vikingTON

Changing our outgoings and cutting our cloth next season is essential, but it does absolutely nothing to address the obvious structural failures in commercial strategy, revenue generation and indeed the absence of any sort of strategic plan at GMFC. Most of which were incidentally inherited by MCT from the Raes' tenure. Cost-cutting is by itself insufficient to solve the crisis that the club faces - and our relatively high degree of dependence on SPFL prize money for league performances presents another looming shortfall from taking such necessary steps. The current ownership model is de facto fan running of the club through volunteers and well meaning but overstretched backroom staff. My view is that we ought to share the load between external business partners who are interested in running professional operations, to allow MCT to complement GMFC through its own capital investment and communication outreach. Any ongoing capital investment by MCT in the club itself should be treated on a like for like basis with external parties (which the mystery Estrella deal clause never clarified). The terms of any such partnership absolutely require scrutiny - but the status quo is not a credible alternative. This should be recognised and a coherent alternative path to divesting a stake in either the club or the propco or both established - not least given that Estrella made no claim on the propco and yet were howled down regardless.

Being brave on the ball was key to the win at Arbroath too - if they can do this, then there's a real counter-attacking threat in this team. If we ever get a fit no. 9 then that could provide a different option, but we'll need to lean into that second half showing at Livingston, Dunfermline and Raith. No reason why they can't do so if the spine of the team is intact - which was never anywhere near as weak as that loser Murray would have the media believe.

1) And yet your deeply held concern about your lack of knowledge surrounding consortium members, did not lead you to submit any questions to the other consortium member who attended the meeting 12 days ago. Such a curious oversight! 2) Your assumption that voting Yes to DD is a de facto vote or preference towards a final Yes vote is not substantiated by anything whatsoever, other than your own need to set up a straw man by which the gullible MCT rubes are behind the consortium while you are fighting nobly against their ignorance. There is no credible 'judgment' on which you base this claim. And as for consortium members standing in MCT elections, this wouldn't actually place them in decision-making roles at the club at all before June '27 (are you John McMaster, who similarly didn't understand how the two board structure works?). It was also a role that was never designed for serious external investors - those roles are for representatives within the fanbase/MCT who have skills to bring to the table (including representing the wider MCT voice). As opposed to placeholders who are still trying to extract themselves from the back side of American benefactors in order to finally resign. This 'why don't they run for the MCT board' is such an obvious red herring. The decision-making is made at the GMFC board, and that board has contrived to make the club insolvent through its incompetence. Anyone who wants to seriously invest in the club at this time has every right to demand direct representation on that board - whether the terms and external skills that they're offering is good enough is up for the MCT membership to decide.

An unexpected result (from a statistical view) like that is huge in undoing damage from the first quarter. While QP losing an injury time winner now completely cuts them adrift. The series of away league games coming up is unrelenting - but Stenny at home next Saturday is a great opportunity to further build momentum going into those. My consistent criticism of our wider players such as Garrity (like Moffat etc. too last season) was the lack of a reliable return in goals/assists. Whatever the coaching staff are doing (tactics, decision making, motivation) has revitalised that area of the park above all else. So full credit to the players and staff for that.

Nobody is voting Yes because there isn't a proposal to vote on yet. You are yet again conflating the decision to progress to DD with a final vote, to try and present MCT members as gullible morons inferior to yourself. Yet as shown above, it is you who is either ignorant or being dishonest in your shtick.

So you didn't bother to attend the meeting online or in person, where one of the other consortium members was literally in the fucking room and answering questions? And you didn't bother to listen/read to anything about the consortium, in which other consortium members (some not all) have been explicitly named? Including at the meeting 12 days ago? So let's be clear - you are only seeing the above consortium members because you want to only see them. It's a position of either deliberate ignorance or dishonesty - and I'm not sure which is preferable.

He's the king of total fucking cunts in the Championship, now that Brian Graham has dropped into the seaside leagues.

