Jump to content

Lord Pityme

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership Proposal (Merged)

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Or... this was always the plan?
Kibble featured heavily in the 10000 hours clusterf**k
ad did Scott again...! Trying to punt his shares.
I knew something like this was on the cards before BtB was landed! It's no surprise to me, especially with the complete lack of effort made since BtB to work with and help to make the community more resilient.
Add to that not ONE additional revenue stream being created by the club. NOT ONE!
This was the endgame they wouldn't tell you about.

The plot thickens

42 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Still not true, a complete and repeated lie. 

or does it.

 

Even more confused.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dickson said:

O I totally get what you mean. I mean the demographic around Ainslie Park is all luxury developments, Aston Martin cars, and £multi millionaires. Oh wait! Really? Haud on! Oh, the Scottish Government says it's one of the most deprived areas in Edinburgh. It says Ainslie Park is surrounded by two council housing schemes - East and West Pilton. Wikipedia says it's got a high crime rate with loads of anti social behaviour, joyriders, and stolen high powered vehicles. 

Never mind eh. A coffee shop in Edinburgh eh? They don't have many of them there. No competition so it's good everyone from Morningside who fancies a cuppa will head straight there. Oh, there's loads of coffee shops in Edinburgh. Wow, who'd have thunk it. 

Still it's not quite Ferguslie Park eh? LPM is clearly mental thinking a coffee shop would work. Bonkers idea - unless it's done by the Kibble. Yep they are the only ones could make a coffee shop work. 

  Hide contents

Just incase anyone missed it - I'm being sarcastic. 

 

The demographic does have an impact on how successful these projects can be but I am not for a second saying it relates only to affluence, again you have completely missed the point.  You surely realise affluence isn’t the only factor in making community related football (and other) projects work in an area? Hence why I can see it working in Ferguslie Park in theory. 

My comments were related to the positioning of Ainslie Park and its surroundings. From a quick look there is a modern leisure Centre and a much more built up area than where our stadium is. Good effort Stuart but yet again this is far too easy for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, East Lothian Saint said:

I cannot agree or disagree with anything you say because I don't have a clue  (possibly like most SMISA members but maybe I'm a minority) how the club is run day to day or what plans it has for the future. I am not up to speed with the current interests or challenges in most aspects of the club other than the bit on the park.

I can tell you who the players are and who I think is playing well and playing shite because I go to games but I've never been to a board meeting or even a SMISA meeting.

I'm just worried that without the proper expertise. If SMISA (of which I am a member) get complete control. Then the lunatics will be running the asylum.

The  volatile £2 spend discussions, the scepticism about SMISA from non SMISA Fans  and the fascination with getting it right up GS on here does not paint a pretty picture of fan ownership.

You more than anyone has been banging the Question SMISA drum.

Fan ownership is beginning to scare me more than the thought of a kibble veto. The anarchy which could be unleashed if every Shull, faraway and  st Ricky suddenly thinks they should have as big a say as the board is frightening.  No one knows how things will work if we reject Kibble. There is no plan.

The Kibble may not be ideal but we have no real leadership at present. 

SMISA will still exist in any event. If it blunders on for another 5 years without kibble, I suppose it means we can keep the GS is Cnut threads running and keep spending our £2 pot on stuff non smisa folk don't want and keep fantasising and scheming about how we can wrestle 300K from GS because he should have gone under if Gilmour had been more prudent.

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Still undecided.

 

 

Honestly I agree with a lot of what you are saying. 

I am a big advocate for Fan Ownership - always have been. In the mid to late 90's I befriended a number of football fans at struggling English clubs through the business that I was running at the time. They were setting up Independent Supporter Associations at clubs like Exeter City, Stockport County, Wycombe Wanderers, Bury, Swansea City and Chesterfield - with the goal of buying up shares in their club and trying to get a seat on the board. The ultimate goal was to have fans in football boardrooms all around the country so that fans could have a say in the way national associations ran the game. 

