David Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 30 minutes ago, wunderwell said: Yes as a general BUT the Society can barely manage themselves. All this chat about how the new members are doing so much more? Quantify that - two statements and getting everyones details updated on the database and a couple more buckets at the game. C'mon........ I think that's a bit unfair to be honest. The Society has done a very good job to this point. Perfect? No, and I'm sure they'd agree on that, but there's been funds raised, and let's be honest, without those funds the club would have faced more problems than it has. It's also a fairly new board that has come into place, and instead of spending most of their time dealing with actual serious matters they've been dragged into dealing with rogue "investment" videos, and are now embroiled in trying to make sense of a ridiculous offer from an LA-based businessman that has changed already within a matter of days of it being released. The Society Board have not been privy to these discussions, by the way. They pretty much learned about the changes to Wild Sheep Sports offer when we did. 30 minutes ago, wunderwell said: Still waiting on this game changing plan. Eric B is acting when is the WS going to? Erik is acting? Really? Because I've asked him numerous times for an actual detailed plan of what he's going to do if he wins this vote and he's equivocated about how it's unfair to expect him to provide a plan. Erik's "acting" is essentially an attempt to secure a presence in our boardroom and a 46% ownership stake in the club for £300,000-£350,000 per year over the next six years. He has promised absolutely nothing. I ask you, where is his game-changing plan? Or our own club boards, for that matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 44 minutes ago, wunderwell said: Yes as a general BUT the Society can barely manage themselves. All this chat about how the new members are doing so much more? Quantify that - two statements and getting everyones details updated on the database and a couple more buckets at the game. C'mon........ Still waiting on this game changing plan. Eric B is acting when is the WS going to? Maybe start with a date when we can all expect to receive the info by. And what exactly are you expecting in this game changing plan? Are you looking for the Society to come up with a magical suggestion about how to secure massive financial input to the Club? If so, that is totally unrealistic and is exactly what McMahon wants you to expect. Basically the Society to do his job for him. It is all deflection tactics on his part. The Society Board's remit is to grow the Society, safeguard fans' contributions and work with the Club Board on a range of matters, including Community projects and strategic planning. Or it would be if the current Club Board had not excluded them. The Society does not run the day to day operations of the Club but should have input when appropriate. Recent Society Board changes have attempted to address an imbalance that existed and progress is being made in that more scrutiny is now made of Club requests for assistance and Board influence within the Society is much reduced. That progress appears to have resulted in even more resistance from the Exec Board, culminating in the Society being excluded from the Barmack negotiations. Other than the input from Dickie and Feely which it now transpires was not in line with Society thinking and has brought into question where those individuals' loyalties lie. But comprehensive change takes time and being compelled to intervene in the current situation is not helping. This mess is none of the Society's doing but unfair pressure is now being placed on them, a team of volunteers, to sort it out. Perhaps you should turn your understandable frustration on those professionals that are responsible for the mess in the first place. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 3 hours ago, dennyc said: This mess is none of the Society's doing but unfair pressure is now being placed on them, a team of volunteers, to sort it out. Perhaps you should turn your understandable frustration on those professionals that are responsible for the mess in the first place. It's worth remembering that McMahon paid a lot of money to a PR firm to get this through. Step 1. Put out a video which gives the impression a club well in the black are skint. Make it so cheesy it demoralises the support. Step 2. Hype Barmack as a Netflix exec and wealthy and also promote a shite bid to make him seem better by comparison. Step 3. Put pressure on the Well Society to create a new business model and have dubious social media accounts constantly banging on about it. Step 4. First offer to test the waters. Spend two weeks taking note of fan complaints on social media then revise to seem more reasonable when in fact nothing really changes. McMahon is using every tool available to him. The Well Society board have a more powerful tool and it's up to them to use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0Neils40yarder Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 5 hours ago, Kmcalpin said: When we're speaking to a parent with a prospective Academy entrant I think that selling point might well leave them somewhat.....unimpressed. My point is that our competitors are upping their game. What is it that is so wrong about Dalziel Park? Changing facilities could be improved but in the main, the training pitches are excellent 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 14 minutes ago, steelboy said: It's worth remembering that McMahon paid a lot of money to a PR firm to get this through. Step 3. Put pressure on the Well Society to create a new business model and have dubious social media accounts constantly banging on about it. Step 4. First offer to test the waters. Spend two weeks taking note of fan complaints on social media then revise to seem more reasonable when in fact nothing really changes. McMahon is using every tool available to him. The Well Society board have a more powerful tool and it's up to them to use it. My Word. We agree again😃. I'm worried now. The Society should come out of this stronger though, and establish a better working relationship with a new Club Board. But first the proposal needs binned. I can see why the Society prefer a vote but they could be stronger in condemning what has been placed before them. I also think they are being drawn too deeply into coming up with their own Club investment