New Investment Options

[steelboy]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/24438541.motherwell-board-tarnish-legacy-handling-investment/

Graeme McGarry with another spot on article. 

[claretband]

I know my offer is pretty derisory but you have to appreciate what having someone like me on board will bring to the party

[texanwellfan]

2 hours ago, steelboy said:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/24438541.motherwell-board-tarnish-legacy-handling-investment/

Graeme McGarry with another spot on article. 

Hopefully these types of articles will reach the broader fan base who have votes in the Society or as share holders and sway them in the right direction. It’s ridiculous to be proposing to spend several times the amount of investment. Just where is all that money going to come from? 

[StAndrew7]

Just to add to the lols, Jim's statement still has a reference to the Barmarks in it, after being changed everywhere else. 🤣

Edited July 9, 2024 by StAndrew7
This is from the 5th of July, not yesterday. But still: lol.

[joewarkfanclub]

7 minutes ago, texanwellfan said:

Hopefully these types of articles will reach the broader fan base who have votes in the Society or as share holders and sway them in the right direction. It’s ridiculous to be proposing to spend several times the amount of investment. Just where is all that money going to come from? 

This is what really annoys me about McMahons statement yesterday. He is asking the WS to show that any investment they have lined up stays in the club. Yet under the proposal he is trying to push through, we will spend £4m in the first 3 years for a £900k investment. Im no bussinessman, but that looks like £3.1m going out of the club with no guarantee it will generate any extra revenue to justify the expense.

[StAndrew7]

Just now, joewarkfanclub said:

This is what really annoys me about McMahons statement yesterday. He is asking the WS to show that any investment they have lined up stays in the club. Yet under the proposal he is trying to push through, we will spend £4m in the first 3 years for a £900k investment. Im no bussinessman, but that looks like £3.1m going out of the club with no guarantee it will generate any extra revenue to justify the expense.

And all of the same questions apply to Barmark's proposal; where are the details of who will invest in his (shite) business plan, other than "celebrities", "tech bruhs in shitty chinos" and "hollywood elites"?

The level of scrutiny being put towards one proposal, absolutely has to be put to the other (and also bloody well answered). There has still be no public acknowledgement of the inaccurate figures used in the plan EB published last Thursday.

But hey; this isn't a vote for or against the WS proposal, is it? 🙄

[yosemite sam]

Please don't expect me to say yes to a proposal that will reduce our substantial shareholding of 71% to 50.1% ( changed only because we didn't accept their first offering), while also us putting nearly as much money into the offer as Wild Sheep and giving them from day one, chairmanship of the board and another two directors for a paltry £300k.

Then after six years a small change of hands of shares, could reduce our shareholding below the 50.1% and everything would be effectively run by Wild Sheep.

My vote is in.

[texanwellfan]

For the well society vote, is it a majority of the votes cast or a majority of the registered members? 

[StAndrew7]

7 minutes ago, texanwellfan said:

For the well society vote, is it a majority of the votes cast or a majority of the registered members? 

Votes cast, just like any election/referendum.

I'm not sure what sort of required turnout there is, but I would expect it to be significantly higher than the last vote (which was in the mid 30s percentage wise, I think?) so I don't anticipate there being an issue with that.

[santheman]

1 hour ago, joewarkfanclub said:

This is what really annoys me about McMahons statement yesterday. He is asking the WS to show that any investment they have lined up stays in the club. Yet under the proposal he is trying to push through, we will spend £4m in the first 3 years for a £900k investment. Im no bussinessman, but that looks like £3.1m going out of the club with no guarantee it will generate any extra revenue to justify the expense.

Its taking speculate to accumulate to a whole new level.

[steelboy]

54 minutes ago, yosemite sam said:

Please don't expect me to say yes to a proposal that will reduce our substantial shareholding of 71% to 50.1% ( changed only because we didn't accept their first offering), 

I think what sums this whole thing up is that they don't even respect us enough to give us 51%. 

The 50.1% is so obviously a way of making it as easy and cheap as possible for Barmack to eventually get majority control.

 

[dennyc]

27 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

Votes cast, just like any election/referendum.

I'm not sure what sort of required turnout there is, but I would expect it to be significantly higher than the last vote (which was in the mid 30s percentage wise, I think?) so I don't anticipate there being an issue with that.

