Jump to content

Possible Questions for the SMISA meeting


animal
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Cumbriansaint72 said:

What they don't have to do now is approach companies to see if they will provide training places, they now have a 'captive audience' of club sponsors who may feel obliged to do so as it will 'benefit the community', blah, blah, blah.

 

🤔 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, pod said:

🤔

Have a look at their website, more so about their skills academy. Makes sense why they would want to be involved with the club having numerous sponsors who could be utilised for placements. Certainly saves Kibble the hard work of finding companies that would want to be involved with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pod said:

Why, no ambition to be 100% fan (SMISA) owned. 🤔

I agree, ideally should be 100% fan owned.  There are 2 points really

1) Kibble came up with the money.

2) GLS did accept so he got his investment back early whereas he could have always said no and stuck to the timescale planned for SMISA to completely own club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

If we are fan owned, how can, by your admission, a non-fan entity change our operating model? 

In fairness, you are not a liar, just deluded, blinkered and in denial. 

Our fan ownership model includes a stake sold to The Kibble charity. It’s possibly the only one of its kind in professional football, but fan ownership, it still is. 
 

You’re just bitter fans didn’t vote in the manner you want & now you crave the collapse of SMFC while the Kibble are involved. 

A fan owned club enjoying its best season in over three decades. No luck :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Our fan ownership model includes a stake sold to The Kibble charity. It’s possibly the only one of its kind in professional football, but fan ownership, it still is. 
 

You’re just bitter fans didn’t vote in the manner you want & now you crave the collapse of SMFC while the Kibble are involved. 

A fan owned club enjoying its best season in over three decades. No luck :) 

Same old tired inaccurate rhetoric. Ok. Now you are a liar! 

The Kibble charity, as you call them trying to strengthen your lost cause of a claim, can change our operating model, again, according to you. 

It is not a fan.

The stake, as you call it, was sold to a non fan, meaning the fans do not own all the stakes or fully control the club! 

I typed that slowly for your benefit! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cumbriansaint72 said:

Have a look at their website, more so about their skills academy. Makes sense why they would want to be involved with the club having numerous sponsors who could be utilised for placements. Certainly saves Kibble the hard work of finding companies that would want to be involved with this.

Just means they can place their country wide residential kids rather than the local community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cumbriansaint72 said:

I agree, ideally should be 100% fan owned.  There are 2 points really

1) Kibble came up with the money.

2) GLS did accept so he got his investment back early whereas he could have always said no and stuck to the timescale planned for SMISA to completely own club.

Has SMISA the same time scale with Kibble as they had with GLS.  🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:

Same old tired inaccurate rhetoric. Ok. Now you are a liar! 

The Kibble charity, as you call them trying to strengthen your lost cause of a claim, can change our operating model, again, according to you. 

It is not a fan.

The stake, as you call it, was sold to a non fan, meaning the fans do not own all the stakes or fully control the club! 

I typed that slowly for your benefit! 

Still a fan owned club though :) I know it sticks in your throat. 

Hmm, take a minute to try and understand why typing slowly doesn't have an impact on how a person reads your BAWA post. 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am always confused to read on here about "fan owned".  What does "fan owned" actually mean?  

Even the SG, GLS Consortium was "fan owned" albeit a small number of them and there was always the risk of sale to an outsider..

To listen to some people, they think without Kibble, SMISA would own 100% of the club.  

The original ownership model of buying all of GLS shares would not have given 100% ownership.  There are still about 20% of shares out there in the hands of small shareholders, most of whom are fans but free to sell to whoever they please..  

"Fan Ownership" to me, means the majority of the shareholding is in the "fan group's" hands so that the club is saved for the future. No threat of a Brealey etc coming and buying us.

But the important thing is that even if Kibble went looking for all of these small shares, or deced to sell to a "predator", nobody can ever get a majority.

 

That brings us on to the upcoming elections, "fan owned" v "fan managed", they are very different things, but that is for another day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, bonzoboys said:

I am always confused to read on here about "fan owned".  What does "fan owned" actually mean?  

Even the SG, GLS Consortium was "fan owned" albeit a small number of them and there was always the risk of sale to an outsider..

To listen to some people, they think without Kibble, SMISA would own 100% of the club.  

The original ownership model of buying all of GLS shares would not have given 100% ownership.  There are still about 20% of shares out there in the hands of small shareholders, most of whom are fans but free to sell to whoever they please..  

"Fan Ownership" to me, means the majority of the shareholding is in the "fan group's" hands so that the club is saved for the future. No threat of a Brealey etc coming and buying us.

But the important thing is that even if Kibble went looking for all of these small shares, or deced to sell to a "predator", nobody can ever get a majority.

 

That brings us on to the upcoming elections, "fan owned" v "fan managed", they are very different things, but that is for another day

For me the majority control to a fan group & completion of the fan buying journey, is enough to say fan owned. I feel it's pedantic (and sour grapes?) to complain otherwise. this is what fan ownership looks like to SMFC and so far, it's looking successful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

For me the majority control to a fan group & completion of the fan buying journey, is enough to say fan owned. I feel it's pedantic (and sour grapes?) to complain otherwise. this is what fan ownership looks like to SMFC and so far, it's looking successful. 

