Well-meaning, but amateurish. Perceptions that critics of The ‘Well Society have long held about the fan ownership model at Motherwell.
However, what this past week has revealed is that those who may previously have cast such stones, and who sit on the side of the proposed investment from Wild Sheep Sports, are sitting in glass houses.
How else do you explain erroneous figures – supposedly lifted from social media - pertaining to Motherwell’s wage bill being included in the strategy document released by Erik and Courtney Barmack?
Or the statement released yesterday in support of it by chairman Jim McMahon as voting cards were distributed to shareholders, which repeatedly referred to someone named ‘Barmark’?
The second of those errors is infinitely less important than the first, but had The ‘Well Society committed either, they would be crucified. And rightly so.
That such mistakes are being made in relation to the club’s finances at this late stage raises a red flag that could scarcely be any bigger supposing Graeme Souness marched onto the Fir Park turf and planted it in the centre circle.
This isn’t the first misstep from the club’s side in this whole sorry farrago. Why has it all played out so publicly, for instance, with the offer being restructured to ensure The ‘Well Society remained the majority shareholder after an initial backlash?
Such negotiations over terms should surely have taken place behind closed doors, and included the Barmacks, the club and the society, before the proposal ever reached the public domain.
What also seems a mystery is just why the club’s executive board seem so keen to push this deal through in its current form. As McMahon has now repeatedly said, the club is not in financial peril, and does not necessarily need the money post haste, which leads to a presumption that it is being driven solely as a legacy project for the outgoing board members.
Broadly speaking, seeking investment to complement the fan ownership model is a perfectly logical stance, and the argument the outgoing chairman makes about moving away from budgeting on a ‘season-to-season basis’ is sound enough.
But the particulars of this specific proposal simply don’t add up, nor offer anything close to the threshold that would make the dilution of The ‘Well Society’s shareholding – and cash reserves, too, as they are required to almost match the Wild Sheep investment – worth the gamble.
As McMahon also admits, this isn’t actually a vote on the viability of The ‘Well Society, but if one good thing has come from what has turned into a hugely divisive episode, it is that the society will emerge re-energised with a clear strategy of their own for taking the club forward.
Including the possibility of working with outside investors, which are both difficult to find, and should be welcomed. That may even include the Barmacks, if they are still keen to bring their expertise to the table without ultimately taking control of the boardroom.
Brian McCafferty, former chairman of both the club and of The ‘Well Society, came out swinging against the proposal yesterday.
“The Wild Sheep offer would put fan ownership and the financial future of Motherwell at major risk,” McCafferty said.
“The revision to allow the Well Society to retain slightly more than half of the shares is largely symbolic as the deal immediately hands Wild Sheep effective control.
“Although both groups will have three representatives on the board, Erik Barmack will have a casting vote as chairman and the deal stipulates that Wild Sheep will develop overall strategy in conjunction with two club executives. The Well Society is only entitled to ‘discuss’ these key decisions.
“Much has been made of the independence of the two club employees on the board, but people come and go at football clubs all the time – especially if they disagree with the chairman – and Wild Sheep could appoint any replacements. So it’s unquestionably boardroom control.
“There are other factors that risk fan ownership, including what happens if the Well Society misses its financial obligations to almost match the Barmacks’ investment. This remains unclear, and I’d expect many fans would stop paying subscriptions if control is handed to an overseas investor.
“Fans would have no say over other investors Erik Barmack has talked about introducing and Wild Sheep could be entitled to take a share of the club’s profits after year six.”
McCafferty also has concerns about the strategies for growing club revenue that were outlined in the Wild Sheep proposal, including a Motherwell app that aims to attract 50,000 downloads and a large investment in ‘predictive AI’, with the cost far outweighing the level of investment that the Barmacks would be committing to.
Read more:
-
Motherwell begin crucial shareholder vote on proposed takeover
-
The Well Society express concerns over prospective investors strategy
“I find it strange that there is a drive to rush this deal through when the club is financially stable,” he said.
“The Wild Sheep plan outlines almost £4million of spending on projects inside three years – yet the Barmacks are only investing £900,000 during this period.
“The nature of many of the plans, such as spending £600,000 on pre-match and post-match entertainment, casts major doubt on the financial viability of the project. There is a real chance the club would need further funding which could leave it in serious trouble or again dilute fans’ share.
“The deal was always going to be a gamble. Fans would be putting their own money and the club’s finances in the hands of someone with no track record in football. By the looks of the Wild Sheep plan, it’s a massive gamble and I urge Motherwell fans to reject the offer.
“The Well Society plan is a highly considered approach and I know there have been alternative financial options emerging during this process that could provide some security for the club without the risks inherent in the Wild Sheep offer. There is absolutely no need to rush into this deal.”
Voting is open on the investment proposal until July 22nd.
In the end, sadly, all the executive board may have achieved in their handling of this issue is to tarnish their legacy rather than burnish it, and a lot of hard work and good they have done for Motherwell in the past along with it.
