irnbru
-
Posts
7028 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Posts posted by irnbru
-
-
11 hours ago, HamCam said:
Irnbru your bitterness towards MCT knows no bounds. You had your day - move on. Just to add I am not a member of MCT.
I responded to the shareholder AGM e-mail, was sent a link and had no problem joining the meeting. My two boys also got send the e-mail but were not able to participate. The issue with some stakeholders missing out however requires to be urgently addressed. Gordon Ritchie appears to be the point of contact and I would hound him to get it resolved.
As for the AGM, I am sure when one of the volunteers has a moment they will provide a proper summary. In the meantime my take on it as follows:
- The loss in 2021/22 was concerning/alarming but has to a great extent been addressed after MCT took over. The feeling was historically costs were not as closely monitored when people assumed there was always a sugar daddy down the line to bail the club out.
- This years accounts, when they are published (after the year-end in May) will show a healthy profit largely due to the cup game with Celtic bringing in over £200k. Even without this 'windfall' the Board are confident the club would break even.
- Recent sponsorship deals are crucial to the financial balancing act. If I picked it up correctly, the main sponsor Dalrada provided a 12 month package with the option for a further 5 years. Dalrada require the club to share in their ambition for GMFC to succeed and the Board are optimistic/positive Dalrada will take up the option to exercise the option to extend sponsorship at the end of this season.
- The majority of the new sponsorship monies has all gone to the manager to improve the squad hence the additions, contract extensions and loanees in January.
- All players contracts have been reviewed updating from a template someone found on the internet to a more bespoke arrangement reflecting the modern world of football.
- The Board are aware with success other clubs could come in for the manager and players. The Board have tried their best to protect the Club but accept if the money is right they will not stand in the way of an individual looking to better themselves. It is a difficult balancing act protecting the 'assets' without handing out lengthy and onerous contracts to players who maybe do not ultimately fulfil their potential (my words not the Board).
- For the first time I heard people explicitly stating the ambition is not just survival in the league but promotion. Realistically recent results have made a title win more difficult but we should be targeting a play-off place.
- Average gates are slowly increasing.
- The ongoing ticket and entry farce at Cappielow was fully acknowledged. No quick solution this season but the proposed arrangements in the future should hopefully resolve the issue.
- Proposals in hand to improve the fan experience and tidy up Cappielow. The Board are looking at the options for the parcel of land they acquired to do something similar to what Ayr provide in their car park. I believe it is a mix of something for the fans on the ground floor and offices above.
- Importantly the proposals to replaces the 'Articles' were passed with only one minor amendment requiring (not optional) the Board to hold an AGM.
- The three Board members, in attendance, highlighted they would encourage any fan to come forward for election to the Board if they believe they have something to offer. The Club is now 'ours' and it is up to us to ensure it not just survives but moves forward.
I am sure there are aspects of the AGM I have omitted but hopefully the above is an accurate recollection of the main points I recollect.
No bitterness from me, I'm just a bit concerned the MCT side has been quiet. Club side has been great as per your updates (didn't get to the agm so thanks for the summary!).
Pay what I can into MCT each month and don't see any reason to change but would be good to get more updates for people who have a more passing interest in Morton.
-
12 minutes ago, port-ton said:
No one know how it went then? I was fine with missing it when I thought everyone received a zoom link but looks like only I did
I'd have thought MCT would have a report to members but they don't seem to do much now.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Toby said:
This can only be seen as good news, any tickets I’ve bought through fan base have been a piece of piss to buy. Now work towards binning the security company.
Aye, easy to use and off the shelf rather than some guy who's built a website himself that he doesn't know how to fix. Presumably this one has a lot less costs for upkeep as its a standard service too.
Hopefully the stewards learn that standing in front of turnstiles shouting means that people can't actually use them.
1 minute ago, TRVMP said:Who else is using it? A few other clubs were using "Interstadia" or whatever it was called, which was one of the reasons Morton went with them. This lot, however, seem to have a bit more pedigree.
-
10 hours ago, vikingTON said:
I appreciate the point preemptively raised in the interview about the need for better communication on the MCT-club dynamic. We're obviously all on the Imrie for World Club Championship glory in 2025 bandwagon right now, but it has been very quiet from an MCT point of view since August or something. If the directors are busy doing the work highlighted behind the scenes then great, but that lack of communication from GMFC down will prove an issue as soon as we end up with a much more difficult first team situation. That's going to happen in football - but we need to keep the fan ownership show on the road regardless of those downturns.
Better to keep on top of that now when the going is good, rather than try to patch things over while another 'Gus' figure is stinking the place out.
