Galty has put in £2m? Excellent news - our money worries are over, praise be to Galty!!! 🤪🥳👏😇

Postman he is great,does about 15 pubs in a session .will give it a watch[Link]

When we tried to raise capital through selling more shares during the construction of the stadium it barely reached £2m. It was heavily pushed and incentives were offered depending on the value of the investment, some of which I believe still remain unhonoured. Even the stadium installation with names of subscribers had many missing names because of poor data and to this day I am still chasing the club to put this right. I'd love to be wrong but I simply don't believe the appetite is there. The reason the bonds were successful is investors could see a return and a route to getting their money back. None of these apply with shares.

The great British pub crawl on you tube was in Wimbledon last night you might see yourself if you take a look and was on the sherbet

We are in some ways poorly run because we make year on year losses with no way to cover them. Other clubs at our sort of level are badly run because they make year on year losses and have someone willing to cover them. I am not sure that there are clubs similar to us in Leagues1 or 2 who regularly break even or better but would be happy to hear details of them.

Thanks Meadow.

6MDM & OI - I wouldn't be doing this as a logical investment. I'd be doing this because Wimbledon have been a big part of my life. That said I wouldn't want my money pissed up against the wall - funding day to day losses - so I most definitely wouldn't invest unless I knew that the Club was going to cease being controlled by a "Collective" and would from herein be run along commercial lines. These latest thoughts have come about because my seat neighbour on Saturday asked me what it would take to get me more financially involved - so I have given it some further thought. But I assure you I'm not chomping at the bit and would be more than happy to spend £2m on something else.

Aideen - to me the issue isn't whether I had 25% - in fact I'd rather not have a large percentage as I wouldn't want or seek any form of control. The issue I would have is with any other one person or entity having significant control.

Nick W: I agree with your assessment with the one proviso - that 5000+ fans owning shares is more akin to fan ownership than the model of ownership by an outdated Collective Industrial & Provident Society. Anyway I have put some money where my mouth is. I would be committed to £2m. Whether or not all, some or any of the other 5000+ fans who currently own shares would participate I can only have a gut feeling which would be we'd be oversubscribed.

JG - agreed. His argument was that no votes mattered because the DT had so many! My suspicion was that an admission that NR had paid less for his 1 vote shares than he did for his 3 vote shares would have complicated the adjustment that was necessary to compensate the purchasers of shares via Seedrs.

OI - I think someone was being somewhat disingenuous suggesting that a share with 3 votes was worth the same as one with 1 vote. Value is usually attributable in proportion to voting rights.

“It’s being edited”

Donial, you have mail.

Aideen, it's being edited. I put out a chaser on Discord last night. It should be available today.

Thanks guys, I’m trying to find out if the meeting is online anywhere? Stu, it’s probably to sell more to ppl who already invested to take them over the currently permitted threshold.

Stuart i think it was said that we have 23.6% available under 50%+1 so if someone wanted 25% they would need to buy 1.4% from existing shareholders

Selling a lot of shares at a big discount, as per JG's suggestion is definitely a good way of raising capital, but would result in the DT losing control of the club, given that the DT has no cash to take up its shares (eg if you assume that the DT owns all of the "3 vote" shares then if we issued another 200m of the one vote shares to new investors the DT voting stake would be diluted to ~25%). I personally don't mind that, as I think that the day of fan ownership is past at our level, but it's not an easy solution. In reality, if you did this, neither most of the small shareholders nor the DT would take up their rights shares, so in effect this would be a route for takeover by a small number of wealthy fans, who would then still have to stand behind our losses (even if those might be reduced if we increased our capacity) or see their investment wiped out.

Aideen - the move to 25% would be voted on as it’s a RA. My only question is I don’t believe we can sell 25% as it would move us under 50.1

Selling more shares for whatever price without the purchaser getting control is akin to a donation as they will get nothing in return and cannot easily sell the shares at a later date. The shares I own in the PLC are effectively worthless. The PLC registrar has said as much to me in writing in the past when I enquired for tax purposes. We do not get told how much a stand costs to operate and how much additional revenue would be required to cover this, let alone generate surplus income to erode the trading losses. Then there is the disruption to stadium capacity during construction, should we even afford to build another stand which I doubt given how much the west stand cost, when we need as much income now as possible just to stay afloat. I can't see a rights issue raising very much and it still would not deal sufficiently with trading losses.

Is part of **

Aideen - unless I misunderstood - any potential investors - after all negotiations etc will be put to the membership to have the final vote - and lifting the 15% threshold is sort of the 50.01 vote

Aideen my understanding is that is going to be voted on as part of the 50%+1 vote in March.

No one else worried that we’ve now upped the limit if how much someone can own to 25% with no consulting with ‘owners” Sneaky that.

Yes,thank mother nature for global warming (climate change)

OTD was first game since 15th December nearly 2 months winters were harsher in those days