Leaderboard

The player sales model debate is an interesting one. For me, it's not a precarious model by any means. And I'd suggest that it demonstrably works. We're in a situation where the club doesn't urgently need outside investment - it would just be preferable. Our model ensures that it's unlikely that the hypothetical gap outlined in the Well Society's consultation earlier in the year, and the hypothetical gap that is the very reason for courting external investment in the first place, will, based on the experience of fan-ownership to date, materialise. It never has under fan-ownership and, even if it did, the Well Society has enough funding to cover that gap as a one-off. The issue would be if something that has yet to happen didn't just happen one year, but two in quick succession. Of course, nothing is impossible in football. Over the same time period that fan-owned Motherwell has remained in the division, reached cup finals, and made Europe, clubs with bigger resources such as Hearts, Hibernian and Dundee United have all been relegated. So it's a duty of the club to at least recognise that hypothetical gap and see if there's a more productive way to eradicate it, other than relying on the Well Society to plug it if it happens once, and then to probably slash our playing budget if it happens again in quick succession (before the Society has built up the safety net again). But in terms of our model, David Turnbull always gets picked out as a seeming "anomaly" but in reality, he's the result of an effective player sales model. Since fan-ownership came into being, we have - purely off the top of my head, so there'll probably be others I miss - sold, for cash, guys like Louis Moult, Cedric Kipre, Kevin van Keen, Sondre Solholm Johansen, James Scott & Ben Heneghan. We could have, had we tied them down on contracts, added Chris Cadden, Allan Campbell, Jake Hastie, Dean Cornelius & Max Johnston to that list. However, the compensation for each still numbers in the hundreds of thousands meaning that, collectively, that's still well over £1m. We will probably sell Theo Bair on for a relatively decent fee in the summer, January, or next summer, while at the same time, Lennon Miller will almost certainly go for a price that you could perhaps list alongside the Turnbull fee. In terms of any investment meaning a change from that model and the ability to keep our best players, I would argue that is incredibly unlikely, if not impossible. The player sales model is only partly because of a financial need, it's also largely because of the club's stature in world football. As has been mentioned elsewhere, it was confirmed at the AGM by the club that no investment offer is transformational, meaning that there would be no change to the model. In fact, you could argue that, if any investor was keen on getting a return on their investment, the player sales model could become even more important in that situation. The only way in which our model ceases to be our model that I can see is if we ended up with an incredibly unlikely Colin & Christine Weir scenario where a diehard Motherwell fan wins the Euromillions and wants to just chuck cash at the club. But even in that situation, where you don't necessarily need to sell players, players would still be sold - because the best guys will always want to move on to play at perceived bigger clubs or in better leagues, regardless of how much cash you're able to throw at them. The player sales model at Fir Park has been in place, and worked successfully, before fan-ownership, has worked under fan-ownership, and will continue to work regardless of whether the club is owned by the fans, an external investor, or a hybrid of the two. Personally, I think it's both a successful model that we should be positive about, because we're good at it, and a model that will be integral to the club whether we like it or not anyway.

Nope. We got peak Kev in his last season. Given his age and his normal goal scoring form of single digit seasons, I never wanted him back. Just bask in his record breaking season and look forward to the next Kev we uncover. I'd be happier if we kept Vale for next season.

I dont know what it is many Motherwell fans cant get their head around about the ground improvements. The £3 million we got from Government was a 20 year interest free loan. It could not be spent on players wages . The stipulation was it must be spent on the fabric of the club. The club would have been mad not to take the loan. At worst the expenditure to finance that loan in any year only ever amounts to £150,000 a year. A very small proportion of any losses we incur in any season. The £3million pound will never ever appear as a loss on the clubs accounts because its not a loss its a loan. There is so much pish written about us wasting money on ground improvements when the reality is we couldn't have got the loan for anything else and it was an absolute bargain on those terms.

Thanks Theo nice to see your backing yourself, self confidence is important.

At the financial levels we operate at re wages etc £750k would fund possibly 4 or 5 players, so it's very decent cash to a club like ours. And the bigger English clubs know this all too well, it's small change to them.