plan, rather than plans which grow the Society. That plays into McMahon's hands. He will attempt to shoot down whatever the Society come up with, and point to the Sheep as the only solution. When in fact we don't need an immediate solution, just two Boards working together to move the Club forward. Hopefully with sum sort of acceptable outside investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehaven'Well Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 I have been watching the debate over the last few days, and thought now was the time to contribute. - The offer is a bad offer Who pays for less ownership? The resources of the Well Society will be massively reduced. Who on earth is going to continue contributing to well society for less influence? If this deal goes through, in my opinion, there is a good chance well society membership will collapse and it will fail to meet its contribution 'obligations'. - The Board and the Well Society have not acted in an open and transparent way. The Well Society are the owners, yet members had zero influence. Just because the majority of those who voted on the issue of external investment voted yes was not a green light for the board to accept and propose any deal. - Have the Well Society approached Wild Sheep for direct conversation? If not why not? If they are unwilling to have a conversation, then for me that is a big red flag. - Is Wild Sheep 'investing' or purchasing an asset. I think it is the latter. Investment to me would be to make an offer directly to the Well Society (and the club) for 20% of the society's shares(which would go to the club). That way we see real investment and the Society is not bankrupted. - Who controls the board. The Society is the majority shareholder but has no control. That is bizarre. The current offer if accepted, would result in the end of fan ownership as the Well Society would end up as irrelevant and membership would fall. This would result in financial crisis. No doubt some white knight would come in and by the 51% for 50p!!! I accept that additional investment is desirable, but this is not the deal. Shame on those who have come up with this. Come on Erik, post on here, not P&B! Sorry, but this deal is a NO vote for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santheman Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 7 hours ago, Kmcalpin said: Your comments are always realistic and worth considering San, and when you post, I sit up and take notice. We've read thousands of words on here and elsewhere expressing negative sentiments, and thats fine and just. Comments about what isn't acceptable and that in itself is very helpful but we must must now move the discussion on in a more positive vein. I'm hopeful that the Well Society's impending announcement will do exactly that. Yes, I think you're right, in that Society members may well have to dig deeper, and I don't think some will have a problem with that (there is a limit to this source though). However, I hope that the Society comes up with more, much more than that. Unless the vote is pulled, then the Society has to consider 2 scenarios in its strategic plan. The first being that the Wild Sheep proposal is deemed acceptable by stakeholders. The second being that its rejected and the Society, does its own thing, for the time being at least. Apart from the membership contributing more, if indeed thats whats advocated, I really hope that the Society's Plan focuses very heavily on community and local business involvement. In my eyes this is absolutely critical to investment. Half hearted attempts were made in the past to do this with very limited success. It will also have to be careful not to impinge on the club's contact with businesses; rather build on that and complement it. I'm hopeful that the Society will do the above given its recent attitudes survey. Its how it uses that information that will count. An absolute must in my view is for the Society to reinstate its own website and surely this should be done quickly and at relatively low cost given the number of experts in our support, many of whom would no doubt volunteer their services free of charge as they have generously done in the past. As a aside, for those who wish to preserve the club as it is, as opposed to conserving it, Kilmarnock have announced plans for a new upgraded Academy facility. That is what we'll be competing against. Thanks for your kind words. I believe the WS have nearly completed a 50+ page business plan to state their case so looking forward to that. Hopefully they can condense all the information into an easy read document. I think we need to know exactly how they intend to raise the funds required (do we even know how much is actually required to take us to this "next level" or are we just going to use EBs proposed investment figure as a bench mark and try to match that?). In an ideal world we would have 2 arms of the WS, one to salt away funds for a rainy day that it was originally intended for and to fund community projects and one to concentrate on attracting investment to help fund the day to day running costs and improvements to the infrastructure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 12 minutes ago, santheman said: I think we need to know exactly how they intend to raise the funds required (do we even know how much is actually required to take us to this "next level" or are we just going to use EBs proposed investment figure as a bench mark and try to match that?). Sorry but a couple questions. If I read you correctly. Whatever funds are required (and I accept outside investment would help), are they required immediately? When did it become the Society's role to secure outside investment for the football Club? That is surely the role of the Club Board of professionals with the support of the Society (if allowed in). