Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[Yorky]

It’s a decent draw, either team could go through.

[capt_oats]

On 09/07/2021 at 18:01, YassinMoutaouakil said:

Cue the Marc McNulty links

[Swami]

(I actually think it would be a good signing)

[supermarv]

I’d take McNulty but would kinda overload us up front. Having said that with the big handsome Finish guy next. After they 2 (if McNulty is true) id say we still possibly need a left sided defender and another quality midfielder then that would be us. Still plenty of time left in the window so I suspect if we had to bring in another defender and midfielder it would most likely be later in the window on loans etc.

[one m in Motherwell]

McNulty makes quite a lot of sense.

Combination of him/Watt/KVV/Woolery/Amaluzor/Lawleff actually gives us a bit of depth (I really don’t want Lawleff to play much, if poss…)

We get the Finnish dude and a left Winger and I think that’d be ok.

[supermarv]

9 minutes ago, one m in Motherwell said:

McNulty makes quite a lot of sense.

Combination of him/Watt/KVV/Woolery/Amaluzor/Lawleff actually gives us a bit of depth (I really don’t want Lawleff to play much, if poss…)

We get the Finnish dude and a left Winger and I think that’d be ok.

Also forgetting Shields so we have plenty options in those areas. If anything we required an out an out winger like Jordan Roberts. When the Finnish guy signs for me next priority is another midfielder.

Edited July 25, 2021 by supermarv

[welldaft]

Was about too mention Connor Shields but supermarv beat me too it. I had high hopes for him. Featured in the Championship Team of the year last season. Double digit goals from 28 appearances is none too shabby. 

Conversely McNulty only scored 3 goals from 20+ appearances for DDee United last season. Would be a surprise  as we do seem to have options up front. Still seems quite random to be made up..in saying that and on the face of it - it would be a decent signing. 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by welldaft

[YassinMoutaouakil]

I don't rate McNulty at all fwiw

[Mr. Brightside]

I just want to say, I love you @capt_oats

[capt_oats]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Brightside said:

I just want to say, I love you @capt_oats

[ZX1886]

This of course means it’s actually happening #AnnounceMcNulty

[well fan for life]

Might as well put out that we're interested in this lad: https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/cameron-barksdale/profil/spieler/525654

[one m in Motherwell]

I totally forgot about yer man Shields.  What’s the script with him, is it an injury or COVID related?

[dezz]

I don't rate McNulty at all fwiw

Same - I’m not a fan. Presumably he’d be one of our top earners too, no thanks.

[capt_oats]

2 minutes ago, one m in Motherwell said:

I totally forgot about yer man Shields.  What’s the script with him, is it an injury or COVID related?

 

[capt_oats]

6 minutes ago, ZX1886 said:

 

This of course means it’s actually happening #AnnounceMcNulty

 

The boy who posted the original Tweet I took the screenshot from has locked his account. 

[one m in Motherwell]

‘Knee’

[Kapowzer]

Club has on the face of it changed its signing policy a bit it seems. Moult and Johnson were signed on 3 year deals under Les and I know McGinn was floated to him but he didn't bite. They were purchased with sell ons expected so the activity this summer is not new just not seen for quite a while, they both proved lucrative but conversely Randolph didn't.

The length of the deals does seem at odds with the drastic reduction in revenues from the lockdown at the end of 19/20 season, all the way through last and until the end of this one. I say this as season ticket revenue is essentially halved by offering a 2-FOR-1, no walk up revenue, concessions, hospitality or away fans. We don't know how long that will last this year too. Certainly few would envisage the South being full of 5,000 baying OF fans at any point.

Is there any restriction on the £3m from wee Nicola when it comes to transfer policy? If not I'm sure it could be used in other facets of club business and allow funds to go to potential transfers. The potential of purchasing players of quality opposed to free agents which is a bit of a lottery with the aim to improve the product on the pitch and capitalise on future returns is refreshing and maybe not been available if it wasn't for that loan.

[capt_oats]

16 minutes ago, Kapowzer said:

Club has on the face of it changed its signing policy a bit it seems. Moult and Johnson were signed on 3 year deals under Les and I know McGinn was floated to him but he didn't bite. They were purchased with sell ons expected so the activity this summer is not new just not seen for quite a while, they both proved lucrative but conversely Randolph didn't.

The length of the deals does seem at odds with the drastic reduction in revenues from the lockdown at the end of 19/20 season, all the way through last and until the end of this one. I say this as season ticket revenue is essentially halved by offering a 2-FOR-1, no walk up revenue, concessions, hospitality or away fans. We don't know how long that will last this year too. Certainly few would envisage the South being full of 5,000 baying OF fans at any point.

Is there any restriction on the £3m from wee Nicola when it comes to transfer policy? If not I'm sure it could be used in other facets of club business and allow funds to go to potential transfers. The potential of purchasing players of quality opposed to free agents which is a bit of a lottery with the aim to improve the product on the pitch and capitalise on future returns is refreshing and maybe not been available if it wasn't for that loan.

This was kind of touched on the other week when there was a discussion about the £3m and our accounts.

As far as I'm aware the credit facility of the SG loan is tied to losses incurred as a result of the pandemic. However we're in the position where we've turned a profit on the books to May '20 (largely down to the James Scott sale) and since then we've sold Turnbull for a club record fee, had our Business Interruption Insurance accepted (according to the note in the accounts to May 20 the total of the sale and insurance is expected to be £4m+).

That's without the SG loan factored in.

To put that in context, our turnover in a fairly boring, normal year eg: 18/19 is £4.5m.

So going by the noises made at the AGM our accounts this year should show we're in a "good" position but there will probably be a substantial operating loss. If my understanding of it is right then it means that the operating loss as a result of Covid will be covered by the SG loan rather than David Turnbull (he's just paying for the capital expenditure on the stadium and, I'd guess, everyone's free season tickets).

If that makes sense.

Edited July 25, 2021 by capt_oats

[rambunctious]

6 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

This was kind of touched on the other week when there was a discussion about the £3m and our accounts.

As far as I'm aware the credit facility of the SG loan is tied to losses incurred as a result of the pandemic. However we're in the position where we've turned a profit on the books to May '20 (largely down to the James Scott sale) and since then we've sold Turnbull for a club record fee, had our Business Interruption Insurance accepted (according to the note in the accounts to May 20 the total of the sale and insurance is expected to be £4m+).

That's without the SG loan factored in.

To put that in context, our turnover in a fairly boring, normal year eg: 18/19 is £4.5m.

So going by the noises made at the AGM our accounts this year should show we're in a "good" position but there will probably be a substantial operating loss. If my understanding of it is right then it means that the operating loss as a result of Covid will be covered by the SG loan rather than David Turnbull (he's just paying for the capital expenditure on the stadium and, I'd guess, everyone's free season tickets).

If that makes sense.