New Investment Options

[santheman]

33 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

I think there is some kind of middle ground here. I can see where Spiderpig, David and StAndrew7 are all coming from. The principle of the WS being run by volunteers is fine but, it does need to exert more strategic control over the club. This is entirely consistent with it being the major shareholder. To date its been far too passive, for various reasons. Thats not to say that it should run the club on a day to day basis. It shouldn't. 

Currently I think it employs 1 employee, full time or not I don't know. That perhaps needs to be increased slightly. Its simply too much for one person to handle.

Sally (lovely lady) handles all the WS administrative duties and probably loads more tasks not on her job description.

[Mccus28]

No matter what the WS do, they won't increase the membership by a significant amount, we have a small hardcore fanbase, they may in the short-term increase it by hundreds but long-term I personally don't see it.

The WS have done a decent job so far, no more than that and if people are happy to consistantly sit bottom 6 or even be relegated then we can continue as we are.

For Motherwell to progress we NEED outside investment, maybe not the offer as it stands just now but we should be looking at ways to raise our profile abroad and at home.

I have little confidence in the WS personally no matter how well meaning they are as an entity which is why we see our own fanbase divided right now.

I am however full of optimism as we are at least having the discussion on how we move forward.

[StAndrew7]

17 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

No matter what the WS do, they won't increase the membership by a significant amount, we have a small hardcore fanbase, they may in the short-term increase it by hundreds but long-term I personally don't see it.

The WS have done a decent job so far, no more than that and if people are happy to consistantly sit bottom 6 or even be relegated then we can continue as we are.

For Motherwell to progress we NEED outside investment, maybe not the offer as it stands just now but we should be looking at ways to raise our profile abroad and at home.

I have little confidence in the WS personally no matter how well meaning they are as an entity which is why we see our own fanbase divided right now.

I am however full of optimism as we are at least having the discussion on how we move forward.

Just to make a couple of points and ask some questions on this (also; by no means having a go here, just interested to hear your thoughts on what you've said!):

- If a couple hundred people signed up to £10/month on average, that's an extra £24k a year. Add in others who pay in a bit more, you're probably anywhere from £25k-30k increase. That's good!

- I would agree with this; they have stepped in and helped when they can but the "so far" thing is now seemingly down to being stifled by the Exec Board and others, I would argue. That means there's definitely scope for the Society to do more with a fully collaborative/bought in Exec Board and Club management structure.

- What do you define as "progress" for Motherwell? Consistently mid-table/the odd cup run and foray into Europe? If it is that, we've done that over the last 10 years. Recently we've had two/three poor seasons, down to bad decisions made at the Exec Board level in terms of managerial appointments and not replacing the CEO properly for over a year. This is not the fault of the Society.

- You've said the Society have done a decent job so far and no more, yet say you have little confidence in them; why? I assume you'd be willing to give them a chance to prove to you "wrong" as it were?

- The divided fanbase is an interesting point; I definitely think there are "sides" in this whole debacle, which is exactly what you'd anticipate given such a polarising issue, however, that's always going to be the case. There will always be people dead set against it or for it; and they tend to be the most vocal.

I would say that I was very much in the "I'm intrigued by this and interested to see what is proposed" camp before everything was published; having now considered it and everything that is continuing to come to light (check out Vietnam91's latest on P&B, it's particularly eye-opening about our Outgoing Chairman), it's absolutely not the right deal for the club. That doesn't mean there's not a "right" one out there and that it can't be found by a rejuvinated WS/Executive Board working together rather than at odds with each other.

[Mccus28]

2 minutes ago, StAndrew7 said:

Just to make a couple of points and ask some questions on this (also; by no means having a go here, just interested to hear your thoughts on what you've said!):

- If a couple hundred people signed up to £10/month on average, that's an extra £24k a season. Add in others who pay in a bit more, you're probably anywhere from £25k-30k increase. That's good!

- I would agree with this; they have stepped in and helped when they can but the "so far" thing is now seemingly down to being stifled by the Exec Board and others, I would argue. That means there's definitely scope for the Society to do more with a fully collaborative/bought in Exec Board and Club management structure.

- What do you define as "progress" for Motherwell? Consistently mid-table/the odd cup run and foray into Europe? If it is that, we've done that over the last 10 years. Recently we've had two/three poor seasons, down to bad decisions made at the Exec Board level in terms of managerial appointments and not replacing the CEO properly for over a year. This is not the fault of the Society.

