The Well Society - How Are They Doing?

[Cameron_Mcd]

8 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

So all investment is bad then just because you choose to point out failings in St Johnstone's model (in your opinion)

That's not what I said, the comparison was due to the fact that they went through an American investment proposal at a similar time that we did.

13 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

Im also confused by your comment, as the current Well Society board WILL be looking for investment.

The last sentence of my post was aimed at the people (not aimed at you) that seem to believe that we need investment at any cost, there is room for investment but it needs to work for both parties.

11 minutes ago, Mccus28 said:

What people on here are pointing out is the fact that a comedy nights and some bucket money collectors at a game isn't exactly mind blowing stuff, well meaning yes, mind blowing strategy.........no.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that they're reinventing the wheel however they should be given credit where it is due for making more of what is infront of them, some thing that the previous board failed to do.

[David]

As I mentioned earlier, for those seeking a significant investment, I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on the following:

"What kind of return on investment do you believe is realistic when putting money into a club like Motherwell?"

This isn’t a loaded question, nor is it meant to catch anyone out.

[Busta Nut]

1 hour ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I note that Feeleys term of office on the WS Board is up but he is standing for re-election.

No harm to the guy, but I cant imagine that will be supported by the wider membership.

2 vacancies will be voted on. His and Jay Henderson who is standing down after 8 years.

Opportunity for all those who dont think the current WS Board is doing enough, to step up and make a difference!

Feeley will have his pals that will vote for him. He'll also have the WS Nay sayers on his side since he was unfathomably so pro Barmack. I don't think he's a bad guy and I reckon a voice like his should be welcomed. I have a lot of respect for him since he turned up to the WS nights a few month ago and answered questions on his thought process. 




As for the Quiz nights and Comedy nights. I think that's more about getting folk involved than the few hunner quid(that's gonna also be welcome).

I'm all for that and sorry that I missed them both.

[steelman1991]

6 hours ago, Cameron_Mcd said:

allowed there pitch to be massacred by a guy that has now pranced about Easter Road in a Hibs top after a 3-0 loss.

Is this deliberately obtuse or am I just out of the loop? 🤷‍♂️

[Cameron_Mcd]

5 minutes ago, steelman1991 said:

Is this deliberately obtuse or am I just out of the loop? 🤷‍♂️

Apparently the St Johnstone groundsman was parading about Easter Road after their game on Saturday with a Hibs top on.

[Yoshi-1991]

On 4/1/2025 at 1:19 PM, David said:

As I mentioned earlier, for those seeking a significant investment, I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on the following:

"What kind of return on investment do you believe is realistic when putting money into a club like Motherwell?"

This isn’t a loaded question, nor is it meant to catch anyone out.

From what ive seen, what we are looking for is a senile old investor that wants to chuck their money in with zero interest in a return. That's no happening. 

Its looks like we've sat and watched what's happened at Wrexham and tried to jump on the band wagon but without putting up the same stakes. You could even look at both clubs situations as similar,  both fan owned and hit a ceiling, needing outside investment. From what I understand (and can remember, its been a while) is that the deal was struck that the ground was retained by the fans but they gave up control. You are going to find it neigh on impossible to find any investor worth their salt that won't involve giving up one or the other. 

What we would have better off doing is spending the time and money to look at better ways to create sponsorship & partnership opertunites as that makes more sense keeping in line what what we are willing to actually give up.

[joewarkfanclub]

12 hours ago, Yoshi-1991 said:

What we would have better off doing is spending the time and money to look at better ways to create sponsorship & partnership opertunites as that makes more sense keeping in line what what we are willing to actually give up.

The new club board are apparently doing that.  It was communicated during the WS agm that they believe that there are opportunities to grow the business within the current set up.

The previous board did not, hence the cringey video and bending over for Barmack.

If you want serious investment from an outside source, you need to show that you are a viable investment opportunity.

It would appear that in the short term all efforts are being put into getting our house in order so that we are in a stronger position to make that pitch.

At the very least it should help us to be a better version of ourselves.

[Pepper]

I never thought that the Well Society's most important function would become protecting the club from a large section of its own fans, but there you go. 

[wellfan]

39 minutes ago, Pepper said:

I never thought that the Well Society's most important function would become protecting the club from a large section of its own fans, but there you go. 

It could be argued that its most important function has been to protect the club from the actions and desires of its executive board members last year. 

[Stuwell2]

On 4/3/2025 at 12:28 PM, Pepper said:

I never thought that the Well Society's most important function would become protecting the club from a large section of its own fans, but there you go. 

what do you consider to be our fan base and how many people do you think it is? how much of that is this “large section” you mention? and how do you know their views?

