Yabba's Turd Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Well Society podcast special featuring Society Chairman Brian McCafferty. http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/c/4/c/c4cdfd38110a22eb/mfcspecial.mp3?c_id=8070573&expiration=1418970431&hwt=9e2d155684a992f0fc2586e52bd266b4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goggles & Flippers Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Interesting, no answers on Les' involvement though and how its envisaged things will pan out. We're now almost a week from when his was named and we as a membership haven't been furnished with anything tangible other than Les' is a lovely guy and what I've heard on the BBC. Jim Henderson's question deserved a more complete answer. Would maybe suggest that breaking a posed question down into easier to answer bullet points rather than reading something verbatim could work better. I also look forward to the Society answering the questions I posed in the associated thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Interesting, no answers on Les' involvement though and how its envisaged things will pan out. We're now almost a week from when his was named and we as a membership haven't been furnished with anything tangible other than Les' is a lovely guy and what I've heard on the BBC. Jim Henderson's question deserved a more complete answer. Would maybe suggest that breaking a posed question down into easier to answer bullet points rather than reading something verbatim could work better. I also look forward to the Society answering the questions I posed in the associated thread. Unfortunately due to the ongoing talks with Les etc, the "confidentially agreement" in place with the 'Well Society meant that a lot of the questions about Les, loans etc couldn't be answered at present. Brian's agreed to come back on to answer more questions in the New Year though, when he's able to answer a lot more in that regard! Also, Brian's in-depth and extensive answers were very much welcomed, but it did mean a few other questions we had lined-up didn't get asked before we ran out of time! As for the breaking down of questions, it's something we'll take on board for next time! The podcast itself is still in its infancy and this was our first attempt at a Q&A setup, so any feedback is definitely welcomed! Hopefully overall it was a reasonable success and folk find it a worthwhile listen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 I have just discovered I am able to access this website in work again! Yay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Interesting, no answers on Les' involvement though and how its envisaged things will pan out. We're now almost a week from when his was named and we as a membership haven't been furnished with anything tangible other than Les' is a lovely guy and what I've heard on the BBC. Jim Henderson's question deserved a more complete answer. Would maybe suggest that breaking a posed question down into easier to answer bullet points rather than reading something verbatim could work better. I also look forward to the Society answering the questions I posed in the associated thread. There's a 30 day cooling off period that means, amongst other things, the details of the deal can't be discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goggles & Flippers Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 There's a 30 day cooling off period that means, amongst other things, the details of the deal can't be discussed. I should have added "where able", as I'm versed with the 30 day rule and it has been mentioned already. However I'm not looking for specific details (they will follow in time), more an overview to the running and structure under these arrangements. At present Les has effectively bought the club, that to me suggests no WS involvement unless our banked £500k is being used as part of that deal or as a guarantee. If it's the former then I don't fully understand why they are gagged. To me that would be an arrangement between LH and JB. Regardless, as pointed out we have raised approximately £500m to date. JB/club changed the amount to be raised to £1.5m by the end of November so we have effectively raised 33% of that figure. We are told now to secure the club will be less than £1.5m due to a reworking of the budgeting and strategy. Therefore my contention is that the WS currently have between 33%-50% of the funds required to own the club outright based on the above figures. However our current tangible steak is 6% exchanged for loans in the past. The board from my reading is made up of 2 WS board members (of which, one is also club Chairman), 2 legacy appointments (I'm sure most fans are happy to have the continued involvement of Derek Weir and Jim McMahon) and 3 from Les (his daughter and other trusted individuals/colleagues). I hope the WS board members remember that in their dealings they represent a membership that does wield anything from 33%-50% of the club ownership and will represent that membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Remember that it would 33% - 50% of the 70 % majority shareholding not 100%. When the WS do takeover it will be Les Hutchisons shares they will take (previously John Boyle's) not everybody else's too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goggles & Flippers Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Apologies, I assumed most would be well versed with the JB shareholding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Nae need to apologise just pointing it out for anyone else reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smeddum07 Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Another good show and very interesting! I was obviously disappointed that not one of my questions was asked but understand time pressures. However I still didn't get a sense of what the society actually want to do bar owning the club for the "community". No answers on what the direction of the club will be going forward (Developing players buying undervalued English players etc) no answers on lowering ticket prices or safe standing or even promotion. No answers on what SPL level decisions were wanted from the society i.e fairer distribution bigger league? And most importantly whether if I signed up as a member I would have any say in this at all through voting or would i just be voting on board members? Seems to be that the Society is a way to make fans pay twice for the club. Since all money (basically) raised by the clubs is our money from tickets merchandise etc now we are being asked to pay a tenner a month for basically nothing at all. I know hearts fans have been mentioned a couple of times and I don't know the current situation but first time the club went to the fans people took out credit cards and went into debt to basically pay footballers wages madness. I just want to know in a nut shell are we double paying for the status quo and it still feels as if we are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 The way I see it; *Paying for a season ticket , buying a shirt etc is a product that I pay for to enjoy and of course it keeps the club in business to an extent. I am a customer *Joining the society goes towards gaining society club ownership and as a society member I will have a say in how the club is run (to an extent) Loads of the answers to the other questions, all you mention which are valid, I think come later down the line. That said, if It is a stumbling block for you joining it's something the society need to think about addressing as you won't be the only one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I was obviously disappointed that not one of my questions was asked but understand time pressures. However I still didn't get a sense of what the society actually want to do bar owning the club for the "community". No answers on what the direction of the club will be going forward (Developing players buying undervalued English players etc) no answers on lowering ticket prices or safe standing or even promotion. No answers on what SPL level decisions were wanted from the society i.e fairer distribution bigger league? And most importantly whether if I signed up as a member I would have any say in this at all through voting or would i just be voting on board members? I just want to know in a nut shell are we double paying for the status quo and it still feels as if we are! As Superward had said, your questions will be answered further down the line, I'd guess late 2018 at the earliest. Most of them relate to operational detail. Don't forget the Society won't be in a position to do much about these issues until it actually owns the club, by which time some of these matters will have moved on anyway. Once the Society actually owns MFC it will then have a good idea of the club's finances and the future transfer market. If you signed up as a member I'd hope you wouldn't have too much say in the details of running the club. It would totally unworkable. Frequent meetings of members would have to be convened to vote on every significant issue. If the Society opted for an across the board price reduction in ticket prices would you expect a vote to be held on the extent of that reduction? Would you feel disenfranchised if your favoured option was voted down by say 51/49? Members should have the overall say on strategic matters and elect board members. If those board members are out of tune with the membership then they could of course be voted off. The Board members should be left to take care of the running of the club and members shouldn't try to micro manage. Why pay for a dog and then bark yourself? Double funding? Yes that would be the case to a certain extent. However at the moment ordinary fans do not own the club or have a say in its running. Currently shareholders have a limited say on strategic matters. If the community wants to own the club then it has to pay for it. 2 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.