New Investment Options

[StAndrew7]

9 minutes ago, weeyin said:

There is some good scientific evidence that when you challenge (with evidence) someone on a strongly held belief - it actually causes them to strengthen that belief.

That's one reason that trying to debate things on social media quickly deteriorates into shouting.

Aye, it does feel very much like this sometimes:

[joewarkfanclub]

59 minutes ago, weeyin said:

There is some good scientific evidence that when you challenge (with evidence) someone on a strongly held belief - it actually causes them to strengthen that belief.

That's one reason that trying to debate things on social media quickly deteriorates into shouting.

Cognative Dissonance.....

[Mccus28]

Im going to be unpopular here and just to be up front I think EB's proposal isnt very good.

But, Im very surprised about the amount of love for this WS proposal, it literally tells us nothing whilst using the word "stategic", 25 times and uses emotional language to get the fans behind it.

This is literally as vague as EB's on funding projections, its quite poor really if you take the emotions out of it.

No substance and is just a wish list, both sides MUST do better

 

[StAndrew7]

8 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

Im going to be unpopular here and just to be up front I think EB's proposal isnt very good.

But, Im very surprised about the amount of love for this WS proposal, it literally tells us nothing whilst using the word "stategic, 25 times" and uses emotional language to get the fans behind it.

This is literally as vague as EB's on funding projections, its quite poor really if you take the emotions out of it.

No substance and is just a wish list, both sides MUST do better

 

I think @David has already covered this off a bit; this is a proposal, it's not a formal business plan. There's KPIs and ROI projections in the background which form part of the Business Plan side and will be discussed/released in due course I think.

There's a danger with things like this that you overwhelm with too much information and a drip feed/progressive release of things often helps get messages across more efficiently.

I understand you're not feeling it and that's fair but I do think there's more in this than anything Barmack has proposed on Twitter/P&B or in any of the lengthy statements released by the Club/Exec Board.

[Mccus28]

41 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I think @David has already covered this off a bit; this is a proposal, it's not a formal business plan. There's KPIs and ROI projections in the background which form part of the Business Plan side and will be discussed/released in due course I think.

There's a danger with things like this that you overwhelm with too much information and a drip feed/progressive release of things often helps get messages across more efficiently.

I understand you're not feeling it and that's fair but I do think there's more in this than anything Barmack has proposed on Twitter/P&B or in any of the lengthy statements released by the Club/Exec Board.

I understand what your saying but to play devils advocate, EB was ripped to pieces for not going into the minutia of any plans by some on here.

Steelboy im sure wouldnt have been happy until EB was in his kitchen telling him how he was going to spend every single penny.

I honestly want fan ownership to win the day but that release is nowhere near enough and as I said, just as bad as EB's but with a bit more emotion.

[StAndrew7]

1 minute ago, Mccus28 said:

I understand what your saying but to play devils advocate, EB was ripped to pieces for not going into the minutia of any plans by some on here.

Steelboy im sure wouldnt have been happy until EB was in his kitchen telling him how he was going to spend every single penny.

I honestly want fan ownership to win the day but that release is nowhere near enough and as I said, just as bad as EB's but with a bit more emotion.

Fair; I do think that will come over the next few days based on what's been said on here, but I'm not privvy to the details/comms plan.

One thing I will say, is that the plan does gives potential increases for rejuvenating the membership numbers from dormant members into regular contributors, season ticket sales along with target areas/towns and markets and the support/growth of the women's team. So there's some detail provided there.

It's also got a timeline for how the investments will progress if EB's scheme doesn't go through; so again, dates and key deliverables are there.

It definitely feels like there is more to come; with the session on Wednesday and the ongoing comms in the press etc. I would hope you (and we all) get the details that we're wanting.

I am feeling far, far more positive about it all now though. I hope people can see just how much has gone into this plan, all the while dealing with the investment stuff; remember this was always something the Society was planning on doing, it's had to be sped up because of the circumstances.

[bobbybingo]

50 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I think @David has already covered this off a bit; this is a proposal, it's not a formal business plan. There's KPIs and ROI projections in the background which form part of the Business Plan side and will be discussed/released in due course I think.

There's a danger with things like this that you overwhelm with too much information and a drip feed/progressive release of things often helps get messages across more efficiently.

I understand you're not feeling it and that's fair but I do think there's more in this than anything Barmack has proposed on Twitter/P&B or in any of the lengthy statements released by the Club/Exec Board.

