joewarkfanclub

Seems to me everyone is trying to attribute their own spin on this to suit their own position. Bottom line is we have voted to consider the options presented to us. Im reading elsewhere that the better of the 2 offers is £2m over 6 years for a controlling share of the club. I think thats giving away our fan ownership too cheaply. That kind of money isnt life changing and not beyond the kind of some we could potentially raise ourselves if the new WS Board are given a chance to improve the Society and what it offers the club. Happy to see the detail and be proved wrong. But, for me, if we are giving up control of the club it should be for transformational money, not the fee we could get for Lennon Miller in the summer......

In think the only Livvy player I would be remotely interested in is Bruce Anderson. But that would depend on the strategy for next season and who else we are thinking about going after/retaining......

With respect, we also dont need to agree with your assessment that EVERYTHING has been shite. I see a young manager struggling for results under difficult circumstances. Making mistakes along the way, but slowly improving things and a squad all bursting a gut for him because they clearly believe in him. You see someone who is either incompetent or not good enough and who will never improve or get better. Thats fair enough. But its way too early to call which is right.

Excellent!

Probably gonna need at least 3 wins and a draw out of those to have any real chance. The fact we have 3 home games and 2 of them are against direct rivals helps. As always its gonna come down to squad size and what injuries and suspensions we have. Keep out important players (Spittal, Vale, Bair, Miller, Devine, Gent) fit and it gives us a chance. Big ask, but not impossible.

Ive scored some hospitality for this, so I bloody hope so! Would be lovely to sit and gloat surrounded by seethe! The hoodoo has to end sometime right? Please tell me it can be so.......

Whats this weeks lottery numbers? Maybe we could invest in a football club? 😆😆😆

Absolutely you can. But do you accept any of the mitigating factors? Do you think there is another manager out there that we could get on our budget who could have done better whilst being asked to do what SK has been tasked with? No one is denying that results for a 3/4 month period were poor and that there are still glaring weaknesses in our squad. But, for me, its a work in progress caused by previous bad decisions by the board and/or managers.

You'd have had to been absolutely mental as a board to sack SK in those circumstances off the back of sacking Alexander and Hammell. If we had lost to Livingston before the New Year he would have been under severe pressure and probably couldnt have argued had the board acted. But he won that game and our form since then has been pretty decent. You can argue all day that there havent been many wins. But there havent been many losses either and the performances overall have been relatively decent. I know Im a broken record on this, but the board tasked SK with keeping us in the league whilst slashing the playing budget and reducing the squad size. He is on course to do that and has had a significant amount of injuries and other issues that have hampered us during that process. Im not sure there was a long list of managers out there that could have do that on the money that we pay, otherwise we may have interviewed them when Hammell or SK got appointed.

Lots of good perdormances tonight but I thought Lennon Miller was our best player by some distance. Controlled the pace of the game for large parts and played some really lovely passes under pressure. I didnt think he had his best game on Sunday his assist apart. But tonight he bossed it.

Absolutely this. There seems to be the view that we have to give up majority shareholding to secure any investment. This shows it is possible to maintain WS Ownership and get business partners on board. Lets not sell the family jewels too cheaply. By all accounts the numbers veing offered by our 2 lead investors are nowhere near what Hibs have secured.

Huge 3 points tonight. Really disappointing start and sloppy goal to lose (again) but I thought we responded well and controlled the game. 72% possession first half tells you we were tge better team. Granted we could have been better with that possession, but when the other team sits in its very difficult for teams like ours to break them down. The changes second half definitely improved us and we scored 3 good goals and ran out deserved winners. For those questioning why we didnt start with that line up, you need to consider the manager knows who is carrying a knock and who can last 90 minutes and makes decisions accordingly. Some of the players were absolutely done after Sunday so no surprise to see a couple on the bench. 3 points of top 6 now with a run of winnable games coming up after Rangers away. Thats a free hit now. Hopefully we will go out and give it a go. Vale and Gent will certainly have a chance of starting having been rested somewhat tonight.

Thanks for this information. As a contributing member I may be willing to increase my monthly contribution if the WS continue to hold a majority share and have control of the club. If an outside investor came in and wanted to take a majority shareholding and that was voted through, fair enough. However, I would not longer feel compelled to contribute financially. I would suggest that I would not be the only on to feel this way. So there needs to he an understanding with any investor that the money coming in from Society members cannot be taken for granted should they try and force through majority shareholding. There would undoubtedly be a further gap in funding they would need to meet in those circumstances

3800 may well have been the number. My short term memory isnt what it was! 😆

Was sure Id read a communication from the club that as a result of "the video" that we were now up to 3,600 members. However, checking back the feeds, I cant see it. Anyone confirm or refute that?

I thought so too. Was initially starting for Stirling Albion but has been getting minutes as a sub recently. May as well do that for us. Be good to see another youngster develop and cone through the ranks.

Regardless of how good or bad anyone thinks Paton is. Not having him available even to freshen up the team say, around the 90 minute mark, hurts us and seriously reduces our options in midfield. Restricts us tactically too.

Havent seen any timescale given. Was supposed to be a calf issue so wouldnt expect it to be a significant lay off, but its been a couple weeks already......

I think when the season is done and dusted we need some sort of analysis done on the injuries we have sustained this season. It maybe that we have just been dreadfully unlucky, but I really dont remember too many seasons as bad as this one. When we are looking to be running with smaller squads, we really cant afford to be down to the bare bones as often as we have if we expect to remain competitive. I remember when Les Hutchison came in there was some investment made in injury prevention. We really need to be looking at that again. Paton will be a miss. With Halliday already injured we are going to be asking the same guys to go again and again until the end of the season. So no matter how little you rate him. It will effect the team/squad.

That would make sense, with the revenue going into the club. And yes, happy to move the discussion.

Aye he wont be with us for long. Just need to enjoy him while we can and extract as much revenue for him as possible.

Im not sure he is on this one. Ive heard Lee Miller interviewed on this and he stated that it was more important for Lennon to be getting first team football at this stage of his career to allow him to develop. His attitude was that the money will come. Of course we would have to wait and see how far that could be tested, but I dont think he will be off at the first offer. It would be nice to see us improve his terms at the end of the season with a little bit longer on his contract to provide us with some protection. On the understanding that a significant fee would trigger a release clause. No guarantee he would sign, but you have to show the kid how much we value him.

The Well Society own 70% of the club. To maintain a majority shareholding obviously requires 51% So the Society could sell 19% of its shareholding to an interested party and still maintain control of the club. Investors could of course try to buy up the other 30% of shares that are in private hands. The Society would have no control over that, but they dont have to. That money wouldnt go into the club though. It would go into the pockets of the individual shareholders. The club could obviously hold a share issue to generate money as other clubs have done, but I couldnt comment on how that would work or the pro's and cons of that......

Sounds like the kind of thing that would sit well with the Well Society ethos.....

No. It would be up to the Society as a whole to vote on the matter. The Society owns the shares not the individual. We are all "members" of the Society.