Jump to content

Value For Money


BuddieinEK

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Yflab said:

SMiSA have confirmed that this is funded from BTB members subs. SMiSA's only source of income currently is member subscriptions.

Fair enough, also good to know we aren’t breaching any rules. Never thought about the interest generated, great way to put it to use without using the £12/£25 money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


43 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Fair enough, also good to know we aren’t breaching any rules. Never thought about the interest generated, great way to put it to use without using the £12/£25 money. 

:lol:

Doh....

Not a good look for someone who waxes so eloquently on finances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, antrin said:

:lol:🤣

 

PLEASE!!!!!

Just stop digging!😂🤣

Not digging at all, I’m man enough to admit I was wrong regarding the generation of other fund (many others on here that can’t admit when they’re wrong).

But believe it or not I know interest is generated on saved funds :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Yflab said:

The feedback I have had from SMiSA is that 

a. There are currently no specific rules in the Constitution about levels of expenditure requiring member approval. The £500 which is sometimes mentioned in online discussions relates purely to re-imbursement of personal expenses incurred by elected board members in relation to Society activities, and is from the Board Membership and Conduct Policy, not the Constitution.

b. SMiSA's only source of income currently is member subscriptions. However as the share purchase funds accumulate, the interest earned thereon helps to offset some of our operating costs. After separating the £2 Spend part of subscriptions, everything else after allowing for running costs is held in the Share Purchase account.

Right there at point A. Is a convenient bit of smoke and mirrors. I know there is nothing regarding expenditure approval in the constitution. There never was, it is in the Smisa committee's own rule book! Them mentioning the constitution and it not being in there is pure deflection!

the bit about the expenses is irrelevant. The policy for membership expenditure approval predates BtB, and it would seem the Smisa committee have chosen to ignore, or remove it?

Think about it for a minute.... what that response from the Smisa committee is suggesting is that a group of unelected, ungoverned individuals can spend as much of smisa's funds, on whatever they damn well please and theres nothing the membership can do about it! There isnt a co-operative in the country, and perhaps the world that is run "Legally" like that!

if i was a smisa member i would be extremely concerned with that statement suggesting they can spend what they like of YOUR funds! It just isnt legal... but hey when has that ever stopped them dishing your money out?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lord Pityme said:

Right there at point A. Is a convenient bit of smoke and mirrors. I know there is nothing regarding expenditure approval in the constitution. There never was, it is in the Smisa committee's own rule book! Them mentioning the constitution and it not being in there is pure deflection!

the bit about the expenses is irrelevant. The policy for membership expenditure approval predates BtB, and it would seem the Smisa committee have chosen to ignore, or remove it?

Think about it for a minute.... what that response from the Smisa committee is suggesting is that a group of unelected, ungoverned individuals can spend as much of smisa's funds, on whatever they damn well please and theres nothing the membership can do about it! There isnt a co-operative in the country, and perhaps the world that is run "Legally" like that!

if i was a smisa member i would be extremely concerned with that statement suggesting they can spend what they like of YOUR funds! It just isnt legal... but hey when has that ever stopped them dishing your money out?

 

Here’s example one of a person that just can’t admit when he’s wrong. Plenty of examples of it as well. 

Continuing to claim the way SMISA act ‘just isn’t legal’ this failing vendetta is embarrassing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Poor Baz....

poor Baz.....

looked oot the windae....

and seen his ass......

People would probably gain a wee bit more respect for you if you were actually capable of admitting when you were wrong, like on here. Or say... claiming there were 3,500 early bird season tickets last season when you’ve been shown there wasn’t? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2019 at 10:56 PM, oaksoft said:

A content Management system.

I can understand why they would want one TBH but not having anyone onboard prepared to create a simple website with one is an expensive problem.

ETA. Thinking anout this a bit more, £4200 for a website is pretty expensive. A decent freelancer would charge about £30 to £50 an hour so that's around 100 hours work. What on earth do they need which requires nearly 3 weeks of continuous work given that they are currently getting by on spreadsheets?

From experience, it all depends how complex the job is. You are correct with your estimations of a freelance design/developer rate up here, though agencies will charge 2-3 times that up here and at least 4-5 times that down south and something like this would require a programmer too which is higher again.

From a professional web design/development perspective, every job is different and you are paying for the time required. If you do an actual project breakdown on time there is more understanding where time is spent on a project. Depending the project £4200 is actually not that bad. Being in the industry in an agency environment I have seen website being built for £35k upwards.

