Prices Up - thanks to the moaning Minnies!

[W6er]

4 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Come on Saints, do the right thing, you are more than happy to have the players take the knee for BLM and give pre- match tannoy announcements about racist, sexist, gender abuse but when it comes to addressing bigotry you are happy to stick your fingers in your ears and take the money. 

Because that is the right thing to do...for our club. 

[Rascal]

7 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Come on Saints, do the right thing, you are more than happy to have the players take the knee for BLM and give pre- match tannoy announcements about racist, sexist, gender abuse but when it comes to addressing bigotry you are happy to stick your fingers in your ears and take the money. 

We now have a choice to make. We may not like the choice we have been given but it has ensured that all of us face the reality of the situation.

We can stop the club giving away the family stand but it is going to cost us, as supporters, money if we make that choice. 
 

As I see it, there is an opportunity for those fans who can’t go to games because of distance to help others to be able to attend at a very small cost per individual. An opportunity for those who live far-away perhaps to show their financial support.

[bazil85]

10 hours ago, SuperSaints1877 said:

No I think I understood exactly what they message meant. Yes they knew it was possible to submit the survey twice, therefore they stated not to. The club just wanted to make sure they reached all regular fans. There are some SMiSA members who are not ST holders. The only failure here is your misunderstanding.

 

So your post made absolutely no sense since that wasn’t what I was talking about, it was the concern it could be submitted more than once. (In response to someone that made this point also) 🤷‍♂️

Glad we sorted that out. A great effort from you but you’ve kind of made yourself look silly. 

[antrin]

As part of the club’s “sell” of reasons why we should kow-tow to the bigots, we are told that the club needs the money for players so Saints can try to break into…

…the Top Six!  

Wow.  

So… extra/better players won’t help to win the league…. Or even offer a snawbaw’s chance of doing so.

It’s more realistic (and moral) to simply accept that…

…it’s not a genuinely competitive league and not actively aid the bigots in their struggle against each other but pay attention to St Mirren fans’ wishes and desires rather than keeping those bigots happy.

Another journeyman, past-it, injury-prone player added to the squad each year is never going to make miracles happen.

 

St Mirren genuinely has nothing to lose here, other than home fans and the moral high ground.

 

[saintargyll]

18 minutes ago, antrin said:

As part of the club’s “sell” of reasons why we should kow-tow to the bigots, we are told that the club needs the money for players so Saints can try to break into…

…the Top Six!  

Wow.  

So… extra/better players won’t help to win the league…. Or even offer a snawbaw’s chance of doing so.

It’s more realistic (and moral) to simply accept that…

…it’s not a genuinely competitive league and not actively aid the bigots in their struggle against each other but pay attention to St Mirren fans’ wishes and desires rather than keeping those bigots happy.

Another journeyman, past-it, injury-prone player added to the squad each year is never going to make miracles happen.

 

St Mirren genuinely has nothing to lose here, other than home fans and the moral high ground.

 

This is what i dont understand about all this, lets take the family stand as an example

if we took it away from the OF, it wouldnt lie dormont and empty

so how much money would we lose in the season if it was half full of saints fans FOR 3 GAMES ???

[bazil85]

3 minutes ago, saintargyll said:

This is what i dont understand about all this, lets take the family stand as an example

if we took it away from the OF, it wouldnt lie dormont and empty

so how much money would we lose in the season if it was half full of saints fans FOR 3 GAMES ???

Around £100k, and it’s never half full of saints fans, these games or almost any game. 

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So your post made absolutely no sense since that wasn’t what I was talking about, it was the concern it could be submitted more than once. (In response to someone that made this point also) 🤷‍♂️

Glad we sorted that out. A great effort from you but you’ve kind of made yourself look silly. 

[StanleySaint]

9 hours ago, W6er said:

Such as? Sell our assets? Some examples would be useful.

Sorry, don't the club employ people to come up with these solutions, it is meant to be a business not golf/bowling/social club. All I'm saying is maybe they should do their chores before asking for their pocket money. 🤔

[waldorf34]

Charge Smisa £100k for naming rights of the stadium

[Kombibuddie]

15 hours ago, pod said:

Better class of player on park might work. ££££

That it will.

