Goggles & Flippers

Happy Days .... is this where he turns shite?

Maybe Les cause a few more problems than anyone wants to admit. But he did play a part in the evolution to where we are now.

2017 .... its a cynical place we now live in #newnormal

I'll put a caveat at the start that I know him personally and I have defended him on here in the past when I felt too many were unfoundedly sharpening their knives or stepping over a line in the sand. However I have also been critical where it was merited but when I have done so I've tried to offer an viable alternative. I think it would only be the most downhearted Well fan who would not be pretty happy and optimistic of where we are at present and the potential of where we can go. Yes under his tenure he's made a few mistakes, however none in the media as he's very adept at that and crucially gets on with most of the press corps. Maybe he should have stood up to McGhee a bit more or advised Les to wind in the spending but when you are new in post, people citing your age as a hinderance and ultimately dealing with very strong and opinionated people I can understand why he may have been steamrollered. In the same, for all we know he may have stood up to people putting his job on a shaky peg. We have a manager who sees a happy dressing room as key. We're seeing it pay dividends as players like Bowman have been a revelation and 3/4? others have penned extended deals. News today of Campbell is what prompted this thread, a 4 year deal in this age is astute and a nod directed to both player and management for reciprocating faith in each other. Our U20's are performing really well under Craggs, Las seems to be fitting together with Robinson like a glove and we have a first team where we've still really to see 3 players involved that on paper could turn games. A good summer with 80%ish (for now) success rate on signings. Financially we're healthy (ish?), 4 guaranteed OF games, Hibs back in the top flight, Cup Semi with the TV and ticket kickback, Marvin's money and Henegen's improved season ticket sales and more astute commercial department that for me has injected a degree of professionalism into what was a bit haphazard. A pitch that winds awards and a new roof on the Hunter for free. Scottish Cup still to come in January. Be aware most of the appointments now in place were made with Flow at the helm, under his stewardship and his influence. Maybe some of the naysayers would like to comment why they still hold a negative opinion or perhaps offer an apology ...... Credit where credit's due. But the PA system is shite and the scoreboard doesn't work, so P45 in the morning Burrows you wage thief.

That was fifth round ...... Dundee in the fourth Stranraer in the fifth next was Dundee Utd in the QF that went to replay then St Johnstone at Hampden then ..... well ..... you know the rest.

Roof done for free as mItch pointed out

Yeah but their contracts go on well past the summer.

My perception was all fur coat and nae knickers. If the accomplishments are binning the two bears and writing a surveymonkey questionnaire then I can understand why Flow may have parted company. Of course he could have walked. Fan Engagement was always a funny term, if it was Fan Growth that is something better defining what maybe the club were looking for and measurable in terms of success. I didn't see what he accomplished because I don't work in the Chapman Mon-Fri 9/5. In the same way I don't see players in training but often question why they are benched at the expense of someone else. I suppose if the role is re-advertised then we have our answer.

