dennyc

So the monies paid out do not show as an expense on the Profit and Loss Account for the year then?

Just been reading through this thread properly for the first time. Here’s a suggestion. Incurring a loss at the same time as repaying outstanding debts of £1m seems a bit weird but maybe the loss of £436k was effectively on paper only, to ensure no tax liability and produce a loss which could be offset against future or past profits. If we had repaid the debt AFTER the tax year we would have been in the position of having to pay tax on a profit of around £500k in the tax year.. Roughly about £100k. By being tax clever and repaying the debt before the end of the tax year, I’m guessing the Club have saved a decent amount both now and in the future. Hardly on the scale of Amazon or Starbucks , but all totally legal. I’m not an Accountant so that might all be nonsense. But it makes sense to me. Many profitable Business find ways to reduce profits and therefore tax liability. Good practice. And the fact The Board do not seem at all bothered by the results might speak volumes. It also gives our Manager good reason to continue pleading poverty and to promote the need for Well Society subscriptions to keep rolling in.

Not just Grimshaw. It’s the exact same on the other side. Must be team orders

A certain Wullie P from 1973. Junior football match against England at Nuneaton. England 1 Scotland 5. Our man scored two. Played for East Kilbride at the time

Tempting fate but after a while we have learned how to play on that Accies pitch and as a result have had some pretty good results there of late. Compare that to Livingston where game after game we persist in sticking to our usual style. Passing the ball back and forth across the back, collecting in midfield and trying to hold off/sidestep men before playing a searching pass. Contrast that to how Livingston play on their own pitch. They get the ball into the final third as quickly as possible, usually one touch, and only try to play passing football when they are in that area. Even if there was nobody to pass to, I lost count of the number of times they just punted the ball upfield into our full back areas and then pressed us into overplaying and usually giving away possession. Dykes may be an excellent player, but the rest are a bunch of journeymen who play to instructions ...and do it well. Apart from Gillespie the performance yesterday was shocking and disheartening. I take it the game plan was set out for them so Robinson and Lasley must take their share of the blame. Why are we unable or unwilling to adapt our style to suit that pitch? Time after time it’s the same story. Even when we get a fortunate result like the start of this season. I don’t buy that we don’t have the players for a more suitable approach. Man for man we have better players than Livingston, but not on yesterday’s showing. Surely professional footballers of supposed good quality are capable of adapting to conditions, if they are instructed to. Interestingly Livingston appear able to play a more passing game when playing away from home on a grass pitch. So they are able to adapt. I don’t think James Scott would have made much difference and would have been isolated in the same way as Long, eventually playing deeper and deeper. Sad to see him go though. That said we might not have been treated to the sight of Bevis Mugabi doing his very best impression of a left winger/ centre forward. Credit to him for effort, he certainly gave it his all. And having suffered through both games, YES, yesterday was far worse and more embarrassing than the defeat to Accies.

If players stay with us (for comparatively low wages) there is no certainty their decent form will continue and that life changing offers will come in down the line. They could even find themselves far from guaranteed a starting position and eventually released. There is always the possibility of injury ruling out further opportunities. Injured long term on £5/8k per week is better than being injured long term on £1k per week. David Turnbull for instance may come to regret not moving on instead of extending his contract. Hopefully he fully recovers and gets the transfer his ability and loyalty merits. Securing a team with a respected coaching set up, on higher wages, with a two or three year guarantee is a no brainier. It’s what every youngster is looking to achieve. And it shows ambition and self belief. Unless for personal reasons there is a reason for staying at Motherwell it’s a no brainier. Football is a short career and players need to take opportunities when and if they present themselves. As fans it’s easy for us to talk about youngsters needing to stay for development reasons/first team football. But I’m pretty sure Clubs other than Motherwell can just as readily provide that progression. And of course Motherwell’s Business Plan requires transfer income to balance the books. I suspect they are more than content with the rewards of Hastie moving on. And with the monies received when youth players like McKinstrey opt out before graduating to our first team.

Younger brother. Rangers been after him for some time. Nothing we can do to keep him

According to MFC the Hastie payment was in MFC Bank Account by the end of May, paid in full. Discussions between the Clubs were amicable and went well. I believe they went that well that an add-on % was also agreed. If it had gone to Tribunal because the Clubs could not agree, then their would have been no such add-on . We did ok out of that move. And Rangers played it straight.

Great news re Carson. Would think that means Gillespie will make the move he has earned. Kyle Semple ( U16 but plays U18) off to Rangers as I was told would happen. 5 figure fee but not sure of exact amount. Another outstanding youngster picked off by a bigger Club. Frustrating. But it’s what we do.

Sadly it’s not about whether the outgoing players make a success of it or not. In football terms Motherwell pay a pittance. It’s a short career. Any player offered the chance to earn upwards of £5k a week for say 3 years would be mental not to take up such an offer. I’m sure in the real world we would all jump at the chance. Just calculate how much that equates to. Strange also how nobody really said anything negative about McKinstrey moving to Leeds, no doubt for much much more than Motherwell were prepared to pay ....even if clearly less than Hastie etc secured. Yet the likes of Hastie, Henegan, Hall and possibly Scott are criticised for taking a similar route. Sometimes it seems to be more about who they join and how they left, rather than the fact they left. Erwin is mentioned as one who “ clearly got it all wrong”. I’m not sure he would agree with that. His Bank balance certainly should not. Leeds have a well regarded set up which is praised for its youth development and the quality of coaching. If Erwin failed there despite all their expertise, who can say he would have definitely fared better by staying with Motherwell, a Club where the coaching Staff he worked with has changed dramatically and funds are tight. He could well have joined a long list of unfulfilled potential by staying, but at least he had a go and helped his Bank balance at the same time. And how much less is he likely to be earning at County now than he would be if he had stayed with us? It’s not lack of ambition or lack of confidence as someone on here suggested. It’s the exact opposite, and common sense. As a Club that appears to still be operating at a loss in the absence of regular, substantial transfer income....per the recent Accounts and the constant reminders that “Well Society Subs are required to ensure the viability of the Club”.......is anyone in any doubt we will jump at any decent offer for any player? In short it suits Motherwell FC and the player for cash to change hands. Get used to it. From youth level right through to the first team.

AND at winding up the Hearts players

Don't know about players coming in but look out for another highly rated youngster moving on to pastures new. Kyle Semple... younger brother of Jamie and rated by many as the better prospect of the two... is drawing serious interest from Rangers, Brighton and Leicester. Not the first time Rangers have tried to lure him. He'll only turn 16 in February so not a lot we can do if he opts to leave like McKinstry. Fortunately he's been with us for some time so we should receive a decent development fee.

And was his much lauded innovative scouting scheme not replaced by the bloodhound that is Martin Foyle? He did bale us out of the financial mess created by Boyle and Dempster though so let’s be appreciative of that. But everything he touched did not turn to gold.

I thought that Motherwell confirmed Rose, Bowman, Mclean, Johnson and possibly Bigi were allowed to go for free.....the financial saving being their wages. McAlear and and McKinstry Development Fees mutually agreed with English clubs but Cadden's fee in dispute and looking like zero. Hastie was the only one where no information whatsoever was volunteered, perhaps as part of an nondisclosure agreement with Rangers?

BBC comments thread about Stephen Robinson makes mention of a fee of £350k from Rangers for Hastie. First I have heard of that although by now it should be all done and dusted or headed to a Tribunal. Any body know if that fee is correct? Might be a factor in us clearing former owners' debt which seemed a wee bit out of the blue. Comment on BBC site is not from a name I have seen on Steelmen.