Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
waldorf34

Smisa Director on St Mirren board

Recommended Posts

The Smisa Director on the St Mirren board has  a legal duty to put the club's interest first and Smisa and supporters second.  This is not what the members envisaged surley . This is a conflict of interest that he is duty bound to avoid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Smisa Director on the St Mirren board has  a legal duty to put the club's interest first and Smisa and supporters second.  This is not what the members envisaged surley . This is a conflict of interest that he is duty bound to avoid.
OK smart arse, IF what you say is true I look forward to you telling us how he is duty bound to avoid this legal duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:
4 hours ago, waldorf34 said:
The Smisa Director on the St Mirren board has  a legal duty to put the club's interest first and Smisa and supporters second.  This is not what the members envisaged surley . This is a conflict of interest that he is duty bound to avoid.

OK smart arse, IF what you say is true I look forward to you telling us how he is duty bound to avoid this legal duty.

He/or she does not become a Director of St Mirren ,merely  an observer ,to learn the ropes,and does not vote in any discussion,freeing  them to push Smisa and supporters feeling and ideas.

Keeps them out of the Boardroom at halftime, no more free booze and pies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He/or she does not become a Director of St Mirren ,merely  an observer ,to learn the ropes,and does not vote in any discussion,freeing  them to push Smisa and supporters feeling and ideas.
Keeps them out of the Boardroom at halftime, no more free booze and pies
OK, so your solution is to not have a representative of the organisation buying the club on the board. You do realise that would give smisa less influence and input.
It would at least remove the "legal duty that you feel they are duty bound to avoid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cockles1987 said:
2 hours ago, waldorf34 said:
He/or she does not become a Director of St Mirren ,merely  an observer ,to learn the ropes,and does not vote in any discussion,freeing  them to push Smisa and supporters feeling and ideas.
Keeps them out of the Boardroom at halftime, no more free booze and pies

FFS, the lunatics are taking over the forum emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png

Personally, my thoughts were they were busy building support to take over the club.  B)

Share this post


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

The Smisa Director on the St Mirren board has  a legal duty to put the club's interest first and Smisa and supporters second.  This is not what the members envisaged surley . This is a conflict of interest that he is duty bound to avoid.

any director that sits on the board of any company is legally bound to act in the best interest of that company. That is a statement of fact. The application of such company director rules is however subjective. 

The reality is that what’s in the best interest of SMFC should align directly with the best interest of SMISA & fans. You’re creating a problem and a conflict of interest that isn’t there. 

It isn’t ‘us vs them’ people with that mentality does not help. We all share a common goal, the betterment of our football club. 

Feels like you’ve been going out your way recently to try fabricate problems for the new director. Why? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2019 at 1:22 PM, waldorf34 said:

The Smisa Director on the St Mirren board has  a legal duty to put the club's interest first and Smisa and supporters second.  This is not what the members envisaged surley . This is a conflict of interest that he is duty bound to avoid.

You know it's really odd but you've been posting like this for about a week but for some reason you are adopting a "passive aggressive" role and somehow hoping the rest of us will simply read between the lines and see what you are getting at.

Cut the bollox and spit it out man. Exactly who are you accusing and what are you accusing them of?

We don't need two LPMs on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2019 at 2:09 AM, oaksoft said:

You know it's really odd but you've been posting like this for about a week but for some reason you are adopting a "passive aggressive" role and somehow hoping the rest of us will simply read between the lines and see what you are getting at.

Cut the bollox and spit it out man. Exactly who are you accusing and what are you accusing them of?

We don't need two LPMs on this forum.

I'd say we don't need one... 

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...