Leaderboard

I voted but I hate emails and any sort of form you have to fill in. There might be people who are just happy being silent members unless it's a big thing like the takeover scam.

Without divulging too much before we are further down the line, I think this is a really important post that touches on where the Society is at for now. Members that attended the AGM or attended any recent sessions will be aware that we have recently implemented a new CRM system and a lot of the work carried out recently has been to find out more about our members; most importantly how many active members we actually have, why some may have lapsed, where opportunity lies, etc. @dennyc is absolutely spot on, quoting 3 or 4k membership is good PR when building up the Society but comes back to bite us when it comes to voting turnout. Some of the immediate work the new board will be getting stuck into is finding out how many active members we have, how we can get those who are in a position to do so to increase their subscription, how can we improve communications, etc. etc. It's been touched on before but there is many reasons for that; junior members who lapsed and didn't continue as adults, members who paid up at the start and haven't contributed since, members who have passed away and the Society was never notified etc. It might sound silly but I actually think there's members out there who don't realise they are still a member because they've not contributed for a sustained period of time. It's arguably a historical failing of the Society that we're not totally on top of this, no hiding from that, but since the new board was elected back in October significant strides have been taken to improve this and we're getting there. There were 1,531 votes were cast in the investment proposal by Tuesday 16 July at 10am. 56% of eligible members. I get there was still a week to go but I think this percentage will actually be a lot higher than 56% if we were only counting active members. It should also be noted that around double voted in the elections than voted in favour or Erik's deal. I actually fully agree with those here who have raised concerns, regardless of the reasoning we need to have a lot more people engaging in the democratic process. Whilst this might be far from ideal, I actually think it presents a huge opportunity for income growth and a great opportunity to re-engage members and bring them on our journey. I keep banging this drum but I'm really confident about where we are at the moment and where we can go in the not too distant future.

I think some posters can't get past the Wrexham situation when overseas fans are discussed. I believe there are Society members from something like 20 different countries. If a few of them promote the club for free to others in the same country, what's the problem? If that leads to a few more dollars/euros/pounds spent with the club, more power to them. If it doesn't, no harm done.

Excellent post to be honest...absolute fantasy stuff from a few on here today

With a 24.7% turnout It would be interesting to see the percentage split of the votes for those candidates elected. I can't remember if it was 4 or 6 posts up for grabs but that means that those elected may have won with as little as 4% of the vote each so potentially 96% of eligible voters either did not vote for them or didn't vote for anyone. That's not a very stable basis / mandate going forward and shows that the vast majority of members apparently have no Interest in the WS or who is running it, which is an unhealthy situation.

Personally I would have ran a smear campaign BEFORE the elections. But then the people who are trying to smear Derek don't seem to be very smart.

Well aye, that’s also a point. An Instagram story of a Bobby Sands mural followed by one of King Billy doesn’t suggest any political leanings but that doesn’t suit the narrative. If you wanted to dig up political posts from today, they could have highlighted when I was critical of the Scottish Government on rail fares but again, maybe that doesn’t suit the narrative. If we’re going to talk about club representatives being political; Jim McMahon appeared on BBC Question Time (or maybe it was Debate Night) whilst he was in the role. He was also pictured campaigning for Scottish Labour whilst Chairman. I should add that I’ve absolutely no issue with that whatsoever, but it’s worth highlighting. Is it that we don’t want people associated with the club posting about politics or we don’t want them posting about politics that you don’t agree with?

He looked happy on the green green grass of a home game.

Globalisation? Let's learn to walk before we start to run eh?

No he isn't. Far from it, in fact.