- You've said the Society have done a decent job so far and no more, yet say you have little confidence in them; why? I assume you'd be willing to give them a chance to prove to you "wrong" as it were?

- The divided fanbase is an interesting point; I definitely think there are "sides" in this whole debacle, which is exactly what you'd anticipate given such a polarising issue, however, that's always going to be the case. There will always be people dead set against it or for it; and they tend to be the most vocal.

I would say that I was very much in the "I'm intrigued by this and interested to see what is proposed" camp before everything was published; having now considered it and everything that is continuing to come to light (check out Vietnam91's latest on P&B, it's particularly eye-opening about our Outgoing Chairman), it's absolutely not the right deal for the club. That doesn't mean there's not a "right" one out there and that it can't be found by a rejuvinated WS/Executive Board working together rather than at odds with each other.

A very eloquent response with some good points which is where the discussion should be going, on your questions :-

£25-30K isn't great but its something, Id hope with a renewed vigour we could get into 6 figures somehow with extra donations and investment.

Id say the WS need full-time employees as that way the sole focus is on driving forward rather than trying to find the time to do so.

Progress for me would be consistant top 6 and cup runs coupled with decent signings year on year.  Now I fully understand that even with major investment none of the above is guaranteed but some solid optimism every year would be nice.  You say we have achived this several times in the last 10 years but lately and certainly in the last 3 years we have regressed with football that at times has been difficult to watch.

When I say they have done a decent job, I say this due to raising the funds they did, however to caveat that, Id say it was the fanbase as a whole who were united and most entities could have done exactly the same job as the WS given the cicumstances we as a club were faced with.  I have little faith in them as they have been mostly silent for a number of years and stagnated, HOWEVER I am willing to wait and see what plans they have to drive us forward but I think some full-time workers with a degree of strength are a neccessity to have some focus.

The divided fanbase was always going to happen but the degree of venom and belittling at times has been poor to see.  We all want Motherwell to be a success story and can have a difference of opinion.

[StAndrew7]

25 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

A very eloquent response with some good points which is where the discussion should be going, on your questions :-

£25-30K isn't great but its something, Id hope with a renewed vigour we could get into 6 figures somehow with extra donations and investment.

Id say the WS need full-time employees as that way the sole focus is on driving forward rather than trying to find the time to do so.

The divided fanbase was always going to happen but the degree of venom and belittling at times has been poor to see.  We all want Motherwell to be a success story and can have a difference of opinion.

Aye, I think looking at raising money outside membership is critical; there's no reason we can't be speaking to local  or international companies/firms etc. for £10/20/30/40k sponsorship deals a season for the club/investment into the WS or Club where they can bring specific pieces of information, skills or products to support us.

I'm not convinced full time employees are the answer if we wish to retain the status quo from a WS perspective; there needs to be a clear line between the role of the WS and the role of the Exec Board/Club management. If we're asking the WS to do more of the work which the Exec Board is (supposed) to do like looking for investment, increased sponsorship, local partnerships etc., then I think we're moving into different territory in terms of roles and responsibilities, which would need to be explored.

The WS should remain as it is for me, essentially raising rainy day money up to a certain point (let's for argument say that's the magic £750k number, or round it up to £1m); once it reaches that total, anything over and above that raised can then go to the club as additional funds or as a soft loan etc. to add to transfer funds, or to cover loan costs and so on. Also, there's no reason that the WS can't start to use its membership more; there's thousands of people there; many of whom will have very good business acumen/skills and experience in areas which can support the Society with its targets and mission. It doesn't necessarily take a full time team to achieve that, with the right people in the right places. I do think that some sort of overall Secretary/Executive type role would be beneficial, to keep things ticking over and monitoring progress; although the existing governance structure would point to that being the Chairperson(s) of the WS Board.

I think there's been a bit of a mashing together of roles and responsibilities over the last few weeks/months and I think it's a narrative that's been driven forward by the Outgoing Chairman; the WS and its Board/Members aren't responsible for the day-to-day operations of the club and its ability to raise monies through investment, sponsorship or otherwise, nor should they be.

The fact that the Exec Board didn't appoint a CEO for well over a year shows that the ball was very much dropped; the kind of leadership the Club could have had over the last 18-24 months with someone in place would have changed our current situation drastically; we can't ignore that. Although, for the record, I think that Brian Caldwell is the right man for the job; i can remember one or two of the previous shortlist not exactly inspiring confidence.

It feels very much like a rewriting of the way the club has been allowed to drift unguided over the last 3 or 4 years (go and take a look at Vietnam91's latest post to see the kind of Outgoing Chairman we have).

