Leaderboard

The only time we have had significant injections of money from outside investors in my lifetime has been with Boyle for the first four years of his ownership which ended up almost killing the club then Les coming in and handing his chequebook to Barraclough which was another disaster. We have performed better as a football club when we are standing on our own feet. A change from a Jim McMahon dominated board to one which reflects the Well Society's position doesn't have to change anything financially.

And what exactly are you expecting in this game changing plan? Are you looking for the Society to come up with a magical suggestion about how to secure massive financial input to the Club? If so, that is totally unrealistic and is exactly what McMahon wants you to expect. Basically the Society to do his job for him. It is all deflection tactics on his part. The Society Board's remit is to grow the Society, safeguard fans' contributions and work with the Club Board on a range of matters, including Community projects and strategic planning. Or it would be if the current Club Board had not excluded them. The Society does not run the day to day operations of the Club but should have input when appropriate. Recent Society Board changes have attempted to address an imbalance that existed and progress is being made in that more scrutiny is now made of Club requests for assistance and Board influence within the Society is much reduced. That progress appears to have resulted in even more resistance from the Exec Board, culminating in the Society being excluded from the Barmack negotiations. Other than the input from Dickie and Feely which it now transpires was not in line with Society thinking and has brought into question where those individuals' loyalties lie. But comprehensive change takes time and being compelled to intervene in the current situation is not helping. This mess is none of the Society's doing but unfair pressure is now being placed on them, a team of volunteers, to sort it out. Perhaps you should turn your understandable frustration on those professionals that are responsible for the mess in the first place.

It’s honestly unbelievable. I can’t believe we’re still all talking about this and it hasn’t been laughed off as some sort of weird joke. i was dismayed by the original offer, after the ‘lengthy statement’ and subsequent revised offer, now I'm just angry.

Giving thought to the present situation at the Club. I think Kmcalpin talks a lot of sense and I agree with him that change on a number of fronts is essential otherwise we will be left behind by our peers. The Society with it's limitations is just not enough. Investment being part, but not all of the action required. But this deal is not for me as it lacks actual detail.....much has been said already about the lack of a workable Business Plan....and threatens the Community and fan based principles of the Club. But it does point to a number of areas that should be investigated. Sadly however, I see of a lot of give from the Society with very little heading the other way. The balance is just not right. The deal reeks of a keen to depart Chairman grasping at the first offer he has been able to get on the table, irrespective and non-caring of potential outcomes. For me the way ahead is to decline the amended offer. Then, if the sale of Bair/Miller (or both) is as advanced as some say, utilise a large portion of those funds to buy time to address relationships, efficiencies and structures within the Club. The end result being a refreshed, forward thinking Exec Board that does not look upon Society funds as the easy and only solution to all. We do have that time. No income streams have been lost since season end. in fact new TV and sponsorship deals have boosted income, although exact amounts are not known. And transfer income looks likely. I see Brian Caldwell playing an important role in that progression towards a Board that is willing to work with the Society to JOINTLY explore all areas where investment might be secured. Starting within the Community but also looking to other areas. I would not rule out working with Barmack or the like to bring a mindset and qualities to the Club Board that I believe are currently sadly lacking. But not at any cost. I also don't think it is solely up to the WS to secure investment and I believe that suggestion was a not so subtle attempt by McMahon to heap pressure on the Society Board and manoeuvre fans towards his escape plan. Sadly it appears some fans have been taken in by that ploy and are looking for far too much from the much awaited Society proposal. Fear is another tactic I see deployed. My view (and I have no insider contact) is that the current Board became complacent, were resistant to change and ran out of ideas. At the same time shutting out the Society resulting in friction and resentment. In some cases ego possibly played a large part. I also find it telling that a number of people in the past couple of years have up and left the Exec Board. I don't believe in coincidence. I hope a lot of good can come from this entire situation. Bringing about a proactive, more open Exec Board working closely with a stronger and united Society Board for the benefit of club, fans and community alike. That will take time. But I repeat, we have that time given assurances made that the Club is not in a critical situation. But the Membership will decide and I have idea how that vote will go. I now see David beat me to some of this! Sorry if repetition

The lodging of the Wild Sheep proposal has brought many hitherto festering issues to the fore. Of immediate concern the Society's representation on the Executive Board. Its position as the major shareholder needs to be reflected in its composition, both in principle and in practice. In the medium, if not the shorter term, the Society Board needs to take a more proactive and assertive role in the running of the club at a strategic level, and that includes finances and investment, from whatever source. It cannot afford to simply say its nothing to do with us thats up to the club. That strategic role should not include day to day decision making or financial management. The appropriate medium for this would be 3 Society reps on the Executive Board. Again this merely reflects strategic direction from the major shareholder. The looming spectre of a financial mineshaft opening up in our back garden, courtesy of Jim McMahon, seems to have disappeared. However a decision needs to be taken by the Society as to its role, probably through consultation with members, and maybe via an amendment to the constitution. Should the club simply continue as is, or should it seek to modernise to retain our status and competitiveness with close rivals? A fundamental question for members I suspect. Santheman has just posted as I type. "I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors." I agree 100% with that. The Society needs to start exerting itself, befitting its role as the major shareholder.

Sorry but a couple questions. If I read you correctly. Whatever funds are required (and I accept outside investment would help), are they required immediately? When did it become the Society's role to secure outside investment for the football Club? That is surely the role of the Club Board of professionals with the support of the Society (if allowed in).

