Jump to content

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership Proposal (Merged)


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

"The head of the hearing panel said: "The councillor not only failed to declare a financial interest and participated in a vote on the motion but also spoke to and seconded the proposal in its favour."

So a councillor who works for Kibble..

Voted

Spoke

and seconded a proposal to award his employers a contract.....

Oversight, or load of shite?

 

don't you f****** start :lol

although it was reported

Quote

Councillor Mark McMillan, the current leader of the Labour administration of Renfrewshire Council, has been reported to the Standards Commission for a clear breach of the councillors code of conduct. 

Quote

Councillor McMillan not only failed to declare an interest in a debate on his employer receiving a council contract, but he actually took part in the debate – declaring that, “I am happy to support this project

Hopefully he'll have learned his lesson & this won't become an example in the future (if the vote is yes) of folk asking "why are St Mirren skint & Kibble rolling in it?"

As I said previously, oversight is the political types default setting when caught out.

Edited by Kombibuddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites


The important point is not so much the Kibble guy (who looks like he'll be on the smfc board) trying to pull a flanker on the council.
Its things like the Street Stuff contract that the club have with the council which is worth over £250k...
If Kibble get in, then that money may never see the club accounts again as Kibble have stated they want to run all those parts of the operation.

Ffs think.. why are they buying £300k of worthless shares???
Because they have their 'eyes on the prize"..!
Smfc is a potential cash cow they wanna milk dry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dickson said:

I can't find it on the SMISA website, but isn't the vote closed now anyway? 

If it has then it's pointless continuing to argue about it. I just hope that if the proposal is voted through, that those who voted for it end up being on the right side of history and that they don't regret their decision. Somehow I don't think the excuse of "I just trusted the SMISA committee" and "I was too busy to read the legal agreement" will hold much credence if it transpires that the SMISA membership have voted to replace supporter control of the club with a model that proves financially debilitating, or the membership find that their views cannot be carried because Kibble have a veto. 

 

Noon, Friday 21st is when the vote closes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't find it on the SMISA website, but isn't the vote closed now anyway? 
If it has then it's pointless continuing to argue about it. I just hope that if the proposal is voted through, that those who voted for it end up being on the right side of history and that they don't regret their decision. Somehow I don't think the excuse of "I just trusted the SMISA committee" and "I was too busy to read the legal agreement" will hold much credence if it transpires that the SMISA membership have voted to replace supporter control of the club with a model that proves financially debilitating, or the membership find that their views cannot be carried because Kibble have a veto. 
 
Voting open till Feb 21st.

Sad thing is that most automatons will have voted according to party policy by now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Still can't count to one!

You can't do yes or no! emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png

I elaborated it on it being a yes. Someone demanding a yes and no answer doesn’t mean they get one. Must have been a very spoiled upbringing if you think you can demand such things 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Voting open till Feb 21st.

Sad thing is that most automatons will have voted according to party policy by now.

Another one that doesn’t give voting members credit to make their own decisions and that is completely incapable of understanding the benefits in people close to the deal making recommendations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one that doesn’t give voting members credit to make their own decisions and that is completely incapable of understanding the benefits in people close to the deal making recommendations. 

Pity the people making the recommendations haven't explored the membership skillsets before throwing in the towel & recommending Kibble to become a major shareholder.

 

It's quite a different question to "who wants to be on the SMISA committee"

 

No exploration of 'what next' amongst the membership.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:


Yes.

I don't even trust myself with my online passwords. emoji38.png

I was replying to various posts. Your post didn't have to have anything to do with the others. Just like I'm doing here. It was perfectly clear.

Besides that, I won't take lessons on how to reply from someone who does it by copying and pasting.

It's "overly" not "overlay" - just trying to be helpful.
That's plenty of time for LPM to make a rip-roaring c**t of himself a few times more.

Feels like you were needlessly going off on a tangent to me from the rest of the content. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one that doesn’t give voting members credit to make their own decisions and that is completely incapable of understanding the benefits in people close to the deal making recommendations. 
Funnily enough, a friend phoned me last night.

He was encouraging everyone to vote.

I mentioned the veto.

He called to ask "what veto".

Most voters will have followed party policy when voting.

