New Investment Options

[StAndrew7]

9 minutes ago, David said:

This is key. We can all discuss future award-winning documentary series, Netflix, TikTok and so on, but we need to know what the actual angle here is. 

All questions that will need to be answered before I decide which way I'd vote, if asked. And I hope others do the same.

These two points are 100% where I'm coming at this from, too. There needs to be a "secure" exit/route for the WS to buy back any shares issued to investors to regain its original holding (or however that will work in any proposal).

On the second point, if there are details of a proposed investment issued and it's a comprehensive package, I'll be taking an afternoon or full day off work to go through it line by line, in detail (because I'm a bit sad like that). It needs to be given proper consideration, as (stating the obvious) it has the potential to be massive for the club, both positively and negatively.

However, if it proposes the WS/fans losing majority ownership, I won't bother looking at it at all.

[David]

Just now, StAndrew7 said:

On the second point, if there are details of a proposed investment issued and it's a comprehensive package, I'll be taking an afternoon or full day off work to go through it line by line, in detail (because I'm a bit sad like that). It needs to be given proper consideration, as (stating the obvious) it has the potential to be massive for the club, both positively and negatively.

On this, I'd hope there's a good number of Society members who do exactly that and then pass any concerns or questions on to the Society board, who can then go about getting those questions answered. 

Perhaps even via a video Q&A? Maybe hoping for a bit too much there though.

1 minute ago, StAndrew7 said:

However, if it proposes the WS/fans losing majority ownership, I won't bother looking at it at all.

Me too. We've simply come too far and have secured a position as a fan group that countless other club's fanbases would kill to have.

We can't throw that away based on short-term thinking. I'd hope when the arse eventually falls out of the English league (and it will, that model isn't sustainable long-term) and the aftershock affects certain clubs up here who are operating outside of their means, we are still standing as a fan-owned club.

[StAndrew7]

Just now, David said:

On this, I'd hope there's a good number of Society members who do exactly that and then pass any concerns or questions on to the Society board, who can then go about getting those questions answered. 

Perhaps even via a video Q&A? Maybe hoping for a bit too much there though.

Me too. We've simply come too far and have secured a position as a fan group that countless other club's fanbases would kill to have.

We can't throw that away based on short-term thinking. I'd hope when the arse eventually falls out of the English league (and it will, that model isn't sustainable long-term) and the aftershock affects certain clubs up here who are operating outside of their means, we are still standing as a fan-owned club.

Yeah, I'd certainly be looking for an avenue to be asking questions of the Exec Board/Club/Directors as a private shareholder, so I would absolutely expect the same avenue for members of the WS.

You latter point is absolutely spot on, too. English football will burst at some point; it almost did with the Super League proposals and, frankly, that will come around again and with other American ownership coming in (and FIFA/PL announcing the possibility of domestic games being played abroad) it will just continue to become more and more of a circus. There's a few basket case clubs already, see Everton, Forest etc.

[Stuwell2]

12 hours ago, weeyin said:

As I've said before, the most important thing for me is the exit plan. What is going to happen when the investor leaves, runs out of money or gets bored? Are they going to take their money and run, will they sell to a property developer or will they leave a self-sustaining (or at least healthy) infrastructure behind.

One way of doing this - although I’d be shocked if it happened - would be as part of the agreement the WS gets a small % of any transfer money up to a certain value (say £1.5m which would take a long time granted) that is then invested long term and ring fenced in such a way that it is there to ensure the clubs future.
Never going to happen though. 

[wellfan]

Caldwell described the investment from Erik Barmack as a 'takeover'. Freudian slip? The investment update starts at 6:48.

