David1979 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 3 minutes ago, brokeville said: Have you guys done due diligence on this investment? This is not going to end well if it goes ahead. A number of us have, and we've posted our viewpoints and questions over the past number of pages of this thread. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 36 minutes ago, Swello said: Honestly - I didn't pick up on this stuff at all when I read the initial press release. If this is true (and the maths looks right to me if your assumptions hold), then it's breathtakingly bad (and sleekit as f**k). I took it as if small shareholders don't take up their allocation then the WS can purchase it. If the current 28.3% don't exercise it then their existing shareholding cumulatively is 5% so that's how the 46% for the WS under this proposal has been conveyed. However, it would appear 46% is the absolute high water mark, the reality is it may very well be less. However, all sorts of sums and panic no doubt happening over the next 24hrs to rejig and yet again test the water. Draft 8. Question is ... will that be the last and final offer or if it hits the skids by Wednesday is it #wegoagain. The groundhog day of never-ending offers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 I'd almost forgotten about the League Cup, what with the investment chat and the 2024 Liam Kelly European Championships 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 4 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said: I'd almost forgotten about the League Cup, what with the investment chat and the 2024 Liam Kelly European Championships If Canada win this American Cup thing Bair can be back for the Montrose match. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhame Buddie Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 hour ago, Gallus Numpty said: True, that Barcelona are utter shite. Great point. Barcelona and Motherwell are exactly the same. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 Just now, Doonhame Buddie said: Great point. Barcelona and Motherwell are exactly the same. You're right, better weather and Girona aren't half as annoying as you lot 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munoz Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 minute ago, Doonhame Buddie said: Great point. Barcelona and Motherwell are exactly the same. What's wrong with fan ownership? St Mirren are currently having their most successful period in the League in decades. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneThrowAway Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstarcvedza Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 56 minutes ago, Swello said: Honestly - I didn't pick up on this stuff at all when I read the initial press release. If this is true (and the maths looks right to me if your assumptions hold), then it's breathtakingly bad (and sleekit as f**k). (1) How are the required contributions by TWS to be accounted for ? Usually its cash out/loan receivable for TWS and cash in/loan payable for the club. Presumably its just to be a gift to the club with nothing (shares or loan) in return for tws. (2) Does anyone have any idea who owns the 28.3 % and how they are aligned ? 14% of those shares are still required if tws votes for the deal ? (3) The tws reps on the club board recommending the deal without agreement of rest of tws board members is totally out of order (4) This will hopefully be the shake needed to have a clear strategic plan with strict demarcation of cash raising activites between the club and tws. (5) I never though I would see a worse deal than swapping Steve Kirk and Paul McGrillen plus cash for Eddie May but I stand corrected 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 Could Motherwell please just go a few months without being in a crisis? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazylegsjoe_mfc Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 Samson and Hollis (and having to play their like-for-like deputies) really has put me off promoting a number two to number one. In terms of transfers, I imagine our first choice back three is (probably) in the building. There's probably numbers wise room for one more centre back, whether that's a first pick or a squad player, I'm not sure. We definitely need at least one left wing back - perhaps Wilson will be deputy but his loan spells didn't inspire last season. Deeper midfield is all sorted (I still imagine Slattery will sign a deal of sorts), so I'd imagine the focus is on forwards. Nicholson and Stuparevic could probably be the Vale and Spittal replacements, but we definitely need more there. Don't want us to be one injury away from Harry Paton playing there. Bair / Moses / Ferrie is okay numbers wise for centre forward, but with Bair at Copa America and linked with a move, I'd like at least one in there. That makes the shopping list something like: 1x GK 1x CB 1x LWB 2x AM 1x ST 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 (edited) It's been, frankly, a pretty bizarre week - so in advance of whatever damage limitation statement we see tomorrow - is this an accurate idiots guide (ie - so I can understand it) to where we are currently with the main points of current proposal as of Sunday night? WS lose majority ownership of the club WS shareholding in future could peak at 46% but could dip into the mid-20% range in a worst-case outcome WS are required to contribute around 90%(?) of the total proposed by the potential investor over the period of the investment WS are required to write off 50% of the loan currently outstanding with the club as a show of good faith In return, the club (and not the society) would receive £300k (the fee we received for Ben Heneghan) a year for the investment period + access to additional marketing expertise and possibly other unspecified investors Investor would become chairman immediately and will appoint 3 further directors in an 8 seat board. Casting vote in the event of a tied vote would sit with the Chairman. WS currently has one active seat on the club board and another seat occupied by a former representative who has so far decided to remain in place in a personal capacity The current board of directors unanimously approved the above as being in the best interests of the club. Anything unfair/untrue there? Edited June 16 by Swello Changed 48% to 46%. Added point on proposed Board makeup 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 (edited) @Swello I'd just add the whole reason for seeking investment massively negated by announcement of Premier Sports and UEFA income increase to the tune of +£800k a season. All the rest is correct except its 46% as of close of business on Friday. Edited June 16 by Vietnam91 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Kirk Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 hour ago, brokeville said: Have you guys done due diligence on this investment? This is not going to end well if it goes ahead. Nah mate due diligence is for cowards and the weak. Have you seen the 1968 movie Charge of the light brigade? Well that’s us . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazylegsjoe_mfc Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 @Swello - great summary. Fair play to Erik for being engaging, but I've now seen him write pages upon pages of detailed replies, none of which have done anything to either refute any of your bullet points, or add any context which would lead to me think it is a good deal. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 (edited) Barmack has been online since @Vietnam91's post earlier on today, I did notice earlier that it said that he was 'typing'. Very interesting that despite having posted several times a day since the announcement of his proposal on a range of different issues in response to people's queries/critiques there has been radio silence today. Edited June 16 by camer0n_mcd 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 2 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said: Barmack has been online since @Vietnam91's post earlier on today, I did notice earlier that it said that he was 'typing'. Very interesting that despite having posted several times a day since the announcement of his proposal on a range of different issues in response to people's queries/critiques there has been radio silence today. He better not be getting tooled up with lawyers, I'm living off a PIP. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 39 minutes ago, redstarcvedza said: (2) Does anyone have any idea who owns the 28.3 % and how they are aligned ? 14% of those shares are still required if tws votes for the deal ? I think I have 20 shares which will amount to 0.001% of the total. I am willing to be schmoozed for my vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstarcvedza Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 hour ago, Swello said: It's been, frankly, a pretty bizarre week - so in advance of whatever damage limitation statement we see tomorrow - is this an accurate idiots guide (ie - so I can understand it) to where we are currently with the main points of current proposal as of Sunday night? WS lose majority ownership of the club WS shareholding in future could peak at 48% but could dip into the mid-20% range in a worst-case outcome WS are required to contribute around 90%(?) of the total proposed by the potential investor over the period of the investment WS are required to write off 50% of the loan currently outstanding with the club as a show of good faith In return, the club (and not the society) would receive £300k (the fee we received for Ben Heneghan) a year for the investment period + access to additional marketing expertise and possibly other unspecified investors WS currently has one active seat on the club board and another seat occupied by a former representative who has so far decided to remain in place in a personal capacity The current board of directors unanimously approved the above as being in the best interests of the club. Anything unfair/untrue there? Could also add that EB takes control of the board right away with the casting chairman vote 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellin Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 (edited) 1 hour ago, ropy said: I think I have 20 shares which will amount to 0.001% of the total. I am willing to be schmoozed for my vote. 20 shares . I have zero . I'm in the poor pretendy Motherwell fan pile. Edited June 16 by Wellin 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.