Jump to content

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership


Recommended Posts

Guest TPAFKATS

Trying to sort out in my mind...

Pros

Can get control by Dec 2021 -

Kibble will provide support services ( Need clarification)

Would be able potentially to reduce SMISA subscriptions early

Cons

Already projected to be able to buy by 2023 (Kombi’s point) so why not wait another 2 years and buy outright

We (SMISA and other supporter shareholders) would no longer be sole owners of StMirren

Proposal may piss off enough members that Dec 2021 target is not met

Would lose option to sell spare shares later (Waldorf’s point)

Questions

Why is SMISA paying all legal fees to achieve this ?

What happens to current Income from Kibble as a customer ?

What are specific benefits to Kibble ?

What does ‘Kibble will ....invest in new facilities’ mean and who would own these. I.e. is this new money coming from Kibble ?

If present income is maintained what is revised date for original purchase plan ? (estimated 2023 - see above)

For me it comes down to :

  1. Do we want jam now (2021) from the pros above or
  2. Do we wait another two years and buy outright

 

....and I cannae make my mind up..

This highlights the importance of getting clear, concise answers at next weeks meeting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


8 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

If you wish me to expand, I will..............................your post was a load of twaddle.

I hope this is enough, you're not worth any more of my time. :byebye

More than enough. Please don't expand on anything. No point you filling another thread with emoji's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The club isn't being sold though is it?

I think everyone, except you it seems, at least understands that very basic point.

The proposal is that 27% of Gordon's shares are sold Kibble.

SMiSA currently have a legal agreement to buy those shares.

SMiSA members are being asked to vote on whether they want that sale to proceed.

SMiSA will continue on their path towards fan ownership, at the end of 2021, when they will own the majority shareholding of 51%

 

This is really pretty simple to understand. Try and think hard before you post and see if you can come up with a better lie.

 

Aye, tell me when did smisa members ask for this?

Your lie... trying to convince people selling over a quarter of the club to an outside organisation isnt in fact selling over a quarter of the club to an outside organisation.

Smisa members did not ask for this hotch potch betrayal of what they were promised.

But hey, if you're happy to just let solemn promises slide then you live with whatever that brings you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are Kibble buying up shares? That's what I don't get. Why not just rent out the facilities from St Mirren? What commercial advantage does buying the shares give Kibble? 
As I said on the other thread I'm all for St Mirren partnering with community groups, charities and service providers. It's what I always argued for so I'm not against the idea of St Mirren working with Kibble to make things happen - what I don't get though is why a charity feels the need to buy up shares off Gordon Scott to make it happen. 
This.
Absolutely this.

Partnership and trading agreements are possible without share purchase.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Dickson said:

Why are Kibble buying up shares? That's what I don't get. Why not just rent out the facilities from St Mirren? What commercial advantage does buying the shares give Kibble? 

As I said on the other thread I'm all for St Mirren partnering with community groups, charities and service providers. It's what I always argued for so I'm not against the idea of St Mirren working with Kibble to make things happen - what I don't get though is why a charity feels the need to buy up shares off Gordon Scott to make it happen. 

Exactly my point plus we keep the extra shares for a rainy  day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Why are the smisa committee even entertaining it?
Who asked them to facilitate selling over a quarter of the club to an outside organisation?

It does not matter why , or whether they were asked. It will only come to pass if a majority of SMISA members OKs it. If you are a member you will have a vote, if you are not It shouldn't concern you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buddymarvellous said:

Trying to sort out in my mind...

Pros

Can get control by Dec 2021 -

Kibble will provide support services ( Need clarification)

Would be able potentially to reduce SMISA subscriptions early

Cons

Already projected to be able to buy by 2023 (Kombi’s point) so why not wait another 2 years and buy outright

We (SMISA and other supporter shareholders) would no longer be sole owners of StMirren

Proposal may piss off enough members that Dec 2021 target is not met

Would lose option to sell spare shares later (Waldorf’s point)

Questions

Why is SMISA paying all legal fees to achieve this ?

What happens to current Income from Kibble as a customer ?

What are specific benefits to Kibble ?

What does ‘Kibble will ....invest in new facilities’ mean and who would own these. I.e. is this new money coming from Kibble ?

If present income is maintained what is revised date for original purchase plan ? (estimated 2023 - see above)

For me it comes down to :

  1. Do we want jam now (2021) from the pros above or
  2. Do we wait another two years and buy outright

 

....and I cannae make my mind up..

Based On this alone WE STICK. 

Very Little is ever gained long term by selling off the family silver.... Harold Macmillan 1985

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:


Not sure if the buy out option has to be completed when we SMISA have the funds or we wait and have a rainy day fund.

You seem to contradict yourself regarding we shouldn't be giving up on the shares that the kibble will be purchasing but be able to sell to a.n.other so still not having the 71 % ownership.

You do raise a lot of good points that need answered for I believe the majority including myself to finally decide how we will progress.

 

Thanks Cockles

I don’t think we would have a rainy day fund at the point we buy up to the 51% anyway

I wasn’t proposing  that we would ever sell the shares - just making the point that we would always have that buffer/rainy day fund option 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:
5 hours ago, waldorf34 said:
Smisa already had shares before the agreement 

I knew that, just don't recollect them having or being able to reach 80% from the shareholding available. Can you show how you came up with that figure.

After paying off the old board directors last summer Smisa own 29%GS owns 50.2%,so total 79.2%

By GS selling 27.5% Smisa get 22.8%  adding that to the 29% gives them 51.8%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LPM.
SMISA members are being asked whether or not they approve of this! No deal has been done; it is still only a proposal. if you are a SMISA member you will get your say.
Maybe so... But my Motherwell supporting pal was asking me all about it believing it to be agreed going by press reports.

The press coverage and photos are hardly impartial... They are leading and manipulative, aimed at selling the deal before SMISA members have even had the chance to discuss it.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does not matter why , or whether they were asked. It will only come to pass if a majority of SMISA members OKs it. If you are a member you will have a vote, if you are not It shouldn't concern you.
So anyone who isnt a smisa member has no right to be concerned a quarter of the club is being flogged off?
What an arrogant fool you are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....and now I have a nice long flight to read 21 pages.....
 
......wonder how much i will recognise....
 
I admit I have had a bit of a chuckle at this...
I'm a smisa member and trying to decide what would be best to vote for and although there are a lot of conspiracy theory elements to LPM's postings he does raise some valid points, it seems to me that we haven't heard much from you of late and with the above post I don't think you've helped much. Don't get me wrong you are entirely at liberty to post or not as you see fit as is anyone else, just why this and why now? Confused of Stanley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a smisa member and trying to decide what would be best to vote for and although there are a lot of conspiracy theory elements to LPM's postings he does raise some valid points, it seems to me that we haven't heard much from you of late and with the above post I don't think you've helped much. Don't get me wrong you are entirely at liberty to post or not as you see fit as is anyone else, just why this and why now? Confused of Stanley
You don't think he has earned the right to gloat or snigger up his sleeve?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, cockles1987 said:
12 hours ago, waldorf34 said:
After paying off the old board directors last summer Smisa own 29%GS owns 50.2%,so total 79.2%
By GS selling 27.5% Smisa get 22.8%  adding that to the 29% gives them 51.8%

Forgot about the GLS 8%

Always thought GLS was not selling his 8% and SMISA only ever referred to having a potential 71%.

Of course as we can see, things can change.

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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...