Have MCT lost control of GMFC? - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Have MCT lost control of GMFC?


Recommended Posts

I’m a shareholder in Greenock Morton Football Club one of the approx. 10% and I have deep reservations about how the club is being run by MCT or not as the case may be. You may disagree with my observations and that’s fine we are all entitled to our opinion.

1.       I believe the MCT members who are on the GMFC board no longer represent the MCT membership. It’s my understanding that both Farmer, Barr and Ritchie now have no affiliation with the MCT board other than they are members of MCT. They are free to vote how they like and don’t take direction from MCT. The only conduit to the GMFC board from the MCT board is Graham McLellan. A lone voice on a board of seven.

2.       This is compounded by the fact the both Farmer and Ritchie are the only directors of GMFC Property Ltd which leaves them free to make decision regarding the football ground which could be detrimental to the ethos of fan owned and with little or no consultation with the MCT board. This is not what fans voted for when MCT took control of the club. GMFC Property Ltd needs to be governed by the directors of MCT.

3.       There is no oversight of the football club by MCT. They have one representative on the board of GMFC but no agreement in place as to how this relationship should work. I believe that sort of agreement is common in other community owned clubs but for reasons unknown has been rejected by the board of GMFC. They really don’t want the fan owned organisation, that’s you, having any say in what happens at Cappielow.

4.       The other 10% of shareholders are of course kept in the dark. We receive no communication from the club unless we are members of MCT. I know of long-time die-hard Morton supporters, also shareholders, who simply refuse to join MCT because of the individuals involved at Cappielow. That is a sad indictment on those in positions of power at Cappielow with no way to resolve that situation.

5.       There is no mechanism that those people, who are also shareholders in GMFC, have of rectifying this situation. There is no way that those board members of GMFC can be held to account even if the 10% were members of MCT. The Articles of Association of the football club are so out of date they would not stand up to legal scrutiny. That needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency in order that ALL shareholders of GMFC can hold the club board to account.

6.       I’m well aware that matters on the park can mask or otherwise what’s going on off the park and vice versa. Our on the park performances in the main are good, we all want a successful team. But we also want a successful club off the park and there is a danger that MCT, the owner of GMFC, is side lined by people who have their own personal agendas and not that of the owners, that’s you and me not them.

The recent deal that was struck with Dalrada Technologies and the ongoing relationship is a great move by the MCT board. I emphasise the MCT Board as all publicity surrounding the deal gave the impression that the GMFC board were the main drivers of the deal which is not true. This deal was set up by the MCT board and deserve the credit which I don’t believe they received. But it’s just another example of how the MCT board are being side lined by individuals on the GMFC Board. When they side line the MCT board they are really sticking two fingers up at the club owners and in case you are in no doubt that's you that they would gladly ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with most of the substance of this but it is correct to say that the club's Articles of Association need a significant revision, and that the right of recall of GMFC directors via MCT membership needs to be somehow made explicit. 

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are all pertinent points which have previously been raised by myself and others - most recently prior to the MCT AGM.  Unfortunately (as you yourself have said), rectifying this situation will require the rules of the club to be changed, so it wasn’t possible to address them by making amendments to the MCT articles.

MCT members and also GMFC shareholders will get a chance to ask these questions as well as suggest amendments to the articles when the time of the GMFC AGM comes round.

From what I’ve seen, both Richie and Farmer have put a lot of time & effort into their roles at the club, while receiving little or nothing in return.  And it’s worth noting that them being sole directors of GMFC property doesn’t actually give them carte blanche to do whatever they want, as they are still governed by company law.  
 

There absolutely has to be accountability, transparency, and a clearly defined process for how GMFC directors are appointed, but I’m not convinced that the current situation exists by design - it’s more likely just a case of the current owners inheriting a club with extremely antiquated rules which are no longer fit for purpose (especially in the context of community ownership).

This is a very important topic and absolutely needs to be sorted, but I’m not sure if your clickbait topic title or the conspiratorial tone of your post are really conducive to reasoned discussion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, regarding the 10% non-MCT shareholders - how valued did these folk feel under the previous owners? Other than the accounts and an AGM notice what did you get? What do you expect to get? Calling it the 10% is in any case a massive misnomer: I'm an individual shareholder and I'm not part of a 10%. I'm one of dozens, even hundreds of people with a fraction of a percentage of a stake. I don't work in concert with the other minor stakeholders. Are the GMFC board supposed to phone me if they want to change the tannoy music just because I own pennies worth of the club? It's a ludicrous suggestion. No club can operate this way, kow-towing to a completely atomized set of minor stakeholders whole pretending they're a meaningful group. 

