Jump to content

Potential questions for Kibble proposal meeting 6/2/20


Recommended Posts


5 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

How much of a say does that 21% have in the board room right now?

None but in the hypothetical circumstances that @waldorf34 brought up I would be prepared to proxy my vote to SMiSA (as I have done in the past) and I think many others would too.

Also why would fans like myself be prevented from buying any new shares issued?

We can end up deep inside our arseholes here. :oohlala 

Edited by Bud the Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So that describes having to lose 20% in bad times. 

the same argument can be made for wilfully selling the 20% in good time’s. That’s the point TBC regarding this vote. 
 

I know I’d rather give 20% for something good than have to do it because my football club is over a barrel. 

The difference  is selling the 20%now the money goes to GS and not to the club,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

The difference  is selling the 20%now the money goes to GS and not to the club,

That isn’t really relevant because him getting his money back will happen regardless. The 20% is part of the shares GLS has bought. We either pay him in a few years or the Kibble pay him now. It doesn’t negate the point that you’re talking about selling when we have to. I would rather sell for something beneficial than when we were in severe difficulty. A hypothetical in itself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
1 hour ago, Kombibuddie said:
There will not be 2 Kibble reps on the board but 2 more SMISA reps if SMISA owns 71% of the shares.

Owning 71% of shared is more effective safeguarding of the club than only owning 51%.

As 71% owners, St Mirren (SMISA) can still collaborate with Kibble for the mutual benefit of both.

SMISA are more likely to retain higher membership levels owning 71% of the club than they will owning 51%.

There's also nothing stopping kibble buying the other 8% that GS owns but isn't part of the buy the buds agreement. That would take them to 35% and I'm sure they'd be looking at having at least 1/3 of board members.

Kibble will purchase a 27.5% stake in SMFC from Gordon Scott, at which point, the provisions outlined under ‘the interim phase’ will apply. Throughout this period, SMISA will retain a 28.3% stake in SMFC and Gordon will retain 22.7%.

The above from the SMISA webpage indicates to me that GLS is selling his own 8% as part of Plan B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

None but in the hypothetical circumstances that @waldorf34 brought up I would be prepared to proxy my vote to SMiSA (as I have done in the past) and I think many others would too.

Also why would fans like myself be prevented from buying any new shares issued?

We can end up deep inside our arseholes here. :oohlala 

I agree. We shouldn't be prevented from buying new shares issued.

I also agree, that if it came to it, existing shareholders (within the 21%) could proxy their vote to SMISA but that'll only happen at AGM's & EGM's. In between times, the St Mirren FC Board will discuss and vote on matters and the running of the club. 2 board members out-with SMISA dilutes SMISA's influence in the decision making and (imho) is jeopardising The Club needlessly for a wee bit of flash "Kibble has the expertise"

When BTB was introduced to us, there as no need for Kibble' expertise then & I believe, there isn't now. I have faith in the talent within the SMISA membership to make a success of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:


 

 

 


I was hoping to see more candidates standing for the Club Director position, especially the second time. That's what slightly worries me, but hopefully they were just biding their time for when we have fan ownership at whatever >50% (hope I got that symbol correct) ownership level.

 

me too. If I lived local, I'd be in the thick of it. Instead, I have to content myself with starting up my own football club (youth), now 8 months old :D.

On second thoughts, probably better for SMISA that I am 500 miles away :lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Kibble will purchase a 27.5% stake in SMFC from Gordon Scott, at which point, the provisions outlined under ‘the interim phase’ will apply. Throughout this period, SMISA will retain a 28.3% stake in SMFC and Gordon will retain 22.7%.
The above from the SMISA webpage indicates to me that GLS is selling his own 8% as part of Plan B
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting it would happen as part of this process.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
32 minutes ago, alanb said:
Kibble will purchase a 27.5% stake in SMFC from Gordon Scott, at which point, the provisions outlined under ‘the interim phase’ will apply. Throughout this period, SMISA will retain a 28.3% stake in SMFC and Gordon will retain 22.7%.
The above from the SMISA webpage indicates to me that GLS is selling his own 8% as part of Plan B

Yeah, I wasn't suggesting it would happen as part of this process.

Yeah, I don't see how it could happen period and SMISA achieve 51% next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kibble will purchase a 27.5% stake in SMFC from Gordon Scott, at which point, the provisions outlined under ‘the interim phase’ will apply. Throughout this period, SMISA will retain a 28.3% stake in SMFC and Gordon will retain 22.7%.
The above from the SMISA webpage indicates to me that GLS is selling his own 8% as part of Plan B
Oh yes.. wouldn't be surprised to see Scott sell off more of his shares to smisa once this goes through.
What will smisa's line be then?
"We need a 59% shareholding to be fan owned"
The crucial issue in all this is the smisa committee should never have even got involved before asking the membership "do you want to see over a quarter of the club in the hands of a third party"?
Then, and only then, if the membership indicated they sought that should smisa seek out The Best fit partner, not the mob who have been trying to weasel in for years!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Oh yes.. wouldn't be surprised to see Scott sell off more of his shares to smisa once this goes through.
What will smisa's line be then?
"We need a 59% shareholding to be fan owned"
The crucial issue in all this is the smisa committee should never have even got involved before asking the membership "do you want to see over a quarter of the club in the hands of a third party"?
Then, and only then, if the membership indicated they sought that should smisa seek out The Best fit partner, not the mob who have been trying to weasel in for years!

Given the numbers above, GLS has 50% or just over at the moment What he bought from consortium (42%) + what he already had.

All for sale under this plan. He may keep a few for old times sake, so its either 51 % or Status quo and eventually 71% never 59%.

Unless purchased from independent share holders

Edited by alanb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the numbers above, GLS has 50% or just over at the moment What he bought from consortium (42%) + what he already had.
All for sale under this plan. He may keep a few for old times sake, so its either 51 % or Status quo and eventually 71% never 59%.
Unless purchased from independent share holders
If he gets to sell 27.5 to Kibble, then nothing stopping him selling any of his remaining 22. %.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Yeah, I don't see how it could happen period and SMISA achieve 51% next year
Well I've read that GS is now looking to sell his 8% having previously been keen to retain it.
So either smisa, kibble or A. N. Other buys them.
Why would smisa buy them when they've just let 27.5% go?
Can't see anyone else wanting 8%?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I've read that GS is now looking to sell his 8% having previously been keen to retain it.So either smisa, kibble or A. N. Other buys them.

Why would smisa buy them when they've just let 27.5% go?

Can't see anyone else wanting 8%?

The 8% is part of what SMiSA gets in any new deal

GLS currently has just over 50% so if the kibble gets the proportion SMiSA gets the balance

GLS may have a wee drop left over to cuddle

Pending a vote going ahead and result of said vote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it better if a current SMISA member asks the question?

Aye... we thought we already had an agreement! (Legally binding too)
What this proposal proves is nothing that was promised is certain to happen.

I'll go a wee bit further and say,
LPM said as much a year or 2 ago & it was met with derision and here we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
The 8% is part of what SMiSA gets in any new dealGLS currently has just over 50% so if the kibble gets the proportion SMiSA gets the balance
GLS may have a wee drop left over to cuddle
Pending a vote going ahead and result of said vote
Thanks. That's not how I've read it on the 2 threads on here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
25 minutes ago, sally02 said:
Who is this "we" you are talking about?

Everyone who thought the agreement Scott signed with smisa would be hounered. Does that get to you?

Don’t know if this has been asked before ,If GS sells his shares does he also step down as chairman?

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...