Stuwell2

I think that most on here would agree that if it was all down to finances then year in year out the top six would be Rangers, Celtic, Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen and A.N.Other between us, STM, STJ and Killie (and DUTD when they get back up). I don’t think us making top six is punching above our weight but at the moment outwith the old scum and Hearts it is down to manager/squad and a slice of luck which teams make it, unfortunately this season we fell short.

With some of the posts on here over the last few days, this thought gives me the fear.

I’d argue that any investor who doesn’t invest in his target customers will lose them and his investment.

Did Les get his money back? From memory there was an initiative where he matched fans cash with his up to the £1m he had put in initially. Was a bit of a gimmick to encourage fan to join the society. From my point of view having the community trust means we engage with our potential support which in the long term brings in income through youngsters asking to be taken to games and local businesses giving something so they are seen to be helping the community. Also I think that the CT gets grants from the governments and other agencies as long as they can invest a % which is where the WS helps out when there is a shortfall. Folk might see this as wasted cash but I think the indirect return to the club is probably more than what the WS pays to the CT.

I find it quite puzzling that folk talk about the WS (as main shareholders)needing to stop putting money into the club at the same time extolling the virtues of Bowie, Budges, Gilmour and other investors at other clubs. I’m sure that if a rich Well fan was willing to do to same - or Boyle had been able to find a buyer willing to do that - then the WS would keep the cash it raises through membership or wouldn’t even exist. Unfortunately or possibly fortunately this hasn’t happened so the WS, as owner of the club, has a responsibility to keep the club going and put money into things deemed by the club board as important to the clubs future. I’m sure the the WS board look at every request and the case put to them by the club board before handing over any cash.

My understanding of it is that the WS board elect two members to be on the exec board to protect the interests of the WS so there will always be two members who are on both boards. Understand your concerns regarding potential conflicts of interests if they are also private shareholders but as the society needs to put any proposal to the members and they will have the final say then if - and it’s a big if (more like bullshit) - that they are out to line their own pockets, then no matter how it was dressed up, I’d hope that there are enough society members smart enough to tell them to GTF. Edit: I’d also point out that these people are only two of the society’s board and for anyone to believe that some sort of a shady deal is being done and will be presented to members by the board as a good deal and asked to accept it, then there would have to be more that those two in on it which I personally believe is, like the rest of this theory, a crock o shit.

The Society board has a responsibility to the Society members which will involve them doing due diligence on both the final agreement submitted to them and the person involved. After that they will draft a statement to be distributed to the members after it has been cleared by lawyers. Once this has been done and distributed it will be up to the society members to vote on acceptance or rejection by a simple majority. Im not sure if there is a time limit on between becoming a member and being given the right to vote but I’d advise anyone wishing to vote on this who isn’t already a member to join the society now or forever haud yer wheesht . To often smart arses on here and other places seem happy to stir up shite when if they were serious a quick search would have given them the correct answer rather than them posting crap on here. Im not having a go at anyone who genuinely asks questions but those who ask loaded questions to stir up trouble because after winning this weekend they can’t post their usual shite about the manager/team. Rant over and I feel better.

I’d like to keep both McGinn (1year deal) and SOD (1or2year deal). Both have something to give but being 33 and 31 respectively there probably isn’t room for both of them unless their wage demands reflect their age leaving us enough to pay a younger guy who can play there and develop with their help until - hopefully - our academy player is able to step up. At their age I’d suspect both of them will be able to get one more decent contract either in the Scottish premiership or championship so both could be off and I’d say thanks for their time here and best luck to them.

In his position would you have been happy with “probably unlikely” to help StM overtake you and kept the cash or spent it to be sure?

