David1979 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 minute ago, TheMotherwell1 said: Before folk jump the gun and vote this through. Obviously. Is that the option we have? Either the Society says something, or we just automatically vote for a terrible offer? Here's an alternative idea - why not reject this terrible offer, and then look for a better one? Also, if this is the best that our current Chairman and the club board can find for us, maybe we need a new Chairman and some new board members? 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 hours ago, eliphas said: Agree with all of that pretty much. But out of interest why is it only McMahon and Dickie. Feely is as involved as Dickie and I'd argue our Finance Director, who's been Head of Finance at MFC well before this all started, are all under serious question from me. The only one of the board I think gets a pass, just, is Caldwell as he is seriously late to the party This is, of course, fair. Agree that Caldwell broadly gets a pass since this has whole shitshow started before he was even in the building and if @StAndrew7's point (below) is correct it seems the move to get him in was driven by the WS. 5 hours ago, StAndrew7 said: The Exec Board have let the Club become listless in the last few years; it took them well over a year to appoint a CEO after the first round of recruitment ended with none of the original interviewees being appointed. Things, as far as I understand it, were then not restarted. I believe it took the (new) Well Society Board insisting on it restarting that Brian Caldwell was then appointed. Derek Weir did his best having been dealt a very shitty hand in the first instance; former managers still being paid, terrible recruitment etc. (and given how keen he was to leave during the "discussions" with investors, I think he saw exactly how this was going to play out and rightly left before he was tarred with it all). I seem to recall there was vagueness (quelle suprise) from McMahon et al about the CEO at the AGM. The only certainty came from Derek Weir whose energy was "f**k this. I'm out of here in March no matter what. Sort it out amongst yourselves". 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMotherwell1 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Just now, David1979 said: Is that the option we have? Either the Society says something, or we just automatically vote for a terrible offer? Here's an alternative idea - why not reject this terrible offer, and then look for a better one? Also, if this is the best that our current Chairman and the club board can find for us, maybe we need a new Chairman and some new board members? I’m unequivocally rejecting the offer. Others will vote for it on complete misinformation. The Well Society is duty bound to protect the club and should be publishing a statement against this proposal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1979 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 minute ago, TheMotherwell1 said: I’m unequivocally rejecting the offer. Others will vote for it on complete misinformation. The Well Society is duty bound to protect the club and should be publishing a statement against this proposal. I'm almost certain that they will. They posted a statement against the first proposal. However, maybe the club are figuring they can release this "update" on a Friday, knowing the Society likely won't issue a response over the weekend? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMotherwell1 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 4 minutes ago, David1979 said: Is that the option we have? Either the Society says something, or we just automatically vote for a terrible offer? Here's an alternative idea - why not reject this terrible offer, and then look for a better one? Also, if this is the best that our current Chairman and the club board can find for us, maybe we need a new Chairman and some new board members? Also, I don’t understand your point? The owners of the club shouldn’t issue a communication to members over this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 (edited) 8 minutes ago, TheMotherwell1 said: Before folk jump the gun and vote this through. Obviously. It's a good statement. It's friday night, the club owners don't need to jump every time the outgoing chairman shouts. Time for the dog to start wagging the tail again. Have a beer, enjoy the footie and wait for next week. Edited June 21 by Handsome_Devil 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 (edited) 4 minutes ago, TheMotherwell1 said: I’m unequivocally rejecting the offer. Others will vote for it on complete misinformation. The Well Society is duty bound to protect the club and should be publishing a statement against this proposal. It already has against the old one and I would imagine they got very little visibility of the revision much before it was announced, with the club saying the negotiations were between the Exec Board and the Barmacks. Give them some time to formulate one! Edited June 21 by StAndrew7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1979 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 minute ago, TheMotherwell1 said: Also, I don’t understand your point? You said people will jump the gun and vote this offer through. I was offering what I believe to be an alternative way of looking at the matter. it's not an either/or situation. 2 minutes ago, TheMotherwell1 said: The owners of the club shouldn’t issue a communication to members over this? They should. And they will, as they've acknowledged in their brief statement tonight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 5 minutes ago, TheMotherwell1 said: I’m unequivocally rejecting the offer. Others will vote for it on complete misinformation. The Well Society is duty bound to protect the club and should be publishing a statement against this proposal. Good to hear! They will, all in due time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 minutes ago, David1979 said: Is that the option we have? Either the Society says something, or we just automatically vote for a terrible offer? Here's an alternative idea - why not reject this terrible offer, and then look for a better one? Also, if this is the best that our current Chairman and the club board can find for us, maybe we need a new Chairman and some new board members? Agree with this (obviously). I don't know if there's anything to read into the line in that update about them "taking further legal advice" before providing a further update. Dunno, but that seems more sensible that just firing out a response immediately. I noticed @StAndrew7's post on SO that the WS and Club have engaged separate outside legal teams (they may also have posted on here but I was at work when all this was being discussed and tbqh I'm fucking bored of the whole thing). 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boozyBJ Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 minute ago, capt_oats said: Agree with this (obviously). I don't know if there's anything to read into the line in that update about them "taking further legal advice" before providing a further update. Dunno, but that seems more sensible that just firing out a response immediately. I noticed @StAndrew7's post on SO that the WS and Club have engaged separate outside legal teams (they may also have posted on here but I was at work when all this was being discussed and tbqh I'm fucking bored of the whole thing). Aye I forgot to post that on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Club: "we've got lawyers to f**k over the owners", Society: "we've got lawyers to make sure the board don't f**k the club" Hibs ..... we're now the banter club of the league by a country mile and you appointed Malky. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 (edited) 7 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said: Aye I forgot to post that on here. Absolutely gone at the notion that the Owners of the Football Club are having to engage outside counsel because there's a conflict of interest with the Executive Board of the Football Club who can't be trusted to act in the best interests of the Football Club. Edited June 21 by capt_oats 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmen Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 I’m hoping the legal advise the society board is getting confirms the club board can’t force the owners to hold a vote or at least pause it until we can sort both boards out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1979 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Just now, capt_oats said: Absolutely gone at the notion that Owners of the Football Club having to engage outside counsel because there's a conflict of interest with the Executive Board of the Football Club. I'd say that the reason for that is that the Chairman and certain members of the executive board don't actually see the Society as owners of the club. I mean, is there any Society members except Dickie and Feely who wear blazers? How are the executive board supposed to take them seriously if they don't wear blazers? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ill Ray Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Hope we’re taking legal advice against Barnsley for Oli Shaw. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Just now, David1979 said: I'd say that the reason for that is that the Chairman and certain members of the executive board don't actually see the Society as owners of the club. I mean, is there any Society members except Dickie and Feely who wear blazers? How are the executive board supposed to take them seriously if they don't wear blazers? Oh I absolutely agree. I suspect that the underlying motivation here is precisely that McMahon et al don't see the newly minted WS as "Proper Chaps". It was even implied in that statement the other day when the comment was made about the Executive Board member traditionally having been "business owners" (or words to that effect). 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Seems like the club and Barmack are pulling a fast one on the 50.1% thing. The club haven't even worked out the how many new shares they are going to issue each year. And like before with the % Well Society share the 50.1% is only a theoretical maximum if other shareholders do not buy their allotment of shares. The Well Society shareholding could still be diluted to below 40% 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Are we officially in our 'banter years'? 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.