wunderwell
-
Posts
481 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by wunderwell
-
-
21 hours ago, David said:
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.
This budget does not match the recent P and L's
I suspect now that we are setting a proper budget and Kettlewell has less for the playing squad. -
32 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:
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 seems is 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.
I agree, if it's truly fan ownership and the Well Society has controlling interest. (Which is now ceased at Companies House, anyone else notice that?)
Then we should appoint the board. Not 2/5 board members.
The fan ownership simply isn't real. It's a funding mechanism for the club with no real say.-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, steelboy said:
Over the 7 years of fan ownership we have an overall profit of £2 million.
Compared to most other clubs we are doing extremely well. I'm not going to check but we won't be far off breaking even over the past 20 years since we came out of administration.
Two cup finals and the sale of David Turnbull to thank.
Neither of those events look likely soon unless they can convince Lennon to sign an extended contract. -
7 hours ago, steelboy said:
There have already been 45 or so UK clubs bought by Americans. There aren't many left to buy and we attractive because (1) we run at a profit (2) have no debt other than to the Well Society who will never call it in (3) McMahon has obviously told them that the Well Society members are stupid enough to effectively hand the club for free.
From what I have heard they intend to make a documentary series as part of an expansion of their Hollywood business.
But 1. We don't run at a profit.
-
7 hours ago, steelboy said:
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.
We've lost 2.65 million in the last 2 accounting periods. With a third mill loss to come.
-
On 4/13/2024 at 12:27 PM, steelboy said:
I disagree.
I think our turnover, playing budget, stadium investment and net profit during fan ownership have been impressive.
We've blown all the money we made since the accounts posted 2021.
That's the boards fault though not the society's
-
1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said:
I agree with most of that. Not convinced by Davor though, but thats balanced by Paton, who has done a job. To be fair, he's brought in some decent loan signings: Vale, Gent, Spencer, and Biereth, although he got his fingers burnt with the latter two.
Halliday? I just don't know,. I wasn't as concerned as many when he first signed but he hasn't really worked out. Now is that down to lack of fitness or his legs going? Maybe a bit of both. I just hope SK knows. Midfield is an area we definitely need to strengthen for next season.
Leaving out those successful loan signings that have played for large parts of the season suits the Steelboy agenda.
Those players still had to be sourced and recruited even though they are not permanent signings.
There is a lot of duff at the club as there is across the whole of the SPL.If Steelboy is saying operating with quality not quantity then it is definitely the right way to go. 20 man squad with the youngsters being chucked in when the inevitable injuries come in.
-
7 minutes ago, wellgirl said:
I got pretty much rinsed for suggesting that Kelly was the highest paid player we have 😂. I agree but I'll be sorry to see him go if he does go all the same
He is one of our top paid players.
-
2 minutes ago, sailor_h said:
Get Spittal to f**k! Hasn’t played since he signed for Hearts.
He's actually been atrocious. All he's done is pass "clever balls" direct to the opposition.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, santheman said:
A new website giving all that kind of info is near completion according to the WS along with new ideas on fundraising.
As I said earlier the new board are starting to make their presence felt.
Excellent stuff that be a real good addition
-
13 hours ago, santheman said:
They might have had in the past and rightly so but with the election of the new WS board members, what I know of them and what I've heard so far convinces me that we've now got good people on board and they have finally got their act together. One of the board members Jay has posted several insights on P&B to what has been happening behind the scenes so well worth a look. They're actual facts straight from the horses mouth and not some of the pish being spouted on here by a certain person.
All the rumours and conspiracy theories being banded about on here are just that, and NOTHING will happen without the agreement of the WS members who will all be privy to what final offer (if any) is on the table before being asked to vote on whether to accept it or not.
I doubt anything that doesn't guarantee the WS retaining 51% would succeed unless it was something absolutely spectacular akin to a Euromillions win.
I for one would laugh the "rumoured" 1.5m offer for 51% out of the park and so would anyone else in their right mind.
I sent in some comments that I've been saying for a long time. To which I got I got a reply asking about volunteer work. So first of all through business and 3 kids etc, I have no time for that. I would like the WS to address the points I have raised though.
Sending out a weekly newsletter is far from good enough in 2024.
https://www.foundationofhearts.org/
Cracking site with login facilities and we should be at the same level as this irrespective of supporters numbers.
Why do we not have the same or aim towards the same? Could we not appeal to the support perhaps we have some cracking web developers that could take this on?
