dennyc

The Directors are not interested or going to do anything. If they ignore the issue long enough folk will get fed up and shut up. All that has happened so far is that some longer bolts have put in because some seats were unstable. Oh, and folk have been told to move if they are not happy. All very fan orientated….not.

Excellent summary and not rambling at all. There are so many aspects involved it is hard not to end up with lengthy posts. I’ve picked out one area where I think I know the answer. And apologies if too lengthy. Re protection. Any loan monies the WS provides are secured by a first charge over Fir Park and are interest free so as not to burden the Club. . That places the Society ahead of other Creditors were disaster to strike. Tax Authorities might have a prior claim as they are a Law unto themselves. So any loan monies could eventually be returned to the Society subject to the amount being less than the sale price of Fir Park. In 2011 those returning monies were seen as a restart fund if it came to it. Please note, under normal circumstances there is no intention of ever seeking repayment of the Loan. It is simply in existence to protect Society monies as the Society indicated in their presentation. Last time I asked the WS and checked with Companies House, that Charge was still in place and covered all monies loaned to MFC by the Society. But that is certainly one point that needs confirmed beyond all doubt. The First Charge being granted to the Society also means external funding is not so easy to access. Lenders ( just like the Society) prefer to have Security in place., and be first in line. But given that the Society are the first in line, any new lender would have to accept being next in the queue. Or the Society would have to agree to step aside which would normally not be acceptable. It is done though if circumstances suit. So that situation can be a barrier to seeking finance elsewhere and anything agreed could be more costly than normal. Donations are an entirely different ball game to Loan monies. Donations are not protected by the Security over Fir Park. So once a donation is made, those funds are gone forever. That happened fairly regularly under a different regime. Otherwise the current Loan and/or Bank balance would be a great deal higher. From discussion with Society Board Members that is an issue they were keen to address soon after Board membership changed after the Barmack approach. Personally I don’t understand why all monies passed to MFC should not be by way of adding to the Loan. That way everything would be protected. Maybe there are accounting or tax implications? Talking of Barmack. One of his demands was that the outstanding Society Loan be written off entirely. Why was that? Well, that write off would have dispensed with the need for the Society to have Security over Fir Park. Barmack could then have sought external finance using Fir Park as a Guarantee. Default on any new Loan and Fir Park would have been at risk. A potential risk members identified and took into account when telling him to get lost. Hopefully never to be relied upon, but that Security over Fir Park provides so much protection in so many ways. It grants a huge say in the way things are done. But the Loan needs to exist for the safety net to exist. That is my understanding of how things stand. Anyone who knows differently please dive in. More than happy to stand corrected. Edited to add. Per Football Authority rules. Football debts are cleared first or else Club is sanctioned. So wages, outstanding transfers, suppliers are first up to be cleared. Tax is behind secured creditors as they lost a recent court case.

Is it the case that we should as a minimum know the basics of what the ground report revealed? And what upgrades are urgently required. If we are staying put even. I support 100% any proposal that improves things for our less able supporters. Lifts being installed seems like a no brainer to me. In this day and age all grounds should be adapting as required. Other venues have to by Law but football seems to get an easy ride. We need to know what the long term plans are re Fir Park before we commit to any expenditure. I hope at the very least the Society have had some indication of what that Report revealed. As owners, I am reminded. As to what we need as a Reserve should disaster eventually strike, the McLean houses over 4500. Relegation would lose us 2 home games against Rangers, Celtic and more than likely Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. Assuming top six. (The reason no League reconstruction will be sanctioned). That equates to around 30,000 paying away fans. Possibly more if the other three exceed 2000 per game. At £25 each that totals lost income of £750,000……for one season (somebody please check my calculation. It shocked me). I guess playing Arbroath, Livi, County etc would not really compensate. Add loss of tv revenue, match day sales etc. WeeYin rightly mentioned Parachute payments but how much will that really compensate given other areas that would also be adversely affected. In the absence of a sugar daddy or external finance I don’t think a reserve of £1.5m or less is anywhere near enough. And I don’t really care what other Clubs have in place. Each situation is unique. Of course my figures are only guesstimates. How about someone from the Society with access to accurate figures and the Club Board draw up details of the financial impact of relegation? That’s what we should be made aware of, even if nobody believes it will happen. What cuts would require to be made if sufficient resources were not available? Cuts which would affect our ability to bounce straight back up. I’m in no way against the Society providing funding as they have done for the likes of Mrs Baillie’s. It’s a great ambition and the results benefit all. . But let’s not forget why the Society was created in the first place.