Not sure if he was serious 🧐

Wellgirl & bobbybingo, what I’m saying is that at the window Bowie couldn’t know which KVV would return - the goal machine from last season if he got himself sorted or the no confidence one from this season - so decided to hedge his bets and not take the chance that StM got a goal machine. That’s why I’m saying it’s potentially money well spent. As a side note, while checking the league to see how many wins Killie still need to secure 4th, I’ve just worked out that if they get beaten in every game from now to the end of the season, StM only win against Killie but also lose the rest and we win every game out-with the OF then we make 4th - how much of a shock would that be

I view it differently, signing KVV stopped StM getting him and if he’d hit form for StM then 4th place would have been lost to Killie. Further to that Killie getting 4th and making Europe will just about cover the cost of a new pitch so paying KVV circa £100K could be money well spent.

Initial thoughts on the game are we were terrible in the first half - unsure if that was because of the state of the half of the park we were shooting towards, piss poor play, over cautious tactics or a combination of all of the above. Second half passing and tactics to go forward improved and we looked better but WTF was Kelly doing at the second goal? I thought our penalty was never a penalty and that VAR/referee bottled not giving it but will reserve judgment until I see it again. After that the rest of the game was manic and we could have scored another 1 or 2 goals. Delighted with the result.

Nobody even trying to header that Also, passing as bad as last week - and that’s me allowing for the pitch.

If the game is postponed that will be their 5th home game and given that they only play 19 league games at home that’s 25% so far and that could still rise. It appears to me that they priorities wages for players over making the park up to standard and as such should be punished either financially, point reduction or both.

Obviously we need to wait and see what the offer is and how it is structured but what do folk seriously think would be an acceptable level of investment for a minority control of the club? I don’t know but the £300K per year mentioned earlier is less than 10% of our current turnover but if the £1.5M figure I seem to remember as our players wage bill is correct and the money all went to this then that’s a 20% increase. You could equate that to one extra player on just under £6K per week, two extra players on £3K or three extra players on £2K per week. Would bringing in one, two or three players who would accept these wages really change things or guarantee our top flight survival long term? I don’t think so. In which case what would be the point or worth of accepting such an offer?

Piss poor passing, piss poor marking, overall a piss poor game

I don’t like the time it takes to make a decision but if they have to review 3 or 4 cameras then recheck to confirm things to avoid mistakes then - no matter how pissed off I feel I can accept that - BUT to take so long and then make the wrong decision is incompetence and that should get them removed from the job. The thing is tv footage can be reviewed anywhere so why not have foreign retired refs (who have no affiliation to the incompetent clique we have or Scottish clubs) do the review’s. Mistakes will probably still be made but we would know that they were honest mistakes.

It would be interesting to see what the league table would look like if the goals/penalties that were allowed/disallowed were left as the original on field decisions. would we be better off or worse off? Obviously this would still be inaccurate as sending offs etc which potential changed games can’t be taken into account.

Well if the country is overtaken by a totalitarian regime and public executions at football grounds become the thing………..

I was in favour of VAR - or more the idea of VAR - but now I think it’s a joke, not just here but down south as well. If it’s going to be kept it needs to be stripped back to basic’s.

Agree with your sentiments and probably the WS board does too, which is why I suspect they’re having a collection for the community trust to save them having to be seen to give the trust money directly. If this raises £2000 for the trust then it’s £2000 that the WS doesn’t need to give them.

I’m thinking that possibly by raising money this way it allows the society to have to give less to the trust therefore it’s indirectly beneficial for the society’s bank balance without being seen to be shaking the bucket for themselves.

Agree with you on the low response, it’s disappointing. A few members may have changed their email address and not notified the society, a few may have sadly passed away, some people may have put money in who aren’t fans but liked the idea of a fan owned club and feel they shouldn’t make decision on the future of the club but added up that’s not enough to make a difference. The apathy concerns me as like you I voted yes so that no opinion’s were taken off the table but I’m definitely not in favour of giving up on fan ownership and hope that between now and - if - an offer is put before us then the society will try to check that they have the correct and updated details of as many members as possible. min not in favour of having the board members standing at games looking for the members as this could lead to them being abused by members/non members.

A joy to have so many to choose from but despite giving me a couple of heart in mouth moments I’ve gave it to Liam Kelly.