Oh, by all means! If there's a way for a workstream to include those US fans and those who think it's a good idea, then absolutely! If a few US-based fans want to help spread the word, then that’s great. That's true, but from the perspective of the club and the society, what value do those Facebook fans from Uganda or elsewhere actually provide? Are they purchasing matchday tickets? Dining and drinking in the Cooper bar before a match? Buying season tickets? While someone posting on Facebook might seem cool, it doesn't really contribute any tangible value to the club or society. I'm not sure how many Society members we have in Uganda just now? As I said, most fans based overseas who support Motherwell tend to have family ties to the area, if they're not actually from the area themselves and have left for various reasons. Wrexham has a lot to answer for, doesn’t it? The truth is, no one cared about Wrexham before they were taken over, and honestly, no one cares about Wrexham now. People are interested in the owners of the club. That’s the real draw. I’m fairly certain I saw somewhere that the new seasons of the documentary series included a clause in the contract requiring the owners to appear on screen for a minimum percentage of the time. The distributors know that the audience isn’t tuning in to see how Wrexham are performing, or because they’ve suddenly fallen in love with the club. They’re tuning in to see a reality series featuring two fairly well-known individuals who are willing to put themselves centre stage for entertainment. Hasn’t Tom Brady invested in a football club as well? And the guy from Creed? Why aren’t they taking off and making huge waves in the US? It’s likely because there’s no compelling documentary story for people to follow. The US interest isn’t in Wrexham. It’s in the “reality” show being filmed around it. That's a line that Barmack was also pushing, and there were numerous flaws and issues highlighted in that particular model. A great deal of information on Pie & Bovril was pointed out by people who know the entity and the business model far better than I do. Ask those individuals who are watching those podcasts and YouTube shows if they’d be willing to pay a tenner a month to each channel in order to continue watching. It’s not just about the cost of running it; it also concerns the amount of time that people involved need to invest. Having observed the various workstreams associated with the Society recently, it’s clear that their time is already stretched to the limit for many. We have a multitude of tasks that need addressing, from revising and improving the governance, sorting out the executive board, and understanding why the representation from the Society board essentially "went rogue" on the Barmack vote, among other things. As I mentioned, if we have US fans who want to get involved, donate their time, and create a US market workstream, then go for it; there’s certainly no harm in it. The same applies to those who believe the US market is ripe for the taking. @wellgirl, you were expressing concern about the female representation on the Society board. You don’t need to be a board member to get involved. If you think we’re missing an opportunity in the US market, then get involved with others who share the same view and make it happen. What I don’t agree with is people who think the Society should be pursuing this market or that market, but who expect others, whose availability is already stretched, to do the work. That's an issue that needs addressing. The turnout was ridiculous, and there has to be something done to find out why that was the case.

I like your passion at playing it down but I just don't agree. Almost 80% who were able to vote, didn't, surely that, at the very least is a little alarming no matter how you wish to spin it. Its not just the casual fan, its nearly 80% of people who, to this point have cared enough to be members with a vote.

Re the politics in football thing. If someone is posting stuff on an official club / society feed thats one thing. Using your own personal accounts to post stuff is fair game imho. Particularly if you are a volunteer of an organisation and not a paid employee where certain rules apply. The Society elections were open and democratic. If you dont like someone for whatever reason you dont need to vote for them. Coming on social media after the fact seems quite cheap.

This is a nice summary of that deal https://youtu.be/RUVIAHGMgOI?si=DSKsUKVZOzFwtsdj

I'd be quite surprised if many apolitical folk are running to be democratically elected representatives of a fan ownership organisation?

Surely if there are Motherwell fans like Chris then there could be other Motherwell fans all over the world. Look at the amount of fans who post on Facebook because of Bevis and the new boy we signed last week

I'd argue that Les Hutchison saved out club and helped structure it for a healthy future; and I'll always be grateful for that. I'm 100% sure his politics are very different from mine.

There's nothing better than someone starting a bit of a stramash only to respond with "end of story" when they get some push back.

Interesting responses here. I probably shouldn’t need to reply, but whilst on a trip to Belfast where I’ve visited both sides of the community and shared photos of both on my personal Instagram, it’s quite telling that the poster above has only lifted one’s from one side. To suggest that either offers political opinion is simply note true.

Their deluded support believe All that garbage as well.