Explosive Smisa application

[billyg]

1 hour ago, alanb said:

SMiSA Update on RCGF Application

Rumbling along 

SMiSA to ask Club board and AW for their thoughts

Yes , that what over 75% of those attending asked the Smisa board to do  , so they're following the process. I don't know what AW and his cronies are proposing , but Kibble are here for the long haul , be it with the current two on the BOD or others. Bottom line is , the Smisa membership voted overwhelmingly to speed up the process by allowing them  to purchase GS's shares , so we're stuck with it , for good or bad !

[Doakes]

The way I see it, we can either embrace what we've got and make the relationship between the club and Kibble work, or allow a vocal minority to turn the relationship sour

I know what side I'm on 

[alanb]

26 minutes ago, billyg said:

Yes , that what over 75% of those attending asked the Smisa board to do  , so they're following the process. I don't know what AW and his cronies are proposing , but Kibble are here for the long haul , be it with the current two on the BOD or others. Bottom line is , the Smisa membership voted overwhelmingly to speed up the process by allowing them  to purchase GS's shares , so we're stuck with it , for good or bad !

I get the impression that AW and the Kibble directors dispute got personal from an 1877 club tweet, asking for two resignations and the club to engage with the Kibble bossman.

 

[HSS]

New communication out from SMiSA today which I think AW will be delighted to see 

[FTOF]

WGAF?

 

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

I got half way thru reading it then lost interest. 

[StanleySaint]

Basically enquiry only got responses from AW and the Council but not board of SMFC, can't comment further as court case pending, so as you were.

[Hendo]

58 minutes ago, StanleySaint said:

Basically enquiry only got responses from AW and the Council but not board of SMFC, can't comment further as court case pending, so as you were.

I know others think there's nothing to see here, but for me this is concerning.

Why would Kibble directors prefer court action rather than engaging with SMISA, and why are SMISA directors on the SMFC board not engaging with the enquiry either?

[Hendo]

Just re-read the update - Kibble directors are seeking orders against SMISA who have had to use funds to seek legal advice. We have, of course, heard nothing from SMISA appointed board members of this.

 

 

[HSS]

SMiSA have also found that Kibble used the SMFC Charity without their permission and Renfrewshire Council “refutes entirely” that they made the mistake with the drawings for the planning application 

[beyond our ken]

None of this looks very good, the governance structure seems not to have been respected and when individuals make an application on behalf of a body they are connected with, but not appointed to represent, then the suggestion (at least) is that some people on the board see their remit as unlimited and unrestricted.  If any good comes out of this, it will be around the defining of exactly who has the right and permission to do exactly what.

As regards the orders made against SMISA, I wonder what they are.  Possibly around public disclosure of things that might harm Kibble and that Kibble contest?

As I said at the very start, there is rarely anything so chaotic as a bunch of people using other people's money without any sense of accountability. 

Edited August 29, 2023 by beyond our ken

[Brilliant Disguise]

2 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

None of this looks very good, the governance structure seems not to have been respected and when individuals make an application on behalf of a body they are connected with, but not appointed to represent, then the suggestion (at least) is that some people on the board see their remit as unlimited and unrestricted.  If any good comes out of this, it will be around the defining of exactly who has the right and permission to do exactly what.

As regards the orders made against SMISA, I wonder what they are.  Possibly around public disclosure of things that might harm Kibble and that Kibble contest?

As I said at the very start, there is rarely anything so chaotic as a bunch of people using other people's money without any sense of accountability. 

100% Shambolic. 

Sounds like we have a majority board being bullied by the minority members. No way to run a company.  Threats of legal action when they don’t get their way. 

[rabuddies]

3 hours ago, HSS said:

Renfrewshire Council “refutes entirely” that they made the mistake with the drawings for the planning application 

Remember this is the department that couldn't count the number of weans that would need primary and secondary education in future years.  I rest my case.  

[Hendo]

1 minute ago, rabuddies said:

Remember this is the department that couldn't count the number of weans that would need primary and secondary education in future years.  I rest my case.  

Thats not relevant.

What is relevant, and concerning, is two members of the St Mirren board taking legal action against the supporters organisation that owns the club.

Its a pity, this should have been able to work, unfortunately too many egos at play, together with it would appear weakness and lack of integrity from our reps on the SMFC board. Time to reconfigure the managemenr of the club without kibble involvement IMO.

