Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[Swello]

5 minutes ago, Jastons6 said:

Disappointing if Bair does leave . Hopefully the club can hold out for £1m and spend that on decent players instead of constant loans.

Feels like he's left already - I don't think there is an "if" at this point honestly. I wouldn't expect us to be announcing that we've closed next season's operating gap in the run up to the big vote mind you

Might sound weird, but in this case I'm pleased that we're likely selling a guy we got for nothing for a good fee. I'm pleased for Bair (who seems like one of the good guys) personally because he will have gone from a bit part at Saints to (you would imagine) some life changing money in the blink of an eye. I'm pleased for the club as I don't think Theo is irreplaceable and so we have yet another example of the kind of Career Laundering that we seem to be regularly capable of - agents notice that type of thing and so it helps us in the long term...

[CoF]

14 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

Yessssss but again to be (grudgingly) fair, you don't know he's pulling it together now just because it's not yet published. It's entirely possible he'll have his draft good to go with the exception of some fan and community bits he's currently copying in.

Totally agree on the board mind.

Hmm, aye fair - I might have misunderstood exactly what EB is talking about. The initial investment announcement 10th June does make reference to a heads of terms being released prior to the vote - is it that? Or is it more akin to the well society’s “vision” document? 
 

 

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

I would agree with that too, though without knowing EB it's hard to be absolutely certain. Just what does a win for him look like now?

A couple of presumptions, one that he is not truly intending to run us into the ground and two that he was led down the garden path in terms of fan reaction and future cooperation.

But even if he squeeks home (and there's surely not a landslide in his favour coming given 37% were against even considering a bid like this) his vague idea looks in shreds. 

Does he plough on regardless? As much as he will make money if we don't get relegated, and he basically can't lose either way, his vague point about there being easier ways to profit is true. Running a club against the will of a huge chunk of the fan base - by definition in this scenario the active and engaged chunk - is certainly not fun.

 

I think this is really important; if this ends up in a close vote in either direction, I think we'll have more problems than we do now. If there's a big enough majority either way, I think there'll be some kind of acceptance of we've now made our bed and it's time to get on with whatever.

One of those (I think anyway), will lead to a rejuvenated fan base and one will not.

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, CoF said:

Hmm, aye fair - I might have misunderstood exactly what EB is talking about. The initial investment announcement 10th June does make reference to a heads of terms being released prior to the vote - is it that? Or is it more akin to the well society’s “vision” document? 
 

 

I believe there'll be quite a substantial amount of information coming out of the Club along with voting papers/information on how to do so for shareholders. That'll include the full Heads of Terms, planned share issues etc. Not sure about EB's business plan/vision but I imagine that will form part of it, yes.

Quite how that's to be shared with the WS membership I'm not sure; I assume that it'll all be given to the WS Board and Sally to disseminate to members to give them as much information as possible to inform their decision.

Edited Wednesday at 10:58 by StAndrew7

[Handsome_Devil]

3 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I believe there'll be quite a substantial amount of information coming out of the Club along with voting papers/information on how to do so. That'll include the full Heads of Terms, planned share issues etc. Not sure about EB's business plan/vision but I imagine that will form part of it, yes.

Definitely, the club will have no choice but to provide lengthy and detailed legalese given the technicalities of what it's proposing happens to existing shares.

How much info and detail EB provides in support of his bid is largely up him.

[capt_oats]

9 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I believe there'll be quite a substantial amount of information coming out of the Club along with voting papers/information on how to do so for shareholders. That'll include the full Heads of Terms, planned share issues etc. Not sure about EB's business plan/vision but I imagine that will form part of it, yes.

Quite how that's to be shared with the WS membership I'm not sure; I assume that it'll all be given to the WS Board and Sally to disseminate to members to give them as much information as possible to inform their decision.

Not being wide but would you reasonably expect information for Shareholders to be disseminated to non-shareholders?

I mean, you can't pitch up at an AGM just because you're a WS member so in principle I'm not sure that there's an obligation for information reserved for shareholders to be put out in a general sense.

Edited Wednesday at 11:06 by capt_oats

[StAndrew7]

3 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

Not being wide but would you reasonably expect information for Shareholders to be disseminated to non-shareholders?