 

[wellfan]

Barmack is watching, according to his article:

https://theankler.com/p/how-i-used-ai-to-brainstorm-a-show

“As a sidenote, this idea has come because my family is considering an investment in a Scottish Football Club, Motherwell. Whether this is a sound business decision is a matter discussed with my wife between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. But here we are now, later in the night, and I’m oscillating between surfing through message boards on the “Steelmen” (Motherwell’s nickname) and thinking that some buyer would be interested in a dramedy set in the world of something like the Scottish Premiership, while using the voices of famous football players (and yes, the actual voices of Mbappe and Vinicius Jr., and not AI-generated clones of players that clubs like Motherwell could never have).”

 

[weeyin]

While obviously on a completely different scale, there's an interesting article in The Guardian today that discusses and rates the successes and failures of American investors in English, Italian and Fench clubs.

 

 

Full article here.

 

[ropy]

On 5/21/2024 at 12:03 PM, weeyin said:

As I've said before, the most important thing for me is the exit plan. What is going to happen when the investor leaves, runs out of money or gets bored? Are they going to take their money and run, will they sell to a property developer or will they leave a self-sustaining (or at least healthy) infrastructure behind.

This has consistently been my position too, what happens in the end?  I can get on board with the recent chat about a partnership, an investor can put his money in and use us to his advantage, a marketing ploy, a commercial venture or just bragging rights to his chums (good luck there).  But his project is likely to be a 5 year or at most a 10 year one, what happens then, how does he get out, is there an agreed exit, what if he has made no money?

If he wants to take control he needs to invest some serious money, say £10M, but what does this mean?  It means he owns a company with £10M in cash, who is in control of that cash, him?  He could pay that as a dividend.

I am happy for us to be exploring this concept but the outcome needs to be a strong club because we will still be here when the investor has gone, (and so will Bevis presumably).

[Kmcalpin]

Valid points Ropy and Weeyin.

I'm very much open to both routes, but the devil will be in the detail and will emerge in good time.  I'm greedy as I  do want more investment in our club but I also want our long term future safeguarded.

I'm still unclear as to the involvement, active or otherwise, of the Society in the external investor discussions and no doubt that will eventually emerge in the wash.  It would be absurd, to the point of being incredible, if there hasn't been any at all.

If the external investment route proves to be a dead end then the Society really needs to come up with a credible alternative which is based on much more than fund raising events and bucket collections, valuable as they are. 

[Big Wispy Flossy]

When it comes to discussing options, if it suggested that they can offer a credible alternative, the well society need to be fully transparent and  outline how much has been generated in fundraising up until now excluding subscriptions. 

[David]

3 hours ago, wellgirl said:

Some fans don't want investment. They've been at pains to say everything is fine as it is. 

We clearly can't compete with other clubs who have more cash to spend but that is what it is. 

No, I think most fans would be interested in investment. However, what we're often discussing isn't true investment. Instead, most fans are talking about someone giving us money to spend on players we can't really afford.

If someone is serious about investing, they need to clearly state how much they plan to invest and show exactly how they expect to get a return on that investment. That's the key aspect for me. By definition, an investment must provide a tangible return for the investor.

What I find concerning is the lack of specificity in the proposals we've seen so far. For instance, the individual we've been linked with seems to rely on vague terms like 'narratives ', 'connecting dots ', 'TikTok ', 'building value ', and 'passion '. These are industry buzzwords that don't provide a clear plan of action.

I hope I'm wrong and that we get something solid from this guy, but if I had to guess, I'd say we're not going to get a straight answer about his plans.

If he were a serious investor, his answer to the BBC and any other media outfit contacting him about the potential deal would have been "no comment." 

[StAndrew7]

6 hours ago, David said:

No, I think most fans would be interested in investment. However, what we're often discussing isn't true investment. Instead, most fans are talking about someone giving us money to spend on players we can't really afford.

If someone is serious about investing, they need to clearly state how much they plan to invest and show exactly how they expect to get a return on that investment. That's the key aspect for me. By definition, an investment must provide a tangible return for the investor.

