All Activity

It will be another big day today I think. We'll find out if the club are going to back down or double down and we might even see Tom Feeley come out of hiding.

@StAndrew7 I saw your comment about not emailing on P&B but I'd appreciate if you would ask this as a private shareholder. The number of shares available in each of the 6 annual subscriptions and who are they allocated to? The price per share in each of the 6 subscriptions for (i) Erik Barmack (ii) private shareholders (iii)the Well Society? Cheers

The thing here is David, its a grey area, if it was done on these boards we'd probably be looking at removing them. They may be posted from someone taking part in the chat BUT and is a big but, that is a private conversation and there is nothing to say that the other party agreed to it and if any of the text was changed before posting, especially as some parts have been highlighted. So there could be legal ramifications for the poster at least if not the forum owner.

If other potential investors keep discussions within the negotiating team (such as the executive and society boards), they needn't worry. I'd focus more on the content of Barmack's messages rather than his confidentiality concerns.

I’d see your point if the guy that posted the conversation’s is an official of the club or society and the leaks were official corespondents but since I don’t know who the guy is then at the moment I’m not concerned.

What he chooses to discuss on the forums is up to him and his team... certainly seems a bit ill-advised to me, but he's made a lot more money doing what he does than I ever will, so you have to assume he either knows what he's doing, or thinks he does. Either way, it's his choice. So yes, the thought that more suitable investors might be put off from dealing with us in future because we now apparently have previous for leaking private conversations during negotiations does concern me more than that.

If it’s two Mexican’s some on here will explode

Ok how about this, at the moment under the current proposal as I understand it - and my figures are rough calculations due to being on holiday and no time to dig deeper - after 6 years EB has 49% paying £1.8M Private shareholders will have 29% paying £1.16M (if my quick guess of what they’re valued at taking the £4M valuation is correct and anyone feel free to admen if any of my figures are wrong) WS will have 22% paying £2M Why not have the WS buy out the private shareholders for £1.16M then look at new investment, giving up a maximum of 49% for £1.9M (using £800K of that to repay some of the £1.16M) Over the 6 years saving the WS £840K and keeping the WS as majority shareholder in the club. If done correctly, I’d think that some non WS folk would sign up, existing members will continue to pay in/start paying again/up payments if possible. I know this would be a bit unfair on the private shareholders but I can’t see any other way to resolve this and keep the society as the majority shareholding. Sorry it’s a bit rough and ready but just an idea.

I hope he's not signing the old bloke in that picture.

Really? You’re more concerned about that than Barmack openly discussing his ridiculous plans on internet forums and WhatsApp with people not involved with the club? His language and content doesn't suggest he’s serious about these negotiations. It’s very concerning that anyone would vote on the club’s future based only on the interested party’s curated information, ignoring the nitty gritty behind it. There’s ignorance, and then there’s willful ignorance.

That was a dodgy judge looking out for racist polis. The ruling got overturned. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/sep/16/scottish-police-officers-lose-disciplinary-fight-over-racist-messages This is also a different matter as it's someone in the conversation publishing rather than a third party demanding access.

I have to admit, I did wonder about that being an issue when they were posted.

I'd be more concerned about the legality of sharing them, as there appears to be precedent in Scots law for reasonable expectation of privacy in WhatsApp group chats.

Entirely as I see it. We agree. The only thing I would add is that since last year's changes to the WS Board, the new regime has been trying to effect change whilst battling internal barriers (Hopefully those barriers will soon be history). Seeking a return to original operating principles and testing more closely any request from MFC or other bodies for the release of those monies. So that is to their credit. It does strike me that it is no coincidence this attempt to diminish the Society further comes at a time when uncomfortable questions were being posed and the Club Board's influence within the Society was under threat. Suddenly the Society is not as compliant and so McMahon etc are under pressure.

