Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[Handsome_Devil]

1 minute ago, one m in Motherwell said:

‘Literal’ rollercoaster? Have we acquired M&Ds?

Didn't they literally change the definition of literally a few years ago because folk kept misusing it or did I imagine that?

[Vietnam91]

15 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

I was gonna rant about the pish McMahon spouts but others have done so more elegantly and calmly. 

Talking of pish spouted. The more you look at the two bumpf's surrounding the resignations:

"Following the statement released today from the majority of the Well Society Board, I unfortunately cannot align myself to much of the content."

and

"I’m at odds with the strategic direction currently being taken and cannot in all considered conscience continue in my role as Board Member"

Supporting an offer to take the society from 71.7% to 46%, it’s peak mental gymnastics and questionable as to what their first duty lay, their electorate or fealty to what McMahon wants.

All the majority on the WS are doing is following their own Articles of Association. Some choice clauses include:

       2.i. to strengthen the bonds between the Club and the community which it serves and to represent the interests of the community in the running of the Club;

       2.viii. to acquire shares in the Club, and to assist the Club by supporter representation on the board;

       4.1.f. buy and hold shares in the Club;

 

You know, all the stuff you lack alignment with and are at odds with strategic direction …...

[well fan for life]

26 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

Just 3 minutes after the announcement of our first signing and the Motherwell Rollercoaster™ has been mentioned.

We are so back.

 

Aye it's that one at M&Ds that fell apart mid ride a few years ago. 

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

2 hours 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.

all the first vote was about was that the Society board would participate in negotiations that could see the end of fan ownership.without that the legal position of the well society board could have come into question

but just because you say you will listen to someone does not mean the offer should be automatically put to a members vote if the board deem it is not good enough. There is nnow a 6-1 majority of board members against the proposal.  I don't see why there should even be a members vote.  Some members of the club board will be for the proposal they negotiated with the vast majority of the well society against it.

It will be a divisive process and self destructive for the club. And instability like that only leads to long term damage. Look what is happening at ICT. Boycotts, board resignations, threats of admin.

[Handsome_Devil]

Just now, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

all the first vote was about was that the Society board would participate in negotiations that could see the end of fan ownership.without that the legal position of the well society board could have come into question

but just because you say you will listen to someone does not mean the offer should be automatically put to a members vote if the board deem it is not good enough. There is nnow a 6-1 majority of board members against the proposal.  I don't see why there should even be a members vote.  Some members of the club board will be for the proposal they negotiated with the vast majority of the well society against it.

It will be a divisive process and self destructive for the club. And instability like that only leads to long term damage. Look what is happening at ICT. Boycotts, board resignations, threats of admin.

It's a valid concern but while the Society board would have been justified in saying no, the vote is perhaps the lesser of two evils. Had they said no, the executive would - or at least could - have thrown all kinds of shit at them, aided by the howlers who demand investment on any terms or have no idea what the Society was originally meant to do.

It definitely has the potential to get ugly, unfortunately, but you can also argue that some clear dividing lines to clear out certain individuals and then a hopefully blowout win for the Society in the vote is the best way of unifying the biggest majority of the fans as possible afterwards.

[Muzz1886]

1 hour ago, capt_oats said:

I notice that there's no mention of a fee 'undisclosed' or otherwise in either Motherwell or Palace's announcements but yeah that was the rumour.

Also as @StAndrew7 says below:

And even then he had to walk it back when he had his absolute car crash of a press call after the video launch.

I mean, I'm pretty sure Weir mentioned that we expect to at least break even this season (which is another point that folk wringing their hands about the losses over the last couple of seasons - when we sunk literal millions into capital expenditure projects - could do with taking into account).

CapEx doesn't result in a loss.

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

Just now, Handsome_Devil said:

It's a valid concern but while the Society board would have been justified in saying no, the vote is perhaps the lesser of two evils. Had they said no, the executive would - or at least could - have thrown all kinds of shit at them, aided by the howlers who demand investment on any terms or have no idea what the Society was originally meant to do.

It definitely has the potential to get ugly, unfortunately, but you can also argue that some clear dividing lines to clear out certain individuals and then a hopefully blowout win for the Society in the vote is the best way of unifying the biggest majority of the fans as possible afterwards.

The dividing lines are clear now.

Asking for a binding members vote that goes against the principles of the society is potentially shaky legal ground imo.

I don't think the proposal will win but I also don't think the Board members should gamble. David Cameron thought he would win the EU referendum.

If the board reject the offer out of hand people can show them what they think of that decision at the next elections or general meeting.

[Lukovic]

2 minutes ago, Muzz1886 said:

CapEx doesn't result in a loss.

It literally shows as a loss on balance sheets as there would be less money than there was before.

[YassinMoutaouakil]

59 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

Just 3 minutes after the announcement of our first signing and the Motherwell Rollercoaster™ has been mentioned.

We are so back.

 

To be fair this might be the first time it's actually been fairly relevant 

[Handsome_Devil]

Perusing the Society AoA there, not only is there a mechanism (rightly not overnight) to remove certain members but there is the perhaps useful provision...

A Society Board member may be suspended from office by a resolution of the other members of the Society Board on the grounds of conduct detrimental to the interests of the Society subject to such Society Board member having been provided with a fair opportunity to be heard.

[Handsome_Devil]

1 minute ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

The dividing lines are clear now.

Asking for a binding members vote that goes against the principles of the society is potentially shaky legal ground imo.

I don't think the proposal will win but I also don't think the Board members should gamble. David Cameron thought he would win the EU referendum.

