Commercial Activity - Page 31 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Commercial Activity


Jamie_M
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think there is probably a need for MCT as an entity to have a board of directors, and for Morton as a company to have a board of directors.  MCT don't own 100% of Morton (I know that as I myself own a small number of shares in GMFC, shares which I have not novated to MCT (I think that is the correct term).  Seems to me that MCT, as a major shareholder, should have board representation on the boar of GMFC, although maybe not making up 100% of the board.  the remaining bord members of gMFC should need to justify their presence - it's not sufficient to say that they were there last year and are there in perpetuity. I would think that MCT should have board membership roughly proportional to their share ownership percentage.

I don't think that the board of MCT necessarily also have to be on the board of GMFC - in fact there might be some merit in having separation of responsibilities to allow better scrutiny.  At the moment, I have no idea who is giving the orders or dictating policy.

Edited by Alibi
  • Upvote 1

"Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Alibi said:

I think there is probably a need for MCT as an entity to have a board of directors, and for Morton as a company to have a board of directors.  MCT don't own 100% of Morton (I know that as I myself own a small number of shares in GMFC, shares which I have not novated to MCT (I think that is the correct term).  Seems to me that MCT, as a major shareholder, should have board representation on the boar of GMFC, although maybe not making up 100% of the board.  the remaining bord members of gMFC should need to justify their presence - it's not sufficient to say that they were there last year and are there in perpetuity. I would think that MCT should have board membership roughly proportional to their share ownership percentage.

I don't think that the board of MCT necessarily also have to be on the board of GMFC - in fact there might be some merit in having separation of responsibilities to allow better scrutiny.  At the moment, I have no idea who is giving the orders or dictating policy.

In practice the exact opposite is what's happening. This is why it's less important, in my view, to worry about the composition and the interaction of the various boards, and instead it's more important to focus on the people and the priority. "I am person X and my priority is making sure Morton is accountable and transparent to its owners." Such a person would win any election in a landslide. Instead the people on both boards are being co-opted and voted on the basis of their expertise - an expertise which, to be polite about it, isn't particularly evident at this point.

What it looks like right now is that you can show up with a middling corporate career or a dusty legal diploma written with a quill pen, and then you're the Lord's anointed. You can do whatever you want, you can say whatever you want, and above all you're not judged on your track record at Morton because that track record is completely indistinguishable from the next guy's. It's a sinecure, pure and simple.

As others have said, there's no way the board can't separate the truly confidential and the truly sensitive from day-to-day matters and from key decisions. They just don't want to. Similarly there will be a few matters in which cabinet responsibility comes into play. Right now it's literally all of them. As such there is no recourse for the average member who is dissatisfied with the current incumbents except to vote against every incumbent at every opportunity. This will have the side effect of getting rid of people who are committed to transparency and accountability but find themselves outnumbered... but this will be their own fault for not representing those views publicly and thus courting the electorate.

tl;dr version: every time an MCT board member is up for election against a newcomer, vote for the newcomer. Every time we have an opportunity to remove an incumbent from the GMFC board, do so, regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of the newcoming candidate. That is, due to the choices MCT and GMFC have made, the only way to even have a chance at improving transparency and accountability.

Edited by TRVMP
  • Upvote 2

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, TRVMP said:

The opacity is the point. They are the board and we are scum who aren't worth the time to write it out. Not that we could be trusted with the information anyway, given that they're all apparently experts in some field or another.

They've had their chance. Every incumbent of the GMFC board needs to be removed.

I think you need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. I have no idea who is actually on the GMFC board, nor why they are there. Apart from Nick Robinson who has I think some relevant financial experience. We need to start from scratch & elect a board that can achieve better than what we have had - that board has to be supported by people who can implement the decisions and make things work. Ideally the board say “we want to achieve this” and the folk employed by the club do what is needed. Football decisions should be the responsibility of the manager.

I think we maybe need the Augean stables valeted - but allowing for any current incumbents who can show they have done a decent job. And yes, it needs to be open and transparent.

