TRVMP

As far as I'm concerned the bridge has been completely and totally burned. They could offer 10 million and I'd still vote no.

By the way, I voted for McLennan based on his three-point plan of Communication, Working Structure, and Togetherness. There's a mug born every minute.

This is the crux of the matter for me. A combination of our own failings during due diligence (including what they're now going to sue us for, hilariously, if we don't roll over and beg for them) plus general impatience meant that some of the shine had come off Estrella prior to that weekend. But it was the weekend and especially the unhinged rant at the start of the AGM that had, as you say, almost the entire present membership wanted to hit the pause button based on that. It's not to say Estrella were the only ones who aroused suspicion that night. There are plenty of problems here at home as well. But how many left the meeting thinking "oh gosh, if only it had gone to a full vote." But the email is so disingenuous: Yeah, why didn't it go to a full member vote? Because we didn't want it to! Because it was clear to all present that we were in no shape to vote for it regardless because of the blaring sirens going off all around us, based on your conduct, Van der Valk, as well as ours! As for "allowing the suggestion" that Estrella would secure majority control, yes, that was a daft concern, but you know what? It's a member's organization and some members are going to be misinformed and ask silly questions. We "allow" that and we discuss it because that's the nature of a democratic organization. I'm sure it would have been more advantageous for Estrella if the entire meeting was just the 30 minute rant - which, by the way, if anything was to be "disallowed", it should have been that - followed by rubber-stamping, but that's not how it works, and the fact that they think it is means there can never be a working relationship between Estrella and MCT, which is why I'm voting "no" regardless of what the new Investment Agreement says about the matter. At this point administration and relegation are far preferable to selling the family silver to these guys for the sake of another couple of seasons of mid-table Championship football. A clean slate and a sustainable future. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there's a huge groundswell of the members who didn't bother their arse attending who wanted to keep it going on the night and vote in Estrella, in which case it shouldn't be too hard for the several hundred of them to answer the 'rallying cry' and fulfill McLennan's manifest destiny.

I'll be voting no regardless of the substance of the proposal. They're flying around Europe getting nowhere with any club of size except Pro Patria and from the way they've conducted themselves so far I don't think this is a coincidence. We're well rid.

Time for Murray to put himself in the shop window.

Depends on the contract and its jurisdiction. Either way you can't get blood from a stone and if the sponsor is indeed Dalrada Technology Ltd. in the UK they're skint.

The guy's just a loser. Afraid of his own shadow.

If any mug punter off here buys the square footage I'm going to find that exact spot and do a widdle on it next time I'm over. Fair warning.

https://gmfc.net/board-update-04-09-26/ It's a good statement overall, and it is transparent up to a point. But this makes absolutely no sense: "Greenock Morton has consistently sought to operate within its means, maintain a debt-free model and align football ambition with income available. The challenge we face today is not the result of underlying financial weakness, but rather the loss of a significant income stream that had formed part of the club’s expected budget. While that presents a serious challenge, the underlying business remains stable if we can navigate this cashflow issue." The two sentences in bold are mutually exclusive. We are (correctly) now adjusting for life under the assumption we'll never see any of the 325k Dalrada had pledged to us. OK. But then it's no longer a cashflow issue and it is a structural one: a major sponsor has pulled out, and as such a huge amount of our income has gone. Without that income we are, apparently, clear through to the new year as a going concern. That is a structural issue! If one of the main pillars of your structure is not viable - in this case, because a sponsor is refusing to pay us - that is the structure! You can say it's not really our fault or whatever you like but a 325k hole in the foundation is still a hole regardless of how it got there! If we have written off the 325k - and we have, we're seeking to replace it - that is no longer a cashflow issue but a structural one. Again, this is the correct thing to do, and I salute the club for doing it. But they still seem reluctant to spell out what the actual stakes are.

Typically it's not investment per se. It's interest-free loans, most of which get written off. I get what you mean, they're not shareholding with a view to "be a shareholder" in the sense of holding a growth stock or a dividend stock. But while many will have grand designs of making their team successful and thus growing the market cap of the company that way, in practice it seldom actually happens. They just loan money, they eventually write it off, and they'll eventually sell to the next guy who wants a crack at turning Queen's Park or Dunfermline into a European powerhouse.

I mean yeah, Fever is a huge platform and is truly industry-leading. But at our level it seems like overkill.

Nice to have a feeder club. edit: In seriousness, it's great that we've been able to do this by cultivating a relationship with agent(s) and proving to an MLS club that we're a good place to blood young talent like Schwake. Operating at our level and with our financial issues means we need to be creative because we can't compete on a direct footing with other clubs of our level. Of course this approach brings its own challenges; they operate on a different season timeline to us, there's a ton of immigration and work permit stuff to do (presumably), and we won't be able to scout them easily in person. But it speaks well to the club that they've been able to pull this off.

It's not that. It's that neither they nor anyone else is going to be so desperate that they "need" to acquire a stake in Morton.

I was never convinced this consortium actually existed. You'd think one of them might have stuck his head up during the fighting fund to get some good PR. Estrella can still get lost.

The goal's up on facebook. Excellent move and though the angle's bad I think both questionable passes were onside. The second one, I think the big galoot 32 just about plays us on.