If the sour grapes contingent want to turn the 10% into something with a meaningful voice in the club - and something that merits communication - they should start a group for that purpose and try to increase their shareholding. Seriously, if you think the club is in peril from the current GMFC directors that is the course of action you should take. I don't share that thought, that we're in danger, so I wouldn't commit my tiny shareholding towards it, but it sounds like there are some people out there who would, and they have every right - and I'd say responsibility, if their concerns are genuine - to incorporate for that purpose. 

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2022 at 3:24 PM, The 10 Percent said:

I’m a shareholder in Greenock Morton Football Club one of the approx. 10% and I have deep reservations about how the club is being run by MCT or not as the case may be. You may disagree with my observations and that’s fine we are all entitled to our opinion.

 

 

1.       I believe the MCT members who are on the GMFC board no longer represent the MCT membership. It’s my understanding that both Farmer, Barr and Ritchie now have no affiliation with the MCT board other than they are members of MCT. They are free to vote how they like and don’t take direction from MCT. The only conduit to the GMFC board from the MCT board is Graham McLellan. A lone voice on a board of seven.

 

 

2.       This is compounded by the fact the both Farmer and Ritchie are the only directors of GMFC Property Ltd which leaves them free to make decision regarding the football ground which could be detrimental to the ethos of fan owned and with little or no consultation with the MCT board. This is not what fans voted for when MCT took control of the club. GMFC Property Ltd needs to be governed by the directors of MCT.

 

 

3.       There is no oversight of the football club by MCT. They have one representative on the board of GMFC but no agreement in place as to how this relationship should work. I believe that sort of agreement is common in other community owned clubs but for reasons unknown has been rejected by the board of GMFC. They really don’t want the fan owned organisation, that’s you, having any say in what happens at Cappielow.

 

 

4.       The other 10% of shareholders are of course kept in the dark. We receive no communication from the club unless we are members of MCT. I know of long-time die-hard Morton supporters, also shareholders, who simply refuse to join MCT because of the individuals involved at Cappielow. That is a sad indictment on those in positions of power at Cappielow with no way to resolve that situation.

 

 

5.       There is no mechanism that those people, who are also shareholders in GMFC, have of rectifying this situation. There is no way that those board members of GMFC can be held to account even if the 10% were members of MCT. The Articles of Association of the football club are so out of date they would not stand up to legal scrutiny. That needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency in order that ALL shareholders of GMFC can hold the club board to account.

 

 

6.       I’m well aware that matters on the park can mask or otherwise what’s going on off the park and vice versa. Our on the park performances in the main are good, we all want a successful team. But we also want a successful club off the park and there is a danger that MCT, the owner of GMFC, is side lined by people who have their own personal agendas and not that of the owners, that’s you and me not them.

 

 

The recent deal that was struck with Dalrada Technologies and the ongoing relationship is a great move by the MCT board. I emphasise the MCT Board as all publicity surrounding the deal gave the impression that the GMFC board were the main drivers of the deal which is not true. This deal was set up by the MCT board and deserve the credit which I don’t believe they received. But it’s just another example of how the MCT board are being side lined by individuals on the GMFC Board. When they side line the MCT board they are really sticking two fingers up at the club owners and in case you are in no doubt that's you that they would gladly ignore.

Thanks Stuart.

 

Next.

*insert signature here*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2022 at 3:24 PM, The 10 Percent said:

I’m a shareholder in Greenock Morton Football Club one of the approx. 10% and I have deep reservations about how the club is being run by MCT or not as the case may be. You may disagree with my observations and that’s fine we are all entitled to our opinion.

 

 

1.       I believe the MCT members who are on the GMFC board no longer represent the MCT membership. It’s my understanding that both Farmer, Barr and Ritchie now have no affiliation with the MCT board other than they are members of MCT. They are free to vote how they like and don’t take direction from MCT. The only conduit to the GMFC board from the MCT board is Graham McLellan. A lone voice on a board of seven.

