Well Society Board Election's 2024

[Busta Nut]

Globalisation? 

Let's learn to walk before we start to run eh?

[dennyc]

I too was disappointed at the poor turnout % but I wonder if the 'eligible to vote' figure is a misleading starting point. Making the voting turnout look worse than than it actually was. Quoting 3 or 4k Membership is good PR when building up the WS but has the opposite effect when it comes to voting turnout. I wonder what the turnout % would be if gauged against active Membership?

As has been said before there are many reasons for the difference between active and inactive Membership...... out of date contact details, folk who joined on a one off basis such as former players and original sign ups like myself, folk passing away, personal circumstances.  Not everyone has become inactive through lack of interest although that will have played a part and needs addressed. A figure for those re-engaging or joining for the first time might be a better indicator?

It is something that requires investigating though. I am sure that everyone who took part in discussions would have made the effort to vote. I know for a fact that my little band fired in their nominations. 

 

 

[joewarkfanclub]

1 hour ago, Mccus28 said:

I like your passion at playing it down but I just don't agree.

Almost 80% who were able to vote, didn't, surely that, at the very least is a little alarming no matter how you wish to spin it.

Its not just the casual fan, its nearly 80% of people who, to this point have cared enough to be members with a vote.

Not trying to play it down at all.

Obviously it would be far better if all our members were fully engaged in Society matters all the time. Not just when we need to keep the wolf from the door.

Im just not overly concerned right now as we have seen significant change in the Society in the last 12 months in the way it operates and its plan for the future.

I have every faith that the right people are now in place and will be looking to address the many issues both it and the club have going forward.

[MWellChilders]

10 hours ago, fizoxy said:

Memphis. We have a bass pro shop in a pyramid, and crime.

I am in Nashville.

[0Neils40yarder]

2 hours ago, David said:

Oh, by all means! If there's a way for a workstream to include those US fans and those who think it's a good idea, then absolutely!

If a few US-based fans want to help spread the word, then that’s great.

That's true, but from the perspective of the club and the society, what value do those Facebook fans from Uganda or elsewhere actually provide? Are they purchasing matchday tickets? Dining and drinking in the Cooper bar before a match? Buying season tickets? While someone posting on Facebook might seem cool, it doesn't really contribute any tangible value to the club or society.

I'm not sure how many Society members we have in Uganda just now?

As I said, most fans based overseas who support Motherwell tend to have family ties to the area, if they're not actually from the area themselves and have left for various reasons. 

Wrexham has a lot to answer for, doesn’t it?

The truth is, no one cared about Wrexham before they were taken over, and honestly, no one cares about Wrexham now. People are interested in the owners of the club. That’s the real draw.

I’m fairly certain I saw somewhere that the new seasons of the documentary series included a clause in the contract requiring the owners to appear on screen for a minimum percentage of the time. The distributors know that the audience isn’t tuning in to see how Wrexham are performing, or because they’ve suddenly fallen in love with the club. They’re tuning in to see a reality series featuring two fairly well-known individuals who are willing to put themselves centre stage for entertainment.

Hasn’t Tom Brady invested in a football club as well? And the guy from Creed? Why aren’t they taking off and making huge waves in the US? It’s likely because there’s no compelling documentary story for people to follow.

The US interest isn’t in Wrexham. It’s in the “reality” show being filmed around it.

That's a line that Barmack was also pushing, and there were numerous flaws and issues highlighted in that particular model. A great deal of information on Pie & Bovril was pointed out by people who know the entity and the business model far better than I do.

Ask those individuals who are watching those podcasts and YouTube shows if they’d be willing to pay a tenner a month to each channel in order to continue watching.

It’s not just about the cost of running it; it also concerns the amount of time that people involved need to invest. Having observed the various workstreams associated with the Society recently, it’s clear that their time is already stretched to the limit for many.

We have a multitude of tasks that need addressing, from revising and improving the governance, sorting out the executive board, and understanding why the representation from the Society board essentially "went rogue" on the Barmack vote, among other things.

As I mentioned, if we have US fans who want to get involved, donate their time, and create a US market workstream, then go for it; there’s certainly no harm in it.

The same applies to those who believe the US market is ripe for the taking. @wellgirl, you were expressing concern about the female representation on the Society board. You don’t need to be a board member to get involved. If you think we’re missing an opportunity in the US market, then get involved with others who share the same view and make it happen.

What I don’t agree with is people who think the Society should be pursuing this market or that market, but who expect others, whose availability is already stretched, to do the work.

That's an issue that needs addressing. The turnout was ridiculous, and there has to be something done to find out why that was the case.

Excellent post to be honest...absolute fantasy stuff from a few on here today 

[weeyin]

I think some posters can't get past the Wrexham situation when overseas fans are discussed.

I believe there are Society members from something like 20 different countries. If a few of them promote the club for free to others in the same country, what's the problem? If that leads to a few more dollars/euros/pounds spent with the club, more power to them. If it doesn't, no harm done.