To generate more monies to the WS you just can't stand outside with a bucket and send a weekly mailchimp.
-
Got to laugh. People want the manager to quit at half time.
Beat Rangers at Ibrox, what a few weeks ago?
Eighth in the league, budget lowered, safe as houses soon.
God help us if were losing 1-0 at half time against Hibs on Saturday. Morons can't even wait until full time anymore.
Probably the same tadgers that get bored half way through a 10 second clip on Instagram.
-
1
-
-
I'd cheer the team spirit of GrizzlyG
Always positive throughout the season and I hope the team give him the just rewards on Saturday.
Terrible stand up comedian though....
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
I'm afraid that the WS has a bowling club mentality.
I once invested in a bowling club so I'm certain I know what a bowling club mentality is like.
-
-
3 minutes ago, David said:
Far be it for me to defend or champion the cause of the people you're talking about, but the world would be boring if we all agreed.
Or, it would be like a Twitter feed—an echo chamber.
Most people here bring something to the discussion, and everyone adds value in their own way. But the call is yours to make. Hopefully, we'll see you back at some point.
Cheers pal,
I like a balanced viewpoint where I think P and B will suit me
There are certainly things wrong with the club. No escaping that.
But to deal with people who can only see black is like speaking to a Tory about the qualities of say SNP or labour or vice versa. Completely deaf.
take care and all the best David
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
Well this is my last post on this site.
Off to P and B to chat to people with similar thoughts.
Would the miserable bastards on this site do us a favour and not follow suit.
You can stay here and hate the world.
I know plenty of people in the world like the people above and never stood about long enough to listen to their bile.
See you in the Spl next season.
I’ll spot you because your pants will be wringing and Kettlewell will have taken a shite on your doorstep.
Catch the good guys later. Keep up the faith. -
1 minute ago, thewelllfan said:
If we don't get a striker in just can't really see us avoiding that relegation paly off squads now
Kelly/Oxborough
Mcginn/SOD/Butcher/Casey/Blaney
Devine/Elliot Miller/Davor/Paton/Halliday/Slattery(INJ) Montgommery/Gent/Jill
Spittal/Nicholson
Bair/Vale/Obika
Still short of a St and an experienced cb
What makes you say StJ and Ross County have better?
St J signed a striker that plays semi professional football
-
Whilst the continued debate goes on about Vale. Who will probably end up our 3rd striker.
I think Nicholson will prove to be a good signing. Montgomery would have been as well.
-
5 minutes ago, ppower said:
Seen more Motherwell games than you have had hot dinners. Was a season ticket holder for 25 years. No longer. You probably don't remember what a good Motherwell team looks like.
Don't rub it in 😢
-
It's a shame about Montgomery. For me he was a good signing.
-
3 minutes ago, FirParkCornerExile said:
I can assure you a loan is not a loss. There are not a set of accounts on the planet that show a loan as a loss, well except Donald Trumps accounts. The only contributing factor factor any loss would be the outgoings to finance the loan. In this case I.e £200,000 a year. You cannot attribute a twenty years cost to one years accounts.
The P and L which is a loss of 1 million pounds includes this cost. Funded by a balance sheet item of a loan. You and I can go into politic speak about describing the same thing in two different ways. I do understand what you are saying.
What I will say is the cost up front is probably set off against losses that would be incurred by paying to maintain the fully grass pitch over time. ie a P and L hit now for the greater good, as you say funded by the government but in time repayable.
What is more concerning is that wages matched turnover because "we done well" as per Jim McMahons comments.
Some finance model that. As I say again that's why we are pinching the pennies.
-
46 minutes ago, FirParkCornerExile said:
Bollocks how often do fans need to be told the ground renovations were paid for by a twenty year £3.5 million interest free loan from the Scottish Government
That my friend is still a loss in the p and l funded by long term debt.
Still lost a million quid whether they borrowed it from the government or borrowed it from Taylor Swift.
-
1 minute ago, Mccus28 said:
Right now they have 31 first team players and we have 22 so I don't agree with you.
The number difference alone more than makes up for the wage discrepancy
Ok Killie Accounts!
Due the same day as Motherwell this month.
They lost 1.8 million in the season they won the D1 title.
Running a wage bill of 3million. Still pretty hefty.
Have a high list of creditors and borrowed 1 million from Scottish government.
More difficult to decipher until later this month and the accounts of the return to the SPL.
My gut is if Billy Bowie wants something then he will put the money in.
New Investment Options
in Club Chat
Posted
This is the bang on the money in every detail.