Jump to content

Potential questions for Kibble proposal meeting 6/2/20


Recommended Posts


20 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:
30 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?

Does what get to me?

Everyone who is a member of SMISA and paying to buy the majority shareholding in SMFC you mean, don't you? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sally02 said:

Does what get to me?

Everyone who is a member of SMISA and paying to buy the majority shareholding in SMFC you mean, don't you? 

LPM can’t comprehend the nature of this, in that members will be voting in favour or against. It’ll be their choice & their choice alone if this proposal goes through. They aren’t getting the wool pulled over their eyes, they’re getting asked a question. Same as the £50k pitch funding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

LPM can’t comprehend the nature of this, in that members will be voting in favour or against. It’ll be their choice & their choice alone if this proposal goes through. They aren’t getting the wool pulled over their eyes, they’re getting asked a question. Same as the £50k pitch funding. 

I think he does, in fact from reading his posts on this matter I am sure he does.

 

LPM is the only person bringing this matter into the limelight.  So what does that say for the other Smisa members?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TediousTom said:

I think he does, in fact from reading his posts on this matter I am sure he does.

 

LPM is the only person bringing this matter into the limelight.  So what does that say for the other Smisa members?

 

 

He has been instrumental in bringing this to the fore and encouraging debate and thought. No bad thing. No matter whether you agree with his point of view.

After all. This IS a very significant deviation from the original plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Doakes said:

As much as the debate can be a little frantic / personal at times - there are some important points being raised by LPM here. It's a pretty big decision that could have a huge impact on the future of our club

The fact remains that it cannot go ahead without the approval of a majority of the SMISA members, all of whom will have a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. About that Bazil. The wool was pulled over quite a few eyes on that one and you know it too cause you've quoted me on it in the past. 
I would be a lot less suspicious of the SMiSA commitee if they stopped with the bluster, the half truths and their attempts to lead opinion on every vote. Good leadership isn't about keeping the membership in the dark and dragging people with you. Its about building consensus, enthusing the membership to follow your vision and having everyone buy in to where you want to go. 
Perhaps had SMiSA stuck to their initial sales pitch and set out to work with and benefit the community if the first place they'd be seeing an unstoppable snowball effect by now. They chose to go back on that to fight a few fires and now their in a position where they struggle to get members engaged never mind enthused and it must feel they are dragging a ball and chain around with them trying to do the Chairmans bidding. I'm sure they also wish you weren't their main cheerleader. 
Amen to that...

But hey... Till now...
Club v Community....
Baz sides with club 100% of the time. He's a consistent, is the synchophantic puppet!

Now however... Club v Community is dressed up a Club helps Community... The same Community it ignores regularly now! (How many community options on the last vote? Sorry to DRONE on about it!)

The sad reality is, as always, the spin will probably see the vote sail through with lack of proper scrutiny!

Fan ownership my arse.
Fan paying for ownership and doing whatever chairman tells them, more like.

Mind you... Fans can't be trusted to run a fan owned club! [emoji850]
Link to comment
Share on other sites



.
Mind you... Fans can't be trusted to run a fan owned club! [emoji850]


LPM also warned this was in the pipeline, a number of times over the last 2-3 too & here it comes to pass.

He ain't no visionary though is he, he seen the writing on the wall & got slaughtered whenever he mentioned it.

He'll feel like Jimmy Cricket now
"C'mere, there's more"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TediousTom said:

I think he does, in fact from reading his posts on this matter I am sure he does.

 

LPM is the only person bringing this matter into the limelight.  So what does that say for the other Smisa members?

 

 

The situation on the vote is irrelevant, he’d have moaned regardless of the announcement. Have you not seen his response to almost every single SMISA communication to date? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

The situation on the vote is irrelevant, he’d have moaned regardless of the announcement. Have you not seen his response to almost every single SMISA communication to date? 

I agree with you here Baz - but you must take some responsibility yourself.

A lot of good arguements here are lost in the fog of you and him to-ing  and fro-ing.

The danger I see for you is that you get so entrenched that you end up supporting the proposal just to spite him instead of listening to the many good points raised re sticking to the original reason why we signed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dickson said:

Yeah. About that Bazil. The wool was pulled over quite a few eyes on that one and you know it too cause you've quoted me on it in the past. 

I would be a lot less suspicious of the SMiSA commitee if they stopped with the bluster, the half truths and their attempts to lead opinion on every vote. Good leadership isn't about keeping the membership in the dark and dragging people with you. Its about building consensus, enthusing the membership to follow your vision and having everyone buy in to where you want to go. 

Perhaps had SMiSA stuck to their initial sales pitch and set out to work with and benefit the community if the first place they'd be seeing an unstoppable snowball effect by now. They chose to go back on that to fight a few fires and now their in a position where they struggle to get members engaged never mind enthused and it must feel they are dragging a ball and chain around with them trying to do the Chairmans bidding. I'm sure they also wish you weren't their main cheerleader. 

The issue with this post Stuart is it’s only your views and pretty much none of it is backed. I can understand some not being happy with the £50k but that’s the nature of a democratic society, if you thought 100% of people would be happy with every vote SMISA ever undertook you’re extremely naïve. Giving your clear history of being unhappy with so many other aspects around SMFC, it’s unbelievable you’d hold this view. Good leadership is also about keeping members views and wants at the front of your democratic society. Like it or not your views have been consistently in an observable minority throughout the history of BTB. As for SMISA keeping people in the dark, not seeing much of that TBH. Them waiting until the terms of the deal are pretty much fully developed and giving members time to digest is a good approach. No one needs drip feeding of this deal, it would only lead to hold-ups and questions that couldn’t yet be answered. This is a very common approach in business.