I think what the past few days have highlighted is that there are major issues with the Executive Board (name should be changed to Club Board) and the Society Board. Although we saw positive change last year to the WS Board, more fresh blood is now required due to resignations. The make up of the Executive Board also needs to be examined as a matter of urgency. We need a settled, forward looklng leadership. I believe there have been some interested local parties who approached the club to invest in the recent past. Without knowing the details, perhaps this avenue could be looked at again? The bottom line is that the WS needs to take control of the Executive Board, being the major shareholder. As far as external investment goes, we require it, not to plug financial holes or to try to improve our status in Scottish football but to consolidate our position, both on but also off the field. That investment has to be right for us though. MFC is our club. Still, I'm looking forward to seeing what this week brings both on and especially off the field.

It seems we can expect more new players incoming soon. Kettlewell expects signing announcements - https://www.bbc.com/sport/articles/cekk5jgm44do

As a life long supporter of the club and a non member of the WS I can only say that from the details we have so far this investment deal looks like a crock of shit. A few points seem obvious 1. The governance of the WS from its formation until recently has been an ineffective shambles, taking in millions from the fans with no proper control on where or how that money was spent. 2. The existing club board have used the Fans/ WS as a piggy bank to raid whenever they wanted and the WS were compliant in allowing them to do so. Now they are desperate to get their cash out and walk away. 3. The deal they are so keen to endorse is basically selling the club to Barmack at a knock down price and at the same time fundamentally rendering the WS useless by taking their cash to reduce their own shareholding ffs, but they won't give a toss as they will have their cash and dissappear into the sunset. 4. So after the dust settles Barmack will quietly buy up the private share holdings to gain majority control without any prospect of interference from the WS which means the millions contributed by the members will have all been for nothing. 5. The club will then be in the hands of someone with no great love of football other than seeing a profit from selling it on when he inevitably gets bored. The club really needs to tell these investors to GTF and get it's own house in order first with proper and effective governance for the WS and the club board and then an only then can suitable investment be sought when there are effective safeguards in place to protect the club and its fans, especially the subscribing WS members.

In return for their investment, the Barmacks receive a % of these new shares which eventually would result in them owning 49% of the new total share capital issued by the club (i.e. 49% of the total of the club’s existing share capital plus the new shares issued over the 6 years). On each occasion a batch of new shares is issued, then the remainder of the shares being issued which are not allotted to the Barmacks, will be made available for purchase by all the current existing shareholders (the WS and others) based on their current shareholding (i.e. a current other shareholder with a 1% holding could not acquire 10% of the remaining new shares even if they so desired but could acquire 1% of them). I've just seen Vietnam91 post this on P&B which is a response from the club about the new share issues and who can buy. It is in conflict with the document on Monday which says private shareholders will get the chance to buy pro rata from all shares issued and doesn't say anything about the Well Society getting the opportunity to buy pro rata. Now they are saying WS will get the chance to buy pro rata but there is no detail on the size of the issue or price of the shares. This opens up the possibility that in year 6 when the issue will be at the largest size the Well Society will have run out of cash and private investors will be able to buy up a large part of the club. When it says "new shares issued" here does it mean of all new shares issued that year or another amount which they are keeping secret so far? 3- The current shareholders in MFC are WS 71% – other shareholders 29%. 4- Other shareholders will have the right to subscribe for their pro rata amount each year eg if a shareholder owns 1% at present, they will be entitled to subscribe for 1% of the new shares issued. If they do that, it will reduce the amounts the WS need to subscribe and the number of shares they receive on that share issue.

Nothing wrong with "Un, Dos, three times" Moysie, a man of international style and pizzaz.

I've been happily running a VPN for years - but I'm more than happy to take Derek Rae over most (all) BBC and ITV commentary teams. Especially the BBC combo on the Poland game today.

You need a VPN. It's worth every penny.

Imagine Liam trying to avoid getting blocked by this guy at a corner vs Hungary.

Not a player, but happy to report we get Derek Rae on commentary over here.

The worrying thing is, you have someone saying, those communications are none of my business and I won't take them into account when voting. There's none so blind.

Oh, I don't doubt that they are conniving and conspiring to control the narrative and agenda, which does take some brains, but they also must be thick if they think they can pull the wool over our eyes in this instance. The bowling club comment isn't particularly in reference to their talent, as I’m sure many bowling club board members are excellent at running bowling clubs, it's more about McMahon et al’s ability to run a football club properly for the benefit of the football club and its community/fans.