A lot to cover, so lets get to it .... As Superward pointed out, the club wanted to reach a threshold of 300k from memory for JB to release his initial stake. The reasoning was to make sure the fans via the WS were serious and had credibility. It was suggested at the time a SPFL club needed a backup fund of around 500k to cover most eventualities including relegation. This would allow us to hopefully only spend one season in the league below before bouncing back without losing any personnel or infrastructure. There was a transfer of funds during that time back and forth plus a shareholding was secured for a sum of money (the amount escapes me). With the transfer to Les and then his plan (which turned out to be curtailed) the goalposts did change. Like ropy I bought into one plan, it then changed to another without a vote. That was quite a dramatic change in direction and one certainly worthy of full membership debate than an executive implementation. Personally I don't have an issue with that WS money being used to go directly to Les. One owner (Les) wants a certain amount of cash to transfer his ownership to a buyer (the WS). A collection of 2,000 committed fans should not be seen in terms of the purchase as any different to a single lottery winner or a successful business person. I think the repayment via the club model was proposed because it was seen that would be the quickest way by Les to recover his outlay. Relying on 300 quid here and there or a drip feed of DD's as illustrated by Jay brings in a 6 figure sum starting with a 1. It looks like Marvin's sale will bring in the best part of 500k, cup semi 250k, etc. It would take the WS 7ish years to accumulate that. As a board member you appear to suggest that all revenues (minus running costs) collected over the course of a year go directly to the club to finance player salaries. I suppose Big Roy does that at Ross County but he is his own boss and unanswerable to anyone. Personally I am in fundamental disagreement with this as how the WS now functions. If it's a convoluted way of accounting that the club pays Les £150k then the WS put £150k into the club, then I get that some elements of our support may be more content as they feel their cash is being used on talent rather than paying off the previous owner (which we actually do have an obligation to do). I'd be much happier if the WS (as owner) said to the club, "If the 6 figure sum we contributed is the gap between skirting with relegation and higher ambitions, then to ensure continued sustainability (that being defined as SPFL status), when that sum equates to 300 adult season tickets or a specific commercial deal(s), then please go out and secure this as a matter of priority" This for me makes things sink home. While I love the club and will and have given it a lot of my time and effort beyond merely watching I also recognise it sells a 1.5 hr entertainment experience for £19. If I spend a further £2, I can get a pie and no longer hungry. If I'm inclined to go to the shop I buy a replica top and I'm a further £45 down but I have an item of clothing. If I want a better seat then I pay £4 more. Other than attaining a lapel pin or the knowledge you are contributing what exactly do we get for regularly contributing to the WS? A £10 DD per month results in a £5 per game hike. To those who say a better product on the park, well what we witnessed over the past seasons was as much down to poor scouting and acquisitions as much as the money in the pot to secure them. This year we appear to have something good building but all it takes are a few lemons or a couple of long term injuries. Money doesn't insure anything Leicester City success over the bottomless pockets of Man City and Chelsea and at the other end of the spectrum Hibs up here a few years back prove that. I accept that a bigger player budget mitigates the chances but is by no means a guarantee. I agree if you continually set up to exist with such a fine margin then it wouldn't take much to dip below that target of 10th and above. I also get that success often breeds success (and extra revenues) plus speculating to accumulate. Personally I don't have an issue with that WS money being used to go directly to Les. One owner (Les) wants a certain amount of cash to transfer his ownership to a buyer (the WS). A collection of 2,000 committed fans should not be seen in terms of the purchase as any different to a single lottery winner or a successful business person. I think the repayment via the club model was proposed because it was seen that would be the quickest way by Les to recover his outlay. Relying on 300 quid here and there or a drip feed of DD's as illustrated by Jay brings in a 6 figure sum starting with a 1. It looks like Marvin's sale will bring in the best part of 500k, cup semi 250k, etc. It would take the WS 7ish years to accumulate that. I suppose I want to see the WS use its revenues and influence to lead the way in Scotland and deliver initiatives centred round the support. I want to see it influence the club to significantly increase attendances and make attending easier on the pocket and supporter-centric. We have a product staged 18/19 times a year and 8,000 spare seats on average. It costs us the same amount to put on the show regardless, so every extra backside on a seat has to be considered a bonus.

Who has been our highest ever paid player? John Spencer during the crazy days?

You cite the decent players in our squad, but to be fair you should also mention that it could equally be used to pay for Clay or Lucas' wages and in its most tenuous and indirect, for Jacob Blyth to afford to get to Ibiza. Maybe I'm in the minority but I don't see what is a commercial entity as a charity at the same time. If any other business wants us to contribute more then we generally want something for it. I'd just rather the six figure sum was raised by the club by existing commercial means, wither it is increased sponsorship, advertising, hospitality or punters taking seats. By your argument the WS contribution makes us competitive, the fear of relegation hanging over us regularly is diminished but it would be a factor without this injection. My argument is this revenue stream is mitigated with the addition of 250-300 new adults to FP a season and a few extra bit of advertising here and there. That for me is truly sustainable but for some reason is something we seem unwilling to go for.