They should absolutely have input into that; for example, if a proposed sponsor or investor is an arms company, I doubt that would go down well (there was a recent case of that in Germany with Rheinmetall and Dortmund where it went through and the fans weren't happy). The structure has been to this point that the WS would be in the background with the Exec Board making the strategic decisions when required, with day to day run by the CEO and others.

I think consistent top-6 and cup runs is definitely achievable and is actually well within our current means; we've shown that in the past. I think a lot of that is down to squad building and having relative stability at the club; we saw that with Robinson and McCall before him.

On your last point, outside of X/Twitter (which, frankly, is to be expected, it's a vile place) I haven't seen much of the venom/belittling. I accept there's been a few testy replies on here and P&B (it's a very emotive subject, after all) but for the most part it feels like it's been done in good spirit.

[Mccus28]

2 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Aye, I think looking at raising money outside membership is critical; there's no reason we can't be speaking to local  or international companies/firms etc. for £10/20/30/40k sponsorship deals a season for the club/investment into the WS or Club where they can bring specific pieces of information, skills or products to support us.

I'm not convinced full time employees are the answer if we wish to retain the status quo from a WS perspective; there needs to be a clear line between the role of the WS and the role of the Exec Board/Club management. If we're asking the WS to do more of the work which the Exec Board is (supposed) to do like looking for investment, increased sponsorship, local partnerships etc., then I think we're moving into different territory in terms of roles and responsibilities, which would need to be explored.

The WS should remain as it is for me, essentially raising rainy day money up to a certain point (let's for argument say that's the magic £750k number, or round it up to £1m); once it reaches that total, anything over and above that raised can then go to the club as additional funds or as a soft loan etc. to add to transfer funds, or to cover loan costs and so on. Also, there's no reason that the WS can't start to use its membership more; there's thousands of people there; many of whom will have very good business acumen/skills and experience in areas which can support the Society with its targets and mission. It doesn't necessarily take a full time team to achieve that, with the right people in the right places. I do think that some sort of overall Secretary/Executive type role would be beneficial, to keep things ticking over and monitoring progress; although the existing governance structure would point to that being the Chairperson(s) of the WS Board.

I think there's been a bit of a mashing together of roles and responsibilities over the last few weeks/months and I think it's a narrative that's been driven forward by the Outgoing Chairman; the WS and its Board/Members aren't responsible for the day-to-day operations of the club and its ability to raise monies through investment, sponsorship or otherwise, nor should they be.

The fact that the Exec Board didn't appoint a CEO for well over a year shows that the ball was very much dropped; the kind of leadership the Club could have had over the last 18-24 months with someone in place would have changed our current situation drastically; we can't ignore that. Although, for the record, I think that Brian Caldwell is the right man for the job; i can remember one or two of the previous shortlist not exactly inspiring confidence.

It feels very much like a rewriting of the way the club has been allowed to drift unguided over the last 3 or 4 years (go and take a look at Vietnam91's latest post to see the kind of Outgoing Chairman we have).

They should absolutely have input into that; for example, if a proposed sponsor or investor is an arms company, I doubt that would go down well (there was a recent case of that in Germany with Rheinmetall and Dortmund where it went through and the fans weren't happy). The structure has been to this point that the WS would be in the background with the Exec Board making the strategic decisions when required, with day to day run by the CEO and others.

I think consistent top-6 and cup runs is definitely achievable and is actually well within our current means; we've shown that in the past. I think a lot of that is down to squad building and having relative stability at the club; we saw that with Robinson and McCall before him.

On your last point, outside of X/Twitter (which, frankly, is to be expected, it's a vile place) I haven't seen much of the venom/belittling. I accept there's been a few testy replies on here and P&B (it's a very emotive subject, after all) but for the most part it feels like it's been done in good spirit.

Again, an outstanding reply!!!

[Kmcalpin]

4 hours ago, santheman said:

Sally (lovely lady) handles all the WS administrative duties and probably loads more tasks not on her job description.

Yes  I've dealt with Sally a few times and always found her helpful. However, I do think she needs someone else to help her  

[santheman]

7 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Yes  I've dealt with Sally a few times and always found her helpful. However, I do think she needs someone else to help her  

Apparently Steelboy is good at admin.

[Toxteth O'Grady]

https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2024/06/25/consultation-period-on-proposed-investment-extended/

CONSULTATION PERIOD ON PROPOSED INVESTMENT EXTENDED

14:59

Following discussions with the Well Society Board, the consultation period on the proposed investment from Erik & Courtney Barmack (Wild Sheep Sports) has been extended by seven days following the revised offer last week. 