What I find concerning is the lack of specificity in the proposals we've seen so far. For instance, the individual we've been linked with seems to rely on vague terms like 'narratives ', 'connecting dots ', 'TikTok ', 'building value ', and 'passion '. These are industry buzzwords that don't provide a clear plan of action.

I hope I'm wrong and that we get something solid from this guy, but if I had to guess, I'd say we're not going to get a straight answer about his plans.

If he were a serious investor, his answer to the BBC and any other media outfit contacting him about the potential deal would have been "no comment." 

shialabeoufrapturousapplause.gif

 

You're spot on; the definition/understanding of "investment" in a football club has been overtaken by what's happened at Wrexham, other clubs down south and across Europe. I agree that I think most fans would be interested in investment but it very, very much depends on what that all entails. We already know anything EB is going to propose isn't going to be transformational, so I think people need to realise we're not going to go out and sign every free agent we're linked with because there's an American investing £500k (or whatever) a season over the next few years.

On your last two points, I think the BBC interview came as a result of all the speculation and the club releasing its statement on exclusivity. I imagine it was more of a taster of his plans rather than concretely laying them all out because negotiations were in their (relative) infancy; it was what, 8 weeks ago now? Longer?

Like you, I'm anticipating/hoping for a comprehensive business plan/investor pack to be provided if and when the time comes for a vote on his proposal, with an exact timeline of his investment and when and where funds will come from (with particular emphasis on the where because if it's anything other than cold hard cash that's an immediate red flag). If we don't get that, how can we be expected to make an informed decision on any proposal(s)?

Anyway, back to transfer rumours; Kofi Balmer, anyone? Someone on P&B saying we've had a bid knocked back and, I know this may shock people, St Mirren are also interested in him. Also that we've lost out on 3 keepers so far, so perhaps that Brentford lad was on the radar, after all!

[Kmcalpin]

Maybe I've missed something but I'm unsure what we, as fans, Society members or shareholders, are going to get. I appreciate that these groups are not mutually exclusive and these groups will be consulted with in slightly different ways.

However, I fall into all 3 categories, as will many of you. Are we going to receive the Society's proposal, irrespective of whether or not the external proposal is finalised?  One thing is for sure, the status quo is now no longer an option.

Maybe its just me, but I now detect a very slight shifting of opinion away from the "we might just have to accept our lot and we end up where we end up in the leagues" view.  

[StAndrew7]

21 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Maybe I've missed something but I'm unsure what we, as fans, Society members or shareholders, are going to get. I appreciate that these groups are not mutually exclusive and these groups will be consulted with in slightly different ways.

However, I fall into all 3 categories, as will many of you. Are we going to receive the Society's proposal, irrespective of whether or not the external proposal is finalised?  One thing is for sure, the status quo is now no longer an option.

Maybe its just me, but I now detect a very slight shifting of opinion away from the "we might just have to accept our lot and we end up where we end up in the leagues" view.  

Based purely on speculation and my (very limited) understanding of things, for those three groups:

1) Fans will get they get through whatever is released publicly; the general public isn't necessarily entitled to see details of any proposal that's under NDA/exclusivity agreements, I think?

2) Private shareholders will (at least) receive details on the share purchases, the associated value of investment, the resulting % stakes in the Club and source of funds evidence. I would imagine a business plan would be included in that to detail exactly what the investment is going to bring us (aside from some cash) and how EB will make his return. I would also hope for an understanding/proposal of how any shares can be brought back into the club/WS holding, should EB decide it's not for him after x/y/z years of buying in or not getting his expected ROI.

3) I would expect WS members will receive communication from the WS Board re: the investment, I can't see why this wouldn't be the same information as private shareholders will receive; I think other communications from the Board mentioned that they would provide their own position on the investment to the members, too?

As for receiving the Society's own investment/re-invigoration proposal, surely that should be a thing, regardless of the potential outside investment? It's been discussed and mentioned enough that it should be published and shared, as far as I'm concerned. Like you say; otherwise we continue the way we are and there's a clear move away from fans to accept the status quo/potential to end up where we end up.

