Jump to content

munoz

Does The Club Need Fresh Investment?

Recommended Posts


1 minute ago, St.Ricky said:

Take it as you wish. You put stuff out there and then fail to support it or to consider other points put forward. 

Ffs if you are going to stalk me get you carer to push you in your wheelchair! I am fed up having to hang around waiting for you to catch your f**king breath!

Share this post


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

Ffs if you are going to stalk me get you carer to push you in your wheelchair! I am fed up having to hang around waiting for you to catch your f**king breath!

Yawn.Do keep up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jaybee said:

You still need to take your pills bud.  :D

Jaybee. 

Interest rates being as they are its hardly worth moving money out of a current account. Depreciation on his car might hit £20k a year. Simply work out the interest on 700k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:
15 minutes ago, jaybee said:

That's a bit rich Ricky, so what does one call the time he puts in at no cost? And more to the point if he had not stumped up and bought the aforementioned shares it is highly lightly there would be no club.  To many pedants on here at the moment methinks.

You misread me. I'm not knocking GLS. I am however being realistic and accurate.. Not pedantic. 

I'm not wholly convinced by t h e fan ownership model but enough were to make it work. Full marks to GLS for negotiating a deal which suits both the fans and himself. 

My reply was aimed at you re GLS's  investment in the club, clearly he has and still does put many hours in gratis and equally clearly as Basil stated earlier "On £620k he could make in the region of £200k before tax on this rate over 10 years." so no money invested is way out of order.  The pedant comment was not intended to be aimed at yourself, rather just a generalisation which seems pretty accurate at the moment regarding some posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone from SMISA know whether they propose to continue to seek members to continue their BTB subscriptions post purchase of the club?? 

1000 members continuing to contribute £12 * 12 months =  £144,000 p.a. 

That would be money that arguably could go straight into the club as additional revenue if the fans were willing to continue to commit in those numbers. 

When you look at that number you really realise the limitations of the fans' financial power. That has always been a question mark for me as to where the money comes from in tough times and where money can be generated to push the club forward.  

The club's current owner and future fan ownership really have a job on their hands to increase revenue streams, grow our support and market the club better. 

You could actually argue that we've reduced our potential for additional revenue streams that would come in the form of investment from new directors/shareholders coming on board. There's currently no incentive for anyone to invest in the club as the path is already marked out for GLS to sell to the fans - thereby making any other shares irrelevant. Similarly, once the fans have control - why would anyone invest? 

Thinking way ahead - if someone came in with willingness to invest a reasonable sum in the club and good intentions  would SMISA sell up?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:
15 hours ago, Thorizaar said:
A post full of questions that you have no idea of the answers to but still conclude in outraged fashion.

How exactly do you know what knowledge I have?

No outrage... Sheer frustration and disappointment!

You happy with our outcomes from the areas mentioned?

I rather think his point was ............. that your point would be better made if it came with some practical solutions to the 'quite valid issues' that you highlight.  This is not aimed at you ................. but everybody thinks 'this' isn't right or 'that' hasn't been done etc but nobody can offer realistic solutions as we are not privy to the BIG picture and so we all continue to type and post some more drivel on here..  and I am just as guilty as everyone else.  😎

Share this post


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

Higher profile chairman? Not sure if that’s what you meant but I think a lot of people can see the benefit in fan ownership in the modern day. I don’t see any other outcome that’ll be better for our club personally, especially considering the near decade the club was up for sale before BTB completed. 

Please don't shoot me for asking, but .................... is it not the case that buy the buds is ONLY possible because GLS put up the money to buy the rest of the shares and he has agreed to pass them on at cost?  If that is the case then there are some people on here who should be ashamed of the vitriol aimed at him at times.

Share this post


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

Does anyone from SMISA know whether they propose to continue to seek members to continue their BTB subscriptions post purchase of the club?? 

1000 members continuing to contribute £12 * 12 months =  £144,000 p.a. 

That would be money that arguably could go straight into the club as additional revenue if the fans were willing to continue to commit in those numbers. 

When you look at that number you really realise the limitations of the fans' financial power. That has always been a question mark for me as to where the money comes from in tough times and where money can be generated to push the club forward.  

The club's current owner and future fan ownership really have a job on their hands to increase revenue streams, grow our support and market the club better. 

You could actually argue that we've reduced our potential for additional revenue streams that would come in the form of investment from new directors/shareholders coming on board. There's currently no incentive for anyone to invest in the club as the path is already marked out for GLS to sell to the fans - thereby making any other shares irrelevant. Similarly, once the fans have control - why would anyone invest? 

Thinking way ahead - if someone came in with willingness to invest a reasonable sum in the club and good intentions  would SMISA sell up?

 

 

If someone wanted to invest and take control of the club then the clearest path would be to canvass and force an smisa EGM, or  specific item on the next AGM agenda for a propsal to lend smisa the money needed to bump up their funds to buy out Scott.

i could see members voting for that if they retained a board member, kept paying into BtB and perhaps got two or three smisa board members. As long as said investor could show proof of funds, invest plan, additional revenue stream development plan and vision for the club.

with BtB we got none of that, all we got was "trust me, i used tae be a joiner" and people bought that!

Share this post


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

Please don't shoot me for asking, but .................... is it not the case that buy the buds is ONLY possible because GLS put up the money to buy the rest of the shares and he has agreed to pass them on at cost?  If that is the case then there are some people on here who should be ashamed of the vitriol aimed at him at times.