 

 

2.       This is compounded by the fact the both Farmer and Ritchie are the only directors of GMFC Property Ltd which leaves them free to make decision regarding the football ground which could be detrimental to the ethos of fan owned and with little or no consultation with the MCT board. This is not what fans voted for when MCT took control of the club. GMFC Property Ltd needs to be governed by the directors of MCT.

 

 

3.       There is no oversight of the football club by MCT. They have one representative on the board of GMFC but no agreement in place as to how this relationship should work. I believe that sort of agreement is common in other community owned clubs but for reasons unknown has been rejected by the board of GMFC. They really don’t want the fan owned organisation, that’s you, having any say in what happens at Cappielow.

 

 

4.       The other 10% of shareholders are of course kept in the dark. We receive no communication from the club unless we are members of MCT. I know of long-time die-hard Morton supporters, also shareholders, who simply refuse to join MCT because of the individuals involved at Cappielow. That is a sad indictment on those in positions of power at Cappielow with no way to resolve that situation.

 

 

5.       There is no mechanism that those people, who are also shareholders in GMFC, have of rectifying this situation. There is no way that those board members of GMFC can be held to account even if the 10% were members of MCT. The Articles of Association of the football club are so out of date they would not stand up to legal scrutiny. That needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency in order that ALL shareholders of GMFC can hold the club board to account.

 

 

6.       I’m well aware that matters on the park can mask or otherwise what’s going on off the park and vice versa. Our on the park performances in the main are good, we all want a successful team. But we also want a successful club off the park and there is a danger that MCT, the owner of GMFC, is side lined by people who have their own personal agendas and not that of the owners, that’s you and me not them.

 

 

The recent deal that was struck with Dalrada Technologies and the ongoing relationship is a great move by the MCT board. I emphasise the MCT Board as all publicity surrounding the deal gave the impression that the GMFC board were the main drivers of the deal which is not true. This deal was set up by the MCT board and deserve the credit which I don’t believe they received. But it’s just another example of how the MCT board are being side lined by individuals on the GMFC Board. When they side line the MCT board they are really sticking two fingers up at the club owners and in case you are in no doubt that's you that they would gladly ignore.

Hey Strathblane crescent ie Mr Duncan, hiya pal.

As predictable as day and night

TIME FOR CHANGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complete nonsense from start to finish. Ignores the reality that every single point about democratic accountability was addressed at the MCT AGM, and has either already been resolved with the updating of MCT's articles which passed at the AGM, or will be resolved with the impending update of GMFC's articles which they have promised will take place at the next GMFC AGM. Those changes make board members of GMFC & MCT directly accountable to MCT members. I would entirely agree the lack of democratic accountability was unacceptable if this hadn't been addressed, but it has been.

At the time the Dalrada deal was agreed Gordon Ritchie and Stewart Farmer were both still on the MCT board, so even your "it was all the MCT board not the GMFC board!" protests don't work as a criticism of those individuals.

It's also entirely correct that the club's owners, who hold a stake of over 75% of the club, have more power than small shareholders with shareholdings of fractions of a percent.

MCT should always be open to constructive criticism and fans giving feedback with concerns or suggestions for improvement, but this looks distinctly like a personal vendetta against individuals rather than genuine concerns about the running of the club.

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Oh Lord, Brian Wake

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

Complete nonsense from start to finish. Ignores the reality that every single point about democratic accountability was addressed at the MCT AGM, and has either already been resolved with the updating of MCT's articles which passed at the AGM, or will be resolved with the impending update of GMFC's articles which they have promised will take place at the next GMFC AGM. Those changes make board members of GMFC & MCT directly accountable to MCT members. I would entirely agree the lack of democratic accountability was unacceptable if this hadn't been addressed, but it has been.

At the time the Dalrada deal was agreed Gordon Ritchie and Stewart Farmer were both still on the MCT board, so even your "it was all the MCT board not the GMFC board!" protests don't work as a criticism of those individuals.

It's also entirely correct that the club's owners, who hold a stake of over 75% of the club, have more power than small shareholders with shareholdings of fractions of a percent.

MCT should always be open to constructive criticism and fans giving feedback with concerns or suggestions for improvement, but this looks distinctly like a personal vendetta against individuals rather than genuine concerns about the running of the club.

I agree.  Do you think its because Gordon Ritchie is actually a Hamilton Accies supporter?