As a result, the ballot now opens for Well Society members and Motherwell Football Club shareholders on Monday 8th July. This will be the start of a two-week voting period.

You can email questions to Club via shares@motherwellfc.co.uk. Well Society members can also contact the Well Society directly with any queries via members@thewellsociety.uk.

Details and more information on how to vote will be shared with MFC shareholders and Well Society members in due course.

[wellgirl]

Email just in from the well society. The cut off date for members who are eligible to vote is 10th of June at noon. 

[dennyc]

4 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Aye, I think looking at raising money outside membership is critical; there's no reason we can't be speaking to local  or international companies/firms etc. for £10/20/30/40k sponsorship deals a season for the club/investment into the WS or Club where they can bring specific pieces of information, skills or products to support us.

I'm not convinced full time employees are the answer if we wish to retain the status quo from a WS perspective; there needs to be a clear line between the role of the WS and the role of the Exec Board/Club management. If we're asking the WS to do more of the work which the Exec Board is (supposed) to do like looking for investment, increased sponsorship, local partnerships etc., then I think we're moving into different territory in terms of roles and responsibilities, which would need to be explored.

The WS should remain as it is for me, essentially raising rainy day money up to a certain point (let's for argument say that's the magic £750k number, or round it up to £1m); once it reaches that total, anything over and above that raised can then go to the club as additional funds or as a soft loan etc. to add to transfer funds, or to cover loan costs and so on. Also, there's no reason that the WS can't start to use its membership more; there's thousands of people there; many of whom will have very good business acumen/skills and experience in areas which can support the Society with its targets and mission. It doesn't necessarily take a full time team to achieve that, with the right people in the right places. I do think that some sort of overall Secretary/Executive type role would be beneficial, to keep things ticking over and monitoring progress; although the existing governance structure would point to that being the Chairperson(s) of the WS Board.

I think there's been a bit of a mashing together of roles and responsibilities over the last few weeks/months and I think it's a narrative that's been driven forward by the Outgoing Chairman; the WS and its Board/Members aren't responsible for the day-to-day operations of the club and its ability to raise monies through investment, sponsorship or otherwise, nor should they be.

The fact that the Exec Board didn't appoint a CEO for well over a year shows that the ball was very much dropped; the kind of leadership the Club could have had over the last 18-24 months with someone in place would have changed our current situation drastically; we can't ignore that. Although, for the record, I think that Brian Caldwell is the right man for the job; i can remember one or two of the previous shortlist not exactly inspiring confidence.

It feels very much like a rewriting of the way the club has been allowed to drift unguided over the last 3 or 4 years (go and take a look at Vietnam91's latest post to see the kind of Outgoing Chairman we have).

They should absolutely have input into that; for example, if a proposed sponsor or investor is an arms company, I doubt that would go down well (there was a recent case of that in Germany with Rheinmetall and Dortmund where it went through and the fans weren't happy). The structure has been to this point that the WS would be in the background with the Exec Board making the strategic decisions when required, with day to day run by the CEO and others.

I think consistent top-6 and cup runs is definitely achievable and is actually well within our current means; we've shown that in the past. I think a lot of that is down to squad building and having relative stability at the club; we saw that with Robinson and McCall before him.

On your last point, outside of X/Twitter (which, frankly, is to be expected, it's a vile place) I haven't seen much of the venom/belittling. I accept there's been a few testy replies on here and P&B (it's a very emotive subject, after all) but for the most part it feels like it's been done in good spirit.

Excellent post. Positive, realistic and achievable. I think a strategy most on here could buy into.

Essential for me is a proper, working, respectful relationship between the two Boards.

When the WS was originally established, there was supposed to be a drive to attract Corporate Membership. Targeted at local Companies initially, but thereafter further afield. Perhaps providing matchday benefits to those Companies that signed up, working in partnership with the Club. Not sure where that initiative ended up or whether it was even taken forward?

I like the idea of passing funds above a certain Balance to the Club, but would say it must be on an a soft loan basis only, secured by the existing Charge over Fir Park. Not that the Society would be looking for the Loan to be repaid under normal circumstances. Not a Donation though. Also the WS should be involved in deciding for what purpose those funds should be used.

  The requirement for funds to be provided on a Loan basis was originally built in to protect those monies. For future use by the Society should disaster befall the Club. That is the reason I am so against a portion of the existing Loan being written off. The write off would weaken the Society, now and in the future. The arrangement also provides protection for Fir Park.

