camer0n_mcd Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 5 minutes ago, standupforthemotherwell said: The comments on the club's Facebook post about the investment are WILD. Christ, I hadn't had a look at Facebook. It's fucking terrifying that a decent chunk of our support genuinely believe some of the nonsense spouted on that platform. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 5 minutes ago, standupforthemotherwell said: The comments on the club's Facebook post about the investment are WILD. There are genuinely Motherwell fans who seem to think we should be challenging for the league and 300k a year will make it happen. One other I noticed was adamant that Barmack having 49% wouldn't give him more shares than the well society. I fear the vote may be closer than expected by this forum given that so many don't actually understand it. Tbf, I don't think anyone on here has ever been under any illusions that it would be closer than it should be. In fact there's a more than reasonable chance that it would actually carry for the precise reason you mention - folk don't understand what the impact of the deal actually is and also a significant section of our fanbase are literal idiots. The one thing that's kind of an unknown I guess is how many of those Facebook morons are actually WS members because ultimately it's Society members who are doing the voting here. I mean, I stand firmly in the camp that this shouldn't even be going to a vote. It should be taken out of the Executive Board's hands and launched as I think there's more than enough materially wrong with this situation that it justifies the Well Society just killing the whole nonsense. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allroy for Prez Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 I’m less than enthused about this signing. Another centre mid of questionable quality and just back from a long term injury, what could possibly go wrong? I hope Kettlewell knows what he’s doing but I have my doubts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 10 minutes ago, 'WellDel said: Other than that you think he's decent though, eh? He’s a nice bloke. So actually I’d quite like to seem him do well. I’ll put it this way, County will need to replace him, but I don’t think it will be that hard. I don’t want to sound bitter. As I say, I’d have kept him, but I’m mightily surprised he’s moved to a bigger club. Edited June 19 by Savage Henry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 6 minutes ago, capt_oats said: I mean, I stand firmly in the camp that this shouldn't even be going to a vote. It should be taken out of the Executive Board's hands and launched as I think there's more than enough materially wrong with this situation that it justifies the Well Society just killing the whole nonsense. a few of the club go-pro's would need to be installed on the boardroom walls to capture multiple angles of the reaction to the WS deciding not to take this to a vote. I think the resulting statement might be *quite* long though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 You got me with Bair last Summer, you're not getting me with Callachan this year. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 If you gave Callachan's energy and workrate to Halliday I think you'd have one decent, but thoroughly unlikeable, player. As a pair though I think they're just two p***ks that aren't much use either. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Callachan isn't a very good football player but he's a very good brute. The thought of him and Butcher ever playing CM together is reminiscent of early 90s Airdrie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one m in Motherwell Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Tbf to Kettlewell we needed a patsy now that (fucking)Oli Shaw is no longer with us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Why isn't it Callaghan, anyway? Who the f**k is called Callachan? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowsdower Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 6 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said: Why isn't it Callaghan, anyway? Who the f**k is called Callachan? It's Humphries 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfans68 Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 4 hours ago, Vietnam91 said: We prefer the term "first officer" these days ..... You're not going to fit in with EB vision if you dont recognise the "CoPilot" mentioned is the AI from Microsoft lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 In all seriousness Ross Tierney might be killed in training by the look of your midfield so far. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 This must take the crown for the worst post of this whole ordeal 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said: Callachan isn't a very good football player but he's a very good brute. The thought of him and Butcher ever playing CM together is reminiscent of early 90s Airdrie. Butcher's away. Tbh, it's just a very weird signing as others have said we're now looking at midfield options of: Miller, Dzravkovski, Halliday, Sparrow, Tierney, Nicholson, Paton and nominally Dylan Wells. There was also a report a few weeks ago that Slattery had re-signed but there was never any confirmation of that. I was quite pleased we picked Balmer up and Stuparević looks like he could be fun assuming he signs but between Sparrow and now Callachan it's kind of difficult to see what the point of them is compared with what we've needed to replace ie: Spittal. Miller aside our midfield basically looks like landfill. Edited June 19 by capt_oats 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirkySuperSub Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 I don't generally do long posts on here...or long rants...I've never really have that much to say, but... Without wishing to tempt fate... The longer this sorry saga goes on, I honestly can't see in any way how this proposed deal can come to a successful conclusion to the overall benefit of the Barmack's, or those who support it... However you wish to interpret his words, whether you believe them or not, he's already stated on this very board that