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 8 minutes ago, dennyc said: When did it become the Society's role to secure outside investment for the football Club? That is surely the role of the Club Board of professionals with the support of the Society (if allowed in). The club board and the Chairman and to a lesser extent the CEO are being given a free pass in all of this. Some fans are bypassing the experienced and qualified individuals on the club board and putting the responsibility on the board of volunteers who form the Society board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 3 minutes ago, David said: The club board and the Chairman and to a lesser extent the CEO are being given a free pass in all of this. Some fans are bypassing the experienced and qualified individuals on the club board and putting the responsibility on the board of volunteers who form the Society board. As was intended by the comments from the Club Chairman. So now unrealistic demands are being made of those volunteers. Next stage, the soon to be gone Club Chairman will declare Barmack as the only show in town. I do have some sympathy for the new CEO as he is between a rock and a hard place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stv Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 45 minutes ago, Stonehaven'Well said: Come on Erik, post on here, not P&B! Sorry, but this deal is a NO vote for me. You can't be serious Steelboy / Peter Miller would have him in tears and running for the hills after his first post 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 hour ago, Stonehaven'Well said: Who pays for less ownership? The resources of the Well Society will be massively reduced. Great post. This point sums it up. Who pays for less ownership? No one does that but somehow McMahon and Barmack think we can be tricked into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santheman Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 41 minutes ago, dennyc said: Sorry but a couple questions. If I read you correctly. Whatever funds are required (and I accept outside investment would help), are they required immediately? When did it become the Society's role to secure outside investment for the football Club? That is surely the role of the Club Board of professionals with the support of the Society (if allowed in). If you believe the Executive Board then yes they are. My own opinion is that we could probably plod on quite comfortably as we are but there will come a day when that outside investment is needed, when? Who knows. I don't think it's the responsibilty of the WS to physically scource outside funding but if they're going to reject EBs offer then they at least need to show a way forward and a plan on how to achieve it to counter that offer which is what everyone against EBs proposal is looking for them to provide. I assume all this will be detailed in their soon to be released document. I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjy Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 As someone who is not an accountant nor a business person please help me with a simple answer. I have read through most of the posts here. I pay into the Well Society every month. Please correct me if I am wrong but the bottom line for me is that Barack gets almost total control of the club for an initial outlay of £300,000. If that is true then it is a massive no from me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted June 22 Author Report Share Posted June 22 The lodging of the Wild Sheep proposal has brought many hitherto festering issues to the fore. Of immediate concern the Society's representation on the Executive Board. Its position as the major shareholder needs to be reflected in its composition, both in principle and in practice. In the medium, if not the shorter term, the Society Board needs to take a more proactive and assertive role in the running of the club at a strategic level, and that includes finances and investment, from whatever source. It cannot afford to simply say its nothing to do with us thats up to the club. That strategic role should not include day to day decision making or financial management. The appropriate medium for this would be 3 Society reps on the Executive Board. Again this merely reflects strategic direction from the major shareholder. The looming spectre of a financial mineshaft opening up in our back garden, courtesy of Jim McMahon, seems to have disappeared. However a decision needs to be taken by the Society as to its role, probably through consultation with members, and maybe via an amendment to the constitution. Should the club simply continue as is, or should it seek to modernise to retain our status and competitiveness with close rivals? A fundamental question for members I suspect. Santheman has just posted as I type. "I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors." I agree 100% with that. The Society needs to start exerting itself, befitting its role as the major shareholder. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 21 minutes ago, sinjy said: As someone who is not an accountant nor a business person please help me with a simple answer. I have read through most of the posts here. I pay into the Well Society every month. Please correct me if I am wrong but the bottom line for me is that Barack gets almost total control of the club for an initial outlay of £300,000. If that is true then it is a massive no from me. That is correct. For less than the price of a house on Fir Park Street. https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/details/scotland-125143163-21358774?s=fc5c472d3ec4ba1f495a555dacc2410d0818e921f15155fe669274d5739e4afe#/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 19 minutes ago, santheman said: If you believe the Executive Board then yes they are. My own opinion is that we could probably plod on quite comfortably as we are but there will come a day when that outside investment is needed, when? Who knows. I don't think it's the responsibilty of the WS to physically scource outside funding but if they're going to reject EBs offer then they at least need to show a way forward and a plan on how to achieve it to counter that offer which is what everyone against EBs proposal is looking for them to provide. I assume all this will be detailed in their soon to be released document. I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors. Thanks for that. We are not really that far apart. If the WS take their rightful place, I see it as their role to appoint a club Board that has the the ability, willingness and drive to go out and seek external investment utilising their professional skills and contacts. Attributes that I do not see in the existing Board, bar perhaps the CEO whom I have high hopes for......... although that is a leap of faith to a degree. Thereafter the Society Board should be involved in negotiations to ensure that a united, realistic proposal is presented to the fan base. And it should all take the time it takes, in contrast to the ridiculous urgency and fear that has been introduced to the present proposal in an attempt to bluster