Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[capt_oats]

Lifting this from the Club AGM thread on SO:

8 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

There's a few details I think it's worth adding to this, particularly given some folks' concerns (on here and on P&B) re: asset stripping etc.

The two bids that are furthest forward are:

An American who "made his money in streaming" and now owns his own documentary company. His vision/strategy is to increase global exposure of the club and increase opportunities for further sponsorship, growing the fan-base and generating other revenue streams.

An Aus/USA/Middle East group who are primarily looking to transform the recruitment side of the club and use more advanced data analytics, machine learning etc. to bring in players across the age-groups of the club to create a culture, style of playing etc. and sell them on for profit.

Both parties have spoken with both the Club and Well Society Boards and at least one did it in person from what I picked up, although both may well have.

• Neither of the bids are philanthropic; they will be looking to make a return on their investment via their own business plans and strategy
   
• The investment will be made by buying shares, not in loans (like Hutchinson) or other guarantees that can be secured against the club; however these might be a special category of share that allows them to take some % of profits etc. (I missed the name of these)
   
• The share purchases will not be instant, nor will the investment be "transformational" straight away; one bid is proposing the WS go down to "around 50%" and another is wanting a controlling stake, but the % was not mentioned
   
• One of the groups would be looking to appoint their own CEO; "someone who played for Benfica and is running an Australian club" was mentioned (based on a quick Google, I believe that's this chap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaz_Patafta)

• Transfer fees recouped for players will remain within the club (I'm not sure how that will work with the second investor I mentioned; perhaps through their specific type of shares they'll be able to share profit rather than taking away directly from transfer fees)
   
• One of the reasons for the urgency/speed around this is that one of the parties wants to be involved in planning for next season; both are looking for exclusive negotiating positions
   
• There is still a long way to go with negotiations, analysis of club finances by parties, addition of potential clauses etc. still need to take place which will then result in a final offer
   
• The interested parties might come back based on the results of any vote of the WS membership and accept that a 51/49 split with WS retaining ownership could work for them and that would be part of their heads of terms/initial agreement with the club
   
• There is potential to negotiate with investors clauses etc. in the final proposal(s) that would allow the Well Society first refusal on any investor's shareholding, in the event they wish to sell their stake in the club so the club would return to being fan owned, should the Society have the necessary funds to purchase the shareholding
   
• Equally, a "No" from the WS re: the red line on majority fan ownership could will be enough for the two current front runners to back out

In total there were 4/5 serious groups looking to invest in the club; I asked how those were progressing and the simple answer was "not as quickly as these two". At least on of the other parties are investing in other areas of sport (a golf team in LA was mentioned) and the board are trying to get to things developed without having to use a corporate finance consultant as far as possible. Another is an American who Derek Weir had spoken with, who was interested in developing an academy system in the US for developing players but not much more was said on that one. 

The Chairman did state last night that if this is something which does progress forward, he would absolutely propose bringing in experts in corporate finance to ensure nothing is missed in the minutiae that could come back to bite us.

Also, we have interviewed 3 or 4 candidates for CEO by both Club and WS Boards. The issue we have is that with potential investment and at least one group looking to appoint their own, it's a difficult spot to be in. Normally this kind of appointment and negotiations for investment would, ideally, be years apart. So we run the risk of appointing a CEO who brings their own structures and ideas, to then potentially have them removed by any investor.

[welldaft]

3 hours ago, Handsome_Devil said:

That's way down my list of concerns tbh.

I'm not 100% against it until I hear the details but I'm going to need a huge amount of convincing that handing over our future to some random American(s) with no connection to the club or town is a good idea simply because we might get relegated.

That is fair comment. 

But the 1 singular fact that is staring us all in the face is that these days (and going forwards) we do not have the ability to compete financially with our peers let alone the City clubs. 

That will likely lead us to the Championship over the next few years. I can just hear the fans say in a couple of years. You know what I am not bothered we are bottom of the league and that the team is playing shit. At least we never took on board the investment that was on offer a few years back as we did not know where that would lead us.

The problem is that no one investing now will come out and say I will do this for a few years, then get bored and p1ss off leaving Motherwell in the sh1t. That may well happen. But they will not start out with that intention. Of that I am sure. 

The news about the Manager extension is disappointing that it was not communicated. But I think they are getting a bot more stick than they deserve imho. McMahon personally paid for a video to hopefully attract outside investment. Probably lower cost than the road St Johnstone have taken engaging specialist companies etc. And so far it seems to have worked. It may not end up happening but he deserves some credit for that. 

Also as stated they are huge Motherwell fans. They will have the same concerns as the rest of us regarding any new potential owner investor. 

Someone with deep pockets is important. I am not talking about someone spending Chelsea like money (relatively speaking), but someone where throwing £1-£2m per season is going to have little impact on their own wealth. Rather that than someone who starts to run out of money after a few seasons and are more likely to get disinterested more quickly as the wealth evaporates in front of them. 