Held to Account yes. 100%. Undoubtedly. However, the Club Board do have the expertise to operate like any other football club board. They have done that pretty well so far. Seating aside 😂. That responsibility surely includes managing infrastructure projects. The only difference is that they have ‘bosses’ to report to who can intervene if appropriate. In effect that arrangement should provide extra security for us fans. My question is whether the Society Board are strong enough to disagree with the Club Board/Brian and say NO. That has not always been the case in the past. They certainly appear to have sidestepped the POD seating issue. But hopefully those days are behind us. The current proposal has some merit. But are we in a position to commit at this time? I guess that is the question folk have to answer for themselves.

Hopefully the valid points raised are clarified as we move forward. My belief is that the Society should operate as a separate entity and leave Brian and the Board to manage day to day operations. And it is also for the MFC Board to come up with plans to fund and time the major infrastructure projects we appear to need. That’s why they are in position. The WS Board should have input of course and seek fan approval if appropriate. MFC approaching the Society with requests for funding strikes me as questionable. I fear lines are again becoming a wee bit blurred and there is a danger of the Society being viewed as easy and cheap finance. As it was under previous Society/Club Boards which ended up with sizeable amounts being ‘donated’ rather than loaned. Subscription monies gone forever. I prefer not to see a total shift from what was originally the intent of the Society. I’m not saying that is the current intent but there is a shift being proposed. I do suspect this proposal will be sanctioned as it stands. Mainly because of the feel good factor it gives fans. Only time will tell if it is a clever move. No problem with the Society contributing as per Mrs Baillie’s but beyond that level of support I’m not so keen. Certainly not until the reserve fund is a lot more substantial and relates to the current day.

Fair point. I think from memory the 2011 figures were based on possibly taking a few years to rebuild and bounce back up. 3 years times 500k perhaps? Just in case. As u say promotion first up is far from guaranteed. Just ask Ross County. And our commitment wage and contract wise must be greater than back then. Clearly we are not going down 🤞 but if we are serious about building a fallback fund just in case, then the figures have to be realistic taking into account all possibilities. I still think we should align with 2011 in real terms. Is there a rush? Which brings me back to ‘Why now’ etc.

Still mulling this over. Plenty of good intention but yet to be convinced. Also trying to leave the emotional fan owned buzz out of things. First thing that strikes me is the reserve figure of £1.5m as the target originally set…..in 2011. That figure equates to almost £2.4m in 2026. So it’s nowhere near like for like or close to the level of emergency funds that were visualised as appropriate in 2011. Should it therefore be £2.5m we look to have before we use any excess funds for ‘projects’? To give us the same level of protection that was seen as required in 2011. That initial target was for the exact same scenarios set out in the Broadcast. Effectively relegation. Hard to understand why relegation nowadays would have less of an impact than in 2011. I don’t believe using St Mirren and £500k as a yardstick is wise either. Pretty sure other Clubs have identified relegation as having greater financial implications than £500k, even allowing for an immediate return to the top division. My other concern is ‘Why now and who is driving it?’ Fund raising initiatives have worked well this season. And congrats to all concerned. Mrs Baillie’s as an example. So why not carry on in that manner meantime? Walk before you run. Or perhaps, is the upgraded Training Ground and the apparently hush hush Fir Park Report playing a part here? Bearing in mind external funding is not straight forward as the WS hold a First Charge over Fir Park. Lenders don’t like being second or third in the queue if things go belly up. The WS is also a much cheaper source of finance. And per the broadcast, we may have heaps of transfer monies due but only in increments over the coming years. ‘ We do not have £10m in the Bank’ as a direct quote. So how are those two projects being funded? Perhaps I am being too cautious but, until convinced otherwise, I would rather build up to £2.5m before proceeding as proposed. Interested to hear what others think.

