dennyc

We have incurred losses over the past two years….please correct me if I am mistaken….and are projected for another loss in the next set of Accounts. How long can the WS and MFC continue to absorb those losses? Latest projections are that in a poor season there is a £750k shortfall. How many David Turnbull’s are we likely to unearth? How much will an ageing Fir Park cost us in the next few years? The only measure I have to work on is that from quoted figures the Society has to date raised a net sum of £1.7m from fans. Not sure what is meant by ‘net’. Bank balance is projected to be 750k at year end so by my very basic calculation that is £1m of Society funds gone, either by way of donations or specific project requests from MFC. And only 1 season of shortfall available if required. So is the crux of the matter simply that we accept additional external funding to cover our £6m a year costs (and rising) at Premiership level or we refuse that external funding and accept we fall to whatever level will mean we balance the books? Basic as that. I appreciate and think it is only right that the WS are given the chance to provide their own funding proposals. But how on earth are they going to raise the funds required year on year? Possibly £750k a year and rising. It seems like a huge ask to me. And before anybody wades in. I am not suggesting we are going bust. But we need to decide at what level we wish to compete. And what is feasible in respect of the Society.

May I suggest that the initial question should actually carry three options. Not everyone is a definite no or yes at present. That should be reflected. I for one will only decide when I see the detailed proposal and have had a chance to ask questions. eg. 1. No 2. Yes 3. Undecided but open to change if the terms are suitable and safeguard MFC. That would possibly give the Club Board some more negotiating power if the majority were open to change, but not at any cost. If it is a majority no, then end of. Discussion now is good. But we are all speculating regards what will be proposed. Unless we have a Corporate Lawyer in our ranks, then how much of what we assume is actually correct? Somebody mentioned St Johnstone. What they may or may not do ground wise is no indicator of what Motherwell may or may not do. Each Club needs to do what is in their own best interests. Based on their own circumstances. . But if St J are sitting on prime development land which they can sell for a fortune, move to a new ground and still have substantial funds left in the kitty to secure their future, then lucky them. On the 51% red line that folk mention, I get that being the majority shareholder carries power and enables ‘ fan owned’ bragging rights. But a simple (amateurish) internet search reveals Companies often have clauses build in to their Corporate Agreement that permit a Shareholding of only 26% or so to veto certain proposals. It might even be an automatic right? Veto rights it seems can be drawn up to cover almost anything. Like the sale of Fir Park for instance. So a 51% Majority does not grant freedom to do what you like. I could vote for a % reduction if I was convinced MFC was protected against asset stripping and such. Whether any investor would agree to such veto powers is for those whose task it is to protect the Club to investigate. In essence I understand there are terms that can be drawn up to protect against much, if not all, of the concerns that folk will rightly have. But I am no expert so will happily leave that to the Professionals to deal with. Also, it was clearly stated that potential investors were not looking to take a Charge over Fir Park or have the Club provide Guarantees which would put Club assets at risk. That for me is huge and suggests a long term involvement rather than an effort to make a quick buck. My request to MFC and the WS is that when more details are known and we are asked to give our input, then please provide straight answers to straight questions. If the answer is not known, then say so.

Thanks Jay. I am actually encouraged by what you have just said. I was extremely pissed off when Les had the operating model changed so Club access to Society funds was much simpler. From memory (correct me if wrong) that adjustment was made without referral to Society members and to my mind should never have been allowed. But he held all the cards I guess. Can I take it from your comments that any funding the Society provides is no longer on a Loan basis? Getting ahead of myself, but moving forward that might be something to consider. To protect fan contributions and continue to grow the emergency funds.

Thanks Jay. I bought into the WS at the outset on the basis that any funds ingathered were for emergency use only and would be provided to the Club on a short term loan basis. They would not be used for day to day funding. A lender of last resort when required. The intention being that all funds would be protected, grow and be available for rebuild if the ultimate disaster happened. Not sure that is how it operates currently but it is a model that might suit a fair few fans if/when things change.

Thanks again for placing some figures out there. helps us understand the overall situation. Much appreciated.

