The Well Society

[Jay]

I remember there seemed to be a genuine excitement and interest about the whole idea of fan ownership at the start - a proper buzz and a desire to at least engage with the prospect, even if some were sceptical it could succeed.

 

Fast forward a few years and it seems the Well Society's only success has been to take that excitement and interest and kill it stone dead, replacing it with indifference, disinterest and, in some cases now, a genuine dislike of the whole thing.

 

That's the one legacy of those who've been in charge of the Society over the years. It's quite a considerable achievement.

[weeyin]

All these things are easy to moan about, but will remain as-is unless people step up to change things.

 

I understand not everyone likes to volunteer, but complaining only goes so far. If we truly believe the incumbents aren't up to the job we need to vote them out and replace them with people we think are more capable.

[Goggles & Flippers]

You need to re-read the constitution then weeyin and see how "easy" it is to do.

 

That is if the constitution hasn't been re-written since I last looked. There was a concern highlighted by Steelboy that it had been done.

 

The issue is a number of people have put themselves forward to help or offer solutions and have been ignored, pandered to or paid lip service. I don't think there is a shortage of people willing, but the desire to get involve diminishes daily.

[dennyc]

If I do have an axe to grind, it's not with the concept of the Well Society or the original ambition of establishing a Contingeancy Fund to support the Club through difficult times. That's why I was happy to contribute early doors and, following Les' assistance, was seriously considering contributing further on a monthly basis.

However, following extensive discussion on this site and elsewhere I had doubts as to whether the original idea of a back up fund still existed or even if that was still possible. For Society monies to accumulate, the Club has to return to profitability and, in an ideal situation, be able to repay Mr Hutchison without recourse to the Society. Are we anywhere near that situation or are we at least "on track". Projections must have been produced when Mr Hutchison came on board.

My concern is that the Society Board appear to have taken ownership of the debt and that repaying Mr Hutchison is their only real objective. Meantime, the Club continue to operate at a loss and therefore Society funds continue to be drained for day to day survival or to support the loan repayment schedule.

Before I contribute further I only wish to be convinced that our original objective remains and is realistic. I also do not want any further contributions to disappear almost immediately, possibly never to be returned. One of my basic questions was " What is our current balance and by how much is it increasing each month?" Does anyone really think that is information we are not entitled to?

So setting aside the broken promises and lack of meaningful communication I am actually still on board....just.

Regarding the meeting in November, I was told that because of the volume of questions that current and prospective members had. A meeting was being arranged to address ALL issues. I do accept that having a joint meeting will in all likelihood attract a greater audience, but it will restrict discussion on Society matters and is not what was originally suggested.

So, not the rankings of a paranoid, disaffected Member, but I instead genuine concerns from someone who wants both the Club and Society to prosper in the not too distant future.

[weeyin]

You need to re-read the constitution then weeyin and see how "easy" it is to do.

 

That is if the constitution hasn't been re-written since I last looked. There was a concern highlighted by Steelboy that it had been done.

 

The issue is a number of people have put themselves forward to help or offer solutions and have been ignored, pandered to or paid lip service. I don't think there is a shortage of people willing, but the desire to get involve diminishes daily.

 

Right, but I'll bet we can change the constitution if we want to. Problem is, there are few people with the time or the energy to explore how to do that, and then garner sufficient support.

 

I do think there is a shortage of people willing. Not because they are lazy, but because it takes an enormous amount of time and commitment to do this kind of thing well.

[Guest]

 

I don't think any of those who have put themselves forward could be considered anything other than Motherwell fans. However there has to be a distinction between nice people and those able and capable of delivering the duties of their post.

 

This was my concern from the start, really. I'm a reasonably pleasant (relatively, I suppose) person to get along with, and I think Motherwell are smashing, I'd like them to be as good as they can possibly be, but beyond that, I'm in no way qualified to be involved. My fear was that board members are elected on either how many people they know, or how popular they are, as opposed to how capable they are at doing it.

 

You need to re-read the constitution then weeyin and see how "easy" it is to do.

 

That is if the constitution hasn't been re-written since I last looked. There was a concern highlighted by Steelboy that it had been done.

 

As above, in terms of running a football club, I've got absolutely zero experience. However, if this is in any way true, it is a terrible bit of governance. In my semi-grown up capacity, I work with students' associations on matters exactly along these lines, and even 21 year olds elected on a platform of 'more good stuff' in a students' association are trained properly, to ensure that things like this do not happen. The absolutely bare minimum is informing members that a constitutional change is taking place. Constitutions are there to ensure that societies are run with accountability, if you're taking out bits and pieces that you don't like when it suits you then it raises very serious questions.

