Fan Ownership - Morton Club Together - Page 22 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Fan Ownership - Morton Club Together


TheGoon

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 526
  • Created
  • Last Reply

For those at the Q&A will recall he said that he could NOT speak on behalf of the other GC board members, however if there was "significant investment" he would advise the GC board to write off the debt..

It would’ve been nice to have read the minutes from the Q&A session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, as long as GC hold more than 50% of the shares, they'll decide exactly what goes on in the club, nobody else.

No, 25% has enough significance to hold them to account and have an impact.

 

It might not make them the decision maker but if there are bug issues and they are clear on where they stand/ where the majority shareholder stands then if nothing else it gives the fans something concrete to complain about along with the transparency people are asking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, 25% has enough significance to hold them to account and have an impact.

 

It might not make them the decision maker but if there are bug issues and they are clear on where they stand/ where the majority shareholder stands then if nothing else it gives the fans something concrete to complain about along with the transparency people are asking for.

 

No, 25% would account for all other shareholders, not MCT itself as the scheme stands currently. The idea of another minority shareholder like GMST doing anything to hold the custodians of the club to account is given lie by the fact that the entire debt was run up on their watch while they did and said nothing, just like their response to every commercial, administrative and PR fuck-up that's occurred at Cappielow over the last two decades.

 

If GMST has any assets left then perhaps it should dissolve them and pledge them to an organisation that might have some credibility with the fanbase. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What contributions? It's a quest for break-even and hotshots like Dylan Dykes playing from next season, that has already been made quite clear. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway I see that the guy will be on Off the Ball tomorrow to talk about the scheme as well. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone - hopefully this works as I've never been on this or any other Forum in my puff!

 

...

 

Graham

 

Thank you Graham for that detailed post. (I've cut it out for space reasons but I did read it all.) I'm especially heartened by the fact that you're bringing together qualified individuals to make sure the sums add up and everything makes financial sense. My main fear was that this was a well-meaning amateur operation that would ultimately just be giving GC money for old rope, but I'm now reassured that this isn't the case. As such, I've decided to pledge a small monthly amount and may revise it upwards in future if this really takes off. Thanks again.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck me sideways. Are you writing off the debt or not GC? If they aren't and wont sustain our losses then we are in pretty dire straights and 15% of the shares for 400k isn't making that go away.

 

I regard that as GC's problem and not MCT's. Not saying you're wrong to be asking here, since it is a core part of MCT's pledge, but GC's mixed messages on this have been their fault and their fault alone.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck me sideways. Are you writing off the debt or not GC? If they aren't and wont sustain our losses then we are in pretty dire straights and 15% of the shares for 400k isn't making that go away.

I don't really get your point here. Are you saying they should sustain losses?

 

As for whatever they do with shares if this takes off, that's going to need negotiatated and discussed. If they came out and said something that didn't go ahead it would potentially have an impact in their own shares.

 

MCT have their aims and broad support from the other stakeholders but until they have firm agreements in place GC won't be making any statements and I don't think anyone should expect them to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, GC should be covering the losses that they're responsible for creating. Weird how they get to have it both ways, though. When the Raes were spunking 'their' money on all manner of waste, we owed the club's entire existence to them. Now that they don't want to, it's time to be hard-nosed and say it's preposterous for them to invest in a loss-making business. Must be nice to be able to play both sides like that! Perhaps with fresh blood in the boardroom such calumny wouldn't go unchallenged.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, GC should be covering the losses that they're responsible for creating. Weird how they get to have it both ways, though. When the Raes were spunking 'their' money on all manner of waste, we owed the club's entire existence to them. Now that they don't want to, it's time to be hard-nosed and say it's preposterous for them to invest in a loss-making business. Must be nice to be able to play both sides like that! Perhaps with fresh blood in the boardroom such calumny wouldn't go unchallenged.

It wasn't GC though, it was Dougie Rae. Unfortunately for us, it's not a one man show now and there's other shareholders who's priority is their business and its staff.

 

It's covering old ground but my feeling is the 3 year plan was continuing leaning on GC for that period while trying to increase revenue elsewhere, get promoted and cut it off then. It's not the nicest thing to say but Dougie died too early for them to do that, i.e. while Crawford still could without outside influence.

 

There's obviously a strong argument that a gamble shouldn't have been made and they should have managed that risk but they didn't and the relationship with GC is totally different now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...