Basic question and apologies if already clarified. How long does the Lease have left on it before it falls due for renewal or renegotiation? Future ‘landlords’ might not be as supportive as the current land owners. What’s to stop them altering the terms? Given the issues house owners are having in England with landowners holding the leaseholder to ransom I trust it is a very long term lease. The UK Parliament are currently looking at ways to protect house owners from excessive demands from landowners. It is a serious problem. Not saying that could happen to MFC, but protections need to be agreed at the outset.

Other than the transfer fee I raise you Omar Daly signed by his pal Stuart McCall. Biggest waste of space I think I have witnessed at Motherwell. Wonder how much he cost us in wages for no return. And again we were excited when he signed. Jamaican international and a flying machine. Apparently. The point is we sign players every season that don’t work out. Some cost us decent money by way of a transfer fee. Others in wages. Anybody remember Bob Malcolm? Connor Shields? ( currently in Cambodia). List is endless.

He scored 17 goals in 26 games for Newcastle Jets the season we signed him and had just broken into the Australian team. A team that would prove good enough to reach the World Cup via Asian qualifying. That’s not easy. When we signed him nobody on here thought it was a poor signing or that £250k was excessive. In truth folk got excited. For whatever reason it did not work out despite early promise. I remember a goal at Ibrox and a cracking strike at Easter Road. Whether it was family reasons, style of football, injury, homesickness, attitude or Managerial choice we will never know but it was certainly a signing everybody thought was refreshing and showed ambition. . His biggest critics appear to have forgotten that, or chosen not to accurately remember. But it did not work out and better for him to move on. I agree it could have happened earlier. I wish him well and would not be surprised if he is a success wherever he ends up.

I agree. It would achieve next to nothing. The SFA are only proposing it so they can say they are taking action. Quotas for cup games and/or league games will merely throw a few youngsters in at the deep end every now and then and most will sink. They need regular game time at a decent level to prepare them for what lies ahead. At the moment that can only be achieved by way of Loans which relies on other teams and is limited in numbers. It can work with Whyte looking to be a good example. But success is relatively rare. Oh for the days when Craigen was in charge of our youth team, playing competitive games every week or so against top division youth teams. A group of youngsters being prepared for a step up when they were ready. Does that even happen now or is it all closed door run outs, training and bench sitting? That competitive environment seemed to stop when certain teams, backed by the SFA, were allowed to enter B teams in the lower leagues. How did that work out? Covid didn't help either. I get finance is an issue but perhaps if the SFA invested some of their cash in funding youth leagues in which participation was compulsory for all top division Clubs it could be possible. A bit like Premier League 2 down south. Surely something can be worked out if the Clubs are rewarded financially.