Wix and the likes are okay for small website jobs, for business owners with no budget, though web development and programming are professional skills in itself that requires going to uni to get the correct qualifications and knowledge.

This is more than just a website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:

From experience, it all depends how complex the job is. You are correct with your estimations of a freelance design/developer rate up here, though agencies will charge 2-3 times that up here and at least 4-5 times that down south and something like this would require a programmer too which is higher again.

From a professional web design/development perspective, every job is different and you are paying for the time required. If you do an actual project breakdown on time there is more understanding where time is spent on a project. Depending the project £4200 is actually not that bad. Being in the industry in an agency environment I have seen website being built for £35k upwards.

Wix and the likes are okay for small website jobs, for business owners with no budget, though web development and programming are professional skills in itself that requires going to uni to get the correct qualifications and knowledge.

This is more than just a website.

I'd certainly be interested in hearing which agencies are charging £100 (2 times the maximum rate I quoted) and £250 per hour to provide someone to code a bit of HTML, CSS, Javascript and perhaps something like PHP and MySQL at the back end. A friend of mine runs a large recruitment agency in England and they charge about 50% commission if they can get away with it. Are you talking about an agency such as Capita?

You don't need to go to university to program for web development in general. Many people do but it's not true that you need to. Of course you then need another way to get the relevant certificates but you can certainly set yourself up without a degree and many do exactly that.

What they have described sounds like something you could use a CMS with a bit of functionality tagged on through extensions. I'd be surprised if it needed more than that. Certainly not in the short term. I'm open to persuasion on that though.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sort of thing is what has stopped me ever getting involved in BTB.  

I'd love to give my money towards the purchase of our football club but I just don't want to see it squandered away. 

I simply can't see the apparent complexity of running the BTB operation as it currently stands and what really is to be gained by this expenditure other than freeing up committee/admin time (which is currently unquantified).

There's a reasonable size membership of approx. 1200. The majority of those are overwhelmingly, primarily interested in the purchase of the club. That's why there's limited engagement in £2 pot votes, AGM's and meetings. 

It begs the question - what exactly do SMISA intend to do with the 1200 members that requires these additional bells and whistles from a CRM system?

As others have suggested - maybe we have people within BTB that could deliver this?  

I also would share the question as to how exactly this came about and regarding the provider being Glasgow-based when there is a big marketplace. 

Finally, given that we apparently aren't looking to use the full features of this product initially - what does that mean when we do need to unlock additional functionality? Does that result in additional product cost and increased maintenance/support cost? 

 

Edited by Maboza
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Maboza said:

This sort of thing is what has stopped me ever getting involved in BTB.  

I'd love to give my money towards the purchase of our football club but I just don't want to see it squandered away. 

I simply can't see the apparent complexity of running the BTB operation as it currently stands and what really is to be gained by this expenditure other than freeing up committee/admin time (which is currently unquantified).

There's a reasonable size membership of approx. 1200. The majority of those are overwhelmingly, primarily interested in the purchase of the club. That's why there's limited engagement in £2 pot votes, AGM's and meetings. 

It begs the question - what exactly do SMISA intend to do with the 1200 members that requires these additional bells and whistles from a CRM system?

As others have suggested - maybe we have people within BTB that could deliver this?  

I also would share the question as to how exactly this came about and regarding the provider being Glasgow-based when there is a big marketplace. 

Finally, given that we apparently aren't looking to use the full features of this product initially - what does that mean when we do need to unlock additional functionality? Does that result in additional product cost and increased maintenance/support cost? 

 

Dont be surprised when its announced, or leaked that "Hey Presto... guess what? We've realised The Club can utilise this system much more than we can, so were letting them use most of it for Nowt..!"

just as you smisa members suckers keep footing the bill, and allowing us committee bids to soend what we want!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Dont be surprised when its announced, or leaked that "Hey Presto... guess what? We've realised The Club can utilise this system much more than we can, so were letting them use most of it for Nowt..!"

just as you smisa members suckers keep footing the bill, and allowing us committee bids to soend what we want!

I would be quite happy for the club to use this. If the club were using it to communicate will all supporters, organise local sports clubs, schools, organise ticket offers etc I could actually see the point in investing in the thing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Maboza said:

This sort of thing is what has stopped me ever getting involved in BTB.  

I'd love to give my money towards the purchase of our football club but I just don't want to see it squandered away. 

