nicander what I've come to realise over the last 6-12 months is that if/when we struggle to repay the bulk of the bonds, that's when the die hard fan owned people will realise what owning a professional English football club actually means. Putting your hands into your own pockets every single year. Not to buy a ticket or a shirt. That's what supporters do. But to put in your own money to keep the club running. Right now it would take an extra £300 pa from each DT member, i.e. owner, to keep the current budget sustainable. To improve it we're talking at least £500 pa each. That's the realistic cost of owning a professional football club. And since all ST holders are DT owners, increasing prices will effectively do the same to those people. The majority of the increase will be picked up there.

Stuart just a guess but I think they'd had their own little huddle and decided that the only way to guarantee getting 50.01 was to give people who don't want to sell out something they see as a guarantee we don't lose control.

Too many "ultimately"s

Hash that's good. I knew the figure was around 10M but not the payment schedule. I now see OI's 2030 making sense as well. IIRC the interest is 450K pa, so only around 25% of our annual losses. So by 2030 we're likely to have somewhere between 5M & 8M extra debt that we can't service and potentially haven't got a loan to cover.

On the debt repayment milestones - one of the reasons the PLB guys were supportive of 50.01 was that they think it is unconscionable to go back and ask the fanbase to roll over/bail us out again. I agree that wouldn't be ideal, but I also think that was the thinking that meant we had to do PLB in the first place. If the risk is existential, I think ultimately we will grumble and moan but ultimately bail ourselves out - that is what owners of all football clubs end up doing if they want the club to survive. And ultimately we all want something to do on a Sat afternoon. What the structures of that are (shares, more bonds, some sort of high-level membership offer etc) would need figuring out.

I expect the decision to sell down (or out) will be made for us. It's now just a case of whether it avoids doing it with a gun to the head.

Why did the DTB include the resolution to implement a SRA in the first place?

Whilst I voted for 50+01% I’m not sure that there would have been any serious takers - for what would have been a minority equity stake (where a politburo has control) at some irrational and significantly over inflated price. Frankly I wouldn’t have been remotely interested. Fan ownership will now have to deliver what it says on the tin – fans funding the day to day running costs through the non-subsidised price they pay for their tickets, whilst also providing access to future funds for investment in the development of the stadium (which no one has talked about). Time to become real & responsible owners!!!!

Nick I would suspect the football club would go first if we keep losing money every season. Whilst that would be an issue of the owners not being able to maintain it doesn't automatically mean the DT goes first. The DT might be able to manage the friendly debt through deferments But if it can't pay it has to call in the debts from it's own biggest debtor - the football club. That would be before we got to the DT having to sell assets. Also the football club money is going to actual third parties who are more likely to refuse to defer - especially the suppliers. Plus the FA are likely to step in if we stop being able to pay the players. Typically it's the club that goes bust not the owners (not always but usually), the owners generally are club creditors as well.

Doobs - You might need to do a Round 2 of your Hustings following the overnight revelations !

Lurker, we have a total debt of £10.2M of which around £1.7M will either be paid off or written off next year. We then have another £3.3M to pay off in 2027 (assuming nobody roles over / donates / converts) and another £3M or so in 2030. At the moment we have been using money from player sales to put aside to cover these payments, however that cannot be guaranteed so the idea of having an extra 30% of equity available was that it could be used to help pay off this debt. Those debt crunch points are crucial and this vote takes away a significant option to help find the money. RE your second question, it wouldn't directly solve our operational loss but we would be able to redirect interest payments to operational expenditure and / or the playing budget and it would take a considerable pressure off as we would be able to put money from cup runs, player sales etc back into the club and not have to put it aside to make these payments. Hope this helps

ravabelli it's not an issue, I actually think the phrase "football has changed" would probably be more worthwhile telling to people than "greatest story in football". It's certainly more relevant.

Its pretty difficult to work out so far in advance how administration would actually happen ( and it’s certainly not my area of expertise) but arguably one route is that the DT goes into administration because it can’t pay the interest or principal on the bonds. The assets of the DT (ie its shares in/loans to the club) would presumably be sold to pay the DT’s creditors - the sale would be forced and regardless of the preferences of the DT members?

the issue I will always have with 50.01 is that I have no way of knowing that this actually solves the 2 biggest problems. 1. we have still got something like 10M in debt to pay over the next 3(?) years. 2. how does someone buying those shares solve us losing 1.5M+ per year?

Lurker - Apologies, missed that.

WJ, absolutely that

Trebor correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the bond(s) lend the money to the trust who then lent it to the club? Which would still make the trust by far the club's biggest creditor

Trebor - there is no 'membership income' for ST holders. There is outlay from the club, they pay the DT for these people to have membership.

ravabelli I never said we could - you're currently projecting onto people because you didn't get what you want. I've said repeatedly that as things stand the only way now is sell the whole thing.

Actually, if the trust 'membership income' now goes direct to the club via season ticket sales, presumably that no longer applies.

OI - I think you're right. Any realistic Don will surely agree.

REPD - with a trusted board and transparent communication I believe 50.01 would have passed this time

Wouldn't the trust be one of the major creditors if the club went into administration? Just thinking of the previous process of the trust lending the club money then converting the debt into shares, but maybe that's no longer done?

OI- I think that your projection of when we will lose control unless something changes is pretty accurate

Lurker - If you think we can continue you as we are in a modern sport that is completely fucked, you too are incredibly deluded. The sport's changed, we simply have to adapt to that.