Very much this. The thing is that Brian knows many fans may be unhappy with the outcome but he is also aware that very few will vote with their feet or move elsewhere. Nobody likes change and the prime seats elsewhere are spoken for. Plus fans are loyal to the team they support and build up relationships with those fans sitting beside them. I note Brian has backtracked from hinting that fans would have to be relocated elsewhere in the ground. For me that possibility came across as a threat. Now he mentions being relocated within the POD. A grudging acceptance perhaps that there is scope to reduce capacity and still house all Season Ticket holders currently within the POD. If the willing is there. What we should now see is a proposal to reconfigure the POD in the lead up up to next season, detailing exactly where each season ticket holder would end up. Put that out for consultation then proceed if agreed. Exactly what should have happened this time round. Again Brian stated that the need for change was identified months before season end and in anticipation of hosting European fixtures. So it is disappointing that for a Club so closely linked to it's supporters that consultation was not considered appropriate. I agree finance appears to have been the driver from the outset and sadly the views of those affected will continue to be largely ignored. In time those complaints will disappear as folk give up hope. Brian's interview indicated to me that the man is not for turning. As for the Society? Their role appears to have been to act as postman. The discussions I had with them suggested that all correspondence had been passed to Brian. But also that that was the limit to which they wished to get involved. What Brian says etc etc. I actually find it sad that we are having this discussion. On the pitch the performances have been fantastic and the progress the team has made under Jens and Alfred has been amazing. The quality of player and football we are seeing week upon week is exceptional. Football is fun once again. The fan base has grown beyond what anyone could have hoped for. Away games are a joy and we fear no-one. The Board have excelled in moving on from Jens in identifying and supporting his replacement so credit to them for that. Brian has even called out Celtic and their toxic fans which is a brave thing to do. But they have let themselves down in this one area.

I believe most fans would welcome a return to an 18 team league. At least then the visit of the bigger teams to Fir Park becomes more of an occasion and less routine. Similarly for our fans visiting away grounds. Less “Oh, them or there again”. Variety in other words and less repetition. . Sadly that’s not how most Boards, including ours, see it. Cash is king. The dream is top six which guarantees 4 home matches a season against Celtic and Rangers and also more than likely against at least 2 of Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. Financially much more lucrative than replacing that second home fixture against the big four or five with Livi, St J, Raith, Ross C, Arbroath. Thistle and Dunfermline marginally less so. I agree the 12 team set up does make it more of a challenge for anyone other than Celtic and Rangers to win the Title. But that is not the main driver for the set up we have and which is unlikely to change.

I think the rules allow for emergency loans at any time if a team runs short of goalies due to injury. Not ideal but at least it does not tie us to the transfer window. So no doubt we have someone in mind should that need arise.

Perhaps we agreed a once and for all pay off that totals less than what he would have earned under contract. Which in turn lets him head home free to sign on with anyone he can agree a deal with. Saves us money long term and gives him a chance to rebuild his career. I imagine he will be keen to get back playing rather than being paid to sit on his backside as his career stalls even more. Australian window open ahead of season start but in any event he can sign with anyone, anywhere as a free agent. Increases his options. Hence the timing? Win win? And common sense. If he is really away that is.

Wasn't having a dig. Just trying to find a sensible and fair way forward. Apologies if it came across otherwise.

The guy who fell in Freiburg was in the row behind me. Fortunately he was ok if a bit shellshocked. I agree there was limited room but it was marginally better than the POD in my view. Also the Stand in Freiburg was much steeper than the POD which may have been the reason for him falling. And the back of the seats did not buckle when leant on. Others can please confirm or not. And no way could we have been bouncing up and down in the POD like we were in Freiburg fueled by as much beer as we wanted without risking much worse than a guy falling over.

They could accept the issue and attempt to find a solution to be put in place at season end. No one expects an immediate resolution. The POD has more than enough capacity to accommodate all ST holders with room to spare even if the seating has to be reconfigured. By Brian's own figures. Now if that configuration cannot be achieved for property reasons or if the cost is excessive at least provide those affected with a report that confirms that is the case. Let fans see exactly how any reconfiguration would affect them individually.....how far their seat would move as a starter. Consult. Effectively we are talking about removing 500 seats and spreading the remaining 2500 seats over the same area. Hard to believe that is not feasible in the time available between seasons. They could even use the same seats to minimise cost leaving only labour and planning expenses to consider, Unless it is the potential loss of the income from those 500 seats that is the real barrier?

I think that is fair comment. Well said. The fact the new seats don't tilt up as previously to allow folk to pass is the biggest issue. So in a practical sense there is less room. And leaning on the back for support as folk squeeze past causes the plastic to collapse. Written as one not so slim and and not so young. Speaking personally, it rankles that 1. The answer from above is " if fans don't like the way it is then they can move." Hardly a caring approach. Especially to those who have held Season Tickets for decades but also to any supporter irrespective of length of connection.. 2. Despite comments that Brian has tried to speak or contact all who contacted the Club, no phone call or E-mail has come in this direction. Kudos to the WS though, they did respond. 3. I must have have missed the apology for the lack of communication and the end result.