Aye, that's my concern too. One of the key points at meetings, etc was the MCT and GMFC are completely separate. Although the club are in a good place on and off the park and comms are improving, there's been nothing of note from MCT.
Definitely a time to try build trust and increase membership when there's a feel good factor and to attempt to establish a wider understanding of their roles and remit rather than just retweeting stuff from the club and community trust. It can't be a case of the club is separate when we're struggling (which happened earlier in the season) and the same when things are good (which I feel is happening now).
A few people I've spoke to (not Morton fans) are under the impression that the turnaround is all due to Dalrada so they need to try get some credit in the bank while things are good as we might lose sponsorship quickly or go through a poor run of form.
That said, Sam Robinson seems to have done lots of work and been key in getting the sponsorship so has to take a lot of credit. The frustrating this is there are people on the board who say they are comms experts and that's the part that's lacking just now.
Didn't mean for this reply to be as long and sound so negative. It's definitely not the case everything is bad but there's an opportunity to be seized here that doesn't come around that often so hopefully the MCT board get on the front foot a bit more over the coming months.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, TRVMP said:
Certainly the Dalrada contract can't be underestimated, but community ownership was never at odds with corporate sponsorship. It's testament to the good work people are doing within the club that a major sponsor like this was tempted in the first place.
That last bit is the point I was trying to make. It's not simply about community ownership but things like this will make getting external investment easier.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, dunning1874 said:
Went under the radar on here with the anniversary of Imrie getting the job, but MCT announced that as of Hogmanay that'll be £500K put into the club since contributions started, with membership currently at 945.
The stories coming from Inverness and Kirkcaldy of impending financial meltdowns while Hamilton continue to be a basket case suggest there couldn't have been a better time to get our house in order with a break-even budget. The security of having fan fundraising in place is certainly looking preferable to relying on one rich backer who could walk at any time when you look at where other clubs relying on that model find themselves.
While I agree there's a lot of positives, it sounds like Dalrada dug us out a bit of a hole at one point and is essentially a rich backer.
The good thing for me though is that the interview with their guy name checked Sam Robinson who has really impressed me since he got involved with MCT so people within the club are actively seeking (and getting) investment. Everything you've listed will support this though so all in all a positive year.
-
3
-
-
23 hours ago, capitanus said:
I thought you were in your thirties?
Must be older than I look.
-
15 hours ago, Jamie_M said:
Thought that was good. Bit of team binding as an added bonus to something a bit different.
Although on the commercial side, I'm still waiting on a reply about hospitality after getting in touch at the start of the week to see about a payment.
-
10 hours ago, AyrshireTon said:
Alan Mahood. Subbed after about 10 minutes.
Thought that. Did Hunter make a comeback or is my 10ish year old brain playing tricks?
Either way, remember Jim Hunter being class.
-
6 hours ago, TRVMP said:
Yep. That was my first Morton game. I remember Alexander's opening goal and nothing else
Think Alan Mahood (or maybe Jim Hunter) got a bad injury just after coming back from a long period out. About all I remember too and even that might not be right!
-
Just now, RealTonKid said:
Wasn't that the shirt we wore in the B&Q Cup Final?
Aye that's the one.
-
1
-
-
Slightly related to this - if anyone has a Google Pixel 6 and wants a Morton cover or knows anyone who would then I've got an unused one to give away. Turns out it was the pro version of the phone I've got.
It's this one https://nostalgia.co.uk/products/greenock-morton-fc-1992-93-away-shirt-phone-case
-
9 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:
I don’t have a problem per se with the board having the ability to appoint new members without MCT approval, or with there being a possibility of directors being appointed without necessarily having a financial stake in the club. There are many valid reasons for these types of appointments such as if they are bringing valuable skills and experience to the table, or performing a key role within the club. Ultimately, the members nominate & elect MCT representatives into the board and I think they should be allowed to do their job without the possibility of being stymied by needing to put every appointment to a vote of MCT members.
That said, I agree there could definitely be room for improvement on these proposals. At least there is an effort being made to be more transparent, and they are inviting feedback & suggested improvements so this is definitely a step in the right direction.
Aye, as long as there's a majority MCT board I don't really have a problem with external people since they should be able to remove them using their majority. What I'd like to see is normal MCT members being able to vote to replace the MCT board members rather than having to wait 3 years so there is some accountability there.
I'm not keen on the 2 year pathway thing either because it limits replacements since there's only a small number of people that's applicable too and they might not be interested.
