Jump to content

Nobby Solano And A London Based Consortium


Welldel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Taking the 'Well Society' terminology out of this....as its a rather emotive, poisoned couple of words to some folks...

 

The other way to look at this could be that the people potentially buying the club are actually a consortium of well fans based in the UK and a major well fan millionaire from abroad. If they can convince us their future plans for funding in situations of financial stress and how we can continue to compete at a decent level then everything is good no? Looking at it that way it seems no different to the break even model we have (should have) been running since Boyle stepped away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it not that the only way the Well Society can work as a model is if it includes some big investment from wealthy individuals on a regular basis (Ie a Boyle type character)?

 

If thats the case then its not different really from any other investment / takeover of the club.

 

A well society running only on funds from fans will not work as we will never have the fan base to sustain it.

 

Maybe I have got this all wrong, but thats my view of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most clubs around the globe have investors that lend money to them at a low interest rate - or failing that, a bank to do the same. So unless we ever manage to attract someone who wants to buy the club in the knowledge they are unlikely to even get their money back if they could sell it, there aren't really many other options.

 

As for the Well Society, I thought the plan was to have the Board run the club pretty much the way it does now. It's not going to be an Ebbsfleet Utd affair where members vote on every decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is how I understand it. It's not about every society member getting a vote on every decision. If we raise enough cash to buy the majority shareholding from Boyle then...from the Well Society Q&A:

 

The Well Society will become majority shareholders of the club and will have a majority of directors on the Motherwell FC board. Thus the fans and community will oversee the running of the club.

 

Following that, it would be down to the board as a whole (made up of majority society but also other members with a stake) to run the club as they see fit whether that is a break even community club taking no financial risk. Or, a club that would still seek outside investment from time to time. Society members would have a say and influence in that direction I would think but not in every small detail. We have to put our trust in the society board members we elect to make those decisions.

 

If the society get in then nothing really major changes in my eyes between how we run now and then how we would run in the future. By that, I mean, our majority shareholder (Boyle) does not put anything in to the club now and that could well be the same once the Well Society gain the majority shareholding.

 

The only question for me, like I highlighted above is if the society does get in then what are our plans for the future in regards finances for when we have a blip and how do we progress as a club and not stagnate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Society gaining any sort of control of Motherwell will ruin us. It's a disaster waiting to happen. They have continually failed to convice people of their competence and had this been a private investor, there would be some screaming from the rooftops that they should be nowhere near the Club. I can only see horrific times ahead if we go ahead with this nonsense.

 

Me too. On the face of it, it sounds like a great idea but once you sit back and actually think about it.....lunatics taking over the asylum??

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is how I understand it. It's not about every society member getting a vote on every decision. If we raise enough cash to buy the majority shareholding from Boyle then...from the Well Society Q&A:

 

The Well Society will become majority shareholders of the club and will have a majority of directors on the Motherwell FC board. Thus the fans and community will oversee the running of the club.

 

Following that, it would be down to the board as a whole (made up of majority society but also other members with a stake) to run the club as they see fit whether that is a break even community club taking no financial risk. Or, a club that would still seek outside investment from time to time. Society members would have a say and influence in that direction I would think but not in every small detail. We have to put our trust in the society board members we elect to make those decisions.

 

If the society get in then nothing really major changes in my eyes between how we run now and then how we would run in the future. By that, I mean, our majority shareholder (Boyle) does not put anything in to the club now and that could well be the same once the Well Society gain the majority shareholding.

 

The only question for me, like I highlighted above is if the society does get in then what are our plans for the future in regards finances for when we have a blip and how do we progress as a club and not stagnate.

 

 

Thats the part that gives me serious concerns, if the WS have the majority of directors then they control the board and its decisions and by implication all aspects of the clubs business. The main issue i have with this is that those "board members " from the WS may not have any experience at all in running a business, improving the clubs finances etc and in these austere times thats not what a club like motherwell needs.

