Onthefringes

Über fan ^^^

Deary me, you certainly aren't my mate. Not once have I thought my opinion to be more important, nor would I expect anyone to bow to any perceived greater knowledge, education and intellect. Playing to the sycophants on here doesn't suit you. No celebrating victory here, but, aligns with my post fairly well unless 'hint at' or 'mention without discussing at length' aren't definitions of the term 'alluded' nowadays? Having a minter here.

And what about it? Doesn't mean I'm incensed. 'Club make my head hurt' is nothing more than flippant on my part. Hidden inferences? A contradiction in itself. Hardly hidden. Inference is a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning at the school I went to. The reference to a new club employee is baffling. Don't expect his employment to enhance my matchday experience as was heralded yesterday, fan engagement is a world away from what Mark McGhee is offering in the press and I suspect not his remit to engage the cynical among us.

You got me, I'm a cynic, but, incensed? really? Only working with the direct quotes from the manager... Article certainly alludes to Lee Lucas playing as soon as possible thus reducing the opportunity for a youth player is it not?

“We are still working on a shoestring financially, but when things get better he could sign for longer." Then goes onto say about wondering if Lucas can partner the 37 year old Lasley... All the while, young Campbell falls another notch down the pecking order, the penny is never going to drop for that arsehole. Club just makes your head hurt.

Disagree. It was his form in that position that earned him the move to Wigan which was arguably his best spell in the first team. One of the poorer full backs we've had.

10/10 for observance

Should suffice...

Burke? Serious? Deary me... Motherwell boss Mark McGhee has promised well fans he will spend any cash from the sale of marvin johnson wisely. Steven hammell, James McFadden, Scott McDonald , Keith Lasley and Stephen McManus have already been offered contract extensions till 2025. Bookmark it

Echo the sentiments. I'm one of the existing membership who haven't committed further funds - I'm sure it was approximately 1/3rd given as a total of those who thought along similar lines.

Jim McMahon wasn't at the table at the AGM. I do recall him being the only one as pretty blunt and forthcoming alluded to earlier in this thread, downstairs at the Q&A. Plenty of deflection and going round in circles from the others though...

Aye, progress right enough. 'Unfortunately due to confidentiality agreements' rears it's head again... 'however we will provide members with an update as soon as we are in a position to do so' Well, if it's handled as eloquently as Les Hutchison's arrival, we're in for a treat.

Monies raised by academy 'is as ring-fenced as you can make it' suggesting reinvestment in that particular pool.

This I've got to see...

I'm not. Expect another ex-player though

So not too dissimilar to Steven Hammell...

Another on the Luke Watt tip I see... The best fullback (who doesn't feature at fullback much in his development) we have never had!

Unfair to judge? Correct. Game time? Mr McGhoo alluded to being injury free and just needing to get his 'head right' so I'm not expecting we'll be able to judge anytime soon if at all.

Different sub structure, deeper pile on top enables rugby to be played on that type of surface... almost identical to what's available at Dalziel Park. Expecting no excuses.

A bid of circa £500,000 will interest the powers that be. Bookmark it.

How so? Don't think it is as simplistic as that. Suspect it would be described as the fated "undisclosed". Any monies received may well be to offset any contractual issue involving the player so the club unlikely to profit in the short term. Or are some just expecting the player to move on without settling the contract? Your second point is on the money, McGhoo doesn't do one-dimensional so would expect transfer dealings.

Quelle surprise. He's chief sports reporter at the rag who claimed amongst other recent tall tales that Jacob Blyth had stated "Rangers were League One in England material" when the player himself corrected them.

No. To avoid a ticket scramble

Not right for the club in its present form? Pray tell us what is because it's widely acknowledged that the Society is the only show on the road. Despite having plenty to say, you offer no alternative... You may well be correct on the share issue point, but, why did the former owner shy away from that very ideal in order he recoup some of his outlay? Obviously there would have to have been sufficient safeguards? We do, it's called the 'Well Society. As for becoming a club shareholder - I'm sure the club have been approachable in the past for ordinary supporters to do just that and a few from this very board are now shareholders & can enjoy any benefits whatever they may be. Disagree on 'What we have now are WS members contributing significant cash year on year to eventually buy a controlling interest and provide a financial reserve to help the club out when times get tough' - The majority are contributing now to establish their membership in the first instance surely? 'If the club was living within its means then this extra income would not be required so no need for fans to continually contribute year on year' Now you previously mentioned 'proper plans in place to increase revenues, keep costs down, expand and develop playing staff and facilites etc' we'll just gloss over your contradiction - I'd expect any Society contributions are only one of many revenue streams to achieve this no?

You've not quite grasped the Society ideal... we get that. Your rhetoric has become tiresome - if you don't wish to obtain membership, that's your choice, those who are members, would-be members & other naysayers don't need reminding of a perceived 'bowling club' existence. If you feel that strongly, join up - the vehicle is there to attempt change from the inside if you think your efforts would be better served. By your own admission, the business 'needs to be run like one ie proper plans in place to increase revenues, keep costs down, expand and develop playing staff and facilites etc' - this will still be the case even if (I'll use this term loosely) the Society take over ownership of the club. There are individuals appointed like those in their current position to make these decisions on the Society's behalf. To expect the current Society Board to be the main driver on your claim would be folly as this isn't their forte, if it was, they would already be employed at the club in that capacity. Whilst they will seek to advise, not every decision will be made by the Society. The impracticalities of this are further compounded by the groundswell that our support rarely agree on the shade shite should be. For the record, I'm an existing member & not the only one who remains to be convinced to commit further funds, but, that's for another debate.