EDIT TO ADD. I typed the above before being able to read above the excerpt and more detail from the AGM.

If it is not philanthropic then I have HUGE concerns.

It absolutely worries me that anyone could think they could get a return on their investment from Motherwell FC regardless of how they went about things. The money is just not there. Genuinely who thinks that people that know very little about Scottish football can come in and try a few different things and make a return that would satisfy them. This is naive in the extreme. And this type of scenario will more than likely end up with the parties buggering off when they realise it is not doable. 

Without knowing the full details I would rather stay fan owned until a better option came along.

 

 

Edited February 22 by welldaft

[MurrayWell]

My view has always been that any investment shouldn't move us away from fan ownership or at least fans having a big say in what's going on, referenced the 50+1 model in the Bundesliga as being the dream scenario. 

Interestingly, my mate who was at the AGM last night said the recent Well Society elections had a turn out of something like 18 per cent from members. Like I said, my preference is that we remain fan owned, but that lack of engagement is surely a bit concerning? That being said, I've no idea what the usual turnout for this kind of thing is, maybe that's not a dramatic drop from the last couple. 

[Phillips455]

Is this a cruel prank now?

 

 

[Rod]

31 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

An American who "made his money in streaming" and now owns his own documentary company. His vision/strategy is to increase global exposure of the club and increase opportunities for further sponsorship, growing the fan-base and generating other revenue streams.

An Aus/USA/Middle East group who are primarily looking to transform the recruitment side of the club and use more advanced data analytics, machine learning etc. to bring in players across the age-groups of the club to create a culture, style of playing etc. and sell them on for profit.

If both of these 'investors' can get into the sea, that'd be great.

Selling out to these ghouls to become some sort of investment vehicle is the beginning of the end for clubs like ours. What happens when ghoul number 1, the "streaming magnate", finds no one gives a toss about a club with no celebrity owners and bails? And when ghoul number 2 finds out that players from Australia, the USA and the middle east are all donkeys who they can't sell, even to mugs in League 1 in England?

The club may need investment but if that's the best on offer then I'd take relegation. The offer from @rowsdower  sounded more appealing.

#AnnounceRowsdower

[ropy]

If 3000+ Well Society members chipped in £10 a month each would it keep us ticking over?

[Antiochas III]

1 minute ago, Phillips455 said:

Is this a cruel prank now?

 

 

Using win %... 

 

I repeat winning 2 out of 10 is worse than winning 0 out of 10 but drawing 7... 

[capt_oats]

FWIW: there's been additional reporting on that SO post.

56 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

The Well Society have asked for the opportunity to provide a strategy/plan that means they'll be more able to continue funding the club and any shortfalls and create a business / fundraising plan of their own for the club, along the lines of the investors.

I also want to point out that Derek Weir stated that was his preferred option; that the Well Society is able to provide the funding required for the club to continue before difficult decisions (i.e. slashing playing budgets etc.) need to be made. Ultimately, the Society needs to be in a position in October to tell the accounts auditors that they have the funds available to support the club for 18 months; if not, that triggers a warning to the SPFL regarding our financial situation.

Also, to be absolutely clear, the Board are in no way making recommendations to shareholders or the Society to go or not go for the investment from either party. That will be decided when bids are submitted and shareholders and WS members have their vote. They are exploring all their options to ensure the financial safeguarding of the club, which is their job as Directors. As I said above, that also includes the WS continuing in its current role and increasing its input to the club.

Time, however, is of the essence. I would expect WS members to be polled/asked to vote in the coming days. Exactly how that will be put across is key and it'd be interesting to see what is sent out (I'm not a WS member, I have private shares in the club).

[Handsome_Devil]

39 minutes ago, welldaft said:

That will likely lead us to the Championship over the next few years. I can just hear the fans say in a couple of years. You know what I am not bothered we are bottom of the league and that the team is playing shit. At least we never took on board the investment that was on offer a few years back as we did not know where that would lead us.

The problem is that no one investing now will come out and say I will do this for a few years, then get bored and p1ss off leaving Motherwell in the sh1t. That may well happen. But they will not start out with that intention. Of that I am sure. 

Next season Dundee United will be in the top-flight, basically in the same position they were in 2021 with one fourth place, a slightly nicer training ground and about £10m owed to an outsider who may or may not get bored at any moment.

I completely agree about the risk of doing nothing but - especially when you see those proposed business models - the risk-reward of giving up control is totally off for me.

There is surely a middle ground of taking calculated risk with our own money or borrowings to improve so that if it goes wrong we can row back without the club being endangered, even if in the lower league.

Put it this way, is it more likely that five years from now we look back on a sale as a successful game-changer or will we be at roughly the same level but with bored owners who don't care what happens next as long as they get their $Xm back?

