Jump to content

Lord Pityme

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership Proposal (Merged)

Recommended Posts

Just now, portmahomack saint said:

I don't or anyone else on here for that matter

That is the problem PS. Arguments, discussions and questions are being answered by users who have no known association with the proposals and who may not be in a position to comment with any authority to elaborate and clarify.

All we have are the SMiSA Q&A and a recording of the open meeting for information. If anyone has actually asked a question of SMiSA, the BoD and KIbble I have yet to see an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27% is the magic number, or more specifically 25% - which allows a minority shareholder to block special resolutions. 

The legal agreement that you are voting on enhances the power of Kibble further than their shareholding would normally get them though - so that they can veto any "major decision" at the club. 

The 51% figure just means the majority of the shares are held by SMISA but the members of SMISA won't necessarily get to run the club in the way they want to. To cite an example - in 2012 Stewart Gilmour was convinced that it was in St Mirren FC Ltd's interests to keep a liquidated Rangers in the top flight of Scottish Football. He told us all that if Rangers weren't at least in the second tier St Mirren would most likely go into administration. In the end he was persuaded to vote to eject Rangers from the SPL, whilst remaining convinced that the club Chairmen in the SFL would put Rangers into the 2nd tier. They didn't and history has proved Gilmour wrong of course, but you must surely see how a third party might have voted in a different way at that SPL meeting 

 

It would have been impossible to keep a liquidated Rangers in the top flight because, by definition, they went into liquidation!

 

Gilmour also didn’t vote to eject Rangers from the top flight. He couldn’t - they went into liquidation. What he did was vote against a new club, Sevco, from joining the top flight.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Sonny said:

That is the problem PS. Arguments, discussions and questions are being answered by users who have no known association with the proposals and who may not be in a position to comment with any authority to elaborate and clarify.

All we have are the SMiSA Q&A and a recording of the open meeting for information. If anyone has actually asked a question of SMiSA, the BoD and KIbble I have yet to see an answer.

I asked a question via the Smisa website and got a prompt and detailed response .  I would encourage others to give it a go.  

Share this post


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

Not according to the main man Bazil they haven't,

He's stated that progress is being made every season since they took over,  while making a profit too,  And there's still plenty of scope for further growth and he doesn't see it slowing down,  

And yet still he's quite happy to bring on board a third party and lose total control of our club,  :huh:

I think this third party will contribute to the growth of our club. 
 

we are not losing total control of our club, people are blowing up a situation that can exists with any 25%+ shareholding. It’s tinfoil hat stuff from the usual suspects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just sour grapes, very obvious. If a majority vote is good enough for governing our country, it's good enough for a fan ownership proposal. The constitution gives reasoning for when a different voting structure is needed and this ain't one. 
I don't choose when to adhere to it, I am happy with it and have no issue with adherence. I have an opinion on the matter for different scenarios of course. This is just something you don't like so you're crying over it being able to pass in a constitutional way. Poor wee lamb lol. 
Good enough for ruling the country.

Good enough for a major variation on a proposal sold to over 1,200 people.

NOT good enough for a proposals to a minor amendment on how to use the £2 pot.

YOU HYPOCRITE!

I SMELL SHITE!

You must smell it all the more with your nose up arses that often.

Share this post


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

Good enough for ruling the country.

Good enough for a major variation on a proposal sold to over 1,200 people.

NOT good enough for a proposals to a minor amendment on how to use the £2 pot.

YOU HYPOCRITE!

I SMELL SHITE!

You must smell it all the more with your nose up arses that often.
 

You yet again need to spin things to try and have a go don’t you? What desperation. As I have very clearly said, I would have supported that being a majority vote, however the constitution calls it out the way it calls it out.
I do understand the reasoning behind it being more than a majority though. given how little interest it generated, there was the risk of it sneaking through with a very small number of voting members if it was a majority only. I am on record with this consistent view, no luck again buddie. 

Again sorry state where any support for our chairman comes out with this view. oh to be so miserable 😂

 

Share this post


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

I meant the division all members will experience regardless of how they vote. Sorry if that wasnt clear.
I left smisa, but still saw it as the only way to secure fan ownership, and never suggested anyone else should leave.
It is distressing the division that has now be sown, to facilitate one members profit, and give an organisation who have been trying to get their foot in the door for years, free reign.
On a more partisan note!
What bit of Kibble paying £300k to be able to run their programmes and take the fee for their clients they deal, with from local authorities across the UK, and stick it in Kibble's bank do some not get?
Anything Kibble do that makes money, Kibble will keep, its not going to the club community or smisa... it's going into Kibble's bulging bank account.