The problem I would have is, if anyone asks me to give them a specific example of what the Well Society is proposing, I couldn't - which echoes the answers I get if I ask Erik Barmack's backers for a specific example of his plans.

That being said, it's EB's proposal that people should be voting on, not the Society's.

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

The problem I would have is, if anyone asks me to give them a specific example of what the Well Society is proposing, I couldn't - which echoes the answers I get if I ask Erik Barmack's backers for a specific example of his plans.

That being said, it's EB's proposal that people should be voting on, not the Society's.

That's it in a nutshell.

No matter how it's phrased or framed, we're voting for or against Barmack next week.

Yes, the Society will then get to progress its plan; but we can ALL be involved in that as fans and WS members and have our say in it, which is one of the key messages of their proposal.

[StAndrew7]

8 minutes ago, bobbybingo said:

The problem I would have is, if anyone asks me to give them a specific example of what the Well Society is proposing, I couldn't - which echoes the answers I get if I ask Erik Barmack's backers for a specific example of his plans.

On this; some of them are pretty clear, I thought?

They're proposing increasing season ticket sales by targeting specific markets, towns and building a local Society presence in them, re-engaging with non-contributing members in their ranks to up their ability to raise funds annually (and increase the security of the Club as a result) and explore strategic investment opportunities.

[weeyin]

If the Well Society had no plan right now I'd still vote for it, because doing nothing over the next 6 months is, for me, still better (and safer) than accepting EB's offer. 

[Kmcalpin]

A lot of time and effort has been invested in this strategy, so well done to those behind it. It contains a lot of good ideas and there's plenty for us to digest and mull over. It does sound good, but will it work in practice?

Much of its success or otherwise will depend on member input in the form of volunteering and thats where the Society has struggled so far. The Board cannot do everything on its own. How does it enlist the active participation of rank and file members?

A few things stood out for me, but they're detailed issues, and they shouldn't detract from the overall quality of the document. 

I wasn't surprised at just how few members are contributing monthly. This is a legacy issue which arises from the confusion of the past, and one which I've raised before.  Contribution levels also need to be more flexible.  They should benefit the members, as opposed to making it easier for the Society, and make it easier for them to contribute. This does need to be addressed if financial targets are to be met.

Understandably much is made of local connections and thats as it should be as we are a community club. However, some recognition could and should have been included of season ticket holders and members from outwith Lanarkshire, and indeed Scotland. There must be quite a few all told. Please don't forget us.

I thought the spatial analysis of where season ticket holders and members live looks very interesting and promising, and if handled correctly, could yield some very valuable information.  

A final thought on numerous references to Fir Park.  I didn't quite know what to make of them.  Is the strategy saying we're staying at Fir Park come what may?  Is a move away being rejected or is it just loose language?

Anyway a good document but its just a start. Stage one is sort out the relationship between the Club (Executive Board) and its owner, the Society Board. A ridiculous polarised situation which mustn't be allowed to continue. 

Good to see a Society website being resurrected.

[joewarkfanclub]

2 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

A lot of time and effort has been invested in this strategy, so well done to those behind it. It contains a lot of good ideas and there's plenty for us to digest and mull overthink about. It does sound good, but will it work in practice?

Much of its success or otherwise will depend on member input in the form of volunteering and thats where the Society has struggled so far. The Board cannot do everything on its own. How does it enlist the active participation of rank and file members?

A few things stood out for me, but they're detailed issues, and they shouldn't detract from the overall quality of the document. 

I wasn't surprised at just how few members are contributing monthly. This is a legacy issue which arises from the confusion of the past, and one which I've raised before.  Contribution levels also need to be more flexible.  They should benefit the members, as opposed to making it easier for the Society, and make it easier for them to contribute. This does need to be addressed if financial targets are to be met.

Understandably much is made of local connections and thats as it should be as we are a community club. However, some recognition could and should have been included of season ticket holders and members from outwith Lanarkshire, and indeed Scotland. There must be quite a few all told. Please don't forget us.

I thought the spatial analysis of where season ticket holders and members live looks very interesting and promising, and if handled correctly, could yield some very valuable information.  

A final thought on numerous references to Fir Park.  I didn't quite know what to make of them.  Is the strategy saying we're staying at Fir Park come what may?  Is a move away being rejected or is it just loose langauage?

