Clackscat

Now plying his trade with national league north side Hereford, since leaving us has had about 7 clubs, highest level was Gillingham who got relegated, seems to play about 10 games at most then moved on

I spent about 2 hours in total, listening to pitches (some twice) looking at mixes of skill sets, and really struggled to get down to 4 picks. I'm lucky in that I had time to do it. Not everyone has that time and I think that has more to do with the low turnout than anything

Indeed, and has already overseen multiple new signings early in the transfer window and the lucrative transfer of Thelonius, all against a background of nonsense., looking forward to what he can do for us now all this has settled

Been saying for years we need to move, I've moved from members row f in POD where at 6ft plus I have nowhere to put my legs and my knees end up in uncomfortably close proximity to the head of the guy in front of me, now sit at back of south section, better overall view and space, can handle no backs on the seats. I've sat in every home stand, and tbh not a lot of the seats give good views, those that do are snapped up quite rightly by season tkt holders. I often wonder if this could have an influence on our crowds because when we do get an extra thousand or so in they won't be in great viewing seats. Sooner or later the POD will fail a safety, and whilst I have a sentimental attachment, a move into a well designed 10000 or so seater (like AFC Wimbledons) would be great.

No doubt, however plenty of evidence how impeccably the WS Board has conducted themselves diplomatically as well as solid factual arguments as to why this was a farcically terrible deal. My take on it is Chairman Jim was happy to pay lip service to fan ownership while there was a passive WS to not give him much push back, he has seen the change in skillset, attitude, and a more challenging WS Board and shown his true colours by trying to kill the WS with this deal

And the same person thinks EB can't have complete control because he won't have 100% of the share ....... staggering

Have e mailed to get clarification on what happens if 35% not met

Maybe they are acting on that legal advice ?

She is an absolute gem

The biggest issue for me is overall control and at first glance this sees Well Society retain that, (which stregthens the rationale for continued member contributions etc) plus additional input and expertise. As ever the devil is in the detail, but this has swayed me from No to Maybe. A big shout out to those who thus far have forensically challenged the initial proposal to get things to this stage.

I thought the statement was nothing more than a smokescreen, there is no need to get worked up about valuations, of more concern is potential shareholdings and there is plenty to be concerned about there. EB has gone silent on his tweaked offer, and no longer posting on p&b. The club post on fb did produce a number of positive comments, however I wonder how many will have a vote as I doubt they are WS members. The WS really need to step up to plate now, with a detailed rebutal, but how we have got ourselves into a situation where the Board of the largest shareholder in the club are not leading the negotiations,but a chairman leaving the club is, well thats beyond me

He has just posted on P&B that he is considering some changes. He has been quite active on there and has had some interesting and civil exchanges Been quite civilized compared to the cesspit that is twitter/x

Haven't received it although i was approached by a couple of nice chaps from WS on Saturday with a similar but not the same survey. Have always received weekly e mails so will check with them whats happened here.

I am hearing that Lennon's injury is serious and he may be out for the rest of the season.

Was a stunning save, and as others said NO ONE realised at time it was a handball, commentators took till 2nd replay, QPR players didn't claim, looked for all the world like he headed it, especially from ref's angle. I thought the big man was immense last night, strolled the game and pinged some great long passes, can anyone remember what we sold him for?

I thought he was obviously delighted, and well as we played, we did ride our luck at times which was fair enough to point out. I have thought recently he had gone a bit neutral in his comments in recent times (which is fair enough), but I felt you could hear how happy he was, in fact I commented on it at home.

Was at a local (for me) game today, Sauchie v Dundonald Bluebell, ear piece in keeping up to date, walking home when Casey scores, couldn't help the wee jig and punching the air, got some strange looks 🤣. Hope everyone there gets back safe and as others have said, beating either of the bigot brothers is a feeling like no other, and one we've all missed badly. Wee post script, playing for Alloa v Motherwell CT tomorrow in O60s Supervets, hope the Mwell team are on the bevvy tonight!!, I'm being very disciplined (almost)

Sometimes the best ideas are the simplest; emotionally I value my small shareholding in the club, more than my Well Society input which has cost me far more, so I just wonder if that might appeal to those who haven't engaged with the WS. That said I'm sure there will be legal etc barriers to overcome and I wonder just how much could be raised, and it would be a one off. It would buy time with a cash injection, that would then give the WS time to formulate their strategy going forward although I wonder as I write this would it make life more difficult to raise monies afterwards?

Just looked again at the WS result e mail, 993 votes cast 36% turnout. That equates to 2758 members entitled to vote, so even allowing for junior steel members that is still below 3800 or so members. Am wondering therefore if there was a minimum contribution requirement to vote as queried by folks either on here or P&B, which would disenfranchise new monthly contribution members?, (hope not), or is there any other reason for the apparent numbers anomaly?

I have been an off and on contributor via standing order since inception and encouraged by the way the board elections were handled contacted WS with a view to restarting my contributions. It was discovered I was entered twice on the membership list, probably because of stopping and restarting my SO before. They were able to tell me I'd contributed £700 (surprised) over these years, I think the admin issue is historical and nowt to do with how the society is run now, but it does beg questions over how diligently things have been recorded against a background of pushing for numbers. In a way talking up the number of members has bit them on the backside as the poll percentage looks worse than perhaps it is, with Junior Steel Members and one off ex players etc. The figure of 1600? currently active contributing members is a closer indication of those 'engaged'. I think the lack of engagement by WS members points to a combination of lapsed members through apathy and an inaccurate membership roll, all of which should be alarming for WS. The new initiatives and the work of the new Board members shows just what is possible and gives us a glimpse of how much better it could work, but sadly I think for a lot of folks it has come too late in the day, given there is potential for an alternative, hence the poll result. That said I am sure like me, the majority of those who said they would 'consider' other offers would only vote for them if fully convinced of the merits of any proposal, and would be hoping the Well Society come up with a viable alternative, so there is no way I see this week's vote as necesarily the end of fan ownership at Motherwell. I hope it galvanises the WS with renewed purpose.

Yes he will

Was a really well constructed and balanced communication. Basically asking for views as to whether losing the majority shareholding is a red line you would not cross, or whether you would consider a proposal leading to that on its merits. If negotiations commence and a final offer is put forward then members get to vote on that. I understand totally the emotions involved but I think it wrong to dismiss something out of hand without knowing what it involves

Going by his demeanour last night I don't think he would extend, he looked and sounded scunnered with everything to do with running a football club, (referees, financial constraints, VAR, SFA, FIFA, development fees), there was also a wee throwaway comment at the end alluding to unfair criticism. Having said that, bridging that gap until there is clarity around prospective investment would imo be a godsend right now so I hope I'm wrong

StAndrew7 Fantastic, comprehensive, and accurate update, you must have shorthand writing skills!

I think folks should draw the conclusion by the word 'sinister' and the fact no one that knows or thinks they know is prepared to put on record in a forum exactly what it is, that it is a non football related matter that left the club with no choice.