New Investment Options

[grizzlyg]

29 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

It's called having a laugh. Try it sometime.

I try to make people laugh sometimes......not always a success!! 😜😜

[TheoBair14]

Theo Bair one of the main stars of the show

[texanwellfan]

2 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

Phew!! Killie paying at least £6 a week for a guy who hasn't even started for him and basically all they are aiming for is 4th place

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

[wellfan]

3 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

Phew!! Killie paying at least £6 a week for a guy who hasn't even started for him and basically all they are aiming for is 4th place

6 quid is a bargain!

[grizzlyg]

1 hour ago, texanwellfan said:

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

DOH!!! forgot the K

[grizzlyg]

7 minutes ago, wellfan said:

6 quid is a bargain!

See...I can make people laugh 🤣🤣🤣🤣.  Forgot to put K after the £6

[Yabba's Turd]

6 hours ago, wellfan said:

6 quid is a bargain!

Depends how it got sick

[steelboy]

Are the Society going to be completey silent on this?

They don't have to talk about the Yank's offer but it's strange they haven't put anything out highlighting that fan ownership has given the club a solid platform for the past 7 years. 

 

[bobbybingo]

39 minutes ago, steelboy said:

Are the Society going to be completey silent on this?

They don't have to talk about the Yank's offer but it's strange they haven't put anything out highlighting that fan ownership has given the club a solid platform for the past 7 years. 

 

Would that not be seen as suggesting how members should vote? Should the Society be taking a position on this offer?

[Kmcalpin]

15 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

Would that not be seen as suggesting how members should vote? Should the Society be taking a position on this offer?

Yes, I think it would Bobby. If it ever comes to this, both proposals could be put to members with FAQs and an idiots guide for folk like me.

[steelboy]

15 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

Would that not be seen as suggesting how members should vote? Should the Society be taking a position on this offer?

Of course the Society should be taking a position of whether or not the Society is capable of being majority shareholder.

Any Society board members who feel that it isn't should resign (particularly if they also happen to have a significant private share holding).

[wellfan]

26 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

Would that not be seen as suggesting how members should vote? Should the Society be taking a position on this offer?

I see the society as a member organisation, such as a trade union. Therefore, as a member of a trade union at work, I would expect them to put a position to me (and other members) on important workplace issues. 

[joewarkfanclub]

1 hour ago, steelboy said:

Are the Society going to be completey silent on this?

They don't have to talk about the Yank's offer but it's strange they haven't put anything out highlighting that fan ownership has given the club a solid platform for the past 7 years. 

 

They sent out this email 4 days ago....

Thursday 4 April 2024

Dear member,
 
A statement from The Well Society
The Well Society, as the football club’s majority shareholder, would like to acknowledge the statement from the football club yesterday in which it was confirmed that discussions between the Executive Board and a US-based investor had reached the stage of entering into an agreement on a non-binding Heads of Terms (a legal agreement to explore options).

It is important to acknowledge that, while the Well Society Board as an entity is not involved in these negotiations, we are encouraged by the suggestion that the investor would be keen to work in partnership with the Well Society, should investment come to fruition.

We believe that the fan ownership model has – over the piece – been successful. We also acknowledge that, via our recent consultation, a majority of members who voted expressed an openness to consider investment options that may result in revised operating models. As the majority shareholder, we will continue to work on Society plans to engage fans, maximise membership and raise funds, while these negotiations continue.

Things are at an early stage and we do not have the information as yet to reach a decision on whether we, as the elected representatives of the Well Society, believe that an agreement would be credible or beneficial to the football club.

However, should these discussions between the Executive Board and investor prove successful, we would then be in a position to formulate our own position and - most importantly - consult with members of the Well Society on how to proceed, sharing detailed information with you at that stage.

Rest assured that you - our members - will always be those with the responsibility of agreeing to or rejecting any investment opportunity which potentially alters the operating model of the club and the Well Society's shareholding.
 
Thank you,
 
The Well Society Board
Tel: 01698 338009
Email: well.society@motherwellfc.co.uk

[joewarkfanclub]

I think folks just need to show a little patience whilst this all plays out.....

[steelboy]

On the one hand you have the club chairman Jim McMahon funding a marketing campaign to give the impression that we need an American investor when he was in secret talks with an American investor. 

On the other hand you have "We believe the fan ownership model has - over the piece - been successful".  They can't even bring themselves to say it's worked without adding in a weird qualifier. What does - over the piece - even mean?

[joewarkfanclub]

Just now, steelboy said:

On the one hand you have the club chairman Jim McMahon funding a marketing campaign to give the impression that we need an American investor when he was in secret talks with an American investor. 

On the other hand you have "We believe the fan ownership model has - over the piece - been successful".  They can't even bring themselves to say it's worked without adding in a weird qualifier. What does - over the piece - even mean?