 

My concern is that the Society Board appear to have taken ownership of the debt and that repaying Mr Hutchison is their only real objective. Meantime, the Club continue to operate at a loss and therefore Society funds continue to be drained for day to day survival or to support the loan repayment schedule.

 

My main concern. Why are we still operating at a loss? I realise the situations are not exactly parallel, but how is it possible that a club like St Johnstone, who are very similar to ourselves in a lot of ways, both in terms of average gates, location relative to bigger clubs, stadium size, facilities, match ticket prices and all, have a seven figure sum in the bank for a rainy day, and we're asking our fans to chip in ten quid a month so we can keep paying people? How are we losing money when they're making it?

[superward]

Are we still operating at a loss though?

[steelboy]

 

 

My main concern. Why are we still operating at a loss? I realise the situations are not exactly parallel, but how is it possible that a club like St Johnstone, who are very similar to ourselves in a lot of ways, both in terms of average gates, location relative to bigger clubs, stadium size, facilities, match ticket prices and all, have a seven figure sum in the bank for a rainy day, and we're asking our fans to chip in ten quid a month so we can keep paying people? How are we losing money when they're making it?

 

Because we have had two clowns managing us who were unable win cup games.

 

Btw I don't think they changed the constitution just the stated aims which were agreed upon at one of the first meetings.

[dennyc]

In June this year, between them the Club and Society could not cobble together £40k to meet a loan repayment.....so said by Mr Hutchison to the Daily Mail.
According to a previous post, when Security over the Club's assets was registered in January we owed Les £650k and John Boyle £350k. In the recent statement Les confirms that his debt rose to over £1m for the good reasons listed. No mention of JB having been repaid.
On a positive note, £180k has been repaid to LH recently. Perhaps from Erwins transfer fee, perhaps from SPL income or perhaps with help from the Society. It seems unlikely the money came from week to week operations so that suggests we will need another Erwin like boost before the next sizeable payment falls due. Remember the repayment schedule was drawn up when we owed Mr H "only" £650k. Have the payments due gone up in line with the increased debt? That is relevant to Society members as the Society has responsibility for making sure payments are made on time.
Now, I know we cannot expect miracles and it will take time for the Club to return to profitability on a regular basis. But are we getting there, are we on track, are we close to breaking even? Are monthly operational outgoings covered by regular monthly income?
I don't know the answers to the financial questions, but it appears The Society Board and Les want the fans to dig deeper without the reassurance that the Society funds are likely to remain relatively untouched (and therefore grow)in the near future. One other point to consider, originally we were told loans by the Society would be short term and repaid as a matter of urgency. That was a massive selling point to many fans. Has the short term nature of the funding now been abandoned in favour of repaying Mr H?

I had hoped to clarify some of the above during the phone call I was promised from Tom Feely, hopefully setting my mind at ease. Not to be it seems.

[dennyc]

 

Because we have had two clowns managing us who were unable win cup games.

 

Btw I don't think they changed the constitution just the stated aims which were agreed upon at one of the first meetings.

I think the constitution might have been amended in that I understand it now requires 10% of the Membership to call for an EGM whereas previously it was 5% of Membership. That seems reasonable enough given that it was agreed that anyone signing up would have immediate voting rights once their first monthly payment went through. For instance The Society could have been open to an organised group signing up and after one month calling for an EGM. Increasing the % reduces that possibility. In actual people terms 5% of Adult membership is not that much and at £5 a head it was possible, if unlikely.

 

I understand the aims listed on the Web Site were amended as Steelboy suggests. I think to include the bit about helping the Club to pay it's Loans. I don't have a copy of the original Aims and Objectives, so regarding the change I am working from memory. Apologies if I have got it wrong on that front

[Coolhandluc]

I've dipped my toe in the water at a fiver a month. I suppose if more can make this very small commitment, it may make a difference ?

[Kmcalpin]

I appreciate quite a few folk have concerns and unanswered questions about the Society - I have some myself. If Denny has some unanswered questions then he is quite entitled and indeed right to raise that as an issue. Overall though I agree with Weeyin - its easy to criticise but not so easy to volunteer - I quite appreciate that not everyone has the time or skills to help out. If members are seriously concerned about the running of the Society then they should call for an EGM - I'm sure that they could garner sufficient support for that. I hope though that everyone's questions are addressed at the meeting - the Society's communications have not been great so far and its time they improved.

