Gaziantep FK called off its extraordinary board election on 4 November, just one day before club members were due to vote. The abrupt reversal keeps chairman Memik Yılmaz and his current board in office under the club’s statutes and relevant rules.
While the club has not explained why it abandoned the vote, statements from prospective buyers and local reporting point to a dispute over Gaziantep FK’s finances, especially money owed to Yılmaz and guarantees tied to bank loans.
An election called and abandoned
The process began on 21 October, when the club’s official notice scheduled an extraordinary general assembly at Gaziantep Büyükşehir Stadium. The first meeting was set for 5 November at 14:00, with a second session planned for 12 November if attendance fell short at the first. Members were due to vote on the existing boards’ activity and audit reports before electing new management and supervisory boards.
The official notice did not say why the election had been called, though Yılmaz had already spoken publicly about stepping down. In an interview reported by Gaziantep Doğuş on 21 October, the chairman said he would not stand as a candidate because financial backing promised at the start of the season had not been delivered.
Two weeks later, the board changed course. In Gaziantep FK’s cancellation statement on 4 November, the club promised a fuller explanation in the coming days without giving an immediate reason for calling off the assembly. By 10 November, no further explanation had appeared in the club’s published updates.
Why talks with Ahmet Uzer and Bilal Çeker broke down
The clearest account of why the handover collapsed came on 5 November from the group preparing to take charge. In a joint statement published by Gaziantep27, former Gaziantep MP Ahmet Uzer and businessman Bilal Çeker said they had started putting together a new management team after the election was announced. Uzer was expected to lead the group, with Çeker working alongside him.
During their preparations, Uzer and Çeker met city officials several times and hired sworn financial advisers to examine the club’s books. The current board provided financial statements and account summaries for that review. According to Uzer and Çeker, the process raised questions about the club’s bank debts and Yılmaz’s personal receivables from Gaziantep FK.
Their final meeting with Yılmaz took place on 4 November and ended without a deal because the two sides could not agree on the financial figures. Uzer and Çeker added that failing to reach an agreement would not end their support for the club. Neither Yılmaz nor Gaziantep FK has published a detailed response to the points raised in that joint statement, and the club has not given its own account of the negotiations.
Also Read: Girondins de Bordeaux face 13 November ruling on €14.5m debt plan
What local reporting says about the club’s finances
More details about the financial dispute emerged on 8 November in a report by Gaziantep Doğuş journalist Mehmet Demir. Demir wrote that Gaziantep FK needs around ₺1.6 billion by the end of 2026 and spends between ₺80 million and ₺90 million a month on running costs. He also reported that the club would have to pay about ₺980 million to cover its immediate obligations if it were to close down straight away.
Demir broke down the reported liabilities into eight categories. He listed ₺375 million in bank borrowing, ₺220 million owed to companies jointly owned by Yılmaz and his brothers, ₺190 million in restructured tax debt, and ₺130 million in FIFA-related liabilities. The remaining obligations in his report were ₺110 million in unpaid player wages, ₺70 million owed to other club directors, ₺70 million owed to suppliers and other creditors, and ₺34 million in personal receivables claimed by Yılmaz.
These figures come from local reporting rather than current audited accounts, so they do not represent an officially verified total debt. There is also an unexplained gap in Demir’s numbers. Adding his eight separate categories together produces a total of ₺1.199 billion (around ₺1.2 billion), which is higher than the ₺980 million he cited as the sum needed to settle immediate obligations. Demir did not explain what accounts for that difference.
Even with those heavy liabilities, Demir rejected suggestions that Uzer and Çeker had demanded a debt-free handover. According to his report, the prospective administration was ready to take over ordinary operating debts, including bank loans, FIFA-related payments, overdue player wages, and routine bills.
Instead, the talks reportedly stalled over claims owed to Yılmaz and other directors, along with paperwork and guarantees tied to the club’s bank loans. Because Yılmaz had personally guaranteed part of that borrowing, Demir wrote that the chairman wanted written protection for the repayment terms before stepping aside. Neither Yılmaz nor the club has confirmed Demir’s account.
Renewed contacts and pressure on the pitch
The stalemate may not be final. On 9 November, Gaziantep Doğuş reported that the current board had reopened talks with Uzer and Çeker on 8 November. That report said the club could call a new general assembly if the two sides reach a deal, which would allow an incoming board to tackle the finances and hire a new coaching staff. Separately, Gaziantep Oluşum reported that metropolitan mayor Fatma Şahin had met Uzer as efforts to find a solution picked up.
Problems on the pitch have added to the urgency. On 7 November, Gaziantep FK lost 2-0 at home to Kasımpaşa and confirmed the departure of head coach Orhan Ak. That leaves the club trying to sort out its leadership, its finances, and a vacant head coach role at the same time.
As of 10 November, neither report had been followed by a confirmed agreement, and Gaziantep FK had not announced a new election date or a change of chairman. The club has still not published an independently verifiable breakdown of its liabilities, explained the unfulfilled pre-season funding promises Yılmaz cited, or clarified what loan guarantees are needed to complete a handover.
Until those details are made public, the future of Gaziantep FK’s board remains tied to who will take legal and financial responsibility for the club’s debts.
