Leaderboard

This is a really good question & one that's sparked my return from a long hiatus on here (although anyone who also peruses P&B will notice I started posting there a couple of weeks ago after years away too). As a member of the Well Society Board who has been elected & re-elected by Society members, I personally think there's an element of responsibility there in terms of safeguarding fan-ownership. It seems logical to assume that, if Society members have voted for you, they want you to try & grow the Society, champion the benefits of fan-ownership, and presumably subscribe to one of the key reasons used for fan-ownership in the first place - preventing the club from falling into the wrong hands. In terms of growing the Society, I feel like there is now a majority of like-minded individuals on the Board following the recent elections (that, in all honesty, previously just didn't exist to the same extent) who recognise the need for drastic improvements across the Society, ensuring greater transparency, far better communications, and a raft of other aspects. That work is very much underway and I think it's certain that the Society will see growth in membership & income in the coming months & beyond as a direct result - the ceiling of that is, of course, very much up for debate. But, genuinely, it's the most positive I've felt about fan-ownership this side of the pandemic. So, for me, the answers to the original question like this are really important - because if it is, in fact, the case that a majority of Well Society members would rather end fan-ownership, then that's something we would need to be guided by and, essentially, carry out - and it's something we will likely have to actually ask members sooner rather than later, to ensure that we're doing what they want us to do. For the avoidance of doubt, no investment happens in the football club without, firstly, the Well Society Board being involved in the discussions with interested parties and, secondly, a ballot of all Society members - with a majority needing to agree to the offer. In terms of the actual question itself, I think it's worth highlighting the, potentially never-ending, caveats that mean it's not anywhere near as simple a question as "would you swap fan-ownership to compete with clubs who have ownership investment". The level of investment itself, who is providing that investment, their intentions for the club, and a whole host of other aspects are incredibly important there too. It's also worth remembering that fan-ownership isn't just some trinket that's been put in a cupboard in the Phil O'Donnell Stand somewhere, it's the result of years and years of time, effort, and money from an endless list of individuals, so I dare say there's a need to actually consider what scrapping all that work is worth to people. Put it this way - I don't think in today's world it's ever going to be as simple as folk just wanting to "swap fan-ownership to compete with clubs who have ownership investment". What else would they sacrifice for that and where are the red lines? Would folk take a few extra quid to ensure that we're potentially finishing 6th or 7th each year, in exchange for a club that loses its entire community-based ethos? Would folk take five years of European adventures, in exchange for investment that is only part of a five year plan, with investors set to pack up & leave soon after leaving the club in the lurch? Would folk take dodgy money from unknown sources to make us the 3rd force in Scottish football until the investors got bored, in exchange for the eradication of our own youth academy? Would folk take all of those sacrifices - the loss of the club's identify, no long-term plan, no youth academy - for a club that could still end up in the Championship regardless of investment like Dundee Utd? All hypothetical scenarios but all very real possibilities. As I mentioned before, protecting the club from falling into the "wrong hands" has long been a reason given for fan-ownership, and I think this is possibly a very real example of a scenario where people need to be very careful what they wish for.

I totally understand folk who think that fan-ownership isn't working. I would disagree with that but I understand it's a totally acceptable opinion to have - particularly as we all have different ideas of what "working" actually means. I think part of that is actually to do with communications, transparency etc that hasn't been good enough from both the Society and the club in previous years in terms of actually showing people that it's "working", but I also think a big part of that is very simple: there's essentially a big spectrum where, at one end, there's "aiming for short-term success no matter the risks" and, at the other end, there's "safeguarding the existence of the club forever, no matter what level that's at." Every Motherwell fan will fall on that spectrum somewhere, and I don't think there's any wrong answers - people just have different reasons for supporting the club, get different things from going to games, and have different priorities when it comes to their expectations. Personally, I fall quite far along towards that idea that, as long as I have a club to support for the rest of my life, I will be content - even if that means flirting with or even experiencing relegation. I have probably been shunted even further towards that end of the spectrum as a result of discussions I've had around investment. That absolutely does not have to be the same for everyone, and I imagine a lot of people are somewhere in the middle a lot of the time. Fan-ownership ensures that existence though. While the Well Society has the majority shareholding in the club, the club exists. It may be that, as American investors in particular saturate the European football market, we find ourselves tumbling out of the top flight at some point in the future, as other clubs risk their own long-term futures by chasing that short-term success. There would be difficult decisions to make in that scenario, and a lot of disappointment and heartache, but the future of the club wouldn't be in doubt. At the other of the spectrum, investment for short-term gain doesn't even necessarily guarantee that short-term gain. Dundee Utd are the absolute perfect example of that so, even if you do choose that route, relegation is far from off the cards. And even if you do receive the few years of keeping up with others in the division, the long-term future of the club ceases to be protected and any decisions about what happens to the club, what it's future looks like, and even who then subsequently takes up the reins further down the line are taken out of the hands of Motherwell supporters. Again, I don't think there's necessarily a "right answer". Folk want different things from supporting the club. There's my answer and it may be different from other people's, and that's fine. But what's most important is that, with fan-ownership currently in place, if we get to a point where a majority of Well Society members are at that "short-term success" end of the spectrum, then that's what will occur - which, in itself, is almost a good example of a benefit of fan-ownership working and giving the supporters control of the club's direction.

