Leaderboard

Not corporate finance at its highest level. Business qualification before retirement 20+years ago Admin and Statistics in Manufacturing. Shop Floor to end customer at the lowest economic cost to all involved in the supply chain and other major projects. Quite proud in my day to be called the "Gatekeeper" Continued to use these skills with the voluntary organisation including the much maligned on here Bowling Club. Wasn't my plan to take the impetus just preparing myself with as many facts as I could use to make a decision on how to vote on the future of a Club I have supported for 70+ years.

We did. Manager offered his opinion upon questioning at AGM on the subject. Club recognise the issue & programmes are tailored to suit, fitness, preparation, matchday & recovery as advised by their medical team. It’s just unfortunate given most are non impact injury.

I was speaking to a colleague at work who is a Celtic fan on Monday morning and he was commenting on how fit he thought the Motherwell team looked. Kettlewell has had a significant amount of misfortune in his time with us, losing players through injury and contract negotiations etc. I do sense that there is a real effort to do things in the right way and that the misfortune of injuries is just an additional challenge that he has had to adapt to as the season has progressed. With RC currently winning tonight, the game tomorrow becomes just that little bit more important. If it was at FP I would be confident but on the plastic pitch I would take a draw with no additional injuries.

You must know exactly how he feels then.

It should be noted that the ban Celtic imposed on the GB was only lifted after their embarrassing but financially rewarding European appearances ended for the season. The only reason they were banned in the first place was to placate Uefa who were very close to closing areas of Celtic Park, with the next stage being a complete European ban. Either of those sanctions would have cost them millions. Our authorities on the other hand will always turn a blind eye. All the shite Celtic spread around regards incidents at Fir Park, Easter Road etc forcing them to act for the good of football was just a smokescreen. Remember Rodgers saw fit to defend the youngster at Livi (?) who the stewards collared when he ran onto the park, the week before a swarm of them did much worse at Fir Park, even getting in the faces of our players. Toxic. We really should just ban them from Fir Park. Financial hit or not. I know that's not going to happen given our finances but it would at least highlight the issue and maybe force the media to have a serious debate.

Could you imagine if he'd come back to us and done that in front of the 'Fir Park faithful' ?? kettlewell and the interim CEO would have been getting pelters 🤣

Every little helps as they say at ASDA, it over to us now to do the business tomorrow night.

If Ross county score stays same we could be 2 points off play off. Makes living game even more vital.

Good work I can see no reason why the monthly income of the Society from Member subscriptions should be a trade secret. Would a figure not be routinely included in the Annual Accounts anyway? From memory I think an amount was openly quoted during previous discussions. Cannot be sure of that figure though so hesitant to quote a figure, and it will be out of date anyway. To allow folk to consider whether the Society alone can continue to provide the financial backup required, the current income level is information required to arrive at a decision re the need for additional investment We have been told what the Club's shortfall is likely to be on a worst case scenario so it is a simple calculation to see how much is required each year to cover that potential shortfall, without draining existing balances.

I have received the info asked, done some work on them, produced a spreadsheet added my comments and suggestions. Added too that the spreadsheet should be passed to the team working on the alternative to outside investors and it should in my opinion be made available to WS members. Not my prerogative to publish on here. Wait and see what happens next.

As far as I know the whole family are Motherwell fans, so here's hoping for something like that!

Want his great grandfather on the board at Motherwell in the 60’s/70’s ? So maybe some affection for the club to do something like Turnbull did to make sure we get as good a transfer fee as possible?

That’s not what he said. I’m afraid that’s typical of too many posters coming on here and putting their own spin on others’ remarks.

Just in case you haven't seen my post on another topic. In response to the Clubs latest email I have requested this information.

Very harsh. Isn't a world beater but certainly not the worst player we have

Unbelievable, hope he makes a speedy recovery. I know he isn't rated by a lot but I like him, never hides

The loss has fuck all to do with money spent on the ground, how many times does this need to be said. The ground improvement were paid from a £3 million 20 year interest free loan from the Scottish Govt. The money could only be spent on facilities. So at most the payments on the loan cost £150,000 the remaining £1,450,000 loss has fuck all to do with the ground and pitch improvements.

Wee Davor has grown in to his role,seems to have a feel for the club,

There is a God, 😇

Having read the responses concerning the damages to seating in the away stand yesterday I have concluded that the club should advise Celtic FC that in future they will not receive any tickets when they play at Fir Park. I recognise that this will cost the club revenue but I think that’s better than the “just suck it up they’re paying for the damages” argument. I’m sick and tired of seeing the rest of Scottish football kowtow to this lot and their fellow bigots from Ibrox.

Ok whatever. There’s no point in engaging with you so I’m done.

Var really needs to get in the bin

Absolutely fair to raise this - while I have very strong views on the debate, I am trying to be factual & balanced so entirely right to highlight if I've missed something! My understanding is that you are correct around the need for the club to outline to auditors later this year that funds are available to cover the following 18 months, and I believe that Derek Weir outlined both that & stated that the Well Society being able to do so was his preferred option (@StAndrew7 may be able to correct me if I'm wrong though!). That's something that might have to happen anyway - regardless of the outcome of the consultation, the Society has to approach the coming months assuming there'll be no external investment because there's every chance that those with offers on the table could pull out, further negotiations could break down, due diligence could raise red flags, or Society members could vote against any proposal. So it's something that the Well Society will absolutely have to prepare for & I am not aware of us as a Board being told that that is not doable. However, I do agree that it's perhaps one of the few vague areas in the discussion, particularly around specific figures - so, in order to make sure we're dealing with the facts, I'm happy to seek a proper bit of clarification on that specific issue from those at the club & post here again with that, rather than responding with my own interpretation of the situation. Hopefully that will be a bit more useful!