I simply can't see the apparent complexity of running the BTB operation as it currently stands and what really is to be gained by this expenditure other than freeing up committee/admin time (which is currently unquantified).

There's a reasonable size membership of approx. 1200. The majority of those are overwhelmingly, primarily interested in the purchase of the club. That's why there's limited engagement in £2 pot votes, AGM's and meetings. 

It begs the question - what exactly do SMISA intend to do with the 1200 members that requires these additional bells and whistles from a CRM system?

As others have suggested - maybe we have people within BTB that could deliver this?  

I also would share the question as to how exactly this came about and regarding the provider being Glasgow-based when there is a big marketplace. 

Finally, given that we apparently aren't looking to use the full features of this product initially - what does that mean when we do need to unlock additional functionality? Does that result in additional product cost and increased maintenance/support cost? 

 

SMiSA are in the process of taking over a football club in the next few years. Would you rather they worked off a spreadsheet or alternatively a two bob system done on the cheap to run a professional organisation going forward? You can't fully depend on an individual or a group of individuals especially on a voluntarily basis to be always available and to respond to everything required for members. If this system takes the weight off of the volunteer committee members and actually benefits SMISA as a whole too, then it is a worthwhile purchase. You can't have a manual process forever. 

 

It really depends  on an individuals knowledge know how of technology, to actually appreciate how it works and the value behind cost. That is not a dig, it is purely fact. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:

Dont be surprised when its announced, or leaked that "Hey Presto... guess what? We've realised The Club can utilise this system much more than we can, so were letting them use most of it for Nowt..!"

just as you smisa members suckers keep footing the bill, and allowing us committee bids to soend what we want!

Like Kemp I would be happy for the club to use this, given that SMISA/BTB will be the eventual owners of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kevo_smfc said:

SMiSA are in the process of taking over a football club in the next few years. Would you rather they worked off a spreadsheet or alternatively a two bob system done on the cheap to run a professional organisation going forward?

This is a really poor attitude. It's what keeps people buying things like Gaviscon for £3.50 when they can buy exactly the same thing active ingredient in tablet form for about 20p.

Nobody is suggesting any two bob system or that they continue to use spreadsheets.

Honestly do we not get enough of this ridiculous nonsense from Baz?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kevo_smfc said:

SMiSA are in the process of taking over a football club in the next few years. Would you rather they worked off a spreadsheet or alternatively a two bob system done on the cheap to run a professional organisation going forward? You can't fully depend on an individual or a group of individuals especially on a voluntarily basis to be always available and to respond to everything required for members. If this system takes the weight off of the volunteer committee members and actually benefits SMISA as a whole too, then it is a worthwhile purchase. You can't have a manual process forever. 

 

It really depends  on an individuals knowledge know how of technology, to actually appreciate how it works and the value behind cost. That is not a dig, it is purely fact. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The argument now seems to be morphing somewhat within the last few posts of the thread with people now debating the merits of such a system for the football club. That goes way beyond the scope of managing the BTB membership via the proposed system.

If a professional, modern day football club in the Scottish Premiership requires such a system then one should be efficiently and competitively sourced. That’s a different argument from what was put forward at the start of this though.

It’s the seemingly intentional (but possibly accidental) blurring of the lines between BtB and SMFC thats not helped by some of the communications and decisions. 

If I’m not mistaken, we’re talking about investing 2% of recurring BTB income every month.  That’s not insignificant. 

My question is what are BtB members getting in return? 

- It arguably slows the takeover

- It could be argued that it secures the process to some extent by making the organisation more efficient 

- or is it that it’s needed for long-term functioning of the football club? 

 

I don’t have any vendetta against BtB or anyone at the club. I’d just love to understand the objectives crystal clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably someone in SMISA has risk assessed this software as well.

In 7 years time the current software could well be obsolete so talk of buying this system now when we won't use the full suite of functionality is a bit worrying because it sounds like someone maybe doesn't understand how software changes overnight.

What guarantees has this supplier made about upgrades and future-proofing?

Are SMISA absolutely certain that they won't simply be spunking this sort of money on another new system in 7 years time?

Risk Assessment. Cue Baz.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kevo_smfc said:

SMiSA are in the process of taking over a football club in the next few years. 

 

 

 

 

 

Well this the point, they aren't. It is still over half a decade away, and all SMISA need to be at present is collecting our 12 pounds per month and putting that towards the purchase of the club.

If there are other plans that this will help with, then tell us!

Otherwise use a cheaper option for admin.

Link to comment
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...