Welcome back Jay. In response to Denny C, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I dont agree that we have given fan ownership a good go. I think we have played with it a bit and the intentions were good, but without any real vision as to where it was going or how to get there. Thats no real criticism of those involved as we were pretty much the first to do it so there was no manual and we were pretty much making it up as we went along. For me the fan ownership thing is what has sustained my interest over the last few years which have been pretty grim on the playing front. For me Motherwell as a town and the surrounding area doesnt have anything to bind it together anymore in the way that say, the steelworks did. The club is the last thing standing so, for me, the future of the club and its place in the community is paramount. We can poo poo a lot of the initiatives that have taken place in the past and minimise their impact on the football side of our business, but local buy in from the community is so important to everything that we do. Our youth academy and bringing through young local players is and always has been the best way of us bridging the quality gap. We need to get back to that as well. It feels like since covid we have lost our way and a bit of that identity. If we have fresh voices on the Well Society Board willing to address these things and grow the Society/Club, they have my backing. Thats not to say outside investment isnt important and shouldnt be welcomed. But it shouldnt be at the expense of who/what we are. That might sound like a romantic notion, and maybe it is. But personally I dont see any reason we cant find someone out there with a bit of cash that is a bit of a philanthropist and would be willing to support that ethos. As for where I see us? Ensuring our top flight status, the odd cup run, a few more finals with the possibility of maybe actually winning one and the odd foray into Europe is where we have been my entire life. Anything that maintains that without selling us down the river has my backing.

I gotta say for a guy with 42 posts it's extremely unfair for you to insinuate he should be banned or we shouldn't "allow" (😄) him to post here. I disagree with a lot of what he says, including this instance, but I also agree with much of what he has had to say about our torrid season, Kettlewell's abysmal record, the small mind mentality vs the OF and the pish on Twitter about "welcome to our wee club", among other things. Just because he can be very negative and sometimes quite dramatic doesn't mean he shouldn't have the right to post his views, and he's been doing it a lot longer than you have.

For me, it's not the fact that players and the manager have extension clauses written into their contracts that can be and have been triggered, it's that the extensions haven't been communicated once triggered. No wonder fans are continually annoyed by the club. It's happened with SOD and Kettlewell, and probably others, and will likely happen with Obika now as well. I think it's reasonable to say that fans shouldn't have to wait until AGMs for this basic information to be communicated to them.

You have gone all guns blazing here without knowing the circumstances. Does it occur to you that the club using the phrase "personal reasons" might suggest it might not be for football reasons? It might be but equally there may be a family issue that has developed which is none of our business. This might have been a mistake by the club but to go all out and criticise the club automatically without any knowledge of the situation (knowledge that we're not entitled to), seems like looking for an excuse to have a go...

They generally have two feet and wear shorts a lot.

This forum has too many people like MJC (unless they are all actually MJC posting under other names to support his own simplistic, dumb views). So far this season we've had the club being so skint we can't afford electricity for the undersoil heating, Kettlewell needing sacked for signing Bair, every single loan signing has failed, Biereth left cause Motherwell are an amateur organisation with no CEO and we'll 100% be relegated. It really does wear you down reading this utter dross on thread after thread. We could beat Celtic 10-0 on Sunday and one of the regular detractors would greet about the amateur board causing us to give away too many corners and Kelly's goal kicks going out of play.

Sorry, but how does that stack up? What are the club supposed to do about "personal reasons?" Youd need a crystal ball to predict that. The fact that we have let the player return to his parent club without any fuss is surely a positive for the player and the parent club? We have also just had a player so succesful in their loan spell here that the parent club recalled him and farmed him out to a club playing at a higher level. Said player seems to be doing very well at the higher level. Im not saying none of this doesnt impact negatively on the managers ability to put a successful team out on the park or that we shouldnt be re-assessing our recruitment strategy in respect of loans, but I struggle to see how either scenario paints the club and how we do business in a bad light.

