Jump to content

AGM being held via Zoom


Recommended Posts

I must admit that the AGM being held on Zoom is a huge disappointment. Obviously this means that there will be much less debate and meaningful dialogue than if it were held at a public gathering. Smisa have requested that questions be submitted in advance of the AGM - that indicates that it will be more of a simple Q&A than a proper AGM. 

There is no reason for , say, 60 or 70 shareholders not to gather, bearing in mind that the current guidelines about gatherings say that the limit is "up to 200 people at indoor seated events" Furthermore, latest reports claim that "These limits will now be removed from Monday 17 January."

It begs the question: Does the Smisa board, the Smisa reps on the Club's board and the Kibble directors wish to avoid being held to account? That is the whole point of an AGM and the four shareholders to whom I've spoken to today tell me that it is unacceptable to them. They are all deeply unhappy.

I've been told that the Smisa board as well as the Smisa reps on the Club's board read social media so will someone inform us why they are avoiding a traditional AGM in the presence of the shareholders?

Why is our AGM being conducted via Zoom when, according to the guidelines, there is absolutely no need ?

I wonder - is there something to be concerned about? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Since Fibble arrived our AGMs have slipped from November to December to January. Last year’s was by Zoom because it was necessary. This year it is not.
Were I a shareholder I’d ask why other teams have held AGMs during the pandemic, indoors and outdoors.
The 1877 club’s windows, high ceilings, two doors into the main stand, another into the corridor and entrance doors (opening on four sides) make it quite possible to hold the AGM safely. Packed corporate hospitality continued during covid, with more people and less ventilation.
The AGM could even be held outdoors in the main stand. Teams bigger than ours do this annually. Why were shareholders not asked if they liked the idea?
The apathy created is why the board/Fibblefeel they can get away with a Zoom AGM that allows them to pick and control questions, give short answers and move on quickly before things hot up reducing an important AGM to a tightly controlled Q&A session.

Fibble directors are avoiding the people they are supposed to represent. Think on that. They have never faced shareholders who have saved St Mirrentwice in the past. They are suffocating real debate and treating real St Mirren supporters with contempt.They should hang their heads in shame.

We all know home support is on the slide. Fibble’s profile is so low it is all but underground. After the ‘contracts to friends scandalof summer, the unfinished training ground fiasco, the first Fibble General Manager, their report of the club to the Revenue, their jump to attack the Chairman by press release unknown to their fellow directors after a mysterious ‘Rangers fan’ (there is one on our board) revealed his ill-advised comments is hardly surprising.

Fibble have brought nothing to our club except to disillusion the few remaining staff in a club now disjointed by warfare in the boardroom that is an open secret.

No wonder they chose Zoom. Watch it all happen without a squeak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


All that rant and you're not even a shareholder. emoji1787.png

 

Are non shareholders not allowed an opinion on the running of the club? This site would quickly suffocate if only shareholders were allowed to post on the subject of, for example, an AGM.  We are all Saints fans and one could argue that, technically, Animal - as well as the rest of us - are all shareholders, seeing as we are a fan owned club.

He raises serious concerns - such as the Kibble directors NEVER having faced the supporters - so may I respectfully suggest you add your thoughts on the subject matter i.e. why is a proper AGM not being held. 

My view is that there is something untoward when the shareholders are not being allowed to question the directors face to face. That is more important a question than whether or not any individual fan is a shareholder, don't you think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, doakie said:

Are non shareholders not allowed an opinion on the running of the club? This site would quickly suffocate if only shareholders were allowed to post on the subject of, for example, an AGM.  We are all Saints fans and one could argue that, technically, Animal - as well as the rest of us - are all shareholders, seeing as we are a fan owned club.

He raises serious concerns - such as the Kibble directors NEVER having faced the supporters - so may I respectfully suggest you add your thoughts on the subject matter i.e. Why is a proper AGM not being held?

My view is that there is something untoward when the shareholders are not being allowed to question the directors face to face. That is more important a question than whether or not any individual fan is a shareholder, don't you think? 