What Division Most of the people who are posting on here, such as you, who are against the idea are not even SMISA members. 

The Kibble debate and the fall out from some pros and against has proven that Fans Ownership is fraught with division. Some people, such as you, would start a campaign because you were not consulted on the colour of the toilet paper that was selected. Others will maybe not agree with the points put forward, however will accept the democratic majority decision and move on

Selling shares for what you bought them for is not generating or facilitating anyone profit. 

The delusion that  the Kibble who have existed for 180 years are plotting to take over the club with their 27% is way beyond shit stirring of the highest level.

Rather than hiding behind your continual innuendo why don’t you ask proper relevant questions.

Question 1 - What mechanism is in place In the interim period to stop the Kibble and GLS (combined 51%+) amending the BTB agreement further without SMISA input

Edited by Brilliant Disguise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sonny said:

Another question is can a fans' group - the majority of whom are not interested, do not attend meeting, nor vote, and could only find one (inexperienced) volunteer to put their name forward for the Board at the last election - run a football club?

Sonny you hit the nail on the head. The continual debacle that goes on with the same 3-4 people on every £2 vote and the kibble bid proves that Fans Ownership is a potential disaster in the making. It has proven that for Fans Ownership needs help from an outside experienced party capable of running a business and making decisions for the good of a business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What Division Most of the people who are posting on here, such as you, who are against the idea are not even SMISA members.  The Kibble debate and the fall out from some pros and against has proven that Fans Ownership is fraught with division. Some people, such as you, would start a campaign because you were not consulted on the colour of the toilet paper that was selected. Others will maybe not agree with the points put forward, however will accept the democratic majority decision and move on

Selling shares for what you bought them for is not generating or facilitating anyone profit. 

The delusion that  the Kibble who have existed for 180 years are plotting to take over the club with their 27% is way beyond shit stirring of the highest level.

Rather than hiding behind your continual innuendo why don’t you ask proper relevant questions.

Question 1 - What mechanism is in place In the interim period to stop the Kibble and GLS (combined 51%+) amending the BTB agreement further without SMISA input

 

Answer - Nothing!Hence where we are now having thought there was a cast iron deal to buy 71 % shareholding in the club, only to find those making the promise cast it in shit!

Forgot to add... welcome Smisa/ Div

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, saint since 62 said:

I asked a question via the Smisa website and got a prompt and detailed response .  I would encourage others to give it a go.  

Well done SS62. I hope others follow your lead and ask questions of the people that are directly involved and can answer with some authority and not speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:
5 hours ago, Dickson said:
Bazil is like a spinning top. His problem is he does it so much he gets dizzy and loses his place. 
It's a shame really. 
He's been the guy who has argued most against Community Involvement right from the start, yet now when the dog whistle is blown it's the best thing since sliced bread and it's worth gifting away a veto over ordinary resolutions to an outside group at this fan owned club. 
Whisper it, but he looks a bit silly. 

Aye jostling for the title of 'Mr Community' with Scott after he agreed with Scott issuing a STATEMENT to smisa members, warning them how to vote when a community option appeared on the £2 vote.
You couldnae make it up.

Disnae stop ye trying though. 😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Kibble could extend their secure unit to cater for members of the adult community in need of care and protection from themselves.

Criteria for care package:-

Inflated ego trippers

Chip on Shoulder Jealous Sorts

Mis-conception of IQ levels

Wannabe Lawyers/Accountants/Experts in everything and anything

All day keyboard addicts with f--k all else in their lives

Etc.

Etc.

In fact Solitary Padded Cells would work better.

A few on here would be right at the front of the queue.

This thread displays all that is worst in debate/discussion/decision making - always those that think they are always right, better informed, it's my way or no way attitudes, and I would say it's a fairly safe bet that the majority of SMISA members don't want to read all about the personal vendettas and shit throwing going on here.

If you want to get answers, hunt down Gordon Scott, Colin Orr and Jim Gillespie and ask them directly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

That's a strange definition.
I'd say he was elected unopposed rather than rejected?
He stood against David Nicol first time around to ensure there was a vote.
Again, it's not his fault that no other member though it would be good to do same.

 

It seems to be the right definition

This is from the Cambridge Dictionary Web Page.

Alanb says they ran the election anyway. I don't remember that, but as I've admitted already I am happy to stand corrected. 