I know this is a rough back of a fag packet calculation but even though it’s a poor measurement at least it’s measurable in some sense.
from memory last year there were around 2750 members of the society eligible to vote of which around 1500 had voted when the voting was cancelled due to EB withdrawing his interest.
Of that 1200 had rejected the offer while 300 had accepted it giving roughly a 80% majority of those who voted or 44% of the society in favour and 11% against with 45% undecided. 
If you extrapolate that to the feeling of the fan base then 11% in favour isn’t really “a large section of the fan base” unless your argument is that everyone who hadn’t voted or not a member of the WS was in favour of EB’s takeover offer. 
 

[Pepper]

22 hours ago, Stuwell2 said:

what do you consider to be our fan base and how many people do you think it is? how much of that is this “large section” you mention? and how do you know their views?

I know this is a rough back of a fag packet calculation but even though it’s a poor measurement at least it’s measurable in some sense.
from memory last year there were around 2750 members of the society eligible to vote of which around 1500 had voted when the voting was cancelled due to EB withdrawing his interest.
Of that 1200 had rejected the offer while 300 had accepted it giving roughly a 80% majority of those who voted or 44% of the society in favour and 11% against with 45% undecided. 
If you extrapolate that to the feeling of the fan base then 11% in favour isn’t really “a large section of the fan base” unless your argument is that everyone who hadn’t voted or not a member of the WS was in favour of EB’s takeover offer. 
 

Large scation was a deliberate exageration but that's not the point I was making anyway.

It was that you would have envisaged the society having to protect the club from people on the outside traying to gain control rather than it's own supporters, board members or whoever it may be with their feet already under the table.

 

[El Grew]

On 4/1/2025 at 1:19 PM, David said:

As I mentioned earlier, for those seeking a significant investment, I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on the following:

"What kind of return on investment do you believe is realistic when putting money into a club like Motherwell?"

This isn’t a loaded question, nor is it meant to catch anyone out.

Anyone considering putting money into a football club and expecting a return on that money, should seek immediate psychiatric help.

Football clubs are just black holes for money.

[joewarkfanclub]

5 hours ago, El Grew said:

Anyone considering putting money into a football club and expecting a return on that money, should seek immediate psychiatric help.

Football clubs are just black holes for money.

You therefore have to question the motivation of any "investor" who claims they can improve the club and make a profit for themselves.

They are either deluded or lying. Neither of which will pan out well for us......

[Stuwell2]

4 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

You therefore have to question the motivation of any "investor" who claims they can improve the club and make a profit for themselves.

They are either deluded or lying. Neither of which will pan out well for us......

From memory when this was previously discussed last year I’m sure I read that in his first term as president Trump changes the US tax laws to allow Americans to write off overseas tax losses against their US investments - which meant he could claim back the losses of his overseas golf clubs - making owning a football club in the UK an attractive option as in reality it cost them nothing to buy and run. 

[Spiderpig]

The only clubs attractive to investors from anywhere are the bigger, better supported clubs that can actually generate an income, from merchandise sales, advertising,  commercial partnerships etc, as well as having governance that can be bought out and replaced, ie non fan owned.

In all honesty can anyone really see an investor getting a return on their cash at  Motherwell, ownership of the Stadium and/or any adjacent land is the only way I can see to achieve a profit.

 

[joewarkfanclub]

8 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

The only clubs attractive to investors from anywhere are the bigger, better supported clubs that can actually generate an income, from merchandise sales, advertising,  commercial partnerships etc, as well as having governance that can be bought out and replaced, ie non fan owned.

In all honesty can anyone really see an investor getting a return on their cash at  Motherwell, ownership of the Stadium and/or any adjacent land is the only way I can see to achieve a profit.

 

Exactly. Which is probably why Barmack was so keen to "eliminate" the WS loan to the club which holds the security over the stadium.

[dennyc]

16 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

Exactly. Which is probably why Barmack was so keen to "eliminate" the WS loan to the club which holds the security over the stadium.

Not only would writing off that Loan have removed a barrier to the ground being sold or used as Security for external funding, it would also have eliminated the Society's position as a Preferred Creditor in the event of MFC failing. Not seen as likely when the Society was established (and hopefully not now), but a sensible safeguard that was one of the main reason funds were originally to be Loaned rather than Donated.

Repayment of those monies in a worst case scenario to assist a rebirth of the Club if ever needed.  Despite that agreement I believe the former WS Board authorised the release of funds in excess of £1m by way of donation to MFC. That is £1m of fan contributions that have gone forever. Looking forward, I understand the current Society Board have indicated that future funds will primarily be provided by way of Loan? Unless my take on the recent AGM is incorrect that is.

Why the 2 Society Reps then on the Executive Board saw fit to recommend any deal that involved the removal of those safeguards (and potential repayment of monies) defeats me. I did ask the question at the time, but received no explanation.

So how is the revitalised Society doing? A positive start with a great deal more communication and openness. Expectations were high following the plans/ambitions that were set out. Maybe too high? My concern is that the Society are expected to carry out duties that should primarily be the responsibility of the Executive Board. I'm also sad to see Jason moving on after 8 years. I wish him well.