Whilst I keep my mind open to fan ownership options moving forwards, I am practically 100.% aligned with Timmy.

WJ. The non capitalised one. :)

Stu D - we don’t deserve to be fan-owned - that’s why I’m now backing the sell out camp. I don’t feel I get anything more by the club being fan owned. We saved the club, survived, have even prospered, but what’s needed now is a new direction. This place, ProBoards and Discord has led me to believe we need a strong owner in charge

I agree with Aideen and yet another incorrect link sent out by the DTB showing what an amateur approach we currently have to fan/member communication.

To get maximum value for the unissued shares, club should issue convertible loan stock. This would convert automatically after, say, 10 years into the shares. Between now and then it would be secured against the club's assets, ranking only behind the bank loans. Holder would have right to convert at any time, but club would not.

Ian E - which 'can' did you want to replace?

Can't not can

Said it before. Fan ownership CAN work in the EFL. Our particular circumstances are different tho. We bought 1 ground then built a 2nd from scratch. That takes a buttload of fans cash. I think sometimes we can also look at club failures and say fans can run a club when it could just be the fans running the club at the moment aren't particularly good.

A decent away day point on Saturday. I'm thinking around £7m for the remaining 27% down to 50.01%. What is the Clubs' ambition, now it is at home support capacity and how can it grow it's capacity? What Stand can be expanded without reducing capacity? what i wonder, are the continuous I.T costs?

My son took 10+ mates to Wembley. They all support other clubs but they like us and fancied a day out. They wouldn't invest in the club, but I have a feeling that if NPL had a bigger capacity some of them would come along to a game or two, maybe even buy a season ticket. And an increased capacity might pick up some new fans, especially those with kids, who cannot get tickets for their preferred big clubs. As has happened since we moved from KM.

Hash - the risk premium would be far greater now than when NR bought in. Then we were thinking that NPL would bring in enough revenue to cover playing L1/L2 football. Now we know there is a roughly 2 million systemic loss each year. If we don't solve that problem and 50%+1 only helps there at the margins (reduced debt) then shares in a year or two will be worth zero. Any halfway rational person isn't going to spend a lot on shares without some strong safeguards that they won't be waste paper in a couple of years.

Nick, I can’t agree about us not being badly run. Off the top of my head I give you the ticket fiasco, disastrous contract with the caterers whose name I can’t remember , the 400k missing money (all of which we were warned about dealing with). Then there’s the food vans on silly deals, treating volunteers so badly that many have walked ( would love to know how much that’s cost us) ,in some cases being replaced by paid staff. There’s much more I’m sure but can’t think right now.

30,000 at Wembley weren't all wimbledon fans,plenty support other teams like west ham like my cousins family who were at Wembley, spoke to a Yeovil fan in our end,plenty of day trippers .1 k a season each to stay fans owned or sell up wonder what % that would be in poll😂

Trigs, Nick Robertson bought 10% for £2.5M. At the time we were on the verge of pulverisation so I imagine the shares are worth a bit more now. Maybe c. £8-8.5M for 30%?

I would argue that as fans we do pay to be fan-owned though premium ticket prices along with supporting the merchandise available, however it just isn’t enough. As for not deserving to be fan-owned if we don’t support it - I just don’t get that as I didn’t support Wimbledon because they were fan-owned and neither did I continue with that by supporting AFC Wimbledon, there was no choice and it has worked for a good 20 years.

Do we have an idea of what £ amount going to 50+1 would bring in?

Just for the record when discussing this - I'm not advocating or arguing for or against any ownership model. So when I'm asking questions about 50+1 I'm not trying to persuade anyone that it does or doesn't work.

The 50+1 is important as it will pay off a lot of the bonds. It will make us a more attractive purchase as we come with lower debt and shows we can pay stuff off. In the short term it will mean we won't have to pay the bonds due in a couple of years and will keep our heads above water.

I think to Timmy's point "we don't deserve fan ownership if we don't pay for it" the problem is that 71% of members want to sell to at least 50+1 but the articles mean the minority can veto that. So those 29% are the ones who need to step up and put the money in.

OI/Trigg - you may both be correct… I guess my leaning towards 50+1 rather than immediate full sellout is because I think maybe it’s something that might be more acceptable to a greater proportion of fans as a stepping stone, and that a little while after that stage the full sell would be the next acceptable step. Obviously I’m no expert in financials, and I’m only looking at things from a “how I think many fans would feel about different selling options” viewpoint (my own perception, not because I’ve done any sort of survey, not even among friends…). As usual, time will tell, but the main point appears to be that doing nothing isn’t really an option unless we are happy to let things continue to slide backwards (including our potential league position…).

Agreed re 50+1 unless there’s something I’m missing on how it would work and what would be needed/done to avoid ending up back in the same place in 2-3 years time. Happy to have it explained otherwise though.

If I thought I could trust the people running the club I might put more money in but the way the DTB act I would'nt trust them with my lunch money

I don't see what we get from selling to 50%+1. Unless someone is covering operating losses on an ongoing basis, the shares we're trying to sell are worth pennies, even lower than JG's valuations. So anyone buying them will demand a major say in how the club is run so that their investment isn't worthless in a year or two. In other words they will behave as if they were majority owners, so they might as well be.

Grant

Wrexham receive 18 million non repayable from the Welsh government. What are we doing wrong?