New Investment Options

[wellfan]

2 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

I wouldn't say that's entirely fair on the WS. The new board was elected in October and have been working on their vision since then; before any sort of investment video was released etc. The potential for investment will no doubt have given them that kick to get things moving more quickly, I agree, but that doesn't mean they weren't already working on revamping the WS from where it was.

As @Kmcalpin says, the WS board needs to come up with the goods (sooner rather than later, in my view) given where we are. I'm not a member, so can't comment on if any significant/members only communications that have gone out, but it's been awful quiet considering it's been over 6 months since the elections took place. That doesn't mean there's not a flood of announcements/information to come in the close season, though. There's probably been a fair bit of involvement on the WS end in the negotiations/discussions with EB which could have impacted on progress, given the board are all volunteers with a finite amount of time available.

It's been six weeks since the statement from the club on exclusivity being agreed with Barmack and Co. and other than the BBC's interview and Gavin McCafferty's article in the days following, things have (correctly) been kept under wraps. There was the odd social media post of him being at the games and meeting with the WS board representatives, but that's it.

I wouldn't be surprised if we start to hear more after Sunday's game; it would make sense to get the season over and start to announce things from there.

Also, just a final point; there's no reason that the two visions; EB's and the WS' can't work together, if WS/fans retain majority ownership of the club. EB's ideas for promotion of the club etc. could be a fantastic asset to growing the WS membership, beyond our traditional support/markets.

I should've caveated my point to acknowledge that the new WS board are trying to affect positive change, which represents a significant improvement on the visionless status quo before them. However, even as a long-term WS member, I think these new efforts, whatever they may be, could be in vain given the number of paying members and the associated monthly income generated for the WS.

An ideal scenario would be a deal between an external investor and a revamped WS, with the latter retaining majority ownership and presenting a sustainable vision. That's perhaps wishful thinking, however. We've all been discussing this for weeks, so let's hope we get some clarity or an update following the season's conclusion.

[wellgirl]

7 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

I wouldn't say that's entirely fair on the WS. The new board was elected in October and have been working on their vision since then; before any sort of investment video was released etc. The potential for investment will no doubt have given them that kick to get things moving more quickly, I agree, but that doesn't mean they weren't already working on revamping the WS from where it was.

As @Kmcalpin says, the WS board needs to come up with the goods (sooner rather than later, in my view) given where we are. I'm not a member, so can't comment on if any significant/members only communications that have gone out, but it's been awful quiet considering it's been over 6 months since the elections took place. That doesn't mean there's not a flood of announcements/information to come in the close season, though. There's probably been a fair bit of involvement on the WS end in the negotiations/discussions with EB which could have impacted on progress, given the board are all volunteers with a finite amount of time available.

It's been six weeks since the statement from the club on exclusivity being agreed with Barmack and Co. and other than the BBC's interview and Gavin McCafferty's article in the days following, things have (correctly) been kept under wraps. There was the odd social media post of him being at the games and meeting with the WS board representatives, but that's it.

I wouldn't be surprised if we start to hear more after Sunday's game; it would make sense to get the season over and start to announce things from there.

Also, just a final point; there's no reason that the two visions; EB's and the WS' can't work together, if WS/fans retain majority ownership of the club. EB's ideas for promotion of the club etc. could be a fantastic asset to growing the WS membership, beyond our traditional support/markets.

Their vision is a bit slow tbh. They need to get a move on. Completely agree on the working together. 

[joewarkfanclub]

My reading of the situation is that the old board wanted the financial support provided by the Well Society without necessarily having any outside interference in their running of the club.

The Society was set up in a way that it had minority representation on the board and that representation was pretty close to existing board members, making it very difficult for other members of the Society to effect change.

Since the new WS board elections in October, the dynamic has changed somewhat and it feels like there is a drive to have more input into the decision making process.

Given that 2 of the old board are moving on and we now have a new CEO in place who was approved by the Society and an additional Society member on the board, it feels to me like the Society is in a better position to have influence in the direction the club will now take.

What happens next is crucial. Hopefully a joint enterprise between an investor and a rejuvinated Well Society where the future if the club is secured without any long term risk to any of our assets.