 

 

[ropy]

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

I too was disappointed at the poor turnout % but I wonder if the 'eligible to vote' figure is a misleading starting point. Making the voting turnout look worse than than it actually was. Quoting 3 or 4k Membership is good PR when building up the WS but has the opposite effect when it comes to voting turnout. I wonder what the turnout % would be if gauged against active Membership?

 

 

 

Even defining active membership is difficult.  I would say anyone with a regular payment method set up or has contributed in the past 12 months (could be 18 or 24).

What if someone cancels their Direct Debit today, are they active?

Anyway it would be interesting to see the numbers. 

[Dee]

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

I too was disappointed at the poor turnout % but I wonder if the 'eligible to vote' figure is a misleading starting point. Making the voting turnout look worse than than it actually was. Quoting 3 or 4k Membership is good PR when building up the WS but has the opposite effect when it comes to voting turnout. I wonder what the turnout % would be if gauged against active Membership?

As has been said before there are many reasons for the difference between active and inactive Membership...... out of date contact details, folk who joined on a one off basis such as former players and original sign ups like myself, folk passing away, personal circumstances.  Not everyone has become inactive through lack of interest although that will have played a part and needs addressed. A figure for those re-engaging or joining for the first time might be a better indicator?

It is something that requires investigating though. I am sure that everyone who took part in discussions would have made the effort to vote. I know for a fact that my little band fired in their nominations. 

 

 

Without divulging too much before we are further down the line, I think this is a really important post that touches on where the Society is at for now.  

Members that attended the AGM or attended any recent sessions will be aware that we have recently implemented a new CRM system and a lot of the work carried out recently has been to find out more about our members; most importantly how many active members we actually have, why some may have lapsed, where opportunity lies, etc. 

@dennyc is absolutely spot on, quoting 3 or 4k membership is good PR when building up the Society but comes back to bite us when it comes to voting turnout. Some of the immediate work the new board will be getting stuck into is finding out how many active members we have, how we can get those who are in a position to do so to increase their subscription, how can we improve communications, etc. etc.

It's been touched on before but there is many reasons for that; junior members who lapsed and didn't continue as adults, members who paid up at the start and haven't contributed since, members who have passed away and the Society was never notified etc. It might sound silly but I actually think there's members out there who don't realise they are still a member because they've not contributed for a sustained period of time. 

It's arguably a historical failing of the Society that we're not totally on top of this, no hiding from that, but since the new board was elected back in October significant strides have been taken to improve this and we're getting there. 

There were 1,531 votes were cast in the investment proposal by Tuesday 16 July at 10am. 56% of eligible members. I get there was still a week to go but I think this percentage will actually be a lot higher than 56% if we were only counting active members. It should also be noted that around double voted in the elections than voted in favour or Erik's deal. I actually fully agree with those here who have raised concerns, regardless of the reasoning we need to have a lot more people engaging in the democratic process. 

Whilst this might be far from ideal, I actually think it presents a huge opportunity for income growth and a great opportunity to re-engage members and bring them on our journey. I keep banging this drum but I'm really confident about where we are at the moment and where we can go in the not too distant future. 

[steelboy]

I voted but I hate emails and any sort of form you have to fill in. There might be people who are just happy being silent members unless it's a big thing like the takeover scam.

[David]

1 hour ago, weeyin said:

I believe there are Society members from something like 20 different countries. If a few of them promote the club for free to others in the same country, what's the problem?

No one said it was a problem? If those who wish to help promote the club in the US market are up for it, then great. 

[weeyin]

19 minutes ago, David said:

No one said it was a problem? If those who wish to help promote the club in the US market are up for it, then great. 

I won't quote all the posts, but there are 3 or 4 in the last couple of pages alone.

[David]

2 hours ago, weeyin said:

I won't quote all the posts, but there are 3 or 4 in the last couple of pages alone.

I think some people may not think it's worth doing, but I don't think that means it's seen as a problem. As I said in my post, my concerns are more to do with stretching the volunteer manpower we have already, most of whom are dealing with fairly pressing matters. If some of our US members, including anyone who ran for election and wasn't successful this time, alongside some other volunteers wish to look at a US workstream it's certainly doable.

[Clackscat]

15 hours ago, Mccus28 said:

Its really disappointing to see such a poor turnout on such a massive topic and im suprised more hasn't been discussed on here.

The Well Society really need to try and engage with the current members as they are clearly disillusioned.

625 out of 2830 is wildly low and it would be interesting to see if the society will look into the reasons because I fear for progression if members continue down this path.

Congrats to those elected.

I spent about 2 hours in total, listening to pitches (some twice) looking at mixes of skill sets, and really struggled to get down to 4 picks. I'm lucky in that I had time to do it.

Not everyone has that time and I think that has more to do with the low turnout than anything

[Cameron_Mcd]

Alison Thewliss, David Cullinan and Kevin Rogers have been co-opted onto the Well Society board with Phil Speedie becoming WS Chair. Greg Anderson (WS) and Grant Jarvie are added to the Exec board with Kyrk Macmillan becoming the new club chairman.

[joewarkfanclub]

Lots of youth, talent, enthusiasm and experience there.

Look forward to the club making huge strides in all areas as we move forward!