Maybe it's simply because most meetings nowadays, involving substantial numbers, are conducted through Zoom/Teams.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Maboza said:

Out of interest - roughly how many shareholders attend the AGM in normal times? 
 

I have no idea how many shareholders we actually have. 

Over the years, I'd estimate about 70 or 80, which is less than we have on sold out hospitality match days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disgraceful. A shambles is what we have at present and the club I’m afraid is on a downward trend. This needs fixed and the fans need to speak up here. It’s our club. We pay the wages of the players and without our support this team is nothing. Im at the point we’re im  just about to cancel my Smisa membership as they don’t seem to have any influence at all. Hat a shit show this is. How about SMISA step up here let’s pay our money and revert to the old plan that didn’t include the kibble. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Are non shareholders not allowed an opinion on the running of the club? This site would quickly suffocate if only shareholders were allowed to post on the subject of, for example, an AGM.  We are all Saints fans and one could argue that, technically, Animal - as well as the rest of us - are all shareholders, seeing as we are a fan owned club.
He raises serious concerns - such as the Kibble directors NEVER having faced the supporters - so may I respectfully suggest you add your thoughts on the subject matter i.e. why is a proper AGM not being held. 
My view is that there is something untoward when the shareholders are not being allowed to question the directors face to face. That is more important a question than whether or not any individual fan is a shareholder, don't you think? 


Let's start with getting facts right.

https://www.stmirren.com/fans-news/3530-smisa-members-meeting-with-kibble
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hendo said:

When is the SMISA AGM being held, anyone know? For members of SMISA maybe we need to start the process of change there.

Correct me If I am wrong but on the 27th January the St Mirren Football Club AGM will be held. SMISA are shareholders of the club and may well hold their own AGM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


Let's start with getting facts right.

https://www.stmirren.com/fans-news/3530-smisa-members-meeting-with-kibble

 

I apologise for any misunderstanding  but I am confident that I have got my facts right.

The Kibble directors have never addressed the shareholders since they joined the board in March 2020 and this meeting (which was with Smisa and not the shareholders, two separate entities) was prior to their joining the board. This meeting was all about what Kibble could bring to the table and took place before they came on board. So, when I said that "the Kibble directors NEVER having faced the supporters" I'm pretty certain I'm right - they were not directors of St.Mirren at the time this video was shot. I hope that clarifies the situation.

Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge they haven't attended any public meeting or AGM since they actually joined the board e.g. neither Kibble director took the time to attend the two "emergency" meetings with the fans, Smisa and the remaining directors in the summer.

Nevertheless, that is not the issue here but thanks for giving me the opportunity to try and be as specific as I can.

Anyway, let's not get side-tracked....my point is NOT about the Kibble and what they bring or don't bring to the table. No, my post is simply about the shareholders AGM being conducted via Zoom. No more, no less. There is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that a public AGM is much more efficient that a Zoom based meeting so I reiterate: Why is the AGM being conducted via Zoom and not in public when there is no requirement to do so under current guidelines?

In my opinion, that's a perfectly reasonable question that I feel Smisa should answer. 

Thanks for your contribution.

Needless to say, I've written to them asking why. I await a reply with interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

 

Sorry but when I said in another reply that they joined in March it was actually in February.  However, the link and paragraphs below are from Kibble's own website where it's clear that they joined the board after this meeting. Having said all of that and while I'm just trying to be accurate, the point remains - the post is about the Zoom AGM so let's not get too pedantic.

 

https://www.kibble.org/news/fan-vote-kicks-off-historic-partnership/  

Posted: February 21, 2020

A momentous day in our charity’s history, St. Mirren Independent Supporters Association (SMISA) have voted in favour of the exciting new partnership between Kibble and St. Mirren.

By an overwhelming majority, members recognised the value in this partnership that will provide fan ownership by 2021, while strengthening employment and training opportunities for Kibble young people.