Obika isnt very good in the air though. He rarely wins a header. He is much better with the ball into his chest or feet, but Vale can do all of those things and is much quicker. Id love for the big man to he a success, but unless he stays fit enough to get a run of games soon, Im afraid Id be cutting my losses with him.

Firstly, thanks for posting on here Jay. Its always good to have more /better communication not only with members but also with the wider fanbase. In terms of what the Society has achieved, some don't fully understand. Without its presence the club would not have paid off its debts and would have gone onto administration. Thats a huge achievement in my book. As with many things in life, stakeholders do not see what you have prevented, stopped or avoided. Thats life. Has it been run perfectly - no. Could things be improved - yes. However, I took heart from the recent elections. We needed a blend of continuity and fresh blood and we got that. I now hope we can on to a higher level, through fan ownership. Compared to fans of other clubs, I think we tend to have more more modest expectations and thats a good thing up to a point, providing it doesn't stifle ambition. I'm very wary of private investment, although thats not necessarily a bad thing, providing our club is safeguarded. I believe that at least one individual was/is interested in putting money into the club under the present model. I've no idea though, how successful the "Geez money" video was in attracting genuine interest. Clubs like the Dundee twins, St Johnstone and Hibs are playing with fire for short/medium term gain. Dunfermline did something similar a few years ago, and whilst they succeeded, up to a point, yes up to a point in the short term, they've paid heavily for it ever since. I'm fully behind fan ownership but our model can't be fossilised. It had to grow and adapt.. Tonight's club AGM will hopefully give us an update on several crucial matters eg a new CEO and Chairman. Good news on that front will be a fillip for everyone.

I'm good at selective reading, i get lots of practice ignoring the dross you constantly spout but thanks for acknowledging it. 👍

I'm not that young either, but I'd also like to think we're leaving behind a solid community club for our children and their children. Football, for the most part, has become the game of the rich and wealthy. Bought up by millionaires, billionaires, and oil-rich nations. With very few exceptions, that is all that football fans of a certain age know. They buy their overpriced English Premiership jersey of choice, pay to have their favourite multi-millionaire mercenary's name added to the back of it, and watch their team on their large 4K telly in surround sound. Motherwell and clubs like us are different. When I go to a game with a young family member, their heroes can be accosted outside Fir Park for a photo, autograph, and a chat. Our young fans don't need to be happy with briefly seeing their favourite player walk past, head down and headphones on, behind a wall of security as they head into the stadium. Our younger generation can sit in the season ticket seat that our father or grandfather once sat in. For the most part, they can rest assured that they won't be priced out of that, to be replaced with some foreigner who's here on a "football holiday" wearing a half-and-half scarf and paying over the odds to some company that snaps up seats by the tens or hundreds to sell in packages. I like who we are as a club. I like that we employ financial responsibility and don't rely on money from elsewhere. I also like that we are very much community-based. I know that angle gets a lot of slating on here, but I like that our social media account bears the tagline that we exist to improve people's lives. If football doesn't exist to provide value and enjoyment and to improve the lives of those who follow it, then what's the point? To fill the coffers of the wealthy owners? To sell jerseys? We'd all love to win a cup, but I'd honestly much rather we had a fan-owned club that we could be proud of, and that will be there for future generations in a stadium that holds a lot of family memories than anything else. If our fanbase can only afford to support a club that ends up playing in the Championship or even lower, then so be it. I'll still be there, hoping to win the next game and pouring over the stats of our next unknown signing before writing them off and then being proved beautifully wrong as they defy the odds and come good.

Thought he was impressive at AGM tonight, personable and came across as open and honest, even if he uses 3 words when 1 will do!! , and I can see why players and staff are behind him

Announced 2 serious and credible potential investors, both would require a dilution of Well Society shareholding, Well Society Board to put to members whether this would be a red line, before we go any further. Basic summary of what became a 90 minute to and fro.

Aye, but nothing other than that. Means nothing more than MJC consistently using the word 'shambles' in all his posts about anything to do with MFC.

It seems like he needs the wee calf.

Are you sure about that , I give you oli Shaw and Jon obika who both got two left feet. Or right.

Biereth and Spencer both played most games and contributed during their time here. Their parent clubs saw enough improvement to recall them, so it seems everyone got something positive out of it. The problem of successful 'season long' loans being ended early is another issue that needs to be looked at, but it's certainly not one specific to Motherwell. Gent surely has to be seen as a success. Vale and Devine have started well enough to suggest they've been worthwhile signings. Halliday will become permanent in the summer, so he isn't a loanee in the true sense. Montgomery's injury was very unfortunate for him and us, but the same thing could've happened if we'd signed him on a 5 year deal. Shaw has certainly been a poor signing up till now and that may very well continue. Buyabu coming here has been a waste of time for all parties. Overall, I'd say our loan signings have generally worked out ok.

