Leaderboard

Let’s keep things civil; there’s no need for personal attacks. Your contributions to this discussion have mostly been very insightful. Let’s maintain that standard.

It's just more of the usual throwing accusations at the Society while trying to derail any talk about Barmack's game. She's been playing a stupid game since January DM'ing most of the regular posters on the board and posting constant sob stories about injuries, hospital stays and being skint. Very strange behaviour from a new poster who appeared right at the time of the bid.

Aye you registered on the first day the site was created then started posting every day 15 years later as soon as Barmack appeared on the scene. Totally normal account.

We currently have an executive board with a seat meant to be held by a Well Society board member, which is now occupied by someone who has just resigned from the Society Board, citing his position as "untenable." Additionally, another seat is held by an individual who actively disregarded the mandate given to him by the Society, choosing to vote according to his personal views instead. In my opinion, the current structure at the club needs a complete overhaul before any agreements are made with investors. Also, we have a Chairman who is on the verge of leaving. This situation makes absolutely no sense. The timing of this proposal is completely off. We need to get our house in order before inviting guests in for a cup of tea and considering if they might want to buy the place.

He's not going to agree to the Well Society keeping 51% because he wants control over the club's finances. It's clear reading his post on P&B that he want to use the club to develop AI marketing tools and the money he puts in is basically going to be invested into doing that. There's a good chance the money the Well Society puts in will also go towards paying for that. Also the Well Society shouldn't be paying a penny to have their shareholding reduced. That's the stupidest part of the proposal. We pay so he can take over. The fact that he is even suggesting it tells you he's not trustworthy. At the moment we have a fan model which gives us long term security over our vital assets and has over 7 years delivered an overall profit, financial stability, stadium improvements and an increasing player budget. To give up that to hand control to guy with no experience of business in the UK or Scotland, no experience in football and who's primary interest is Artificial Intelligence marketing tools which we are to be the guinea pig for is ABSOLUTELY FUCKING MENTAL. This is only has a chance because of the way it's being framed. The Well Society's track record seems to have been completely discarded and there is an impossible demand being made to find new ways to finance the club. Barmack who appeared on the scene 6 months ago seems to be considered as trustworthy as our democratic fans group with 3000 members. Even the Society board can't make their own case without talking about how great a guy Barmack is which is pathetic. Ordinary working people generally like to find solutions via compromise. Rich people don't as we have seen with Barmack saying he won't move on valuation. The danger we are facing here is people deciding that the reasonable thing to do will be to go with Barmack's second offer as a compromise in some misguided sense of fairness and finding a middle ground.

We've also got a new CEO on the executive board who I imagine will do what his new bosses tell him rather than what he thinks himself. I say that assuming he has voting rights.

No, we didn't. We had a situation this week where a number of supporters and the elected representatives of thousands of Motherwell fans said that via a public statement, in which they recommended their members reject it and provided their reasons for doing so. That's a very different thing. (Aside/general comment: that isn't the WS Board "telling" their members to vote no, it's them doing their jobs as board members and presenting their position to their membership with a recommendation that anyone can choose to take on board or not). I imagine EB will go back to the Exec Board, suggest new terms and renegotiate them with them. The club statement on Monday/early next week will no doubt cover that and how it impacts on the process, vote etc. If a new/revised deal is then tabled, I would anticipate/expect it going to both the Exec Board and WS for their consideration, yes. I asked him if his initial offer was his he all and end all and he said he didn't know,l and that he'd not really thought about it yet. I imagine he will have over the last few days, at least. He's seemingly open to revising certain things/negotiating but by how much, only time will tell I guess. Edit: the other thing to acknowledge here is that the WS is now down a member on the executive board, with the only one left having voted in favour of the first offer, so we can probably assume he won't truly represent the views of the WS Board in any negotiations. That's a proper minefield, right now.

I have stayed quiet since the details were sent out from the Well Society. My first thoughts on the email started with the first line with them advising us to reject the offer, that isn't for them to decide what I do. I also read the statement from the Club. From there my thoughts turned to why do we have two vastly different opinions here and which one gains/loses the most. You could read the email from the WS and feel like it's throwing the toys out of the pram because it loses control of the club but didn't they have a vote that resulted with the members saying they'd consider losing the majority if the deal was right? That is up to us members to have our individual thoughts on it, find out any information we need and decide. Then you see that Dickie and Maureen Downie resign from the board for differences, so why hasn't the 3rd person that voted against not resigned? Why has Dickie not confirmed his resignation from the Exec Board? So we have in fighting on the WS, contempt apparently between the Exec Board towards the WS, so how can we possibly decide which statement is best for the club. I have been on P&B and read all the posts from EB and those that try to have a conversation with useful information (trying to ignore the likes of Busta, being Busta that we all know and love ) I have been encouraged by the fact that EB has taken on points from those conversations and is looking at not binning the offer but readjusting it slightly, whether that is enough to persuade folk it's the right or not will be up to them. We also have still to see what the WS has proposed to raise extra funds. When the football game came out, my thoughts were that they should have auctioned the places off rather than a set price, maybe this was done to make sure they covered their costs and made some money but in a time of cost of living crisis, the auction may have allowed other folk a chance. However, I was glad to see that those that did take part had fun. From the start pf the week where I was probably a definite no, I may be sliding nearer to a maybe if EB can get the adjustments right. Or the WS show they have something to encourage they can finance the club better in the future. However, if the WS do stay in control, the Exec Board need to acknowledge that and work properly with them not only as a failsafe but as a genuine part of running the club, so that may need the likes of Jay (only using that name as I don't the others, although I assume Amber has some of her Dad in her views to MFC) being on the board and making sure it's running to look after the club, finances and fans correctly. Probably one of my longer posts in a while, but if you haven't already, I'd suggest going on P&B and looking at the discussions between EB and Vietnam91 particularly amongst others.

I don't think that's quite what people are saying. The reason Barmack said he'll come back is the (quite vociferous in some cases) feedback and discussions he's received and had with posters there. That and the Society Board's statement on Monday. The conversation about the concerns re: the vote etc. came after he'd stated he'd come back with a revised offer/structure. He's also said that he's concerned it'll be a pyrrhic victory if he does win currently, as it will likely split the fan base; he doesn't want to win this at all costs. Believe him or don't but that's what he's said on there. I think there is (rightly) a concern on both P&B and here that they are both, to an extent, echo chambers. The deal as it stands is absolute dugshite; for the reasons we have all discussed over the last 5 days and the Society has laid out. I think the majority of posters on here and P&B will have a far greater understanding of the proposal now thanks to discussions and work done by others to work through the valuations etc. I would argue that a fair chunk of the support who will have a vote via the WS, don't have that level of understanding and will see £2m investment and the chance of a TV deal and potentially take a punt. Now, I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush, nor do I think either board or the posters on it are superior to the other or to fans who don't post on either, but you can absolutely argue that those who post on here and P&B will be better informed than those who don't. So, being honest, I think that there is reason to be concerned that this will get voted through in its current form if it comes to that. Also, all of what @David just said, too.

French centre-forward?

Is Kelly in the Scotland squad? If only the club had posted some content for me to realise.

What if the majority of Society members disagree with the board? Not that I think it's the case, but for such a big issue surely members have to have a vote..?