Again I’m not seeing any “bluster” or “half truths” that’s just your take because you don’t agree with a lot of the BTB content. Leading opinions on votes IMO isn’t a bad thing when it comes to my football club. I want to know the take from people closest to these arrangements and deals because I want to know what’s good for my team. I trust the people at SMISA to do that, you clearly don’t, it doesn’t mean you’re right. Again, you’ll never get everyone buying in, in these situations. Extremely naïve, have you met St Mirren fans? While you were away (as a profile anyway) we had people moaning about honorary memberships and benefits of a Sports Scientist for crying out loud.

Perhaps but the evidence is against this, a majority of voting members have always favoured supporting the football club we all support. The evidence more points if SMISA went against this, BTB would be in a weaker position. I for one wouldn’t be happy at the majority opinion being ignored. Also from my perspective they have stuck to the initial sales pitch. I have no complaints at all on this. I also don’t see anything that suggests they’ve went back on anything major members happy to pay their money and not get involved in voting isn’t necessarily a bad thing and I’ve not seen a single person say they’re in this situation because of the way voting has went.

As for your comments on the chairman’s bidding and cheerleader banter. It just shows your bitterness hasn’t went anywhere. BTB ahead of target, SMFC doing well on and off the pitch under GLS stewardship, members majority consensus being adhered to, the moans on here practically always a tiny vocal minority. It’s all rosy, you have little to know influence, you can’t stop BTB, get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:

Amen to that...

But hey... Till now...
Club v Community....
Baz sides with club 100% of the time. He's a consistent, is the synchophantic puppet!

Now however... Club v Community is dressed up a Club helps Community... The same Community it ignores regularly now! (How many community options on the last vote? Sorry to DRONE on about it!)

The sad reality is, as always, the spin will probably see the vote sail through with lack of proper scrutiny!

Fan ownership my arse.
Fan paying for ownership and doing whatever chairman tells them, more like.

Mind you... Fans can't be trusted to run a fan owned club! emoji850.png

Another one that doesn't give SMFC fans the credit they deserve to make informed decisions. 

also Baz is far from the only one that sides with the club 100% of the time... The quieter voting majority. :whistle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for tomorrow night.
"Is it the duty of the Smisa board to follow the mandate given to it, by its members to take the necessary actions as planned and agreed to purchase 71% shareholding in SMFC?
Simple yes, or no!
A supplementary question regardless of the reply is "then why have you not followed the mandate given to you by the membership to take the necessary actions to purchase 71% shareholding in SMFC?"

Third question. "Who gave you a mandate to negotiate In Secret this fundamental change in what the membership instructed you to do?"

Is Smisa member run, or Scott/Kibble run?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Question for tomorrow night.
"Is it the duty of the Smisa board to follow the mandate given to it, by its members to take the necessary actions as planned and agreed to purchase 71% shareholding in SMFC?
Simple yes, or no!
A supplementary question regardless of the reply is "then why have you not followed the mandate given to you by the membership to take the necessary actions to purchase 71% shareholding in SMFC?"

Third question. "Who gave you a mandate to negotiate In Secret this fundamental change in what the membership instructed you to do?"

Is Smisa member run, or Scott/Kibble run?

Not a simple yes or no question. The duty of SMISA is to let it's members decide if the new proposal receives a democratic mandate. 

Supplementary question therefore irrelevant. 

Third question, Duty to consider such proposals and put it to our members, we're a democracy not the dictatorship you seem to want them to be. 

final question. SMISA member. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one that doesn't give SMFC fans the credit they deserve to make informed decisions. 
also Baz is far from the only one that sides with the club 100% of the time... The quieter voting majority. :whistle
The Chairman doesn't give St Mirren fans the credit they deserve to make informed decisions.

He can't trust us to run the club.

He openly said as much when he expressed concerns about our ability to run the club.

Are you calling him a liar?

ps... Only sociopaths refer to themself in the third person! [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Chairman doesn't give St Mirren fans the credit they deserve to make informed decisions.

He can't trust us to run the club.

He openly said as much when he expressed concerns about our ability to run the club.

Are you calling him a liar?

ps... Only sociopaths refer to themself in the third person! [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
Gives you an insight to who Baz is though. " Hi Ho Silver... away"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

The Chairman doesn't give St Mirren fans the credit they deserve to make informed decisions.
Disagree, no major concerns and believe the minor ones will be addressed tomorrow. 
He can't trust us to run the club.
He openly said as much when he expressed concerns about our ability to run the club.
Missed this, when did that happen?
Are you calling him a liar?
Nope, I'll give you benefit of the doubt that you'll provide. 
ps... Only sociopaths refer to themself in the third person! emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png

Bantz 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A question for Mr Kibble.

"The proposal states you intend to 'Invest' in the club...

How much do you intend to invest?

What specifically do you intend to invest in?

Over what timescale do you intend to invest? (One off, or continual)

what does Kibble expect by way of ROI? (Return On Investment)?

And how will this effect current or future revenue streams that benefit Smfc?

 

 

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...