I've banged the drum a lot to say that there's no reason a reinvigorated WS can't work alongside an external investor and I still believe that, although I accept it's very much cake and eating it.

Maybe we should move this to the other thread? 😬

[David]

13 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

One thing is for sure, the status quo is now no longer an option.

This perspective always intrigues me.

What is the status quo?

From what I understand, the current approach is to live within our means, which we should always aim to do, regardless of any external financial support.

It seems that we budget based on finishing in 10th place, without any significant cup runs, relying on television and gate revenue, supplemented by smaller income streams.

If someone injects money into the club and the wage bill increases beyond our sustainable budget, we risk significant financial trouble. No business would operate by spending beyond its means, and football clubs should be no different.

It's crucial to recognise the financial constraints of our limited fan base. We cannot rely on the volunteers of the Well Society board to magically generate more funds. This underscores the need for us to be even more responsible in our financial decisions.

There are some opportunities to increase revenue, but there is no magic solution that will allow us to compete with teams backed by wealthy owners who spend beyond the club's actual means.

It's important to learn from history. The overspending approach has historically led to problems, not just in other Scottish clubs, but even within our own. This should serve as a reminder of the necessity of financial responsibility.

[robsterwood]

I personally think we need investment also. Considered but also showing some ambition.

[robsterwood]

52 minutes ago, David said:

This perspective always intrigues me.

What is the status quo?

From what I understand, the current approach is to live within our means, which we should always aim to do, regardless of any external financial support.

It seems that we budget based on finishing in 10th place, without any significant cup runs, relying on television and gate revenue, supplemented by smaller income streams.

If someone injects money into the club and the wage bill increases beyond our sustainable budget, we risk significant financial trouble. No business would operate by spending beyond its means, and football clubs should be no different.

It's crucial to recognise the financial constraints of our limited fan base. We cannot rely on the volunteers of the Well Society board to magically generate more funds. This underscores the need for us to be even more responsible in our financial decisions.

There are some opportunities to increase revenue, but there is no magic solution that will allow us to compete with teams backed by wealthy owners who spend beyond the club's actual means.

It's important to learn from history. The overspending approach has historically led to problems, not just in other Scottish clubs, but even within our own. This should serve as a reminder of the necessity of financial responsibility.

What you describe is very basic business model that you described. And yes a business must break even but the model can still be altered by more investment advertising and creative accounts/ agreements with higher sides for players. Change is needed if Motherwell are to reach next level. 

[StAndrew7]

14 minutes ago, robsterwood said:

Change is needed if Motherwell are to reach next level. 

We all know we're never going to compete with the likes of Hearts, Aberdeen and Hibs in terms of support and finances (current off-form seasons aside for the latter two).

Realistically, I think the best we can hope for is regular mid-table football, occasionally getting into the top-6 and maybe the odd decent cup run. There will be seasons like we had in the early 2010s under McCall and under Robinson more recently where we get to cup finals and perform well in the league etc. but we're never going to be able to sustain that with a core fanbase of what, 4,500?

External investment in the order of what we're anticipating this to be isn't going to be anywhere near enough to sustain a consistent level of top-6 performance or allow us to compete budgets wise with the three teams I've mentioned previously.

So the question then, is, what do I/we/you expect from it to get us to the "next level"? I've seen this phrase used a number of times, now. I'm genuinely interested to where people think we need to go and what you would define the "next level" as?

[Kmcalpin]

10 hours ago, David said:

What is the status quo?

From what I understand, the current approach is to live within our means, which we should always aim to do, regardless of any external financial support........It seems that we budget based on finishing in 10th place, without any significant cup runs, relying on television and gate revenue, supplemented by smaller income streams......It's crucial to recognise the financial constraints of our limited fan base. We cannot rely on the volunteers of the Well Society board to magically generate more funds.

The cause of uncertainty on your part is down to my use of loose terminology, for which I apologise. I agree 100% about not living beyond our means.

