Incredible legal insight as always! Certainly without your pointing this out - after your argument got hilariously fucking demolished, with both sides' lawyers thinking it a non-starter for serious negotiation - none of us could have figured this out ages ago. Go back a few pages, you'll see several people asking the same question.
(Any onlookers wishing to conduct the same experiment may wish to count the number of times cmdc mentioned the tax, rather than rent implications of such an arrangement. This offer is especially open to readers with no fingers, and/or people practiced in the shifting of goalposts.)
There was never, ever a compelling reason for GC to be the entity that held the deeds to Cappielow, except the Raes wanting "their" money back. Your ham-fisted attempts to conflate advantageous tax arrangements with "the Raes get to keep everything forever otherwise Morton are in big trouble guys!" were transparently shan then and are even worse two months on.
The time to endorse a "propco" was months ago. Your plain preference for Morton's risk - ha ha ha - was Option A, losing the stadium to GC with a peppercorn rent. Now neither GC nor MCT want anything to do with it? What's changed?
And on the final point, I remind you of my earlier reversal:
As they say: Act in haste, repent at leisure. Not the first time I've had to learn such a lesson, but then again I'm a huge advocate of lifelong learning.