I didn't say that we have to take any offer - you've simply made that up. If an offer progresses through due diligence and is presented to a vote however, then it is not credible for critics of it to present 'muddle through to June' as an alternative strategy. The can has already been kicked down the road far too long and it has been a delegation of responsible ownership. GMFC needs a credible medium term strategy in place. If there is a realistic presentation of strategy to professionalise the club and business from an external partner - above all in this situation - then questions of ownership and security should be rationally considered as a trade off against that.

No, they clearly are not. The only way that GMFC actually moves forward as a professional football club is to have credible, external expertise and a set of clear, executable priorities. You claim that these issues are separate - well, what other external stakeholders will be interested in providing such essential expertise, if members chase away a consortium of pretty much all local businesses of size (not just the obvious pantomime villains) - having also chased away a multi club ownership proposal less than 3 months ago? On entirely contradictory grounds no less. Just how many buses do you assume are coming along to stop at this New Cumnock level, nick of a destination? What happens if this is the final one and you're humped? Panhandling to June (from whom?) and then doing a boardroom level version of Jim Duffy's fabled Wait and See transfer strategy is risible. It is, in my view at least, a delegation of MCT's role as custodians of this football club to indulge in such wishful thinking nonsense. If MCT members wish to reject the consortium - at whatever terms of proposal is put forward after DD - then there needs to be discussion of a credible medium term strategy to move forward instead. If we don't have that, then what are we actually doing as owners of the club here?

1) There is no alternative where we 'lose Cappielow'. That's just scaremongering pish. 2) It's possible that we could raise funds until season end - although quite why the GMFC board are getting away with not cleaning their decks, as a board with an obligation to operate as a going concern is a mystery - but that doesn't solve the underlying problems. It would be wrong to claim that GMFC under fan ownership is a consistently loss making operation. It is absolutely true however that GMFC is a rudderless ghost ship, with no ideas about how to raise revenue or drag the club into even the 2000s other than frankly guilt tripping. That problem - and many others surrounding the ownership setup - are not solved by some well-wishers throwing yet more money at a self-inflicted problem.

1) How many people do you think did so? Because let's be clear - that was NOT the original premise of MCT. That was set up quite some time before the opportunity of fan ownership of the club actually became a live issue - the original pledge was not to 'own your club'. I think there's a fair bit of revisionism on display by some in the fanbase, who are against the proposal for their own reasons but want to make fan ownership the central principle. 2) Where I absolutely agree is that this proposal or indeed any other partner with an external investor, needs a clear and equitable set of principles for recognising MCT's ongoing capital investment. So if a consortium wants greater than half and half control, it should actually be committing to a greater than half share of capital investment than MCT. This was also the issue that the mystery clause between EFG and MCT never resolved - because we didn't even get to see it. The consortium could do this in the short term by increasing the immediate financial contribution, clearing your point 1) in the process. 3) The risk of falling MCT contributions comes not only from an external partnership, but also from 'the football club being a shambles and MCT a total zoo'. So while it's correct to question the impact of an external partnership on MCT investment, the current rate cannot be taken for granted on a status quo basis either. Patience, I think it's fair to say, is wearing thin despite a welcome fillip on the park in recent weeks.

Or... it's just the weekend and the results will be posted on Monday either way? What opportunities are being missed in this bizarre, alternative reality where MCT waits to massage the results? This is just risible fucking nonsense.

The deadline was to vote - I don't recall any such deadline being set for announcing results. And you're still to explain how on earth your demand for a result has any relevance whatsoever to the future of the football club, which you're somehow trying to link together. This is a quite embarrassing effort tbh.

It really hasn't been 'many years' since we've had a waterlogged section and a game postponed. This isn't 2008. We're nowhere near Dumbarton a couple of years ago leves of fail, but the park has been vulnerable to waterlogging ar the extreme end of the climate for about a decade if not more.

What on earth has that got to do with announcing the outcome of an MCT vote on Saturday or Monday? Is the Nikkei likely to plunge on this uncertainty?