I mean, you can't pitch up at an AGM just because you're a WS member so in principle I'm not sure that information reserved for shareholders would be put out in a general sense.

I think in order for the WS membership to be able to vote with a fully informed position, I think they'll have to receive some form of information that outlines things in detail, yes.

That might not be exactly the same as the detail you or I will receive as shareholders in our own right, but I would expect them to receive at the very least an executive summary with key points and information about it all, yes.

That's kinda what I was saying; I don't know what form it will take when sent to WS members, but for something as fundamental to its ongoing existence and stature within the club, as members I'd say they're entitled to be as informed as possible in all of this.

Edited Wednesday at 11:08 by StAndrew7

[fatcalf]

7 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

Not being wide but would you reasonably expect information for Shareholders to be disseminated to non-shareholders?

I mean, you can't pitch up at an AGM just because you're a WS member so in principle I'm not sure that there's an obligation for information reserved for shareholders to be put out in a general sense.

And another problem there is one of the more recent share issues being handled in the completely amateurish way we are finding out is par for the course only now. My shares were not listed and I almost never got into the AGM because of it. Turns out there is a whole load of details of new shareholders from that issue have simply been lost. I took my certificates up to Feeley to copy for their records and he asked if I knew anyone else in the same situation tell them to get in touch. Farcical situation and blamed on a young lad in the office at the time. Only they will know how many are affected and I suspect will be quite happy to lose the subject in amongst all this nonsense.

[Busta Nut]

How often are shares issued? I mind I missed the last one canny mind why.

[Swello]

5 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I think in order for the WS membership to be able to vote with a fully informed position, I think they'll have to receive some form of information that outlines things in detail, yes.

That might not be exactly the same as the detail you or I will receive as shareholders in our own right, but I would expect them to receive at the very least an executive summary with key points and information about it all, yes.

That's kinda what I was saying; I don't know what form it will take when sent to WS members, but for something as fundamental to its ongoing existence and stature within the club, as members I'd say they're entitled to be as informed as possible in all of this.

Realistically - the danger might be too much information. If you look at that mad epic update on the club website (to be read in McMahon's voice) - that will not have changed a single mind one way or the other as it was completely impenetrable for the vast majority of people (I include myself in that). 

What would be useful to be shared (IMO) would be a readable summary of the key financial points (which the WS have already tried to do) and whatever Barmack's plan is if he gets the votes.

Anything that is put out for WS members should not assume a background in corporate finance basically.

[StAndrew7]

12 minutes ago, fatcalf said:

And another problem there is one of the more recent share issues being handled in the completely amateurish way we are finding out is par for the course only now. My shares were not listed and I almost never got into the AGM because of it. Turns out there is a whole load of details of new shareholders from that issue have simply been lost. I took my certificates up to Feeley to copy for their records and he asked if I knew anyone else in the same situation tell them to get in touch. Farcical situation and blamed on a young lad in the office at the time. Only they will know how many are affected and I suspect will be quite happy to lose the subject in amongst all this nonsense.

It took me 5 years of trying to have my name added to the list correctly; this was the first AGM I've been to, either as a proxy or a shareholder in my own right, where I've not had some sort of issue at the front door with my name not being on the list when it should have been.

It took about a year from my great aunt passing away to me receiving ownership of the shares by transfer, which my mum and I had to keep chasing independently via e-mail or going up in person; too long, frankly. Particularly when it brought up painful memories, for my mum in particular.

Edited Wednesday at 11:29 by StAndrew7

[Handsome_Devil]

6 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

How often are shares issued? I mind I missed the last one canny mind why.

A long time ago you could literally walk up to the office and buy them in tiny numbers, though this wasn't really advertised. There was then - several years ago now - a wee campaign which didn't really try to raise money but promoted the chance to own part of the club yourself and not through the Society.

Since then, they've stopped doing the walk up thing (they claimed it was too much hassle the last time we asked) so you'd need to find someone willing to sell.

[Vietnam91]

3 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

A long time ago you could literally walk up to the office and buy them in tiny numbers, though this wasn't really advertised. There was then - several years ago now - a wee campaign which didn't really try to raise money but promoted the chance to own part of the club yourself and not through the Society.

Since then, they've stopped doing the walk up thing (they claimed it was too much hassle the last time we asked) so you'd need to find someone willing to sell.