[Mintymac]

Shouldn’t be too long now to we here what’s happening and get some meat on the bones .

Now I’ve had a bit of time to think about it providing we can come to agreements with both parties then a joint venture would my favoured option.

The reason I’m saying this is in part due to how other clubs seem to be out manoeuvring us financially by varying degrees . 
The old adage was that money won’t buy you success but maybe not so true nowadays . 
As an older supporter of the mighty Well it probably wouldn’t bother me too much if relegated and playing in the championship as I would still enjoy going albeit it I’d prefer to stay in the top league .

This brings me to the conclusion that financial clout would perhaps keep us up but without it …… who knows but possibly would put us down the pecking order financially and into lower league .

So I’m hoping a mutual partnership would be my favoured option again on the proviso we do due diligence and don’t sell the club down the river . 
Interesting times ahead 

[Kmcalpin]

56 minutes ago, Mintymac said:

Now I’ve had a bit of time to think about it providing we can come to agreements with both parties then a joint venture would my favoured option.

The reason I’m saying this is in part due to how other clubs seem to be out manoeuvring us financially by varying degrees . 
The old adage was that money won’t buy you success but maybe not so true nowadays . 
As an older supporter of the mighty Well it probably wouldn’t bother me too much if relegated and playing in the championship as I would still enjoy going albeit it I’d prefer to stay in the top league .

This brings me to the conclusion that financial clout would perhaps keep us up but without it …… who knows but possibly would put us down the pecking order financially and into lower league .

So I’m hoping a mutual partnership would be my favoured option again on the proviso we do due diligence and don’t sell the club down the river .

I've done a lot of thinking over the past 24 hours and revised my preference a little. I agree with your take Minty.

The danger is, if we don't compete financially, then we drop down the leagues and lose fans. Make no mistake, if we couldn't compete financially with the likes of St Mirren and St Johnstone today, then we wouldn't be able to compete financially with the likes of Dunfermline, Partick and Falkirk tomorrow.  And so it would go on. Such teams will be looking to new investment opportunities sooner rather than later.

Whatever else it does, the Society needs to become more commercially astute and aware. I don't subscribe to the "Bowling Club" mentality that some fans have of the Society, but there's a grain of truth in their concerns. 

[Kmcalpin]

There's been some discussion on P & B about the Society not necessarily needing to put the external investment proposal to a vote, if it deems it to be  pretty unacceptable. I don't know.

However, if it doesn't put the proposal to a vote, it has to come up with a credible alternative financial plan to put to members. 

 

[wellfan]

31 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

There's been some discussion on P & B about the Society not necessarily needing to put the external investment proposal to a vote, if it deems it to be  pretty unacceptable. I don't know.

However, if it doesn't put the proposal to a vote, it has to come up with a credible alternative financial plan to put to members. 

Not putting a proposal to a vote would be a surefire way for the WS to lose the goodwill and support of paying members. Democracy is key. 

[joewarkfanclub]

19 minutes ago, wellfan said:

Not putting a proposal to a vote would be a surefire way for the WS to lose the goodwill and support of paying members. Democracy is key. 

I suppose that depends on the detail of the deal on offer and whether there was any room for negotiation on the part of the investor.

If its a black and white take it or leave it offer that clearly isnt in the interests of the club, not sure what the point of putting it to a vote would be?

Just say we think its a shit offer because of x,y and z and move on.

Democracy is definitely important but Id say transparency is the key.

[wellfan]

7 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I suppose that depends on the detail of the deal on offer and whether there was any room for negotiation on the part of the investor.

If its a black and white take it or leave it offer that clearly isnt in the interests of the club, not sure what the point of putting it to a vote would be?

Just say we think its a shit offer because of x,y and z and move on.

Democracy is definitely important but Id say transparency is the key.

Transparency and democracy are key. There's too much speculation at the moment.

[joewarkfanclub]

1 minute ago, wellfan said:

Transparency and democracy are key. There's too much speculation at the moment.

Agreed. Be nice just to get an announcement and move on. Feels like the whole season has been a holding pattern......

[steelboy]

2 hours ago, wellfan said:

Not putting a proposal to a vote would be a surefire way for the WS to lose the goodwill and support of paying members. Democracy is key. 

