Smisa's Shame

[smcc]

9 minutes ago, melmac said:

Its quite plain for everyone to see (or who wants to see) that the fan reps on the board hold no sway / carry no weight when it comes to making decisions, otherwise im sure a compromise could have been reached with OK re travelling to / from Scotland, if that was the true issue. 

The chairman is only allowing SMiSA to deal / contribute to matters which require a financial input from SMiSA members (2 or 3 ply bog roll etc). There is not a cats chance in hell he will allow SMiSA to take over the reigns until SMiSA are on a proper business footing, when there is a fit and proper person in charge with a fiduciary duty for SMiSA's finances and their overall management.

If they are going to take over the reins(as in horses) it is spelt "rein". Reign refers to a monarch or a dictator. Are you suggesting that SMISA is going to act as a dictator as and when they take control?

[slapsalmon]

7 hours ago, bazil85 said:

 

 

7 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Some people on here just have a major issue with people that want to defend the club in light of a lack of information. Some much prefer to assume the most negative. 

But likewise you have no evidence, just a hard on for the current board 

7 hours ago, bazil85 said:

I didn’t 

Still not proof my opinion that he could do a job for an SP club is wrong. 

You're a wee trooper, maybe one day your effort will pay off. Until then you can take pride in being one of the sites top trolls. 

I'd say the proof is that the only 12 professional football managers in the top league in this country don't agree with you. 

Edited June 29, 2019 by slapsalmon

[faraway saint]

^^^^^^ A new record for copying and pasting, well done. 

[bazil85]

6 hours ago, slapsalmon said:

 

But likewise you have no evidence, just a hard on for the current board 

the point he is referencing is the two stand arrangement  my thoughts on it were it would be a considerable income & it wouldn’t greatly impact crowds  

- it allowed for a 10% increase to the player budget confirmed by someone with full access to our finances & a legal requirement to release annual accounts so would likely be found out if he was lying 

- we had record attendances, highest average crowds & record season ticket sales last season for the new ground  

I’d say those points are pretty evidence backed  

I'd say the proof is that the only 12 professional football managers in the top league in this country don't agree with you. 

- Dundee United are building a team to get them into the SP with a target of getting up this season (like they have the last three). Do you genuinely think not one United player will be paid more than say St Mirren, Ross County Hamilton, Livi & the likes could pay or could get a game for these teams? 

You just have to look at the United team & where some of their players have came from to see validity in an opinion (not a statement of fact an opinion mind) that some of their players could feature in the SP. there’s another Smith in that team that also supports this point & he can hardly get a game  

 

[Kombibuddie]

4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

we had record attendances, highest average crowds & record season ticket sales last season for the new ground

and the consequence of Record season ticket sales, record attendances and highest average crowds is?? more income/increased profits

but still they come for the SMISA money

4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

it allowed for a 10% increase to the player budge

more income generated but still they come for the SMISA money.

When SMISA owns St Mirren FC, I'll be as amazed as LPM is at Jim Goodwin's appointment as manager if the SMISA membership numbers are maintained at the numbers it has now. My flabber might even get gasted too. We'll find out in 2023 when SMISA has the money to complete the purchase.

I know, I know, majority rules and all that.

Edited June 29, 2019 by Kombibuddie

[bazil85]

57 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

and the consequence of Record season ticket sales, record attendances and highest average crowds is?? more income/increased profits

but still they come for the SMISA money

more income generated but still they come for the SMISA money.

When SMISA owns St Mirren FC, I'll be as amazed as LPM is at Jim Goodwin's appointment as manager if the SMISA membership numbers are maintained at the numbers it has now. My flabber might even get gasted too. We'll find out in 2023 when SMISA has the money to complete the purchase.

I know, I know, majority rules and all that.

Hit the nail on the head with the last sentence, majority rules. As long as that’s the case they should continue to come for the money. I’ve seen no evidence of a change in behaviour with SMISA members to suggest that’ll happen during the remaining years. 

