Let’s put it this way… if every pound promised (£86m) comes in over 5 years and thereby SSC owns 90% of our “economic rights” and they say “we’re done here” then what happens to our ground?

Is that what you did? ;)

Trigger I dont know how to reword it to make it any easier to understand. It's quite a simple concept that you can have 90% of dividends but not own 90% of a club or have 90% of the vote. Maybe feed it into chatGPT or something.

Remember this time last year we had Maverick, Hoody and Ninja all super active on here?

Russ that’s nonsense mate can you write that in plain speak? Or at least explain what “economic rights” means? Because no one else can regardless of which way they want to vote.

I think my simplistic take is that, for all the flowery language, this is just us selling out completely. One can logically assume that SSC do want it to work, as their best chance of a return on investment is surely to ultimately sell us on for even more money (and there must be easier ways for them to make money than tricking us out of a ground…). So, I suppose if it all pays off, we can invest in the team etc that’d be great. If it doesn’t, we’d be screwed and have no control at all, but in the same boat as every other failing club. Pretty much the only thing 100% clear to me is this is the end of fan ownership.

I’m sorry 6MDM but no, it doesn’t prove your point. They can have 90% economic rights without owning 90% of the holding company. Similarly someone could own 99% of all available shares and have no voting rights and no control. It’s not as simple as 90% of shares or 90% of ‘economic rights’ mean they have control.

tGG - Prof. Alice coming to Wimbledon, according to this [Link]

Price and Fox must know that this question would come up re ownership of the ground. Would like to hear from them as to why they felt this deal was presentable let alone recommendable in the current state.

HoldCo will own 90% of the stadium. We've not been told how our protections will work. I don't trust the DTB and just rely on them saying it is. Anybody who believes Mir is a philanthropist is more charitable than me. I've never known a philanthropist to purchase titles to make himself sound good and be so opaque about himself.

Given where we're at, I'd be prepared to grudgingly give up ownership of pretty much everything else about the club as long as we kept ownership of the stadium freehold (actual ownership, not just 'control', which, as seems clear, is pretty worthless when the withdrawal of money gun is held to our heads). And any so-called philanthropic investor should agree to that, as they'd never have a thought of selling off the ground so it's effectively worthless to them.

I'm not sure where you copied and pasted that from Russ but you're making my point. The issue is not share of profits. It's ownership. SSC will own 90% of HoldCo. How does that translate into minority voting rights for them? It's not about dividends. If they only owned 49.9% but received 90% of profits as a reward for funding us then fair enough. But that isn't what is happening here. That's my concern.

How to Structure Share Classes for Higher Dividends - To pay a larger dividend to a specific shareholder or group, you must outline the distinct rights of each share class in the company’s Articles of Association and Shareholders' Agreement. • Alphabet Shares (Class A, B, C): You can assign Class A shares to founders and Class B shares to investors or family members. When declaring a dividend, the directors can vote to pay a £5-per-share dividend to Class A, but only £1-per-share (or £0) to Class B. • Preference Shares: These are a dedicated class of shares that explicitly give holders a preferential right to dividends. They receive a fixed or variable dividend amount before any dividends can be paid to ordinary shareholders. • Tracking Shares: A more complex class of shares where the dividend amount is tied directly to the financial performance of a specific subsidiary, department, or revenue stream within the company rather than the business as a whole.

Fofana's penalty just landed in Birko Park

OI: the freehold would not be valued separately to the stadium. We got the land for free.

Pens just got interesting at anfield

Hashtag United 0 AFC Wimbledon 0

I know you weren’t :) it was a preemptive post

I wasn't TF. It is a reasonable question to ask whatever your view of the DTB members (but I have no views on them).

Nice point about the auditors.

OI - I agree, which is why this vote will succeed and I will get to see whether I was right or wrong. I really hope it turns out to be the latter.

Don’t have a go at me about that post OI 🫠 My whole relationship with the trust disintegrated when I flagged that the then Chair had been given the login details to the election system by the ESG, locked everyone else out of the system by mistake and then was allowed to keep those login details anyway for the rest of the campaign. And then lied about it despite proof that it had happened and the ESG admitting it. That’s when the attack puppies came a-wailing.

The reason positivity may be starting to wane is people have had time to think through the proposals, read the slides (which were rushed through due to time constraints on the night) and do a bit of research. My sense is people are so desperate for this to work, want to see football marginally more entertaining than watching paint dry, feel there is a bit of ambition and something to look forward to that they are prepared to overlook the obvious flaws in this proposal or just block them out. Nothing can be as bad as starting again in the Combined Counties League with nothing. At least now we have something ..... for now. Going into administration is not a foregone conclusion if this deal fails. We just have to make some tough choices. If it is, the directors will have failed in the fiduciary duty and the auditors will have been negligent signing off our statutory accounts as a going concern (in which they believe the business can exist for more than 12 months).

And if they don’t vote then the DTB could say they did anyway.

Numbers. There are fewer than 40 people on here discussing it, maybe 100 (probably far fewer) on Facebook. Some more on Secret Discord. Perhaps 300 going to meetings physically or virtually including a lot already counted from social media. Some more reading the pack in detail. We have nearly 7000 members, it seems to me that 80% or more are paying really scant attention to the whole thing. That may be very sad but it is the way it is. If those people vote it will be on things like 87 million, recommendation from the DTB etc.