The Drama queen of SO, but I agree, his takes are becoming more and more unhinged.

It was a tongue-in-cheek statement, but do tell me some more facts about professional footballers while I've got your attention.

Yes, him being capped while playing for us obviouly persuaded his parent club that we were a complete clusterfuck amateur shambles with no CEO and a manager totally out of his depth.

Great post Jay

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.

There is a difference between what I think will happen and what I hope will happen. I always hope for a Motherwell win but given our dismal record in these fixtures then I can’t help but think that we will do nothing other than our usual and lose. Selective reading and quoting at its finest. No one has said that “all they are interested in is beating the uglies” or that that’s anyone’s “sole ambition” to win games against either OF club. But you just go on making things up to suit your ‘agenda’ eh? And of course no doubt you’ll be getting strong powerful ‘vibes’ that Rangers are the “big team some people support” and all that regurgitated nonsense.

Keep up your meds pal

The SPL and now SPFL were set up mostly to benefit the OF. SPL was created with 10 teams to guarantee 4 OF derbies a season. The splitting of gate money was changed to "home team keeps everything" to ensure the OF had proportionately more income. The top-heavy weighting of the 1st and 2nd prize money was created to ensure the OF received the most cash the majority of the seasons. And let's not forget how the authorities wanted to keep Sevco in the top league after liquidation. Even after the fan protests they went against their own rule book and kept them in the league despite the precedent set by the treatment of teams like Gretna. So it's not completely unreasonable for any team to mention the disparity in resources when we come up against them. We are literally playing against a stacked deck every time. But it's football, and in single games, points can be won against them - and winning them is sweeter thanks to the same disparity. The fact that both sides are supported by many small minded bigots just adds the pleasure when we do win.

The "why" is because John Boyle ran up massive debts as an owner/investor. While he didn't call in all that he was owed, he did leave us in a bit of a state when he gave up his holding. One of the reasons we ended up as fan owned was because JB couldn't find a buyer for a club with our problems. As he had put us into administration it meant the club couldn't get a bank loan (for 10 years as I recall) which, even for wealthy investors, is often a requirement for running a business. Whether you like the man or not, we were lucky Les was around to fund us and steer us in the right direction for fan ownership otherwise we could have been floating around the lower leagues by now - or worse. In fact, if you want to see the dangers of a single investor, Boyle is a great example - a fan, a businessman, and a guy who wanted the best for the club, but still managed to nearly kill us off.

Regardless of who owns the club we still have to try and live within our means. Otherwise the club just ends up owing money to the investor rather than a bank. Im sure with the correct investment there is maybe more we can do in terms of the academy, facilities etc which make the club a more attractive place to come and play. However, we need to be making better decisions as a whole and not spaffing money against the wall on managers and players that dont move us forward and generate the extra revenue that can move us forward. Otherwise you end up like Dundee United, playing in the Championship, millions in debt to an American owner who might call it a day at any point. Outward investment could be a good thing for us. But it needs to be the right investor with the right intentions and hopefully the business acumen to maje us a more sustainable proposition.

I realise how unlikely it is we'll beat either of them these days, but that will never stop me hoping/believing the next time will be the time it happens, no matter how often I'm let down. So, as naive as it may appear, I'm looking for positives and reasons as to why we'll win on Sunday. Finding reasons we'll get scudded is far easier. I can't accept that the club, from boardroom to pitch, have gone into these games accepting defeat for the best part of 30 years. I think every SPL club has suffered a gradual decline in the quality of player they can attract over that time, but ours is more marked than the Old Firm. Oh, for the days of wine and Hovis, when we were able to count on at least one win a season against the uglies, and almost invariably had one or two of their exs in our team when it came. Decent - or much more than that - players who had been part of league or cup winning sides, not the never made it scraps we just might pick up now. Having a Russell, Cooper or Coyne in the dressing room had to change the mentality, never mind what they brought on the park. McManus, McDonald and Pearson might've been a few steps down, but they clearly weren't wearing nappies or waving white flags when they ran out at Ibrox that night. Our guys have never played or won anything at that level, so it has to have an affect on your midset, if not going in, then when the going gets tough. Mibbe, just mibbe, the pressure of having to chase Rangers for the first time won't elicit the positive reaction from some Celtic players their fans will demand. I still enjoy clutching at straws.

I'm just amazed that SOD gets all the grief when Bevis form is so all over the place. The odd goal he scores doesn't make up for the defensive errors