Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[camer0n_mcd]

2 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

They are absolutely fucking shameless.

I think I can just about smell Jim McMahon's desperation from that statement.

[Swello]

10 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

 

@StAndrew7

 

One more heave from Jim.

[camer0n_mcd]

Both Grant Russell and Laura Brannan have been pretty outspoken against this, I'm genuinely quite intrigued to know what Burrows thinks of it all.

 

As a side note, a stark reflection on how bad this all is, is Grant Russell and Laura Brannan being the voices of reason. 

[steelmen]

From the Statement 

• There would be no external debt to burden the Club’s future finances.

From the Barmack's own plans there is a £1.3m gap in the finances in the first 2 years needed for his plan.

Where is that money coming from?

Edited July 5 by steelmen

[Well Fan]

TWS see plans 4th/5th July. 3 days before the vote on an investment plan on a multimillion sports team/facilities and with shy on 2 million investment.

I smell shyte! 

Any sensible investor would have walked everyone through it months ago and ironed it out to final document. 

This was back of fag packet stuff initially, before a realisation of losing it dawned. 

Plan quickly revised and part aligning with TWS and other interesting titbits on global marketing. 

Its a win win for The Barmack's however things go. However, no similar outcome for Motherwell FC if things don't come to fruition. 

Additionally, if I was abused on social media when I was helping out the goodness of my heart. I would be walking away while mouthing expletives. 

He is hanging on in because he losses nothing and has everything to gain.

All to win nothing to lose! 

Hope the majority see through this. 

If they don't, hell mend them! 

[David1979]

I'm not going to even comment on the vast majority of the Wild Sheep sports proposal, simply because what they're proposing isn't anything of a surprise really. It's not groundbreaking stuff. And it isn't the real reason behind their proposal. All the talk of passion for the club, and so on? A front. Anyone can see that. Their plan for the club is so bad that it doesn't take a business mastermind to see that very little thought has went into it. 

What is important, and should be highlighted is the wording used in the small print (isn't that always the case in matters such as these?)

Let's look at that:

"And for the purposes of clarity, we are not looking to “take over” the Club by purchasing additional shares beyond the shares outlined in our proposed deal. We are willing to place covenants against further share purchases by Erik and Courtney Barmack, as we wish to remain a minority shareholder."

Erik Barmack’s recent statement indicates that he and his wife, Courtney, have no plans to purchase additional shares directly. However, this doesn’t rule out the possibility of acquiring shares indirectly through a shell company or a third party. This happens all the time in business. Such indirect methods could still allow them to gain control or influence, effectively sidestepping the intended minority shareholder status. 

Something else in the document regarding the financial contribution of the Well society:

 "Should TWS not be able to sustain these payments, our firm belief is that this should not be a “backdoor” to further ownership for
any of the minority owners. Possible remedies could include extending the term, or some further reduction in debt. Our thinking is
that we would need to discuss the most practical solution with TWS that maintains their majority ownership and doesn’t change the
ownership structure of Fir Park."

"Some further reduction in debt." I can't highlight that point enough. The debt in question is secured against the stadium, and more importantly the ground on which the stadium sits.

There is no "or" about it, that's what will be pursued when the Society cannot make those payments.

I refer everyone back to this point I made earlier:

Impact on Existing Loan:

What Could Happen: The £868,000 loan from the Society to the club could be affected. Well, the £434,000 that would remain after 50% of the original amount is converted into shares to help the Well Society maintain a 50.1% majority shareholding in a football club that it would have previously held over 70% in.

How It Works:

• Debt Forgiveness Negotiation: If the Society fails to meet its financial commitments, the club could negotiate to have the loan forgiven in exchange for the Society being forgiven for not making its required payments.

It should be mentioned at this point that the Well Society loan is currently secured against the stadium. And more importantly, the ground it sits on.

All of a sudden that "clean balance sheet" looks really attractive. Why? For the following reasons:

Release of Security:

• What Happens: If the loan is forgiven, the security (the stadium) associated with the loan would be released. This means the stadium would no longer be collateral for the debt since the debt itself would be eliminated.
• Implication: Without the loan, the club would own the stadium free and clear of that specific debt obligation.

Potential Increased Control for Wild Sheep Sports:

• Scenario: If Wild Sheep Sports becomes the majority shareholder, and the loan is forgiven, they could have increased control over the club’s assets, including the stadium.
• Implication: WSS, as the majority shareholder, would have significant influence over decisions regarding the stadium, including the possibility of selling it or remortgaging it to gain finance based against it.

So, yeah. That's the end game. A vote for this proposal is a vote to potentially rob your kids and grandkids of a football club to call their own in the future. All because some small-time investor waved a few quid in front of us.

Edited July 5 by David1979

[David1979]

We need to address a critical issue head-on. Forcing a postponement of the vote on the Wild Sheep Sports proposal might seem controversial, but it’s a necessary step. We must ensure that the terms around any potential failure of the Society to meet its financial commitments are crystal clear and legally vetted. The current vagueness surrounding such a crucial aspect of this deal is simply unacceptable. It's astonishing that the club and all parties involved (looking at you, legal teams) are even considering moving forward with this vote without having these details thoroughly nailed down.

Essentially, we’re looking at committing over £1.3 million of our contributors' money without knowing what the ramifications of failure would be. In its current form, the penalties for non-payment would be decided by the club – essentially the Barmacks – at their convenience. This means they could impose any terms they see fit on any given day. Does no one else see how utterly insane this is? In any business deal, these remedies should be explicitly defined, crystal clear, and legally binding. We cannot leave such critical terms to be potentially exploited at a later stage.

