New Investment Options

[steelboy]

14 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

Standing up for fan ownership by saying he wants to end it.  If that's true, fair enough - prove it.

I meant whoever leaked to Gavin McCafferty is standing up for fan ownership. 

Nick McPheat asked Barmack if he wanted majority control and he didn't deny it. 

[bobbybingo]

7 minutes ago, steelboy said:

I meant whoever leaked to Gavin McCafferty is standing up for fan ownership. 

Nick McPheat asked Barmack if he wanted majority control and he didn't deny it. 

I know what you meant - even though Gavin McCafferty (as far as I can see) didn't mention an unnamed insider as the source of his statement, he just came straight out with it. 

I'm not ideologically for or against fan ownership, but if we continue down that road I don't expect us to be shopping for players or managers anywhere other than where we currently are. I can accept that, as long as the club survives. Will you?

[steelboy]

3 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

I know what you meant - even though Gavin McCafferty (as far as I can see) didn't mention an unnamed insider as the source of his statement, he just came straight out with it. 

I'm not ideologically for or against fan ownership, but if we continue down that road I don't expect us to be shopping for players or managers anywhere other than where we currently are. I can accept that, as long as the club survives. Will you?

Aye. 

Our latest accounts show 6m in turnover and 5m in wages. Weir said player wages are 50% of turn over so we are spending 3m a year (or 58k a week) on players. That's plenty. 

This season we have had 9 or 10 deadweight contracts and are still in the mix for the top 6. The budget is totally fine and even if we see an increase it's not going to bridge us to the level of Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. 

[grizzlyg]

I think we just wait until discussions have taken place and then we are in a position to decide.   Everyone coming up with their own assessments when a lot could be hearsay.    Let's focus on tomorrow as it's the priority...COYW

[Mccus28]

2 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

I think we just wait until discussions have taken place and then we are in a position to decide.   Everyone coming up with their own assessments when a lot could be hearsay.    Let's focus on tomorrow as it's the priority...COYW

Don't bring sound rational thinking into this!!!!!!

What I like is Steelboys thought process where he has made his mind up that any potential deal with an outside investor will result in the death of Motherwell FC, which as far as I can see is based upon knowing:-

1- absolutely nothing

2- pure speculation

3- turning that speculation into fact in his head

But I do respect the fact that he is just carrying on with it as it makes for great reading 🤣

Steelboy, I get that you clearly love Motherwell and the fan ownership model but lets just actually wait and see what the details of the deal are 👍

 

COYW!!!!!!

[dennyc]

Barmack said quite clearly that he did not want to disempower the Society. In fact he was all for supporting it and helping it grow, working in a partnership. Without providing any evidence, the Scotsman journalist is essentially calling him a liar. The whole tone of the article could almost convince me it was written by Steelboy, or at the very least he had input. Perhaps we now know his ‘in the know’ source.

At the end of the day Members will decide whether or not to accept any investment offer. So the Society is in a position of strength.  If Barmack suddenly declares he wants majority control, then that vote will likely go against him. And what can he do if the Society does reject his offer?

Let’s wait until we see the full terms of any offer. Then the fans will decide. Steelboy and McCafferty are trying to stir up unrest without any real evidence to support their allegations. Throw enough shit and some will stick appears to be the plan. If there is any basis in their fears then all will become clear in due course. 

 

 

[Yoshi-1991]

20 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Barmack said quite clearly that he did not want to disempower the Society. In fact he was all for supporting it and helping it grow, working in a partnership. Without providing any evidence, the Scotsman journalist is essentially calling him a liar. The whole tone of the article could almost convince me it was written by Steelboy, or at the very least he had input. Perhaps we now know his ‘in the know’ source.

At the end of the day Members will decide whether or not to accept any investment offer. So the Society is in a position of strength.  If Barmack suddenly declares he wants majority control, then that vote will likely go against him. And what can he do if the Society does reject his offer?

Let’s wait until we see the full terms of any offer. Then the fans will decide. Steelboy and McCafferty are trying to stir up unrest without any real evidence to support their allegations. Throw enough shit and some will stick appears to be the plan. If there is any basis in their fears then all will become clear in due course. 

 

 

It does read like they are looking for that "gotcha" moment.

 

I am in a weird middle ground. I am all for someone coming in and guiding us in a new direction, with the caveat that if they get bored we we are protected from them selling us off as spares and repairs (which is what the 50+1 does however can totally see why this would put an investor off). Outside of that, I am open to the idea of them having more control if that's what it takes. 

