Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[Stevie Kirk]

[Swello]

I don't have a clue about this "investment" - but I'd probably be more comfortable if it was a couple of hundred grand a year that keeps us in training bibs and grass seeds than some silly money seven figure stuff which would set the loudest alarm bells going.

If someone is offering a fairly modest investment, it would surely mean that it's lower risk to us and that we shouldn't be giving too much away (eg. the majority shareholding) for getting it.

Looking forward to reading the detailed proposal.

[Handsome_Devil]

8 minutes ago, Swello said:

If someone is offering a fairly modest investment, it would surely mean that it's lower risk to us and that we shouldn't be giving too much away (eg. the majority shareholding) for getting it.

That's certainly logical but it still leaves the question of what the investor is getting out of it. I've said since the start I was much more interested in what we're giving away than what we're getting.

[MP_MFC]

If the figure of 300k per year for 5 years is accurate and they want anything other than a token share of the club they can get fired right into the sea. 

50% of the club being worth 1.5million? Away ye go. We've got a player on our books currently worth more than double that.

[Desp]

I did like the chat of them bringing in further investors down the line.

"Honest lads, I've got hunners of pals.  They'll be here later on!"

Edited April 3 by Desp

[MurrayWell]

Just now, Desp said:

I did like the chat of them bringing in further investors down the line.

"Honest lads, I've got hunners of pals.  There'll be here later on!"

"You wouldn't know them, they live at my gran's bit." 

[Busta Nut]

8 minutes ago, MP_MFC said:

 

50% of the club being worth 1.5million? Away ye go.

hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[StAndrew7]

1 minute ago, Desp said:

I did like the chat of them bringing in further investors down the line.

"Honest lads, I've got hunners of pals.  They'll be here later on!"

Aye, unless we see a business plan with guaranteed investment that values the club far, far, higher than what's been quoted so far (for a 50/50 split anyway), it can all get in the fucking sea.

If it were for lower than 50% and equated to a decent valuation of the club, although what that is I don't really know, I'd at least be forced into thinking about it.

Considering we'd anticipate Lennon Miller being worth what, £2-4 million(?), it'd need to be double the top end of that for me to consider it worth our time for a 50/50 split.

This all seems very cloak and dagger.

[eliphas]

Just catching up on this and dipped into SOL there for the first time in a while... absolute morons still there I see. Haha. 

As for the statement, pretty par for the course, it's effectively entering bidder exclusivity. Not much can legally be said now.

So we wait to see the outcome first then freak out I reckon. Not the now. 

[capt_oats]

I mean, ethics of taking the cash of Human Rights abusers aside, Gillespie's pretty much living the dream.

[thisGRAEME]

14 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

I mean, ethics of taking the cash of Human Rights abusers aside, Gillespie's pretty much living the dream.

I loved Mark Gillespie.

Hope the US investors bring him back.

[Swello]

2 hours ago, Handsome_Devil said:

That's certainly logical but it still leaves the question of what the investor is getting out of it. I've said since the start I was much more interested in what we're giving away than what we're getting.

That's my point really - if you don't put much in, you'll not be getting much out. If there is an imbalance there, it won't be getting voted for.

[eliphas]

1 hour ago, StAndrew7 said:

This all seems very cloak and dagger

I've got no skin in the game here but I disagree. 

For this to be done properly the club are going about it in the right way and professionally.

Get the expressions of interest and high level bids. Discuss them. Disregard some. Now into a period of more or less exclusitvity but without any binding commitments either way. Get both sides to write down and agree formally what the intentions are and then out to the shareholders, of which the WS are the majority. Even then it can be negotiated if it's not attractive.

Alternative is either put a half baked idea to shareholders that holds no water or extend the info vacuum longer which also gets criticism 

Unless fans are 100% against the idea of investment, which is fair enough, I don't think there is anything to really be annoyed or concerned about here. Yet. 

Edited April 3 by eliphas

[Ron Aldo]

26 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

I mean, ethics of taking the cash of Human Rights abusers aside, Gillespie's pretty much living the dream.

He'll easily be a millionaire despite playing 3 games of football in as many years (all in the 2020/21 season). Fair play. 

Toss up between Gillespie, Randolph and Ruddy for best keepers we've had in recent times. Gillespie would be a very decent keeper at English Championship level but you can't grudge him getting silly money for doing f**k all other than training at the club he grew up supporting. 

[YassinMoutaouakil]

18 minutes ago, thisGRAEME said:

I loved Mark Gillespie.

Hope the US investors bring him back.

Hope he buys us.

[LewisB]

Late night sessions studying Gibraltarian football on TV, stepping up to SCORE a penalty shootout winner and denying an England international from the spot. 

Get the inside scoop on Liam Kelly’s entire career to date.

5000 words on the @MotherwellFC captain’s full career.
Exclusive quotes.
£1.80, cheaper than most papers.

https://storybehindthesteelmen.co.uk/2024/04/03/liam-kelly-the-journey-from-covid-cover-to-captain/

[capt_oats]

This seems worth noting...

I mean, I know there are reasons but it will never not seem backward to me that the Well Society Board (as an entity) is not involved in these negotiations.

[Vietnam91]

3 hours ago, Desp said:

I did like the chat of them bringing in further investors down the line.

"Honest lads, I've got hunners of pals.  They'll be here later on!"

That rumour was started on SOL by the resident troll, who in the absence of facts often injects stuff to fill the information vacuum.

Scrolling down you see that he suggests the video implied we are skint/begging for money (reassured in a hastily arranged face to face with McMahon the day after that wasn't the case, a review of the published accounts would show that. Could the PR company done a better job, yes. Could the message have been delivered more articulately and clearer, yes). How a 10 year old asking a pop star to "geez yer dosh" could transform into "Putting out a video suggesting we require American investment when they were in talks with a potential American investor is extremely dubious." suggests that this investor was in contact in advance of the video not as a result of it, again nothing to back it up.

I suppose it highlights the bigger question going forward. Many have expressed they'd like to see the details of the deal, of course that is everything and context will allow many to make an informed decision.

But then that begs the question, what that looks like to each of us. You'd expect as the offer was deemed palatable the next stage is to the majority owner (Well Society).

The have an elected board many of whom we know. The question is as a WS member:

• Would you want them to publish the offer and go to a public vote either with a presentation of the investor Q&A etc.?
• Would you want it qualified with a "it is the unanimous/majority/5-4 vote of the board to support/reject the offer" as an advisory then a vote or not?
• Would you be happy for them to review and vote at board level if they did not feel this is right for the club and for the WS to draw a line under it there. Releasing something along the lines of "Provisions such as X, Y and Z (outlined in full) were deemed contrary to the WS Board remit and therefore we rejected the need to approach our members with such a proposal".

Edited April 3 by Vietnam91

[Handsome_Devil]

10 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

This seems worth noting...

I mean, I know there are reasons but it will never not seem backward to me that the Well Society Board (as an entity) is not involved in these negotiations.

Aye, this seems utterly insane that the owners of the club are taking a backseat in the negotiations on whether to sell. It brings the question back to just what mandate McMahon has to be doing this? Our governance structure is totally fucked.

[RandomGuy.]

Mug American wants to put in pocket money to tell other Americans he owns a football club (even though he doesn't).

Seems pretty good.