[Last post by:]

Okay, I've always chosen to ignore everything "Well Society" on these forums (until now) so please excuse my ignorance here.

I've taken a look into this today and have a few observations/questions that the website didn't really answer for me.

Benefits - It's the first thing you hit when you log on the site.

The strapline reads "The more you contribute, the more you benefit look out for the Bonus Benefits Scheme"

A quick Google of the domain throws up very little of reference to the scheme.

There is dead link - http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2015/10/20/well-society-membership-benefits-bonus-scheme/

and some talk of a virtual plot of the pitch for contributors who have paid in more than £49.99 so far.

There is little mention of this Bonus Benefit Scheme other than an entry within the AGM minutes from 2 years back stating that the scheme "benefits no one" and that the "proposal was that the benefits system is wound-up"

It goes on "The vast majority of those present at the meeting voted in favour of the board developing its alternative plan in greater detail for more formal consideration."

I click on the link to read all about the benefits and to my surprise the first few paragraphs talk about the goals of the Society with no mention as to what I get for signing up. Then there is a reference to a change of policy which talks about replacing annual renewal fees and membership payments. This must the the old scheme that was being wound up right? Nope, the next part confirms "Your contributions will be recognised in the form of benefits"

There is a chart which details the "revised membership structure and associated benefits"

There is a wooly statement basically saying you don't have to pay by Direct Debit and can pay what every you can (whenever you can). It doesn't really make clear how to get a signed bottle of Claret. Do you need to pay £1,000 on direct debit each month or £83.33 per month. Bit of a difference for those considering signing up. As the Society are targeting new members, why are all these references to how it previously worked listed. I've no idea about what system was there before - but what I do know is that it's not exactly clear how this present scheme(?) works.

The website has a section for Businesses.

It says "Companies that join will receive the same benefits as an individual member at a comparable giving level"

Why? I would have thought that companies will be looking for alternative benefits?

Does this mean that the packages listed on the live website are no longer valid?

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/BusinessClubBrochure.pdf

Doug Inglis and Craig Hughes have a footnote on this page asking for help to distribute flyers to promote the Well Society. Perhaps this plea for help could be re located for maximum visibility.

Maybe this should be in a "How you can help" section that's visible in the menu banner of the site? I think there would be loads of people who read WelltrustFC Forums that would/could help with this sort of thing?

I get the impression the people running it know in their mind exactly what's on offer but they have failed to articulate it on the site.

My recommendations to the people running this site are:

1/Clear up all dead links or out-of-date Scheme references.

2/Spell out the benefits that new potential member (like me) will get

Don't forget to mention the benefits that we'll see on the pitch - i.e the vision points out the money will go to supporting the development of a successful Youth Academy.

3/Rework the pledge page.

Get the user to tell you about themselves and drive the options available to them from there.

Are they an existing member/new member/business?

if existing > do they want to top up or change package etc

if new > give them a list of packages and what each cost

Make clear what happens with overpayments.

Give more specific details about the the benefits on offer (e.g - What is the prize for the monthly cash draw)

and so on. It's just too generic and a bit off puting that there is an option to pay £500 each month with no on screen validation to back up why it's a good idea to join. Investing in the Well Society is an emotion investment too. Having a bland corporate style page with ever increasing amounts of money will put off even the most diehard of supporter.

4/Create a "How you can help" section - lot's of people can offer time rather than money. There are a few request for help in the news section but I suspect they will get lost in there.

5/ If you no longer accept Standing order then remove this form

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/InstalmentForm.pdf

Otherwise - add a link to it within the pledge page as an alternative payment method.

6/Add some website functionality for member to login and see there status and amount paid.
People like to see that their money is going to good use - even if it's just to see their name with a status next to it.

7/Move the progress bar indication how many people have signed up into a splash page or more prevalent at the top of the home page.

Get some basic HTML5 stuff to "load up" the progress bar whenever anyone logs on.

It can't be easy doing this so I respect the people who are behind this.

Hopefully some of these points are looked at.

If you make some of there changes then I think you'll get another 6 or 7 sign ups and maybe some extra support.
I guess it's down to if all that effort is worth it or not....

[fizoxy]

Some good observations there. I offered to with some of the website stuff since I work in that area for one of the biggest fundraising organizations on the planet. Got told my request would get passed on, then heard nothing. Wouldn't really mind if someone had addressed the points above, but to not hear back and see the same mistakes being made again and again is a bit shit.

