dennyc

For info from an EMail I received today after sending in a few questions. I have passed your questions on to chairman Brian McCafferty. Brian is travelling at the moment however will send on a response as soon as possible. Our board member Tom Feely who deals with the accounts will also be able to provide you with full accurate figures as soon as he returns from holiday in Canada. We are also arranging a Q&A over the next couple of weeks. We are looking at having one event where members send in their questions for the board which will be recorded and put on our website and another live event. I will keep you posted on the details.

Everyone seems to just accept that the Well Society are the ones who have the responsibility for paying the debt. Surely it is the Football club who are first in line for the repayment. The Society are only a back-up but it appears that they and most fans have accepted that the Club will not be in a position to pay all or part of the amount due. The best scenario is surely that the Society only need to pay £1 for the shares, with MFC clearing their own debt. I understood that all the background revamp was about returning the Football Club to profitability on a yearly basis, ideally assisted by transfer fees. I don't know, but I think it would be a definite possibility that Mr Hutchison would show some patience time wise if the Club was returning profits and on the way to surviving in it's own right. I guess there are two separate aspects - 1. The return to profitability of MFC on an annual basis and 2. The growth of the Well Society (which Les sees as an indication of fan commitment). Repayment can be from either source but 1. is the best option. In fact, if the Club is not trading profitably before the Well Society takes over, then how long will it survive after that given that there would not be a sizeable back up fund. That is why I feel an indication that the Club is on track with the projections which must have been made at the very start would assist the Society in recruiting Members. Just imagine, Debt repaid, Trading Profitably and substantial funds in The WS coffers as a fall back.

And if the WS keeps having to bale out the Football Club to help meet salaries and the day to day costs of running the organisation how will it ever amass £1m to repay Mr Hutchison. I have a genuine fear that any monies ingathered will be well gone before they can be used to repay the debt. Never mind the fact that it's the Football Club's debt and not the Society's. Despite seeking clarification on this Forum, (and directly to the Society as a member) the question as to whether any loans to MFC are on a short term basis to be repaid from SPFL, Transfer Income etc. has not been answered. The fact that WS Subscriptions were to be protected and would therefore build up into a sizeable sum over a period of time was a major factor in encouraging me to join up. Simple question. How much has been collected in total from day one and how much is currently sitting in the WS Bank Account? Sorry for posting these comments under this topic and not the WS section but my comments are in answer to the question posed by Waldo

On the artificial surface, Accies will do what they always do...get the ball up the park as fast as they can. Play the game in our half and put our defenders/midfielders under all sorts of pressure. It's worked all too well in the past and I'm sick of watching our defensive players fannying about, having balls bounce of their shins and generally looking lost without grass under their feet. So Kennedy in for Laing as Kennedy tends to clear his lines rather than trying to be Franz Beckenbauer, Watt for Law because Watt can actually control a bouncing ball, Grimshaw and Chalmers as part of a midfield four to add some composure and determination, Ainsworth but no Johnson as we cannot afford to be Gung Ho and McDonald either up front supporting Moult or on the bench because he is not a creative midfielder and never will be. Wishful thinking I know. Ripley Watt Kennedy McManus Hammell Ainsworth Lasley Grimshaw Chalmers McDonald or Robinson Moult

Unless someone is going out..permanently or on loan....to free up wages, I just don't get this. Even then it's excessive. Surely any spare cash we do have should be spent on trying to strengthen areas that are costing us points. Both full back positions for example as Law and sadly Hammell are liabilities. Especially as it looks like Watt is not to be given his chance despite looking far and away the best right back we have. I wonder if Dan is about to be released by mutual agreement as they say?

Good point, well made. And I'm sure the poster who raised the subject readily accepts that others may have different views on the subject of political/social banners at football matches. May I suggest it was more the referring to refugees as "Shite" that caused the offence and subsequent OTT response.

Paul Wilson born Bangalore, India although one cap (too many) for Scotland. Dual nationality maybe? Tried John Capaldi for Italy but unless Newarthill has moved that won't work.

Good suggestion and a reasonable approach. I would think it's a certainty that Society Board members are aware of the comments in this forum, either through logging on or by word of mouth. To me, if they choose not to respond to the points raised, that will speak volumes. All that every Motherwell fan wants is the Club to prosper and eventually become self sufficient, hopefully with the support of a strong Well Society. Positive answers to the points raised may lessen the concerns that people have and assist the Society develop as required. Surely for that reason alone there must be some sort of official response.

yes

59 going on 40. Agree. Keep up the great work Bois. Do your thing.

