If this vote falls just watch as they blame us for being bad owners, rather than themselves for being shambolic communicators! Somehow they’ve managed to make this vote even more farsical than the first one.

No apologies needed RK. I did have baby brain.

Some of us having been saying this for years ! [Link]

Ex Don Scott Wagstaff is the new Gillingham u18s coach.

Certainly a lot more cost effective to offer perks for volunteers than to have that many full time or part time roles on the books.

Nick there were plenty of volunteers around during the ownerships of Noades and Hamman, mind you there were plenty of perks offered.

Some people will walk away if we aren't fans owned,not a big loss really.. (although I dare say it's hot air and most will support afc wimbledon no matter what.)

WJ, we're pretty certain to go down next season anyway unless somehow we magic up another £2m or so from s9mewhere. Very sad

I cashed my bonds in at the earliest opportunity after the embarrassment of the Maklin fiasco, seeing how our club was being run, I feared that I wouldn’t have anything to recoup if that was an example of their expertise. Having the DTB and the people who we employ to run our club in a position of unchallenged control as we returned to an empty stadium after COVID felt like the turning point and fans returning to games seemed like an inconvenience, and they were almost viewed with distain. I wonder how bond holders feel about the possibility of their investment supporting an organisation that could have a substantial portion owned by a single business man? I also wonder if volunteers will feel that working for free for the profits of a business (part) owner is not attractive? I have no idea how to vote (or even if I will) as I don’t feel that I have access to all the information I need to decide, but feel that I am being steered towards the option favoured by the DTB rather than having all the info presented to me to make a choice.

Afternoon (just) all. TBH admin is something you only do when you really can't avoid it. While it can work out for the best - Wrexham going into admin all those years ago saved the club - it's not a chance we should really take if it's in our own hands

Far better bet is the threat to Administration and engage with fans meaningfully. This 50.0001% nonsense is delaying stuff. Administration = points deductions, size not known, transfer embargo's, forced player sales and generally loss of good will, when the administrators due their duty in screwing local creditors in favour of the priority ones HMRC etc.

Looks like last night's results more or less went out way 👍

It's looking more and more like the best outcome for the fans is administration and a gamble that we get a decent buyer. Needs to be timed right to avoid multiple points deductions and stiches up any creditors and shareholders who thought they were making an investment and not a donation.

😄😄

I shan’t be voting. The majority ownership of the football club, in the hands of an outdated Industrial & Provident Society, suppresses and denies true fan ownership. As the majority shareholder they consistently trample on the interests of the 5000+ true fan owners, who sank hard earnt savings into owning a small share of their club. They continue to hold the Club back through a lack of investment and access to capital and have denied the true 5000 fan owners the ability to do so – through a rights issue. There is virtually no attention given to the interests and wishes of the 5000 - which is in stark contrast the priority given to the interests of bondholders. The worst part of every match day experience is having to walk past their “Dons Trust” cabin – promoting the idea that their Industrial & Provident Society represents any semblance of fan ownership. The idea that you can suppress the self-interest of thousands of individual shareholders with those of a Collective has been shown throughout history to be condemned to failure. It is just a matter of time.

That 12pm (sorry T9m Swig) ko gives us faraway wombles some practical problems too

Nick, all the more reason to run a campaign like two ticks. Clarify and simplify

That's wonderful Trig!

The last time Discord had a spike in posts because of poor board conduct, the forum moderator announced the uptick in engagement and was congratulated by board members as such on their WhatsApp group.

likewise, Spit - I don't think there are any Thameslink trains from Sutton, which is my route. Will be two or three buses there, and same back.

Sorry to interrupt the club politics, but if anyone is travelling Sunday to the match from the worcester park area ,there are no south western trains.

OI - the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I think that a lot of the DTB are so wedded to fan-ownership that they cannot see that this intransigence may lead to the club going into administration and thus no longer being fan-owned.

I think around half of those 200 Discord posts are from me pointing out that informed voting is important, and expressing disappointment that people are being encouraged to vote before hearing the SGM debate the pros and cons of selling down (eg 'pros are we have a sticking plaster to get us through the next year or so', 'cons are 'there is no clear plan on how to plug losses after year 2 other than to sell the club so what is the point', or whatever). i thought 700-plus people calling a members SGM around this, demonstrating the importance of informed voting on the night, and a pledge to do things properly meant something. But I really have stopped caring and, as Nic says, dipping out of it and just watching the football is a lot healthier, i think, personally. so I'll leave this to others now and see you at the game (which i fancy us to win 4-1:) or the Pub Quiz. (tickets at wearewimbledonfund.com )

Agree with OIs thoughts on nicander’s post. Worst of all he is not the first person to end up burnt out by their experiences of the DTB to the point of disconnection.

The two ticks thing was well managed but had the advantage of a clear message “sell KM so that we can fund the new ground”. Here we are essentially saying “change the rules so that we may be able to sell a stake in the club (not specified how much) to an investor (not specified who) who may (or may not) also provide funding to cover our losses (through a mechanism which isn’t being specified now)”, its clearly a much harder sell and made even harder by the fact that trust in the DTB is lower now than it was then.