Developing MCT/GMFC Board Situation

[Ecb]

Can we can get an update on the substantive points below?

MCT members still haven’t been informed of this possible ownership grab from Dalrada, and the deadline for progressing the deal passed on Wednesday

[quote]

“More importantly, it appears the offer has not been shared with MCT’s membership - those whose commitment lies at the heart of the club’s ownership model.

 

"We are disappointed by the lack of communication and clarity around the process.

 

"Our desire has always been to work transparently and collaboratively for the benefit of Greenock Morton, but it is difficult to do so when reasonable engagement is not forthcoming."

 

Now the tech firm, headed by Greenock-born entrepreneur Brian Bonnar, has given MCT until this Wednesday to begin talks over the proposal to extend its backing of the club.

 

Dalrada’s spokesperson continued:

 

"Given the time-sensitive nature of the offer, Dalrada is now placing a firm deadline on the proposal. to an end on June 30. (Image: Paul Paterson)

"We are prepared to enter discussions, but only if meaningful dialogue on terms begins by the close of business on May 14. After that point, the offer will be withdrawn.

 

"We urge MCT leadership to act with the urgency and openness this opportunity deserves.

 

"Our commitment to the club remains strong, but our patience is not unlimited."[/quote]

 

[Alibi]

There's no harm in talking to Dalrada but I would assume that any offer would need to be put to the MCT membership at some point.  If this is an attempt at a backdoor takeover, they can go fuck themselves.

[Greacen2000]

We need 100% clarity on exactly what Dalrada are offering & what they expect in return.  If as has been speculated they are wanting shareholding in return for investment, we need it to be broken down by 

£a in return for b% shares

and

£x in return for shirt/stadium sponsorship

no way can we accept them bundling the 2 together when in reality they are 2 separate things.

Given the lack of clarity on their financials & their previous record of missing payments, any deal also needs to have clear clauses in it whereby any defaults have consequences in terms of reverting shareholding back to MCT if commitments aren’t met.

 

[TopCat]

2 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:

We need 100% clarity on exactly what Dalrada are offering & what they expect in return.  If as has been speculated they are wanting shareholding in return for investment, we need it to be broken down by 

£a in return for b% shares

and

£x in return for shirt/stadium sponsorship

no way can we accept them bundling the 2 together when in reality they are 2 separate things.

Given the lack of clarity on their financials & their previous record of missing payments, any deal also needs to have clear clauses in it whereby any defaults have consequences in terms of reverting shareholding back to MCT if commitments aren’t met.

 

I'll be surprised if the terms of the deal aren't: 

- a financial contibution similar to the existing deal in exchange for a majority shareholding 

- matched MCT contributions up to a cap over e.g. 2/3 years

[irnbru]

28 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:

We need 100% clarity on exactly what Dalrada are offering & what they expect in return.  If as has been speculated they are wanting shareholding in return for investment, we need it to be broken down by 

£a in return for b% shares

and

£x in return for shirt/stadium sponsorship

no way can we accept them bundling the 2 together when in reality they are 2 separate things.

Given the lack of clarity on their financials & their previous record of missing payments, any deal also needs to have clear clauses in it whereby any defaults have consequences in terms of reverting shareholding back to MCT if commitments aren’t met.

 

Aye, it's would essentially be free sponsorship. Would be interesting to know how long it would be to make the same money if someone else paid for stadium name, shirt sponsor, etc. 

[Greacen2000]

19 minutes ago, TopCat said:

I'll be surprised if the terms of the deal aren't: 

- a financial contibution similar to the existing deal in exchange for a majority shareholding 

- matched MCT contributions up to a cap over e.g. 2/3 years

So putting in a similar amount to the current deal, keeping stadium & shirt sponsorship AND getting majority of shares?  Doesn’t sound like a great deal to me.

[TopCat]

Just now, Greacen2000 said:

So putting in a similar amount to the current deal, keeping stadium & shirt sponsorship AND getting majority of shares?  Doesn’t sound like a great deal to me.

I agree, but we're in a really difficult position and they only need to offer enough to get the MCT vote over the line. I'm not against MCT selling up in exchange for serious investment in general terms, but Dalrada have a strong hand here and this situation makes me nervous.

[Greacen2000]

5 minutes ago, TopCat said:

I agree, but we're in a really difficult position and they only need to offer enough to get the MCT vote over the line. I'm not against MCT selling up in exchange for serious investment in general terms, but Dalrada have a strong hand here and this situation makes me nervous.

I would rather see us go part-time while seeking sponsorship elsewhere than be strong armed by some spiv attempting a hostile takeover by stealth 

[dunning1874]

Increasingly concerned about the detail of this if it's taking them this long to send out the information to members, when every day is another delay to Imrie's planning for next season.

[GiGi]

3 minutes ago, dunning1874 said:

Increasingly concerned about the detail of this if it's taking them this long to send out the information to members, when every day is another delay to Imrie's planning for next season.

If the proposal was already made 2 days ago then it shouldn't take several more days to pass it on to members. Any delay sounds like window dressing to sell the deal as a necessity we should all vote for. 

[Ecb]

Pretty incredible that the football board and the new mct board were able to leak plenty of unattributed tittle tattle to this message board and the tele - but not the details of the deal.

i get the feeling the deal is not going to be worth the grand build up when we finally get it.