An excellent basis for ongoing discussion once this episode is over.

[StAndrew7]

2 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Excellent post. Positive, realistic and achievable. I think a strategy most on here could buy into.

Essential for me is a proper, working, respectful relationship between the two Boards.

When the WS was originally established, there was supposed to be a drive to attract Corporate Membership. Targeted at local Companies initially, but thereafter further afield. Perhaps providing matchday benefits to those Companies that signed up, working in partnership with the Club. Not sure where that initiative ended up or whether it was even taken forward?

I like the idea of passing funds above a certain Balance to the Club, but would say it must be on an a soft loan basis only, secured by the existing Charge over Fir Park. Not that the Society would be looking for the Loan to be repaid under normal circumstances. Not a Donation though. Also the WS should be involved in deciding for what purpose those funds should be used.

  The requirement for funds to be provided on a Loan basis was originally built in to protect those monies. For future use by the Society should disaster befall the Club. That is the reason I am so against a portion of the existing Loan being written off. It weakens the Society, now and in the future. The arrangement also provides protection for Fir Park.

An excellent basis for ongoing discussion once this episode is over.

Thanks! I'd give you a reaction but I'm all out for today. 😄

[wellfan]

4 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Aye, I think looking at raising money outside membership is critical; there's no reason we can't be speaking to local  or international companies/firms etc. for £10/20/30/40k sponsorship deals a season for the club/investment into the WS or Club where they can bring specific pieces of information, skills or products to support us.

I'm not convinced full time employees are the answer if we wish to retain the status quo from a WS perspective; there needs to be a clear line between the role of the WS and the role of the Exec Board/Club management. If we're asking the WS to do more of the work which the Exec Board is (supposed) to do like looking for investment, increased sponsorship, local partnerships etc., then I think we're moving into different territory in terms of roles and responsibilities, which would need to be explored.

The WS should remain as it is for me, essentially raising rainy day money up to a certain point (let's for argument say that's the magic £750k number, or round it up to £1m); once it reaches that total, anything over and above that raised can then go to the club as additional funds or as a soft loan etc. to add to transfer funds, or to cover loan costs and so on. Also, there's no reason that the WS can't start to use its membership more; there's thousands of people there; many of whom will have very good business acumen/skills and experience in areas which can support the Society with its targets and mission. It doesn't necessarily take a full time team to achieve that, with the right people in the right places. I do think that some sort of overall Secretary/Executive type role would be beneficial, to keep things ticking over and monitoring progress; although the existing governance structure would point to that being the Chairperson(s) of the WS Board.

I think there's been a bit of a mashing together of roles and responsibilities over the last few weeks/months and I think it's a narrative that's been driven forward by the Outgoing Chairman; the WS and its Board/Members aren't responsible for the day-to-day operations of the club and its ability to raise monies through investment, sponsorship or otherwise, nor should they be.

The fact that the Exec Board didn't appoint a CEO for well over a year shows that the ball was very much dropped; the kind of leadership the Club could have had over the last 18-24 months with someone in place would have changed our current situation drastically; we can't ignore that. Although, for the record, I think that Brian Caldwell is the right man for the job; i can remember one or two of the previous shortlist not exactly inspiring confidence.

It feels very much like a rewriting of the way the club has been allowed to drift unguided over the last 3 or 4 years (go and take a look at Vietnam91's latest post to see the kind of Outgoing Chairman we have).

They should absolutely have input into that; for example, if a proposed sponsor or investor is an arms company, I doubt that would go down well (there was a recent case of that in Germany with Rheinmetall and Dortmund where it went through and the fans weren't happy). The structure has been to this point that the WS would be in the background with the Exec Board making the strategic decisions when required, with day to day run by the CEO and others.

I think consistent top-6 and cup runs is definitely achievable and is actually well within our current means; we've shown that in the past. I think a lot of that is down to squad building and having relative stability at the club; we saw that with Robinson and McCall before him.

On your last point, outside of X/Twitter (which, frankly, is to be expected, it's a vile place) I haven't seen much of the venom/belittling. I accept there's been a few testy replies on here and P&B (it's a very emotive subject, after all) but for the most part it feels like it's been done in good spirit.

I repeat, forget about the forthcoming wean and offer your services to the Well Society Board 👍

[wellfan]

The Well Society update, 25 June 2024, states that further info and their business plan are coming soon.