Thanks StAndrew's7. A much needed update of where we are currently at. Lots to digest and ponder. Initially my thoughts are in line with a good few in that the status quo is not really a long term option. So one way or another things will change whilst at the same time providing required investment. Couple of points struck me. 1. If I understand correctly, no investment would be secured by charges over Club assets such as Fir Park or Guarantees that would put the existence of MFC at increased risk. For me that stipulation is essential in any Agreement that is entered into. To a degree that protects from an investor simply pulling the plug, taking priority in the realisation of Assets and walking away with no loss incurred. They would basically be in the same boat as Shareholders although perhaps on a Preferred basis? So less likely to walk away. For that reason I understand why a major new investor would want a controlling interest. 2. It was news to me, but makes perfect sense, that the Club has to demonstrate to Auditors and the Football Authorities that it has sufficient funding to cover the following 18 month period. Any Club folding mid season would raise all sorts of problems fixture wise. I assume that has been the case for some time and thankfully has not been an issue for us. looking to the future and without knowing how much is required or what the present Bank balance is, I wonder if the Society could raise sufficient funds at short notice to demonstrate that safeguard, and to repeat that exercise on a regular basis if need be. From what we have heard for some time, finances are tight and indicators on and off the field support that position. The Club Board have openly accepted that further investment is required if we are to continue at our current level and are doing their best to resolve matters, whilst respecting the ethos of the Well Society. I accept that Communication might have been better but I would think that there are confidentiality issues that must be respected, particularly during ongoing discussions. In truth I am surprised that we were told as much as we were last night. It is good news though that parties are seriously interested enough to enter into discussions. I was not sure that would be the case. One question I do have. If the WS members voted to accept a minority shareholding, would the WS continue to ingather funds and would those funds be protected and separate from Club finances? Available only as emergency fund as I believe was the original intention way back then. Not for day to day outgoings.

By “giving it a good go” my view was that within the restrictions in which we exist….fairly small active fan base, the financial set up of the Premiership, the lure of the OF and such….. it was always going to be a big ask to make our fan ownership a success in the Premiership. A worthy aspiration though. i think everybody involved from day one has attempted to tweak and improve how we operate. And good on them for recognising that need. New approaches have been tried and the current WS is not the model that was unveiled at the Launch. As examples. Where is the local Corporate buy in? It was identified early on that individual fan membership would not in itself be sufficient but even after all these years I wonder if any Businesses have taken out corporate membership? We heard nothing after those initial meetings. Does that option still exist? I have asked but without reply. The aim was also to go forward with no Bank debt whatsoever and within a few years we would be operating within Budget. With Society funds (protected) available for short term finance ( short term loans if you like)or heaven forbid to provide start up Capital were MFC to go under. Recession and CoVid were unforeseen barriers of course. My gut feeling is that those in charge recognise that our model is not sustainable at our current level, have done what they can, but feel that change is required if we are not to decline further. By that I mean in status. The recent plea for investment only served to convince me of that. Perhaps they have run out of ideas for generating finance at the same time as carrying forward the ethos of the Well Society. I am not convinced the two are compatible. I hope and pray I am totally wrong and that our Board …or new Board if it comes to that…identify a way forward that suits us all, reduces risk and maintains us as a top level Club. For me continued Fan Ownership would be nice but is not the most important criteria. Somebody mentioned the word Romantic. Perhaps it will come down to a choice between that and Reality. Finally, it is fantastic to read that so many of us love our Club. That certainly comes through even though we may have differing opinions about the way forward.