Theres no doubt after the buyout we wouldn’t retain the same paying members, they might not even choose to ask to continue it. You will still get fans willing to keep paying though so I think it’s a no brainier to ask. (Personally I would continue it open ended but after the 10 years i’ll Maybe drop from £25 to £12) 

[Kombibuddie]

Hit the nail on the head with the last sentence, majority rules. As long as that’s the case they should continue to come for the money. I’ve seen no evidence of a change in behaviour with SMISA members to suggest that’ll happen during the remaining years. 
Theres no doubt after the buyout we wouldn’t retain the same paying members, they might not even choose to ask to continue it. You will still get fans willing to keep paying though so I think it’s a no brainier to ask. (Personally I would continue it open ended but after the 10 years i’ll Maybe drop from £25 to £12) 

But you miss the point.

St Mirren FC's revenue is up considerably but still they come for SMISA's money.

At some stage in the future, SMISA will be the majority owner, it is likely an unexpected bill will land and the question will get asked
"how are we going to pay for that?"

Time will tell.

[Lord Pityme]

23 hours ago, melmac said:

Its quite plain for everyone to see (or who wants to see) that the fan reps on the board hold no sway / carry no weight when it comes to making decisions, otherwise im sure a compromise could have been reached with OK re travelling to / from Scotland, if that was the true issue. 

The chairman is only allowing SMiSA to deal / contribute to matters which require a financial input from SMiSA members (2 or 3 ply bog roll etc). There is not a cats chance in hell he will allow SMiSA to take over the reigns until SMiSA are on a proper business footing, when there is a fit and proper person in charge with a fiduciary duty for SMiSA's finances and their overall management.

This.

i think what people dont get is the extremely weak position smisa has set itself in, despite being a 30% shareholder! In any other business a 30% shareholder would be holding the company board to account on all the big issues.

three years down the road now and what club direction/vision have smisa consulted it's members over...?

answer... none! So what the point of being a 30% shareholder when you have no part in how the company is run?

[Kombibuddie]

You claimed that someone at the AGM confirmed your proxy vote that has been publicly proven to not be true. I have noticed no one has come out and backed you up. But how could they?

Cockles,
I have no idea whose proxies I had. The SMISA guys said I had a couple, i never took note as I thought, the proxies will only need to be counted & verified if it was a close run thing.

It wasn't, even if all the proxies were in favour of the proposal, there still wasn't enough to pass the proposal.

Next time, i will take note of the names before the agm starts [emoji16]. (Basil has just gone apoplectic 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣)

[bazil85]

8 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

But you miss the point.

St Mirren FC's revenue is up considerably but still they come for SMISA's money.

At some stage in the future, SMISA will be the majority owner, it is likely an unexpected bill will land and the question will get asked
"how are we going to pay for that?"

Time will tell.
 

I don’t think I miss the point at all, it’s not like in the last 3-4 years we’ve had expenses we MUST pay (through SMISA) or the club would fold. SMISA has always provided a buffer but it’s never been all or die in those years, just better publicised the benefit.

SMISA & BTB have always presented these as benefits over essentials. This is where people have panicked. ‘OMG what would have happened if SMISA didn’t but those balls or goals?’ 

... yeah we’d have been fine. 

[Kombibuddie]

... yeah we’d have been fine. 

But still they come for the SMISA money.

It hasn't always been the case where we'd have been fine.

They currently don't need to dip into SMISA money but they do.

I genuinely hope you are right.

[bazil85]

3 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

 

 

But still they come for the SMISA money.

It hasn't always been the case where we'd have been fine.

They currently don't need to dip into SMISA money but they do.

I genuinely hope you are right.

 

Bit curious that we had survived for 139 years before BTB then all of a sudden we’d have faced oblivion over a sum of money that’s probably not much more than one players average annual salary...

i look it as the money is there, that’s what the paying members generally want the money to be spent on so why not do it? Would make so sense for them to stop asking. 

[Kombibuddie]

11 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

 Would make so sense for them to stop asking. 

the word much seems to be missing from between "so" & "sense" 🤣

I digress.

