texanwellfan

I saw 1.5 million quoted as the proposed investment over a few years but not sure if that’s correct. We need all the help we can get but that amount doesn’t get me too excited. I could probably run through 1.5 Million nae bother in 3 years by myself. Now 1.5 million a year is getting better but not sure it’s “life changing” for Motherwell FC but could be enough so that we don’t have to worry so much about falling out of existence. Whether it’s 1.5 million a year or over a few years, I don’t think that’s enough to warrant giving up controlling share. I understand it’s not just money but also the integrity and intentions of the investor. All things being equal and asssuming the integrity of the investor I’d be looking for much larger investment than 1.5 million to give up controlling interest.

I’d really like to see Gent and Vale both back here playing next season. Both are pretty handy and always put in a good shift. Players who have some skill and put in a shift are like gold dust to teams like us.

I’d be happy enough to see loan deal again for next season if that’s the only way to get him.

Exactly, we should be trying to set up our possible “target” players so that we can at least get some sort of money when they leave. Surely we can come to some sort of agreement with them regarding contract extensions versus offers from other teams? Would love to keep Gent and Vale but not sure what that would take and wouldn’t be surprised if they already have good offers lined up for next season already or under discussion.

I’m waiting on result from Dundee v Rangers before I start commenting on this game but either way we should obviously be trying to win it.

We didn’t start playing till about 40 mins but much better second half. Less said about their second goal the better, against the run of play and thought it was our undoing at that point. However, we get a bit of luck with VAR for a change and that fires us up. While there’s more than stats to a performance they do make good reading when backed up with a 3-2 win and would support the phrase “a well deserved win”.

Hibs beat. The dream lives on

Keep the ball up their end.

WTF

Yaaaasssss

No encroachment from us. Goal.

Terrible call but take it

Never a penalty

What are we even looking at on var

FFS Kelly

Was from open play.

I hope we improve a bit, soon. This is a hard watch so far.

I like Halliday. Didn’t play that well last week but I think most of our players are going to be like that some good weeks and some bad weeks. Just not so good when we encounter this weeks where they all have a bad game on the same day !!

At this point I’d be very happy to see us beat them and just award 3 points to rangers. Oh and award us 3 points against hibs 😜

They should also be under the gun to get it fixed for next season.

We could have got him for a tenner a week then??

Covid? edit: sorry, didn’t see other posts from fellow smart asses before I replied.

In other words, “We are not going to postpone the game till you are all half way here”.

But we are talking about the club so shouldn’t we be going with the majority of the shareholders??

One thing that I don’t fully understand is that the well society is the major share holder but votes as a unit (from what I’ve read but could be wrong). So does it get viewed as ‘one vote’ on the board or does it get viewed as the vote of X amount of share holders? If it gets treated as the vote of X amount of share holders by the board (voting as a unit) then I don’t think that is right. If the WS vote is split 60/40 or 30/70 or whatever it should be presented that way at the board to reflect the will of the share holders rather than taking the vote of a group of shareholders and basically flipping their vote, whichever way. I can see simple majority votes when the WS wants to decide on an action that is a decision to be made by the WS, like should we give money to the club to help cover cost of pitch upgrade but when it’s a vote to be made regarding an action to be taken by the club the each share holder should have their vote counted as they cast it and not nullified by being in a group such as the WS. Another point is that not all members contribute the same so does higher contributions mean more votes or shared? That applies to voting to decide as a unit and also if they were to present any vote as a ratio of for and against.