it through. That is how it should work, but McMahon and Co would have us believe otherwise. Not any east task I guess, but I live in hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 minute ago, steelboy said: That is correct. For less than the price of a house on Fir Park Street. https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/details/scotland-125143163-21358774?s=fc5c472d3ec4ba1f495a555dacc2410d0818e921f15155fe669274d5739e4afe#/ That's not true is it, was it not £300k a year for 3 years then £350K a year for another 3 years, so £1.95 million in total,. Must be some size of a house in Fir park St 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 minute ago, Spiderpig said: That's not true is it, was it not £300k a year for 3 years then £350K a year for another 3 years, so £1.95 million in total,. Must be some size of a house in Fir park St He takes control immediately after putting in £300k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 minute ago, Spiderpig said: That's not true is it, was it not £300k a year for 3 years then £350K a year for another 3 years, so £1.95 million in total,. Must be some size of a house in Fir park St Does he not get immediate control in year one? After an his initial input of £300k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 minute ago, dennyc said: Does he not get immediate control in year one? After an his initial input of £300k. Yes. £300k for three seats on the board and chairmanship with the casting vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 Just now, StAndrew7 said: Yes. £300k for three seats on the board and chairmanship with the casting vote. It’s honestly unbelievable. I can’t believe we’re still all talking about this and it hasn’t been laughed off as some sort of weird joke. i was dismayed by the original offer, after the ‘lengthy statement’ and subsequent revised offer, now I'm just angry. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 1 hour ago, santheman said: I don't think it's the responsibilty of the WS to physically scource outside funding but if they're going to reject EBs offer then they at least need to show a way forward and a plan on how to achieve it to counter that offer which is what everyone against EBs proposal is looking for them to provide. In my opinion, a constructive step would be to consider appointing a Chairman and additional executive board members who can develop a strategy for achieving success without needing to entertain offers from individuals like the Barmacks. It seems fans have been patient with a Chairman and board that haven't achieved notable results for years. Then suddenly, they endorse a questionable deal from someone who openly admits to lacking football experience and a clear plan. I'm puzzled why the scrutiny isn't directed towards them instead of the Well Society. 1 hour ago, santheman said: I'm not for a minute expecting them to go knocking on doors but if the changes we want to see in the boardroom came about and the WS became the dominant force then seeking investment would surely be in their remit as Executive Directors. Why would it though? It seems like it's not within the remit of the current Executive Directors. If it were, they'd have quickly dismissed Barmack as the opportunist and dreamer that he is and moved on to find substantial investment opportunities. I suppose if the Well Society became the dominant force and were in a position to make decisions, they might consider appointing a chairman with experience, vision, a plan, and a track record of success? 1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said: In the medium, if not the shorter term, the Society Board needs to take a more proactive and assertive role in the running of the club at a strategic level, and that includes finances and investment, from whatever source. That would tie in with my point above. If the Society has the ability to do so, it should recruit a Chairman who can deliver. McMahon has undoubtedly done his best, and he's stepped in when he didn't have to, but we need a serious operator in that position. Erik Barmack isn't the right choice, and neither is Jim McMahon in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 19 minutes ago, David said: I'm puzzled why the scrutiny isn't directed towards them instead of the Well Society. I genuinely feel the current custodians of the club have framed it this way, or am I giving them too much credit? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellgirl Posted June 22 Report Share Posted June 22 3 hours ago, Stonehaven'Well said: I have been watching the debate over the last few days, and thought now was the time to contribute. - The offer is a bad offer Who pays for less ownership? The resources of the Well Society will be massively reduced. Who on earth is going to continue contributing to well society for less influence? If this deal goes through, in my opinion, there is a good chance well society membership will collapse and it will fail to meet its contribution 'obligations'. - The Board and the Well Society have not acted in an open and transparent way. The Well Society are the owners, yet members had zero influence. Just because the majority of those who voted on the issue of external investment voted yes was not a green light for the board to accept and propose any deal. - Have the Well Society approached Wild Sheep for direct conversation? If not why not? If they are unwilling to have a conversation, then for me that is a big red flag. - Is Wild Sheep 'investing' or purchasing an asset. I think it is the latter. Investment to me would be to make an offer directly to the Well Society (and the club) for 20% of the society's shares(which would go to the club). That way we see real investment and the Society is not bankrupted. - Who controls the board. The Society is the majority shareholder but has no control. That is bizarre. The current offer if accepted, would result in the end of fan ownership as the Well Society would end up as irrelevant and membership would fall. This would result in financial crisis. No doubt some white knight would come in and by the 51% for 50p!!! I accept that additional investment is desirable, but this is not the deal. Shame on those who have come up with this. Come on Erik, post on here, not P&B! Sorry, but this deal is a NO vote for me. As far as I'm aware you can make a p and b account instantly whereas on here you need to wait for mods to approve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.