2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Bit curious that we had survived for 139 years before BTB then all of a sudden we’d have faced oblivion over a sum of money that’s probably not much more than one players average annual salary...

i look it as the money is there, that’s what the paying members generally want the money to be spent on so why not do it? Would make so sense for them to stop asking. 

and in those 139 years, there has been times where it has been very challenging to pay the bills. A very notable recent example of that is Greenhill Road. St Mirren were up to their neck in it & the agreed action was to sell Love Street & get a new stadium built in Greenhill Road and wipe out the debts.

There were all sorts happening when St Mirren were struggling to pay their bills.

Groups like FOSMA, SMISA, Fans Council etc made their appearances

Whilst St Mirren' revenue is currently improved & they are bringing in a fair bit of wedge, it would be prudent of SMISA to be building their own funds as much as they can for the eventuality of being a fan owned club.

Future? What future? we can think about that tomorrow..... 

[bazil85]

18 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

the word much seems to be missing from between "so" & "sense" 🤣

I digress.

and in those 139 years, there has been times where it has been very challenging to pay the bills. A very notable recent example of that is Greenhill Road. St Mirren were up to their neck in it & the agreed action was to sell Love Street & get a new stadium built in Greenhill Road and wipe out the debts.

There were all sorts happening when St Mirren were struggling to pay their bills.

Groups like FOSMA, SMISA, Fans Council etc made their appearances

Whilst St Mirren' revenue is currently improved & they are bringing in a fair bit of wedge, it would be prudent of SMISA to be building their own funds as much as they can for the eventuality of being a fan owned club.

Future? What future? we can think about that tomorrow..... 

Haha fair enough typo no* 

yep we’ve had some hard times, 24 hours from administration, directors issuing cheques from their personal accounts, crippling debts. We’ve survived all of that. 

So to think in a time of no debt & good income roughly £8k a quarter could have been a red line is very unrealistic IMO. 

I would also be very cautious of thinking SMISA aren’t planning for the future & there is no plan when we take over because they don’t want to save a wee bonus fee that was always advertised as such. You think it’s prudent to save & that’s fine. I think it’s prudent to use these small sums to better the team & save money now.

SMISA money used to improve the youth academy & save player budgets could be the difference between taking over a championship club in a few years or an SP club with better supported next gen Mcginns & McLeans. If that’s the case, the money we could save would pale in comparison to the increased income streams. 

Lets also not forget SMISA money could have been the difference between L1 & championship football few seasons ago. Now I’m not saying that would have been curtains by any stretch but it certainly is much more prudent to try and avoid that at all cost. 

I’m really not sure what you think saving a max quarter mill (rough calculation) will mean for taking over the club. A few new players one season, 1/4 a new training facility? It isn’t really game changing for our club, we can make that by finishing a few spots higher I believe. 

[smcc]

11 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

 

 

SMISA are quoted at the recent AGM saying there isn't a plan.

"the exact nature of how SMiSA will function post acquisition has not yet been determined"

Seems similar to the present Conservative government with regard to Brexit, which is potentially only a few months away, while the fans take-over of St Mirren is still a few years off. 😊

[oaksoft]

26 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

 

 

SMISA are quoted at the recent AGM saying there isn't a plan.

"the exact nature of how SMiSA will function post acquisition has not yet been determined"

 

There is a difference between not having the "exact" nature of future function determined at this stage and not having any plan whatsoever.

If we are looking at the latter then that would be pretty worrying.

Edited June 30, 2019 by oaksoft

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, cockles1987 said:

 

 

SMISA are quoted at the recent AGM saying there isn't a plan.

"the exact nature of how SMiSA will function post acquisition has not yet been determined"

 

‘Exact nature’ ‘not yet determined’ isn’t the same as not having a plan. 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, cockles1987 said:

I agree, though that's not what Basil wrote.

I totally believe there will be a plan produced in plenty of time.

Full quote here from the AGM

Q: How will SMiSA continue to raise money after the takeover, to pay unexpected or every day bills?
A: AQ and CO replied that the exact nature of how SMiSA will function post acquisition has not yet been determined, but a paper is currently being prepared by the committee which will propose various options and scenarios. This paper when finished will be sent to all members for their feedback. It is, however, envisaged that members will be able to continue paying subscriptions post acquisition in order to have reserve funds available should the Club need them. But it is not possible to say at this time what that rate might be.