I think it means they accept that mistakes have been made and certain things could have been done better.

I dont think anyone would argue with that.

Given we were the first club in Scotland to go fan owned, there was no blueprint and we were pretty much making it up ourselves. Then Les came along and moved the goalposts.

I dont think the Society has maximised its potential thus far. But Im more confident that the right people are in place now and we should see significant improvement going forward.

[joewarkfanclub]

Thats not to say that I dont think there is room for an investor 

I think there is and any additional revenue stream is welcome as long as it fits with the ethos of the club and we remain fan owned.

For me its definitely 51% minimum fan ownership.

Happy to see how investment works alongside that and if we can benefit from the business acumen of any partners as well as the obvious advantage of additional finance then its a win/win.

But lets see what the offer looks like first.

[bobbybingo]

37 minutes ago, wellfan said:

I see the society as a member organisation, such as a trade union. Therefore, as a member of a trade union at work, I would expect them to put a position to me (and other members) on important workplace issues. 

That seems a fair comparison to me, though your opening words, 'I see the society as....' are interesting. I think a lot of people may be asking the question, what should the Well Society board's position/function be in this situation, given it hasn't been tested till now.

 

 

[bobbybingo]

22 minutes ago, steelboy said:

On the one hand you have the club chairman Jim McMahon funding a marketing campaign to give the impression that we need an American investor when he was in secret talks with an American investor. 

On the other hand you have "We believe the fan ownership model has - over the piece - been successful".  They can't even bring themselves to say it's worked without adding in a weird qualifier. What does - over the piece - even mean?

You know what 'over the piece' means. Nothing's perfect.

It sounds like you believe they should make an unequivocal statement on this right now. Out of interest, which side do you think they should come down on?

[Mintymac]

The way I see it panning out is that if the executive board and investor come to agreement then this will be looked at by the major shareholder , the Well Society and from there the members of the WS will be given a vote . 
This vote I’m pretty sure as with most similar negotiations will come with a recommendation from the Well Society board as to whether they think we should accept or reject and and there reasons for that .

However as similar to any trade union negotiations it will be up to the members to have the final say whatever the Well Society Board recommend /say .

One thing I’d like to see is a meeting being held by the Well Society prior to any voting of its members with representatives from all interested parties present to allow us a to then make an informed decision .

This happened when the Well Society came to fruition with a well attended meeting at the Alona Hotel when all parties were represented and I think it would certainly help any undecided members on how to cast there vote .

[joewarkfanclub]

3 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

That seems a fair comparison to me, though your opening words, 'I see the society as....' are interesting. I think a lot of people may be asking the question, what should the Well Society board's position/function be in this situation, given it hasn't been tested till now.

 

 

For me, the Society Board are the members representatives within the club and our access to influence.

They will clearly have greater insight to whats going on within the club and access to more information than us.

I think they also have a responsibility for the security & stability of the club and to the Society model.

That should only change if they no longer believe fan ownership is viable. 

I think once the details of this deal are known and the Society Board have had a chance to examine the proposals, they should put forward the pro's and cons to the members, but ultimately they should take a position on it and give their reasons why.

That way we can all decide our own position based on all the information available.

Its our club. We should decide what happens to it going forward.

 

[Kmcalpin]

39 minutes ago, steelboy said:

On the one hand you have the club chairman Jim McMahon funding a marketing campaign to give the impression that we need an American investor when he was in secret talks with an American investor.

I think this reflects the nature of the Executive Board, which in recent times has been almost divided. Maybe "divided" is slightly too strong a term. Maybe operated as two entities.

Mintymac is right. When the time comes, a meeting or meetings should be held for members, and probably also for private shareholders.

IF the Society makes a recommendation to members, it has to be careful how that is worded and not be seen to rubbish any private proposal. A fine line to tread. I'm sceptical of a "trade union" approach as I had a couple of bad personal experiences of that during my working career.

[steelboy]

I've got a feeling if it's a deal which gives away the majority shareholding McMahon will be putting pressure on the Society board to stay neutral. 

The fact it's apparently going to come down to a Yes/No decision before the Society gets any input at all is absurd. If this guy actually had good intentions he would be coming to the Society and directly asking what concerns we have rather than cutting us out. 

[santheman]

13 minutes ago, steelboy said:

I've got a feeling if it's a deal which gives away the majority shareholding McMahon will be putting pressure on the Society board to stay neutral. 

The fact it's apparently going to come down to a Yes/No decision before the Society gets any input at all is absurd. If this guy actually had good intentions he would be coming to the Society and directly asking what concerns we have rather than cutting us out. 

He's already had some informal discussions with the Well Society board and I believe more are planned as things develop.

Jay gave an update over on P&B a few days ago.

Fired up another laptop and it appears fine on here - but I thought I better hurry on and post before I'm silenced on this too... 

