Foxy Angus already spamming me to get mw to send him a proxy for the 2nd vote on super RAs ....

ravabelli - all the DTB candidates emphasise that the purpose of the DTB is oversight rather than running the club but how much they stick to that is another issue. We do have professionals in place in running the club, whether they have the ability to trun us into a going concern is another matter but they are I guess the best we can get.

ravabelli "that *should* have big ambition now we're home" honestly you're being as delusional as the people you're calling out for it. We're years, decades away from big ambitions unless someone with 5-10m PER YEAR to invest is interested.

Paddington. Wow, just wow. Talk about doubling down on a huge cock-up. 3,258 voted YES, 446 against and 148 abstained. So needs a huge turnaround. Yet voting (appears) to have started. Which would mean people will start to vote and there are 3,258 members who presumably won't change unless they hear alternative views which MAY influence them. But the danger now is that will be too late.

The only way to significantly increase the playing budget is to sell out control to someone willing to put money in (any feasible increase in our financial performance in the current structure would, at best, allow us to maintain the current budget with lower losses). Given that there is clearly no appetite to sell among our current DT membership (and, if we vote through the Super RA we are doing the corporate governance equivalent of Houdini padlocking himself into a milk churn, so wouldn't be able to sell even if we wanted to) that isn't going to happen short of administration.

Agreed Dundonald they only have to look at Rushden & Diamonds and to a much lesser extent Darlington

Do our fans honestly think the DTB has much of a future? Will it not just be continued mess after mess? It's time some of our fans wake up to the fact that amateur, part-time people can't be responsible for running a full-time, professional football club that *should* have big ambition now we're home and with everything that entails. I'd love to stay fan-owned, by the way, but it has become evident that there's only so much we can do as we are. In fact, we'll just decline. The sooner the wider fanbase realise this, the better or we risk settling for a shite deal in the future when we're really close to losing it all.

TSO: I do wonder what candidates mean in saying that selling out is "non- negotiable." Option of last resort? Signalling resolve until such time as the evidence points to fan ownership not being sustainable? Posturing? How many fans would sooner the club go tits-up than support a club not owned by them? I don't think being non- league and fan- owned is sustainable, in the current and foreseeable climate, unless we swap PL for KM (no thanks). It may be that there is a way through with majority fan ownership, which would be great, but not non- negotiable.

Confirmed, no proxies at chairs discretion

Is there a mechanism for the 'result' to be scrutinised from outside of the 'steering group'?

OI exactly - the delusion is palpable.

TSO spot on with the first bit. Selling down will be enough (maybe) to pay off what we owe on the bonds. We're losing 1.5+m per year and that one off share sale doesn't solve that. It's not even going to touch the sides of the playing budget - which best guess is currently lower mid table L2. People need to stop with the idea that it will give us a better playing budget.

Lurker - the DTB have repeatedly said there is nobody lined up to buy overpriced shares offering no control but I have seen people claim that yet again they are telling lies and there is a queue outside the office.

Blimey. 2nd vote email just arrived. They obviously don't feel the need for reflection.

Lee, selling down solved nothing it just kicked the can down the road. If we can get a clear update on an actual strategy I expect the vote to be put to members again. We need a board with ideas and plans not the total bullshit they presented. I believe the vote should include selling out completely but based on the feedback from my question on Proboards there is no likely hood of this happening as appears a red line for all candidates including those who could be new to the board.

Did we ever find out if there is this (these) mystery philanthropist sitting there thinking I'll sink millions into the money pit that is AFC Wimbledon to get them to being a meh league one club? Or is the 50.01 win/lose/sort of neither still totally irrelevant to anything in the real world?

I hate people giving the Chair proxies but that isn't all proxies, they can be cast in favour or against. If they really want to go ahead with the Super RAs (crazy and Nick is right, just wait for admin and the bond holders shafted) they still need to get 3000+ votes/proxies in a fairly short timescale.

Proxy forms in 2nd vote only have yes/no options as far as I know

IIRC there are currently circa 6% of shares available to buy, then what was proposed the additional 24.99% (30.99% total)made available, what's stopping the DTB making say up to 15% available to supporters and families? It would provide an income. Not as friendly debt, but as friendly share options.

Lee selling down or not has nothing to do with the team budget as we're years away from finance actually increasing that.

We’re fucked. don't wanna hear anyone who voted against it moaning about having a shit team

Hash, that’s exactly what I expect and Hope does happen. Almost every no vote that I know of were actually not yet, not like this.

You either vote or not, no proxies in future please.

If I’m right then Angus has the proxies for the second vote so if he could tell us the outcome now that might save a lot of moot discussion.

Have to wonder where did all these Yes votes for Res 1 came from as 621 voted yes for Res 1 and potentially No for Res 2 if look at difference between the 2 YES votes yet I not seen 1 person who stated they were voting YES on Res 1