I followed what they were doing, their battles and how their team were getting on - obviously with very mixed results through some very trying situations for their clubs. Where it worked well it was usually down to the vision and leadership of a few people at the top. They'd lay out a vision that all their members could buy into and they would slavishly follow that vision to achieve goals and targets along the way. Generally membership buy in would remain strong and when it was needed the members would back their committee when the call went out. Where it didn't work so well was where ego's and the potential for personal - lets call it promotion - got it the way, and where leaders believed they, and only they, knew best and where they would shut out the views of their members. 

When I look at SMISA I see much of the latter. There are ego's, a complete deafness, a lack of vision, no published business plan, no ideas and a lack of direction. At SMISA there is a lot of frilly skirts and no knickers which is what I guess you get when you partner a politician with professional PR men. Guys who have ideas and vision are seen as a threat and it doesn't help that at St Mirren the likes of LPM, who does appear to have ideas and vision, are seen as completely unelectable by an online community, many of whom can't move on from the last time they had an argument.

Kibble probably do have the expertise to run the club in a better way. But giving a single organisation the power to veto the membership of the Supporters Association who got them there isn't, for me at least, what fan ownership is all about. . 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, East Lothian Saint said:

The plot thickens

or does it.

 

Even more confused.com

Have a wee search into the club over the life of BTB, you’ll see it is categorically not true there has been no additional income streams.... in fact who knows, maybe they’ll one day cover the story on Buddievision :whistle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

The demographic does have an impact on how successful these projects can be but I am not for a second saying it relates only to affluence, again you have completely missed the point.  You surely realise affluence isn’t the only factor in making community related football (and other) projects work in an area? Hence why I can see it working in Ferguslie Park in theory. 

My comments were related to the positioning of Ainslie Park and its surroundings. From a quick look there is a modern leisure Centre and a much more built up area than where our stadium is. Good effort Stuart but yet again this is far too easy for me.

You've never been there have you. 

I recommend it. Try out the cafe while you are there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dickson said:

Honestly I agree with a lot of what you are saying. 

I am a big advocate for Fan Ownership - always have been. In the mid to late 90's I befriended a number of football fans at struggling English clubs through the business that I was running at the time. They were setting up Independent Supporter Associations at clubs like Exeter City, Stockport County, Wycombe Wanderers, Bury, Swansea City and Chesterfield - with the goal of buying up shares in their club and trying to get a seat on the board. The ultimate goal was to have fans in football boardrooms all around the country so that fans could have a say in the way national associations ran the game. 

I followed what they were doing, their battles and how their team were getting on - obviously with very mixed results through some very trying situations for their clubs. Where it worked well it was usually down to the vision and leadership of a few people at the top. They'd lay out a vision that all their members could buy into and they would slavishly follow that vision to achieve goals and targets along the way. Generally membership buy in would remain strong and when it was needed the members would back their committee when the call went out. Where it didn't work so well was where ego's and the potential for personal - lets call it promotion - got it the way, and where leaders believed they, and only they, knew best and where they would shut out the views of their members. 

When I look at SMISA I see much of the latter. There are ego's, a complete deafness, a lack of vision, no published business plan, no ideas and a lack of direction. At SMISA there is a lot of frilly skirts and no knickers which is what I guess you get when you partner a politician with professional PR men. Guys who have ideas and vision are seen as a threat and it doesn't help that at St Mirren the likes of LPM, who does appear to have ideas and vision, are seen as completely unelectable by an online community, many of whom can't move on from the last time they had an argument.

Kibble probably do have the expertise to run the club in a better way. But giving a single organisation the power to veto the membership of the Supporters Association who got them there isn't, for me at least, what fan ownership is all about. . 

 

Speaking about a guy that can’t move on from a Herald article published four years ago... 