This isn’t just about finances; it's about the future control and security of our stadium. Ensuring that our home remains secured for future generations should be our top priority. If we can't ensure this level of security and transparency, then what are we really doing here? Let's pause, get the terms clarified and legally approved, and then move forward.

That this hasn't been done before now is baffling.

Edited July 5 by David1979

[StAndrew7]

29 minutes ago, supermarv said:

It’s definitely not impossible however it is 110% a difficult challenge. Just look at many other European leagues for example Bodo Glimt (Norway) don’t really have much but have an excellent youth academy which they have profited exceptionally well from and now winning leagues in Norway.

Im not daft and know next season we won’t be pushing out one of the OF but my point is why should we settle for mediocrity to just survive or be stable after a good season we should have plans in place to improve on the squad regardless if perhaps 1 or 2 may leave due to attracting interest. Even look at Leicester in the most money dominated league in the world winning the league against all odds so again definitely not impossible.

Of course the game in our country has to improve as a whole but do we want to just stagnate as a community and be happy little Motherwell to survive every season. Our last cup win was 1991 (35 years ago) yes we have come close but still haven’t won anything since. My point is why can’t we believe as a club with the correct management, players and a new WS and board in place that we can aspire to improve our level or reputation and be a slightly bigger club, push on and challenge for Europe every year instead of just keeping our head above the water.

I think the key thing here is that this is how people should want to do it; we can do all of that  under the WS' plan, without Erik investing a pittance and spending it on "strategic projects" which leave us with a significant black hole in terms of money spent based the calculations in his plans (on top of all the other nonsense in there).

Edited July 5 by StAndrew7

[Handsome_Devil]

17 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

Both Grant Russell and Laura Brannan have been pretty outspoken against this, I'm genuinely quite intrigued to know what Burrows thinks of it all.

 

As a side note, a stark reflection on how bad this all is, is Grant Russell and Laura Brannan being the voices of reason. 

I know Russell has been pursuing his own agenda but I find it vaguely surprising he remains so interested and passionate about us.

Burrows, I assume, is still a WS member. I can understand why he's sitting it out professionally why he's sitting it out but I suspect he's screaming inside. I wonder if he'll eventually crack and reference how he's voting.

[Swello]

6 minutes ago, David1979 said:

Essentially, we’re looking at committing over £1.3 million of our contributors' money without knowing what the ramifications of failure would be.

One of the oddest (or most arrogant depending on how you feel) components of the deal is the fact that EB and Exec Board jointly agreed to sign up ordinary members of the WS to fund a seven figure investment.

I personally can't get past the fact that if I vote "yes" to the EB proposal, I'm making a financial commitment not just for myself but for all of us in the WS. 

[YassinMoutaouakil]

 I know logically it had to be in the close season but did we have to have this entire business coincide with a European Championships and a General Election? My head is fried.

[GrantRussell]

8 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

I know Russell has been pursuing his own agenda but I find it vaguely surprising he remains so interested and passionate about us.

Burrows, I assume, is still a WS member. I can understand why he's sitting it out professionally why he's sitting it out but I suspect he's screaming inside. I wonder if he'll eventually crack and reference how he's voting.

I'm a Well Society member.

[Cloontang]

21 minutes ago, camer0n_mcd said:

Both Grant Russell and Laura Brannan have been pretty outspoken against this, I'm genuinely quite intrigued to know what Burrows thinks of it all.

 

As a side note, a stark reflection on how bad this all is, is Grant Russell and Laura Brannan being the voices of reason. 

I remember Burrows saying in an interview back when Boyle was trying to sell us to that Argentine consortium that if that deal went through he would be leaving immediately which pissed John off no end. I can't remember the particulars of that offer but I'd bet it was far better on what's currently on offer.

 

[Handsome_Devil]

1 minute ago, GrantRussell said:

I'm a Well Society member.

Then fair play...I vaguely remember reading somewhere you weren't actually Motherwell fan so assumed your interest would have started and ended at the professional.

Glad you're voting on the side of the angels anyway!

[Busta Nut]

2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Scab

That bloke is a moron.

[StAndrew7]

1 minute ago, Busta Nut said:

That bloke is a moron.

What's the bet he doesn't increase his contribution if the plan falls? 

[Busta Nut]

Also just wanted to add, Jim McMahon is a fuckin snake.

 

[thisGRAEME]

2 hours ago, fat_tony said:

Not to mention the bit everyone always forgets with software development. It's not a one-and-done thing. There's ongoing hosting, support and maintenance costs, plus development of new features over time etc. 

Same goes for implementing a CRM system. It means nothing if you don't put a solid data foundation in place and continue to support it.

Edited to add: There is some budget allocated for ongoing maintenance for both the app and CRM system that I missed on first read through. I think these are massively undervalued though.

I don't doubt this at all either, plus loading yet further expectations on the already overworked and undervalued media team to create "exclusive content", which in reality will be the same content already made, but kept on a different channel to the detriment of the existing channels that already exist.

[Swello]

Just now, thisGRAEME said:

"exclusive content", which in reality will be the same content already made, but kept on a different channel to the detriment of the existing channels that already exist.

Has the model of paywalling run of the mill pressers and post match interviews ever worked anywhere? I always assumed that it just lowered engagement with the majority of your fans that won't pay extra...

It feels like an old model that was tried (Club TV) and then quietly died out.

[TheMotherwell1]

9 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

What's the bet he doesn't increase his contribution if the plan falls? 

It’s alright, he will probably blame the immigrants if the plan fails.

 Braindead arsehole.