[Kmcalpin]

4 hours ago, StAndrew7 said:

Aye, I think looking at raising money outside membership is critical; there's no reason we can't be speaking to local  or international companies/firms etc. for £10/20/30/40k sponsorship deals a season for the club/investment into the WS or Club where they can bring specific pieces of information, skills or products to support us..........................They should absolutely have input into that; for example, if a proposed sponsor or investor is an arms company, I doubt that would go down well (there was a recent case of that in Germany with Rheinmetall and Dortmund where it went through and the fans weren't happy).

Very good post, with which I agree 95% of the way. We have to be very careful though not to stray into political territory. The Society must avoid that at all costs. Once the Society starts getting involved in those kind of issues, it will start to alienate significant sections of its membership, many of who might terminate their association. Its a tricky one for sure. If it didn't take sides, then that would alienate some; if it did take sides then it would alienate others. Best not to go there in my view.    

[StAndrew7]

9 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Very good post, with which I agree 95% of the way. We have to be very careful though not to stray into political territory. The Society must avoid that at all costs. Once the Society starts getting involved in those kind of issues, it will start to alienate significant sections of its membership, many of who might terminate their association. Its a tricky one for sure. If it didn't take sides, then that would alienate some; if it did take sides then it would alienate others. Best not to go there in my view.    

I think the Society, as a representative body of fans, should absolutely be involved in understanding the implications of sponsorship of the type that I've mentioned there; by a poll or whatever to help them share the views with the Exec Board and Club management. It's highly unlikely it will ever happen, but it's just an example I was citing as having happened in the last 2 or 3 months.

It's not the job of the Society to attract/negotiate with sponsors and frankly it shouldn't be.

I know, for example, that the whole Paddy Power unsponsoring thing was well received because it was something different, but I also know people who have serious issues with the amount of gambling advertising associated with the game, as well.

I'm not saying there needs to be a Go or No Go decision from the WS, but depending on what the Club governance model ends up being, the WS may not have the casting vote on decisions such as those. However, in my view, should absolutely have input into them at the very least.

[steelboy]

I thought with the talk of legal advice on Friday they were going to bin the vote altogether but they have obviously shat it.

 

 

[Clackscat]

7 hours ago, santheman said:

Sally (lovely lady) handles all the WS administrative duties and probably loads more tasks not on her job description.

She is an absolute gem 

[dennyc]

Delaying the vote makes sense. But what is this voting threshold of 35%? is it Turnout?

Who decided on that figure and why?  More importantly what happens if the threshold is not met? Is the vote voided and the Club Board decision stands? What % voted last time out?

A wee bit clarification please.

Also glad to see a cut off date regards who may take part. 

[Clackscat]

11 minutes ago, steelboy said:

I thought with the talk of legal advice on Friday they were going to bin the vote altogether but they have obviously shat it.

 

 

Maybe they are acting on that legal advice ?

[Clackscat]

4 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Delaying the vote makes sense. But what is this voting threshold of 35%? is it Turnout?

Who decided on that figure and why?  More importantly what happens if the threshold is not met? Is the vote voided and the Club Board decision stands? What % voted last time out?

A wee bit clarification please.

Also glad to see a cut off date regards who may take part. 

Have e mailed to get clarification on what happens if 35% not met

[wellgirl]

5 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Delaying the vote makes sense. But what is this voting threshold of 35%? is it Turnout?

Who decided on that figure and why?  More importantly what happens if the threshold is not met? Is the vote voided and the Club Board decision stands? What % voted last time out?

A wee bit clarification please.

Also glad to see a cut off date regards who may take part. 

36 per cent turnout the last time. 

[steelboy]

6 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Delaying the vote makes sense. But what is this voting threshold of 35%? is it Turnout?

Who decided on that figure and why?  More importantly what happens if the threshold is not met? Is the vote voided and the Club Board decision stands? What % voted last time out?

A wee bit clarification please.

Also glad to see a cut off date regards who may take part. 

Generally the way lawyers work is you pay them to say what you want.

This proposal clearly goes against the constitution and the process has been shambolic so it should be open and shut.

[dennyc]

Just now, wellgirl said:

36 per cent turnout the last time. 

Cheers. 

We really need to get fans to vote, whichever way they go. Never heard mention of any threshold before. Just that it would be a majority wins. Goalposts move again. 

[Mccus28]

1 hour ago, steelboy said:

I thought with the talk of legal advice on Friday they were going to bin the vote altogether but they have obviously shat it.

 

 

You are such a wordsmith