Anyway a good document but its just a start. Stage one is sort out the relationship between the Club (Executive Board) and its owner, the Society Board. A ridiculous polarised situation which mustn't be allowed to continue. 

Good to see a Society website being resurrected.

First class post.

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Understandably much is made of local connections and thats as it should be as we are a community club. However, some recognition could and should have been included of season ticket holders and members from outwith Lanarkshire, and indeed Scotland. There must be quite a few all told. Please don't forget us.

A final thought on numerous references to Fir Park.  I didn't quite know what to make of them.  Is the strategy saying we're staying at Fir Park come what may?  Is a move away being rejected or is it just loose langauage?

Yeah, I'm in the same situation as you; I'm living well outside the local area now and will be moving even further away, eventually. I think the key thing is that we all still feel connected to the club, no matter the geographical constraints. I'm sure more will come for those of us who are outside of the Lanarkshire area.

I personally wouldn't read too much into the Fir Park stuff, other than it's our home, it's an emotional attraction for us all and we all have tremendous (and terrible) memories there.

[Clackscat]

5 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Already doing this on Facebook and Twitter.

Apparently this is all "just spin to move support away from the investment which is the real money". 🤦‍♂️

Interestingly, when I've replied to people to challenge them or provide a slightly more realistic take... there hasn't been a response.

And the same person thinks EB can't have complete control because he won't have 100% of the share ....... staggering

[prideoflanarkshire]

In my opinion, the only way the WS can generate substantial increased revenue is for investment and not increased members. 
 

investors will want something in return for their investment. What are the WS offering in return? Shares/percentage of the club? Is that not the same as EB is offering right now? 

[Stuwell2]

8 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

In my opinion, the only way the WS can generate substantial increased revenue is for investment and not increased members. 
 

investors will want something in return for their investment. What are the WS offering in return? Shares/percentage of the club? Is that not the same as EB is offering right now? 

No. 

[prideoflanarkshire]

Just now, Stuwell2 said:

No. 

No what?

[David]

2 hours ago, Mccus28 said:

I understand what your saying but to play devils advocate, EB was ripped to pieces for not going into the minutia of any plans by some on here.

That isn’t quite true. Barmack was criticised heavily for not having any plan at all, and then he didn’t help himself by admitting that he had about 10% of the knowledge needed to create one.

He  indicated in various conversations some of his ideas as follows:

• Take one of our home games against either Celtic or Rangers, where we still don’t fill a 13,700-seat stadium, to Wembley Stadium in London.
• Essentially force the manager and recruitment team to sign and play two Latin American players because it could be useful in securing a sponsorship deal with a tequila company.

Aside from that, he suggested implementing an AI system that would take a few weeks to put together and cost about $10,000.

So no, it’s not quite the same. The Well Society has put together a proposal that includes action plans, complete with KPIs and projected ROI, in a business plan that will be available shortly.

Barmack has produced absolutely nothing so far.

2 hours ago, bobbybingo said:

The problem I would have is, if anyone asks me to give them a specific example of what the Well Society is proposing, I couldn't - which echoes the answers I get if I ask Erik Barmack's backers for a specific example of his plans.

That being said, it's EB's proposal that people should be voting on, not the Society's.

If someone asks you for a specific example, just tell them about the strategic investment section of the proposal.

The Well Society’s strategic investment plan aims to secure the future of the club by attracting partnerships from companies and individuals who can offer both financial support and specialised expertise. In return, the investors will receive a share of the revenue generated from these projects, creating a mutually beneficial arrangement. This approach ensures the club remains financially robust and operationally advanced without relinquishing any shares or boardroom seats.

By leveraging the skills and resources of strategic investors, the Well Society can implement initiatives such as upgrading training facilities, introducing advanced scouting technologies, and creating immersive media content. These projects will not only provide immediate benefits to the club but also generate ongoing revenue and cost savings. Additionally, investors will gain the opportunity to showcase their products and services in a real-world, high-visibility environment, receive valuable feedback and data for further development, and enjoy the brand association with a historic football club, which provides them with the "test case" needed to sell their services to other clubs and companies. The strategy allows for the club’s continuous improvement and financial stability while preserving the fan ownership model, ensuring the values and traditions of Motherwell are upheld.

25 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

In my opinion, the only way the WS can generate substantial increased revenue is for investment and not increased members. 
 

investors will want something in return for their investment. What are the WS offering in return? Shares/percentage of the club? Is that not the same as EB is offering right now? 

See above.