If the elected board members from the WS have business experience then fair enough and we can judge them on their achievements, but i remain unconvinced that this will be the case. Being a good fan, working hard for the WS, organising functions etc are not the desired attributes for runing a multi million pound business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do share the fears recently posted on here but lets remember that there WILL be other board members not associated to the society still on the board making up approx 30% of ownership. Now, while, if the society does get in, they will have a controlling interest and majority share of the vote, clearly, the other board members views will be taken into account.

 

Remember, this isn't a hostile takeover where everybody will be cleared out and it will just be a couple of part time society members trying to run the club. I am sure there will be a lot of assistance, guidance given and pragmatic discussions with the current board members (below) + well society elected board members when they get in place. For example, Derek Weir, is a director on the board of the Co-Op bank. We are not just going to ignore his advice. The same goes for the likes of James McMahon and Andrew Wilson who are directors of other companies too.

Also what's to say that the likes of Derek Weir and Andrew Wilson dont stay as board members but become the Well Society board members...they are Well Society members according to the website so I am assuming they could be elected in a roundabout way?

 

Current board:

Andrew Wilson

Derek Weir

Graham Keys

James McMahon

John Swinburne

Stewart Robertson

+ Well Society (2) members

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+2, the season is only going to get worse both on the park and financially so what does next season bring as there is no big windfall for finishing in 10th place.

 

I hope I'm just unaware of how the society will fund the club but to me it sounds like it will be continued pleas to fans to help financially when shit hits the fan which is never good.

 

In saying that there dosnt seem to much of an alternative to explore or favour.

 

In May we have 10 players who's contracts are up. So with respect to next season the club will be forced to restructure to live within pretty conservative projections I suspect. Not that the current ones are outrageous, at the start of the season top 6, 4 Europa games and 3/4 cup games would have been pretty conservative.

 

With respect to the WS funding the club I would hope not, it was never the intention that Any sustainable business should not spend more than it brings in unless money due to come in in pretty much guaranteed. The nature of the industry is it's results based and win's equal prizes.

 

We are a selling club and we've failed to sell anyone for any tangible amounts. The fact Darren Randolph couldn't be punted in 3 seasons but Arnier could just shows how much it's outwith our hands at times.

 

I appreciate there isn't many alternatives, if any, out there for fresh investment but I'm distressed by how we have seemingly been driven to the brink by Dempster & her sheep.

 

Pretty much over 10 years there haven't been anyone approach the cub with an offer considered acceptable. The WS evolved from JB indicating he finally wanted an exit strategy. The club has been a nice toy that he got his fingers burned on a couple of times with and enjoyed a few nice trips and days with a flower in his lapel. However he doesn't want the burden any longer. Dempster as his employee merely followed out his instructions.

 

We've been "driven to the brink" due to the decline in Scottish football (which can and has been discussed at length elsewhere), not capitalising at key games (cup games) and our inability to sell our assets for a fraction of what they're really worth.

 

JB just doesn't fancy being around for the upturn as I doubt he can predict when it will happen. From reading past posts on these boards some of the things Dee has conveyed about what happened in Norway with fan engagement is the only way forward to reinvigorate.

 

We sit as "best of the rest" pretty much for 3 seasons and that adds what .... 150-200 to a gate? We have a poor run and we're 1,000-1,500 down. However I think many were itching for a while to walk and recent performances helped excuse that behaviour.

 

What annoys me is too many people can't find fault, pour scorn and question those involved intentions on an online message-board but few offer tangible solutions. All you do is make others considering offering their time and effort reluctant to do so to avoid scorn, ridicule and abuse.

 

Easy solution, if you are personally unhappy, next time a board member is to be elected, come on here, convey your manifesto and garner support and deliver, it appears 35 or so votes will do it. Otherwise, have your reservations by all means, but in the meantime, if you wouldn't mind sticking your shoulder to the wheel and help push the cart up the hill that would be pretty cool thanks.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easy solution, if you are personally unhappy, next time a board member is to be elected, come on here, convey your manifesto and garner support and deliver, it appears 35 or so votes will do it.

 

Really, this in no way resolves what is one of my major issues with the Society. 'Aye, well, if you've got a problem, why don't you do it?' is absolutely fine if what we're talking about is 'how to give guidance to students', or 'working in a college', because I know plenty about these things. Running a football club? Not the faintest fucking idea. Literally zero knowledge.