The status quo, if you like, is not radically increasing our expenditure AND income (it must be in balance of course). Football is a cutthroat, competitive business and our ability to finish 10th in the league, is not just dependent on what we do but is also dependent on what our close rivals do. If they increase their spending, recklessly or otherwise, then that makes it harder for us to finish 10th, or stand still if you like. More clubs of a similar size to us are spending more cash, whether they have it or not. We're starting to see other clubs up their spending too eg Raith Rovers. Clubs like Dunfermline and Falkirk will also be looking on closely. 

So, in short, if we want to spend more, just to stand still (mid table football is probably the best we can aspire to as StAndrew7 rightly points out) then we have to increase our income or investment, but only in a prudent manner. Basically, what Jim McMahon and Derek Weir have said.  My understanding is that the external investment proposal is not "transformational" so lets put that to bed. In that regard, I'm not writing off the "volunteers" of the Society Board until I see what they can conjure up in terms of their proposal. 

In short, to me the status quo is doing nothing diferent to what we're doing at the moment i.e. using the same model and not seeking to increase "investment" in the club. . I hope that answers your question.     

[steelboy]

Asking the support for more money and making Jon Obika a coach at the same time because he's a 'nice guy' is something that can't happen.  

Before the Well Society go to the members for more financial support the people in control of budgets at the club should be made to justify their expenditure. It only seems to go one way at the moment.

If we are so skint then do preseason here as well.

[bobbybingo]

23 minutes ago, steelboy said:

Asking the support for more money and making Jon Obika a coach at the same time because he's a 'nice guy' is something that can't happen.  

Before the Well Society go to the members for more financial support the people in control of budgets at the club should be made to justify their expenditure. It only seems to go one way at the moment.

If we are so skint then do preseason here as well.

Who said Jon Obika had been made a coach because he's a nice guy?

[wellfan]

My view of the ‘status quo’ is we carry on as we are, continue to be outbid on Premiership level players by our peers, and soon enough we’ll find ourselves struggling to keep pace with those peers. That scenario will likely lead to an annual struggle to stay in the Premiership and with little much else to play for. 
 

Another point is that everything else in the world is so much more expensive now, and the only way to absorb that cost, let alone keep pace, is to seek more financial input/output than the ‘status quo’. That could be through external
investment or the Well Society pulling its socks up. Otherwise, I think we’ll play ourselves into the Championship in a few years. 

[Kmcalpin]

11 minutes ago, wellfan said:

My view of the ‘status quo’ is we carry on as we are, continue to be outbid on Premiership level players by our peers, and soon enough we’ll find ourselves struggling to keep pace with those peers. That scenario will likely lead to an annual struggle to stay in the Premiership and with little much else to play for. 
 

Another point is that everything else in the world is so much more expensive now, and the only way to absorb that cost, let alone keep pace, is to seek more financial input/output than the ‘status quo’. That could be through external
investment or the Well Society pulling its socks up. Otherwise, I think we’ll play ourselves into the Championship in a few years. 

Thats it in a nutshell. Good post. The football world moves on  but we don't.

[cambo97]

1 hour ago, bobbybingo said:

Who said Jon Obika had been made a coach because he's a nice guy?

He's been injured for a while and I suspect he has been "trying his hand' at coaching and shown enough to get a coaching role. Maybe he's the one who has progressed Theo Bair and that's why he has been given the role but I don't expect that some posters will accept that as a possibility.

[Spiderpig]

16 minutes ago, cambo97 said:

He's been injured for a while and I suspect he has been "trying his hand' at coaching and shown enough to get a coaching role. Maybe he's the one who has progressed Theo Bair and that's why he has been given the role but I don't expect that some posters will accept that as a possibility.

Improving Bair, would that be Obika  passing on his vast knowledge of scoring loads of goals and top class striking techniques over the years, your right I'm not accepting that as a possibility.