Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[StAndrew7]

3 minutes ago, Doctor Manhattan said:

That's not to say there aren't other ways to create value, and EB has sketched out a few possibilities already - but, aye, he's not getting an invite to the next Davos World Economic Forum off the back of this exercise.

Can you imagine what Block E would do to the stadium if he did go there. 

[eliphas]

Good post @capt_oats. Agree with it entirely.

I suppose I'm in the snappily titled 'what have you done for me lately crowd'. Maybe not, but I'm definitely one of the handful of posters I think who are fairly critical/unconvinced with the WS to date. That's as a WS member too.  But as I've said in a recent post the EB bid is not for me so the WS need to be given some time to come up with their plan as the owners of the club and it needs to be more than bucket rattling and matches on Fir Park for a couple of grand. 

The proof will really now be in the pudding and, like I said in my last post, I'll be more than delighted to be wrong when we see the strategic plan that comes out of all the work shopping. 

59 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

Tbh, I'd respectfully suggest that it's less the proposal that could get the WS into action and more the likes of McMahon, Dickie and Feeley being removed from the equation.

The brief statement attributed to Dickie yesterday pretty much makes concrete the entirely backward situation that we've been in which has seen an Executive board working to its own agenda which in Dickie's own words doesn't 'align' with that of the WS (the majority shareholder/owner of the club).

It's often been hinted at but I'd say that what played out yesterday largely confirms that the Executive Board of the club were entirely happy to pay lip service to 'fan ownership' without wanting to actually act in service of it.

Based on what we've now seen I don't think it's a particularly great leap to make to suggest that the WS has actually been stymied in what it's been able to do by the likes of McMahon, Dickie and Feeley.

Which is something that a lot of the 'what have you done for me lately?' crowd would do well to consider when they're taking shots at the WS.

As an aside, Dickie standing down from both boards has to happen. He cannot expect to cling on to the club board post surely if it's a WS seat? Feely needs to go too from both if his views align to Dickie. The third vote from the WS I expect needs to go too or make clear why they voted for the deal.

I do think we need to try and refrain from all the dithering old idiot chat,and getting the pitch forks out like savage breasts though. People are making decisions they think are the best for the club. They might be wrong but if anyone thinks anyone involved is doing out of pure evil intentions they need a shake and a break from the internet for a while.

Edited June 11 by eliphas

[welldaft]

A lot of very good posts over the past few hours. 

I think most of us are aligned to the fact that we would welcome outside investment, but not at any cost and not for a proposal that frankly makes little commercial sense to the Well Society and indeed any impartial observer.  

I have said it before and will again.  We already own 71% of the club. We are being asked / obligated to contribute a similar amount to the Barmacks and in return our shareholding is reduced by a quarter whilst theirs eventually gets to 49% with a controlling interest from the get go.  I will say it again. But NO individual or business would EVER agree to those terms. EVER.  So it beggars belief that our Board have.

It does back up the assertion that the Board have viewed fan ownership as a nice to have but don't meddle in the serious business.  In some ways I get that, but there are many members of the Well Society who have held Senior roles in businesses similar to Jim McMahon and Derek Weir. And many like myself who have contributed significantly to the Well Society over time to simply hand over ownership for a relative pittance.  

It would be good if this offer was re-visited to something that was acceptable. Or better yet someone from the outside sees what Wild Sheep have offered and think I can do better and make a more attractive proposition. Unlikely as it is you just never know.

Giving over half the club effectively for less than the (hoped for) sales of Theo Bair and Lennon Miller is and should be a complete non starter.

 

 

[Ron Aldo]

Can't really add to what others have said about the "offer". It's insulting at best and an out and out pisstake at worst. 

It should be laughed out of Fir Park but my fear is that P&B is a bit of an echo chamber for the sane 'Well fans among us. You only have to look on Twitter, Steelmen Online or go to a game at Fir Park to realise a large chunk of our fans are fucking imbeciles. 

It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of them just hear the word "investment" and vote in favour of any old shite (which is what this offer is) without actually taking in the nuances. 

[well fan for life]

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/06/11/maureen-downie-resigns/

Quiet week, lads. 

[Busta Nut]

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/06/11/maureen-downie-resigns/


Delightful

[welldaft]

Just now, Busta Nut said:

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/06/11/maureen-downie-resigns/


Delightful

Well I guess that likely answers who the other WS Board member was who voted in favour.

 

[Vietnam91]

The WS statement yesterday that launched simultaneously at 2pm with the club's had no doubt been bouncing around among the WS board for days getting revisions and approval.

If there are issues aligning with its content, then those would have been there when the 6-3 vote happened and its first draft published internally. Not 3 hours after it is published publicly.

Being key part of the negotiation to make the organisation you are a chairman of impudent but citing not happy with a press release is the reason you're falling on your sword is wild stuff.

[Swello]

The resignations are fine and to be expected (although expecting any group of 9 people to unanimously agree to everything is unrealistic and not really desirable) - but in this specific case - what the f**k did they expect to happen when this was made public? 

The opposition to losing the WS majority share has been clear from the outset - there was always going to be a reaction to that.

[Handsome_Devil]

6 minutes ago, Vietnam91 said:

The WS statement yesterday that launched simultaneously at 2pm with the club's had no doubt been bouncing around among the WS board for days getting revisions and approval.