This is it exactly for me. The club has always (since administration etc. anyway) operated under a model where we need to sell a player every other year to keep the books balanced, or sell a Turnbull every three or so. The WS' funds essentially became a way for the club to keep things balanced in leaner times after Les came in, and that's absolutely worked and kept the club afloat. I would argue that's not necessarily true fan ownership, which is why I'm intrigued to see what the new WS board have to offer in terms of growing that to something even more meaningful. However, there's also no reason that the work they're doing can't be done alongside an investor who wants to work with the WS to do that, using their own business experience and skills to supplement what is already there. My line in the sand for all of this has always been 51/49 ownership in favour of the fans. If it goes beyond that (even if it takes years, or is performance based etc.) it's a no from me. Also, there is far, far more to any potential takeover than can be acutely summarised on a forum like this. Like I'm enjoying the debate and discussion but we also need to know a significant amount of what we're reading here and in the press is speculation. e.g. The actual, financial valuation of the club and its assets (rather than the emotional one we as fans put on it) calculated by forensic accountants/finance specialists and then adding in any potential clauses the WS want around ensuring that if they lost majority ownership, there is first refusal on the investor's shares if/when they choose to go or sell up. This is all, of course, dependent on it getting to the stage of there being an actual offer for the club that the Exec Board deems worth considering. Exclusivity of negotiations doesn't guarantee that will happen. One (final, I promise) point; none of the potential investors we have attracted so far are offering to put "transformational" amounts of money into the club. So whatever happens in that regard, I believe the WS will have to continue in some capacity to support the club in leaner times. Like you said @joewarkfanclub we need to be very careful when coming to a decision. Personally, I think there is a model where the WS and any investor(s) could work together (whilst the WS/fans retains majority ownership under whatever structure is negotiated) to build the former and help the latter get a return on their investment, leaving the club in a stronger position than it was. There is nuance to that which will take time to work out, if it is indeed an option, but the devil, as always, will be in the detail.

Who do we need to compete with, only Motherwell fans buy Motherwell season tickets, so not increasing the prices is a good thing. A price increase even a modest one might have pushed the price beyond some people's budget. So if there's no need for an increase its happy days and a good move by the club.

she possibly wasn't called Mrs Wellgirl.

You ever get the feeling where I wish I hadn't mentioned it!! Cheers Mr Cowan 😜😜

Probably something to do with his 204 career goals vs Theo's 21.

Ominous. I'll no sleep tonight.

This all day long. We need to ditch the weird formation and get our best players playing in their best positions. Vale is great with his back to goal and holding the ball up and playing others in. Bair is better running in behind. Davor runs around and breaks shit up. Miller and Spittal are both best at controlling the tempo and picking a pass. Gent is great at beating his man and driving crosses across the 6 yard box. Just do that. And if the defence could maybe not chuck any in our own net that would be grand!

Interesting reading here for sure, and as much as it surprises me to be saying this, SteelBoy is on the money with a lot of what he's saying in my opinion. In my experience, people with the financial clout to invest heavily in a football club aren't the type to accept a situation where they have to run their decisions and plans past a majority holding group made up, for the most part, of people who have nowhere near the same level of business experience as they do. If they're putting a considerable amount of money into any venture, they'll expect to make at least that and more back on the other side. That's simply how it is. They're not coming and giving up time and money for nothing. This suggests to me that they'll want majority control and will not be answerable to the Well Society. No serious investor would accept risking their capital in an industry that is difficult to profit from at the best of times without having majority control over how that entity is run and, more importantly, how their money is spent. The Well Society and any votes in the future would simply be seen as inconveniences and roadblocks to the real professionals doing their jobs. Which is maximising profit for the owner on their investment. The most concerning thing for any football fan is that most owners who do not have an emotional attachment to the club they own often see it as just another business venture. Venture is the key word there. Defined as "an undertaking involving chance or risk" or "a speculative business enterprise," which in most cases means that the investor takes a chance, and has an amount of money they're willing to lose before declaring the venture a loss. At that point, they cut it loose and let it sink. It happens to companies every day. It's just that those companies ordinarily don't have fans. I'll be more than happy to be proven wrong on that count and see a unicorn in the form of someone with a ton of cash and no real emotional attachment to the club happy to throw cash into the pot and basically cede overall control and direction to the Well Society. I don't see it happening, though. As has been mentioned already, fan ownership gives us many things, but the most important is that it gives us our club. If the Well Society loses majority control (if it happens), it will no longer be our club—it will be the new owners' club. At that point, we will be just customers. Most of the noise surrounding this issue seems to be paving the way for a change in majority ownership. Again, this is just my opinion based on what I've experienced in the past. Losing majority control of something like a football is a hard sell to fans. The only way to really accomplish that is to convince said fans via various PR means that there's not really any other option moving forward. Vague mentions of financial issues and a drip-style media campaign that gets fans used to the idea of giving up control. Again, I'm not saying this is what is happening, but it looks a lot like it from the outside. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

Anyone who would have been prepared to pay more can always find other ways of putting money into the club. Starting or upping WS contributions Consider buying 50/50 tickets Etc etc.