  • Upvote 1

"Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alibi said:

I think you need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. I have no idea who is actually on the GMFC board, nor why they are there. Apart from Nick Robinson who has I think some relevant financial experience. We need to start from scratch & elect a board that can achieve better than what we have had - that board has to be supported by people who can implement the decisions and make things work. Ideally the board say “we want to achieve this” and the folk employed by the club do what is needed. Football decisions should be the responsibility of the manager.

I think we maybe need the Augean stables valeted - but allowing for any current incumbents who can show they have done a decent job. And yes, it needs to be open and transparent.

In any given election only a small number of these candidates will be up, given the staggered terms of office. 

The second paragraph is exactly my point. Until and unless a candidate can transparently demonstrate why they shouldn't have cabinet responsibility, it should be a given that they're all contributing identically. That's what happens when the board of the club - and MCT, for that matter, with its chocolate fireguard of a cordon sanitaire - refuses to substantively demonstrate who does what. Which, come to think of it, rather negates the need for inidivudal expertise in the first place. Who's the social media wizard arguing over the need for a Christmas merchandise push? I'd love to meet that "MCT Team" fella one day. Absent that, I'm just going to assume all of them signed off on it. 

The flip side of course means that people happy with the current board should vote for them all.

  • Upvote 1

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to MCT's ownership of our club,  I've went through the following five stages of grief:

1. Very optimistic

2. Cautiously optimistic

3. Slightly concerned 

4. Very concerned

5. Total and utter despair to the extent that I fear for our very existence under their tenure

They're taking us only in one direction, and it's the wrong one. There's no doubting their intent, but there's now overwhelming evidence that they're simply not up to the job. There's no shame in that, as long as they can recognise it and pass the baton on to those who have the financial wherewithal and business acumen to turn this shiteshow around. 

Edited by Cet Homme Charmant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:

When it comes to MCT's ownership of our club,  I've went through the following five stages of grief:

1. Very optimistic

2. Cautiously optimistic

3. Slightly concerned 

4. Very concerned

5. Total and utter despair to the extent that I fear for our very existence under their tenure

They're taking us only in one direction, and it's the wrong one. There's no doubting their intent, but there's now overwhelming evidence that they're simply not up to the job. There's no shame in that, as long as they can recognise it and pass the baton on to those who have the financial wherewithal and business acumen to turn this shiteshow around. 

I started at 4 and and reached 5 a few months ago.

"CORNBEEF IS A BELLEND"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:

When it comes to MCT's ownership of our club,  I've went through the following five stages of grief:

1. Very optimistic

2. Cautiously optimistic

3. Slightly concerned 

4. Very concerned

5. Total and utter despair to the extent that I fear for our very existence under their tenure

They're taking us only in one direction, and it's the wrong one. There's no doubting their intent, but there's now overwhelming evidence that they're simply not up to the job. There's no shame in that, as long as they can recognise it and pass the baton on to those who have the financial wherewithal and business acumen to turn this shiteshow around. 

How would this happen exactly? The club has no debt and no serious access to credit. The club has retained a significant book asset in the form of the ground, that could actually be developed if it was necessary to do so (which it should not). The club's largest outgoing by some distance is its first team wage bill, which can be adjusted on an annual basis according to need. The workers don't go on strike about this - they just leave the club and get replaced with others. So what would be the cause of this existential crisis, and why would the current setup not be equipped to deal with it? 

There's a big difference between 'a threat to the club's standing as an even vaguely credible, SPFL team' under the current stewardship (which it absolutely is) and being an existential threat to the club itself. We should not conflate the two and overlook the significant progress that has been made over the last 12 months to turn a second administration event or liquidation proceedings into a very unlikely outcome. 

As for 'financial wherewithal and business acumen' - did the Rae era not do enough to shake your belief in that old saw? You do not actually need demonstrable 'business acumen' to work out that having some merchandise available to sell in the run-up to Christmas might be a good idea. 

Edited by vikingTON

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

8 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

How would this happen exactly? The club has no debt and no serious access to credit. The club has retained a significant book asset in the form of the ground, that could actually be developed if it was necessary to do so (which it should not). The club's largest outgoing by some distance is its first team wage bill, which can be adjusted on an annual basis according to need. The workers don't go on strike about this - they just leave the club and get replaced with others. So what would be the cause of this existential crisis, and why would the current setup not be equipped to deal with it? 

