wearemotherwell

The relevant information on the deal is on the Well Society website, as far as I can see. I've posted links below and tried to summarise what's in them in case that helps anyone. Key facts: the Well Society agreed to meet any shortfall in the club's six-monthly repayments to Les Hutchison's initial £650k loan. Any payments the Well Society makes are in the form of loans to the club. Three defaults by the Well Society means they could lose their exclusive right to buy shares for £1. The Well Society must do its best to recruit 2000 members. Les is owed a further £200k from the club in a separate loan deal (having had 180k of his 380k second loan repaid by the club). I don't understand how the Well Society could have defaulted at any stage given it loaned the club £120k in the summer, when the club's first repayment was due, but there's a Q&A in 10 days. The details on the Well Society deal with Les Hutchison and why it was made - http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/02/24/chairmans-message-part-4/ Background to the deal http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2014/12/23/chairmans-message-part-2/ Another crucial article after the last Q&A http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/05/26/qa-report/ This week's update from Les http://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2015/11/02/an-update-from-les-hutchison/ This week's Well Society update http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/11/04/chairmans-update-2/ There's a whole host of misinformation and misinterpretations on the previous pages and on another recent topic: Some people suspected that the constitution/rules might have been changed - the rules can only be changed by members' votes and I can only remember two changes (allowing loans to the club and ensuring people were not thrown out for failing to pay annual fees). The "objects" of the Well Society remain unchanged in the first page of the rules - http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/well-society-rules/ It's just the aims/objectives page on the website that appears to have been freshened up, presumably to make them clearer/briefer and reflect the huge change in conditions facing the Well Society/club. There's some talk about forcing EGMs/mass resignations as if the board have been clinging on to power for years. I count at least six people who have left the board in three years and only two have been on it from the start. There is a vacancy at present and nominations were recently sought ahead of an election - http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/09/16/board-vacancy-3/ There's 4 elected board members and 3 co-opted board members - as the rules dictate. When an elected member steps down, there's an election; when a co-opted member steps down, another member is co-opted. The rules state that after the third year, one elected member steps down at each AGM to ensure there's a turnover. We've only been going three years but there has been a natural turnover anyway. Someone wanted to attend and vote in board meetings in return for helping out. The Well Society would cease to be democratic (there needs to be a majority of elected board members under the rules) if unlimited amounts of people were allowed to vote, and board meetings would be unworkable if everyone who helped out went along. I've never been on the board but I have done stuff to help in the past and there are a good few others who do the same without going to board meetings. They were recently looking for volunteers to help persuade businesses to join if anyone wants to help - http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/10/13/volunteers-needed-for-an-exciting-new-initiative/ But even persuading a friend to join is a huge help if everyone does it. There was another misconception recently that Well Society members are paying for the new fitness coach - the funding is from a businessman who donated after approaching the Well Society http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/06/26/major-cash-pledge-made/ Someone recently claimed there was no consultation on the new membership structure. There was a meeting, possibly an AGM, when just about everyone present agreed that the best way forward was to cut down on the benefits. After a delay there was a consultation on the new membership structure which everyone was emailed and invited to give feedback. http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/04/27/proposed-changes-to-membership-structure/ Someone argued the Well Society board have somehow dampened/destroyed the enthusiasm for fan ownership. We don't have fan ownership, we never have, so I don't believe you can judge it yet. There's a relatively small group of volunteers trying to make it a reality despite massive constraints. They weren't allowed to set up direct debit/gradual payments until last summer; there was initially no rule that allowed loans to the club; the club has lost more and more money and they're plugging holes without being able to run the club; the club's WS admin help left and wasn't replaced amid the uncertainty of last year. These are just some examples. They've been fighting fires ever since it started. I'd imagine we all expected to be closer to the club's decision-making process when we joined but that's not where we are yet. That's why it might only take 30 seconds to give feedback to a 30-minute presentation no matter how interesting it might be - they're not running the club and Les Hutchison wants to immediately increase revenue. This is what the people running the Well Society have had to deal with: Before the concept of raising a £1.5m reserve fund was launched in early 2012, long before the Well Society got 2 reps on the club board in mid-2013, the club was using a business plan that saw it lose about £1m in seasons 2011-14, and there was a pre-existing debt of £350k to John Boyle which wasn't widely known. Then last year the club stated it needed at least £800k mid-season. If that money wasn't found, then you can't pay bills/wages and that usually means administration. With not enough fans joining the Well Society to reach that amount, you need to find it from somewhere else. The only other alternative appeared to be from an Argentinian consortium. So, barring a late intervention that had not materialised, those were the alternatives to the deal with Les Hutchinson: foreign ownership, administration or quite possibly both. The Well Society would be no more. If it wasn't for that takeover, we'd quite conceivably be on minus points in the Championship right now. Les Hutchison, as many business people apparently do when negotiating corporate takeovers, insisted on confidentiality/anonymity. So what do you do if you're running the Well Society? You do the deal; or give up on the society's goals and let the Argentinians proceed. But there's no guarantee they'd finalise the deal and then the club has weeks to find close to a million pounds. So they did the deal. I have some concerns about current spending given the squad numbers and recent signings but to be fair it helped us stay up last season. It's more concerning this season but I think it's clear that Les Hutchison is calling the shots. He owns 75 percent of the club so that's his prerogative. The Well Society's part of the rescue deal was to recruit more members (up to 2,000) and keep contributing financially in case of shortfalls to the 650k loan repayments. So I will keep contributing and trying to persuade people to join to make sure that the Well Society is meeting its side of the bargain and that it is in a strong enough position to influence the club to ensure it becomes self-sufficient. Then eventually we own the club and the excitement of fan ownership begins rather than the thankless task of trying to get there. The alternative is we go back to the above scenario of one year ago.