In terms of this particular potential investor, I do like the fact they are not just looking to shovel money in and are actually interested in being hands on. However, I also see why some in the Well Society see that as a threat to the "its my baw" status quo we are currently in. 

 

TLDR: Fence sitting etc etc 

[stv]

29 minutes ago, dennyc said:

 

Let’s wait until we see the full terms of any offer. Then the fans will decide. Steelboy mselves. Diand McCafferty are trying to stir up unrest without any real evidence to support their allegations. Throw enough shit and some will stick appears to be the plan. If there is any basis in their fears then all will become clear in due course. 

 

 

I think this international buisness man with years of experience will have sussed out the situation pretty soon and will have decided early enough that he wont get a controlling interest in a fan owned club just like that , so wont try. No matter what Steelboy or others can make up between themselves. Being positive doesn’t make a good story.

lnterested to hear if they thought Les Hutchison was in it for himself and just to make money at the start before he saved the club from ruin.

 

[santheman]

33 minutes ago, stv said:

I think this international buisness man with years of experience will have sussed out the situation pretty soon and will have decided early enough that he wont get a controlling interest in a fan owned club just like that , so wont try. No matter what Steelboy or others can make up between themselves. Being positive doesn’t make a good story.

lnterested to hear if they thought Les Hutchison was in it for himself and just to make money at the start before he saved the club from ruin.

 

This.

He said that he had been looking at various clubs here and in England before settling on Motherwell so he could probably have had the choice of several clubs to invest in without the fan ownership model to contend with so if he'd simply wanted to buy a club outright there are plenty he could have chosen before us. 

Only another few weeks before we know the facts and figures of his offer so it'll give us something to talk about over the close season 

 

 

 

[Stuwell2]

7 hours ago, santheman said:

 

Only another few weeks before we know the facts and figures of his offer so it'll give us something to talk about over the close season 

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

[Kmcalpin]

8 hours ago, Stuwell2 said:

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

Its called democracy.

[steelboy]

I can't wait to see all "We'll never be asked to give up majority control" people switching to "well 35% is still a good shareholding" overnight. 

It's a certainty. 

 

[steelboy]

17 hours ago, santheman said:

 

He said that he had been looking at various clubs here and in England before settling on Motherwell so he could probably have had the choice of several clubs to invest in without the fan ownership model to contend with so if he'd simply wanted to buy a club outright there are plenty he could have chosen before us. 

 

 

He doesn't just want to buy a club though. He wants to buy a debt free club for free. 

[bobbybingo]

54 minutes ago, steelboy said:

I can't wait to see all "We'll never be asked to give up majority control" people switching to "well 35% is still a good shareholding" overnight. 

It's a certainty. 

 

If you want to continue with fan ownership, why are you so excited to see folk vote for a takeover you believe is inevitable - just so you can say, I was right?

[steelboy]

10 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

If you want to continue with fan ownership, why are you so excited to see folk vote for a takeover you believe is inevitable - just so you can say, I was right?

I think fan ownership gives us stability.

In terms of the takeover I think it's pretty obvious that the Well Society has a cuckoo in the nest who has effectively taken over the Society with the intention of ending fan ownership. Right now we have Barmack doing a media campaign in favour of his proposal and absolutely no one speaking up for the Well Society keeping the majority control.

 

[santheman]

10 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I've seen more than one well society board member tweet that they don't want to give the majority control up. 

I know 2 of them and they're in the same boat as most of us.

Waiting to see what the offer is then making up their minds based on the facts and figures.

Everyone will have their own opinion and particular conspiracy theory.

[Spiderpig]

33 minutes ago, steelboy said:

I think fan ownership gives us stability.

 

 

Unfortunately what it does not give is the main  problem for the club, ie a sufficiently large revenue stream to negate the need to seek outside investment.

[steelboy]

7 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

Unfortunately what it does not give is the main  problem for the club, ie a sufficiently large revenue stream to negate the need to seek outside investment.

I disagree. 

I think our turnover, playing budget, stadium investment and net profit during fan ownership have been impressive. 

[bobbybingo]

1 hour ago, steelboy said:

In terms of the takeover I think it's pretty obvious that the Well Society has a cuckoo in the nest who has effectively taken over the Society with the intention of ending fan ownership. 

 

Who is that?