You don't need a PhD in Scottish football history to say the latter is more likely. Probable, in fact.

If any investors want to come in in 'good faith' and invest money in a business model they believe works while guaranteeing the ground, membership of the league etc, is untouched and we're not responsible for their losses,then I'm happy to hear from them. I'm sure the expensive corporate lawyers will be able to work that out. But if not, it's a firm no thanks from me, even if that means we accept Championship football.

[Ron Aldo]

12 minutes ago, Rod said:

If both of these 'investors' can get into the sea, that'd be great.

Selling out to these ghouls to become some sort of investment vehicle is the beginning of the end for clubs like ours. What happens when ghoul number 1, the "streaming magnate", finds no one gives a toss about a club with no celebrity owners and bails? And when ghoul number 2 finds out that players from Australia, the USA and the middle east are all donkeys who they can't sell, even to mugs in League 1 in England?

The club may need investment but if that's the best on offer then I'd take relegation. The offer from @rowsdower  sounded more appealing.

#AnnounceRowsdower

Was about to post my own opinion but this pretty much sums it up for me. 

[Ron Aldo]

Ideal scenario is that someone on here wins the Euromillions and gives the club a lump sum with no strings attached. 

For the record, if that happens to be me then I'll be remaining anonymous. The wife has told me previously that she wouldn't be letting me put any money into Motherwell if (or when ) we win it. 

[JayMFC]

9 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

FWIW: there's been additional reporting on that SO post.

I replied to this on SO, so worth reiterating here:

"Great post mate - just wanted to reiterate this point. There's essentially no status quo option, there's the two investment options as well as the Society undertaking its own study & producing its own strategy, while simultaneously rolling out workstreams to target five key areas (communications, fundraising, membership, governance & events - more information should be shared with members in tomorrow's newsletter). I think we can all agree that there's a ceiling to the kind of growth & income the Society can generate, and what that is is clearly open to debate, but there is a refreshed desire to seriously looking at reaching that ceiling going forward, and, thanks to the board's renewed makeup, there's a majority of folk on there now keen to make sure that happens."

[YassinMoutaouakil]

I have a good feeling about the Australians. We're winning the league. 

[StAndrew7]

11 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

FWIW: there's been additional reporting on that SO post.

That was my post, apologies; I kept adding stuff as it came to me. Was quite the tome in the end...

Finally bit the bullet and signed up here. 

[Ron Aldo]

1 minute ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

I have a good feeling about the Australians. We're winning the league. 

I look forward to them signing some of the best talents the A-League has to offer. 

[well fan for life]

2 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

I have a good feeling about the Australians. We're winning the league. 

Get Castlemaine XXXX on draught in the Cooper Suite. Here we go. 

[Busta Nut]

13 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

That was my post, apologies; I kept adding stuff as it came to me. Was quite the tome in the end...

Finally bit the bullet and signed up here. 

Welcome. what's your thoughts on curries and paneer?

[thisGRAEME]

1 hour ago, JayMFC said:

This for me is the entire "debate". 

I totally understand folk who think that fan-ownership isn't working. I would disagree with that but I understand it's a totally acceptable opinion to have - particularly as we all have different ideas of what "working" actually means. I think part of that is actually to do with communications, transparency etc that hasn't been good enough from both the Society and the club in previous years in terms of actually showing people that it's "working", but I also think a big part of that is very simple: there's essentially a big spectrum where, at one end, there's "aiming for short-term success no matter the risks" and, at the other end, there's "safeguarding the existence of the club forever, no matter what level that's at."

Every Motherwell fan will fall on that spectrum somewhere, and I don't think there's any wrong answers - people just have different reasons for supporting the club, get different things from going to games, and have different priorities when it comes to their expectations. Personally, I fall quite far along towards that idea that, as long as I have a club to support for the rest of my life, I will be content - even if that means flirting with or even experiencing relegation. I have probably been shunted even further towards that end of the spectrum as a result of discussions I've had around investment. That absolutely does not have to be the same for everyone, and I imagine a lot of people are somewhere in the middle a lot of the time.

Fan-ownership ensures that existence though. While the Well Society has the majority shareholding in the club, the club exists. It may be that, as American investors in particular saturate the European football market, we find ourselves tumbling out of the top flight at some point in the future, as other clubs risk their own long-term futures by chasing that short-term success. There would be difficult decisions to make in that scenario, and a lot of disappointment and heartache, but the future of the club wouldn't be in doubt.

At the other of the spectrum, investment for short-term gain doesn't even necessarily guarantee that short-term gain. Dundee Utd are the absolute perfect example of that so, even if you do choose that route, relegation is far from off the cards. And even if you do receive the few years of keeping up with others in the division, the long-term future of the club ceases to be protected and any decisions about what happens to the club, what it's future looks like, and even who then subsequently takes up the reins further down the line are taken out of the hands of Motherwell supporters.