[StanleySaint]

All of the above since my earlier post are indeed relevant but none of it is anything we didn't already know except for the SMISA having to consult lawyers, in my view the link up with Kibble was a mistake and we're perhaps seeing the detrimental effects now that may detract from any benefits.

[beyond our ken]

1 minute ago, Hendo said:

Thats not relevant.

What is relevant, and concerning, is two members of the St Mirren board taking legal action against the supporters organisation that owns the club.

Its a pity, this should have been able to work, unfortunately too many egos at play, together with it would appear weakness and lack of integrity from our reps on the SMFC board. Time to reconfigure the managemenr of the club without kibble involvement IMO.

I don't think it is legal action, in a punitive sense.  More an order not to disclose specific things they know in the public domain in case it prejudices their case against Wardrop.  On one hand, a reasonable and prudent thing to do however it does beg the question of what the SMISA board members know.  If that is just a frivolous scare tactic then SMISA should be easily able to dispense with it.  It could also be that one or more SMISA office-bearers have taken their own legal advice and asked for the kibble guys to make the order application so that they can keep shtum and refuse to answer questions until a counter-order is in place.  All tactics designed to cost the person being sued money and to try and persuade Wardrop to roll over.  I suspect that if this was going to happen then it would already have done so and that this case will end up with an agreement on both sides not to pursue it further. This is probably a futile exercise as SMISA will have to answer honestly if called as witnesses in the case. 

What is clear is that the governance is in shambles if one party feels the need to try and gag another. 

At first i thought that the Kibble guys were just after a few bucks in an out of court settlement, however this looks more like they are feeling vulnerable and trying to get a genie back in a bottle.

[bazil85]

12 hours ago, Hendo said:

I know others think there's nothing to see here, but for me this is concerning.

Why would Kibble directors prefer court action rather than engaging with SMISA, and why are SMISA directors on the SMFC board not engaging with the enquiry either?

They have engaged, they’ve been engaged more than Del Boy Trotter. The thing just won’t die. 
 

They’ve had their characters put under the spotlight so have taken that case forward. No one can blame them given the pathetic way AW conducted himself in all of this. 
 

Given where we are now, it’s no surprise they won’t say anything further. 

[Hendo]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

They have engaged, they’ve been engaged more than Del Boy Trotter. The thing just won’t die. 
 

They’ve had their characters put under the spotlight so have taken that case forward. No one can blame them given the pathetic way AW conducted himself in all of this. 
 

Given where we are now, it’s no surprise they won’t say anything further. 

So are you not even a tiny bit concerned that two St Mirren directors are seeking legal orders against SMISA, which has led SMISA to seek legal advice? Does that sound like a harmonious state of affairs?

Buttoned.up.the.back.

[HSS]

Good old Zoom,that was better than half the shite on the TV 

 

[billyg]

As John Needham said tonight , the working relationship between Smisa and Kibble on the BOD is great , and the improvement in financial performance , turnover and the club in general is testament to that. AW is still the fly in the ointment here , because it appears that in his eyes , it's still all about him !

[Hendo]

1 hour ago, billyg said:

As John Needham said tonight , the working relationship between Smisa and Kibble on the BOD is great 

Aww, thats so nice, glad they are all pals. Do their respective lawyers get on too?

[ALBIONSAINT]

15 hours ago, HSS said:

SMiSA have also found that Kibble used the SMFC Charity without their permission and Renfrewshire Council “refutes entirely” that they made the mistake with the drawings for the planning application 

 

[billyg]

12 hours ago, Hendo said:

Thats not relevant.

What is relevant, and concerning, is two members of the St Mirren board taking legal action against the supporters organisation that owns the club.

Its a pity, this should have been able to work, unfortunately too many egos at play, together with it would appear weakness and lack of integrity from our reps on the SMFC board. Time to reconfigure the managemenr of the club without kibble involvement IMO.

The legal action is by Kibble against AW , but you know that anyway. AW's failed attempt to become a member of the SMISA board is a big factor here , with Kibble not happy at the wording of it , therefore part of their action is to prevent SMISA from removing it , which SMISA have no intention of doing anyway !

[munoz]

I thought it was a shame that so much of last night's time was taken up by the negative sideshow, especially when there's plenty to be positive about. 

[Cookie Monster]

I thought it was a shame that so much of last night's time was taken up by the negative sideshow, especially when there's plenty to be positive about. 

I'd forgotten it was on last night, I don't have a problem per se with highlighting and discussing any negatives if it was to reduce them. Its as you say just one issue that's taking up to much time and possibly resources that could be getting used to build on the positives for the betterment of the club.