Jump to content

The capacity debacle


Recommended Posts

As quoted earlier in this thread, Renfrewshire council leaders are more invested in the ugly sisters than the saints, and who can blame them given most of them don’t live in Paisley. It’s been the same old story for decades, the high street is dying, the streets are crime ridden, don’t care I don’t live here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


It's exactly how it works mate. SMiSA members decide who from SMiSA sits on the club board and we have the majority of seats at that table.
I'm not exactly sure why Kibble are getting the blame for the capacity at the stadium being an absolute farce, it's very clear to me that it's Renfrewshire Council who should be getting the heat for this absurd situation.
I'm not blaming Kibble for the Capacity issues... That is general ineptitude.

I'm wondering why they were granted seats on the board and veto rights when there was no need.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, div said:

And it's perfectly understandable. Every season ticket holder should be at the game on Saturday, nobody is going to persuade me any differently.

It's an absolute disgrace that we are looking at 1000 attendance on Saturday when by Monday the figure will miraculously be 5000.

Someone definitely needs their balls kicked, it's just a matter of clarifying who it should be.

From a household with 2 x STs who haven't sniffed a ballot ticket I feel it as much as the next person. More so when you saw the crowds at Well (or even Kelty) on Saturday. I wasn't defending the situation, merely stating that it was pure frustration causing folk to start firing off at the (allegedly) wrong targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

As quoted earlier in this thread, Renfrewshire council leaders are more invested in the ugly sisters than the saints, and who can blame them given most of them don’t live in Paisley. It’s been the same old story for decades, the high street is dying, the streets are crime ridden, don’t care I don’t live here. 

I'm not sure why the club have stayed so tight lipped if the Council are ultimately dictating the 1039 figure to us. There MUST be a reasoning and thought process behind that decision but it's never been questioned publicly by the club or disclosed by either party. We appear outwardly to accept it with the merest shrug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

I'm not sure why the club have stayed so tight lipped if the Council are ultimately dictating the 1039 figure to us. There MUST be a reasoning and thought process behind that decision but it's never been questioned publicly by the club or disclosed by either party. We appear outwardly to accept it with the merest shrug.

and in stark contrast.....

8D05E8B3-6B1C-45FA-B988-842BA4A3432C.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Right that’s it, council tax boycott! 

There used to be a loophole whereby you could get special dispensation (no charge) by telling council that you hold regular worship at your address.

So I’m starting up the Church of The North Bank Aggro (Elderslie District).

I hold regular sermons at the site of a Love Street crush barrier.

E6019509-EECF-40FE-ACD3-9AAE9FE0C778.thumb.jpeg.ef6af169275716e167570d2bc723ace5.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many others I’m really disappointed that we are in this situation.

The club staff have had around 16months to work out the feasibility of a partial return for supporters. We are the lifeblood of the club.

There has been very poor communication throughout on how this return would work. It was brought up as a concern by supporters at the club AGM and the SMiSA AGM. The responses were very poor imho. 

A detailed process should have been drawn up and published to all registered supporters (both ST and PATG) on how the system would work - especially in relation to family bubbles.

There is no doubt that the transfer from Interstadia to the new ST providers has been a shambles and has probably directed valuable resource away at an important time. But surely after the last game against Hearts (all hail Obika) planning should have begun on supporter return with different scenarios.

Again If the long term plan was to move away from Interstadia why was this not planned better? It’s not a difficult process to migrate to a new database provider if it is planned properly. It was clear for a long time that we were not getting back to the stadium last season, so why was the opportunity missed to implement the migration in time for renewals?

Fail to plan? Plan to fail.

Might be controversial, but perhaps we need changes at the top of our organisation. We have never replaced Brian Caldwell.

We are paying a decent wage for our CEO but are we getting a decent ROI? I’m not convinced. 

Are we paying Kibble staff who have taken on roles as General Managers as well as Kibble responsibilities? Have they delivered positive results? I’m not convinced. 

Out of interest, were these roles advertised publicly?

The last few months have been an utter shambles and if Stu Dickson was still on the forum he would be creaming himself as any other business would collapse if they failed their customer base with so many fcuk ups.

Very concerned ST holder and Shareholder. 😢 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

I'm not sure why the club have stayed so tight lipped if the Council are ultimately dictating the 1039 figure to us. There MUST be a reasoning and thought process behind that decision but it's never been questioned publicly by the club or disclosed by either party. We appear outwardly to accept it with the merest shrug.

The prospect of bad publicity for putting 'lives at risk', maybe? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, W6er said:

The prospect of bad publicity for putting 'lives at risk', maybe? 

 

17 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

So every other club and LA in Scotland have "put lives at risk". Utter nonsense. 