-
1 hour ago, TRVMP said:
The only right of veto here exists at the GMFC board level, not at the MCT level. At the GMFC board level they can reject a candidate who fails a competency test of the board's devising. There is no analog on the other side; there's no mechanism for MCT to recall or otherwise oust a non-MCT-based director.
It's also the case, from this email, that there is no proportional investment requirement - or indeed any other requirement - for directors not from the ranks of MCT, except that they remain in a minority on the Board. That is, hypothetically, you could have MCT owning virtually all of the club, and having six directors on the board, and then five directors who are in no way accountable to MCT's membership in general or its GMFC board members in particular, and in fact hold the right of veto over their appointment in the case of a resignation and proposed addition (there being five and five in that case, rather than five and six.)
I think some of these board guys forget who works for whom here. I'm all for their expertise and their hard work, but if they have confidence in these things they would surely, then, be comfortable with the club's owners (that's us) having a similar right of veto to the one that they want to enjoy.
The pathway to the GMFC board is a good one. I'm pleased with these suggestions. But the door is absolutely wide open for the MCT membership to be treated as walking wallets who are accountable to unelected board members who very possibly have no financial stake in the club themselves, when the exact opposite should be the case.
Definitely progress but there needs to be some accountability at the board level. If MCT members can propose and vote through someone should be removed at any point (or yearly instead of waiting 3 years) that might fill parts of the gap though. That should force the MCT nominee to step aside if it is one and if its not then there should be a majority MCT to vote them out from the GMFC board.
The other part that I'm not sure about is that the pathway could be 5 years (2 on MCT board and waiting 3 til someone's term is up on the GMFC board).
With the two points combined it's still quite a closed shop.
-
7 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:
I actually had a conversation on the phone with one of the guys who was drafting the amendments. 1, 2, 4 & 5 would need to be put forward as amendments to articles of the subsidiaries at their AGMs so aren’t applicable to MCT articles. Number 3 has been reworded and made it in there under 4.4c
I thought 1, 2 and 4 were the main ones that added accountability in.
I get the point but it looks like that can never be done since it relies on boards of people who have never been voted in (including one at GMFC who has recently bought his way in).
-
On 8/16/2022 at 9:15 AM, Greacen2000 said:
That’s pretty much what I’ve attempted to do too, and like you I was pretty surprised they hadn’t already received the same suggestion from others.
I sent this to them last night. I’m sure there could be improvements made to the wording and fine details, but I just want to make sure this subject is on the agenda for discussion as it’s so important.
1. The boards of GMFC, GMFC property, and any other future subsidiaries of MCT should be comprised of MCT nominated representatives which reflect the shares held by MCT - so if it is 100% owned by MCT, then all board members must be nominated & approved by MCT membership, if it is 80% owned, then 80% of the board should be MCT representatives etc.
2. In order to be entitled to a seat on the board of GMFC, GMFC property, or any other subsidiaries, an individual must hold at least 20% of the shares in circulation.
3. In the event of MCT selling a significant percentage of shares to another party(as outlined in amendment 2), the terms of any such deal must be disclosed in full to MCT membership before going to a members vote.
4. Any MCT nominated members of the boards of GMFC, GMFC property & any other future subsidiaries must be required to offer their resignation and stand for re-election by the MCT membership on an annual basis.
5. Any directors of GMFC, GMFC property, or any other future subsidiaries who have taken their seat on the board as a result of being an MCT director, must immediately resign their position on the board upon ceasing to be a director of MCT.
Looks like they haven't made the cut.
-
5 minutes ago, Jamie_M said:
You already said earlier that you interpreted it as 'handing over the running of the club' whicb seems a wild take from the announcement.
Most people have taken it as consultancy, tapping into expertise and tapping into business resource, with the existing operation remaining unchanged. Not even close to handing over the reins.
And as for the Easdales comment - they already got their man on the board.
Aye, it's probably not much different from the Easdales tbf although a more formal agreement. Would be interested to see the terms but got to assume there's nothing binding us to anything other than sponsorship.
-
Don't mind the name. It's basically sponsored rather than a full rename so all sounds good.
Couple of things that are a bit concerning. Would like board membership votes to be by MCT rather than bought and they don't seem to be on companies house as an active company (would like to see the accounts).
-
5 hours ago, vikingTON said:
Why shouldn't the majority shareholder have its representatives on the GMFC board: what is the point of having a majority share if there's literally zero representation at the club's executive level?
We also aren't exactly stacked with people with the time and expertise to run two completely separate institutions, so this self-denying principle strikes me as foolish at best and disastrous at worst.