 

I'd like people who know how to run a football club to run the football club. Not folk that convinced 35 people that they know what they're doing to run a football club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, this in no way resolves what is one of my major issues with the Society. 'Aye, well, if you've got a problem, why don't you do it?' is absolutely fine if what we're talking about is 'how to give guidance to students', or 'working in a college', because I know plenty about these things. Running a football club? Not the faintest fucking idea. Literally zero knowledge.

 

I'd like people who know how to run a football club to run the football club. Not folk that convinced 35 people that they know what they're doing to run a football club.

 

So a solution is to snipe from the wings on an online forum, the beauty of the WS is that any member can influence things if they garner enough support. If you have no desire to do so then that's your business.

 

You're not asked to run the club, lets be clear. If you make the full club board then you would be presented with information and be in a position to ask pertinent questions, afterwards you would vote with the position of those you represent in mind.

 

Primarily the running of the club would stay 90% the way it does already. Weir, McMahon and Burrows will continue to run the club they seem to have a bit of an idea of how Scottish Football works.

 

At present if JB wants the club to go in a certain direction then it does, if the WS become the controlling party then it will be I suspect by majority rule (by which I mean the board, not a referendum to the general WS membership). You merely influence the direction it takes not the implementation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, this in no way resolves what is one of my major issues with the Society. 'Aye, well, if you've got a problem, why don't you do it?' is absolutely fine if what we're talking about is 'how to give guidance to students', or 'working in a college', because I know plenty about these things. Running a football club? Not the faintest fucking idea. Literally zero knowledge.

 

I'd like people who know how to run a football club to run the football club. Not folk that convinced 35 people that they know what they're doing to run a football club.

 

 

 

Who exactly do you think knows how to run a football club?

 

All the people who are currently running the club and have been running the club for last 4-5 years are well society members.

 

As Googles and Flippers says the proportion of members who are engaged is very small and the majority of the people who do make an effort to go along to meetings are generally happy to accept to whatever the society and club board say is preferable. The league reconstruction meeting proved that beyond any reasonable doubt (just think we could be looking at four completely meaningless games and then a reset to zero points if the board got their wishes). The society is effectively the status quo.

 

The Well Society has cash reserves which the club needs and may be able to access cheap loans which the club cannot do. The society is underwriting the club at the moment, no one else is so it's correct that the society takes the controlling interest in the club. What is the alternative? People post about 'serious investors' as if there are people out there who want to throw their money away on a Scottish football club which has no prospect of ever making them a profit aside from selling Fir Park and groundsharing on the plastic with Accies.

 

What we should take from the shambles of the last few months is that we need a chief executive who oversees the manager and makes sure that every contract given out matches the direction we want the club to be heading in. No more giving out two year deals to guys who are barely fit when they sign them never mind in 24 months time. No more 50 grand a year to guys who would struggle to hold down a starting position in the lower leagues.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats the part that gives me serious concerns, if the WS have the majority of directors then they control the board and its decisions and by implication all aspects of the clubs business. The main issue i have with this is that those "board members " from the WS may not have any experience at all in running a business, improving the clubs finances etc and in these austere times thats not what a club like motherwell needs.

If the elected board members from the WS have business experience then fair enough and we can judge them on their achievements, but i remain unconvinced that this will be the case. Being a good fan, working hard for the WS, organising functions etc are not the desired attributes for runing a multi million pound business.

 

Remember a number of current board members are probably WS members so they would most likely continue as things are now.

 

It's not like we're going to have Betty who works the checkout at Lidl Wishaw running things just because she's a WS member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember a number of current board members are probably WS members so they would most likely continue as things are now.

 

It's not like we're going to have Betty who works the checkout at Lidl Wishaw running things just because she's a WS member.

 

 

But if Betty attends all the meetings, people like her and think she is the dogs bollocks, then come the WS AGM, when the nominations and votes for the WS members to take the board seats are conducted, then she may get the gig, so as extreme as it sounds its a possibility. Betty for chief exec, you know it makes sense.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...