camer0n_mcd Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Thanks for the response @Busta Nut & @Vietnam91 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 It was a good event. All the WS board members were there. I felt the WS members who were against investment were spot on in any chat I had with any of them. Tom Feeley was there too and to be fair he showed up and fought his corner. I didn't really feel there was any answers to the questions I asked of Tom and his decision and anything I said was met with a "what if" *insert worst case scenario.* Tom was also confident that with the "Motherwell men" on the board if the proposal went through there'd be no need for EB to have the deciding vote. Cos he felt the Motherwell men would prevent it. I pointed out it doesn't always work that way as an example, himself. Voted on the WS board to protect and maintain the Society, Only to vote against society's ownership. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 minute ago, Busta Nut said: It was a good event. All the WS board members were there. I felt the WS members who were against investment were spot on in any chat I had with any of them. Tom Feeley was there too and to be fair he showed up and fought his corner. I didn't really feel there was any answers to the questions I asked of Tom and his decision and anything I said was met with a "what if" *insert worst case scenario.* Tom was also confident that with the "Motherwell men" on the board if the proposal went through there'd be no need for EB to have the deciding vote. Cos he felt the Motherwell men would prevent it. I pointed out it doesn't always work that way as an example, himself. Voted on the WS board to protect and maintain the Society, Only to vote against society's ownership. Exactly. The "Motherwell Men" are the very people who have gotten us into this mess. Sounds like it's basically been "aye but what if this" from Tom, followed by a lot of "don't worry about it" when he was asked the same hypothetical type of questions or even just standard, logical stuff you'd expect an answer for... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstarcvedza Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Story so far.... Well Society deliberately set up to be a passive owner. Fan owned not fan run. Situation continues until new Well Society Board members elected. Believers in the passive model sense risk that Well Society could become active owner. Fan owned and (at least strategically) fan run. Plan to protect passive ownership (no matter the cost) set in motion. The video, the financial scaremongering, the recommended deal to hamstring/destroy active ownership. Well Society bolster their credentials as active owners through publication of professional, proportionate and powerful business plan Club is at now at crossroads with Well Society members faced with the monumental decision on which direction to take. Let's hope the majority see sense and don't jeopardise the future of the club by accepting the deal on offer. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 When I mentioned we'd probably make up the EB money if not surpass it with the sale of Bair and Miller he said, "we'll sell Bair, We're not selling Miller." Before going into the "what if" injury thing. Make of that what you will. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 (edited) Similarly when I asked "what happens to the society if this deal goes through?" Tom gave the ideal scenario where there is the same amount of members contributing and the Society have X amount of money for a back up. I pointed out that I don't think that would be the case as many members, myself included, would stop their contributions. He couldn't fathom this, I was trying to put a point across "why would anyone contribute to something that has moved the goal posts and no longer stands for it's original purpose?" but it was a busy part of the room and the questions were flying at him. Edited July 3 by Busta Nut 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Just now, Busta Nut said: Similarly when I asked "what happens to the society if this deal goes through?" Tom gave the ideal scenario where there is the same amount of members contributing and the Society have X amount of money for a back up. I pointed out that I don't think that would be the case as many members, myself included, would stop their contributions. He couldn't fathom this, I was trying to put a point across "why would anyone contribute to something that has moved the goal posts and no longer stands for it's original purpose?" but it was a bust part of the room and the questions were flying at him. Thanks for the updates (and everyone else). The fact that they clearly don't grasp the possibility that the society will (at best) contract massively if the EB thing happens is more than a bit worrying. It might also show that they have been viewing the WS as a dumb source of funding that will just carry on regardless... 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMotherwell1 Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Just now, Busta Nut said: I pointed out that I don't think that would be the case as many members, myself included, would stop their contributions. He couldn't fathom this, I was trying to put a point across "why would anyone contribute to something that has moved the goal posts and no longer stands for it's original purpose?" but it was a bust part of the room and the questions were flying at him. 100% agree. Fundamentally it's a ridiculous concept. Why should a largely working class fanbase be expected to fund the pet project of a bored millionaire? If voted through, I'll be cancelling my membership. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 As an aside, anyone up for using the proposed Heneghan money to do a Kilmarnock on Dundee to get Gorrin before St Mirren do a St Mirren? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmen Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 (edited) Bored millionaire… is this the new wealth off the radar?? Edited July 3 by steelmen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisGRAEME Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 47 minutes ago, Busta Nut said: Similarly when I asked "what happens to the society if this deal goes through?" Tom gave the ideal scenario where there is the same amount of members contributing and the Society have X amount of money for a back up. I pointed out that I don't think that would be the case as many members, myself included, would stop their contributions. He couldn't fathom this, I was trying to put a point across "why would anyone contribute to something that has moved the goal posts and no longer stands for it's original purpose?" but it was a busy part of the room and the questions were flying at him. I mean, am I being thick, twice here? In the first, ideal scenario, that isn't there, because the society has to match that funding. So it won't do that. It will also be in a more challenging position to do that, with no real explanation as to what will happen if it fails to meet the targets. Secondly; you're basically going to be getting the flip side of folk who think they get to vote on the transfer business in fan ownership. Folk who expect the owner to answer on everything, so good luck with that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 minute ago, thisGRAEME said: I mean, am I being thick, twice here? In the first, ideal scenario, that isn't there, because the society has to match that funding. So it won't do that. It will also be in a more challenging position to do that, with no real explanation as to what will happen if it fails to meet the targets. He seems to think that no one will drop their contributions and the society will continue to bring money in while paying these yearly bits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Talking to the Well Society board tonight (Feeley aside) left me feeling very confident in their abilities to get the club back into shape. And there was talk of some investment into the Well Society from outside sources which is the obvious thing for someone who wants to help the club and is not interested in securing a return. Obviously those talks are pending on rejecting Barmack's plan. Really disappointed with Tom Feeley's answers regarding the current well society reserves and the crucial ability of the society to cover future shortfalls once we turn all our current funding over in the Barmack deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellin Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 44 minutes ago, TheMotherwell1 said: 100% agree. Fundamentally it's a ridiculous concept. Why should a largely working class fanbase be expected to fund the pet project of a bored millionaire? If voted through, I'll be cancelling my membership. You've every right to feel like that - but the flip side of it is that the same working class fanbase is going to have to dip into their pockets to increase contributions to the well society and to buy more season tickets. I don't think there's any easy answer to any of this. Mainly because we've got such a small core fanbase. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMotherwell1 Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 9 minutes ago, Wellin said: You've every right to feel like that - but the flip side of it is that the same working class fanbase is going to have to dip into their pockets to increase contributions to the well society and to buy more season tickets. I don't think there's any easy answer to any of this. Mainly because we've got such a small core fanbase. Completely disagree. Do not fall for the condescending, scaremongering shite of Jim McMahon and his cohort of bootlickers. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post crazylegsjoe_mfc Posted July 3 Popular Post Share Posted July 3 Plus one on the cancelling my membership if it goes through. I think it was @Vietnam91who made the analogy that it just becomes like voluntarily paying more for your season ticket. I've not said much on the investment stuff lately as I've not had much to add to a lot of other eloquent and well researched posts covering anything I would have said. What I will say now is, I have less respect for @Erik Barmackthan I did to begin with. He brought a very shite deal to the table and when that wasn't met with his desired reception, he reneged on it and brought a compromised, albeit still very shite deal, to the table. If he thought his offer was the real deal and despite the backlash, stuck to his guns, I certainly wouldn't have voted for it, but would have had a bit more respect for him. Now this adds more to his shifty demeanour, in my opinion. Can you trust that someone who moved the goalposts so quickly at this stage, wouldn't move them even further when he was in post? There's nothing wrong with, Feely, Dickie or Downie holding the opinion that they don't think Motherwell being fan owned long term is best for the club. It might not be my opinion, but everyone is entitled to theirs. However, chucking away what everyone has worked for in The Well Society for over a decade (for which they probably consider themselves pioneers