LatapyBairn.

Like this idea

I don’t think this is true, it’s certainly misrepresentative. An email went out to the group last week from a non board member who is a patron with a proposal to raise funds that could then possibly be ring fenced to help boost the playing budget. There was no official contact from the club , the guys on the BOD probably don’t even know about it as they weren’t included in the email and I’m not sure the proposal even got off the ground in the first place for them to be informed. It was definitely before the FSS released they’re statement anyway and there was certainly no chat along the lines of “hoovering up shares”

Might just be me be I did kinda presume when I singed up I was handing my money over for nothing. Framing it as an ongoing donation I find in no way offensive, all I really needed to know is that I was helping the club. In that respect I’m still happy that I am unless I hear differently.

If this is the case. I’d rather wait and see the reasoning when / if it is explained. For example could it be 30k of new money via the PG or another investor is seen as new money and un budgeted for as opposed to the ongoing money from the FSS which is already built into the clubs budget? There may also be another mechanism being discussed to help the FSS get to 25% via some form of share transfer as some on here talked about earlier? If the PG or a third party are indeed buying up the remaining 1% or so of shares it will still leave the FSS in a very strong position as the clubs largest shareholder anyway and I’m sure the will is there to get the society that final push to the 25% +1 mark one way or another. Let’s just wait and see what both the FSS and club board come out with, I certainly don’t need to feel my monthly FSS debit is going towards accruing more and more shares indefinitely to make me keep contributing. In reality all I need to know is the money is going to the club, being spent wisely and in some way helping us kick on.

For me it’s simply about maximising the money going into the club, no need to try and pit one group of fans against another, that’s an extremely unfair reflection of the situation and also not an accurate character reflection of the people involved across all the supporters groups, most have gone above and beyond as far as time, money and effort are concerned. Especially when both groups have members in both organisations, in fact I think all the patrons are FSS members.

Do you think the club may have an alternative buyer for the remaining unsold shares? This would make sense as it would bring in additional funds over and above what the FSS will already be contributing. It may also bring a potential additional skill set into the clubs ownership structure. I’m happy to wait and see what the reasoning from both the FSS and the club board is before flinging a tantrum, if it’s going into the club and I’m content the money is being spent relatively wisely the FSS will keep getting my monthly debit regardless of whether it gains more shares or not.

Do you think the club may have an alternative buyer for the remaining unsold shares? This would make sense as it would bring in additional funds over and above what the FSS will already be contributing. It may also bring a potential additional skill set into the clubs ownership structure. I’m happy to wait and see what the reasoning from both the FSS and the club board is before flinging a tantrum, if it’s going into the club and I’m content the money is being spent relatively wisely the FSS will keep getting my monthly debit regardless of whether it gains more shares or not.

I’m actually more than happy with a situation like this so long as the FSS are able to purchase the required shares to meet the 25% +1 target. I’d also think the members should be canvased on how they’d like to see the funds used going forward after that so this can be communicated to the club. I never really expected the club to continue with infinite share issues but the 25% +1 threshold is important and should be facilitated. Going forward after that point the knowledge that my monthly debit is helping support the club and hopefully giving me some sort of democratic say as a fan as to how that money is spent is enough for me personally, most members I speak to do seem to think along those lines as well to be honest and I’ve always presumed that form of set up to be the case in the longer term but here and now the issue of meeting the targeted share threshold needs to be sorted and the club should be actively helping the society reach that goal not blocking it in my opinion so it will be interesting to hear the boards reasoning for not allowing those final unsold shares to be purchased. I’m not quite ready to line them up in front of a firing squad until all the reasoning and thinking behind these decisions taken are communicated to us from both the FSS committee and the club board.

Like I’ve already said, I’d always presumed when the available shares had been purchased and the FSS reached the 25% needed my monthly debit would become a glorified donation anyway, I’m still perfectly happy with that being the case in the knowledge it’s supporting the club but the society needs to be allowed to reach its targeted shareholding first.

The difference between the FSS reaching the 25% to where the shareholding is now would make minimal difference to where PG shareholding is, I’m absolutely not believing that has anything to do with why this decisions been taken. The plan was always for the FSS to get to that 25% figure however and the club should be helping facilitate that especially when the remaining shares are there and available to allow it, I’d like to hear what the reasoning behind the decision actually is and think the club board should release a statement explaining why they have deviated from what we all believed was the plan for the FSS.