the last thing he wants is for a relatively close vote result - coming out in his favour - with a significant percentage of the support viciously against it from the off... Newcastle United have already been used as a comparative analogy in the thread earlier, last week if I remember, so let's use them again... The relationship with the fans and ownership of Newcastle United during the final days of the Mike Ashley / Sports Direct ownership was just one of sheer toxicity, utterly poisoness... Albeit on a far smaller scale, I am intrigued just how the hell does Erik Barmack - and whoever the custodians of Motherwell Football Club may turn out be as part of his appointed regime - do they expect to promote the good name of the club around the globe, to promote to an at present, unknown global, foreign audience...to attract further outside investment etc., etc., etc...when there's very high potential that there is going to be a significant portion of the fanbase who will be rocking up, outside the doors of Fir Park on day one, with pitchforks in hand, like a thousand, ragin', Claret and Amber clad, Groundsman Willie's... That aside, the other thing that gets me with all of this, it seems to me that a major part of Erik's initial 'charm' was his attachments to Netflix and the very early mention of 'potential' for a mini-docuseries, behind the scenes, at Fir Park... Take away the absurdity of this being quoted as being likely to bring in the region of £100k to the club - and think about that for a minute, a £100k payback for a whole season (presumably, who knows) off footage being shot...on matchdays...in the dressing rooms...in the physio room...in the boardroom...in the manager's offices...every day at training etc...the list goes on...the sheer amount of upheaval across the whole club, with fancy media types demanding access to all nooks and crannies of the club, being general pains in the asses to all involved no doubt - to my uneducated mind, it sounds like a huge, massive upheaval for not a huge, amount of return... And where exactly would this be shown, what's the 'potential' media platform? We're surely not kidding ourselves on that it would be mainstream? So I'm guessing we're looking at YouTube here, at best...?! Well that, or Dave...! Gladly, I'm flying out to the currently ridiculous searing heat in Greece on Saturday for a while... I'm pretty much done with this to be honest, wish it'd all get "in the bin"... It will be a resounding "NO" vote from me on my return however... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) On 16/06/2024 at 20:35, Jim McLean's Ghost said: I'm trying to work out how shares are going to be issued. Say we have 1000 shares* WS at 710 and others at 290. For the Others to be diluted to 5% we need to issue 4800 new shares. Out of that 5800 total Barmack would own 2842 shares for 49% The Well Society would own 2668 (1958 new) shares for 46% Others shareholder 290 shares for 5% This obviously would not be a linear issuance with each year an increasing number of shares would need to be issue to Barmack. But if the other sharehaolders take up their full allocation Barmack would keep his 2842 shares 49% Other Shareholders 1682 for 29% Well Scoiety 1276 (566 new shares) for 22% And I assume other shareholders will get the same preferential valuation that Erik Barmack gets... but the WS doesn't. Right now our current shareholding would or 7!% would be worth 12% of post Barmack takeover. So as long as we diminish our current holdings by a factor of 6 this is nearly a fair deal *just to make the maths easier. There are ~300,000 shares in MFC right now. So i have just seen Derek's tweet that the shares could only drop to the mid 30s% https://x.com/derekwatson89/status/1803458482953203748 So the assumption is first scenario is right. But the second scenario is that that all non-Barmack shares, (rather than the overall total) can be bought at the existing rate. Barmack gets his 2842 shares or 49% Other shareholders get 29% of the remain 1958 +290 orginal for 857 or 15% Well Society 710 original plus the 1391 for 2101 for 36% Multiply by 300 for the number of actual shares since the club confirmed the ~300,000 number Basically pay £1.85m to possibly half our ownership of the club. Edited June 19 by Jim McLean's Ghost 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 And just to add to the math. That is someone right nowowned 3% of the club their shares combined with Barmack's would be a majority of the shares at the end of the process. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 To be fair, I'm still not convinced Barmack has some sort of sinister plan. I can imagine him genuinely thinking that he'll be able to do right by Motherwell FC but- by virtue of coming from an corporate American background, not really fully understanding Scottish football/ fan ownership and why it matters. So I can envisage the deal being voted through and everything staying pretty much as it is or getting slightly better in the short-medium term. It might not even go tits up at all- just the risk that it does isn't remotely worth giving up the security of the club for modest financial gain. For the avoidance of doubt I'm definitely voting No, and this would be a much longer post with more caveats if I wasn't about to go out and watch Liam Kelly's Scotland. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For Your Pies Only Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 21 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said: This must take the crown for the worst post of this whole ordeal See, hot takes like this kind of back up the point capt oats made earlier - from what I've seen, a lot of the loud voices on socials that support the Barmack proposal -and exec board - are not only non-members (with no vote as a result) but made up of folk who are anti-WS and would probably support any investor who would take over the WS shareholding. Unless they are existing shareholders as private individuals, their opinions don't matter for the vote, if it goes ahead. It's an admittedly small sample size I appreciate, but I don't personally know any WS members who are in favour of the proposals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.