of) for the first deal, which not to labour the point, is absolutely shite, is just not on. I imagine fan ownership means different things to different members of the 'Well Society. I'm more neutral than most on it, if we could be privately owned and I didn't need to concern myself with the club's future, I'd probably be quite pleased. However, the mythical creature who has deep pockets, the club at heart and no ulterior motive probably doesn't exist. We've seen enough charlatans in Scottish football over the past twenty years to know that. I would never entertain being on the 'Well Society board personally, (I've got the type of personality that when a hobby feels like a job, I begin to resent it), but I'm glad that there are fans (particularly those who've stood up for the Well Society in the past month or so) who have the drive and enthusiasm. I'm happy to see my direct debit as a contribution to help these kind of people ensure our club remains in good hands. 20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Wellin said: You've every right to feel like that - but the flip side of it is that the same working class fanbase is going to have to dip into their pockets to increase contributions to the well society and to buy more season tickets. I don't think there's any easy answer to any of this. Mainly because we've got such a small core fanbase. Hypothetical one for you. Say we have 4,000 season ticket holders; each one pays £5 two times a season to the WS or towards a particular strategic project instead of having a meal deal at the kiosk. £40k for the coffers and the fan base is healthier because it doesn't eat as many pies. Yes I'm being flippant, but you can see how things don't need to be complicated to increase funds, nor do they need to be financially challenging or daunting. Edited July 3 by StAndrew7 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewarkfanclub Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 13 minutes ago, Wellin said: You've every right to feel like that - but the flip side of it is that the same working class fanbase is going to have to dip into their pockets to increase contributions to the well society and to buy more season tickets. I don't think there's any easy answer to any of this. Mainly because we've got such a small core fanbase. There is one thing putting your hand in your pocket for the benefit of the club when its still fan owned and you know every penny stays in the club. Its an entirely different thing to do the same knowing some faceless millionaire is trousering some of it. If Erik wants to own and run a football club let him. But if wants entire control over the operation he can do it with his own money. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Vietnam91 Posted July 3 Popular Post Share Posted July 3 (edited) 2 hours ago, crazylegsjoe_mfc said: I think it was @Vietnam91who made the analogy that it just becomes like voluntarily paying more for your season ticket. Simply put a £10 per month subscription is a 30% levy on your season ticket cost (if you're in the Hunter). £520 a season starts to move us towards OF territory. For what exactly? Put perfectly above .... working class people, many with limited means to fund a millionaire's plaything and grow its value all to his benefit. Does anyone seriously think if we get to year six the equity value cited today of just under £4m will be the same? Like everything associated with Erik it's sprinkled with the pixie dust of high optimism. Anything the WS highlight is covered in a layer of pessimism. It would be comical if it wasn't so overt and transparent. We bought out one rich guy only to need the help of another that we then paid off, to be run by a third who's disdain for fan ownership is palpable to find him crowbarring in a 4th rich guy that we'll foot the bill for at some point because we'll still be wanting a club to be part of our community in 10 years and beyond. Does everyone forget the mantra rhymed out by Leeann back in 2011? We won't be held by the whims of an individual. As present many join and contribute because they get the building the reserve thing. Remove that and any payments to the WS are essentially nothing more than another revenue stream like programmes, pitchside advertising and pies. This scheme banks on gullibility, heads being turned citing flashy names with a good sprinkle of hope. I told him way back not to treat us like hicks and then I see that club announcement where he assumed we were hicks. This scheme is so egregious it boils my piss only which is only matched by the sycophants in our support making excuses for it. Edited July 4 by Vietnam91 25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 (edited) 7 hours ago, Vietnam91 said: This scheme banks on gullibility, heads being turned citing flashy names with a good sprinkle of hope. I told him way back not to treat us like hicks and then I see that club announcement where he assumed we were hicks. This scheme is so egregious it boils my piss only which is only matched by the sycophants in our support making excuses for it. I've taken a few hours to digest the reports from last night and it's still hard to fathom. I appreciate people can only report on what they heard but was any of the following covered: Why is Feely still Society chair when he supports ending fan ownership? Why is Dickie still on the club board with his Society mandate? What's the rationale of the Society board for indulging the executive in this farce and not just replacing them? Edited July 4 by Handsome_Devil 3 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.