Indeed, the use of emotional tripe is another of the constant attempts to justify "rules" that lack common sense and are based on nothing but airy fairy opinions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Yflab said:

Like many others I’m really disappointed that we are in this situation.

The club staff have had around 16months to work out the feasibility of a partial return for supporters. We are the lifeblood of the club.

There has been very poor communication throughout on how this return would work. It was brought up as a concern by supporters at the club AGM and the SMiSA AGM. The responses were very poor imho. 

A detailed process should have been drawn up and published to all registered supporters (both ST and PATG) on how the system would work - especially in relation to family bubbles.

There is no doubt that the transfer from Interstadia to the new ST providers has been a shambles and has probably directed valuable resource away at an important time. But surely after the last game against Hearts (all hail Obika) planning should have begun on supporter return with different scenarios.

Again If the long term plan was to move away from Interstadia why was this not planned better? It’s not a difficult process to migrate to a new database provider if it is planned properly. It was clear for a long time that we were not getting back to the stadium last season, so why was the opportunity missed to implement the migration in time for renewals?

Fail to plan? Plan to fail.

Might be controversial, but perhaps we need changes at the top of our organisation. We have never replaced Brian Caldwell.

We are paying a decent wage for our CEO but are we getting a decent ROI? I’m not convinced. 

Are we paying Kibble staff who have taken on roles as General Managers as well as Kibble responsibilities? Have they delivered positive results? I’m not convinced. 

Out of interest, were these roles advertised publicly?

The last few months have been an utter shambles and if Stu Dickson was still on the forum he would be creaming himself as any other business would collapse if they failed their customer base with so many fcuk ups.

Very concerned ST holder and Shareholder. 😢 

 

Out of interest, what roles are Kibble delivering? 
 

I can’t say I know anything much beyond them having 2 (?) directors on the board, 27% shareholding, a veto, and some vague statements about us getting benefits from them delivering some operations. No idea what that means in terms of people, roles and financial arrangements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Maboza said:

Out of interest, what roles are Kibble delivering? 
 

I can’t say I know anything much beyond them having 2 (?) directors on the board, 27% shareholding, a veto, and some vague statements about us getting benefits from them delivering some operations. No idea what that means in terms of people, roles and financial arrangements. 

All good and pertinent questions Maboza and this is information that should "absolutely" be communicated to, at the very least, the 51% shareholders (SMiSA Members). It probably doesn't require to be a line by line, number by number sort of communication but it certainly should be a bit more than the "sketchy bollox" we have received so far. I take on board that there is a new Chairman in place and that the completion of "fan ownership" has just taken place but a lot of goodwill could be lost if this sort of issue isn't addressed quite quickly. 

I don't think for a moment that all the current issues lie at the doors of Kibble and their involvement but I always felt the way that they were introduced and the fanfare of "business acumen and proper processes" that they would bring left them open to (possibly unfair) criticism when things go wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WeeBud said:

All good and pertinent questions Maboza and this is information that should "absolutely" be communicated to, at the very least, the 51% shareholders (SMiSA Members). It probably doesn't require to be a line by line, number by number sort of communication but it certainly should be a bit more than the "sketchy bollox" we have received so far. I take on board that there is a new Chairman in place and that the completion of "fan ownership" has just taken place but a lot of goodwill could be lost if this sort of issue isn't addressed quite quickly. 

I don't think for a moment that all the current issues lie at the doors of Kibble and their involvement but I always felt the way that they were introduced and the fanfare of "business acumen and proper processes" that they would bring left them open to (possibly unfair) criticism when things go wrong. 

Agreed. I’m not for a second having a pop at Kibble for the current failings at the club. I also recognise that we’re in a transition phase. 
 

I also appreciate that we, as fans, don’t get all the line by line details about the operations of the football club. That’s the same under Stewart Gilmour’s board, as it was for Gordon Scott’s stewardship, as it now is for SMISA ownership from what we’re being told.  
 

My only real point is that if Kibble operations are integrating into the club then we as average fans, or even SMISA shareholders don’t really know what’s happening and how it’s being driven. I guess the expectation is that we just trust our SMISA elected chairman man and other nominated directors and that’s it?! 
 

What is the current breakdown of our board members? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, div said:

The actual chairman of the club is a SMiSA rep and the former chairman of the club is still on the board. The board are collectively making the day to day decisions regarding how the club is run. That is exactly as it should be.

The fans literally OWN the majority shareholding of the club, that's what Buy The Buds was all about.

Seems a wee bit like we are getting to the point of if in any doubt, just blame Kibble!