Nah, all joking aside - I've been lurking and reading the thread this week, lots of good points, and I know I've been tagged a few times. Don't want to go back and multi-quote everything, but I do want to respond to a couple of points.

Firstly, I believe @capt_oats had a few questions about the Well Society's role in the investment video - I'm going to just take the easy option here and just not answer those. It's something that the Society would respond to officially if someone sent in those questions directly by e-mail.

In terms of the current negotiations themselves, I'd just reiterate what it's in the Society statement - that the Well Society Board is not a part of those negotiations. I know there's a lot of comments and questions around why that is, and whether that's right or not, but again, I'm going to opt out from responding to that. Essentially, that's what the situation is - the Chairman & Executive Board have been discussing options with potential investors, and one of those has reached a point that all parties currently involved are happy to proceed to a next stage.

That said, it's not the case that the Society is kept entirely in the dark. I think it was confirmed at the club AGM that the Society had met with both interested parties at the time. We have also received some updates on progress and some key aspects of discussions, which I would imagine have allowed each of us as individuals to at least start to form some initial thoughts on whether the deal would be good/bad/indifferent for the club and whether members would be likely to think the deal was good/bad/indifferent for the club, but there's no collective position and we haven't had any discussions around reaching one. Basically, it wouldn't be right to do that until we were in receipt of any finalised agreement that the Chairman & Executive Board had reached with an investor and we were able to fully understand what that could mean for the club and for the Well Society.

If we reach that point, Well Society members would be balloted and, in order to make a fully informed decision, would be provided with as much detail as possible. I think it's worth flagging that any potential investor will have been told from the off that their offer would need to be cleared by Well Society members, so it will not come as any surprise that extensive details of any offer should need to be released to members. If any potential investor had a problem with that, I'd suggest they'd have been better looking into a club that wasn't fan-owned - so I don't foresee a problem in making sure members are informed when it comes to a vote.

I think @StAndrew7 has raised a question about whether Society members are club shareholders or not. The answer is no - the Well Society is the shareholder and Well Society members are exactly that, members. So it's up to the Well Society as the majority shareholder how it would vote in any shareholder vote - and it is the democratic and moral position that the Well Society's vote would be guided by its members.

Just on that too - firstly, there's no guarantees we reach a point where there's a shareholding vote or Well Society member ballot, we all know how negotiations work and things might just not reach that point. However, there's also a discussion to be had by the Well Society Board itself around how it conveys its views on any potential offer. There's obviously no automatic assumption that anybody will care what the Society Board itself thinks is positive or negative but the discussion still needs to be had around the communications that accompany any ballot, whether that's remaining neutral, providing a recommendation one way or another, providing arguments for or against, or whatever.

The last thing I'd just highlight is that, while the negotiations carry on between the Chairman & Executive Board and the potential investor, the Well Society is just cracking on with the work it needs to do as majority shareholder. No-one would expect the Society just to sit on its thumbs assuming transformational investment is on the way, instead we continue to approach things with October's refreshed Board, and the fresh approach and enthusiasm that has resulted, by ploughing on with a lot of work to ensure that fan-ownership is even stronger in the future, regardless of what happens here.

Contrary to what some people seem to enjoy suggesting on Twitter, fan-ownership demonstrably works, the previous years have shown us that quite conclusively. However, it absolutely can - and needs - to be better. The workstreams that the Society has formed have already hit the ground round with some fantastic work underway in comms, governance, events, fundraising and membership. As the comms workstream lead, I'm buzzing about the standard of contributor we've got on board (at the risk of complimenting a P&B stalwart too much ) and we've already done some fantastic work around identifying what needs to improve - a comms strategy will be finalised in the next week or two, and a return to a standalone Well Society website, that provides members with all the actual information they want and need, is already underway.

And as a whole, the Well Society Board continues to put together its own strategy and plan, for both the Society and the football club, that it is hoped members can put their faith in should the Society remain as majority shareholder. So I think at our end, we're just cracking on feeling quite positive about what we're doing - the Well Society will grow, members will find that the information and experience they've been deprived or found difficult to access beforehand is soon accessible, fan-ownership will continue to work, and I'm personally very enthusiastic that the new CEO comes into the club with a wealth of experience around income generation, following a recruitment process that the Well Society Board was heavily involved in.

So aye, not actually sure if any of that is particularly useful as such. Basically, the Chairman & Executive Board will continue to discuss things with the potential investor, while the Well Society continues the work we'd identified needed done prior to the investment video even going out - work that we're really positive about and work that we think will see growth in the Society, increased income generation in the club, and a platform to take the already-working fan-ownership model at Fir Park, and make it better. Of course, the perfect addition to that is positive investment that works for both the football club and the Well Society, and so if that is what comes from these negotiations, then that will be a further thing to be positive about.

 

 

[SteelmaninOZ]

Thanks Jay learned more from that than the usual suspects.