Talking yourself & LPM up will not change the facts as they’ve been presented on this website many times. There is a clear bias stemming from personal vendettas against people linked to SMISA. As such both your views have been clouded and both your views to date have been proven wrong regarding BTB. Why anyone should believe this time it should be different I don’t know. 
 

at least we aren’t getting ‘armageddon’ and claims of regulatory non-compliance posts this time... well almost 

Edited by bazil85

Share this post


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

You've never been there have you. 

I recommend it. Try out the cafe while you are there. 

And that means it would work just as well for all football clubs in Scotland? If only people much closer to SMFC with far more business astuteness than you had thought about it... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Dickson said:

When I look at SMISA I see much of the latter. There are ego's, a complete deafness, a lack of vision, no published business plan, no ideas and a lack of direction. At SMISA there is a lot of frilly skirts and no knickers which is what I guess you get when you partner a politician with professional PR men. Guys who have ideas and vision are seen as a threat and it doesn't help that at St Mirren the likes of LPM, who does appear to have ideas and vision, are seen as completely unelectable by an online community, many of whom can't move on from the last time they had an argument.

Kibble probably do have the expertise to run the club in a better way. But giving a single organisation the power to veto the membership of the Supporters Association who got them there isn't, for me at least, what fan ownership is all about. . 

 

I would not let LPM look after my dog never mind giving him a role in the Club. The BTB scheme was always going to come to this point on who and how they run the Club/Business when they take control. Your correct in that SMISA have shown to date that apathy exists in member engagement and the lack of experience in running. A business such as a football club. 

Kibble at least bring a tried and test knowledge of being able to run a business that is 20 times the size of SMFC. The question is can they run a Football Club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Speaking about a guy that can’t move on from a Herald article published four years ago... 

Talking yourself & LPM up will not change the facts as they’ve been presented on this website many times. There is a clear bias stemming from personal vendettas against people linked to SMISA. As such both your views have been clouded and both your views to date have been proven wrong regarding BTB. Why anyone should believe this time it should be different I don’t know. 
 

at least we aren’t getting ‘armageddon’ and claims of regulatory non-compliance posts this time... well almost 

WTF are you talking about. What Herald article? 

I am not talking myself up Bazil. Each one of those items is checkable on this forum. I'd imagine that some on here even remember the arguments that ensued and the derision it got me. Some of what I am talking about predates BtB too by some distance. Infact some of the community projects that I was talking about - particularly when it came to the Spartans and to the Atlantis Leisure Centre  - was right at the start of the 10000Hours campaign to buy the club. 

There's little point in going over it all over and over again. You've made a lot of false claims about what happened with me and SMISA but this is a thread about the dilution of fan ownership at St Mirren FC and I think that's far more important than petty point scoring. 

 

Share this post


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

I would not let LPM look after my dog never mind giving him a role in the Club. The BTB scheme was always going to come to this point on who and how they run the Club/Business when they take control. Your correct in that SMISA have shown to date that apathy exists in member engagement and the lack of experience in running. A business such as a football club. 

Kibble at least bring a tried and test knowledge of being able to run a business that is 20 times the size of SMFC. The question is can they run a Football Club.

I'm sure they can. I don't doubt anyone's ability at Kibble to do a good job. Oh and BTB I would say the same thing about George Adam and a few of his mates on the SMISA committee as you have said about LPM.

What I am concerned about though is this veto on ordinary resolutions. I don't like it. It's not what fan ownership is about and it's not at all what has been sold to the membership. I also an concerned about what Kibble are getting from the deal - it's got to be worth at least £300k for their trustees to have acted lawfully. And I'm concerned about the potential at the club might be represented at important SFA and SPFL management meetings by someone who is not a St Mirren supporter. 

Edited by Dickson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

And that means it would work just as well for all football clubs in Scotland? If only people much closer to SMFC with far more business astuteness than you had thought about it... 

Yes it would. That's exactly the point I've been making. If you knew your Scottish Football History you would know that it was the community partnership between football clubs and the people around them that grew the sport in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dickson said:

WTF are you talking about. What Herald article? 

