Spiderpig Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 2 hours ago, David said: Aside from Wild Sheep sports, which is a small media distribution company, he doesn't own anything. He's someone who's very skilled in media, and has worked as an employee at Netflix. He's not a serial entrepreneur or investor of note. No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, so he must be good at something else other than bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuwell2 Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 Add another one to the reject list folk’s 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 1 hour ago, Spiderpig said: No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, so he must be good at something else other than bullshit. The past eight years he's been employed by Netflix to head up production and distribution of international streaming content for the platform. He's experienced and connected in the streaming media world for sure. If we want to make a docuseries on our club, he's certainly the guy we should be working with. When it comes to actually running a business on the level of a multi-million pound football club on another continent? And dealing with the various aspects of that business that being a major investor and Chairman would entail? I think he's vastly underqualified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 33 minutes ago, David said: When it comes to actually running a business on the level of a multi-million pound football club on another continent? And dealing with the various aspects of that business that being a major investor and Chairman would entail? I think he's vastly underqualified. Less qualified than the current chairman and other board members given the amateur hour performance from them in recent weeks, that's a bold statement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 28 minutes ago, Spiderpig said: Less qualified than the current chairman and other board members given the amateur hour performance from them in recent weeks, that's a bold statement. I do think we need to recognise that up until the last 12-18 months or so, the Club has been run quite well. The results do demonstrate that. The issue we have is that people have stayed in post too long and things have gone stale/been left rudderless; I do wonder if once "all this" is over, we need to consider maximum terms for the Chairman/Board Members, or something similar. Some would argue it's not been that difficult a job (Turnbull's sale, Les setting things up etc.) but there does need to be an acknowledgement of the track record. At least a bit, even with "all this" still going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 2 hours ago, Spiderpig said: No doubt he has a good few million in the bank, What's this based on? Cos I think the issue is he doesn't have that much. I am sure he said as much somewhere. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 Just now, Busta Nut said: What's this based on? Cos I think the issue is he doesn't have that much. I am sure he said as much somewhere. Aye, I'm sure he said (maybe on P&B or The Platform Formerly Known as Twitter) that he wasn't able to put all the cash in up front? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderwell Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 On 7/7/2024 at 8:57 PM, wunderwell said: I said this before, way way back before it all started. Not that I could have foreseen this - but what I pointed out is that a 75 year old man leading the way is a very dangerous thing. At a certain point, they will want out. Cash in the chips and leave it all behind. Therefore his influence is deliberate in order to exit and cash in on those chips. The rest are sheep following his influence. Maybe this is the first post we agree on and a new friendship is blossoming 😘 Jim McMahon reads my posts and releases statements about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 2 minutes ago, wunderwell said: Jim McMahon reads my posts and releases statements about them. Welcome to the club; your membership badge is on the door and we'll teach you the handshake when you're in the back. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderwell Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 6 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said: Welcome to the club; your membership badge is on the door and we'll teach you the handshake when you're in the back. Yes you are in the same boat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewarkfanclub Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 4 hours ago, David said: Aside from Wild Sheep sports, which is a small media distribution company, he doesn't own anything. He's someone who's very skilled in media, and has worked as an employee at Netflix. He's not a serial entrepreneur or investor of note. Im sure he has a lot of connections willing to help him for a small fee..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewarkfanclub Posted July 9 Report Share Posted July 9 25 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said: I do think we need to recognise that up until the last 12-18 months or so, the Club has been run quite well. The results do demonstrate that. The issue we have is that people have stayed in post too long and things have gone stale/been left rudderless; I do wonder if once "all this" is over, we need to consider maximum terms for the Chairman/Board Members, or something similar. Some would argue it's not been that difficult a job (Turnbull's sale, Les setting things up etc.) but there does need to be an acknowledgement of the track record. At least a bit, even with "all this" still going on. I think Alan Burrows was maybe taking up a lot of the slack. Maybe a coincidence or maybe he should have been delegating more to department heads or whatever, but it does seem things spiralled out of control after he left. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 There's some incredible stuff on P&B with the club claiming they hadn't seen Barmack's spending plans before he published them on Friday. So either the Executive Board supported Barmack's takeover without asking him for a business plan or his published plans are different to his privately stated business plan. Either way it's a fiasco. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 12 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said: I think Alan Burrows was maybe taking up a lot of the slack. Maybe a coincidence or maybe he should have been delegating more to department heads or whatever, but it does seem things spiralled out of control after he left. I think you're probably correct on a couple of fronts; he always struck me as someone who wanted to be involved in everything (rightly or wrongly) so perhaps there wasn't as much autonomy as you'd have wanted after he left. I was always told the best compliment a manager can have is that when they leave, they don't need to be replaced because the team they've left just gets on with things. I know the context is a bit different for a football Club, like, it needs a CEO, but a gap of 6-months with Derek Weir as interim should have been fine. It does show that the length of time the recruitment process took has probably been more detrimental to the Club than anyone expected it to be. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 8 minutes ago, steelboy said: There's some incredible stuff on P&B with the club claiming they hadn't seen Barmack's spending plans before he published them on Friday. So either the Executive Board supported Barmack's takeover without asking him for a business plan or his published plans are different to his privately stated business plan. Either way it's a fiasco. Posted with Handsome_Devils permission, for context, anywhere that doesn't have explicit quotation marks, is their interpretation of the reply, not the direct reply/text received: Quote Sorry to ruin the football chat but some more clarifications for the club, since some were wondering: Most interesting on a potential default, and I'll quote the whole bit so I'm not leaving anything out or falsely interpreting, but bold for emphasis: "If either party fail to make their investment payment when due then essentially the deal would collapse and require to be discontinued or the terms re-negotiated and a re-vote would be required in that circumstance. Many have questioned would a financial penalty be imposed on either party but that is not the case. It is believed that the terms are very affordable for both parties and this would therefore hopefully be very unlikely." Meanwhile... Barmack has provided initial proof of funds, should the deal be approved this will be required again before closing. The club stress it has not endorsed his business plan and believes, while some is positive, some aspects of it are unworkable - essentially the same view they hold of the Society plans - but it's not fair to start engaging in a public critique of either, such as in the funding gap. The factual error was the responsibility of Barmack alone and as such it is not for the club to correct (for the record it was pointed out that the relevant PA reporter who flagged this has made his feelings clear, though given this an objective rather than subjective point, I don't think that's particularly relevant). Essentially their position is the best way forward is both parties to work together. Which is, my comment here, the view most people would have held initially before some began to get so pissed off with EB they want nothing to do with him. Presumably the board also feels it negotiated the best deal it could to get him agreed and his skills/contacts are worth the price we'll pay. Interestingly the club and EB's position is they will not be fighting a public war on this. Now that's open to interpretation ofc but would certainly imply there will be no campaign as such beyond the recommendation. You can argue that's noble but when the WS obviously are going to war - given they believe the consequences are existential - it seems strange to me to just let the other side say and do what they like with no response... it gives the impression EB isn't overly bothered and the EB - given they will also know the consequences - are going out with a shrug. Credit to David on the board for his timely and detailed answers btw, even if I don't agree with his overall position. Quote For the record, "unworkable" was my view having read it, the relevant quote and context is: "There are aspects of both plans the club board do not see as workable in their current form / timescale and believe would require to be amended pre implementation." https://forum.pieandbovril.com/topic/230925-motherwell-fc-a-thread-for-all-seasons/page/3554/#comments 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellfan Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 22 minutes ago, steelboy said: There's some incredible stuff on P&B with the club claiming they hadn't seen Barmack's spending plans before he published them on Friday. So either the Executive Board supported Barmack's takeover without asking him for a business plan or his published plans are different to his privately stated business plan. Either way it's a fiasco. Sack the Executive Board now. This isn’t some random sponsorship deal gone sour, this is a takeover bid, and their lack of care and due diligence is beyond belief. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villageman Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 16 minutes ago, wellfan said: Sack the Executive Board now. This isn’t some random sponsorship deal gone sour, this is a takeover bid, and their lack of care and due diligence is beyond belief. I understand and share your frustration (maybe not the best word) but lets wait until the results of the two votes are available. If they go as I think most of us want to go then surely there has to be recrimination at both board level. We also will need elections firstly to the WS including a new chairperson. That board and its chair as 71% owner has to assert authority over all sections of the Club as it has not done so far. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 34 minutes ago, wellfan said: Sack the Executive Board now. This isn’t some random sponsorship deal gone sour, this is a takeover bid, and their lack of care and due diligence is beyond belief. Agreed, the whole thing is an utter shambles. Thinking positively, there is an opportunity for the club to come out of this stronger and with much more engagement in fan ownership. Fingers crossed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 This whole situation goes from bad to worse. So we learn our Chairman (and others) strongly endorsed a Business Plan he had not read or tested, presented by a gentleman with no experience in football. At the same time the owners of the Club were excluded from any meaningful discussions. Rather than undertake his legal responsibilities the Chairman turned the spotlight and pressure on the Well Society possibly in the hope they would come up short and the deal would be waved through. And now we are in a state of concern awaiting the outcome of a vote that should not have been forced upon us. Just let that sink in for a minute. Jim McMahon is the man we trust to safeguard our football club. Hardly points to him adhering to his duty to act in the best interests of MFC and the Shareholders. Following diligence shown by the Society Board (including the production of a document detailing a practical and realistic way forward) coupled with numerous valid questions being asked by a concerned fan base, we are now told that no plan was presented to the Exec Board. I assume the other Club Board Members just accepted assurances given by Messrs McMahon, Dickie and Feeley? Not one of the projections or assumptions had been investigated it seems prior to recommendation. By anyone! So no inaccuracies, financial miscalculations or vague promises are anything to do with the Executive Board. Really? Those other Exec Board members, who must now be embarrassed by the truth of the whole situation, should intervene to bring this farce to an end. Then both Boards can work in harmony to identify a way ahead that is in the interest of all parties and secures the future of our Club. And given the fact that only now has the full background become known....days after the vote opened.....how valid is that vote? Would some folk have voted differently had the full background been known to them? Some Legacy this Mr McMahon. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throughthelaces Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 1 hour ago, dennyc said: This whole situation goes from bad to worse. So we learn our Chairman (and others) strongly endorsed a Business Plan he had not read or tested, presented by a gentleman with no experience in football. At the same time the owners of the Club were excluded from any meaningful discussions. Rather than undertake his legal responsibilities the Chairman turned the spotlight and pressure on the Well Society possibly in the hope they would come up short and the deal would be waved through. And now we are in a state of concern awaiting the outcome of a vote that should not have been forced upon us. Just let that sink in for a minute. Jim McMahon is the man we trust to safeguard our football club. Hardly points to him adhering to his duty to act in the best interests of MFC and the Shareholders. Following diligence shown by the Society Board (including the production of a document detailing a practical and realistic way forward) coupled with numerous valid questions being asked by a concerned fan base, we are now told that no plan was presented to the Exec Board. I assume the other Club Board Members just accepted assurances given by Messrs McMahon, Dickie and Feeley? Not one of the projections or assumptions had been investigated it seems prior to recommendation. By anyone! So no inaccuracies, financial miscalculations or vague promises are anything to do with the Executive Board. Really? Those other Exec Board members, who must now be embarrassed by the truth of the whole situation, should intervene to bring this farce to an end. Then both Boards can work in harmony to identify a way ahead that is in the interest of all parties and secures the future of our Club. And given the fact that only now has the full background become known....days after the vote opened.....how valid is that vote? Would some folk have voted differently had the full background been known to them? Some Legacy this Mr McMahon. And yet arguably not the worst mr McMahon out there if you know you know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderwell Posted July 10 Report Share Posted July 10 12 hours ago, wellfan said: Sack the Executive Board now. This isn’t some random sponsorship deal gone sour, this is a takeover bid, and their lack of care and due diligence is beyond belief. We agree again. The love affair continues. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yabba's Turd Posted July 11 Report Share Posted July 11 I voted to reject the proposal. I don't see how anyone can support the proposal in good faith. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjy Posted July 11 Report Share Posted July 11 I am a Society member and a shareholder. I have two votes. I have already voted reject in the Society ballot. Am I correct that whatever the Society vote says will carry the day as they have 70 per cent of the shares and will out number everyone else? I will send in my reject vote but it is it meaningless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 11 Report Share Posted July 11 18 minutes ago, sinjy said: I am a Society member and a shareholder. I have two votes. I have already voted reject in the Society ballot. Am I correct that whatever the Society vote says will carry the day as they have 70 per cent of the shares and will out number everyone else? I will send in my reject vote but it is it meaningless? It's meaningless numerically, to an extent, yes. It's not meaningless when it adds to the total percentage of shareholders who said "no", just to hammer home the point. It's also not meaningless because you get to tell him to fuck off twice, which is a wonderful, wonderful thing. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjy Posted July 11 Report Share Posted July 11 2 hours ago, StAndrew7 said: It's also not meaningless because you get to tell him to fuck off twice, which is a wonderful, wonderful thing. You have convinced me to send in my vote. Thanks for that. 2 1 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.