What is it that is so wrong about Dalziel Park? Changing facilities could be improved but in the main, the training pitches are excellent

Yes as a general BUT the Society can barely manage themselves. All this chat about how the new members are doing so much more? Quantify that - two statements and getting everyones details updated on the database and a couple more buckets at the game. C'mon........ Still waiting on this game changing plan. Eric B is acting when is the WS going to? Maybe start with a date when we can all expect to receive the info by.

We already have grass parks.

Oh i liked it I liked it I liked it I liked it

It's also notable that when it suits McMahon it's all legally binding periods, head of terms and corporate finance experts. Then as soon as he realises he's made an arse of it the red pen comes out and he can make changes on the fly. A total fucking chancer

Yes. £300k for three seats on the board and chairmanship with the casting vote.

As someone who is not an accountant nor a business person please help me with a simple answer. I have read through most of the posts here. I pay into the Well Society every month. Please correct me if I am wrong but the bottom line for me is that Barack gets almost total control of the club for an initial outlay of £300,000. If that is true then it is a massive no from me.

If you believe the Executive Board then yes they are. My own opinion is that we could probably plod on quite comfortably as we are but there will come a day when that outside investment is needed, when? Who knows. I don't think it's the responsibilty of the WS to physically scource outside funding but if they're going to reject EBs offer then they at least need to show a way forward and a plan on how to achieve it to counter that offer which is what everyone against EBs proposal is looking for them to provide. I assume all this will be detailed in their soon to be released document. I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors.

As was intended by the comments from the Club Chairman. So now unrealistic demands are being made of those volunteers. Next stage, the soon to be gone Club Chairman will declare Barmack as the only show in town. I do have some sympathy for the new CEO as he is between a rock and a hard place.

Thanks for your kind words. I believe the WS have nearly completed a 50+ page business plan to state their case so looking forward to that. Hopefully they can condense all the information into an easy read document. I think we need to know exactly how they intend to raise the funds required (do we even know how much is actually required to take us to this "next level" or are we just going to use EBs proposed investment figure as a bench mark and try to match that?). In an ideal world we would have 2 arms of the WS, one to salt away funds for a rainy day that it was originally intended for and to fund community projects and one to concentrate on attracting investment to help fund the day to day running costs and improvements to the infrastructure.

I have been watching the debate over the last few days, and thought now was the time to contribute. - The offer is a bad offer Who pays for less ownership? The resources of the Well Society will be massively reduced. Who on earth is going to continue contributing to well society for less influence? If this deal goes through, in my opinion, there is a good chance well society membership will collapse and it will fail to meet its contribution 'obligations'. - The Board and the Well Society have not acted in an open and transparent way. The Well Society are the owners, yet members had zero influence. Just because the majority of those who voted on the issue of external investment voted yes was not a green light for the board to accept and propose any deal. - Have the Well Society approached Wild Sheep for direct conversation? If not why not? If they are unwilling to have a conversation, then for me that is a big red flag. - Is Wild Sheep 'investing' or purchasing an asset. I think it is the latter. Investment to me would be to make an offer directly to the Well Society (and the club) for 20% of the society's shares(which would go to the club). That way we see real investment and the Society is not bankrupted. - Who controls the board. The Society is the majority shareholder but has no control. That is bizarre. The current offer if accepted, would result in the end of fan ownership as the Well Society would end up as irrelevant and membership would fall. This would result in financial crisis. No doubt some white knight would come in and by the 51% for 50p!!! I accept that additional investment is desirable, but this is not the deal. Shame on those who have come up with this. Come on Erik, post on here, not P&B! Sorry, but this deal is a NO vote for me.

I imagine it’s difficult for the Well Society Board to respond comprehensively to your satisfaction, when the Executive Board keep moving the goalposts, excluding them from important discussions, railroading them into a vote, and at the same time having had 3 of their board members turn on them. With that in mind, I’d maybe give the Well Society Board a bit of a break and support them in their endeavours to produce their promised business plan, because at the moment all the Executive Board have engaged is an investor with zero business plan and all the buzzwords.

No we don't but people need to realise that any other deal from any other investor will be fundamentally the same. "The club needs investment I have the cash to invest, so here's what it will cost for that investment " deal or no deal. As I said earlier if we really want to embrace true fan ownership then the WS needs to be made fit for purpose, come up with its own plan and as Santheman said a few posts ago, tell the members to prepare to dig deep financially to make it happen. As bucket collections etc won't cut it.

The only deal is a rip off so we have to take it?

Aye it seems clear that 1. The proposal is in direct conflict with the Well Society constitution 2. The situation with the Well Society appointed Executive Board members is shambolic meaning the Society has not been properly represented during the process. 3. The very late change to the Head of Terms with seemingly no Society input invalidates the entire 4 month process. Just tell the members we cannot proceed legally and start talking to Barmack directly.

All I would add to that is if TRUE fan ownership is the holy grail then we had better be prepared to dig very deep into our pockets.

Start the new negotations with three red lines. (1) The Well Society cannot drop below 51%. (2) The Well Society will not fund any reduction of its own shareholding. (3) The make up of the board will reflect the existing shareholding. Barmack will have as much influence as his shareholding and overall contribution to the club merits.

It's good to see they are emphasising legal advice. Call the vote off and restart negotiations with Barmack directly through the new Society Board. The fact that we have had people in charge of this process who apparently only discovered the official definition of fan ownership two days ago perfectly enscapulates how farcical every aspect of this is.

You better hope they do or you will have wasted your time for months.

Even if the Well Society does manage to scrape the money together to get the 50.1% shareholding they will still have no reserves in 6 years time which means 1 bad season and Barmack will be offering to cover it for full control. The deal stinks.