 

I'm in the camp with those who really want to see it work, but feel they could really do with a handful of folk who are willing to put themselves out there and promote the society. We've seen the club benefit from some of the creative minds that have passed through this forum, and there are some really hardworking and innovative guys in the bois, so these people exist.

[joewarkfanclub]

I share a lot of the concerns raised above. Went on the Well Society website this morning and some of the questions raised are answered here.....

 

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/qa/

 

Whether they are answered satisfactorily or not is up to the individual.

 

Would it be worth pinning the Societys page to allow easy access?

[Goggles & Flippers]

I appreciate quite a few folk have concerns and unanswered questions about the Society - I have some myself. If Denny has some unanswered questions then he is quite entitled and indeed right to raise that as an issue. Overall though I agree with Weeyin - its easy to criticise but not so easy to volunteer - I quite appreciate that not everyone has the time or skills to help out. If members are seriously concerned about the running of the Society then they should call for an EGM - I'm sure that they could garner sufficient support for that. I hope though that everyone's questions are addressed at the meeting - the Society's communications have not been great so far and its time they improved.

 

Just to confirm, an EGM can be called by garnering the support of 10% of the WS members. Under the new benefits scheme as soon as you pay your first £10 you have full voting rights (before it was £300 Steel membership), consequently the voting membership has increased with the advent of the Direct Debits. Make of that what you will, makes it harder to call those in post to account outside an AGM but also doesn't disenfranchise anyone. But it's not as easy as you make out to do, I applaud your optimism though.

 

I'd happily open an email account where disaffected members can lodge their disapproval to see if the figure could be met. But I think too many are either ambivalent or care about anything out with impending doom for that route to succeed. Sorry, but experience of the club and these boards tells me that.

 

As for criticism without involvement. I found myself sniping from the sidelines over the woeful communications ("not so great" is being very kind to them). So I opted to get involved, as outlined on the "governance of our club" thread I started.

 

I produced a presentation (took approx 50 hours to compile) and was asked to present to the board. I was hurried in and shown the door after 30 minutes. No feedback or discussion other than me asking for it as the Chairman hurried out after a Q&A session before the Scotland vs. Gibraltar game.

 

So I would take with a pinch of salt that everyone who is vocal is isn't able, competent or unwilling to put their head above the parapet. Problem is people who have had their fingers burned, from scrolling up through the past 10 messages Fizoxy and Dennyc cite prime examples and they aren't alone.

 

I've attached the presentation in 2 parts (due to the size of it), if you review and subsequently don't think I'm justified or earned a right to criticise by not attempting to help first then by all means call me out.

9 Quid Ticket - Part 1.ppt

9 Quid Ticket - Part 2.ppt

[Goggles & Flippers]

Edit - It won't let me add files totalling more than 2.5MB to the thread. I thought it was per message. Unless a moderator can help Part 2 will be unavailable.

[Brazilian]

 

I've attached the presentation in 2 parts (due to the size of it), if you review and subsequently don't think I'm justified or earned a right to criticise by not attempting to help first then by all means call me out.

 

Seems a decent presentation, which held my attention enough to stick with it and be interested to see the other half

 

one thing that screamed out early on though, did you consider VAT on income for your figures, 20% is significant.

 

EDIT:Ps and also seems something very much for the club board, as opposed to the society, although the second half may align that, but as DennyC says its good

[dennyc]

A thought provoking presentation which clearly took a sizeable effort, both in research and in the putting together of a reasoned, constructive argument. The fact you received no feedback, whether positive or negative, is shocking and must have been soul destroying. Perhaps the novel, inventive approach you were championing was far too radical for your audience and may even have left them feeling threatened in some way. Whatever, you deserve credit for at least trying to be of help.

 

Given that the initiatives you outline require a joint approach from Club and Society, I wonder if you might receive a better welcome from some of the Club Board. Someone with Business experience outside the football environment and a willingness to challenge routine, outdated practices. Dare I say it, Les Hutchison or maybe Derek Weir if he is still an active member of the current set-up. Worth a try?

 

Anyway, good effort and thanks for sharing

[Goggles & Flippers]

 

Seems a decent presentation, held my attention enough to stick with it and be interested to see the other half

 

one thing that screamed out early on though, did you consider VAT on income for your figures, 20% is significant

 

All I was suggesting is that current revenues (which are subject to VAT) are maintained, the only difference would be that if we managed to increase our attendances, the price per game per attendee goes down and therefore the total VAT paid by the club stays the same, it's just spread through a greater fan base.

