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.

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.

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.

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!

AHHHHH HAAAAAAAAAAAA

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.

In an ideal world neither side of the OF would win the title, but the seethe from the Rangers fans this week will be as funny as it is epic.

Even McGinn knows the team are dog shit. I think they are the worst bunch of players we have had in a long time but there's still zero chance they are getting relegated now.

My education was also very much delivered in the 1975 Airdrie cup semi. I still have the scarf I bought for that game in case I ever forget.

Two games in there which remind me why I hate Rangers so much, 2-0 up in both and cheated, once by their scummy fans and the other by the officials. Plus (although my memory is a bit hazy on this), the Hibs game where we almost got to Europe for the first time, the one where Willie P lobbed the keeper from 20 yards, I think it finished 3-3 and we finished just behind them in the league.

That seems really high as I would imagine our top earners would be nearer that, ie. SOD, Slattery, Kelly But again I am just guessing, I don't know any inside info

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

Theo will be 25 at the start of next season and only about a third of the way through his career. According to transfer market website his value is €750k (roughly £646k). Salary sport have his salary at £31200 - I’m assuming this is without bonuses. So if they are to be believed £750k isn’t that bad a deal and would mean that for an outlay of probably £50k max, the club would get a return in the region of £700k. Now I’m not saying we sell him but from a financial point of view £750k doesn’t look that bad. Personally, like most of us I’d rather we offered and he accepted a new contract on better terms and continued to develop/improve with the view to selling him for more next summer but to a certain extent that would be a gamble and I could understand selling him if he doesn’t want an extension or if SK and his staff think he can be replaced and have someone lined up. No point in hanging on until the transfer window is about to close and then scrambling about.

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

We can keep him till next summer, if his agent has a sniff of a better deal for him elsewhere he wont sign an extension and let his contract run down and we get feck all. So if that happens the club will say yes take the money on offer and say thanks Theo best of luck with your career.

We need to remember he is only on a 2yr contract. I am not looking to sell him but if we get a good offer be wise to cash in. Reminds me of Connor Sammon at Killie, had 1 good season, derby paid £2 million and he done her haw afterwards

Indeed. I'd also be happier if he played a bit closer to Bair...

On plus side we would get money as uefa pay clubs if your player is in squad..

Given Clark’s obsession with player’s he’s worked with SOD’s the man - hope he’s not booked his holidays yet

Now there’s two of the bogeymen under steelboys bed, which with the amount of bogeymen he sees must either be a very big bed or very crowded under there.

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

Something like : top 2 get champions league, cup winners get Europa, third and 4th place gets Conference league, if 1st-4th win the cup then 5th gets conference league.

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.

Couldn't afford his wages and too many injuries in recent years

This

The society are supposed to be putting together a funding proposal as far as I'm aware.

As the majority shareholders the WS members having the final say on any major decision taken by the club over the years should have been normal practice. But from what the members have said including yourself the consultation / communication etc has been zero, so as I said is there any confidence that this approach will change as it needs to?

Certainly not been our strongest squad in recent years but one thing that can't be faulted is the team spirit and determination. Look at the amount of injury time goals we have scored to rescue points. Yes I know it's only draws but they have kept battling and those points have been crucial. With regards to signing players I hope Kettlewell isn't daft enough to give Obika another year. Now that has been a poor signing (apart from goal at Parkhead)

The 2-4 defeat we were terrible but the other two games 3-3 and 0-1 we didn’t have much luck with the officiating calls. So I expect it to be close again and perhaps a wee bit of good luck for us to see us getting 3 points.

I don't think the budget is the problem. This season we had Lamie, McGinley, Maguire, Tierney, Butcher, Obika, Wilkinson, Shaw, Elliot, Souare, Mahon and Halliday contributing basically nothing. Our top earning players like Kelly, O'Donnell and McGinn kept two clean sheets all season. Slattery is another top earner who contributed nothing after the first international break. Nicholson is unfit and other than a flurry against Livi away added nothing. Spittal will be away and it looks like Mugabi as well. Tierney is the only one of those players under contract for next season. We probably have the biggest scope for a squad overhaul we've ever had this summer. If as rumoured we are going to sign Halliday despite the overwhelming evidence that his legs are gone then it's a bad omen that Kettlewell hasn't learned his lesson from Obika. The budget available isn't in question for next season but we need the manager to prove he can bring in permanent signings who can play 30-40 games at a consistent level. Bair and Davor are the only two proper signings he's made who have had a positive impact and even then they are nowhere near consistent as well being technically limited.

I don't think it is fine. McMahon is financing and producing videos promoting giving up fan ownership but is somehow still allowed to lead negotiations on behalf of the shareholders. It's a clear conflict of interest.

Let's hope he (finally) scores the goal required to secure our safety.

The chat I've heard is he's happy to stay and has a deal essentially agreed but not until he knows we're staying in the Premiership.

George Cumming was also my Geography teacher at Earnock. Not a fan of the OF or their supporters.

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/04/16/500-and-not-out/ New contract announcement soon?

Let's just say he wouldn't have got away with it these days! Speaking of things you wouldn't get away with these days, did you ever have Mr Armstrong for maths?