The 70k figure has been banded about with countless other over the years from the WS so I start to lose track. Sustained common message delivered concisely and all that. However I don't think this was the aim of your post but the fact it is 6 figure for me is even more worrying. All this says is that the club can bumble along not having work as hard to find an extra £100k+ per year to operate because the WS members will shore it up. I thought the club was meant to be sustainable, this isn't a unending moneytree as many will cease their DD's when they reach a membership threshold. At least under the old system, the WS actually had something tangible to show for the digging deep of its membership in terms of capital reserves. To repeat the point of the post I made before. The main issue I have with it and always have with our club is those who already are committed and contribute are pumped for more and more rather than attracting those who have lapsed, fallen by the wayside or never considered attending FP. It was sold as a .... we live in a area blighted by economic hardships, people here don't have a lot of spare cash kicking about. Therefore when a fans group take over the ownership of the club, have we seen anything to mitigate that burden, to try something truly revolutionary and innovative rather than the tired old status quo? I sincerely seen the WS and fan ownership as an opportunity to do things different from the stoic and tired way football clubs are managed in the past. I seen it as a way to get a fresh look at things, implement innovative ideas, engage with parts of the support who had lapsed and those who had yet to associate with the club. However I look and see a distinct lack of dynamism, lack of any innovative ideas and lack of focus on the priorities despite the valiant efforts of too few.

Sorry to say I'm going to be pretty critical on this. When I joined the WS I was unemployed and scraped the £300 together as there was a deadline given with a "if we don't make it over the threshold the dream is dead". I put money in I couldn't afford when I had little spare. I bought into the idea of the club being run by the support and sustainably (* I want to emphasise that word) going forward and a slush fund provided by the WS that would be dipped into when required and topped back up when the sun was shining. In the years since I've witness a degree of amateurism, missed opportunity and languid deadlines. I've seen the structure and direction of the WS change, the dynamic alter without one significant vote and a board who's re-election seems a fait accomplit. One thing is clear, it has not been transparent or representative of ALL those who have contributed. Despite recent efforts by some in particular who have done their best after recognising some glaring issues. We now have a subscription model where the funds collected don't contribute to a fund but are merely an extra revenue stream for the club no different to an advertising hoarding, programme advert, shirt sponsor or TV money. Consequently a season ticket holder who also contributes £10 a month via DD now is faces an outlay of £420 a year. OK in 2.5 years time they will attain steel membership and all that goes with that, but other than being altruistic what else do they get? The particular issue I have is what I mentioned above, that of sustainability. I want the club to live within it's means so therefore revenues are greater than outlays. The £70-120k from the WS per year now are bundled in with all the other revenues and I have an issue with that as it seems skewed. Going after the same people who attend week after week for more money when there are plenty of others who have drifted from attending or never considered Fir Park as an option. These people should be targeted and by avoiding doing so is lazy and does nothing to spread the burden or onus. Now in later September with 100 odd days of the year remaining, a share offer is made. I could already gain a share for £10 by attending the Chapman and parting with some cash but I get that it will be doubled if done via the WS. But is this too little, too late? It seems a pretty simple solution so why wasn't it launched soon after Les' announcement in March/April? Is it truly innovative? What distinguishes this/us from a traditionally owned club? Is this being done because it is late September and there is not much else on the table? What exactly are the WS as club owners doing differently from before? It was sold as supporter focused but now if I buy a season ticket and contribute a DD as they'd like it costs me significantly more to attend FP per season. If a rich benefactor came in and suggested that they would like 1,000 adults to increase their season ticket contribution by 40% they'd be mass boycotts. As we're under the illusion of buying in then its OK and palatable? Nah .... not for me. I was considering contributing £4,700 this year to top up to Amber as times are now good financially and it would be doubled to near enough nine and a half grand but not any longer. Sorry to say but #notapennymore

The place is infectious, that is until we get beat and itll be all doom and gloom again

Is that Tam Cowan on the left? Apologies if that has appeared on here in the past, surely it must have.

I was thinking about this too but you'd argue the most consistent and successful manager in Scotland over the past few years with a limited budget has been Tommy Wright (also N Irish). Haven't seen many come calling for him. Also, maybe if Robinson had been allowed a foray or two into the transfer market at Oldham we wouldn't have him here.