From day one I bought into the fan owned set up and signed up right away. The positivity around the Club was fantastic and it was brilliant soaking up all the fine words that our wee Community Club attracted. Even as the fan model was adapted over time, that enthusiasm continued for a while. The community aspect still gives me a buzz. So I understand why folk want to persist with the current structure. However, the reality is that for financial reasons we have been in decline for a good few years with results falling away and the quality on the pitch lessening season upon season. No amount of "it was planned for" or "exceptional expenditure"will convince me that the losses incurred in recent times are not worrying signs. Simply put, a fan base of 4000 cannot alone fund a Club at the level we all aspire to. It has already been highlighted how the set up in Scotland does nothing to assist our income flow. Any temporary slow down in that decline has been due to a few decent cup runs coupled with player sales, particularly of players developed through our youth development programme. My worry is that as player quality continues to reduce and youth development continues to stall, the likelihood of such income reduces considerably and that downward spiral will persist. I'm not saying mistakes hastening our current situation have not been made. We all have our views regards current and former Board members, Managers, player recruitment etc etc. But stepping back and looking at the bigger picture I am not convinced that anybody could have brought about a different position to where we are at as of now. Money talks. So looking forward? As I see it we can stick with the current "feel good" model until such time as we find a league position that matches our current funding. And I don't think that will be at Premiership level looking to the rate of our decline and the investment I see other Cubs attracting. I do appreciate and accept that some fans would choose that option. Or we can move on from the fan owned majority holding if need be in an attempt to attract sufficient outside investment to maintain our Premiership status. Either option carries it's own risk and there will be differing views expressed by the fans. Existing fans will likely follow our Club no matter what level we are at, but what of future generations? It is tough enough attracting new blood but I wonder how much tougher that would be if we were playing the likes of Annan every week. For me, we gave the fan owned thing a good try. But it is not working and sadly it is time to look at other options. Or Taylor Swift and her boyfriend might come to our rescue just for the hell of it.

Any comment about the free kick that Davor donated to Hearts? I suspect without that free kick we may well have gotten the draw as Hearts were running out of ideas. Also the Miller miss was crucial. And Kelly did well.

Only our deluded lords and masters could paint the recent VAR appraisal as positive. "Adding value and accuracy". Farcical. They are treating the fans like fools. I, too, welcomed it but now just wish it gone. Adding to that the response to the challenge by the rebel six, and it is so obvious the Authorities are circling the wagons. In any other industry they would have been binned long ago for incompetence. But nothing changes

Nobody in their right mind would suggest that victories are not better than draws. Or that draws are not better than defeats for that matter. Just seems that some fans have lost sight of recent progress. The cup exit being a huge blow. But I agree we could be doing better this season and recruitment needs looking at. I share your annoyance about the " Finding our Level " party line. Sadly I fear that communication will continue until our structure and financial situation change for the better. Hopefully our new Leadership, when and if they are in place, can conjure up some solutions and provide us with some hope..

Statistics can be quoted to suit any argument though, depending upon how selective you care to be. What you say result wise is accurate but it is also true to say we have only lost two league games in eleven with one of those losses being to Rangers. And unbeaten in five with two commanding home victories and lots of goals scored. So since end November only one league loss (Ross County away) that was extremely disappointing. So would you acknowledge that recent league results actually indicate an overall improvement? The only stat that really matters for now is our League position and that has improved considerably over those eleven games. So actually two examples...results and league position... that suggest Kettlewell and his team are performing much better now than they were using the stats you selected. Am I happy with our League position and enjoying this season? Definitely not! Am I angry at losing to Morton and frustrated by some of the team selections that Kettlewell puts on the pitch? Definitely yes! But I think overall and taking into account those recent improvements that it would be foolhardy to replace Kettlewell at this time. The time to assess his position is at season end.

It is a valid suggestion that Kettlewell's record over the past 20 games or so brings his suitability as our Manager into question. I don't really think anybody can argue with that and the debate on here has been robust. Whether for or against his retention. Setting aside contributing factors such as finance, injuries etc etc. But if those statistics are going to be the stick to beat him with then there are more recent statistics that point in another direction. Going on the basis that the current tables and form guide on the BBC site are accurate. If they are inaccurate then please dive in. Over the past 5 League games we have secured 9 points and are unbeaten. Only Celtic, Rangers and Hearts have a better record. Livi and County have amassed 1 point each, S J 5 points. More surprising perhaps is that Hibs have only gained 2 points and Aberdeen 3 over that same period. So in effect some folk want to ditch Kettlewell when we are performing better in the League than the vast majority of our rivals, in particular those sitting below us in the table. That makes no sense. In fact the stats suggest a corner has been turned. Then again those stats can change very quickly although even if we lose tomorrow we will still have a better 5 game record than 6 other teams, including Aberdeen. The time to make the decision is at season end. The time to change Manager is well gone for now. A change now would only add to the risk of relegation and I have yet to read of any realistic replacement that is available or would want the job. When that question is asked all we get is the cop out "That's not my job" Of course statistics can be contrived to suit any argument. Should we look at the last 20 games, 40 games even, or 10 games, 5 games? Each will provide a different picture. All that really matters is our final league position and ultimately that will be the deciding factor. But the demands will continue. It appears to have become personal for some, rather than logical.

