Jump to content

Pettigrew

Gold Members
  • Posts

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Pettigrew

  1. 1 hour ago, MurrayWell said:

    Convinced there are folk in the Motherwell fansbase who thrive off of misery, negative stance at every opportunity. Players written off after 20 minutes, managers to be sacked after a couple of shite results, Well Society labelled as a failure with not much to back it up, but also any new investors not to be trusted and not the direction either, even when results are going well it's still not good enough. Get a buzz out of being the most negative, energy sapping person in the room. 

    For the What We Do In The Shadows fans, a bunch of Colin Robinsons (although at least he has good patter). 

    Kristen Schaal Hulu GIF by What We Do in the Shadows

    100%.  Guy behind me at Dens was berating Bair after the penalty miss - "just reminding us how shite he really is" etc and then therefore couldn't bring himself to celebrate his goal 2 mins later as a result.  

  2. 6 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

    Yeah, the survey data would be really interesting to see.

    I'm really hoping the result/turnout motivates people to get more involved, if they can/are able to (like, there may well be a number of members who are sadly no longer with us, who still receive e-mails to a long since forgotten e-mail account).

    Like, I'm not sure if I were a WS Board member I'd be comfortable voting on behalf of a 72% block of shares within the club if the turnout for a final investment vote is less than 50% of its membership.

    How can they say they're representing the views of their members if less than half of them voted? Like, surely there needs to be minimum turnout requirements for something with such large repercussions? I guess that depends on the articles under which the Society was drawn up.

    Do we have any sense of the membership numbers who would be entitled to vote eg not Junior Steel etc?  Sorry if I've missed that somewhere in the discussion over last few weeks.

  3. 3 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


    Motherwell's budget is absolutely not going to be 11th or 12th in this league. Livingston and St Johnstone at the very least will be behind it. Probably Dundee and County too if the rumours are true about how much Kelly and O'Donnell are on.

    Chat last night was that KVV’s wage would have been greater than Kelly, McGinn and Spittal combined. 

  4. 2 minutes ago, ML4 said:

    The malaise caused by not having a functioning CEO for almost a full year now has put us in the position where a takeover looks appealing. Is that by design?

    This is not about fan ownership or benefactor ownership. It is about direction and ambition. The lack of it has put us right here where someone putting some cash in seems the only way. It absolutely is not.

    The language on here from some tells you that attitude has already seeped through. That it is the only way to stay up or survive.

    Someone with deep pockets is not the saviour. It is merely the security. And what if they run the club badly?

    It is high time there was a vote of no confidence in the current board and a 6-12 month plan put in place to do more with what it is within the club current control to get more money in and show there is another way. Instead of being led down the path to a takeover being the only one.

    Who do we have confidence in? The Society? 

  5. 5 hours ago, Randolphtops said:

    Which leaves us in a strange position.

    As chairman stated the club needs someone who knows what they are doing during investment negotiations and a final deal.

    But with chairman and Derek Weir leaving who would that be? Perhaps an incoming CEO, but the potential investor talked about has said he has a CEO in waiting, so our new CEO is expected to take a job in the knowledge that his first main task will possibly be to negotiate investment with an interested party who wants to bring his own CEO in.

    Will the current CEO candidates remain interested once this is known?, if so will they have the quite detailed financial & corporate knowledge needed for this task, or more likely I think that the club will have to outsource for this task.

    I’d be shocked if there’s much crossover between the CVs of people who we’ve looked at for CEO and the CVs of the sort of folk who have the Corporate Finance experience to competently steer us through these discussions.

    Likewise, you have to wonder what skillset lies on the Well Society side to do similar. 

  6. 9 hours ago, wellboy1991 said:

    I really like the look of Nicholson. Looks a very very tidy footballer. Also would love to see him getting more game time. 
     

    Vale looked to me initially that he was trying too hard when he first came on and looked really excitable. However took his goal well and looked to have real pace to burn. Could be a very effective weapon second half off the season from the bench. 

    Vale had had 3 touches before the first "get rid of him" shout from the Main Stand.

  7. 16 hours ago, Swello said:

    The Govt. Loan thing being presented as a problem is one of the things that I have most difficulty with. The terms of that loan are (from a commercial point of view) literally unbeatable - it would be impossible for us to get finance at that cost (doubly so due to our past admin). If the club didn't take that loan on, much bigger questions would have been asked as the Directors would have failed.

    100% this - some of the AGM questions on this in the last couple of years truly beggared belief.  

  8. 1 hour ago, capt_oats said:

    Without wanting to continue the WS pile on, I had revisited the quotes attributed to McMahon when I was writing one of those big daft long posts that kind of touched on a point I think @Handsome_Devil made the other day about the same people being on both boards.

    I'd never really thought of it at the time but I take it the WS board members who sat on the panel were Feeley and Dickie who are also directors of the club rather than folk like Jay and Derek?

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/useful idiot

    image.png.98ad460f41f497d340fc5381746ce9a8.png

×
×
  • Create New...