StAndrew7

I think the Executive Board have the influence here as the overall controller of the club (we can debate that later), in as much as they have recommended a vote of all shareholders which has to include the WS, which in turn means the WS Board has to poll its members as everyone has a share in the Society, which is in turn a shareholder in the Club.

I would need to confirm if that's the case or not (working currently) but there should be something on the club accounts on Companies House if anyone wants to do a quick check!

I think the loan was included as a profit in the year in which it was accounted, so therefore any spending as a result has to be recorded as a loss? I'm sure I read on one set of accounts that the record profits we reported in 21/22 were partly because of that income.

Thanks Dee, appreciate the update. On this last point; I know the statement mentioned the WS would be sharing these plans soon - do you have a timescale? It feels like there's a window of opportunity to sell it as an alternative to the next proposal Barmack submits/is announced by the Club; I know you guys are only volunteers and you've already done a phenomenal amount of work on your plans - I wouldn't want that to go to waste if it's overshadowed by anything the Club announce in the next few days, with an attached narrative that could potentially extinguish your own.

They do if they sell their shareholding to Mr Barmack in a few years...

You heard anything on this, @steelboy? I fear (and I'm sure others do, too) the Society might miss their opportunity to have their say properly if they wait on a statement from the Club being issued, or a renewed offer comes from Barmack...

Aye, that's fair. I would slightly counter that given he's not played for 2 years, we might be able to offer him what Kelly was on and guarantee him first team football.

Casagolda on P&B mentioned we're looking at bringing in a keeper with previous experience in Scotland. There's also chat of Siegrist mutualling his contract at Celtic, might be worth an offer.

Was the brave Bob not only a B Cap? If we're including that Corrigan should be in there!

Hammell got at least one cap, I think? McGhee got a couple, too. Brian Kerr as well.

We were all so young, so innocent back in May, so naive. 😅

Back to work today after a few days off, so will hopefully get to it later. Will also wait until the club update and see what's in there, too.

I have to admit, I did wonder about that being an issue when they were posted.

On your last point, I'm asking this as the Chairman said he'd recommend it at the AGM... No doubt him saying it then was with the idea that it would take longer and he'd have fucked off by the time it got to negotiate properly.

Yeah, I've been drafting an email for a while and this is in there, sending it shortly.

Preach!

That's essentially what I said, or was trying to say. They were giving their opinion based on their elected status, the Society membership voted for them to be their representatives. The membership then gave them their mandate; consider anything that involves investment in the club, including giving up the Society's majority share. The board said quite clearly thereafter that they would give their opinion on any offer and then put it to the vote. They are always open to hearing the views of their membership and I wouldn't be surprised if they'd been canvassing members they know and also receiving significant volumes of feedback directly. I believe the interview with Speedie and Derek said they'd be looking to host Society meetings to discuss things.

As with everything posted on a forum, a big pinch of salt is required to be taken when reading threads etc. Individual posters will clearly want to think they've played a part in it (and given the detailed feedback and discussions that have been had, I would suggest some have) but it's absolutely not just all about them.

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 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.

Sadly even he can't stop passive, narrow tactics from the manager that play right into Germany's hands. 🫠🙄

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

He did, posted it earlier today.

True, forgot about him. Not convinced he's going to be physical enough to survive being anything other than an impact sub but aye, that's a fair point.

Dickie is a chartered surveyor, not accountant; he counts bricks for a living, not money. 😅