No problem. I have no interest in him either other than he manages a lower league team that just turfed us out of the Scottish Cup. He deserves credit for that. I was not suggesting he was a better Manager than Kettlewell or should replace him, as another poster appears to think. From what you have posted I think we are on the same page re Kettlewell ........and Kelly for that matter.

Maybe he will be next man up. The meltdown would be magnificent. Maybe worth it just for that. On a serious note, Ian Murray was a suggestion of a good few at one time. And maybe still is. Imrie is currently performing better than him and they could well meet in the playoffs. On a less serious note, imagine if we were then to play Morton for our Premiership survival!

It is quite a conundrum. Kelly is making too many mistakes and his confidence looks shot. So a rest might be the answer. He is a far better goalkeeper than he is currently showing. It certainly would happen if he were an outfielder. On the other hand, Oxborough did not inspire confidence with his League Cup outings, especially against Queen of the South. Then again he has had no opportunity to demonstrate whether he has improved since those two appearances. SK and the coaches see them both in training. If Oxborough plays I don't think his performance will decide the game. If Kelly plays, his performance may well decide the game.....one way or another. If we could only sort out our central defence and unearth wing backs that could defend the goalkeeper situation would not be so critical. It really is a tough one.

I'll make it even simpler then. Imrie is doing a decent job. Address that fact. You have not come anywhere close to that. I never mentioned Kettlewell. You did.

To make it simple for you. Your feelings towards Imrie are blinding you to the fact that he is doing a decent job with limited resources. As the facts you are keen to tell folk to check confirm. I think my original post made that perfectly clear. Perhaps you would like to address those facts....or deny them if you like.

Talking of an angry man! Maybe you should check your facts. Like him or loathe him, Imrie's record at Morton is decent. Since taking charge in late 2021 he led them clear of probable relegation and then missed the play offs last season on goal difference. Currently in a play off position on a good unbeaten run. Numerous Manager of the Month awards and a win % in excess of 40. In a League where his budget is way below the majority of his opposition. And the team he coaches has just deservedly beaten a team from the Division above. As I said previously, credit where credit's due.

Was he not in charge of Morton when Donnelly scored a late extra time winner at Fir Park to avoid a penalty shoot out? They put up a decent showing that game as well although we did waste lots of chances and dominate possession.

Since 1966 for me and I know exactly how you feel. The issues within our Club run a lot deeper than whoever happens to be Manager. My main concern is I don't see anything encouraging me to believe things will improve any time soon. Any enjoyment I get is short term as the next disappointment/crisis is just around the corner. It is a chore to go to some games now and purchasing a Season Ticket fells more like a duty. But you might be right, it could be just an age thing😄. The only comfort I take is that fans of other Clubs are experiencing similar issues. Why should that be the case? Perhaps despite ever improving facilities, sport science etc. etc., due to financial constraints and poor governance of the game, the standard we are witnessing is falling season upon season and consideration for fans is a thing of the past.

Agree with this. Personally I think the last half hour v County was a missed opportunity. Then again, if SK had made numerous substitutions on the hour and County had fought back, he would have been slaughtered for throwing away three precious points. Also, as much as some fans have an OTT dislike of Imrie, perhaps he is turning out to be a very good Manager and an astute tactician. Credit where credit's due. He did us over.

Forget the bus driver. He took the rest to the game so that rules him out. And he took them home when they should have been made to walk back.

Well said. May I add to your list those that go into hiding when the team put in a good performance or certain players perform well. Or alternatively go into denial when one of the chosen few performs badly. The days after the County game being a standout example. Yes, of course they are entitled to their opinion. But those opinions might actually carry a bit more credence if they were more balanced, less obsessive and more constructive. I sometimes wonder if they actually sit there desperate for us to get a hiding so they can say "Told you so. He is shite" Every player has good and bad days. Every Manager has good and bad days. But you would think that was not the case if you listened to a few on here. Thankfully they are in the minority. Noisy but fairly few in number.

Not a scam at all. All legal and well found by St Mirren The fact it riles you does not make it wrong. Maybe our Board need to be a wee bit more creative. Maybe they do have such an arrangement with local Charities?