Any MCC Members on here, who are worried about the SGM?

[MarkMas]

Is anyone on here a member of the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club)? @Ewan ?
Are you concerned about the Special General Meeting on 15 October where the Committee is proposing to replace the Member-based democracy with a self-perpetuating oligarchy?

 

[Zep]

Sounds a bit Russian to me comrade.

 

[jasst]

Should please comrade @Wanderer

 

[rossyl]

I'd be surprised to find many MCC members on here, but you never know.

I think i've missed the boat at putting my name down by now.

Sounds like there's trouble at the top.

 

[dickygrace]

Not a member of the MCC but I know how it all works. Covid-19 has massively hit sport and Lords is no exception. They are lucky that they have the facility for which people will pay £75k to be a life member. That funding could save the whole club, other clubs would give anything to have that revenue boost.

 

[Ewan]

Sorry, I’m not a member, Mark. I’m simply fortunate enough to have friends that are so can usually rely on access to tickets.

 

[allandwf]

I did wonder what that title meant. lol

 

[MarkMas]

Not a member of the MCC but I know how it all works. Covid-19 has massively hit sport and Lords is no exception. They are lucky that they have the facility for which people will pay £75k to be a life member. That funding could save the whole club, other clubs would give anything to have that revenue boost.

True.
The Committee proposed what was basically three fund-raising schemes in one:

• life membership for existing members - ie pre-pay your annual subscriptions in a single lump sum to improve the Club's short-term cash flow
• accelerated membership for those on the waiting list - ie you have already applied, but pay £75k and we will award you one of 350 new memberships right away
• accelerated memberships for anyone - ie we don't care who you are, so long as you are rich. so pay £75k and we will award you one of 350 new memberships right away

The first was uncontroversial, the second a bit doubtful and the third very much disputed. So the Committee put all three to a single vote to force through the unpopular with the benign.

But they would not have needed to do any of this if they had not earlier rejected a £30 MILLION income deal from a low-impact land development project at the far end of the ground. And if they had not gone ahead with a highly ambitious £300 MILLION stand redevelopment project, having rejected the free money.

 

[MarkMas]

Sorry, I’m not a member, Mark. I’m simply fortunate enough to have friends that are so can usually rely on access to tickets.

Have you asked your friends about how they feel about no longer being able to choose who is on the committee of their own club after 15 October?

I will PM you the letter I am sending out to members I know, and that I am asking people to send to their friends who are members.

 

[zagatoes30]

Trouble brewing in all areas best watch SM doesn't become an oligarchy, oh sorry it already is

 

[midlifecrisis]

True.
The Committee proposed what was basically three fund-raising schemes in one:

• life membership for existing members - ie pre-pay your annual subscriptions in a single lump sum to improve the Club's short-term cash flow
• accelerated membership for those on the waiting list - ie you have already applied, but pay £75k and we will award you one of 350 new memberships right away
• accelerated memberships for anyone - ie we don't care who you are, so long as you are rich. so pay £75k and we will award you one of 350 new memberships right away

The first was uncontroversial, the second a bit doubtful and the third very much disputed. So the Committee put all three to a single vote to force through the unpopular with the benign.

But they would not have needed to do any of this if they had not earlier rejected a £30 MILLION income deal from a low-impact land development project at the far end of the ground. And if they had not gone ahead with a highly ambitious £300 MILLION stand redevelopment project, having rejected the free money.

It's simply not cricket, isn't it.

 

[MarkMas]

It's simply not cricket, isn't it.

It is not.

Basically, the members are sleeping while the Chairman does a 'Putin' on them

 

[zagatoes30]

It is not.

Basically, the members are sleeping while the Chairman does a 'Putin' on them

View attachment 75895

Do they not always sleep? I thought the only reason they were members was to get away from the wife for 5 days at a time and have a snooze in peace

 

[Phil H]

Is anyone on here a member of the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club)? @Ewan ?
Are you concerned about the Special General Meeting on 15 October where the Committee is proposing to replace the Member-based democracy with a self-perpetuating oligarchy?

I see that Baron Botham has given up on Lord's and deferred to 'the other place', or was it a satnav error?

PH

 

[CatmanV2]

This has to be the most middle class, first world problem ever. And I mean no offence to anyone, by that but.....

...bloody ****!

C

 

[MarkMas]

This has to be the most middle class, first world problem ever. And I mean no offence to anyone, by that but.....

...bloody ****!

C

I suppose.
But if you were an investor in a £100,000,000 business, with 18,000 small shareholders, where the Chairman was proposing that from now on only his friends could be on the Board, you might take a different view.

 

[CatmanV2]

I suppose.
But if you were an investor in a £100,000,000 business, with 18,000 small shareholders, where the Chairman was proposing that from now on only his friends could be on the Board, you might take a different view.

I might, indeed. Not really detracting from my point about the issue

C

 

[JonW]

I’m missing something - the three membership / fundraising options sound sensible, and are just cashing in on the fact there are lots of rich people willing to pay to be a member of the MCC, or to shorten the waiting time...

How goes this change who can be on the Board? Isn’t that open to all members?

 

[MarkMas]

I’m missing something - the three membership / fundraising options sound sensible, and are just cashing in on the fact there are lots of rich people willing to pay to be a member of the MCC, or to shorten the waiting time...

How goes this change who can be on the Board? Isn’t that open to all members?

Sorry, I haven't yet bored everyone with the whole story.

Selling memberships was an effective fundraising wheeze, but it was quite controversial, and the governance issue there was that the Committee put it to a vote at the AGM but bundled the benign proposal with the controversial one in a single vote, to get it through.

For the same AGM, the Committee proposed rule changes so that:

• instead of allowing any member to stand for election to the Committee in future, only candidates approved by a nominations vetting process (controlled by the Committee) would be allowed
• anyone on the Committee who the Chairman thought did not exhibit 'appropriately collegiate behaviour' could be excluded from the committee
• anything that the Committee did that the Chairman ruled to be 'in good faith' was valid, even if it was actually against the rules of the club

These proposals were withdrawn at the last minute, in response to an outcry, but supposedly 'due to drafting errors'.

Then a group of members put forward an alternative proposition (getting the necessary 200 signatures), to be voted on by an SGM, that instead of these rule changes there should a a governance review to increase democracy and accountability. This proposal was rejected by the Committee on the grounds of ‘incorrect paperwork’, ‘legal problems’ and ‘timing difficulties’. The Committee then hurriedly announced their own SGM on 15 October to try to pass broadly similar proposals to the ones above, before this alternative proposal could be voted on. If they get their way, then the Chairman will control 4 out of the 7 votes in the nominations process, and can thus put up anyone he likes for election to the Committee and exclude anyone he doesn't like.

The MCC Committee has a long history of a profoundly undemocratic attitude to members (I could go on) and this is their boldest power-grab ever.

 

[Ebenezer]

Sounds like these rules are specifically written to exclude you in particular!
Eb