What's the script?

[joewarkfanclub]

1 minute ago, Yabba's Turd said:

No thanks.

I was joking! 😉

[Spiderpig]

11 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I dont know how they go about exerting power, but I tbink there are only 2 on the board (I could be wrong on that) so in the minority and not able to force through or demand anything if the other board members vote against.....

Thats true they are in a minority but they are the majority shareholders reps on the board so they should be asking the hard questions about the way the club is run, future direction etc thats their role.

i get the impression that they are happy with their positions on the board but won't put their heads above the parapet to question anything that may jepordise their position, if that's the case then what's the point of having reps on the board who never get involved.

Their job should be to make sure the views and concerns of the majority shareholder ie the WS members are known, and put to the board etc for discussion. Yes the other board members might vote them down but then again they might not if the case us persuasive enough, for me thats true fan ownership.

[wunderwell]

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

Thats true they are in a minority but they are the majority shareholders reps on the board so they should be asking the hard questions about the way the club is run, future direction etc thats their role.

i get the impression that they are happy with their positions on the board but won't put their heads above the parapet to question anything that may jepordise their position, if that's the case then what's the point of having reps on the board who never get involved.

Their job should be to make sure the views and concerns of the majority shareholder ie the WS members are known, and put to the board etc for discussion. Yes the other board members might vote them down but then again they might not if the case us persuasive enough, for me thats true fan ownership.

When do our two appointees address the Well Society that voted them in?

Would be nice to hear regularly from them - I do get a weekly newsletter asking for donations.....

[David]

On 12/12/2023 at 3:15 PM, joewarkfanclub said:

But thats not really fan owned is it?

Not really. I've never liked the term, I've always preferred the title "fan-backed" rather than "owned." 

Most of us aren't qualified to run a business of the magnitude of a football club, and when the barrier to entry for the society is so low that is even more of an issue. 

We're basically provided with the opportunity to help secure the future of the club, play a very small part in the direction it goes in, and can sleep easy at night knowing that it won't fall into the hands of some con artist with bad intentions.

[joewarkfanclub]

3 hours ago, David said:

Not really. I've never liked the term, I've always preferred the title "fan-backed" rather than "owned." 

Most of us aren't qualified to run a business of the magnitude of a football club, and when the barrier to entry for the society is so low that is even more of an issue. 

We're basically provided with the opportunity to help secure the future of the club, play a very small part in the direction it goes in, and can sleep easy at night knowing that it won't fall into the hands of some con artist with bad intentions.

I dont want a say in the day to day running of the club. Thats what the board and/or a CEO are for.

But if we genuinely "own" the club (ie the Well Society is the majority shareholder) we should have a say on the big decisions and general direction of the club.

For exanple, do we want to spend money on a training ground, or keep leasing Dalziel?

Do we want to stay at Fir Park and pay for the upkeep or should we be looking at moving / redevelopment.

Some of the ideas you posted elsewhere regarding the way forward for the club, a "blueprint for development" or whatever you want to call it, should all be up for discussion and there should be a mechanism in place to allow for this and take things forward.

It would then be up to the board /CEO to investigate and if achievable implement these changes, or at least come back to us and explain why it isnt viable.

It shouldnt just be, give us your money, now sit down and leave it to the grown ups, we know what we are doing.

Like all investors, we can stop parting with our cash at any point if we feel we are being taken for a ride......

[wunderwell]

5 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I dont want a say in the day to day running of the club. Thats what the board and/or a CEO are for.

But if we genuinely "own" the club (ie the Well Society is the majority shareholder) we should have a say on the big decisions and general direction of the club.

For exanple, do we want to spend money on a training ground, or keep leasing Dalziel?

Do we want to stay at Fir Park and pay for the upkeep or should we be looking at moving / redevelopment.

Some of the ideas you posted elsewhere regarding the way forward for the club, a "blueprint for development" or whatever you want to call it, should all be up for discussion and there should be a mechanism in place to allow for this and take things forward.

It would then be up to the board /CEO to investigate and if achievable implement these changes, or at least come back to us and explain why it isnt viable.

It shouldnt just be, give us your money, now sit down and leave it to the grown ups, we know what we are doing.

Like all investors, we can stop parting with our cash at any point if we feel we are being taken for a ride......

I put tons into the well society - if I was a Hearts fan - I would log in to the account and see exactly how much and like a Tesco clubcard see what benefits myself and my wee boy would be entitled too.

I haven't put anything more in for the last 18 months. Does any one care?