The full quote backs up what I have said. I said people should be cautious in thinking SMISA aren’t planning for the future. 

‘Paper being prepared’ ‘continue paying subs’ ‘reserve fund’ all backs that up IMO. 

[bazil85]

1 minute ago, cockles1987 said:

 

 

I was referring to your statement. Where you wrote about two different indices separated by &



So a plan hasn't been presented to us members yet as its still in the planning stage. Corroborated by SMISA in my previous post.

Unless you know different from SMISA.

 

Jesus you’re not going to be another one jumping on the band wagon to scrutinise every single word in my posts are you? 

i of course don’t know any different but I assure you it was a high level comment that there will be a plan for us to take over. Like Oak & I both said, no plan & exact nature not determined are different thinks 

[bazil85]

1 minute ago, cockles1987 said:

As if I would. You'll notice though that I is of course a capital letter wither it be in or at the start of a sentence.

I really hope I didn't make a #thichasfcuk mistake there.

For using Oaky as corroboration, really. I'll try again, like you wrote having something in the planning stage and having a plan is different. I hope you're not disagreeing with yourself.

No you’re right “I” certainly is and most websites usually capitalise it for you... not sure why this one didn’t (usually does) 

Not like you to engage in trolling, you bored? 

I’m not disagreeing with myself at all, I fully stand by my comments as I always do. There is a strange notion on here that I won’t put my hands up to mistakes though, not sure where it has came from though because I always do. Most can’t make the same claim. 

[BuddieinEK]

No you’re right “I” certainly is and most websites usually capitalise it for you... not sure why this one didn’t (usually does) 
Not like you to engage in trolling, you bored? 
I’m not disagreeing with myself at all, I fully stand by my comments as I always do. There is a strange notion on here that I won’t put my hands up to mistakes though, not sure where it has came from though because I always do. Most can’t make the same claim. 

"I fully stand by my comments as I always do. There is a strange notion on here that I won’t put my hands up to mistakes though,"

You don't see the irony there? Really?

[bazil85]

5 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

"I fully stand by my comments as I always do. There is a strange notion on here that I won’t put my hands up to mistakes though,"

You don't see the irony there? Really?

Nope not at all, I stand by my comments regarding my opinion & take on situations because they don’t generally change but when I make a mistake, I’ll put my hands up to it. 

For example earlier in the week I mistook someone’s comments for them talking about GLS when they were talking about TF. I put my hands up as I would expect anyone to do. 

[bazil85]

Just now, cockles1987 said:

I hope you laughed as I did when I noticed it.

Ouch.

It's just the wording you used. If you had just stated that they were planning (a plan) for the future that is totally correct, it was the bit after saying they had a plan I disagreed with as it looked like when you used it separately from the planning, that something had been finalised.

If I get more than one like I'll assume I've written that correctly and easy to understand.

It is very pernickety, reminds me of the time BEK spent three weeks on how he defines the word ‘few’ 

I could be pernickety as well & say where’s the ‘quote’ that says ‘there isn’t a plan’ after all that’s what the word quote would hint at? I won’t though 

I don't think ‘exact nature not determined’ suggests at all there is no plan. Maybe WIP would have been a better way to put it but a formulated plan & a work in progress to a plan can ultimately be summarised in my words I would say. 

[BuddieinEK]

It is very pernickety, reminds me of the time BEK spent three weeks on how he defines the word ‘few’ [emoji38]
I could be pernickety as well & say where’s the ‘quote’ that says ‘there isn’t a plan’ after all that’s what the word quote would hint at? I won’t though [emoji14]
I don't think ‘exact nature not determined’ suggests at all there is no plan. Maybe WIP would have been a better way to put it but a formulated plan & a work in progress to a plan can ultimately be summarised in my words I would say. 

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]
You didn't just move the goalposts that time... You changed ends.
That was one of your funniest attempts to save face by changing your words bit at a time!
Made me laugh.

[bazil85]

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

You didn't just move the goalposts that time... You changed ends.
That was one of your funniest attempts to save face by changing your words bit at a time!
Made me laugh.

I didn’t though, that’s just a fib from you isn’t it?