If the board reject the offer out of hand people can show them what they think of that decision at the next elections or general meeting.

Yeah, it's a fair argument for sure. There's certainly an element of risk in the vote but I'd say the reward justifies it... might change my mind when opinion polls are published!

[Muzz1886]

Just now, Lukovic said:

It literally shows as a loss on balance sheets as there would be less money than there was before.

A loss isn't the same as a reduction in cash. They are very different things.

[Vietnam91]

3 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

It's a valid concern but while the Society board would have been justified in saying no, the vote is perhaps the lesser of two evils. Had they said no, the executive would - or at least could - have thrown all kinds of shit at them, aided by the howlers who demand investment on any terms or have no idea what the Society was originally meant to do.

It definitely has the potential to get ugly, unfortunately, but you can also argue that some clear dividing lines to clear out certain individuals and then a hopefully blowout win for the Society in the vote is the best way of unifying the biggest majority of the fans as possible afterwards.

The opens up a whole sort of new questions. At least 7 offers came off the back of the video, 6 were deemed unpalatable by the club board, however this universally agreed unpalatable offer has to have the oxygen of a public vote. So it appears we do have a threshold, it's just defined by McMahon and we all have to accept there is a chance Motherwell will cease to be fan owned.

What has happened here, this offer was always going to a vote regardless of the WS position because McMahon decided it was. The owner/chairman relationship has been blurred to suggest he has as much weight, which I'm sorry to inform his ego, he doesn't. It all points to the overreach and disdain McMahon wants out because he's been asleep at the wheel but he also thinks the WS will be the ruin of the club, with zero self awareness to know that he has engineered and facilitated their impudence by design. It's like saying "ahh this car is fucked, I just filled up the fuel tank with water too, why won't it go? Scrap the car!".

A fair deal for both parties can only be achieved if they both start roughly equidistant from the mid-ground and both make fair compromises.

 

[djchapsticks]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

Surely that signing immediately kiboshes the idea that the club is on death's door and needs investment to survive. I'm sure decent six figure sums were being discussed when he was linked with St Mirren.

Apparently we had £75k knocked back and rumour was that we went back with £100k, which I don't think we actually did in the end as Rooney then became available and signed.

[Handsome_Devil]

3 minutes ago, Vietnam91 said:

The opens up a whole sort of new questions. At least 7 offers came off the back of the video, 6 were deemed unpalatable by the club board, however this universally agreed unpalatable offer has to have the oxygen of a public vote. So it appears we do have a threshold, it's just defined by McMahon and we all have to accept there is a chance Motherwell will cease to be fan owned.

It's not quite universally unpalatable sadly, otherwise we wouldn't be here...and sure, there's a risk. But we'll have what, 3000 adult members voting? If a majority of them decide to risk everything to accept this then we deserve what we get really.

[Vietnam91]

1 minute ago, Handsome_Devil said:

It's not quite universally unpalatable sadly, otherwise we wouldn't be here...and sure, there's a risk. But we'll have what, 3000 adult members voting? If a majority of them decide to risk everything to accept this then we deserve what we get really.

It really should be, the more you delve into the weeds of this the more it enrages. At the end of year two under these proposals the WS could initiate a buy back. It would have contributed £400k, Barmack £600k. He also has a pretty cheeky £60k admin penalty too.

Currently the WS raise c.£150k a year so will have to dip into the £750k war chest if they maintain their income level (which they own't) after a vote to cede ownership.

So in August 2026 the reality is to buy back 16% of the club already transferred is going to cost us £660k.

We are wiped out and unable to satisfy an SPFL audit held 2 months later to prove 18 months of SPFL viability in October 2026. The clause itself shouldn't even be cited because we can never enact it. Talk about thumbing the scale.

It's mind blowing stuff. Hobble the society while telling us you're not hobbling the society.

[Archie McSquackle]

Anyway, are we due to announce our new strip soon?

[Handsome_Devil]

Just now, Vietnam91 said:

It really should be, the more you delve into the weeds of this the more it enrages. At the end of year two under these proposals the WS could initiate a buy back. It would have contributed £400k, Barmack £600k. He also has a pretty cheeky £60k admin penalty too.

Currently the WS raise c.£150k a year so will have to dip into the £750k war chest if they maintain their income level (which they own't) after a vote to cede ownership.

So in August 2026 the reality is to buy back 16% of the club already transferred is going to cost us £660k.

We are wiped out and unable to satisfy an SPFL audit held 2 months later to prove 18 months of SPFL viability in October 2026. The clause itself shouldn't even be cited because we can never enact it. Talk about thumbing the scale.

It's mind blowing stuff. Hobble the society while telling us you're not hobbling the society.

I don't disagree but there's no point in saying it is or should be when there's demonstrable proof it isn't.

Part of avoiding complacency in the next five weeks is acknowledging there are those who disagree and that there are reasons for it, however unfair or incorrect those reasons might be.

Convincing those who are swithering or believe the outgoing chairman's rubbish is as important as talking among ourselves.

What was the old John Peel joke when he couldn't understand why his favourite song bombed in the charts? "Everyone I know has bought a copy." "No, John, you know everyone who has bought a copy."

[StAndrew7]

26 minutes ago, Archie McSquackle said:

Anyway, are we due to announce our new strip soon?

Training kit is here and it is absolutely ganting and reeks of Dundee United.

[Desp]

1 minute ago, StAndrew7 said:

Training kit is here and it is absolutely ganting and reeks of Dundee United.

When did Dundee Utd start playing in Coral & Anthracite? 

The kids who drew over that fella's arms would've done a better job at designing a training kit for us.