[joewarkfanclub]

57 minutes ago, wunderwell said:

I put tons into the well society - if I was a Hearts fan - I would log in to the account and see exactly how much and like a Tesco clubcard see what benefits myself and my wee boy would be entitled too.

I haven't put anything more in for the last 18 months. Does any one care?

But you got an email though.

So........

[Throughthelaces]

I’ve thought the well society should and could be incentivised a bit more to get people to sign up I’m thinking membership cards give us some kind of discount at the shop or some money off our season cards or something. I do think on certain matters we should be polled as the well society on matters like moving from fir park (which I’d always vote against),building a training centre, use of funds and where they go on our priorities. 

[David]

23 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

For exanple, do we want to spend money on a training ground, or keep leasing Dalziel?

While I'm not an expert, it seems likely that the specifics of such a deal would include confidential information, particularly from Dalziel's perspective. It's uncertain whether the club could share such information with the general public.

If they couldn't, would the broader Well Society membership be able to make well-informed decisions?

23 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

Do we want to stay at Fir Park and pay for the upkeep or should we be looking at moving / redevelopment.

Similar to the previous point, obtaining comprehensive information might be challenging, given the reluctance of the club and external entities to disclose certain details publicly.

At that point, we might find ourselves in a situation where individuals are casting votes without possessing a full understanding of the relevant facts. Executing a proposal of this nature for Society members likely involves more complexities than many of us realise.

23 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

Some of the ideas you posted elsewhere regarding the way forward for the club, a "blueprint for development" or whatever you want to call it, should all be up for discussion and there should be a mechanism in place to allow for this and take things forward.

It would then be up to the board /CEO to investigate and if achievable implement these changes, or at least come back to us and explain why it isnt viable.

One thing I'd say is that I'm not 100% certain that the club aren't already carrying these ideas out. Granted, if they are they're not doing it very well, but still. 

On 12/13/2023 at 6:06 PM, joewarkfanclub said:

It shouldnt just be, give us your money, now sit down and leave it to the grown ups, we know what we are doing.

I don't see it exactly in that way, but the truth is, most of us, myself included, lack the qualifications to make decisions of that nature. That's why we elect representatives to the board to act on our behalf.

I do share the sentiment of holding those board members more accountable. There's a noticeable lack of communication from them. I believe it would be beneficial to have more transparency about their decisions – not necessarily revealing all the details of discussions but at least helping us understand what topics they are voting on as board members and how they cast their votes. It's similar to the accountability we expect from politicians. Currently, it feels like we choose a few individuals, they get elected, and then we seldom hear from them again.

[Spiderpig]

7 hours ago, David said:

While I'm not an expert, it seems likely that the specifics of such a deal would include confidential information, particularly from Dalziel's perspective. It's uncertain whether the club could share such information with the general public.

If they couldn't, would the broader Well Society membership be able to make well-informed decisions?

Similar to the previous point, obtaining comprehensive information might be challenging, given the reluctance of the club and external entities to disclose certain details publicly.

At that point, we might find ourselves in a situation where individuals are casting votes without possessing a full understanding of the relevant facts. Executing a proposal of this nature for Society members likely involves more complexities than many of us realise.

One thing I'd say is that I'm not 100% certain that the club aren't already carrying these ideas out. Granted, if they are they're not doing it very well, but still. 

I don't see it exactly in that way, but the truth is, most of us, myself included, lack the qualifications to make decisions of that nature. That's why we elect representatives to the board to act on our behalf.

I do share the sentiment of holding those board members more accountable. There's a noticeable lack of communication from them. I believe it would be beneficial to have more transparency about their decisions – not necessarily revealing all the details of discussions but at least helping us understand what topics they are voting on as board members and how they cast their votes. It's similar to the accountability we expect from politicians. Currently, it feels like we choose a few individuals, they get elected, and then we seldom hear from them again.

We don't need in depth commercially sensitive information its not rocket science ffs, a simple "the club is looking at possible new training facilities " or "the club are carrying out a feasibility study on a possible relocation to a new stadium" General info that gives the fanbase an insight Into the general direction the club is going, that's all that's needed here, especially for WS members contributing financially.

The WS are the majority shareholders ffs nothing should be signed off without their approval, I know that means asking the membership their views etc but if its not done then its just  ad another poster said " keep giving us your cash every month, technically you'll be in charge but In reality we'll make the decisions and you have no say.

[bobbybingo]

5 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

The WS are the majority shareholders ffs nothing should be signed off without their approval, I know that means asking the membership their views etc but if its not done then its just  ad another poster said " keep giving us your cash every month, technically you'll be in charge but In reality we'll make the decisions and you have no say.

