Yeah there are a couple of similar websites that list company employees and they go on forever and all the headshots look eerily similar plus some of the folk are not people I’d want to be associated with. Pretty sure AI was used to make his video as well but I think we’ll all just have to get used to that as it’ll become more common. Doesn’t build trust with me but it is what it is.

My feeling when googling Mir is that every website looked like it was made on the show Hustle - creating the fake digital estate they needed when about to con their next victim.

That said, if it didn't end in tears, it would turn out to have been a great deal.

What I would say on Mr Mir is that it is perfectly possible for him to come from a very wealthy, very private family. However, there are a number of red flags, including: changed name at least once; seems to have come out of nowhere in last c.3 years; no declared single source of wealth; in the last few years has established credibility for himself by securing advisory roles that were conceivably paid for by him (eg King's Trust, Imperial); bought a barony; involved in a nascent technology that has a lot of theoretical money flying around but not as much in actual assets.

Simple take for those of us that can't be bothered reading the 60 pages [Link]

Based on recent form I can only see an away win tomorrow and if other results go against us we could be in the relegation zone by full time although I think that’s relatively unlikely. Struggling on the pitch already and talk of change off the pitch often doesn’t help teams perform so I think we risk another 0-3.

I'm just always a bit suspicious of people who advertise their philanthropy. In my experience true philanthropists (like Warren Buffett) don't shout about it. In any case I'm not at all interested in philanthropic credentials when it comes to owning or running a football club. I'm solely interested in their business credentials. Have they got successful records of building businesses?

Don’t forget those checks have been done by Mr Mir’s solicitor and our solicitor. Not casting any doubt on their professional conduct but they’re both both represent parties who want this deal. I don’t know to what extent the IFR and EFL look into these things. Suspect we’ll only know whether SSC is to be trusted some way down the line and even then look at what happened with Sheffield Wednesday their most recent owner was good at first but then went bad when their money ran out and they didn’t handle it well.

Yeah not comfortable with these people and to be honest for a high net worth individual there is really not much information about this Omar Mir bloke that is public but if all the checks have been done then you'd hope to trust that process. I am voting yes because 1. The alternative is at best the same thing happening in 6 months but probably with worse terms for us 2. I want us to be a good football club and I want to enjoy myself when i go to football and i like what they have said about football (of course proof will be in the pudding). 3. The protections seem good to me.

Aideen - Thanks for the Mikey T link 👍

Yeah ,sam or worse waiting for us in administration. Those voting against need to understand that!

The more I reflect on this deal, the more uncomfortable I am with it. Having said that, I am voting yes because I think the alternative is worse.

DD - that was why I wanted to find out more about Mir

6MDM, at one of the SGMs about 50.1%, the DT (Graeme, I think, but apologies if I mis-remember) did say something to the effect of retaining majority ownership meaning economic ownership as well as voting control. On the other hand, Angus did say that the boards would go forward and seek to find the deal that we had authorised but couldn't guarantee that we'd get absolutely everything we wanted. Personally, unless we find out something terrible about these people, I am in favour. There is a significant chance that our things turn out other than we intended in 5+ years. But I'd sooner that than be in a much worse position in 6 months. I also think (and hope) that this investment is somewhat philanthropical and aimed at a long-term relationship.

Shall we change our name to SSC Wimbledon?

🚨New episode available now🚨 Danny Baker & Lee Finch 🔵Wednesday and Mansfield 🟡Sloane Street Capital 🔵Wycombe preview [Link] Like, listen and let us know what you think.

Just wanted to try to understand what makes Mir tick

into royal charities built on community stewardship and social responsibility, entering a football club partnership that preserves democratic fan-ownership rather than staging a hostile, corporate takeover fits his public-facing ethos perfectly.

I had a "conversation" with AI this morning focusing on Dr Omar Mir and why he might be the main funder of the SSC consortium. This was the reply - It makes total logical sense based on his background. While an £87 million proposal to a League One football club is staggering for any individual, it aligns perfectly with the multi-million-pound philanthropic and technological patterns established by Dr Omar Mir. Looking at the details of the bid —submitted via his investment vehicle, Sloane Street Capital (SSC) — the move highlights several consistent traits in how Dr Mir deploys his capital. The Scale of Wealth - A personal commitment to inject an initial £16 million upon completion, followed by £71 million over the next five seasons, requires immense private capital. As a board member at World Wide Technology and an advisor at General Atlantic, Dr Mir operates within the ultra-high-net-worth brackets where anchoring long-term, multi-million-pound initiatives —just like his decade-long "Generation Potential" campaign with the King's Trust — is a familiar playbook. A Focus on Digital and Structural Modernisation -If the deal is approved by the fans, Dr Mir's consortium firm will oversee AFC Wimbledon's football operations. Given his background as an international technology specialist who advises King Charles III's sustainable initiatives on artificial intelligence, he will likely treat the club's infrastructure, academy data tracking, and community programs with the same high-tech, forward-thinking lens he applies to his philanthropic digital rollouts. Alignment with Supporter-Led Governance. What makes this deal particularly interesting is that AFC Wimbledon is a historic, fan-owned phoenix club. The proposed terms respect this legacy explicitly. The Dons Trust will permanently retain 50.01% of the voting shares. Fans maintain veto control over the Plough Lane stadium freehold, the club's name, its badge, and its kit colours. For a philanthropist heavily integrated

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

If SSC miss contributions, they will still own whatever percentage of shares they have been issued at that point but may lose some influence like control over football matters but will still be the majority owner of our club. The only way their percentage could reduce is if more shares were allotted and issued to somebody or something else to dilute their percentage. Whether they would have any pre-emption rights at that stage isn't pointed out.

It will pass because the alternative is administration and being picked off by any old opportunistic vulture. The DT is now a busted flush so at least this is a more controlled way for them to disappear but disappear they will.

The following link is still live [Link] "The Dons Trust is asking members to lower the Trust’s minimum shareholding to 50.01% of voting rights and remove the 15% individual investment cap." It is silent on OWNERSHIP.

This deal looks dodgy. Not saying it’s not the better option but even just a little scratch at the surface of doctorates and tartans and barons suggests the future (because obviously this will pass) will be a bumpy road.

I went back and read the emails we were getting spammed with to vote the 50.1% thing through. I just picked on the one I received dated 11/03/2026 and it stated, "The Trust remains the majority owner and the ultimate decision-maker." That was what we were asked to vote on with 50.01%. However, this will not be the case if this deal goes through.