Those investors appear to have nothing in common on the face of it (although I've not spent any time looking) so I wonder how they met and why they decided to look for an English football club to invest in. Seldom do investors make anything in the long term but personal losses. I get that they are banking on the value of the club increasing so when they sell further down the line they get 90% of the resale value even though they only own 34% (perfectly legal but can be a tax nightmare if HMRC think they are describing income as a capital gain). What happens in year 6 after they invest? Are they still obliged to keep pumping money in? I can't see in practical terms what the DT could do if they don't or how they will have any real say in who they decide to sell their shares to as we would not have the money to buy them back and we will have become reliant on external funding,

Millions of £s aside, are the players training properly today, or is it half measures again? Cos in the end what they do on match days is what this circus all comes down to, so they need to be up for it both mentally and physically.

MK as a city of culture? E-coli and Rabies are pretty nasty forms of the bacterial population that inhabits the the frenzy dome.

Naz new series of Mortimer & Whitehouse Gone Fishing starts this weekend 👍

Having seen Biggles ask a question last night, maybe should ask what podcasts and social media do they read and which one is WIJG on here...

That will be some sight Naz, and a lovely idea. Thoughts with all the Stranks tomorrow, I’m hoping to get to the club if there’s people still there when I finish with at 7.

To no one surprise, I third that Trigger!

Harry Brook just broke Englands ODI top score record 202 off 116 balls

Double hundred for Harry Brook

Yeah and the first one was objectively unlucky so at worst it is 2 bad performances in a row. Not even close to sackable.

Getting away from the latest depressing/promising(?) developments on and off the pitch, let's not forget Paul Strank and Mikey T both RIP. I gather the Paul Strank Roofing trucks are going to be in some sort of convoy tomorrow to and/or from the funeral to the wake. And Mikey deserves a fantastic send off and celebration - details all TBA I guess.

Losing three games on the spin (two of those against serious promotion contenders) is a bad run, it's not a sackable offence.

Yeah i accept all that nicander I just had enough direct experience with the current world to know that i would have as many of them gone as possible. If that turns out to be a better the devil scenario then that’s how it is - we have no say either way we just like to pretend we do at the moment.

Trig - I wasn't saying that as a particular compliment to Mick Buckley, more to point out as far as I can tell the relative lack of sports leadership experience in the people we are proposing to unsackably lead our sporting efforts.

2 new managers a season would suggest that the results aren't good enough then surely?

Spit - results are also long-term. We have mostly parted with managers at the right time IMO, Robinson aside. There are moments we could have let go of Ardley or Jackson that if we had done so would possibly have cost us promotions.

I think people were taken back by his lack of knowledge on the charities because a big bit of the pitch was how the investors were attracted by that side of things and the story and the philanthropy play et.

We will probably have 2 new managers a season now,will give oi and carshalton fits;-) but pro football is a results buisness

I seconded that Trigger

I hope they jettison Buckley swiftly.

I unfortunately couldn't go last night but awaiting the pack. On the face of it, it seems like the best deal we could possibly get, which in itself raises suspicions if you see what I mean. The one big caveat to that is to me I do not understand why they want control of football operations and what they intend to do with that control. Bluntly, as far as I can tell, Mick Buckley has significantly more experience running a lower-league football club than any of this group, Bertrand included. We have been phenomenally successful on the pitch through the simple mechanic of hiring football people to do football and doing very little boardroom meddling. Why do they need control rather than being able to influence via their stake? If their ideas and tech are good, then our football people would use them. I am concerned their ideas are shit (or worse yet 'innovative') and there won't be anything we can do about them as they drive us into a (footballing) hole and then leave us with the mess. It didn't sound like there was much interrogation of this last night, would be grateful for any insight on these points.

Only one million?

Bromley have a millionaire owner which is why they have got to league one whether he continues to plough in the big money is another matter

Bromley would probably still be non-league if it wasn't for Woodman. He'll probably go on to a better job as will JJ if the new brooms dump him.

Woodman got sacked because Bromley think they are a massive club whereas we are more realistic and don’t sack managers unless we really have to