Nothing? 

[wellfan]

8 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

We don't need in depth commercially sensitive information its not rocket science ffs, a simple "the club is looking at possible new training facilities " or "the club are carrying out a feasibility study on a possible relocation to a new stadium" General info that gives the fanbase an insight Into the general direction the club is going, that's all that's needed here, especially for WS members contributing financially.

The WS are the majority shareholders ffs nothing should be signed off without their approval, I know that means asking the membership their views etc but if its not done then its just  ad another poster said " keep giving us your cash every month, technically you'll be in charge but In reality we'll make the decisions and you have no say.

I'm pretty sure that a feasibility study is planned and the basic details were disclosed at the most recent Well Society AGM. I attended it virtually, but others may be able to confirm/correct this point. It was also mentioned at the AGM that approval for such things would be sought via consultation with members. 

Nonetheless, if you're a member of the WS, attending events in person or online is the best way to access information and make your feelings heard. If not, I'm not sure of the answer as Club and WS comms are varied. 

[Kmcalpin]

As others have said, there's a balance to be struck. We should trust the Society and club Directors to take care of the day to day running of the club, and commercially sensitive issues, and not get involved. Strategic decisions are a different matter entirely. Since Alan Burrows' departure, communications have been poor. From what I hear there also have been more general issues since before he left.  Currently the club is rudderless off the field. This isn't good enough for a fan owned club. 

Yes, some of that is down to the Society and probably the Club  itself. Thats not in doubt. It ought to be more accountable to the rank and file members. However, there is another side to the issue. Members themselves need to do more to become involved. That might only mean submitting comments prior to Society Board meetings; it might mean attending AGMs either in person or remotely; it might also mean, heaven forbid, volunteering! Elected Board members or paid officials can't do it all on their own, nor should they. Its not good enough for us all to say "Its nought to do with me - try somebody else".  

The recent Society elections were an opportunity to change things. I would like to know what percentage of members voted in the recent elcetions. That will be interesting. There are some new Board members voted in and they have my support. I hope they can encourage change. There are also some hard working and able existing Board members lets not forget.

Its all very well for us to come on here and have a good grouse but we have to get more involved, even if only in a minor way. 

[David]

10 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

We don't need in depth commercially sensitive information its not rocket science ffs, a simple "the club is looking at possible new training facilities " or "the club are carrying out a feasibility study on a possible relocation to a new stadium" General info that gives the fanbase an insight Into the general direction the club is going, that's all that's needed here, especially for WS members contributing financially.

Ah, I see. I thought the discussion was centred around the fans having an actual say in the direction the club would take in these matters. If it's just being informed that our representatives on the board are voting a certain way then fair enough, we wouldn't need all the information.

10 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

The WS are the majority shareholders ffs nothing should be signed off without their approval, I know that means asking the membership their views etc but if its not done then its just  ad another poster said " keep giving us your cash every month, technically you'll be in charge but In reality we'll make the decisions and you have no say.

Aren't the members views asked for and discussed at meetings? Or do you mean taking another approach?

As for who makes the decisions, I assumed that as a collective, we voted for several representatives to sit on the board. Surely then those individuals are provided with a mandate to vote on behalf of the society? 

1 hour ago, wellfan said:

I'm pretty sure that a feasibility study is planned and the basic details were disclosed at the most recent Well Society AGM. I attended it virtually, but others may be able to confirm/correct this point. It was also mentioned at the AGM that approval for such things would be sought via consultation with members. 

Yes, the basic details were made available, but the point I'm making is that if it comes down to an actual decision to be made on the matter, it would take more than basic details to make an informed decision?

Surely at that point, we'd be relying on the individuals that we have voted to represent us on the board to make the correct call? I don't think the way to deal with such situations is for the entirety of the society to have a vote on the matter because the only way that could be done correctly is for everyone to be provided with all the information.

56 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

As others have said, there's a balance to be struck. We should trust the Society and club Directors to take care of the day to day running of the club, and commercially sensitive issues, and not get involved. Strategic decisions are a different matter entirely. Since Alan Burrows' departure, communications have been poor. From what I hear there also have been more general issues since before he left.  Currently the club is rudderless off the field. This isn't good enough for a fan owned club. 

Yes, some of that is down to the Society and probably the Club  itself. Thats not in doubt. It ought to be more accountable to the rank and file members. However, there is another side to the issue. Members themselves need to do more to become involved. That might only mean submitting comments prior to Society Board meetings; it might mean attending AGMs either in person or remotely; it might also mean, heaven forbid, volunteering! Elected Board members or paid officials can't do it all on their own, nor should they. Its not good enough for us all to say "Its nought to do with me - try somebody else".  

