to act as consultants thereafter to other schemes.  The people behind the community hydro in Rumbling bridge are raking in the extra pennies for those who joined the scheme at it's inception and some of the prime movers are now making extra cash helping other communities to access similar renewable energy schemes.

Given the footprint we have of flat, accessible land situated between commercial and domestic estates, there might be some promise there, if we did a community heat project at Ralston the locals might even save enough money to take spam off the menu for at least one night per week

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...