Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[Phillips455]

3 minutes ago, Cedrics Mighty Well Army said:

When are the fixtures out? Today? Tomorrow?

Second game = Sevco @ Hampden. (Tories are placing bets on it. Allegedly.)

Tomorrow I believe. I only know that since i will be going to the Netherlands to watch us get pumped by FC twenetes youth team. The closest I'll get to watching us in Europe now (luckily didn't get picked for the Sligo game lotto).

 

Also, I've been hearing it's us verses the sevco at home first (with it being on Sky).

[Ill Ray]

21 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

"Marvin Johnson"

David Clarkson’s “Ah scored against him” referring to Petr Cech is top drawer. 

[Vietnam91]

1 hour ago, CoF said:

I’d still argue it’s the responsibility of  previous incarnations of the society board to tackle drift and underperformance of the executive board, no? It’s akin to a manager of an underperforming employee shrugging their shoulders and claiming it’s not their fault, when they have direct responsibility for that persons performance. 

I’m saying this as a society member who believes in fan ownership and is enthused by the new society board.  They’re obviously not to blame, and should be given time to put their stamp on things. 

In theory yes, but when you regard fan ownership as something you pay lip service to and you are the chief architect of ensuring the most affable of yes men sit beside you and do your bidding then he's not going to be held to account. When in the clubs own press release (the first one, not the detailed clarification, or the amended offer one) says:

Quote

The WS owns 71% of these shares. If more than 50% of the votes cast by the WS members is in favour that translates to a 71% acceptance.

That "more than 50%" precedent ceases to be a thing when the 2 WS reps on the club board vote against the majority 6-3 vote (66.6% to be exact) of the WS board. The mental gymnastics required to justify that is quite something.

From 2 months ago, all of it is pertinent but the bit in red especially.

On 24/04/2024 at 12:51, Vietnam91 said:

Well party through the message of the video not fully hitting the brief marked by JM doing a talking head the next day to set things straight and you can't control who or what interested parties bring to the table. But also as alluded by @Busta Nut and others an underlying mistrust that the WS can competently give direction to the club, some "adults" are needed in the form of a proven business(man).

For what you're saying only works if the exec board believe in and are true to the ideals of fan ownership. I don't believe that is the case, maybe they were but not now. The Aussie bid appears to have been sat on the table for far longer than it should have especially when its contents were so unpalatable. Low ball offers were already on the table before the WS vote, not as a result of it.

The video was made because JM at his own admission dropped the ball. With an exit strategy planned the video was a sticky plaster fix. Driven by not empowering the society or previously implementing improvements in the standard commercial/hospitality/ticketing/advertising revenue streams. Prior to October 2023 it was weakened and hobbled during and in the aftermath of Les moving on for expediency and very much by design. There is a massive disconnect by the architects of that bad faith that they engineered it as thus and it became a self fulfilling prophecy of stagnancy, poor transparency and disconnect from its membership and not a great track record to trade on.

As for the no binding vote, yes it stymied the WS and we are were are. I initially voted yes thinking about how what has happened at Wrexham has transformed them and in all likelihood the fans will get the club back or bobbing along in the championship/div 1 at worst opposed to a slow death spiral in the conference. I didn't want to rule out something like that as its the gold standard of football club investment only vying with the Anderson involvement at Hearts. I changed my vote to no when I actually thought it through and what it meant for us.

If or when the current offer on the table sees light, what we see will have been tweaked numerous times, we need to ask ourselves what it must have been like back in January in its first draft.

We are here because, bereft of sustainable plans and implementation to make the club secure through existing revenue streams, a wee video was made as a sticky plaster, fix all. Erik's offer is the best of a bad bunch and it's still ridiculous. But rather than admit the video didn't work he's ploughing on having to go through this charade with a real chance of killing fan ownership. All the while costing both club and society a healthy amount in legal fees.

What we can never quantify is what may have been achieved by now if the video wasn't made, the chairman tapped out when he said he would, the WS could have been developing things like a season ticket initiative along with the club to offer something beyond an earlybird incentive. Rather than pouring hours and hours into this nonsense.

