Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
bazil85

SMISA Annual Accounts & AGM Update May20

Recommended Posts

While we appreciate football may not be at the forefront of everyone’s minds at the moment, we are required to update you on plans for SMISA’s Annual General Meeting. As you know, our planned AGM on 28 March was cancelled.

As it will clearly not be possible to hold an actual meeting for some time due to the ongoing COVID-19 restrictions, and since there are formal business matters which require member approval in the meantime, we have decided to conduct our AGM by electronic means this year instead.

Supporters Direct Scotland have confirmed that this is in accordance with our rules. Many other organisations whose AGM is due are using the same solution.

That means we are inviting you to vote remotely via a VeryConnect ballot on all the formal AGM business (see below).

We have also written a review of the year covering the topics we would have presented on at the AGM, namely: our 2019/20 highlights; an update on our finances and membership numbers; how we performed against last year’s objectives, and a look forward to the ones we have set for this year;

You can read that on our website here: https://tinyurl.com/ybtjulzx

We invite all members who would have liked to ask any questions of us at the AGM to do so by email via [email protected]. We will respond to the sender by email but will also publish the questions and answers in due course for all members to see.

We will look into the possibility of holding an actual Q&A member meeting at some point in the future once the government restrictions are lifted.

Formal business We invite all members to cast a vote (yes or no) on each of the following matters:

1) to accept the Annual Accounts for the financial year ending November 2019. A copy of the accounts is attached here application-pdf.c5b2f493fe74a73fda3b2e7fc07a6294.pngSMISA Final Accounts 2019-1.pdf

2) to disapply the need for a full audit of next year's accounts by instead appointing an Independent Examiner. (as an organisation with total revenue of less than £250,000, we are not obliged by law to have our accounts subject to a full audit, just a review by a suitable Independent Examiner. But members must give their approval each year for this to happen.)

3) Three of the current committee are required to step down and stand for re-election. As no other members have put themselves forward for election, we are required to hold an affirmative ballot, where members are asked to either accept or reject each of the three candidates – George Adam, Kenny Docherty and Alan Quinn. You can read candidate statements from the three on our website here: https://tinyurl.com/sugvc72

4) this year we have also proposed a number of changes to SMISA’s constitution, to better reflect our situation as we move closer to majority fan ownership. A copy of the constitution with the proposed updates marked in red, and a brief explanation of the rationale behind them can be read on our website here: https://tinyurl.com/ycg2ler4

The voting is open now and will close on Friday 15th May. You can vote now via VeryConnect: 

If you have any questions about any of the items listed above you would like to ask before you vote, please email us via [email protected]

Thank you for your cooperation The SMiSA Committee

 

 
 
 

 

 

open.php?u=30653463&id=329adb7ea59049e6b4003ee6c1562582

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cookie Monster said:

Depends on the answers to the questions I asked. emoji6.png

Not saying I'm not touched that I am that important to your decision. But sorry to inform, I haven't overlay looked yet, just sharing. 

Although the progress SMISA & the current BOD have brought along with the significant approval numbers for the Kibble deal, I don't imagine I'll be anything other than supportive. Struggle to understand why any fan wouldn't be... Or why some view positivity regarding SMFC as a bad thing :whistle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Not saying I'm not touched that I am that important to your decision. But sorry to inform, I haven't overlay looked yet, just sharing. 
Although the progress SMISA & the current BOD have brought along with the significant approval numbers for the Kibble deal, I don't imagine I'll be anything other than supportive. Struggle to understand why any fan wouldn't be... Or why some view positivity regarding SMFC as a bad thing :whistle


You're not, the questions were already emailed to SMISA. Just trying to save pages of posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


You're not, the questions were already emailed to SMISA. Just trying to save pages of posts. emoji14.png

 

I simply posted the topic, I didn't give any of my own thoughts. Feels like an attempt to start never mind save. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AGM votes are in, yes won in all seven voting matters. 

460 votes cast for each, all matters received high 90% backing with the exception of "disapply need for full financial audit" which received 85.6% backing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2020 at 10:29 PM, antrin said:

460 out of 1170 members - for a fuller picture.  :)

 

It’s pretty clear to all by now that there are a lot of aspects of SMISA that many contributors are happy just to let run. These voting numbers wouldn’t be considered low for comparable foundation/ company votes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It’s pretty clear to all by now that there are a lot of aspects of SMISA that many contributors are happy just to let run. These voting numbers wouldn’t be considered low for comparable foundation/ company votes. 
Comparable organisations would be football clubs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:
On 5/21/2020 at 8:53 PM, bazil85 said:
It’s pretty clear to all by now that there are a lot of aspects of SMISA that many contributors are happy just to let run. These voting numbers wouldn’t be considered low for comparable foundation/ company votes. 

Comparable organisations would be football clubs?

They would be yes but the pool of football clubs operating in this way, in this country, in compassion to others is still pretty small. I haven't looked but any that do operate in this way, I would be surprised if they had a significantly higher percentage response. Happy to be proven wrong on that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2020 at 4:36 PM, bazil85 said:

AGM votes are in, yes won in all seven voting matters. 

460 votes cast for each, all matters received high 90% backing with the exception of "disapply need for full financial audit" which received 85.6% backing 

 

On 5/19/2020 at 10:29 PM, antrin said:

460 out of 1177 members - for a fuller picture.  :)

 

 

On 5/21/2020 at 8:53 PM, bazil85 said:

It’s pretty clear to all by now that there are a lot of aspects of SMISA that many contributors are happy just to let run. These voting numbers wouldn’t be considered low for comparable foundation/ company votes. 

My post was not about how comparable foundations/companies  might vote.  (I don't gaf about them)

It was simply to clarify that the 90% backing in SMISA - which you cynically pitched as a landslide endorsement - was not really...

…because it wasn't.

 

Carry on spinning, by all means.  :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, antrin said:

 

 

My post was not about how comparable foundations/companies  might vote.  (I don't gaf about them)

It was simply to clarify that the 90% backing in SMISA - which you cynically pitched as a landslide endorsement - was not really...

…because it wasn't.

 

Carry on spinning, by all means.  :)

 

I quoted the voting numbers, I imagine anyone reading these posts is aware of the rough SMISA numbers.
 

It’s a landslide from SMISA members with a voting opinion on the subjects.
 

There is absolutely no spin, if I hadn’t quoted the numbers & just said over 90% you’d have had a point  👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2020 at 10:29 PM, antrin said:

460 out of 1170 members - for a fuller picture.  :)

 

Baz should be clear when he talks about 85% approval that he means it's 85% of the vote rather than the whole membership (no idea why he plays these games) but that doesn't mean you have an excuse to abuse the stats even more than he did.

What's the point of including those who didn't vote?

You are, quite without foundation, insinuating they would all have voted against everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Baz should be clear when he talks about 85% approval that he means it's 85% of the vote rather than the whole membership (no idea why he plays these games) but that doesn't mean you have an excuse to abuse the stats even more than he did.

What's the point of including those who didn't vote?

You are, quite without foundation, insinuating they would all have voted against everything.

No.

My initial post had no such insinuation... if you had truly read the thread you’d have seen that my figures were unadorned.

On 5/19/2020 at 10:29 PM, antrin said:

460 out of 1177 members - for a fuller picture.  :)

This post simply and gently makes the same point that you are belatedly repeating.

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...