I think you are spot on. The potential loss of revenue from 500 seats was the issue for the Board. And saying that the loss of those seats would have displaced fans to other Stands is a flawed attempt to justify their decision. They wished to maximise income from European ties by retaining 3000+ seats in the POD. Some might see that financial reasoning as justification. I doubt those affected think that way though. And the figures presented don't add up. The loss off those 500 seats would leave a capacity of over 2500 which is surely more than enough to cater for all current POD season ticket holders. Given the number of unoccupied seats in the wings and the tickets available for purchase for league matches that seems a reasonable conclusion. Folk might not have been seated in the exact location as they are at present but moving a few meters up or down/right or left would have been preferable to what we now have. In my opinion anyway. And consultation could easily have taken place as the possibility of European qualification was known for months before season end. The Club made a poor decision which badly affected many long term, committed fans. Now Brian is circling the wagons to justify that poor decision. That will come back to haunt him when/if someone gets badly injured. Meantime keep handing in any broken seats to the Director's Box.

In fairness, in response to my E-Mail, a Society Board Official did contact me on the Monday before the Freiburg game. But really only to confirm that the many complaints they had received had been passed to Brian. Although there was an acknowledgement of an issue it did not feel like the Society were prepared to challenge Brian on our behalf. When pushed, the background and justification presented for the 'improvements' was almost identical to the Statement from Brian. Practically word for word in fact. Read into that what you will. It was suggested that if I was unhappy I could move elsewhere, failing to recognise that I have sat in the POD for years and gotten to know the folk around me. Part of the match day enjoyment. I seriously doubt the WS intend to get involved. What Brian says goes. I get nothing can likely be done whilst home games are coming thick and fast but a promise that solutions would be investigated with a view to work being undertaken at season end following consultation with those affected would at least have shown some respect for fans' concerns. That statement does nothing of the kind.

Perhaps the reason that Sydney did not pick him up was because MFC (quite rightly) were looking to recoup some of the fee they paid initially. If it reaches the stage that he can leave for free I am sure he will have plenty of takers from his homeland. And I would not be surprised if that is sooner rather than later. Maybe not contributing lots of goals but he featured in almost every game and helped Sydney reach the season ending League play off final against Auckland. JGR was CB for Auckland.

Exactly. No admission that the seating is not fit for purpose and is a hazard. If it was thoroughly tested then why are seats breaking? Why are folk falling over as they attempt to get to their seats? etc etc etc No intention whatsoever of rectifying the mistake. Their own figures show there is plenty of room in the POD for all existing season ticket holders even if the capacity is reduced. Sure some movement would happen but not as dramatic as suggested. The threat of fans being displaced to other Stands is just a poor attempt at justification and to make those responsible the good guys. A whitewash and as you say a GIRFUY. They blew it and are not big enough to accept it.

I think Whyte is first team ready now and shows a composure beyond his years. But how to fit him in as a starter? I'm not sure loaning him out again would actually benefit him or us. For me he should stay with us and feature more and more, even if we fight off the supposed interest in Fadinger. Vogt is a dilemma. No doubt he has ability but in my opinion needs to learn the game, increase his work rate and toughen up for what faces him in Scottish football. Not a lost cause and could return from a spell in the lower leagues a much more developed player. Stama I think is at the end of his time with us. For whatever reason it has not worked out as we had all hoped. Injury, attitude, luck or home sickness? Who knows? Possibly a mixture of all. I would be delighted if he could turn things round but I doubt it. I can see him being released in time for the Australian season which starts in October.

Rangers have been involved in the JT chat for months. I'm not saying it is likely to happen but if they offered £3m I think we would sell. On his 2026 form that is a premium.