Capture.thumb.PNG.507661962749f1b78511018c4d2fe8c4.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SMISA December update and director election result
View this email in your browser
 
9df5467a-3fcd-43a3-944f-b588fed55e70.png
 

SMISA December update

 
 

Dear SMISA member

Here is your latest update from SMISA – including the results of our director election, an update on the new pitch we helped fund at Ralston, and some of your member benefits.

Director election

As you know SMISA is currently electing its next representative on the St Mirren board. As only one eligible candidate – David Riley – came forward, we asked you to vote on whether to approve his appointment. The results were as follows:

YES – 734 votes (95%) / NO – 36 votes (5%).

This means David will be SMISA’s man in the St Mirren boardroom and the link between the club and the trust for the next two years. We on the committee are looking forward to working with him and believe he would have been a strong candidate regardless of how many others were on the ballot. David's appointment will be made official at the upcoming club AGM.

David Nicol – who has been SMISA’s board rep for the past two years – will stay on the St Mirren board temporarily to help the transition and ensure continuity, at the agreement of all parties. However David Riley is now the nominated SMISA rep and your point of contact – should any member wish to discuss a club-related issue with him, he can be contacted on [email protected]

New 4G pitch at Ralston

In April you voted to commit £50,000 of our £2 pot money towards the cost of the club replacing the astrograss pitch at the club’s training ground and youth academy. That work is now complete and the new pitch will soon be used by hundreds of young players from the club’s various youth teams, as well as the first team squad.

The £2 pot allows SMISA to invest in the future of the club and the assets we will one day be majority owners of – and this investment allowing the next generation of St Mirren players to develop is one you can be proud of your role in. In our October £2 spend you also chose to invest in a new set of moveable goals for the academy and these have now been ordered.

Ralston member benefits

As part of our investment in the new pitch it was agreed SMISA would become the sponsors of the youth academy for the next two seasons, with a series of benefits made available for members.

The club has already announced a chance to play on the new 4G pitch (rescheduled for Sunday 3 February due to a clash with the now-televised home game v Hibs) where fans can buy a place to play against a team of ex-players and club staff, with money reinvested back into the academy. And on that day the club will be thanking SMISA members for your contribution in two ways.

Firstly, there are two places in the legends/staff team for SMISA members, free of charge. Anyone interested should send their name to [email protected] by Sunday 9 December, and we will draw and notify the two lucky winners. Please note you must be aged 18 or over.

Secondly, all SMISA members are invited to an open day at Ralston on the day of the game. Not only can you watch the match but you will have the chance to get a short tour inside the facility itself. We will be in touch with more details nearer the time.

Academy Christmas dinner

This coming Friday (7 Dec) sees the Youth Academy Christmas dinner - a three-course meal and party at the stadium hospitality suite, with all proceeds to the academy.

SMISA has paid for a table as part of the ongoing benefits package offered to our plus and premium members, however there is one place left for a member and their guest, which we are offering to all members.

If you would like to go, please email [email protected] by Tuesday 4 December and we will draw someone to be there on the night.

Community season tickets

Back in April you voted in favour of using £2 money to run a community season ticket scheme allowing SMISA to reach out to local good causes and help bring the club and community closer together.

Like last season we have 24 seats (four rows of six) in the South Stand for all home league fixtures in 2018-19, apart from Old Firm games – offered free to community groups, third sector organisations and local charities operating in Renfrewshire. So far this season we have helped Crisis Counselling in Erskine, Shelter, Home Start Renfrewshire and the Star Project to but name a few.

We have been working closely with Engage Renfrewshire to find suitable homes for the tickets but would like any members who know of or are involved with a group who would benefit from a free day out at the football to apply – which you can do online here

SMFC Community Trust Festive Friends event

As you know SMISA has donated money towards the SMFC Community Trust’s Festive Friends event – which will see a Christmas meal at the stadium on December 25 for people living locally who might otherwise have spent the day alone.

The organisers haven’t yet filled all the places and asked if any SMISA members would like to nominate anyone they know who would benefit from being there on the day. If so, please contact [email protected]

As always, if there are any questions, you can reach us via [email protected]

The SMISA committee

Facebook
Twitter
Website
Email
 
Copyright © 2018 St. Mirren Independent Supports Association, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email as a current member of SMiSA and as such correspondence from us will contain up-to-date information regarding the Association, it's activities and the club itself.

Our mailing address is:
St. Mirren Independent Supports Association
smisa c/o St Mirren Football Club
Simple Digital Arena, Greenhill Road
Paisley, Renfrewshire PA3 1RU
United Kingdom
Edited by smcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Yflab said:

The only solution is for you to rejoin SMiSA and get elected as a representative because the boardroom is where you will find the hidden treasures including sausage rolls. The paying public or riff raff don’t get access to such delights.

