Amen to that. Time to move on.

A misreading ravabelli, I would like all season ticket holders to become DT members by choice and more specifically become active DT members, voting and taking part in discussions. I believe we have pushed joining the DT in previous ST renewal exercises, so these people have deliberately chosen not to join. Do you think they are likely to become very active now it is incredibly hard for them to avoid becoming members?

Wot Ravabelli said. The Never Go To Dublin/MK/Basingstoke WISA types are still fighting the past in their heads and therefore are very conservative. It's a sort of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Stuart is also right, football is changing. Out model has been amazing but it has its obvious limitations. Do we want to be responsible for holding the club back? Seeing it struggle should we enter non-league? Given increase in demands, can our model really cope? Fact is, football's fucked. We can only be the paragons of virtue for so long and if it means the future of our club is in doubt, then I'd rather take the leap.

Aren't the complaints around the DT opening up its membership from the cliques that have essentially held it back at times? Fact is, we need to grow as a club and part of that is by enabling fans new and old to have a voice. Some people won't like that, especially the same old influential voices that have essentially played their part in the DT dying. Now, it has been given some hope and a much-needed change to reflect the entire fan base, not just a few hundred people who shout the loudest.

TBH I wouldn't trust the new regulator to make a cup of tea properly

I can't remember (I suspect Dundonald knows from past history) who handles the count and oversees it for votes on restricted actions? It seems horrific to even imagine the DTB would try to fix it but I fear I do.

Interesting point about the independent regulator, Stu. Do you think that the regulator will have sufficient clout to prevent bad owners ruining clubs? I'm just concerned that those in power will do all they can to undermine the regulator's power.

I would sell out completely nicander .The independent regulator gives protection and we could do the pitch owner thing also. Our journey is amazing, however we need to know when to adapt and realise what the financial pressures are. I don’t want to be a club that doesn’t react and falls out of the league and becomes a club like York or even Torquay. It can happen and I go to football and support Wimbledon to see us achieve things, not continue to be a movement of fan-ownership which hardly any other club or fans want as they know its limitations in the football league.

Yes, Scotty, and we're getting a wonderful new digital platform to disseminate the propaganda. But it's not necessarily a bad thing. The DT (essentially a rebadged WISA) was pretty much dead. This might well be a boon for fan ownership.

sav yeah that's where it all seems to me to be a bit too much emphasis on 50+1 as the game changer. We can only get ourselves to day 0 with a lot of things all aligning. As you say we've yet to prove that even if we got there we'd do much better with that position.

The horse has bolted. As KD says, the club will find a way to get ST holders to vote when necessary. Don't underestimate how they will do this. They've gifted DT membership. And it could be borderline dirty. Such as ST prices to increase by 10% the following season unless we can get vote X through. A lot can be played on the fact the cost of repaying all 2025 due bonds exceeds our seasons playing budget.

Lurks - it’s the combo of equity sales, rollovers and maybe some commercial debt that resolves it for now. Although none of these really “solve” for the fact that running a football club is, on average, a loss making enterprise - and we are yet to show we can be above average stewards of the football club that plays in Wimbledon.

Sav - cheers. If you've got a lot of money it's probably not a bad investment in terms of minority ownership (you'd have a fair bit of clout and plenty of opportunities to do networking at other venues every other weekend). It's not as risky as putting it into other football clubs.

I'm assuming selling down to 51% is around 24% sold

Stu - I think it’s very clear that the board consider having 50%+1 available to them is a critical piece of the finance puzzle, and I applaud that. With 89% support on the resolution it seems the membership is being persuaded as well (up from the reasonably comparable question in the Rye Report where support was 55% or so).

Realistically selling down to 51% is still only going to raise something in the 6-7M range. It's not going to solve anything really unless whoever buys them is then willing to just piss 10m+ up the wall for free.

OI one goat? I thought it was an entire farm stock, including Llamas

Nick Robertson paid 2.5m for 10% - maybe you can make a case the valuation has changed but realistically that will be the anchor for any new investor and so I would guess 3.75 with maybe 500k either way depending on details like board seat.

Was disappointed with the ‘pitch owners’ idea not being explored. It gives a bit more security for the site regardless of the clubs financial position. It’s not perfect but it does provide a bit more of a safeguard.

Stu - sell out entirely, or sell down to 50+1? The latter I agree with you on, although conversely I am less likely to vote for it than I would have been a couple of weeks ago.

Morning all. Roughly speaking, how much would it cost to buy 15% of AFCW?

It felt to me a strong theme and tone of the DTB on Monday was that of the need to pass through the resolutions to ensure that outside investment people can get 15% and also potentially get a place on the PLC if the DTB felt they would add value to the current board. Michele as a financial person openly said she is risk adverse and that with the majority of league clubs losing money each year, we only avoided that recently with player sales and that can’t be budgeted or relied on.

KD - I certainly can imagine that, and I'm sure there are movers and shakers on the plc board who can too. No idea if that includes members of the DTB, who appear to have nodded along with this initiative rather than been the drivers of it. May or may not turn out to be that easy. Would be interested to know, for example, what the open rate is on club emails to ST holders. They'd be doing extremely well if it was 30%.

nicander if you haven’t already please check your message inbox on ProBoards. Thanks