20221008_223441.jpg

 

*insert signature here*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2022 at 3:24 PM, The 10 Percent said:

I’m a shareholder in Greenock Morton Football Club one of the approx. 10% and I have deep reservations about how the club is being run by MCT or not as the case may be. You may disagree with my observations and that’s fine we are all entitled to our opinion.

 

 

1.       I believe the MCT members who are on the GMFC board no longer represent the MCT membership. It’s my understanding that both Farmer, Barr and Ritchie now have no affiliation with the MCT board other than they are members of MCT. They are free to vote how they like and don’t take direction from MCT. The only conduit to the GMFC board from the MCT board is Graham McLellan. A lone voice on a board of seven.

 

 

2.       This is compounded by the fact the both Farmer and Ritchie are the only directors of GMFC Property Ltd which leaves them free to make decision regarding the football ground which could be detrimental to the ethos of fan owned and with little or no consultation with the MCT board. This is not what fans voted for when MCT took control of the club. GMFC Property Ltd needs to be governed by the directors of MCT.

 

 

3.       There is no oversight of the football club by MCT. They have one representative on the board of GMFC but no agreement in place as to how this relationship should work. I believe that sort of agreement is common in other community owned clubs but for reasons unknown has been rejected by the board of GMFC. They really don’t want the fan owned organisation, that’s you, having any say in what happens at Cappielow.

 

 

4.       The other 10% of shareholders are of course kept in the dark. We receive no communication from the club unless we are members of MCT. I know of long-time die-hard Morton supporters, also shareholders, who simply refuse to join MCT because of the individuals involved at Cappielow. That is a sad indictment on those in positions of power at Cappielow with no way to resolve that situation.

 

 

5.       There is no mechanism that those people, who are also shareholders in GMFC, have of rectifying this situation. There is no way that those board members of GMFC can be held to account even if the 10% were members of MCT. The Articles of Association of the football club are so out of date they would not stand up to legal scrutiny. That needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency in order that ALL shareholders of GMFC can hold the club board to account.

 

 

6.       I’m well aware that matters on the park can mask or otherwise what’s going on off the park and vice versa. Our on the park performances in the main are good, we all want a successful team. But we also want a successful club off the park and there is a danger that MCT, the owner of GMFC, is side lined by people who have their own personal agendas and not that of the owners, that’s you and me not them.

 

 

The recent deal that was struck with Dalrada Technologies and the ongoing relationship is a great move by the MCT board. I emphasise the MCT Board as all publicity surrounding the deal gave the impression that the GMFC board were the main drivers of the deal which is not true. This deal was set up by the MCT board and deserve the credit which I don’t believe they received. But it’s just another example of how the MCT board are being side lined by individuals on the GMFC Board. When they side line the MCT board they are really sticking two fingers up at the club owners and in case you are in no doubt that's you that they would gladly ignore.

Have you ever Etta Crouton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of control of GMFC, a non-MCT director - Alex Gray - has stepped down:

https://www.gmfc.net/alex-gray-steps-down/

That leaves the following six directors:

Graham Barr
Stewart Farmer
Ross Gourdie
Michael Harkins
Graham McLennan
Gordon Ritchie

As mentioned in the original post, only one of these - Graham McLennan - is on the MCT board, and there is no right of recall from GMFC through MCT right now. I expect this to be repaired at the Morton AGM, for MCT to have more oversight over the composition of (but not the day-to-day workings of) the GMFC board.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know any of the Morton directors, but how did they get to be directors in the first place? Are they all MCT members (as opposed to MCT board members)? Is it intended at any stage to have an election process for the Morton board?

"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

On 10/21/2022 at 5:03 PM, TRVMP said:

On the subject of control of GMFC, a non-MCT director - Alex Gray - has stepped down:

https://www.gmfc.net/alex-gray-steps-down/

That leaves the following six directors:

Graham Barr
Stewart Farmer
Ross Gourdie
Michael Harkins
Graham McLennan
Gordon Ritchie

As mentioned in the original post, only one of these - Graham McLennan - is on the MCT board, and there is no right of recall from GMFC through MCT right now. I expect this to be repaired at the Morton AGM, for MCT to have more oversight over the composition of (but not the day-to-day workings of) the GMFC board.

 

*insert signature here*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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



×
×
  • Create New...