I am not talking myself up Bazil. Each one of those items is checkable on this forum. I'd imagine that some on here even remember the arguments that ensued and the derision it got me. Some of what I am talking about predates BtB too by some distance. Infact some of the community projects that I was talking about - particularly when it came to the Spartans and to the Atlantis Leisure Centre  - was right at the start of the 10000Hours campaign to buy the club. 

There's little point in going over it all over and over again. You've made a lot of false claims about what happened with me and SMISA but this is a thread about the dilution of fan ownership at St Mirren FC and I think that's far more important than petty point scoring. 

 

The one LPM references about the bigot brother two stand arrangement.

Oh you were, it gave me a wee chuckle. I think what’s checkable on the form is you using anything at your disposal to have a negative outlook on practically any SMFC related subject. I’d say your admittance to this deal being “exactly” what you’re looking for, yet still manage to troll over negative nonsense shows that. Let me ask you, nothing about your ripping apart of BTB back in the day that you regret or look upon differently? Four years in and you still think you were completely right on it, even considering where it has taken the club to date? Each to their own.

It is not a false claim, I’ve explained very clearly to you the duty and the steps that would have been taken regarding your previous claims. It was very well documented that you were crying breach back in the day. You were wrong.

8 minutes ago, Dickson said:

Yes it would. That's exactly the point I've been making. If you knew your Scottish Football History you would know that it was the community partnership between football clubs and the people around them that grew the sport in the first place. 

There is absolutely no way to know if we mirrored their business plan regarding their stadium and the surroundings that it would deliver the same results. If it was that easy you’d have every club in Britain doing it. I had my concerns back in the day about people making these suggestions, I recognised the risk involved, I think the risk is significantly reduced with someone like the Kibble involved. Do I still think it will all work out and be sunshine and skittles? Undecided but I now think it's a risk worth taking. 

Strange that this sounds like "exactly" what you want, will grow income for SMFC, benefit some of the most deprived in our community & beyond yet you're still hung-up on a guy getting his own money back + a bit extra for previously owned shares that probably won't even cover the lost interest his involvement has cost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

 

There is absolutely no way to know if we mirrored their business plan regarding their stadium and the surroundings that it would deliver the same results. If it was that easy you’d have every club in Britain doing it. I had my concerns back in the day about people making these suggestions, I recognised the risk involved, I think the risk is significantly reduced with someone like the Kibble involved. Do I still think it will all work out and be sunshine and skittles? Undecided but I now think it's a risk worth taking. 

So let me get this straight just for my own head. You reckon that there is no way the local education authority would trust St Mirren to deliver a schools based project on their behalf? You think there is no way an pre and after school care club would work at St Mirren. You think that a coffee shop in Paisley couldn't possibly turn a profit You think there is no demand for office space or conference facilities at the stadium. And you think there are no suitable community partnerships that could operate between St Mirren and the local community unless it's run by Kibble with the power to veto SMISAs membership. 

And yet you claim I am consumed with negativity. 

 

Edited by Dickson

Share this post


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

So let me get this straight just for my own head. You reckon that there is no way the local education authority would trust St Mirren to deliver a schools based project on their behalf? You think there is no way an pre and after school care club would work at St Mirren. You think that a coffee shop in Paisley couldn't possibly turn a profit You think there is no demand for office space or conference facilities at the stadium. And you think there are no suitable community partnerships that could operate between St Mirren and the local community unless it's Kibble. 

And yet you claim I am consumed with negativity. 

 

No Stuart, your back to exactly what you used to do, spin comments to absolute rubbish. First of all I have never said "there is no way" I have never said "couldn't possibly turn a profit" about anything, those claims are all lies from you. 

What I am saying is there is no magic formula where if you say something will definitely work, it will definitely work. There is no no way to know if we were to have done all this stuff ourselves some years ago it would 100% of all came up well. Do you really think it's that easy to succeed in business? It is perfectly reasonable to have reservations about all of the above at our stadium, there was then and there is now. My personal view is I am a lot more confident right now on these kind of deliverable, assuming this vote is a yes. 

