New Investment Options

[Yabba's Turd]

The pertinent issue is, you're full of bile and bullshit, and will slant anything the club does as negative and not meeting your standard.

[StAndrew7]

On 3/16/2024 at 5:34 PM, steelboy said:

They haven't been looking for a CEO at all since well before Christmas. 

Apart from the interviews that took place in February as discussed at the AGM, aye? Shut yer hole.

[dennyc]

4 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Apart from the interviews that took place in February as discussed at the AGM, aye? Shut yer hole.

And the AGM  comments as reported on here that continuing the CEO appointment at this stage might be pointless given the Investment discussions taking place.

 

[joewarkfanclub]

A number of credible candidates for CEO were identified during the interview process.

The whole thing has been put on hold until the investment issue has been resolved because at least one of the investors wants to appoint their own CEO.

Any suggestion that the current board have been ignoring this is patently nonsense.

[Yabba's Turd]

I don't care what you think. Steelboy is straight up posting false statements as facts.

Show what's personal, he is full of bile and bullshit, we've established that over his years of posting.

You can flounce all you like, steelboy lied, and he's been called out for it.

[David]

1 hour ago, wellgirl said:

Either people have the right to say what they want on here or they don't.

They don't have the right to say what they want on here. 

This isn't a democratically run public park where everyone has a right to be. It's a website run and owned by certain individuals. 

1 hour ago, wellgirl said:

Calling posters out as a mod is a really bad look as far as I'm concerned.

He's not a mod. He's an admin. There's a big difference. I'm a mod, which means I give up a little of my free time to help out where I can in running the forum, but what an admin is responsible for requires a whole lot more involvement. 

The truth is, as harsh as it sounds, he can call out whoever he likes. He doesn't, though, unless there's a reason for it. This forum is pretty relaxed when it comes to rules and how people are treated, with a lot of leeway given. That approach comes from the top down.

I know that you personally have had some issues with how this forum is run and the leeway I mentioned, which the moderating team didn't agree with you on.

It's a football forum. For the most part, the mod team lets stuff slide because football is a passionate subject, and people get heated, particularly after games when the result hasn't gone our way. I think, by and large, we do quite a good job in that regard. 

Basically, we are a small team, but we've done okay the past few years, I think. But it's important to remember that being allowed to post here isn't a right. The admins in charge make the rules, and the mods help keep things flowing as best we can. People can choose to either stick around and follow the rules set by the admin team or not. 

[steelboy]

18 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Apart from the interviews that took place in February as discussed at the AGM, aye? Shut yer hole.

So when are we getting a new CEO?

[santheman]

1 hour ago, steelboy said:

So when are we getting a new CEO?

Just after you get a new a***hole to replace the one you've just had ripped.

[steelboy]

2 hours ago, santheman said:

Just after you get a new a***hole to replace the one you've just had ripped.

There was talking of American investors in January so I believe that they were interviewing candidates in February as much as I believe Kettlewell's contract was extended last summer. 

[StAndrew7]

4 hours ago, steelboy said:

So when are we getting a new CEO?

At the appropriate time based on negotiations regarding investment in the club, as reported by both the Club and Society boards at and after the AGM. I'm not arguing the point that appointment of CEO has been put on hold; I'm contesting your suggestion that nothing has happened since Christmas.

2 minutes ago, steelboy said:

There was talking of American investors in January so I believe that they were interviewing candidates in February as much as I believe Kettlewell's contract was extended last summer. 

So you're saying that both the Club and Well Society boards are lying to the fans about it, then? Evidence, please.

[wellfan]

36 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

So you're saying that both the Club and Well Society boards are lying to the fans about it, then? Evidence, please.

I'm not sure any deliberate lying is happening or is being suggested to have happened. However, given the recent mistakes made and embarrassing failures in basic communications on big issues, you can see why fans will and do speculate on what the hell is and has been going on.

Clear and consistent communication is required to build trust between a football club and its supporters, which generally prevents speculation and accusation. I think we could all agree that both the club and society (the latter to a lesser degree now that it has new board members) have been crap at comms for a while now. 

[StAndrew7]

14 minutes ago, wellfan said:

I'm not sure any deliberate lying is happening or is being suggested to have happened. However, given the recent mistakes made and embarrassing failures in basic communications on big issues, you can see why fans will and do speculate on what the hell is and has been going on.