If the proposal is shit then what's the point?

If the Well Society board is split then the next steps will be complicated. These sort of repercussions are why it was a stupid idea to let Jim McMahon run about trying to give away a football club that he doesn't own. 

[steelboy]

2 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

 

However, if it doesn't put the proposal to a vote, it has to come up with a credible alternative financial plan to put to members. 

 

Why?

The club's finances are sustainable, the manager has a budget that allows him to compete for Top 6 and the Well Society has £700,000 in reserves and has a charge on the club of £900,000.

If individual members want to put more money in no one is stopping them but there's no pressing need at the moment to lean on the membership for more funds. 

[StAndrew7]

I agree that any bid which is giving majority ownership for a pittance should rightly be thrown out before it even gets to the WS Members/Shareholders. Although, like others, I would want to understand the structure of any deal that's proposed and thrown out, because I think transparency in situations like this is often the best route to go down; it saves the rumour mill and the (occasionally baseless or ill-informed) accusations from going into overdrive.

As for why the WS should be putting forward their own vision, it's because that's all we've been hearing about since January and the much maligned investment video came out (if not before that). The new workstreams, the plans to generate more revenue, increase membership etc. Where is it?

I have no problem with the Society continuing with majority ownership and there being no external investment; I'm definitely not in the "investment at all costs" group. Like @steelboy says, the club is financially stable (which, somewhat ironically, is why we're attractive to investors) and the Society has a healthy enough bank balance to plug any shortfalls in the next 12-18 months. The level of funding needs to be maintained at a level to satisfy the Governing Bodies that we won't go out of business; so if we do have the plug the gap by x or y, the funds will need to be raised to replace them the following year to provide the same guarantee.

The doomsday scenario is that that any hole needs plugged two years in a row, or a couple of times over a 2-5 year period; building up £500-750k over a year or a couple of years isn't easy through asking for an increase in direct debits alone. Now, because we budget with a degree of common sense, the club (probably) won't have to do that; however, all it takes is a season like this one, but without the last minute goals, or a horrendous injury to Lennon Miller and we're (at least potentially) right in the shitter.

The biggest issue for me is that we're all discussing this based on rumoured values and figures from weeks, if not months ago. Given that over six weeks of exclusivity have passed, I would imagine we're a ways beyond the original figures/numbers that were floated about. The key thing, is that none of the investors were going to be offering transformational levels of cash; which is why giving up fan ownership shouldn't be considered in my view.

I want the club to remain fan owned; but if it can remain fan owned with a relatively well connected external investor who can support the WS with its growth and expansion targets, ultimately strengthening its position and the value of the club, why shouldn't we consider it?

It made sense to delay any announcement relating to or terms of potential deals until after the season was finished; now that we're done, I'd like to see that happen, or at the very least a formal update given as soon as possible.

[Kmcalpin]

16 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

The doomsday scenario is that that any hole needs plugged two years in a row, or a couple of times over a 2-5 year period; building up £500-750k over a year or a couple of years isn't easy through asking for an increase in direct debits alone. Now, because we budget with a degree of common sense, the club (probably) won't have to do that; however, all it takes is a season like this one, but without the last minute goals, or a horrendous injury to Lennon Miller and we're (at least potentially) right in the shitter.

Thats it for me. If the Society had to fork out £750K, for one year, the coffers would be empty and we could not meet any guarantee required. I'd guess, at current levels, the Society might be able to raise say £150K per year? We'd then be relying on player sales, which can be unpredicable. Thats why the Society needs an alternative proposal.  None of this takes into account the discretionary additional finances that might be required to keep us competitive with the likes of St Johnstone or St Mirren.

[StAndrew7]

19 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Thats it for me. If the Society had to fork out £750K, for one year, the coffers would be empty and we could not meet any guarantee required. I'd guess, at current levels, the Society might be able to raise say £150K per year? We'd then be relying on player sales, which can be unpredicable. Thats why the Society needs an alternative proposal.  None of this takes into account the discretionary additional finances that might be required to keep us competitive with the likes of St Johnstone or St Mirren.