If there are issues aligning with its content, then those would have been there when the 6-3 vote happened and its first draft published internally. Not 3 hours after it is published publicly.

Being key part of the negotiation to make the organisation you are a chairman of impudent but citing not happy with a press release is the reason you're falling on your sword is wild stuff.

Being a leading figure in an organisation which exists for fan ownership and objecting when it tries to protect fan ownership is some going.

One more to go.

[StAndrew7]

I've been casting my mind back to McMahon's comments at the AGM; he's on the record, publicly stating that his preference for the Club moving forward is for the Society to succeed (as was Derek Weir, although how much he's truly had to do with this debacle is debatable, outside initial conversations with parties), grow and there not be a requirement for any (significant/controlling stake, I would caveat) investment.

This offer effectively gives the Society two years to do that, albeit with the quite ridiculous buyback terms that could and some would argue will, ruin it as an entity, so at the very least he's been dishonest or he's outright lied to the shareholders, right?

The fact that we have WS Board members resigning as a result of this because they don't align with the rest of the WS Board wishing to retain fan ownership and going against their auld pal Jim, speaks volumes about them and their "passion for fan ownership".

[standupforthemotherwell]

I have no problem with differences of opinion within the society board. Everyone will have different views of the best way forward so it is completely expected. It isn't unusual for board members of companies to recommend being taken over for example.

My real issue is that the society seats on the executive board should be voting in line with the wishes of the wider society and it's board and not their own personal views. The members elect the board to represent them so to act in direct contradiction to their wishes does not sit right at all.

Feeley needs to resign today.

[eliphas]

1 minute ago, standupforthemotherwell said:

My real issue is that the society seats on the executive board should be voting in line with the wishes of the wider society and it's board and not their own personal views. The members elect the board to represent them so to act in direct contradiction to their wishes does not sit right at all.

This is it for me. 

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, standupforthemotherwell said:

I have no problem with differences of opinion within the society board. Everyone will have different views of the best way forward so it is completely expected. It isn't unusual for board members of companies to recommend being taken over for example.

My real issue is that the society seats on the executive board should be voting in line with the wishes of the wider society and it's board and not their own personal views. The members elect the board to represent them so to act in direct contradiction to their wishes does not sit right at all.

Feeley needs to resign today.

 

Just now, eliphas said:

This is it for me. 

I'm not for one second defending the decision making process here and their actions, but the Society members voted in favour of considering investment that gives up majority ownership; so technically they have voted in line with those wishes to recommend this goes to a Society vote.

They appear to have resigned due to the WS board vote not aligning with their own thoughts/recommendations, which is a slightly different thing, albeit all interconnected.

[Handsome_Devil]

1 minute ago, StAndrew7 said:

 

I'm not for one second defending the decision making process here and their actions, but the Society members voted in favour of considering investment that gives up majority ownership; so technically they have voted in line with those wishes to recommend this goes to a Society vote.

They appear to have resigned due to the WS board vote not aligning with their own thoughts/recommendations, which is a slightly different thing, albeit all interconnected.

Fair point.

I don't think it's unreasonable they actually waited to yesterday to resign, if they'd done so earlier it would have raised some obvious questions before the official announcement.

But they had no choice but to go, you cannot be an office bearer in a fan ownership organisation while advocating the end of fan ownership.

[eliphas]

So, Feely essentially becomes chair of the WS unless he resigns soon (which he should if he approved the deal as part of the exec board)

Who becomes chair to lead the next few months? Do they automatically get the vacant club board seats (assuming they will becom vacant as it's untenable to keep them)

[Handsome_Devil]

6 minutes ago, eliphas said:

So, Feely essentially becomes chair of the WS unless he resigns soon (which he should if he approved the deal as part of the exec board)

Who becomes chair to lead the next few months? Do they automatically get the vacant club board seats (assuming they will becom vacant as it's untenable to keep them)

They will need to appoint an interim chair amongst themselves I suspect before and arrange an EGM/fresh elections when we know how the vote went.

There will also need to be a club EGM, I imagine.

People will no doubt demand to know why the Society hasn't worked wonders in a few weeks/months while clearing up this mess.

The six of them deserve tremendous credit, plenty of support and shouldn't be putting their hand in their pocket for a drink in Motherwell the rest of the year if they pull this off.

I believe Dickie is still on the club board fwiw.

Edited June 11 by Handsome_Devil

[eliphas]

3 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

 

I'm not for one second defending the decision making process here and their actions, but the Society members voted in favour of considering investment that gives up majority ownership; so technically they have voted in line with those wishes to recommend this goes to a Society vote.

They appear to have resigned due to the WS board vote not aligning with their own thoughts/recommendations, which is a slightly different thing, albeit all interconnected.

That's fair challenge actually yeah

[StAndrew7]

5 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

They will need to appoint an interim chair amongst themselves I suspect before, and arrange EGM/fresh elections when we know how the vote went.

I believe Dickie is still on the club board.

The latter point is flabbergasting.

D'you think he's holding out hope it gets voted through? He was only on the board as one of the WS representatives? I assume that there will be some kind of justification for keeping the quorum or whatever until a replacement can be found but that absolutely stinks.

[CoF]

After a fairly shambolic few years it’s nice to have a summer break with a clear plan and some stabili…… ah, f**k.