[Spit_It_Out]

I am seriously thinking about turning this topic into  some sort of stage show and taking it to the Fringe it’s utterly insane the amount of nonsense that’s getting slung about lol.

 

[wellfan]

I thoroughly enjoy reading this thread every day, but I’ll be waiting for actual details to be released before offering any comment or my hot take. Others should keep it up, however, as it's exactly why this forum is often fun and nippy. 

 

[Spit_It_Out]

3 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I really do want to know who the cuckoo in the well society nest is though and the evil plans they have for Motherwell fc

I do know who " the source" is🤣

Me aswell I am sitting on the train on the way to the Well game chuckling to myself folk probably think I am away with the fairies but this has me rolling lol.

[David]

Interesting reading here for sure, and as much as it surprises me to be saying this, SteelBoy is on the money with a lot of what he's saying in my opinion.

In my experience, people with the financial clout to invest heavily in a football club aren't the type to accept a situation where they have to run their decisions and plans past a majority holding group made up, for the most part, of people who have nowhere near the same level of business experience as they do. 

If they're putting a considerable amount of money into any venture, they'll expect to make at least that and more back on the other side. That's simply how it is. They're not coming and giving up time and money for nothing. 

This suggests to me that they'll want majority control and will not be answerable to the Well Society. No serious investor would accept risking their capital in an industry that is difficult to profit from at the best of times without having majority control over how that entity is run and, more importantly, how their money is spent. The Well Society and any votes in the future would simply be seen as inconveniences and roadblocks to the real professionals doing their jobs. Which is maximising profit for the owner on their investment.

The most concerning thing for any football fan is that most owners who do not have an emotional attachment to the club they own often see it as just another business venture. 

Venture is the key word there. Defined as "an undertaking involving chance or risk" or "a speculative business enterprise," which in most cases means that the investor takes a chance, and has an amount of money they're willing to lose before declaring the venture a loss. At that point, they cut it loose and let it sink. 

It happens to companies every day. It's just that those companies ordinarily don't have fans. 

I'll be more than happy to be proven wrong on that count and see a unicorn in the form of someone with a ton of cash and no real emotional attachment to the club happy to throw cash into the pot and basically cede overall control and direction to the Well Society. I don't see it happening, though.

As has been mentioned already, fan ownership gives us many things, but the most important is that it gives us our club. 

If the Well Society loses majority control (if it happens), it will no longer be our club—it will be the new owners' club. At that point, we will be just customers. 

Most of the noise surrounding this issue seems to be paving the way for a change in majority ownership. Again, this is just my opinion based on what I've experienced in the past. 

Losing majority control of something like a football is a hard sell to fans. The only way to really accomplish that is to convince said fans via various PR means that there's not really any other option moving forward. Vague mentions of financial issues and a drip-style media campaign that gets fans used to the idea of giving up control. 

Again, I'm not saying this is what is happening, but it looks a lot like it from the outside. 

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

[Stuwell2]

On 4/13/2024 at 12:27 PM, steelboy said:

I disagree. 

I think our turnover, playing budget, stadium investment and net profit during fan ownership have been impressive. 

Agree that what’s been done is impressive but I have concerns - and I believe that most would agree - that we are not sustainable at the current level with what other clubs are spending and what we will need to spend on more ground improvement over the next few years. 
This is why I’m happy to look at any proposals and options before deciding. Although it would have be be an outstanding proposal with cast iron guarantees before I’d be willing to give up the society’s majority shareholdings. 
 

As for David’s post above I don’t agree that we are being drip fed info via the media designed to get us to give up control. As for the WS will need to give up control narrative, again I disagree as the clubs not a loss making enterprise - our profit/losses over the last 7 years pretty much even out but future ground improvement’s are needed and will put us into loss more over the next 5-10 years no matter player sales - and although could survive without investment all be it probably in a poorer fashion. 

The question is how is he going to get a return on his investment? The options I can see are either through a % of player transfer fees, some sort of media involvement or a combination of both. These don’t require total control of the club but more a clear contract which states where and on what his investment can be spent, what % of transfer fees he gets (if this is even on his agenda) and what is expected from the club and society. 

[steelboy]

Just now, Stuwell2 said:

Agree that what’s been done is impressive but I have concerns - and I believe that most would agree - that we are not sustainable at the current level with what other clubs are spending. 
 

What are the other clubs spending compared to us?

Last week you posted on the thread that our wage budget was £1.5m a year which is miles out. If you don't know what the Motherwell budget is how do you know what the other clubs are spending?