The amendment to clarify what happens when reps step down from MCT and whether/for how long they can retain a spot on the GMFC board is a much better point that needs clarifying.
I should probably have wrote necessarily be on both. Agree on all the other points here - much needed changes to how it's run.
I actually thought it was a bit worrying that the new people didn't really flag that king of thing.
-
3 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:
5. Any directors of GMFC, GMFC property, or any other future subsidiaries who have taken their seat on the board as a result of being an MCT director, must immediately resign their position on the board upon ceasing to be a director of MCT.
Might be misreading this but I don't think an MCT board member should be on the Morton board. Keeping them separate should work better if there's accountability and challenge which the other points start to address more than is done now.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:
With a cost-of-living crisis that's only going to get much, much worse over the winter, I would suspect 'luxury' expenditure like Hospitality will be one of the first things that will be ditched by folk who are struggling to make ends meet.
I booked Hospitality for the rearranged QotS match in February, but it was cancelled a couple of days before the game due to lack of numbers (not related to the cost-of-living crisis which hadn't properly kicked-in by then, it was probably more to do with the relatively short notice). I think for this game only something like 15 people had signed-up, so that's probably the threshold below which it's no longer financially viable. I suspect therefore Hospitality will be cancelled for many games this season, particularly less attractive ones. And even the ones that do go ahead will probably be with far fewer numbers than normal. I've got no idea if reduced Hospitality income was taken into account when setting budgets, but if it wasn't, that could be very bad news.
Very unfortunate timing for MCT to take over the club right before the biggest cost-of-living crisis in living memory.
Aye, I guess so. As with the gate price going above £20, it's went over the £100 mark and I think that's the kind of thing people subconsciously or otherwise makes people change their minds.
I noticed the price listed for the dundee game is actually lower but as far as I can see there's no promotion of it being lower.
I really feel for the commercial guy though - he seems to cover pretty much everything whereas Lesley Ann was basically hospitality and lottery. We've got people of both the club board and MCT board with their selling point as having marketing backgrounds - I've yet to see any joined up approach to marketing or a strategy (this is different from the commercial job but should support it).
-
14 minutes ago, TRVMP said:
Yep, there'd need to be much more emphasis on the post-game offering.
That said, there must only have been about 20 there on Saturday...
-
6 hours ago, TRVMP said:
Avoiding use of floodlights and undersoil heating is unquestionably the right thing to do. These are, in the grand scheme of things, luxury goods.
There will be edge cases of people who bought season tickets who get off work at 2pm or something. That is a small problem. A far bigger problem would be burning money that we simply do not have.
It's a cost of living crisis and we need to start thinking in terms of that crisis, not of minor inconvenience.
Would need to be more creative with hospitality too. Can't see many people wanting to turn up at 930.
6 hours ago, Alibi said:The old mindset, basically that Douglas Rae or whoever would put some money in to cover excess expenditure, is out of date. I don't quite understand how energy prices have risen quite as high as now seems to be the case - the oil price for Brent is under $100 a barrel at the moment, less than it was in 2014, so why didn't we have mahoosive energy bills then? Also, when there's a moderate breeze, Scotland is self sufficient in energy from renewable sources and the cost of wind hasn't gone up, so why are we being ripped off? Anyway, given that we're stuck in this situation, for which I largely blame those who voted no in 2014, Morton need to act to mitigate the effects. Changing kick off times so that games are played during daylight hours might be an option, although in midwinter the light is often pretty poor even during the daylight hours. I don't think it would be a popular strategy, but it's probably what was done prior to about 1960 when floodlighting wasn't more or less universal - I think Cappielow only got floodlights in about 1958 or thereabouts, presumably when the cowshed was built, so before that games must have been scheduled during daylight hours.
It can't be said often enough - there is no magic money tree now, failing a good draw in the Scottish Cup maybe. Morton has to be run as a business, not a pet project. I'll be interested to see the bio of each candidate for election to the MCT board to find out what particular talents they bring to the table. I also think MCT need to have someone competent handling the PR side, as recent events have suggested it's not always being handled well.
MCT candidates aren't really anything to do with the day to day running of the club so aren't responsible for the PR. They should be responsible for holding the club to account though which they don't seem to do.
-
See that an MCT board member who's supposed to have a background in marketing saying the tone of the latest club update is good and it's good to see feedback from fans.
This has been the message from MCT for a while and I fail to see what they're doing to help or hold the club to account. Instead it seems like he's distancing them. Not a good look.
Commercial Activity
in General Morton Chatter
Posted
Make them all.