Don't tell me that's the actions of someone putting the club ahead of ego.

Edited Wednesday at 12:06 by Vietnam91

[Cedrics Mighty Well Army]

1 hour ago, Phillips455 said:

Tomorrow I believe. I only know that since i will be going to the Netherlands to watch us get pumped by FC twenetes youth team. The closest I'll get to watching us in Europe now (luckily didn't get picked for the Sligo game lotto).

 

Also, I've been hearing it's us verses the sevco at home first (with it being on Sky).

Get intae thum.

[Peter Millar]

7 hours ago, dinnae-punt-it said:

Genuine question, is there anyone on the Well Society board that have the business skills to run the club? The reason I ask is because at least Erik Barmack has a track record of managing companies. If The Well Society are serious about presenting an alternative, they need to have people with a track record of running businesses involved or it risks being a bit of a mess too.  It feels like a bit of a Scottish trait to criticise without having a viable alternative. I’ve not decided how I’ll vote yet, but most of the criticisms levelled at the Executive Board and Erik Barmack could also be levelled at The Well Society. This is where it feels a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas when it comes to asking 3500 to vote on stuff they don’t really understand. I know this is putting my head above the parapet, but I feel it is worth saying. 

I think I am in the same place as you.

A look across the league shows that Americans/American based owners have generally not been too successful. Even when they are very passionate about the club and community such as the Gordon family at Hibs. As a result I’m not that keen on the EB investment proposal although I do think it has good elements in it.

in terms of the Well Society Board I’m not sure how, as owners, their current skills and experiences translate across to directing the Executive Board of a football club. I’m not questioning their passion or commitment just that I have concerns. This is why, to me, the Well Society proposal is crucial. If I feel it is deliverable I will vote no to the EB proposal. If I feel it’s not deliverable I’ll vote yes to the EB proposal.

 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 17:05 by Peter Millar
Missed a word

[rowsdower]

Just now, Peter Millar said:

I think I am in the same place as you.

A look across the league shows that Americans/American owners have generally not been too successful. Even when they are very passionate about the club and community such as the Gordon family at Hibs. As a result I’m not that keen on the EB investment proposal although I do think it has good elements in it.

in terms of the Well Society Board I’m not sure how, as owners, their current skills and experiences translate across to directing the Executive Board of a football club. I’m not questioning their passion or commitment just that I have concerns. This is why, to me, the Well Society proposal is crucial. If I feel it is deliverable I will vote no to the EB proposal. If I feel it’s not deliverable I’ll vote yes to the EB proposal.

 

 

 

Why does it have to be either or?  I'm voting against the EB offer, but that doesn't mean I will be against any offer that cones in in the future. Voting for EBs terrible offer just because you're not happy with the WS is very shortsighted.  There's no turning back once he has control, whereas we can vote out the WS board if we choose.

This false urgency and giving out the impression that this is the only investment offer the club will get is another trick that the exec board and EB will use.

[Randolphtops]

2 minutes ago, Peter Millar said:

I think I am in the same place as you.

A look across the league shows that Americans/American based owners have generally not been too successful. Even when they are very passionate about the club and community such as the Gordon family at Hibs. As a result I’m not that keen on the EB investment proposal although I do think it has good elements in it.

in terms of the Well Society Board I’m not sure how, as owners, their current skills and experiences translate across to directing the Executive Board of a football club. I’m not questioning their passion or commitment just that I have concerns. This is why, to me, the Well Society proposal is crucial. If I feel it is deliverable I will vote no to the EB proposal. If I feel it’s not deliverable I’ll vote yes to the EB proposal.

 

 

 

There is a lot resting on this proposal thats for sure, as I suspect a lot of members feel the same. The new WS Board have had a baptism of fire, really hope they can deliver a plan that convinces enough folks

[Vietnam91]

11 minutes ago, Peter Millar said:

I think I am in the same place as you.