Spoiler

 

i didn't blame Kibble for anything, i simply questioned why a poster should be unhappy with the actions of a board that contains SMISA reps when things are running as intended.  It was all there in black and white on the proposal to include Kibble and people voted for it, getting exactly what was promised.  That must have been what they wanted?  Right?

The SMISA members can only influence the SMISA reps and the other veto-holders can act as a cartel (it was set up between those two that way so i doubt that they didn't get together and agree how it would work before they took the offer to  SMISA).

I happen to think that fan ownership is a bad thing as it is very hard to get a model that  truly represents what fans want-which must in itself be a very eclectic collective view.  I never envisaged that the model we adopted would deliver any degree of control and only gives a little influence.  Too late to change now and I'm not carping, just surprised that anyone is surprised by recent events

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:
  Reveal hidden contents

 

i didn't blame Kibble for anything, I simply questioned why a poster should be unhappy with the actions of a board specifically because it contains SMISA reps when things are running as intended.  It was all there in black and white on the proposal to include Kibble and people voted for it, getting exactly what was promised.  That must have been what they wanted?  Right?

The SMISA members can only influence the SMISA reps and the other veto-holders can act as a cartel (it was set up between those two that way so i doubt that they didn't get together and agree how it would work before they took the offer to  SMISA) to make sure that their ideas are implemented.

I happen to think that fan ownership is a bad thing as it is very hard to get a model that  truly represents what fans want-which must in itself be a very eclectic collective view.  I never envisaged that the model we adopted would deliver any degree of control and only gives a little influence.  Too late to change now and I'm not carping, just surprised that anyone is surprised by recent events

I'd like to add, your last sentence is snide and seems to be drawing fire away from the original point of the thread, you are putting words in people's mouths there for a reason that I cannot fathom.

the final and most important point, SMISA could have 99% of the seats on the board, carry every proposal that they want to make and still have no control as a result of the veto(s)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

As quoted earlier in this thread, Renfrewshire council leaders are more invested in the ugly sisters than the saints, and who can blame them given most of them don’t live in Paisley. It’s been the same old story for decades, the high street is dying, the streets are crime ridden, don’t care I don’t live here. 

That's down to the voters my friend, if they don't like who is in power, then campaign for someone who you would like to be in power............ I think it's called Democracy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Maboza said:

Out of interest, what roles are Kibble delivering? 
 

I can’t say I know anything much beyond them having 2 (?) directors on the board, 27% shareholding, a veto, and some vague statements about us getting benefits from them delivering some operations. No idea what that means in terms of people, roles and financial arrangements. 

There are many rumours in the background of what the Kibble will be delivering moving forward. Time will tell.

When the SMISA/Kibble share split was announced it was sold to the SMISA team that the Kibble would bring (paraphrasing) a level of compliance and experience to the club that was missing. However at the time, Kibble had 2 Directors placed on the board with immediate effect (circa 12 months ago)

I am not blaming Kibble, the blame for the current issues at the club lie collectively with the board. The Kibble just so happen to have 2 Directors watching over this debacle.

Baz will come on and state mitigating circumstances, the pandemic, New Owners, New Chairman, Brexit or what ever take/line he has been advised to, but it does not explain the lack of thought that went in planning for the season tickets, Skyview and the stadium capacity. 

It was mooted by someone that Interstadia had gone out of business and not the fact they were not user friendly and were the wrong company. Well they haven’t they are still trading and still serving other clubs. The issue with the season tickets lies with Club not planning and implementing the change quickly and efficiently to avoid this issue.

Skyview were on a rolling contract as club sponsor. Did the board renew this rolling contract at the correct time to avoid the future embarrassment of complaints when the Digby Brown sticker falls off the strips being reprinted.

Stadium Capacity is now being bounced on to a Council issue. From the statement i read it suggests the council answered the question the club asked of them.

The main stand is now in the “Red Zone” due to incomplete works at Ralston. This has resulted in a reduced capacity in the main stand unless your a Director or one of his pals. Who is the builder, when did they start and why are they late. Also why were other parts of the club not used for the players changing ie the Dome or Portacabins. It was mentioned on here that the “Builder” is the Kibble.

Fans places at the stadium for the 3 games have been lost due to poor planning and implementation by the board. 

While we now have SMISA on as the “Saviour” of the club. What new members are on the Board to make these dramatic changes. …………NONE

Edited by Brilliant Disguise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jaybee said:

That's down to the voters my friend, if they don't like who is in power, then campaign for someone who you would like to be in power............ I think it's called Democracy

The elected leaders don’t make these sorts of decisions. It’s the paid employees of RDC that do. I think the poster is making the point that the people at the head of RDC, that command a huge council tax payers salary, don’t necessarily stay in Renfrewshire. Therefore they don’t give two hoots.

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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...