The fee is immaterial. Neither Turnbull or Lennon needed to sign extended contracts but did so to make sure the club got a payment for their investment. They knew they were / are going and could have left for nothing but chose to help the club . As I said they are exceptions. Whatever Bair does it is extremely unlikely if he knows he's a wanted man and likely to be leaving that he'd sign an extended contract to ensure Motherwell were taken care of. He, like the vast majority, will when the time comes piss off without so much as a backward glance to the club. Football is full of guys like Chris Cadden..

Where are we getting the £4million from?

Miovski's a much player than Bair. He looks like he chucked it after January this season but still turns up against the Old Firm to keep himself in the shop window.

Well, either him or Harry Paton.

In the real world a player is only as valuable as what another team are prepared to pay, no offers no sale and he walks for nothing next summer.

No even in a lucky bag. His race is run.

Random shite as usual

There are some fantastic goals to choose from, but it's got to be Bair's dink against Livi for me. Honourable mention for Spittal's thunder bastard strike, however. The other takeaway from that video is how important Spittal has been for us. Putting Bair's revival and goals aside, Spittal has been our most important player by far this season, and it's not the first time I've posted that on this forum. We're going to miss him a lot.

100% correct why should fans have faith in promises made that could have been delivered over the last 5 or 6 years. I am not convinced by the American interest either but ill wait until I see actual facts rather than what someone down the pub thinks.

The finances are fine. We have made a good profit during a difficult period. To me it looks like the clique that have run the club in various guises for 20 years don't like the fact that the majority of the Well Society board are now supporters from the East Stand and decided they would rather privatise than see working class fans have a real say in how the club is run.

PS. I agree with David, in that if this deal goes through (and I might yet vote for it) and the Society no longer has majority shareholding, I will no longer feel the need to continue my subscription. In my opinion, if you give away majority shareholding the purpose of the Society no longer exists and you may as well wind it up. Not sure if the Board or investors hace considered that.......

100% this.

🤣. COYW!!!

It really comes down to the criticism and how it's delivered. I doubt that Bair would have any issue with anyone calling into question his record before he arrived at Motherwell or people questioning our signing him based on that record. If we're honest, it was absolutely honking. He'll likely be the first to admit that. He's not an idiot. He'll know his record wasn't great. Another key aspect is being critical of the player's performance and his record without getting personal. But those same fans who were critical of him are now giving him his due credit, so it works both ways, doesn't it? Social media is a cesspool anyway, and any player who reacts to that really needs to sort themselves out. Once we step into the stadium, all that criticism should go out the window. It's at that point we support the team and the manager. I don't think booing or hurling abuse from the stands is acceptable.

Still think Bairs worth more keeping him even if it ends up a January deal. He's got pace and composure and is intelligent player. We wouldn't get 4 or 5 players. More like 3. But even then it may be guys like Wilkinson and Ollie Shaw.

Posher than Slats?

Had Hynd, both Whitefords and Morton's Frank Welsh as PE teachers, bizarrely I got on really well with Hynd, even more bizarre though was becoming good friends with Alan Faulds from pre match pints in the Cooper

Youre right could actually be 2.5k a month. I'll need to look it up but think thats more likely. Pretty sure it is around 2.5k a month Bair is on. Don't ask me why I said a week.

Would actually say Theo Bair is currently the most inform player in the UK

So they’d be buying a future 183 goals. Cough up the cash Bristol !!

Someone said that on Friday over on P&B. Whether Cowan has heard that from the same source or he's just lifted it from the P&B Forum, who knows.

Clarke will probably pick some jobber from English leagues one.