It really would clarify things if a Society Board member could answer the various points this discussion has raised. I know they might have been covered before, perhaps at meetings. However not all members can attend meetings midweek due to work commitments or living miles from Motherwell. Suggestion, how about a meeting before or after a home game. Won't help our overseas guys but maybe help those travelling a distance for a home game. Two birds one stone.

Does Les Hutchison really own the ground...or does he have Security over it to protect his interest free Loan. It's not the same has having his name on the Title deeds as owner. Again discussion raises more questions.

Somebody earlier mentioned the words "lingering doubt" and I think that kind of sums it up for me. If anybody from the Society is reading this can you please advise.... 1 How much has the Society raised to date? 2 How much has been loaned/given to Motherwell FC? 3 How much has been returned by Motherwell FC? These figures should be readily to hand and I assume they will be shown in any Annual Accounts that are made available to Members. Don't get me wrong. I am delighted the Society has been able to help Motherwell avoid administration and if my small contribution helped I am also delighted. However I would like to know where we are at financially and more importantly where are we going. I repeat - Lingering doubt.

So it should come back then unless it is repayment to Les. No offence but r u 100% sure

Fair point. The Society should be all About building up membership/funds and the Football Club should be attending to their own affairs. Asking the Society for financial help should be crossover. I just get the fear that any money gathered by the society is just absorbed Almost immediately by the Club. Can anyone clarify.... Is any money handed over at the current time a short term loAn to be returned a sap or is it gone forever? Sorry about capitals cropping up. Bloody phone.

Although the two are separate I get where Busta Nut is coming from. We hear next to nothing from MFC off field related while the Society seems all too anxious to take on the burdens of the club. If the Football Club are struggling to meet THEIR repayments what are THEY doing to sort things out? A normal business would be negotiating reduced terms or a deferment until cash flow permits. From what I see the whole Hutchison thing has been thrown at the Society. How about. Hey, Les. We have money coming from Sale of Erwin and Murphy. How's about backing off and giving us time.

All I would like is confirmation that the Football Club is using the breathing space provided by the Hutchison funding to get it's financial affairs in order, thus ensuring that when he does up and leave the Business can continue to operate. They should know by now if financial projections are working out given the "expertise" that was drafted in as a condition of Les Hutchison's assistance. A big thing was made of the amateurish set up he inherited and the need for change. Whether the Well Society is privy to that monthly financial information I don't know, but they should be if they are expected to pick up the tab. I accept that it will take time to turn things round and possibly as long as the 5 years mentioned. However a simple statement that we are on track might ease some concerns.If it's true that the Club (with or without Society support) was unable to meet the first scheduled Loan repayment, that suggests to me that matters are not going as planned or maybe that a too optimistic a view was taken regarding the repayment schedule. Although the take up of Society Membership is an important matter, surely the return to profitability of the Football Club as soon as possible is the main issue. If that is not being achieved, the Society (The Fans) cannot cover the losses indefinitely. Chucking away good money after bad and all that. I desperately want the Club to survive and the Society to succeed but the pressure that is being put on fans to contribute further in the absence of any meaningful clarity is unacceptable. The silence from the Football Club regarding non football matters is deafening, bearing in mind that any funds we donate are really for their benefit. Oh, and for the sake of clarity, I do look upon my contributions as an investment with a potential for financial gain. However, before I make further donations, I want to know that Motherwell Football Club is keeping their end of the bargain.

Not quite in the "not a penny more" camp just yet. But before I do contribute further I want to know whether the Football Club is still losing money on a day to day basis. If it is, and the trend over the past few years has not been reversed, then I can see any funds the Society does have/ingathers disappearing very quickly. Surely Financial projections must have been drawn up when the new regime took over. Are we on track? Is the new Business model working? If, on the other hand, the Club is operating in the black then the Society monies are likely to grow.... Providing a means to assist the repayment of Les Hutchison's Loans and thereafter establish a Contingeancy Fund to support the Football Club through short term funding. On that basis I would be more than willing to contribute on a monthly basis. I am sure others would be similarly encouraged if there was some positive news in this regard. What does worry me is that it seems the Society's has taken on the full burden of repaying Les. That should first of all be the responsibility of the Football Club with the Society as a fall back only. Or are we admitting defeat? Thankful though I am for Les's help, I am more concerned about long term planning and seeing the Football Club operate on a sustainable manner. If the Football Club is seen to be making progress I would hope Mr Hutchison would show some patience and understanding. After all, he is hardly in desperate need of the money. I guess what I'm saying is that the Club needs to be able to stand on it's own two feet and for that to be established before I part with any more cash. To rely on everyday funding from the Society cannot continue indefinitely. That is only papering over the cracks.