I think if people/fans are going to want to compete for top-6, realistically there needs to be an increase (not necessarily an immediate one) in how much the club can put into the first team.

The only way that's going to come is from one of, or a combination of the following:

• Selling Lennon Miller for £eleventy billion,
• Asking for the WS/its membership to raise more money to inject into the club periodically,
• Asking existing private shareholders to invest,
• Seeking outside investment

Otherwise, we'll all need to accept a drop off in our ability to sign players of a calibre that we've become accustomed to and that it will impact on the product on the pitch and, potentially at least, our top-flight status.

[David]

37 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

The doomsday scenario is that that any hole needs plugged two years in a row, or a couple of times over a 2-5 year period; building up £500-750k over a year or a couple of years isn't easy through asking for an increase in direct debits alone. Now, because we budget with a degree of common sense, the club (probably) won't have to do that; however, all it takes is a season like this one, but without the last minute goals, or a horrendous injury to Lennon Miller and we're (at least potentially) right in the shitter.

For me, the real doomsday scenario is us handing control of the club to someone because they've offered to throw us a few quid and a suggestion of a documentary, only for them to change their mind and decide they don't want to cover said hole that needs plugged.

At least as things are now, there's an element of transparency. If and when someone else takes majority control, they don't need to tell us anything if they don't want to, because it would be their club, not ours.

[texanwellfan]

I don’t think we can survive at premier league level relying on being fan owned club, unless the WS can come up with some ingenious plan where it can raise significant funds on a guaranteed basis. So hopefully we can find an investor on suitable terms. I appreciate WS efforts at fund raising and every little helps but I just don’t think it will be enough to help us compete against other clubs who have more investment. Even our model of being a selling club is pretty dodgy as we could hit a dry spell with respect to having and sellable players. 

[StAndrew7]

17 minutes ago, David said:

For me, the real doomsday scenario is us handing control of the club to someone because they've offered to throw us a few quid and a suggestion of a documentary, only for them to change their mind and decide they don't want to cover said hole that needs plugged.

At least as things are now, there's an element of transparency. If and when someone else takes majority control, they don't need to tell us anything if they don't want to, because it would be their club, not ours.

I'd say that's more like "Uber Doomsday: Return of the Horsemen".

But more seriously, I completely agree; I am absolutely against giving away majority control to anyone, despite what guarantees they provide or the levels of investment offered (unless it's truly transformational). But that's kind of my point though; we don't know if that's what is going to be tabled, or perhaps it has been and ongoing discussions mean that it hasn't?

The gap can happen to us whoever is in control; granted, I don't think it's particularly likely given how well run^TM we are, but shit can, and indeed does happen.

[wellgirl]

26 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

I think if people/fans are going to want to compete for top-6, realistically there needs to be an increase (not necessarily an immediate one) in how much the club can put into the first team.

The only way that's going to come is from one of, or a combination of the following:

• Selling Lennon Miller for £eleventy billion,
• Asking for the WS/its membership to raise more money to inject into the club periodically,
• Asking existing private shareholders to invest,
• Seeking outside investment

Otherwise, we'll all need to accept a drop off in our ability to sign players of a calibre that we've become accustomed to and that it will impact on the product on the pitch and, potentially at least, our top-flight status.

I really agree with you here. We can't ask for Motherwell to be top six on a regular basis and have a good cup run with the funds we currently have. If we want to progress we need more investment.

I've seen it said online this season that this Motherwell team are the worst they've ever seen. If we want better players then the manager needs more money to spend. 

I just don't see how we can do that without outside investment 

[StAndrew7]

9 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I really agree with you here. We can't ask for Motherwell to be top six on a regular basis and have a good cup run with the funds we currently have. If we want to progress we need more investment.

I've seen it said online this season that this Motherwell team are the worst they've ever seen. If we want better players then the manager needs more money to spend. 

I just don't see how we can do that without outside investment 

I get what you're saying but I think I slightly disagree with your last statement.

I do think that the WS can raise funds more effectively than it has in the past and that the new board deserve their chance to prove they can provide a sustainable vision for fan ownership in its current guise. The issue is that it's been talked about for a long time without much of anything coming of it so far.