A look across the league shows that Americans/American based owners have generally not been too successful. Even when they are very passionate about the club and community such as the Gordon family at Hibs. As a result I’m not that keen on the EB investment proposal although I do think it has good elements in it.

in terms of the Well Society Board I’m not sure how, as owners, their current skills and experiences translate across to directing the Executive Board of a football club. I’m not questioning their passion or commitment just that I have concerns. This is why, to me, the Well Society proposal is crucial. If I feel it is deliverable I will vote no to the EB proposal. If I feel it’s not deliverable I’ll vote yes to the EB proposal.

Welcome to here from the other place.

Your criticism of the experience level of the current board is not unique and probably one of the major things that have fuelled the chairman's consistent mistrust and desire for anyone but them.

If you look at a post I made this morning on the previous page, there have been a number of clangers made by those with a wealth of business experience in recent memory that deserve scrutiny too but they are avoiding a lot of that heat. Therefore, I'd argue it's not always a good arbiter of proficiency and acumen.

With all the expertise on the board they still advanced this scheme, one which undervalues the club, makes the WS impudent and gives away control in reality (not symbolically). Little things like allowing Erik to pay up for his controlling interest like the club is on tic, we've agreed to a 350k payment in 5 years time. Due to time and inflation the buying power in 5 years time will have diminished significantly.

What aspects of Erik's proposal have swayed you? So far only one person with business experience has backed it publicly, but I'd advance the merits of the deal are not McMahon's motivator.

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

18 minutes ago, rowsdower said:

Why does it have to be either or?  I'm voting against the EB offer, but that doesn't mean I will be against any offer that cones in in the future. Voting for EBs terrible offer just because you're not happy with the WS is very shortsighted.  There's no turning back once he has control, whereas we can vote out the WS board if we choose.

This false urgency and giving out the impression that this is the only investment offer the club will get is another trick that the exec board and EB will use.

Aye.

You only get to sell the thing once. There could be someone in the future who offers much better value and terms than Barmack with a genuine vision to take the club forward.

Giving it away for a knockdown price to someone that has said absolutely nothing about how he intends to run the club or any long term plans is really really stupid.

[capt_oats]

30 minutes ago, rowsdower said:

Why does it have to be either or?  I'm voting against the EB offer, but that doesn't mean I will be against any offer that cones in in the future. Voting for EBs terrible offer just because you're not happy with the WS is very shortsighted.  There's no turning back once he has control, whereas we can vote out the WS board if we choose.

This false urgency and giving out the impression that this is the only investment offer the club will get is another trick that the exec board and EB will use.

Exactly this.

It's not an either/or situation. It's a terrible deal that we don't need to take.

Worst case scenario with saying no is that we stay as we are, we get shot of the charlatans who, as I've said before, have been paying lip service to fan ownership rather than acting in service of it and we give it another go with the sustainable and profitable business model that Les Hutchison put in place.

Worst case scenario with Barmack is that the whole thing gets torched to the ground for an annual "investment" that's LESS than we got for Jake Hastie.

As @Jim McLean's Ghost says above giving the club away because you've bought into this false narrative created by the Executive Board is...really stupid.

Edited Wednesday at 17:40 by capt_oats

[camer0n_mcd]

54 minutes ago, Peter Millar said:

I think I am in the same place as you.

A look across the league shows that Americans/American based owners have generally not been too successful. Even when they are very passionate about the club and community such as the Gordon family at Hibs. As a result I’m not that keen on the EB investment proposal although I do think it has good elements in it.

in terms of the Well Society Board I’m not sure how, as owners, their current skills and experiences translate across to directing the Executive Board of a football club. I’m not questioning their passion or commitment just that I have concerns. This is why, to me, the Well Society proposal is crucial. If I feel it is deliverable I will vote no to the EB proposal. If I feel it’s not deliverable I’ll vote yes to the EB proposal.

 

 

 

Welcome Peter, as mentioned by a number of other posters above me I don't think it has to be a case one or the other.

Motherwell are in a position where we still have money in the bank and don't need an immediate cash injection (despite what some might suggest) because of this we get the luxury of being able to take our time with this.

We can very much say 'no thanks', get our own house in order and wait for another offer that is on better terms, be that with Barmack or be that with someone else.

[capt_oats]

28 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

Welcome Peter, as mentioned by a number of other posters above me I don't think it has to be a case one or the other.