[StAndrew7]

10 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

No what?

No, it's not the same.

What @David said.

[prideoflanarkshire]

I’m failing to see why someone would invest to get a “share of the revenue generated”. What does that even mean. Say I wanted to invest £100k into the club what revenue do we generate to allow an investor to get return on their investment?

im not trying to be difficult or controversial but that just sounds a lot of buzz words and convoluted statements. 
 

what is the WS offering an investor to encourage them to invest in us?

[weeyin]

2 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

I’m failing to see why someone would invest to get a “share of the revenue generated”. What does that even mean. Say I wanted to invest £100k into the club what revenue do we generate to allow an investor to get return on their investment?

Here's a hypothetical example or two.

I own a 4G (or 5G) football pitch company. I invest 50K into the club and lay a practice pitch for cost. In return I get 5 year's free advertising inside Fir Park and 50% of revenue generated by renting out the practice pitch.

I'm a sports data company. I give you the equipment and software to use for free. In return, you give me all your player data for free and I combine that with other team's data that I combine and sell to sports scientists, universities, journalists and game developers.

I invest 500k for new equipment and faclities in the academy. In return, I get 10% of transfer fees from academy graduates for the next 10 years, capped at 750k.

 

 

[StAndrew7]

13 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

I’m failing to see why someone would invest to get a “share of the revenue generated”. What does that even mean. Say I wanted to invest £100k into the club what revenue do we generate to allow an investor to get return on their investment?

im not trying to be difficult or controversial but that just sounds a lot of buzz words and convoluted statements. 
 

what is the WS offering an investor to encourage them to invest in us?

On top of @weeyin's examples, I'd suggest keeping an eye out for the Business Plan that's going to be released soon. I think it'll help answer these questions, alongside what @David has already said.

[prideoflanarkshire]

3 minutes ago, weeyin said:

Here's a hypothetical example or two.

I own a 4G (or 5G) football pitch company. I invest 50K into the club and lay a practice pitch for cost. In return I get 5 year's free advertising inside Fir Park and 50% of revenue generated by renting out the practice pitch.

I'm a sports data company. I give you the equipment and software to use for free. In return, you give me all your player data for free and I combine that with other team's data that I combine and sell to sports scientists, universities, journalists and game developers.

I invest 500k for new equipment and faclities in the academy. In return, I get 10% of transfer fees from academy graduates for the next 10 years, capped at 750k.

 

 

None of that sounds great at all…

we are now offering free advertising, percentages of our transfers, part of our end of year profits, some of the revenue from renting out our facilities all to try and gain investments. 
 

I do look forward to reviewing the business plan in the forthcoming days. 

[StAndrew7]

10 minutes ago, prideoflanarkshire said:

None of that sounds great at all…

we are now offering free advertising, percentages of our transfers, part of our end of year profits, some of the revenue from renting out our facilities all to try and gain investments. 
 

I do look forward to reviewing the business plan in the forthcoming days. 

How else do you suggest a return on investment is provided, then?

Returns on investment in any business are provided from, basically, three things (I'm being somewhat flippant here):

1) Profit related payments 

2) Something being provided for free there would normally be a cost associated with

3) Receiving a percentage of the sale of an asset you helped develop or were involved with, or the related IP which you can then exploit for your own gain.

What else are we meant to do when someone invests and wants their investment back or to make a profit on it, provided it's all worked out?

[Peter Millar]

13 minutes ago, weeyin said:

Here's a hypothetical example or two.

I own a 4G (or 5G) football pitch company. I invest 50K into the club and lay a practice pitch for cost. In return I get 5 year's free advertising inside Fir Park and 50% of revenue generated by renting out the practice pitch.

I'm a sports data company. I give you the equipment and software to use for free. In return, you give me all your player data for free and I combine that with other team's data that I combine and sell to sports scientists, universities, journalists and game developers.

I invest 500k for new equipment and faclities in the academy. In return, I get 10% of transfer fees from academy graduates for the next 10 years, capped at 750k.

 

 

I have some queries on your hypotheticals

Who meets the cost of maintaining the pitch, ensuring it’s clean and safe for each let. Who pays the utility bills and what are these costs because that will eat significantly into any profits.

I’m your star player, and I don’t want my data shared because I or my agent is doing a separate deal with the sports data company, or just because it is protected by GDPR.

What happens if I invest £500k in new equipment and facilities for Academy and the Academy produces zilch. How do I get a return on my investment?