Sometimes on here I've found myself typing things like "even by your standards, the lies in this post are pathetic" but as many of us know, this is right on par for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bazil85 said:

No Stuart, your back to exactly what you used to do, spin comments to absolute rubbish. First of all I have never said "there is no way" I have never said "couldn't possibly turn a profit" about anything, those claims are all lies from you. 

What I am saying is there is no magic formula where if you say something will definitely work, it will definitely work. There is no no way to know if we were to have done all this stuff ourselves some years ago it would 100% of all came up well. Do you really think it's that easy to succeed in business? It is perfectly reasonable to have reservations about all of the above at our stadium, there was then and there is now. My personal view is I am a lot more confident right now on these kind of deliverable, assuming this vote is a yes. 

Sometimes on here I've found myself typing things like "even by your standards, the lies in this post are pathetic" but as many of us know, this is right on par for you. 

I guess there was just a better pool of talent at Spartans then eh? Better brains, better businessmen, higher achievers, people with bigger ambitions for their football club and for their local community. Yes that must be it. After all they are doing it and they have the support of their local community whereas at St Mirren SMISA stood petrified, not sure what the word "community" meant never mind having the social skills to go and talk to local community groups. 

See the difference between Spartans and St Mirren is their fans weren't asked to donate upwards of  £100 per ball for some first team players to kick about, or to pay players wages. They were asked to support services supplied by the club where profits would be re-invested in growing the number of services the club could offer for the local community. 

You, it appears, have come late to the conclusion that working with the local community is a fantastic idea, so great infact that you think it's only right SMISA should give up control of St Mirren FC to allow a third party, a minority shareholder, a veto on any major decisions at the club. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Dickson said:

So let me get this straight just for my own head. You reckon that there is no way the local education authority would trust St Mirren to deliver a schools based project on their behalf? You think there is no way an pre and after school care club would work at St Mirren. You think that a coffee shop in Paisley couldn't possibly turn a profit You think there is no demand for office space or conference facilities at the stadium. And you think there are no suitable community partnerships that could operate between St Mirren and the local community unless it's run by Kibble with the power to veto SMISAs membership. 

And yet you claim I am consumed with negativity. 

 

Lots of empty offices in Paisley. One has already been turned into a Motel, another has submitted planning permission for hotel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
O I totally get what you mean. I mean the demographic around Ainslie Park is all luxury developments, Aston Martin cars, and £multi millionaires. Oh wait! Really? Haud on! Oh, the Scottish Government says it's one of the most deprived areas in Edinburgh. It says Ainslie Park is surrounded by two council housing schemes - East and West Pilton. Wikipedia says it's got a high crime rate with loads of anti social behaviour, joyriders, and stolen high powered vehicles. 
Never mind eh. A coffee shop in Edinburgh eh? They don't have many of them there. No competition so it's good everyone from Morningside who fancies a cuppa will head straight there. Oh, there's loads of coffee shops in Edinburgh. Wow, who'd have thunk it. 
Still it's not quite Ferguslie Park eh? LPM is clearly mental thinking a coffee shop would work. Bonkers idea - unless it's done by the Kibble. Yep they are the only ones could make a coffee shop work. 
Spoiler

Just incase anyone missed it - I'm being sarcastic. 

 

Im not convinced that a coffee shop would be feasible at St. Mirren Park. Kibble are though and if this proposal is successful they'll be going ahead with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would not let LPM look after my dog never mind giving him a role in the Club. The BTB scheme was always going to come to this point on who and how they run the Club/Business when they take control. Your correct in that SMISA have shown to date that apathy exists in member engagement and the lack of experience in running. A business such as a football club. 
Kibble at least bring a tried and test knowledge of being able to run a business that is 20 times the size of SMFC. The question is can they run a Football Club.
Mibees we should give them a trial first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dickson said:

I guess there was just a better pool of talent at Spartans then eh? Better brains, better businessmen, higher achievers, people with bigger ambitions for their football club and for their local community. Yes that must be it. After all they are doing it and they have the support of their local community whereas at St Mirren SMISA stood petrified, not sure what the word "community" meant never mind having the social skills to go and talk to local community groups. 