The plans will see Kibble own a 27.5% stake in the club, opening future job prospects and opportunities in employment, training and education, as well as widening access to sport, health and wellbeing. It will also address local deprivation and exclusion through youth employment, community engagement, initiatives and activities.

Today’s decision followed a public meeting earlier this month where over 100 SMISA members were given a platform to ask questions to a panel of St. Mirren and Kibble representatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, animal said:

Since Fibble arrived our AGMs have slipped from November to December to January. Last year’s was by Zoom because it was necessary. This year it is not.
Were I a shareholder I’d ask why other teams have held AGMs during the pandemic, indoors and outdoors.
The 1877 club’s windows, high ceilings, two doors into the main stand, another into the corridor and entrance doors (opening on four sides) make it quite possible to hold the AGM safely. Packed corporate hospitality continued during covid, with more people and less ventilation.
The AGM could even be held outdoors in the main stand. Teams bigger than ours do this annually. Why were shareholders not asked if they liked the idea?
The apathy created is why the board/Fibblefeel they can get away with a Zoom AGM that allows them to pick and control questions, give short answers and move on quickly before things hot up reducing an important AGM to a tightly controlled Q&A session.

Fibble directors are avoiding the people they are supposed to represent. Think on that. They have never faced shareholders who have saved St Mirrentwice in the past. They are suffocating real debate and treating real St Mirren supporters with contempt.They should hang their heads in shame.

We all know home support is on the slide. Fibble’s profile is so low it is all but underground. After the ‘contracts to friends scandalof summer, the unfinished training ground fiasco, the first Fibble General Manager, their report of the club to the Revenue, their jump to attack the Chairman by press release unknown to their fellow directors after a mysterious ‘Rangers fan’ (there is one on our board) revealed his ill-advised comments is hardly surprising.

Fibble have brought nothing to our club except to disillusion the few remaining staff in a club now disjointed by warfare in the boardroom that is an open secret.

No wonder they chose Zoom. Watch it all happen without a squeak.

Those pesky Kibble directors. Challenging bigotry, unprofessionalism and moving AGMs a few weeks, how dare they?! 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Sorry but when I said in another reply that they joined in March it was actually in February.  However, the link and paragraphs below are from Kibble's own website where it's clear that they joined the board after this meeting. Having said all of that and while I'm just trying to be accurate, the point remains - the post is about the Zoom AGM so let's not get too pedantic.
 
https://www.kibble.org/news/fan-vote-kicks-off-historic-partnership/  
Posted: February 21, 2020

A momentous day in our charity’s history, St. Mirren Independent Supporters Association (SMISA) have voted in favour of the exciting new partnership between Kibble and St. Mirren.

By an overwhelming majority, members recognised the value in this partnership that will provide fan ownership by 2021, while strengthening employment and training opportunities for Kibble young people.

The plans will see Kibble own a 27.5% stake in the club, opening future job prospects and opportunities in employment, training and education, as well as widening access to sport, health and wellbeing. It will also address local deprivation and exclusion through youth employment, community engagement, initiatives and activities.

Today’s decision followed a public meeting earlier this month where over 100 SMISA members were given a platform to ask questions to a panel of St. Mirren and Kibble representatives.

I think the point he is making is that there is a difference between a "Kibble Director" and a "Kibble-appointed SMFC Director". Kibble Directors did "face the fans" at the Glynhill though they obviously weren't Kibble-appointed SMFC Directors at the time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I think we’ve wondered away from Doakie’s original point which was - paraphrasing - will Zoom meeting give the board a free hurl when there is no longer a good reason not to have a proper AGM 


No to a free ride and there is a good reason.

If anyone wants to SHOUT, just put the caps on when typing a question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we’ve wondered away from Doakie’s original point which was - paraphrasing - will Zoom meeting give the board a free hurl when there is no longer a good reason not to have a proper AGM 
Or you could look at it as even if the Director is isolating, they have no reason not to attend a Zoom AGM and are more likely to be able to be "held to account" - all just swings and roundabouts.
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...