You know that but still insist on being a cantankerous yes man!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

Pity the people making the recommendations haven't explored the membership skillsets before throwing in the towel & recommending Kibble to become a major shareholder. 
It's quite a different question to "who wants to be on the SMISA committee"
 
No exploration of 'what next' amongst the membership.
 
 
Dafty.. what the hell skills would 1,200 combined members have?

Tube!

You know fine well we can't be trusted!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

Pity the people making the recommendations haven't explored the membership skillsets before throwing in the towel & recommending Kibble to become a major shareholder.

It's quite a different question to "who wants to be on the SMISA committee"

No exploration of 'what next' amongst the membership.

I am 100% sure there would still be moaning from the select through regardless of how the panned out. However the ‘exploration’ of a very successful charity to the extent our futures are correlated doesn’t seem a bad thing to me or many. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Still can't count to one, wee scrote.

I called you out, you’re raging, all else has failed so it’s the insults. Ouch 

3 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Funnily enough, a friend phoned me last night.

He was encouraging everyone to vote.

I mentioned the veto.

He called to ask "what veto".

Most voters will have followed party policy when voting.

You know that but still insist on being a cantankerous yes man!

All details are available to your friend. The veto has been blown up on here way out of proportion. It’s already been pointed out that it’s aligned to 25%+ shareholding

your friend not being aware of that when they voted, isn’t necessarily a bad thing. As I have said before, many supporting this proposal have earned good faith given the success of BTB to date. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:
33 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:
Pity the people making the recommendations haven't explored the membership skillsets before throwing in the towel & recommending Kibble to become a major shareholder. 
It's quite a different question to "who wants to be on the SMISA committee"
 
No exploration of 'what next' amongst the membership.
 
 

The members have had 4 years to come forward and declare an interest, if my memory is correct a total of 3 persons have came forward.

I agree in part, there has been 4 years for members to show an interest but, as I said, "who wants to be on the SMISA committee" is a very different question to exploring 'what next' for when the buds is bought.

There has been no exploration of the skillset of the membership to identify if the required skills are available and there would be members willing to utilise their skills and come on board.

After the Buds were going to be bought, under the original plan, SMISA representation on the club board would be very different to what it is now. It's been said on here many times, right now, as the majority shareholder, what GLS wants, GLS gets (or just about. Maybe he gives some concessions). That doesn't enthuse people to get involved.

SMISA owning 71% of the club and having greater representation on the BOD would, most likely encourage members to become more involved. Instead, this partnership with Kibble, is in effect, us throwing the towel in for others to run The Club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Hi

Dafty.. what the hell skills would 1,200 combined members have?

Tube!

You know fine well we can't be trusted!

If the exchanges on here are representative of 1200 members, then f**king right they can't be trusted to run a football club IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

 

There has been no exploration of the skillset of the membership to identify if the required skills are available and there would be members willing to utilise their skills and come on board.

Actually, there has.

I remember e-mailing SMISA when they were looking to see what could be offered.

After a few e-mails back and forth, it all went quiet.

Probably proves, other than an ability to drink a lot of beer,  I've got eff all skills worth mentioning.:lol:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All details are available to your friend. The veto has been blown up on here way out of proportion. It’s already been pointed out that it’s aligned to 25%+ shareholding
your friend not being aware of that when they voted, isn’t necessarily a bad thing. As I have said before, many supporting this proposal have earned good faith given the success of BTB to date. 
[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]twattery.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Funnily enough, a friend phoned me last night.

He was encouraging everyone to vote.

I mentioned the veto.

He called to ask "what veto".

Most voters will have followed party policy when voting.

You know that but still insist on being a cantankerous yes man!

Seems to be  a lot of canvassing going on 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:
Feels like you were needlessly going off on a tangent to me from the rest of the content. 

As I said, it was perfectly clear.

My point that it stemmed from was perfectly clear. You just felt the need to continue into a different conversation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:


You're really not very good at this, are you?

He was found guilty of an "oversight", i.e. a mistake, not deliberately doing anything.


Fact what? Evidence what?

I presume due to the fact that I do not know if they will even have any legal fees for it.Only to you.

How on earth do you accidentally forget that you work for Kibble during a decision to award Kibble funding?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...