See the difference between Spartans and St Mirren is their fans weren't asked to donate upwards of  £100 per ball for some first team players to kick about, or to pay players wages. They were asked to support services supplied by the club where profits would be re-invested in growing the number of services the club could offer for the local community. 

You, it appears, have come late to the conclusion that working with the local community is a fantastic idea, so great infact that you think it's only right SMISA should give up control of St Mirren FC to allow a third party, a minority shareholder, a veto on any major decisions at the club. 

 

Nope, yet again spin away. Whether you understand it or not the demographic, the location and the opportunities differ from location to location in this world. By your logic, maybe you should explore the interest in starting a skying holiday business in the Maldives, they seem to be lacking. Someone thinking their business idea universally can't fail under any circumstances doesn't mean it's true... I am not like you though and won't assume the ridiculous, so can I just clarify that's your take? All the mentioned items, if put in place at St Mirren park, were void of any risk? 

I would wager if they had a similar set-up and asked, the fans would back it. The nature of football fans is generally to prioritise the club they support, we know that's lost on you. I would also wager they'd pick playing in the SP over where they currently are. Not even you can deny the league progress made by SMFC since BTB launched. 

Again completely incorrect, always seen the benefit in it, always taken pride in what we have done as a club over the years for the community (SMISA included). I just realise it isn't always as simple and clear cut as people make out. In times of fire fighting, we backed the team, that ended with a promotion and survival in the top flight of Scottish football. In a football sense the decisions made were the right ones.. In a community sense, a stronger St Mirren is more beneficial

We are now on the brink of forming a very interesting partnership that will allow our ties with the community to undoubtedly grow. I mean seriously, what do you think we should have done differently here? apart from not support a team that risked relegation to the third tier of Scottish football. for the first time in its history of course 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

Kibble at least bring a tried and test knowledge of being able to run a business that is 20 times the size of SMFC. The question is can they run a Football Club.

Two parties, one to look after the business side, the other, football. As one would image, one can't be trusted to look after the other.  OMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

By your logic, maybe you should explore the interest in starting a skying holiday business in the Maldives, they seem to be lacking. 

Maybe it's not a good idea to take a bikini holiday in the Maldives either! :whistle

Share this post


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

Im not convinced that a coffee shop would be feasible at St. Mirren Park. 

It will be once cannabis is legalised. Just think the Kibble could use the dome to grow the gear.

Edited by Yflab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see the topic go the same way as all the others that baz gets involved with.

It may have been covered in the previous 40 or so pages but the only reason I can see why GS would want Kibble involved is because he can't trust SMiSA. If Kibble (or any other well run business) get on board, they will be calling the shots for everything and SmiSA will be able to do nothing about it. Any services coming from Kibble to the club, you can be certain the club will need to pay for (they are a charity remember) can't just give assets (staff; time etc) away for nought.

There is a reason why someone would want to have 75% or as close to 75% of the shares, if you dont know, look it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, melmac said:

Good to see the topic go the same way as all the others that baz gets involved with.

It may have been covered in the previous 40 or so pages but the only reason I can see why GS would want Kibble involved is because he can't trust SMiSA. If Kibble (or any other well run business) get on board, they will be calling the shots for everything and SmiSA will be able to do nothing about it. Any services coming from Kibble to the club, you can be certain the club will need to pay for (they are a charity remember) can't just give assets (staff; time etc) away for nought.

There is a reason why someone would want to have 75% or as close to 75% of the shares, if you dont know, look it up.

Smoke and Mirrors. The magic number to have overall control of a company is 75% of the shares not 71% or nearly 75 %. It’s 75% 

SMISA were never going to have the magic number. They always going to be accountable to the remaining. 29% of shareholders. Look it up

So having 71% or 51% does not change much on the shareholding control

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...