I E-Mailed the Society to confirm things and was advised that if the turnout threshold of 35% was not reached, then there will be no change. No change means the proposal from Barmack is rejected.

[StAndrew7]

3 minutes ago, dennyc said:

I E-Mailed the Society to confirm things and was advised that if the turnout threshold of 35% was not reached, then there will be no change. No change means the proposal from Barmack is rejected.

Aye, I can't see it not being met in such an emotive/important vote; but if it's not, that's good to know. Cheers!

[dennyc]

2 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

Aye, I can't see it not being met in such an emotive/important vote; but if it's not, that's good to know. Cheers!

Really provides a safety net if the turnout is less than last time (Unlikely as you say). But will make more of a statement if the threshold is exceeded and the majority who vote reject the offer. That leaves less scope for the Club Board to gripe about the outcome if/when they lose. 

[joewarkfanclub]

The other thing that struck me was that if the £4m outlined to be spent by Barmack is used to buy services owned by companies he either owns or has associations with, then he stands to make a healthy return on his £900k regardless if whether it generates revenue for the club or not.

[David]

44 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

The other thing that struck me was that if the £4m outlined to be spent by Barmack is used to buy services owned by companies he either owns or has associations with, then he stands to make a healthy return on his £900k regardless if whether it generates revenue for the club or not.

Aside from Wild Sheep sports, which is a small media distribution company, he doesn't own anything. He's someone who's very skilled in media, and has worked as an employee at Netflix. He's not a serial entrepreneur or investor of note. 

[Spiderpig]

2 hours ago, David said:

Aside from Wild Sheep sports, which is a small media distribution company, he doesn't own anything. He's someone who's very skilled in media, and has worked as an employee at Netflix. He's not a serial entrepreneur or investor of note. 

No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, so he must be good at something else other than bullshit.

[Stuwell2]

Add another one to the reject list folk’s 

[David]

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, so he must be good at something else other than bullshit.

The past eight years he's been employed by Netflix to head up production and distribution of international streaming content for the platform.

He's experienced and connected in the streaming media world for sure. If we want to make a docuseries on our club, he's certainly the guy we should be working with.

When it comes to actually running a business on the level of a multi-million pound football club on another continent? And dealing with the various aspects of that business that being a major investor and Chairman would entail? I think he's vastly underqualified.

[Spiderpig]

33 minutes ago, David said:

 

When it comes to actually running a business on the level of a multi-million pound football club on another continent? And dealing with the various aspects of that business that being a major investor and Chairman would entail? I think he's vastly underqualified.

Less qualified than the current chairman and other board members given the amateur hour performance from them in recent weeks, that's a bold statement.

[StAndrew7]

28 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

Less qualified than the current chairman and other board members given the amateur hour performance from them in recent weeks, that's a bold statement.

I do think we need to recognise that up until the last 12-18 months or so, the Club has been run quite well. The results do demonstrate that. The issue we have is that people have stayed in post too long and things have gone stale/been left rudderless; I do wonder if once "all this" is over, we need to consider maximum terms for the Chairman/Board Members, or something similar.

Some would argue it's not been that difficult a job (Turnbull's sale, Les setting things up etc.) but there does need to be an acknowledgement of the track record.

At least a bit, even with "all this" still going on.

[Busta Nut]

2 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, 

What's this based on? Cos I think the issue is he doesn't have that much. I am sure he said as much somewhere.

[StAndrew7]

Just now, Busta Nut said:

What's this based on? Cos I think the issue is he doesn't have that much. I am sure he said as much somewhere.

Aye, I'm sure he said (maybe on P&B or The Platform Formerly Known as Twitter) that he wasn't able to put all the cash in up front?

[wunderwell]

On 7/7/2024 at 8:57 PM, wunderwell said:

I said this before, way way back before it all started.

Not that I could have foreseen this - but what I pointed out is that a 75 year old man leading the way is a very dangerous thing.

At a certain point, they will want out. Cash in the chips and leave it all behind.

Therefore his influence is deliberate in order to exit and cash in on those chips.

The rest are sheep following his influence.

Maybe this is the first post we agree on and a new friendship is blossoming 😘

Jim McMahon reads my posts and releases statements about them.

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, wunderwell said:

Jim McMahon reads my posts and releases statements about them.

Welcome to the club; your membership badge is on the door and we'll teach you the handshake when you're in the back.