In answer to what happens when Les moves on, possibly with the Society's money in his hip pocket. Presumably the intention is that the reshaping of the Football Club coupled with the ambition to generate substantial income from the sale of players we have developed will mean the Club will be trading at a profit and thus be self sufficient. There would be no need for the Society to provide day to day funding as long as the Football did not incur losses such as those seen the past few years. If, and it's a big if, the Club can operate profitably then the Members' monthly payments to the Society would eventually provide the Contingeancy Fund which was originally outlined. We can only hope that the business experience which Les has brought to the Club will help to achieve this goal. Also, if the Club can achieve profitability sooner than later, then it is possible that Les could be repaid without using up all the Society's monies. This would be the ideal solution but like many others I am not sure it can be achieved in the short term or soon enough to meet the repayment schedule. I think the Society Board need to clarify the following, rather than issuing statements which appear to me to more threatening rather than encouraging and positive. 1. What funds do the Society currently hold and how much of the original contributions remain? We already know £150k was given to the Club in time of need in return for (worthless?) shares and as such has gone. What of the rest and by how much is the balance growing each month through ongoing contributions? 2. Is it still the case that any monies provided to MFC in the future will be on a short term basis to be repaid as soon as possible? This was the original plan and one of the main reasons I signed up. 3. Is the Club now operating at a profit? We were told Les was insisting on faster, more up to date financial information... presumably to make sure we were not incurring losses each month. In summary Can the Society confirm that the Football Club is now self sufficient...notwithstanding the amounts due to Les...and that the proposed Business model is in place and working? Or at least give an indication when that is likely to be the case. I feel it would be much likelier to attract new Members if some positive news was released in this regard. If however the Club are still trading at a loss then I fear for it's future regardless of how many fans sign up over the next three months.

Strange how different folk see different things. To my mind a creative middle to front midfielder is exactly what we are lacking. How often do we look incapable of opening up defences and killing off the opposition? In the two games last week it was up to either MacDonald or Clarkson to feed the ball through to the forwards/wingers and, with the odd exception, it just did not work. Lasley and Leitch are just not able to fill that role and it looks like the Manager does not think Cadden can either. Result, our keeper and defenders lose faith in their midfield and start humping 50 yard passes trying to pick out the wide players. The ball flying into touch over the heads of Ainsworth, Thomas or Johnson is just frustrating and pointless. With the correct supply I have no doubt any of the three wingers could tear most defences to shreds and provide numerous chances to Moult or Fletcher. Surely a mix of Lasley, Leitch, Taylor and Pearson when he is fit can provide the drive and ball winning required. If played centrally I am sure Conor Grant could provide the link up/creativity required. If that means tough decisions have to be made about who plays and who sits on the bench so be it. Under McCall I was sick of watching players struggle in positions they could not adapt to. Unless we sign someone along the lines of Grant I fear more of the same this season. Players should start in their correct position or not at all, injuries permitting. Oh, and Watt if fit must play right back. May be only my view, but there you have it

Would be happy with Grant as long as he is played in the centre of midfield where I think we badly need some creativity. A waste of his abilities if he is stuck out wide.

£20 sent via paypal. Well done again for setting this up.

Cannot understand all the negativity re signing Clarkson. I don't recall the same reaction when we signed a thirty three year old cripple in January who had been plying his trade in India because no one in the UK wanted him. And I think most would agree that the signing of Pearson was critical to us staying in the top division. Most are also looking forward to seeing him drive on the team from midfield this season. Not all our signings will be youngsters with sell on potential and a squad balance has to be struck. He's only 29 for goodness sake, and recalling how he performed at Fir Park for Dundee, I believe Clarkson is worth the punt and will be a valuable squad member. He wants to play for us which helps and clearly is looking forward to helping to develop the younger, less experienced players. Can our new super duper medical staff keep him fit? I don't know, but let's not write him off before he's even pulled on the shirt.

I see the BBC reporting is up to their usual standard, quoting a one year deal re Ainsworth. Typical incorrect, lazy reporting whenever the Old Firm are not involved.

Google image search brings up Andy Paton and team receiving League Cup. Watters scored in the final and the guy front left looks a weebit like the photocard . Could be your man