I'd much rather manage within achievable budgets & do not rely on making a quick buck out of rangers & celtic by giving away any home advantage we have.

Here's a radical one,

We hire their stadiums for our home matches against them and fill them with their fans.

50000 rangers fans at £30 will bring in £1,500,000. After costs & rental fee, i'd expect at least £500,000 could be trousered.

Keeps the OF out of Greenhill road altogether 😁 and we make a stack of cash. Everybody's happy.

£105000 over 3 matches in Paisley would be chicken feed. 😁

[bazil85]

26 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

Charge Smisa £100k for naming rights of the stadium

SMISA own the club, that would be the decision for their representatives.
 

And the SMISA money isn’t for that use, we had fans crying about this a few years back when there was a vote on them giving money for players wages. 

[W6er]

56 minutes ago, StanleySaint said:

Sorry, don't the club employ people to come up with these solutions, it is meant to be a business not golf/bowling/social club. All I'm saying is maybe they should do their chores before asking for their pocket money. 🤔

Well perhaps the solutions they have thought of have been presented to us, and we have been asked to vote on them?

[Sonny]

We charged £22 for a ticket last season. The OF £30. So bump up to their prices against them to £30 and we pull in approx £40k (1600 * 8 * 3) per stand. This should be done regardless of the outcome of the vote.

So that leaves a £60k shortfall if we only give them one stand. (We gain an extra £80k if we give them 2 stands). Some of any loss will be offset by

- slightly increasing Family Stand season ticket prices to reflect validity for all games.

- maybe slightly increased number of Buds returning if only one stand allocated to the bigots.

- some OF infiltrators into the Home Stands.

So the loss would be closer to £50k than £100k. Not great but we can live with that.

[Rascal]

20 minutes ago, W6er said:

Well perhaps the solutions they have thought of have been presented to us, and we have been asked to vote on them?

Irrespective of our views on this, we now have an opportunity to register these with the club directly. Either the club lose income or the fans pay in more or we accept the “blame “ for reducing the managers budget. 

[beyond our ken]

13 hours ago, W6er said:

We are majority fan owned. Many of the comments, if not the majority, that I have seen about the two stands question, is that we are now supposed to be fan owned and the board should listen to the fans. £105K is a LOT of money, the club have to inform fans what's at stake, otherwise it's not an informed decision.

 

No, they're relatively minor issues that have not received the sort of criticism that this has. Do you want fans to be consulted? Many seem to thing that now we're majority fan owned we should be consulted. They can't win really, can they? If they just make the financially prudent decision they will be accused of not listening to us, but you're not happy that they're consulting the fans. Ultimately the decision is made by the board, but they're letting fans know of the consequences.

the signing of players is a minor issue for a football team?  Wow!

A board should be making decisions and if the shareholders don't like it they can vote them out.  Unfortunately that doesn't look a likely proposition for St Mirren

[beyond our ken]

it's all a load of pish, really.  I would not allow them in, but that is not an option.  If you go to their grounds you go in the same stands as they get so the clear solution is to provide better facilities and house them in northern sections of the two large  stands.  Its the way the stadium should have been designed anyway.  It's either that or just accept the current situation but do it in  a way that season ticket holders are not adversely affected.

Edited May 28, 2022 by beyond our ken

[Wilbur]

I get it that some fans are prepared to stump £30 if that would allow the club to keep 3 stands for home fans, if that would make St Mirren no worse off financially. But this wouldn't be a one-off commitment, unless the idea is to keep the 3 stands for home fans for a single season only. But surely the plan is to make this a permanent situation ? Are those offering to pay the £30 prepared to make a legal commitment to the club to make this payment every year for an indefinite period ?

IMO some of the solutions put forward above are just laughable.  John McGinn money ?? Is he likely to be transferred to a new club for a higher fee every season ??

