All Activity

Stephen Hughes and Bob Malcolm also.

Lee McCulloch, Jamie Murphy

Amongst my circle of Well fans I found that initially most of them were slightly intrigued (and some won over)by the glamour of an American investor. When the actual figures came out every one of them completely changed their stance. I'm hoping that my circle of mixed age group some who are social media savvy and some who never use it is a representative of the wider fan base and see the current offer for what it is, a non starter.

I accept that, and it's up to the individual who posted the information to deal with the consequences, if any. They likely understood the impact of sharing conversations where a millionaire revealed some startling information. They could have easily considered your point and kept the messages private. Let's be honest, 99% of people would have done that. But they didn't. They've shown a level of courage rarely seen at our club's executive level and, in my opinion, should be commended as a whistleblower. If this deal is rejected, as I believe it should be, they will have done the club's fanbase a great service. What I'm arguing against are those who say they would ignore this information and vote based solely on the "shiny brochure," as someone else put it. Voting only on what Barmack's polished plan says, rather than his actual words and true intentions, is incredibly naive and mind-boggling.

Rab McKinnon, Stephen Pearson, Chris Cadden, Steven Saunders, and Brian Martin.

Yes Stevie Hammell did , had forgotten all about McGhee Declan Gallagher another one I just thought of

Hammell got at least one cap, I think? McGhee got a couple, too. Brian Kerr as well.

George Burley , Craig Brown and Pat Nevin another 3 names

In preparation for Wednesday and probably more disappointment I have been on YouTube watching some Scotland related videos last few days Got me thinking about players and managers in the last 30/40 years or so who have represented our great club good or bad Davie Cooper , Faddy , Gary McAllister , Tom Boyd , John Spencer, Brian Mcclair , Andy Goram , Stuart McCall , Graham Alexander , Paul Lambert , Stephen McManus , Alex McLeish , Stephen O’Donnell , Phil O’Donnell, Davie Clarkson , Ross McCormack, Liam Kelly Few others missing no doubt I am forgetting

If he's still here - I would expect to see a couple more strikers announced (loans maybe) even if we don't lose Bair. We're apparently looking at a Serbian striker -Stuparevic

We were all so young, so innocent back in May, so naive. 😅

Our choice of strikers for the opening fixture(s) could be somewhat limited, as things stand, if the Bair is afforded a wee well deserved break after international duty.

I'm still hoping for some answers Derek. Cheers.

Back to work today after a few days off, so will hopefully get to it later. Will also wait until the club update and see what's in there, too.

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.