Motherwell are in a position where we still have money in the bank and don't need an immediate cash injection (despite what some might suggest) because of this we get the luxury of being able to take our time with this.

We can very much say 'no thanks', get our own house in order and wait for another offer that is on better terms, be that with Barmack or be that with someone else.

And crucially, with regards that last sentence, actually have the owners of the club engaged in the discussion rather than purposefully being kept at arms length by those trying to sell the club on their own agenda.

Edited Wednesday at 18:37 by capt_oats

[Peter Millar]

40 minutes ago, Vietnam91 said:

Welcome to here from the other place.

Your criticism of the experience level of the current board is not unique and probably one of the major things that have fuelled the chairman's consistent mistrust and desire for anyone but them.

If you look at a post I made this morning on the previous page, there have been a number of clangers made by those with a wealth of business experience in recent memory that deserve scrutiny too but they are avoiding a lot of that heat. Therefore, I'd argue it's not always a good arbiter of proficiency and acumen.

With all the expertise on the board they still advanced this scheme, one which undervalues the club, makes the WS impudent and gives away control in reality (not symbolically). Little things like allowing Erik to pay up for his controlling interest like the club is on tic, we've agreed to a 350k payment in 5 years time. Due to time and inflation the buying power in 5 years time will have diminished significantly.

What aspects of Erik's proposal have swayed you? So far only one person with business experience has backed it publicly, but I'd advance the merits of the deal are not McMahon's motivator.

Thanks for the welcome it’s much appreciated. Rightly or wrongly I’ve tended not to focus on the ills of the current Executive Board. Whichever way the vote goes there will be a new board in place either put there by Erik or the Well Society. The current Executive Board will be gone soon and I feel we need to move on from it. Others might not - but that’s how I feel.

in terms of Erik’s proposal. My major concern is there is no indication of how he will support the local community (last time I looked) even though someone raised it with him on X, and as I mentioned earlier American based investors in Scottish clubs don’t have a great record in terms of continued sporting success within a financial structure that suits their club or community.

The thing about the proposal I like is he’s thinking big. Football is a developing global economy and clubs can really leverage their revenue streams with partnerships across a number of industries. We don’t play in La Liga, and we’re not Barcelona but even at our level, and in our league there are global opportunities. Artificial intelligence is already bringing benefits to clubs who are starting to use it and  better fan engagement systems can widen our reach across the world. Again, we’re not `Tottenham but I’m sure I read somewhere that 71% of  Spurs fans never attend games but they buy merch. I’ve done that myself for my two daughters who adopted Spurs as their second team. I think he just thinks bigger .

Football is changing and moving forward the most successful teams will be those who embrace this huge global market at a level that is appropriate to them but it needs people who can understand and realise these opportunities. I think Erik could do that for Motherwell.

My preference is the Well Society remains in control but I’ll be looking for an imaginative proposal from them that takes into account these wider opportunities - and provides support to local communities.

 

[Vietnam91]

19 minutes ago, Peter Millar said:

The thing about the proposal I like is he’s thinking big. Football is a developing global economy and clubs can really leverage their revenue streams with partnerships across a number of industries. We don’t play in La Liga, and we’re not Barcelona but even at our level, and in our league there are global opportunities. Artificial intelligence is already bringing benefits to clubs who are starting to use it and  better fan engagement systems can widen our reach across the world. Again, we’re not `Tottenham but I’m sure I read somewhere that 71% of  Spurs fans never attend games but they buy merch. I’ve done that myself for my two daughters who adopted Spurs as their second team. I think he just thinks bigger .

Undoubted its growing but the that growth in past 30 years hasn't affected us all that much certainly compared to other leagues and teams. Most of the growth centres on the top 25% of teams in each league, SPFL - 1st to 3rd, EPL, La Liga, Ligue 1, Bundesliga, Serie A - 1st to 6th. We're selling our top players for the same money we did in the mid 90's and buying players for slightly less (when we do).

Football is also a global sport and therefore not unique, when our product is sold overseas its generally as filler for a 24hr sports channel that needs content.