By the same token we would be in a better position if we had not incurred losses of over £3m in the past two accounting years. Those losses are clearly not of concern to some. How long can we sustain losses of that nature? And, Yes, we would still have had to spend a fortune on the East Stand and Pitch even if that previous income had not been available. Possibly funded by the Well Society leaving us even more exposed. Those upgrades were almost mandatory for Safety Certificate reasons and to avoid further SPFL sanctions because of the pitch. And Fir Park will continue to eat up funds as repairs are ongoing. And, if investment had been secured earlier, we could perhaps have also had funds to improve the playing squad rather than bringing in the low cost players you have openly stated are not good enough. There is scope for outside Investment, the Society and player sales. In fact proper application of any Investment could actually result in more profitable youth development, increased player sales and improved performance on the pitch.

Because McMahon and Weir don't like the look of the new Society board.

For me this is the vital ingredient. I think everybody acknowledges that just like everybody else we are a selling Club. And there is nothing wrong with that. But unless the club is at the same time generating profits and/or has a constant stream of quality youth coming through, then the product on the pitch inevitably decreases. A trend we have seen for a good few seasons as income has been utilised for a wide range of infrastructure improvements rather than maintaining player quality. Not having a dig at the Directors here as most Clubs are experiencing similar decline. To a degree that has hidden our own issues. What the Board statement actually said before all this debate started was that to CONTINUE TO OPERATE AT THE CURRENT LEVEL some form of outside investment is required. If we are prepared to risk a drop in the level we play at, then we can continue as is. So why can't we strive to have a balance that incorporates outside investment on acceptable terms plus income from player sales plus a growing Well Society? Especially if that additional investment is used in part to fund a stronger and more productive youth programme. Then any on field performance above the level budgeted for results in growth and does not mean we just stand still at best. Also the big issue with bringing in value through player sales is that players will often deliberately let contracts run out. And there is nothing the Club can do about it. Take Lennon Miller. Thankfully he has extended and we all expect him to go for Turnbull like monies. But what if next January Motherwell are offered half of what they think he is worth. Do they turn the offer down or reluctantly accept it because we need the money? If they opt not do sell, could that upset the player in which case he might decide to run down his contract in the hope of a big sign on fee from a top club in due course? That situation is happening throughout the football world. My point is that overly relying on player sales is risky. And if those potential sales are the only realistic way of generating income then that risk is greatly increased. And sorry, but saying we have broken even over the past seven, ten or twenty years is meaningless. Turnbull and two cup finals in a season are history. What matters is how finances are working out in the present.

Ryan Jack and Halliday would be a decent midfield in wheelchair fitba. The club have put out a Liam Kelly highlights video... an ominous sign.

It's not precarious if the club is run correctly. We budget for finishing 10th and a few cup games, and anything else above & beyond that goes into the "rainy day" fund. Be it player sales, extended cup runs, top six finishes, whatever. For example, we're sitting 8th at the moment, and let's say that finishing in 8th means getting £1.375 million instead of the £1.250 million the team finishing 10th gets. That's an extra hundred grand or so that we didn't account for, so it's a little bonus.

Can only repeat what everyone else has said. Vale up top with Bair. He is a striker so why is SK playing him deeper. Gent fires in low crosses all the time but never any takers. Or is it worth starting Moses in central role and give him say 55 mins?

This

Exactly its a precarious operating model. We need more regular definite funds not funds that are rely on the exception rather than the rule. The WS need to tell us how they will achieve that.

your 'just do that' reminds me of the best tactics I ever know as a Well fan. Get the ball to Cooper Get the ball to Faddy Get the ball to Turnbull Just do that - happy days.

Yep, I agree. I daren't criticise anyone who gives their time to the cause either, but as a paying member, I am happy to question/criticise the Society as an entity. I'm looking forward to whatever proposals come forward, from all parties, as I'm not one to make up my mind without a full view of all the detail.

If it's left to the Well Society to find additional investment, where would that come from, given the idea any investor is not going to want full control is laughable, in your opinion? Or do you want them to find thousands of new members willing to donate money on a regular basis?

I'm in the well society and it's all well and good but we are going to be standing still , at best,probably going backwards if we don't get some form of investment ...it's for the fans to decide at some point...if they are aware of the pros and cons ,

What a memory jerker that is. Dropped my mum and sister off in the city centre - dad in his wisdom decided we would take in the game. First turnstyle he came too was the main stand at the city centre end of the ground. Got in and were surrounded by priests (hundreds of them). My dad's advice? sit on your hands and we both managed it until Pettigrew's winner - he was first out his seat followed quickly by me. Thankfully we got out without too much trouble. The look on their faces as we celebrated was a joy to behold.

Turns out a professional football manager knew more about coaching players than random punters on a message board.