Which is surprising (well not really based on who recently walked) as its a tenet of their rules:

2. (ix)            to encourage greater ownership of ordinary shares in the Club; and

[Phillips455]

Just incase anyone can't make the league cup games, all the other Motherwell games will be on the Premier Sports stream service. It's a 48hour pass to watch some selected games during that time frame. 

 

I mean, it will be hard for some people to reach the likes of Montrose and Clyde (Hamilton).

[Wellwatcher]

1 hour ago, Archie McSquackle said:

Is Orange and Purple not what a lot of fans of other teams think we play in?

My mate mentioned it when he bought the tickets and they didn't know about it.

[Handsome_Devil]

1 hour ago, Vietnam91 said:

Which is surprising (well not really based on who recently walked) as its a tenet of their rules:

2. (ix)            to encourage greater ownership of ordinary shares in the Club; and

Sorry, I was unclear - you could walk up to the club to buy them, presumably because the shares had been created from god knows when but not purchased or taken up. They now don't do this.

The initiative, I believe, was the Society actively selling some of their own shareholding. Which I imagine in current circumstances they're perhaps not keen to revive...

I'd certainly encourage as many fans as possible to buy shares if we ever do anything similar - not for the sake of raising cash but anything which might get people reading accounts, attending the AGM etc is a positive.

[KirkySuperSub]

I know it's been mentioned before, but the amount of absolute moon-howlers in our support on Facebook is f'kin scary!

I very, very rarely post comments on any public post on Facebook, purely to avoid interaction with the general stupid, but felt compelled to post a reply to someone on the Well Society's proposal.

There is a guy - (who I'll not name, but he's easy to find!) - who has reacted to my post with - - who it appears has went onto do the same on every single post supporting the WS, without it offering any reasoning.

This whole escapade is proving already extremely divisive and damaging within our support.

We're supposed to be a "community club", the toxicity within our support could last for many years, no matter the outcome of this vote.

No matter what happens in the future seasons, success or failure, missing out on players, selling our top assets (as we've always done), this vote will be used by both sides as a stick to beat the other, blaming each other for whatever predicament we may land ourselves in.

It's a f'kin shitshow.

 

Edit:

To add, I'm also not as convinced this will be as cut and dried as everyone on here thinks it will be.

I'm concerned that there's perhaps a silent element who are purposely not making their feelings known for fear of being shot down.

I'm seeing posts on FB from posters who I know, who appear to be very astute, smart, and successful in their field who are, I wouldn't say in support of the EB bid, but showing signs of being receptive to it.

It concerns me, have to say!

Edited Wednesday at 13:33 by KirkySuperSub

[capt_oats]

2 minutes ago, KirkySuperSub said:

I know it's been mentioned before, but the amount of absolute moon-howlers in our support on Facebook is f'kin scary!

I very, very rarely post comments on any public post on Facebook, purely to avoid interaction with the general stupid, but felt compelled to post a reply to someone on the Well Society's proposal.

There is a guy - (who I'll not name, but he's easy to find!) - who has reacted to my post with - - who it appears has went onto do the same on every single post supporting the WS, without it offering any reasoning.

This whole escapade is proving already extremely divisive and damaging within our support.

We're supposed to be a "community club", the toxicity within our support could last for many years, no matter the outcome of this vote.

No matter what happens in the future seasons, success or failure, missing out on players, selling our top assets (as we've always done), this vote will be used by both sides as a stick to beat the other, blaming each other for whatever predicament we may land ourselves in.

It's a f'kin shitshow.

He did the same with my post and having checked his profile...well. What can you say about that.

Dearie me.

[KirkySuperSub]

2 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

He did the same with my post and having checked his profile...well. What can you say about that.

Dearie me.

Haha, the pyjamas?!

[Swello]

6 minutes ago, KirkySuperSub said:

This whole escapade is proving already extremely divisive and damaging within our support.

We're supposed to be a "community club", the toxicity within our support could last for many years, no matter the outcome of this vote.

No matter what happens in the future seasons, success or failure, missing out on players, selling our top assets (as we've always done), this vote will be used by both sides as a stick to beat the other, blaming each other for whatever predicament we may land ourselves in.

I think this is probably right - and it would be quite the legacy for outgoing board members because it really didn't need to be like this.