The recent Society elections were an opportunity to change things. I would like to know what percentage of members voted in the recent elcetions. That will be interesting. There are some new Board members voted in and they have my support. I hope they can encourage change. There are also some hard working and able existing Board members lets not forget.

Its all very well for us to come on here and have a good grouse but we have to get more involved, even if only in a minor way. 

I agree with most of this statement. We elect representatives for a reason, and that reason is so that the in-depth details are only then shared with those individuals along with the club board. 

I don't really have much of an issue with the Society, except for accountability. I'd like to see those that we elect being more pro-active as far as keeping the wider membership base updated.

I'll be honest, I have toyed with the idea of running in the past (you at the back, stop laughing!) with the primary aim of doing so to open the channels of communication between the club and the Society Members. A monthly email written up and sent to all members detailing exactly what has happened that month, what has been discussed, and also full transparency on my own feelings and voting intentions if applicable. 

Comms have been poor since Alan Burrows left, but that wouldn't stop the Society reps we have elected from being more proactive on the information front. They may not be privy to everything that's going on, but something is better than nothing. The current newsletter is really just basic fluff, wrapped around a request for more people to sign up.

So, I'm one of those people you're talking about when you say "It's nought to do with me, try someone else" because for all my good intentions I've never actually gotten around to putting myself forward. I'm guessing a lot of others are in the same boat.

[Spiderpig]

3 hours ago, David said:

 

Aren't the members views asked for and discussed at meetings? Or do you mean taking another approach?

As for who makes the decisions, I assumed that as a collective, we voted for several representatives to sit on the board. Surely then those individuals are provided with a mandate to vote on behalf of the society? 

I'm not a member of the WS, so I don't know what comms the members get on a regular basis but I suspect it's not the best.

The WS reps on the board should know the views of the members on major topics being discussed by the club as that's the only way they can legitimately claim to have a mandate to represent them.

[fizoxy]

The latest WS email has a link to send in questions for the upcoming board meeting, so dust off your typing fingers.

[Kmcalpin]

1 hour ago, fizoxy said:

The latest WS email has a link to send in questions for the upcoming board meeting, so dust off your typing fingers.

Yes, a perfect chance folks to get involved and ask questions. 

[Busta Nut]

Feeley and Dickie won't want to rock the boat, they've a cushy wee number, interesting time ahead.

[Kmcalpin]

32 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

interesting time ahead.

Do you know something we don't Busta?

[Electric Blues]

Jim McMahon To Step Down As Chairman

[steelboy]

If we had 6 more points no one would be talking about directors or chairman. Hopefully this isn't connected to results or moans and groans from the support. 

 

[Spiderpig]

23 minutes ago, steelboy said:

If we had 6 more points no one would be talking about directors or chairman. Hopefully this isn't connected to results or moans and groans from the support. 

 

It's been evident for a while now, especially since Burrows left that the club was not moving in the right direction, the shambles around dumping Alexander and a rushed bad appointment of Hammell, no replacement CEO appointed, signing off on dubious recruitment advice during the summer etc etc.

Maybe the club have finally realised that some changes are required and this is the 1st step, it will be Interesting to see how it develops as the club needs to get back on track both on and off the park.

[Big Wispy Flossy]

Whilst I’m supportive of change, we need to be mindful that weir and McMahon have the clubs best interests at heart and have probably been disillusioned not only with fire fighting year on year but also with the incessant moans and groans from the support. It’s been clear for sometime that the well society operating model is unsustainable especially with the subscription levels and the income it generates. As a member of the society I would be happy with it being disbanded tomorrow providing it enabled more investment (not reckless investment it has to be added)

 

[Coatsy]

Yep i think this signals the end of the fan ownership experment

[wellfan]

1 hour ago, Electric Blues said:

Jim McMahon To Step Down As Chairman

This stament from McMahon is very interesting, although perhaps signals the end of majority fan ownership:

“It has become very clear over the last few years that for the club to operate on a sustainable basis, provide the manager with a competitive player budget, meet the vastly increased cost of our other activities including having a successful Woman’s Team and maintaining a fit for purpose Stadium, Training Ground and Academy facility, that it will require significant investment; funding on a similar scale to that received by many others in the SPFL.

We have undertaken a large amount of work and held numerous discussions to explore how we could best achieve this. The final stages of a fund-raising initiative are almost complete and will be ready to be shared early in the New Year.“