Again, I don't think there's necessarily a "right answer". Folk want different things from supporting the club. There's my answer and it may be different from other people's, and that's fine. But what's most important is that, with fan-ownership currently in place, if we get to a point where a majority of Well Society members are at that "short-term success" end of the spectrum, then that's what will occur - which, in itself, is almost a good example of a benefit of fan-ownership working and giving the supporters control of the club's direction.

Kettlewell's extension was news to me too.

This is accurate. The Society Board have essentially conducted the recruitment process regarding CEO but are now in a state of limbo due to the terms of some of the investment options on the table.
 

This is where I imagine most fans are. 

I think it's worth highlighting that none of this is "we'll give you X for Y", there's usually a whole host of caveats and other considerations that mean it's not anywhere near as simple a question as "would you swap fan-ownership for investment". The level of investment itself, who is providing that investment, their intentions for the club, and a whole host of other aspects are incredibly important there too. It's also worth remembering that fan-ownership isn't just some trinket that's been put in a cupboard in the Phil O'Donnell Stand somewhere, it's the result of years and years of time, effort, and money from an endless list of individuals, so I dare say there's a need to actually consider what scrapping all that work is worth to people.

Put it this way - I don't think in today's world it's ever going to be as simple as folk just wanting to swap fan-ownership to compete with clubs around us who have some sort of investment. What else would they sacrifice for that and where are the red lines? Would folk take a few extra quid to ensure that we're potentially finishing 6th or 7th each year, in exchange for a club that loses its entire community-based ethos? Would folk take five years of European adventures, in exchange for investment that is only part of a five year plan, with investors set to pack up & leave soon after leaving the club in the lurch? Would folk take dodgy money from unknown sources to make us the 3rd force in Scottish football until the investors got bored, in exchange for the eradication of our own youth academy? Would folk take all of those sacrifices - the loss of the club's identify, no long-term plan, no youth academy - for a club that could still end up in the Championship regardless of investment like Dundee Utd? All hypothetical scenarios but all very real possibilities.

As I've mentioned before, protecting the club from falling into the "wrong hands" has long been a reason given for fan-ownership, and I think this is a discussion where people need to take fully on board that investors aren't just coming along to chuck money into Motherwell for the good of Motherwell. That's not to say that there can't be a workable, mutually beneficial agreement found - but it's not quite as easy as some, particularly on Twitter, seem to think.

My honest answer to this would be:

Pre-pandemic Society - probably.
Post-pandemic until October 2023 Society - no.
Post-October 2023 Society - yes, and I would hope that some of that confidence will at least start to build over the coming months.

This is why I voted Jay, tbh.

[StAndrew7]

1 hour ago, Rod said:

If both of these 'investors' can get into the sea, that'd be great.

Selling out to these ghouls to become some sort of investment vehicle is the beginning of the end for clubs like ours. What happens when ghoul number 1, the "streaming magnate", finds no one gives a toss about a club with no celebrity owners and bails? And when ghoul number 2 finds out that players from Australia, the USA and the middle east are all donkeys who they can't sell, even to mugs in League 1 in England?

The club may need investment but if that's the best on offer then I'd take relegation. The offer from @rowsdower  sounded more appealing.

#AnnounceRowsdower

I think the key thing to say here is that no-one is saying that these are the best or are any better, or worse than other proposals. These are the two furthest down the line at the time of the AGM, so were the main points of discussion. They could both be thrown out in the WS vote, or at the point it's taken to shareholders. The high-level information received is exactly that; high-level. Negotiations can continue, changes can be made to make sure the fans still own the club or have first refusal on investor's shares if and when they decide to pull out.

The important thing to note is that within the structure of any investment made, that the board are insisting that it won't be done using loans or any financing that can be secured against the club. It will be a gradual share purchase to whatever level is agreed in the final terms (in the cases of the two which are furthest along).

My post that @capt_oats quoted from SO mentions there's another couple of proposals which aren't as developed as the others so far, purely down to time available to the Board and those involved in the process.

These are by no means the only options thus far; the extra context I added includes the potential for the Well Society to step up, as well. The ultimate issue here is the one that @JayMFC mentions; the status quo cannot continue and ultimately will not work to keep the club sustainable financially.

Edited February 22 by StAndrew7

[Handsome_Devil]

11 minutes ago, well fan for life said:

Get Castlemaine XXXX on draught in the Cooper Suite. Here we go. 

As fun as going Aussie would be, relying on taking the same data and tools available to everyone else and continually producing better results than everyone else is a stupid strategy. Being a farm for players from their region is much more realistic - combined with our own youth system arguably not that different to what we do now.

The US strategy interests me more because it seems obvious to me that off the pitch is where we're more likely to make a difference.. whether that particular plan is how we can best do so, less convinced.