[Greacen2000]

1 hour ago, GiGi said:

If the proposal was already made 2 days ago then it shouldn't take several more days to pass it on to members. Any delay sounds like window dressing to sell the deal as a necessity we should all vote for. 

This is precisely my fear.  The more they delay this being put to MCT membership, the easier it will be for them to present it as a fait accompli - I.e. “this offer is the only show in town, turn it down and we don’t have enough time to line up alternative sponsorship/funding and will need to go part time”.

If that’s what presented to us then not only do we need to reject it, everyone involved in getting us to this point needs emptied for being complicit in the situation.

Another elephant in the room here (assuming Dalrada do want shares in the club) is what happens to the stadium.  My understanding is that Cappielow is owned by a seperate company (GMFC property) which is in turn owned by MCT.  If this offer turns out to include demands on stadium ownership too, that’s a major red flag for me.  Having a say on the running of a club you invest in is one thing, but if it turns out that this also includes moves to control the property business then it will raise another set of questions around dalradas intentions

Edited May 16, 2025 by Greacen2000

[James]

With the resignations we have seen from the MCT Board (the Dalrada-sceptics if you like), how can we have any trust that the remaining MCT Board members will give an impartial recommendation to the membership on this proposal?

It is clearly going to be for some shareholding in the club, potentially a majority share. Or perhaps a minority share but with severely limited opportunities for important sponsorship revenue.

[James]

One other thought I have on this, among many, is that we as fans and MCT members are complicit in this.

Once the immediate proposal is dealt with, and should MCT retain a majority share of the club, we need to become far more engaged in who is actually on both Board and what their motivations are.

Im sure there are some who’ve been to many MCT meetings and thought long and hard about Board elections. But most of us honestly haven’t and have sleepwalked into charlatans in a position of power.

[Alibi]

It would be daft to let anyone take a majority stake in the club.  If that's what Dalrada want, they need to be told to get to fuck.  We are fan-owned and we need to keep it that way.  Naming rights to the stadium is fine as a fundraiser but the ownership of the club should not be up for discussion.  Otherwise John Laird will be chairman for life.

[Rossco]

2 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

Increasingly concerned about the detail of this if it's taking them this long to send out the information to members, when every day is another delay to Imrie's planning for next season.

It's now Friday & they have sat on this for 2 days without emailing it's members. How long does it take to draft an email & send out.

[Jamie_M]

Seriously can't think of any possible proposal that needs this level of preparation and that needs the MCT membership to approve that would be acceptable.

Out of interest, what's the voting levels required to approve things?

[gmfc_craig]

Obviously waiting til end of the working day before pressing that send button. 

"Listen, last one leaving today, remember and hit that button before you lock up" 

[Greacen2000]

2 hours ago, Jamie_M said:

Out of interest, what's the voting levels required to approve things?

Articles state -

“

4.4

Shares in Greenock Morton Football Club Ltd, owned or controlled by the Company, may be sold or disposed of at the discretion of the directors of the Company subject to the following restrictions:

a) the approval of a General Meeting is required if the sale would result in the total shareholding in GMFC falling below 75% of the total share capital of GMFC

b) the approval of a General Meeting is required if the sale would result in the total shareholding in GMFC falling below 50% of the total share capital of GMFC.

The proceeds of any sale of shares must be deposited into the funds of the Company.

c) In the event of MCT proposing the selling of shares of GMFC to another party, in line with the restrictions noted at 4.4, the extent of the total share equity to be held by posed purchaser must be disclosed in full to MCT membership before seeking approval from a General Meeting of any share sale.

”

Approval from a general meeting means a majority of votes cast by the attendees & proxies. The articles however don’t define what a quorum is for such meetings, so it’s possible it could get passed with a relatively low number of votes if the meeting isn’t well attended by MCT members.

[vikingTON]

4 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:

This is precisely my fear.  The more they delay this being put to MCT membership, the easier it will be for them to present it as a fait accompli - I.e. “this offer is the only show in town, turn it down and we don’t have enough time to line up alternative sponsorship/funding and will need to go part time”.

If that’s what presented to us then not only do we need to reject it, everyone involved in getting us to this point needs emptied for being complicit in the situation.

Another elephant in the room here (assuming Dalrada do want shares in the club) is what happens to the stadium.  My understanding is that Cappielow is owned by a seperate company (GMFC property) which is in turn owned by MCT.  If this offer turns out to include demands on stadium ownership too, that’s a major red flag for me.  Having a say on the running of a club you invest in is one thing, but if it turns out that this also includes moves to control the property business then it will raise another set of questions around dalradas intentions

Couldn't agree more and it's worth stressing that there is no actual fait accompli:

• The biggest outgoing at a football club is the first team wage bill - that's to a significant degree a variable cost. 

• The club has no long-term debt to account for. 

• There should therefore be sufficient room in terms of expired contracts to absorb any loss of revenue from a single sponsor. If not, then GMFC is further mismanaging its resources. 

I frankly couldn't care less at this point about the first team's strength going forward. It should be nowhere near top of the priority list. If this past fortnight is serving as the prelude to a form of bad faith takeover then that has to be rejected first and foremost. For those who may (understandably) disagree with that emphasis - take a look at Hamilton to see what happens when your 'ambitious' first team goals meet the reality of actually signing over your club to a bunch of bad faith chancers. 

I look forward to seeing the details of the proposal, but can't hide the reality that my prejudgement has swung to at least 40-60 against just about any deeper involvement with Dalrada after the past few weeks.