Exactly! A lot of positives on the playing front which is by far and away what football fans want most, really wish some could enjoy these small highlights more and hopefully we can build on that win. Most of our new players all looking like upgrades on last year as well…... Also, for what it’s worth when the FSS do reach the 25% (and they will one way or another) I’ve always been more than happy for my money each month to basically be a glorified donation and did presume that would be the case. I’ve never really expected anything material in return for the membership other than knowing it was helping support the club but regardless of that I don’t think the FSS committee should be taking these unilateral decisions on our behalf without consulting the wider membership via a vote.

This seems sensible and covering all angels, also very possible to be put in place, something along these lines really needs written up and voted on by members with an agreement from the club board. I’m also pretty certain knowing a few of the people involved with discussion that agreement would be found for a proposal along these lines.

For me I always presumed when joining the FSS after the 25% was reached it would be a form of monthly donation however ideally i’d like a mechanism in place where members have a say in how that money is then spent, I liked the idea of the FSS perhaps having direct involvement with the academy for example and taking control of funding that.

All members of the BOD are also FSS members, both the patrons and FSS organisations are entitled to two directors each so in that respect it’s balanced. Do we know if the patrons group would be allowed to invite new patrons or buy new shares?

I’ve no idea which board members backed or did not back the decision, having asked a similar question on another issue in the past they tend not to let you know who voted for what. Only if a decision was unanimous or not but I’d certainly be asking the question anyway.

I think you’ll find it was me being berated, I’m surely entitled to respond to that! ……Anyway, I’m in agreement it’s not a great move by the club board (partly made up of FSS reps remember and I believe all are also paid up FSS members) at least from an optics point of view if nothing else but also don’t see it as in insurmountable problem if everyone gets around the table. Without being sure of the exact logistics in share transfer I think you are right in that the club in theory have a veto however I doubt they actually would if it was proposed but failing that it’s surely not beyond the means of man to organise a more informal way of bringing a number of the smaller shareholdings under the FSS umbrella for voting purposes without actually having to transfer the shares directly. The patrons group is made up of individual shareholders banded together, somthing similar on a larger scale should not be overly difficult to achieve and might actually increase the FSS shareholding way beyond the 25%.

Not sure what’s so outlandish about my suggestion, I’m purely offering a potential solution rather than just howling at the moon. Have also emailed the FSS with the suggestion. Hopefully something along along those lines can be offered up to the members in a vote. I’d be more than happy to transfer my own small shareholding and it could also potentially lead to growing the FSS shareholding way beyond the 25% if enough done the same.

Should be easy enough to find the final 3700 shares, I’m told one or two of the patrons group would happily transfer their shareholding to the FSS and there will be a number of minor shareholders prepared to do the same (i’d happily do so)as well I presume. Can also understand why the club would like to retain some unsold shares for fans or potential new patrons to buy. Don’t see this becoming a massive issue for the FSS to solve in all honestly. Might actually be a good way of unionising and bringing all the small shareholders under one umbrella, FSS could easily exceed the 25% needed given the number of small shareholdings that exist.

The only person creating the phrase “stretched targets” is you! If you don’t think the club has enough money to see the season out then yes! You are indeed a pitch fork lunatic! Don’t know how clearer JW could have made it there. Let’s see how the club fairs between now and this time next year! No guarantees how the team will perform but there is more than enough information out there now to clarify how the business will be fine in the short term which I’m sure again will be clarified at the AGM! Let’s see what happens in a few months time.

Wow! At no point has anybody stated next season was covered. This season is and always has been and thank f**k Jamie clarified that before the lunatics turned up with pitch forks. Enjoy the win for f**k sake!

You realise we just won an opening game of the season 3-0! ……………incidentally that’s not what was said in full context at all. Don’t let the facts spoil a good story tho!

Agree, the lad hasn’t put in a bad performance yet and is getting goals over and above that. In general all the new signings are performing well so far.

The difference in prize and gate money alone as outlined by JS between 3rd in our league or 3rd in the championship is surely the obvious solution toward solving the problem! Potentially near 400k of a difference, let get out of this fucking league!

Did the former MSG members provide all the soft loan offerings last year? I was told the majority came from members of the patrons group?