That is subjective. However lets not get in to a debate on that

The Club and SMISA are at an important crossroad on the future of how they will be governed and by whom

The club is a business, as is SMISA to an extent, as a business they need governance and direction by people who will always act in the best interest of that respective business and no other. With that in mind of us being fans owned we need competent people in charge. IF we don’t have that competence within the SMISA membership then we need to recruit elsewhere. SMISA has a significant number of competent people in their membership. Unfortunately they appear to have no desire to put themselves forward for scrutiny. The recruitment of SMISA board members needs to evolve. If not it will become like a golf club committee.

Your willingness to be a Director/Board Member is not the threshold as the competence to be one. That is an important point especially with the current SMISA elections

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

That is subjective. However lets not get in to a debate on that

The Club and SMISA are at an important crossroad on the future of how they will be governed and by whom

The club is a business, as is SMISA to an extent, as a business they need governance and direction by people who will always act in the best interest of that respective business and no other. With that in mind of us being fans owned we need competent people in charge. IF we don’t have that competence within the SMISA membership then we need to recruit elsewhere. SMISA has a significant number of competent people in their membership. Unfortunately they appear to have no desire to put themselves forward for scrutiny. The recruitment of SMISA board members needs to evolve. If not it will become like a golf club committee.

Your willingness to be a Director/Board Member is not the threshold as the competence to be one. That is an important point especially with the current SMISA elections

As much as I agree with the premise that we need a competent board (both the SMISA & SMFC boards actually), I don't know if there are any current concerns on competency. Yes, there is a fair amount of moon howling going along with the upheaval but I think we should be giving the benefit of the doubt to those applying to join the board. 

Our club looks to be in its best shape in years, I don't see any benefit in inventing concerns.  

- Strong cash on hand figures (last accounts) 

- Only concerns down to Covid which almost all clubs have faced (last accounts) 

- Strong team with sellable assets

- Multiple internationals in the first team and coming through the academy again (youth internationals)  

- Capability to pay good money for players/ coaches 

- in demand manager 

- Strong home crowds 

- Experienced Kibble resource to support in developing our operating model 

Why not just enjoy it until someone can actually show a shred of concrete evidence that the club is facing any sort of trouble? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

As much as I agree with the premise that we need a competent board (both the SMISA & SMFC boards actually), I don't know if there are any current concerns on competency. Yes, there is a fair amount of moon howling going along with the upheaval but I think we should be giving the benefit of the doubt to those applying to join the board. 

Our club looks to be in its best shape in years, I don't see any benefit in inventing concerns.  

- Strong cash on hand figures (last accounts) 

- Only concerns down to Covid which almost all clubs have faced (last accounts) 

- Strong team with sellable assets

- Multiple internationals in the first team and coming through the academy again (youth internationals)  

- Capability to pay good money for players/ coaches 

- in demand manager 

- Strong home crowds 

- Experienced Kibble resource to support in developing our operating model 

Why not just enjoy it until someone can actually show a shred of concrete evidence that the club is facing any sort of trouble? 

There are obviously issues going on in the background. All of the resignations maybe a coincidence. However I don’t believe in coincidences.

There is a fine line of what these issues are and what concern they are to the day to day fan. (Your list on success is also subjective)

Football Clubs are unique to any other business. Fans like to think they should be notified of everything that goes on in club, probably even down to the colour of the toilet paper. The realty is the running of the club should be left to the Directors and the employed personnel. 

The point i was making, before you deflected it in to the usual Bazil propaganda,,  SMISA board and the Club need new directors they need to ensure the correct personnel are selected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

There are obviously issues going on in the background. All of the resignations maybe a coincidence. However I don’t believe in coincidences.

There is a fine line of what these issues are and what concern they are to the day to day fan. (Your list on success is also subjective)

Football Clubs are unique to any other business. Fans like to think they should be notified of everything that goes on in club, probably even down to the colour of the toilet paper. The realty is the running of the club should be left to the Directors and the employed personnel. 

The point i was making, before you deflected it in to the usual Bazil propaganda,,  SMISA board and the Club need new directors they need to ensure the correct personnel are selected.

Let's be honest here, I'm not sure what previous account you posted under. But I imagine I could have a reasonable stab at half a dozen who have cried wolf at issues in the past which never crystallised. Why should I think any different regarding the people warning of doomsday again now? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

There are obviously issues going on in the background. All of the resignations maybe a coincidence. However I don’t believe in coincidences.

There is a fine line of what these issues are and what concern they are to the day to day fan. (Your list on success is also subjective)

Football Clubs are unique to any other business. Fans like to think they should be notified of everything that goes on in club, probably even down to the colour of the toilet paper. The realty is the running of the club should be left to the Directors and the employed personnel. 

The point i was making, before you deflected it in to the usual Bazil propaganda,,  SMISA board and the Club need new directors they need to ensure the correct personnel are selected.

I've no real desire to get involved in the different aspects of this debate, there's enough shite without my input, but on this "success" issue, where we are for a brief moment in time means little or nothing IMO.

Success would be sitting 4th at the end of the season.

This was "used" at a point last season to make Goodwin look better than he was by a few "Goodwinites". :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Let's be honest here, I'm not sure what previous account you posted under. But I imagine I could have a reasonable stab at half a dozen who have cried wolf at issues in the past which never crystallised. Why should I think any different regarding the people warning of doomsday again now? 

Jeezo, you'd never make it as a detective would you? :lol:

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...