There's a big difference between 'a threat to the club's standing as an even vaguely credible, SPFL team' under the current stewardship (which it absolutely is) and being an existential threat to the club itself. We should not conflate the two and overlook the significant progress that has been made over the last 12 months to turn a second administration event or liquidation proceedings into a very unlikely outcome. 

As for 'financial wherewithal and business acumen' - did the Rae era not do enough to shake your belief in that old saw? You do not actually need demonstrable 'business acumen' to work out that having some merchandise available to sell in the run-up to Christmas might be a good idea. 

You're right, and I probably didn't word it well, but by threat of existence I meant more that we gradually slip down the leagues and become a complete irrelevance to the town and Scottish football in general (even more so that we are now). So under MCT we may well indeed continue to exist in some form or other, but I genuinely believe it will be in lower league perma-diddydome. 

You site the Raes as an example of a local successful business running the club and failing. Just because it didn't work out with Dougie at the helm (and I don't think his tenure was a total disaster) it doesn't mean that would always be the case. It's generally accepted that Dougie's biggest weakness was that far too often he let his heart rule his head - even Crawford stated as much. If new owners came in with a significant cash injection and a much more hard-headed business approach, there's every chance the current direction of travel we're in could be reversed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) How would the club get any more irrelevant to the town than it is currently? The club's commercial presence is non-existent while buses traipse up to the bigot domes every week. Stinking out the second tier as we have been doing for years does not convince anyone of our relevance. It simply adds 'shite, negative, losing, football' to the list of reasons why folk aren't going to go to Cappielow. 

So long as the club survives, it can recover from any position quite quickly under competent leadership. In the meantime, even if the club is in the lower leagues, there is a lot that it can still do to grow its supporter base. Reducing gate prices and making a more concerted effort at getting kids to the game and enjoying their day - instead of having a dozen loser stewards surrounding them at all times - would be a start. 

  • Upvote 1

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

I still think the Easedales will take over at some point. To be honest at this stage I don't think it would be a bad thing.  

I do feel for MCT. They have the right intentions but at the moment are not up to the task. I think given time everything will settle down but I don't like the idea of my club being their guinea pig while the new owners carry on firefighting through the early days. I genuinely do not see a light at the end of the tunnel at the moment and I am concerned about the club on and off the park. We need to start getting the basics right and can only do that by establishing and developing an infrastructure and processes that promotes organisation, clarity and a clear vision. Accountability is key to. At the moment the club is verging on a faceless entity which is not how it should be.

  • Upvote 1

There's a storm on the horizon

And for that I can't see the sun

For I'll keep a waiting on the pavement

For the ice cream van to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) The Raes ran up £2 million of debt (and the rest back when they were using share issues instead of the IOU principle), to take the club no higher than it had been five years before administration. No top flight football and no capital development of the club (fixing the stadium in safety standards is not the same as adding revenue-generating facilities) is an appalling return on that investment. It was squandered by giving haddy managers like Jim McInally unlimited funds and unlimited patience for his gross incompetence. So let's not start the revisionism about the good old Raes already.

Your mitigating circumstances for Rae undermine your original point. If Rae was at fault for judging a football club with his heart rather than his head, then what's to stop your next dreamboat businessman from making the exact same error? That's what football clubs do: they are not companies in any meaningful sense of the word. Tesco's chief executive does not get praise from the stands for parading trophies around, or vicious pelters from thousands at a time for failure. 

NB: I also don't even buy the 'if only Dougie was more hard-headed' excuse. What hard-headed decisions would have been made? Douglas Rae showed no insight about how to make GMFC equipped for the modern game: he was a man of his time, and his methods were unsurprisingly outdated. The only thing that a hard-headed Douglas Rae would have done differently IMO is bail out of the club entirely after a few years and sell it on. 

Edited by vikingTON

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

6 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

If Rae was at fault for judging a football club with his heart rather than his head, then what's to stop your next dreamboat businessman from making the exact same error?

Absolutely nothing.

But neither should it be an automatic assumption they would make the same mistakes as Dougie did.

There's no guarantees in life, but I think our chances of thriving and progressing with MCT at the helm is zero, and with the other option I'm suggesting there's at least a fighting chance. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...