We don't have the resources to fund scouts or branded academies abroad, our best bet is to make our facilities, pathway and success stories here something that is enviable among our peers.

Erik doesn't have the star power of a guy with 21.4m social media followers (on one platform alone).

Finally I don't know if you are aware but our merchandising has been outsourced to Provan Sports. The run all the ordering, staff the shop, supply all teams within the club. Under the deal the club only gets revenue when annual sales go over a threshold, one which we rarely do unless its we have a cup final.

[Scmwell1]

If it’s true that the current chairman refused to meet EB as he was unhappy at not being mentioned in an interview EB gave to the BBC it just shows that this is all about him and his vanity, he should be removed from his position asap. 

[Busta Nut]

I'm not long back from a decent break. Took me a few attempts and few hours to read through all the pages.



I can only really ask, how did we get to this point?

This should have been binned by the WS, I do understand their concerns about the fans who would have felt their right to vote was blocked and that McMahon and crew would have just pointed the finger at them cos the details would have had to remain confidential. 


The second this guy appeared on this website was the biggest red flag we could have had. He's been caught out talking shite about a number of things, he's using answers with loads of words that say absolutely nothing when asked direct questions and has changed the terms of his offer cos a couple of guys on a football forum called him out.

It's hard not to be insulted and hard not to reply with insults. But that's cos I am not as eloquent as most of you. 

It's frightening seeing some of the facebook and twitter replies. Even some of the comments on here "If the WS doesn't come up with a decent plan, I'm voting for the Netflix guy, just cos".  That's just wild.

The WS board members are treated by some of you with the same contempt that McMahon, Dickie and Weir treated them with. Cos they don't wear the same suit or blazers. Because of their age. Dare I say because of their backgrounds?


There were also many great posts in there. Kudos to them. I see many of you fighting the good fight.
 

Edited Wednesday at 19:56 by Busta Nut

[capt_oats]

1 hour ago, Peter Millar said:

Thanks for the welcome it’s much appreciated. Rightly or wrongly I’ve tended not to focus on the ills of the current Executive Board. Whichever way the vote goes there will be a new board in place either put there by Erik or the Well Society. The current Executive Board will be gone soon and I feel we need to move on from it. Others might not - but that’s how I feel.

One of the key issues here is that it's the current Executive Board who are recommending this shambles of a deal and trying to force it through.

With the greatest of respect, surely their ills are worth focusing on!

They've been making consistently Bad Choices for *years* and the rate has escalated since Alan Burrows stepped down. This is yet another. There are red flags all over the place but their choice of narrative is to undermine the credibility of the WS which had two of the Executive Board as co-Chair for the duration (but don't mention that).

If someone has proven to make poor choices then why on earth should anyone take them at their word - especially in this situation where the "investor" in question hasn't been held to anything like the scrutiny the Well Society are being subjected to (and they OWN the fucking club!).

Edited Wednesday at 19:57 by capt_oats

[Scmwell1]

1 minute ago, capt_oats said:

One of the key issues here is that it's the current Executive Board who are recommending this shambles of a deal and trying to force it through.

With the greatest of respect, surely their ills are worth focusing on!

They've been making consistently Bad Choices for *years* and has only escalated since Alan Burrows stepped down. This is yet another - there are red flags all over the place but their choice of narrative is to undermine the credibility of the WS which had two of the Executive Board as co-Chair for the duration (but don't mention that).

If someone has proven to make poor choices then why on earth should anyone take them at their word - especially in this situation where the "investor" in question hasn't been held to anything like the scrutiny the Well Society are being subjected to (and they OWN the fucking club!).

Totally agree. We surely can’t move forward with any vote/deal until we get our own house in order,the current chairman and executive board should be removed and negotiations with any potential investors started again with the new board. 

[Swami]

I need the League Cup, and I need it now. Sunday night has proper broken me. 

[camer0n_mcd]

1 minute ago, Swami said:

I need the League Cup, and I need it now. Sunday night has proper broken me. 

Can't wait to declare this big Serbian boy our new saviour after scraping a 1-0 win against Edinburgh City at Fir Park.