Id add the following monetary values: 4 Home OF games £250k each Ben Henegan £400k (reported) Marvin sell on fee £500k (conservative) League cup semi £300k (reported) Final? Scottish Cup? Hibs back in the top league all adds up to a decent return for the year financially and thats before we get out of September. Only thing is tricky, with his form and inflenice what would we do come January if someone comes in wanting Moult on an immediate transfer rather than a pre-contract? I imagine a team needing a shot in the arm to turn around a poor start to the season. Do we cash in or keep him for his influence and goals?

It was only a few months ago where I had abject apathy, sometimes I'd go internet surfing and find out there was a game on I wasn't aware we'd been in and thought "oh well". The change in our fortunes and atmosphere around the club is electric at the moment. Of course we will experience a plateau, that always happens, but I'm happy to ride on the crest of the wave for as long as I can. In a few short months we've gone from relegation fodder to truly exciting. Look at that team last night, Bigi on the bench and our best player from Jan to May in Frear still to return plus an unknown prospect in Deimantas Petravicius. Off the field we face the Old Firm 3 times each at FP. We're going to Hampden, Les' double your money offer, increased season ticket numbers and massive improvements on the commercial side. We have a manager who places a focus on work ethic and creating a harmonious atmosphere in the dressing room. His recruitment has been focused on sourcing guys based on footballing ability but also the right character. I genuinely feel there is a definite team spirit. We have exciting players who are home grown and also Well fans in Cadden and Campbell, which we can all identify with. While there has been talk to extend this or that players contract, can I be among one of the first to request that we also look at extending that of the manager. I am truly impressed with what I see and I think in time we may struggle to hold onto him.

Back on thread topic. I understood any revenues (under the original plans) were to be used to create an effective slush fund/war chest, that the club could dip into and repay when times were good. In the same way a rich benefactor has deep pockets. Am I right in assuming that the revenues from subscriptions to the WS are now channelled directly to the club as an additional revenue stream no different to a shirt sponsor or TV money? It must be worth 70k a season (obviously doubled this year). Is that the case?

Lottery numbers please buddy! Is it just me or was that a very non Motherwell performance? Up against a bigger team, early goal, controlled things, no squeeky bum stuff. It's what we watch other countless other teams with big resources and confidence do repeatedly. I can't think of how many times I've watched Motherwell and had a feeling of "What if?" That tonight was a delight to watch. Moult was fantastic and Bowman looks like we've got a above average player for free, not many who were wanting him out the door in the summer would countenance a move now. Again good performance from Campbell and Cadden got GMS hooked 35 minutes in, what does that tell you. Only sad thing is Robinson seemed truly resigned that Moult will be off in the summer and no offer can be made to encourage an extension. I love this club.

Here's hoping she gets her optimism from her mum

I'm in the air sadly. No WiFi on board till January

p2p4u then .... delish

On the telly? I'm out the country

Hibs were nothing to be feared despite the extra resources 17,000? season ticket holders bring over 4,000. Not to mention the advertising revenue being a capital city club. Yes a few players have been either kippered by streetwise players and dopey refs. But they are by and large young guys and will learn. As for how we deal with the slow start in the first half, I don't know, I think we have to address how the team can be lop sided at times with definite target channels for opposition players. The midfield conundrum is also a tough one, of course it was easier when we had slim pickings, we knew our best line up. Now we're almost spoiled for choice and have a multitude of options which changes what happens in the final third dramatically. I do think when Robinson gave McHugh the armband he is semi-teflon coated, however I have seen him so far buck the norm and make sweeping changes. I think unless there's an injury or distinctive loss of form he's safe. I sincerely he gets his form and touch back as I'm sure he's conscious of it as much as we are. Rose does an unglamorous job and rightly picked up on by other posters, he maintains his starting place so is either valued in his contribution that we are mere voyeurs don't notice or doing what he is told effectively. It's up to Bigi, Tanner and Frear (when fit) to really push for a start in training. Along with guys like Plummer they have to be champing at the bit and know they can maybe bring more. Ultimately I fear nobody in this league apart from the unwashed for obvious reasons. The rest we can take on our day. Only criticism our "day's" have constituted 45-55 minutes rather than a full 90.