No the reverse is actually true. If the fans (smisa members) hadnt been on board then the previous board would not have sold shares to Scott. We would be being rin by Argentinians now had smisa and BtB not happened. Big question there...?

would that have put us in a better poster now, or not?

it would be hard to imagine a group of foreign investors making such an intentional f**k up of neglect if they were putting their money in imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
12 minutes ago, jaybee said:

Please don't shoot me for asking, but .................... is it not the case that buy the buds is ONLY possible because GLS put up the money to buy the rest of the shares and he has agreed to pass them on at cost?  If that is the case then there are some people on here who should be ashamed of the vitriol aimed at him at times.

No the reverse is actually true. If the fans (smisa members) hadnt been on board then the previous board would not have sold shares to Scott. We would be being rin by Argentinians now had smisa and BtB not happened. Big question there...?

would that have put us in a better poster now, or not?

it would be hard to imagine a group of foreign investors making such an intentional f**k up of neglect if they were putting their money in imo.

I can't dispute that as I know no different , others may; we shall see, however I am NOT a fan of foreign investment in sport in this country and would rather see Shull's scenario and us all return to part time football than join the Abranovich's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jaybee said:

I can't dispute that as I know no different , others may; we shall see, however I am NOT a fan of foreign investment in sport in this country and would rather see Shull's scenario and us all return to part time football than join the Abranovich's.

Hit Stuart Gilmour up on twitter! I am sure ye woukd be happy to confirm what was the selling consortium's position regarding the sale to smisa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:
41 minutes ago, jaybee said:

You still need to take your pills bud.  :D

Jaybee. 

Interest rates being as they are its hardly worth moving money out of a current account. Depreciation on his car might hit £20k a year. Simply work out the interest on 700k

Ricky (You still need to take your pills bud..:D.) was in response to BuddieinEK. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I rather think his point was ............. that your point would be better made if it came with some practical solutions to the 'quite valid issues' that you highlight.  This is not aimed at you ................. but everybody thinks 'this' isn't right or 'that' hasn't been done etc but nobody can offer realistic solutions as we are not privy to the BIG picture and so we all continue to type and post some more drivel on here..  and I am just as guilty as everyone else.  
I made some suggestions which could well turn out to be practical solutions...

Involve supporters in MC'ing at hospitality to allow our Marketing manager to freely network.

Host network events for sponsors on a more regular basis... Businesses supporting one another adds to the value of sponsorship.

Promote our venue for events such as funerals.

Those were just a few suggestions off the top of my head in my original post.

I agree with you... It is easier to criticise than offer solutions.

I'm just very frustrated and want better for and from Saints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
8 minutes ago, jaybee said:

I can't dispute that as I know no different , others may; we shall see, however I am NOT a fan of foreign investment in sport in this country and would rather see Shull's scenario and us all return to part time football than join the Abranovich's.

Hit Stuart Gilmour up on twitter! I am sure ye woukd be happy to confirm what was the selling consortium's position regarding the sale to smisa.

I am not doubting, simply awaiting further info which I am sure will be forthcoming. If what you say is the case it would appear to me to be a symbiotic partnership where both partners require the other to exist, not necessarily a bad state of affairs to be in the interim, however like others I do worry re long term investment in the club with a fans ownership in place.  If someone will pass to me their winning lottery ticket .................... I may JUST have a solution.  😎  😎  😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jaybee said:

Please don't shoot me for asking, but .................... is it not the case that buy the buds is ONLY possible because GLS put up the money to buy the rest of the shares and he has agreed to pass them on at cost?  If that is the case then there are some people on here who should be ashamed of the vitriol aimed at him at times.

Yeah that’s correct, not at a penny personal gain from the money he’s invested. Shameful some of the abuse he’s getting on Facebook and Twitter. 

Share this post


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

No the reverse is actually true. If the fans (smisa members) hadnt been on board then the previous board would not have sold shares to Scott. We would be being rin by Argentinians now had smisa and BtB not happened. Big question there...?

would that have put us in a better poster now, or not?

it would be hard to imagine a group of foreign investors making such an intentional f**k up of neglect if they were putting their money in imo.

This is just wrong, without GLS capital BTB couldn’t have happened because no one else had the money & willingness & the nature of the old BoD request was they wanted the capital early rather than late in the deal. 

As for the Argentinian owners, that not progressing was due to them not being the right fit for the club in old BoD opinion. BTB or otherwise there is no evidence it would have completed. 

There are also several examples of what looked like great deals for clubs up front and turned out to be very poor, even to the point it made clubs stop existing. 

Fan ownership as a model at home and abroad seems to have had more consistent success. Strange why some feel St Mirren will buck this trend. Same people certainly can’t show evidence of that view. 

Share this post


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

Goodwin has walked into the lowest budget in the league and lower than some in the league below. 

I would be amazed if we have the lowest budget in the division with Accies & Livi included..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No the reverse is actually true. If the fans (smisa members) hadnt been on board then the previous board would not have sold shares to Scott. We would be being rin by Argentinians now had smisa and BtB not happened. Big question there...?
would that have put us in a better poster now, or not?
it would be hard to imagine a group of foreign investors making such an intentional f**k up of neglect if they were putting their money in imo.
Yes, foreign investors with no attachment other than financial always act in a football clubs best interests

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Go check the last accounts, and compare them to the previous board's! 
More innuendo from you. You made a claim, which may well be true. I'm only asking for proof. Now though when I ask for evidence you expect me to go and find it?

Share this post


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

it would be hard to imagine a group of foreign investors making such an intentional f**k up of neglect if they were putting their money in imo.

Doesn't Dundee have foreign investors. :rolleyes:

Share this post


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

Yes, foreign investors with no attachment other than financial always act in a football clubs best interests emoji1787.png

Livingston are an excellent example of just how well things go with foreign investors...…………………...🤣

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...