MCC members to be given vote on closer ties with the Hundred

Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) will let its members vote on the club’s growing involvement in the Hundred at a special general meeting in September. MCC plans to accept the ECB’s proposed gift of 51% of the shares in London Spirit and intends to retain its position as majority shareholder, but has asked members for their approval.

The ECB publicly confirmed last week its intention to attract private investment in the Hundred’s eight teams and the appointments of the Raine Group and Deloitte as advisors. Under a proposed model, the eight Hundred ‘hosts’ – seven counties plus MCC – will be given majority stakes in their respective teams, with the ECB selling the remaining 49% to interested parties.

Guy Lavender, MCC’s chief executive, wrote to the club’s members on Thursday outlining the committee’s support. “Subject to the satisfactory conclusion of negotiations between the various parties, we are firmly of the view that MCC should accept ECB’s offer of the 51% equity share in the London Spirit franchise and participate fully in a tournament which will grow the men’s and women’s game,” Lavender wrote.

While some hosts may sell part or all of their stake, Lavender said the committee’s “initial thinking” is that MCC should retain its 51%. “We wish to retain control of the franchise and believe the tournament will grow over time,” he wrote. “Pragmatically, we will need to keep that position under review both through the initial sales phase and in the future.”

But MCC has made clear that, despite the club’s support for the ECB’s proposals, it will not move forward without member approval. It will continue to consult with members over the coming weeks and will hold an SGM on the week starting September 9, at which members will vote on the club’s acceptance of a 51% equity share in London Spirit. The results will be announced the following week.

MCC will “retain the right of veto” on any bidder to become the minority shareholder in London Spirit. “This decision is not about accepting the highest bidder,” Lavender wrote. “It is about finding the right partner who has the skills and expertise to help us grow the franchise, whilst also recognising and understanding the history, values and uniqueness of MCC.”

Lavender said MCC are “unclear” whether it is practical for members to vote on the identity of a potential partnership, but suggested that the prospect of them voting to reject a proposed investment partner could be “hugely damaging” to the ECB and the counties’ plans to generate revenues to support English cricket as a collective.

London Spirit is expected to be the most valuable Hundred franchise due to its association with Lord’s. “Those MCC members are sitting on a bit of a goldmine,” Andrew Umbers, the co-founder of Oakwell Sports Advisory told the Unofficial Partner podcast. “With the scarcity premium of the two London teams, jeez, it’s [worth] a lot. I’m sure Reliance and the Ambani family are going to be really interested in one of the big two in London.”

The seven other Hundred-hosting counties are evaluating their own positions on the competition’s future. They are: Surrey (Oval Invincibles), Hampshire (Southern Brave), Glamorgan (Welsh Fire), Warwickshire (Birmingham Phoenix), Nottinghamshire (Trent Rockets), Lancashire (Manchester Originals) and Yorkshire (Northern Superchargers).

Hampshire is a private club rather than member-owned but the other six counties have not publicly committed to giving members a direct vote on the Hundred’s privatisation and it remains to be seen if MCC’s decision has set a precedent. At Surrey, for example, members are represented on the general committee which in turn advises the club’s board on their stance.

“This shows that the MCC recognises the significance of the decision not just for the club but the game as a whole, and was sincere in its recent promise to listen to and respect members’ views,” Alan Higham, the coordinator of the County Cricket Members Group, told ESPNcricinfo. “We expect all well-run boards of member-owned counties to want their members’ approval before agreeing to such seismic changes.”