This debate is about romanticism versus pragmatism. Cutting off a much needed income source without firstly having secured a rock solid replacement source would be insane. 

[bazil85]

43 minutes ago, Sonny said:

We charged £22 for a ticket last season. The OF £30. So bump up to their prices against them to £30 and we pull in approx £40k (1600 * 8 * 3) per stand. This should be done regardless of the outcome of the vote.

So that leaves a £60k shortfall if we only give them one stand. (We gain an extra £80k if we give them 2 stands). Some of any loss will be offset by

- slightly increasing Family Stand season ticket prices to reflect validity for all games.

- maybe slightly increased number of Buds returning if only one stand allocated to the bigots.

- some OF infiltrators into the Home Stands.

So the loss would be closer to £50k than £100k. Not great but we can live with that.

They are doing this, it's in the details sent to fans, along with the survey. 

[Tommy]

Since saints fans will never agree on this subject, why not let the bigots decide. 

First of all, put out a club statement saying you will get 2 stands, but if you break the law by any means, the next time you visit, it will be 1 stand for you. 

Charge them what they charge us, and any saint fan who buy a ticket, even if it is a concession, give them a decent discount for any other home game of their choice. 

 

[waldorf34]

2 hours ago, bazil85 said:

SMISA own the club, that would be the decision for their representatives.
 

And the SMISA money isn’t for that use, we had fans crying about this a few years back when there was a vote on them giving money for players wages. 

That was before Smisa became largest shareholder. 

But the argument  was the same, theclub do not do enough  to raise income by opening  the stadium during the week ,its unused 90% of the time .

[antrin]

3 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

 

Here's a radical one,

We hire their stadiums for our home matches against them and fill them with their fans.

50000 rangers fans at £30 will bring in £1,500,000. After costs & rental fee, i'd expect at least £500,000 could be trousered.

Keeps the OF out of Greenhill road altogether 😁 and we make a stack of cash. Everybody's happy.

£105000 over 3 matches in Paisley would be chicken feed. 😁

🙇‍♀️🙇🙇‍♂️👌

Brilliant!

I’m ashamed that I never followed the SMISA statement to its logical conclusion.  Thank you, kombi!

with this simple, smart solution Saints could hire dozens of journeymen players capable of scraping the club into the Top Six/Valhalla/the Promised Land.  

[Sonny]

They are doing this, it's in the details sent to fans, along with the survey. 

My mistake. Still means we are not losing £100k.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[bazil85]

2 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

That was before Smisa became largest shareholder. 

But the argument  was the same, theclub do not do enough  to raise income by opening  the stadium during the week ,its unused 90% of the time .

It's completely unfounded that we could open the stadium up for other purposes during the week in viable, business operating means. Our location isn't great for many business purposes and their is a myth that exists with some fans that this would be shooty in. As I have said before, if it was so easy, all clubs our level would do it. 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, Sonny said:

My mistake. Still means we are not losing £100k.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Yeah absolutely, they do say the decisions will in part mitigate the issue. Just wish we had done it every season to date. 

[Rascal]

1 hour ago, antrin said:

🙇‍♀️🙇🙇‍♂️👌

Brilliant!

I’m ashamed that I never followed the SMISA statement to its logical conclusion.  Thank you, kombi!

with this simple, smart solution Saints could hire dozens of journeymen players capable of scraping the club into the Top Six/Valhalla/the Promised Land.  

On the basis that cutting costs are popular in improving margins, A bit of an alternative approach. Should we consider reducing the capacity of the stadium and stewarding costs?

We could cut back on the seats in the family stand. We can (have) increase(d) costs for season ticket holders throughout the ground.

I would also increase ticket prices for fans from other clubs with the highest increases tickets for The OF,Hibernian, , Hearts and Aberdeen.
 

I would also go for having a  pot into which fans, not just season ticket holders,  can contribute to help others in more financially straitened circumstances attend games.

I also like an idea put forward that home fans who are not season tickets holders can buy a batch ticket for our areas of the ground for a few games perhaps including an OF game. This might discourage OF fans from coming into the West, Main or South Stand.