I think that would probably be everyones worst nightmare. Can you imagine letting me loose on sausage rolls? 

 

Share this post


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

Just sour grapes, very obvious. If a majority vote is good enough for governing our country, it's good enough for a fan ownership proposal. The constitution gives reasoning for when a different voting structure is needed and this ain't one. 

I don't choose when to adhere to it, I am happy with it and have no issue with adherence. I have an opinion on the matter for different scenarios of course. This is just something you don't like so you're crying over it being able to pass in a constitutional way. Poor wee lamb lol. 

I shouldn't. I know I shouldn't - but Bazil - a majority vote isn't good enough for governing our country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So irrespective of whether you like David Riley or not and irrespective of what you might think of smisa can we acknowledge that David Riley was elected to his post and not rejected by the smisa members.

There's enough confusion and misinformation regarding the kibble proposal without adding to it.

Share this post


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

I shouldn't. I know I shouldn't - but Bazil - a majority vote isn't good enough for governing our country. 

You shouldn't and you know you shouldn't... I think you realise I was referring to the simple biggest vote count (per seat) wins system we have here, split away SD.

Hands up though my bad, I should have been clearer given the persnickety nature of oor fans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hiram Abiff said:

It would have been impossible to keep a liquidated Rangers in the top flight because, by definition, they went into liquidation!

Gilmour also didn’t vote to eject Rangers from the top flight. He couldn’t - they went into liquidation. What he did was vote against a new club, Sevco, from joining the top flight.

emoji12.png

Aye, semantics. You know what I meant and so does everyone else. 

The thing is though - there were plenty of prominent St Mirren supporters that were prepared to back Gilmour as he tried to get a mandate from the fans to vote to replace Rangers with Sevco. Some of them have partaken in this thread throwing their weight behind the scheme to give a third party a veto over the will of St Mirren fans whilst trying to scythe down others who are a bit more cautious and a bit more wary when it comes to throwing away control over their football club. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will either happen or it won't. I at least have a vote but I honestly won't get my knickers in a twist either way nor will the vast majority of smisa members. As always some will think they are above democracy whatever the result and the toys will be oot the pram but most will just get on with making the best of whatever result.

Well if you are happy with the membership being split, and how that plays out going forward, good luck trying to raise funds.
The damage being done, for the long planned sale to Kibble will affect the club and support permanently.
Ha,ha... I would if this will get the old Ref Brearley treatment in years to come. Mind you, we dodged Reg...

Share this post


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

Question 1 - What mechanism is in place In the interim period to stop the Kibble and GLS (combined 51%+) amending the BTB agreement further without SMISA input

I presume the proposed veto in the legal agreement would be the mechanism that could be used to stop that from happening. Although we know from history now that if GLS has asked for it the SMISA committee will issue a lengthy statement telling their membership why it's a good idea and try to push the membership to vote the way GLS wants them to. 

You are right though - I'm not a SMISA member and after a fair bit of thought I eventually decided I was against the deal because of the enhanced rights that have been given specifically to Kibble to veto any major decision at the club. Like you though I think LPM is over stating the division amongst the support. I'd be extremely surprised if more than 20% of the SMISA membership have read the legal agreement, or watched the video. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a SMISA member and I haven't been in the past. I chose not to join as I envisaged the type of public blood letting we are seeing on the forum and perhaps elsewhere on the issue of control arising at some point. Inevitable. 

The question of whether or not there were sufficient fans interested in mounting a successful bid though has been answered and the answer is yes. I have no right to interfere in the process or influence it in any way but  the bid from Kibble has, to my mind, many things to commend it.

The company, for that's what SMFC is, has asserted through their directors that they wish to become more integrated with and involved in community involvement. On this issue, Kibble offer a fast track route to achieving this aim. This I like. 

They also offer opportunities to extend the use made of the premises and expand the income from these in much the same way as the Trust involved with Falkirk do but in their case, the benefit, apart from PR and Greater community involvement, goes financially to the council but in our case to SMFC. 

GLS will get his cash back. Sooner or later. I am largely disinterested in whether this is sooner or later. 

The issue at the Heart of the matter is Control. The same issue has arisen at the club over the years but generally behind closed doors. The difference here is that the 1300 SMISA members now have what they wanted.. The ability and opportunity to make major decisions. This bid is such a decision and control is the issue. 

Members need to accept the responsibility involved in ownership. Do they want the club to grow faster or do they want to ensure that they have full control. 

Over to SMISA. 

 

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...