As has been mentioned, the director in question moved job role several months ago so, as much as folk are entirely free to link the resignation with perceived "financial trouble", it was always going to happen regardless due to time constraints etc. In terms of the CEO, I think there's a lot of valid criticism to be levelled at the club for the lack of movement in that area previously & certainly around lack of communication. However, at the moment, we are simply in a situation where there will be no CEO as long as the majority shareholding in the club is up for negotiation. Any potential new majority shareholder would want to either appoint their own people or have a very strong input into any appointment, so despite a recruitment process having already been carried out & suitable candidates identified, there'll be no movement there for the time being. The club theoretically could offer the job to one of those suitable candidates tomorrow if the majority shareholding was no longer a part of any negotiations. That's not me trying to sway anyone's vote one way or another, it's simply the reality of the situation - and something I think that was mentioned at the AGM too. As for the Society saying they can raise £600k a year, I'm not sure I've seen anybody say this? The Society is saying it can grow & generate more income than it currently is. The financial situation of the club hasn't changed - where we are now is where we've been for years, we have a model that is essentially based on bringing through young players & selling them on, while also hoping we can finish higher than 10th & get a few cup ties. Because of that model, since fan-ownership we've made a net profit of £2.2m. If that model was to fail for a season, the Society already has the funds to plug the gap that would arise but fully supports looking for external investment to ensure that, if that model failed a second time before the coffers were rebuilt, the gap wouldn't be an issue. That's essentially the whole situation in a nutshell. The idea that the Society or indeed anyone even needs to put £600k in a year just isn't accurate. We have a particular model based around a strong youth academy & selling players for profit - a model that could be in place even if we didn't have fan-ownership - and this is about adding extra protection to maintain the level we can budget for should there be a couple of terrible seasons. Some think that should be achieved by actively looking to move on from fan-ownership, some think that could be achieved by considering options that include moving on from fan-ownership, and some think that can be achieved by maintaining fan-ownership while also looking for external investment that aligns with that (which was, in all fairness, the pitch in the video where potential investors are invited by Leann Crichton to join the 3,700 odd members of the Well Society rather than replace them). In what seems to have become quite an emotive debate all in, there's not really a wrong answer there - just differing opinions of what's possible & different perspectives of how important fan-ownership is to each individual 'Well fan.

So a director has resigned. We still have no CEO. We have 3 board members 2 of them well society. They don’t want to give up control and have put it to a non binding vote. They have said they can raise 600k Pa when just now it’s 100k at most. The LA consortium want us to be a feeder club for their youth. And oh we made a loss of £1.6m. does that sum up the AGM better without the spin ??????

The fact that Wilson, Weir and McMahon are stepping back and have suddenly decided fan ownership isn't viable doesn't seem like a coincidence to me. I think they have always viewed fan ownership as a means to allow them to continue to run the club and have probably convinced themselves they are the only people in the support capable of it. They have obviously put a look of work into the club which they should be thanked for but it always has to be remembered that they all worked for Royal Of Bank Scotland and were in prominent positions when it was run into the ground by Fred Goodwin. Bankers will always say the richest person in the room is the one you have to listen to but the vast majority of us aren't bankers and we all should bear in mind who actually paid the bill for Royal Bank Of Scotland going under and who walked away with a lot of money. I think after this week it's clear that the infamous video wasn't aimed at attracting investors as this has obviously been going on for longer than a few weeks. The video was aimed at us to demoralise us and prime us for the suggestion that we need to sell the Well Society shares to whoever is interested. The reason we don't have a CEO is because the two interested parties want to appoint their own people and Weir and McMahon have chosen to prioritise driving through a sale over the day to day running of the club. A manager who can't win a football match with a secret contract, videos that embarrass us and make it seem like the club have no money, vital positions unfilled on and off field and the threat of a bogeyman auditor popping up again. It's all designed to bully us into handing the club over. The Society needs to be proactive and put out some figures that people can actually understand. We have a top 10 budget in the country but everyone I talk to goes on about "no money". We are spending over £5 million a year on wages while being owned by the Society, that doesn't look like "no money" to me. We need a great deal more information about the club's financial status at the moment relative to other clubs and we need it put forward in way that the average society member can comprehend. We also need people to be able to separate the on and off field factors, we can't abandon fan ownership because Kettlewell and Daws are useless in the transfer market.

Until we have all the information it’s all a bit pie in the sky………..let’s see what’s on offer by who/what etc etc we are getting the usual knicker wetting when we don’t actually know all the facts

The challenge is we've not been profitable. The model hoped we'd sell players and hoped we'd be able to have cup runs to make things meet. That's not happened. Crowds are reducing and unlikely to ever increase, other revenues from tv etc have not been forthcoming. Our cost is 50:50 ratio on players v's other costs. Thinking from the eyes of an investor, if investing funds in a football club (even if I was a Well fan) I'd want control, I wouldn't want a well meaning society to have control the majority control. I personally don't believe we're any better off with a society owned model than we had for the previous +100 years of existence.