Clear and consistent communication is required to build trust between a football club and its supporters, which generally prevents speculation and accusation. I think we could all agree that both the club and society (the latter to a lesser degree now that it has new board members) have been crap at comms for a while now. 

I'm not disputing that re: poor communication in the past and have said the same in other posts.

My point is, and will continue to be, that there are what I believe to be fallacies (I concede that lying might have been the wrong word to use in my post) being posted on here without any evidence, when, in this instance, we have evidence of (decent, not brilliant) communication to the contrary directly from both the Club and Society.

If any evidence can be produced to contradict what I and others heard from our Chairman, CEO and club directors at the AGM and have also heard and read from Well Society Board members in person and on this forum, I'd be happy to change my position.

[wellfan]

26 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

My point is, and will continue to be, that there are what I believe to be fallacies (I concede that lying might have been the wrong word to use in my post) being posted on here without any evidence, when, in this instance, we have evidence of (decent, not brilliant) communication to the contrary directly from both the Club and Society.

Introducing fallacies will always be a feature of fan forums, whether deliberate or otherwise, particularly in the face of poor comms. 

[StAndrew7]

3 minutes ago, wellfan said:

Introducing fallacies will always be a feature of fan forums, whether deliberate or otherwise, particularly in the face of poor comms. 

Just because it's always been a feature doesn't mean it should be accepted or not challenged when there is evidence to the contrary.

[wellfan]

3 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

Just because it's always been a feature doesn't mean it should be accepted or not challenged when there is evidence to the contrary.

My point wasn't that it shouldn't be challenged; it should be. My point was that it'll be everpresent, regardless.

In this context, it's also fair to note that it's reasonable for fans to display mistrust for what the club/society chooses to tell them when there are significant things that both have chosen/forgot to communicate to us recently. 

Furthermore, much like it's accepted that perceived fallacies should be challenged, it's also acceptable to question the narrative the club/society presents to us. There's maybe a more nuanced way to go about the latter, however.

[Yabba's Turd]

On 3/19/2024 at 12:12 PM, StAndrew7 said:

 

So you're saying that both the Club and Well Society boards are lying to the fans about it, then? Evidence, please.

Don't feed the troll Kenny lad

[Clackscat]

On 3/16/2024 at 10:59 AM, Kmcalpin said:

An interesting survey from the Society, which I received yesterday. Hope all members received the email.

https://t.co/TIOYhXivPN

Its also illuminanting the number of members who have updated their contact details.

Haven't received it although i was approached by a couple of nice chaps from WS on Saturday with a similar but not the same survey.

Have always received weekly e mails so will check with them whats happened here.

[Kmcalpin]

Any progress updates on the discussion with external parties or with the Society proposals? 

[bobbybingo]

The game's afoot....

 

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/04/03/agreement-with-us-based-investor/

[mio]

24 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

The game's afoot....

 

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/04/03/agreement-with-us-based-investor/

Really interesting, wonder who the family are and what they do. The Kardashians like football don’t they? 🤣

[FirParkCornerExile]

Well the Kardashians have plenty tits , could be a good fit. Knowing our luck it will be Trump.😁

[steelboy]

The rumour going about is that they only want to put in £300,000 a year for five years and are talking about bringing in more investors later.

Society members would need to be stupid to vote for that. Any credible buyer would pay what the club is worth. 

It also has to be questioned why the Society are still fundraising when this is moving forward.

[Onthefringes]

A nothing statement on nothing confirmed.

Its arguable McMahon is determined to make it look like his wee video worked wonders rather than putting the club first.

[steelboy]

Also it stinks that this has been going for months and there hadn't been a society members meeting to discuss what's happening.

Surely they don't think they can just give the club away via a few emails? 

[FirParkCornerExile]

10 minutes ago, steelboy said:

The rumour going about is that they only want to put in £300,000 a year for five years and are talking about bringing in more investors later.

Society members would need to be stupid to vote for that. Any credible buyer would pay what the club is worth. 

It also has to be questioned why the Society are still fundraising when this is moving forward.

if they are not wanting a majority control its surely £300,000 a year we currently don't get. Certainly for that level of investment I wouldn't expect much control to be ceded to them.