[Big Wispy Flossy]

 

Just to confirm, an EGM can be called by garnering the support of 10% of the WS members. Under the new benefits scheme as soon as you pay your first £10 you have full voting rights (before it was £300 Steel membership), consequently the voting membership has increased with the advent of the Direct Debits. Make of that what you will, makes it harder to call those in post to account outside an AGM but also doesn't disenfranchise anyone. But it's not as easy as you make out to do, I applaud your optimism though.

 

I'd happily open an email account where disaffected members can lodge their disapproval to see if the figure could be met. But I think too many are either ambivalent or care about anything out with impending doom for that route to succeed. Sorry, but experience of the club and these boards tells me that.

 

As for criticism without involvement. I found myself sniping from the sidelines over the woeful communications ("not so great" is being very kind to them). So I opted to get involved, as outlined on the "governance of our club" thread I started.

 

I produced a presentation (took approx 50 hours to compile) and was asked to present to the board. I was hurried in and shown the door after 30 minutes. No feedback or discussion other than me asking for it as the Chairman hurried out after a Q&A session before the Scotland vs. Gibraltar game.

 

So I would take with a pinch of salt that everyone who is vocal is isn't able, competent or unwilling to put their head above the parapet. Problem is people who have had their fingers burned, from scrolling up through the past 10 messages Fizoxy and Dennyc cite prime examples and they aren't alone.

 

I've attached the presentation in 2 parts (due to the size of it), if you review and subsequently don't think I'm justified or earned a right to criticise by not attempting to help first then by all means call me out.

It would appear you have carried out a fair bit of ground work in researching and preparing your presentation. Well done in that regard and certainly satisfies the out of the box thinking strategy that may be required to make the society a success. Whilst I don't believe some of your suggestions are as easy implemented as proposed, as a member of the well society I'm disappointed that you were 'ushered' out the door with not any form of feedback or reasoned debate on the merits, or otherwise, of your suggestions.

[Kmcalpin]

A good presentation - well done. I don't pretend to follow everything in it but you've obviously put a lot of thought and effort into it. It deserves serious consideration.

[Goggles & Flippers]

EDIT:Ps and also seems something very much for the club board, as opposed to the society, although the second half may align that, but as DennyC says its good

 

 

Slide 3. Genesis of Concept, outlines why a growing attendance at FP only helps the WS as you have more engaged people to recruit. But you are correct the second part does follow on.

 

The WS has 2 members on the full club board out of 7? from memory, they can bring suggestions from their membership to the board you would think approximately 30% of the time.

 

I understood fan ownership (or a move towards it) would allow us to try different ways of doing things rather than flogging the same old ones. Now with representation, it should give the ordinary fan a voice.

 

However it's a tad short sighted for the WS only to be concerned with growing their own membership when ultimately in just over 4 years they will be charged with growing that of the club. Why not try and grow them in tandem? I've criticised the fact the recruitment was put on the back burner while the deal with Les was worked through, I would hope that multitasking was seen as key to their survival.

 

Finally, if there's more people attending there's more revenue streams available for the club, meaning the WS have to contribute less to guarantee the loans to Les as there is less chance of the club coming up short.

 

Flossy - Don't dispute that it's simplistic at times, why I put a caveat on page 1, I was more than willing to have it pulled apart and if it lead to something that grew from the concept, then great. However I didn't get any.

[Yabba's Turd]

G&F's post updated with both parts of the presentation.

[Big Stall]

 

 

I've attached the presentation in 2 parts (due to the size of it), if you review and subsequently don't think I'm justified or earned a right to criticise by not attempting to help first then by all means call me out.

 

Thats quite an impressive piece of work Goggles&Flippers. I'm guessing you've built a little revenue operations model which sits behind it and the calculations are not just back of fag packet?

 

My concern is not that with anything which is in your presentation, I don't have the time or inclination to sit and pick it apart or check through. I am however very concerned that you seem to have been dismissed out of hand. Perhaps the club are happy with where they are, and where they are going, which is fine - a shake of the hand for you you and told yes, but this is where we are looking to be Goggles and show you how it differs from your views would be nice.

 

The alternatives are that the club have looked at your figures and disagree with them - again fine although some kind of feedback to you should have been provided with where you are going wrong with any assumptions you have made and how the club does not agree with your recommendations. Or....................... worryingly, the people who have seen your work are not able to follow what is going on. That for me is the biggest concern that perhaps we still do not have the right type of people in place at the club.