Also, if we sell Miller for the expected value (most would think in the region of what, £3m+ for him if not more?) and also Bair for a decent wedge, I think we'll be able to achieve that increase as well, which will hopefully bring a sustained period of higher prize money to continue to invest in the first team whilst also swelling the reserves/coffers a bit.

[wellgirl]

1 minute ago, StAndrew7 said:

I get what you're saying but I think I slightly disagree with your last statement.

I do think that the WS can raise funds more effectively than it has in the past and that the new board deserve their chance to prove they can provide a sustainable vision for fan ownership in its current guise. The issue is that it's been talked about for a long time without much of anything coming of it so far.

How? Genuine question. Do you mean by asking people to raise subs or asking local businesses to invest?

I just think there's too much uncertainty around everything at the moment. Surely if the well society are going to put a proposal together then members and fans should know. All I am seeing at the moment is tweets about how great fan ownership is and not a lot more. All there is is speculation at the moment. It would actually be good to know what the offer from the American investor was/is. 

[Spiderpig]

1 minute ago, wellgirl said:

All there is is speculation at the moment. It would actually be good to know what the offer from the American investor was/is. 

Assuming that an actual firm offer has been made, as its all went very quiet over the last 6 weeks or so.

[StAndrew7]

24 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

How? Genuine question. Do you mean by asking people to raise subs or asking local businesses to invest?

I just think there's too much uncertainty around everything at the moment. Surely if the well society are going to put a proposal together then members and fans should know. All I am seeing at the moment is tweets about how great fan ownership is and not a lot more. All there is is speculation at the moment. It would actually be good to know what the offer from the American investor was/is. 

I think (somewhat ironically) the message in the investment video is quite a strong one that the Society should be looking to utilise. We are a unique club, with a really good story to tell.

And yes, I think there's definitely potential to speak to local businesses to sponsor the club/invest in it and various aspects of its work, or changing how membership works to allow companies to buy into the WS and the become partners at events, or opening up avenues for additional exposure for them to fans. Discounts for fans with local companies who buy in to the club to increase their sales/footfall.

International/regional partnerships as well; looking to tie in with other clubs and their models, understanding how they've made such a big success of it (someone shared a link earlier in the year to a particularly impressive model; I think it was a Scandinavian team but I forget which).

There's also looking at the membership in detail; a lot of fans will have made one contribution/payment and never changed to a DD. There's definitely quick wins there to be had, but also longer-term ideas to fit in with the vision.

Perfect example; I'm not a WS member, as I'm sure plenty of members here aren't either. Why not? Firstly, I couldn't afford it when it was established and when I could, never felt like there was a need to. Secondly, I've got my own private shares, so what's the realistic attraction for me? I think there is now but I'm holding back because I want to see what the vision is for the WS before committing to it.

I agree with you that fans/members should know about the plans; I've never said otherwise.

20 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

Assuming that an actual firm offer has been made, as its all went very quiet over the last 6 weeks or so.

That's because we're in the exclusive negotiating period; it'll be covered by NDA/confidentiality agreements. That doesn't necessarily mean a firm offer will be made but it means the Exec Board saw enough in Barmack's offer for it to warrant consideration.

[David]

When I see the term investment thrown out there, I often wonder how many people who have put money into a Scottish football club have come away with a profit?

I believe Fergus McCann did back in the day, but taking the big two out of the equation, has anyone or any particular investment group come into Scottish football and made an actual profit?

[StAndrew7]

Just now, David said:

When I see the term investment thrown out there, I often wonder how many people who have put money into a Scottish football club have come away with a profit?

I believe Fergus McCann did back in the day, but taking the big two out of the equation, has anyone or any particular investment group come into Scottish football and made an actual profit?

Mike Ashley? 👀

I can't think of anyone who has, but equally, I also can't really think of anyone who has invested in a Scottish football club with that aim, or at least to make a profit over and above getting their initial money back. Perhaps the guy at Hibs, if he can add money and develop talent there and sell them on?

If EB/whoever wants to make a return on their investment and has a plan that looks plausible to do so, it'll be interesting to read it and udnerstand it. I would caveat that with wanting some sort of buy-back option/first refusal for the WS on any shares which are purchased if it doesn't work out at any point.