I am still inclined to vote against the 50.01% purely from the place that says they are a trust. Recently their activities have shown them to be untrustworthy in my opinion. When simple process and procedures have been openly neglected in favour of a closed shop clique that has seen TWO board members resign over the lack of transparency and the withdrawal of TWO candidates who have all seen through this charade. Think about it, these four people could have been a major percentage of the DTB in office. A major chunk of future change candidates and Board members that dared to remove themselves from this, rather than endorse the practices some there choose to live by. The DTB don't speak for me, nor will I toe the line in voting for something that they are pushing for us to support. The principle of the sale isn't the issue for me, it's the selective actions they choose to work on, and those that the ignore that they don't. I do not trust them, in my view they are the worst DTB in the history of the club. The definition of trust is, firm belief in the reliability, truth, or ability of someone or something. To me they are seriously lacking in this. The views expressed here are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the WUP moderation team or owners.

When the DTB announced that they were giving membership to all and sundry I actually thought they must be trying to stymie 50+1. Baffling.

I'm slightly concerned by the precedent of hosting a vote, being told no, then going ahead anyway - on the justification of holding a vote with a gun to people's heads.

And (not for a hat trick) does it seem dubious that this announcement suddenly arrives when those who are going to vote in the elections, will already have done so?

It is also weird that we woo potential investors with the idea that there will be an agreement in principle and THEN it has to pass two 75% votes when we've gifted membership to a load of people who are not very interested in the running of the DT and plc

Methinks that email should have been sent out at least five years ago

Getting the debt down is one thing Martin and excellent that that is being worked on. Solving our ongoing annual loss is another issue entirely. Will the new investors commit to chipping in each year to help cover losses? If not we're achieving little and still heading eventually for administration.

TBK- £600k is all very well (and impressive as a level of one- off donations) but it’s probably less than a third of our current year operating losses (assuming no player sales), so we are actually getting deeper into trouble even with those donations.

Yes Spartan. I'm worried I might get in! ;)

Nick, I don't think you can be quite so dismissive when various initiatives have reduced our debt by over £600k this year [Link]

TBK - only 5 get in. He had 317

Interesting email- seems pretty clear that the panic button has been pushed when the “last throw of the dice” appeal for donations proved wildly insufficient. Sadly I doubt that we will attract any meaningful investors while we want to retain trust control, but this represents the next step on the road to acceptance of reality, that our model simply doesn’t work in the long term in an environment where basically all of the other competitors are willing and able to operate at a loss, funded by investors/owners.

It really is a pity that such an important issue is being handled by a bunch of people who’ve shown themselves to be imaginative with the truth .

All very good points 6mdm.

I think TBK is worried about coming last in the viewing figures. 🙄😉

I got the email too. We need proper informed choices, not misleading wording to force us into a suboptimal choice. When the question about fan ownership is asked, it should ask do you want to remain TRUST owned and be expected, with other trust members, to continue to find £2m every year through donations, over inflated ticket prices, etc. Merely asking if you want to remain fan owned is not helpful, as you get the wrong answers. If we sell out to an investor, they will want a return either by asset stripping or selling the club on to somebody else. If we can find a benefactor to sell to, which will fund our ongoing losses, as soon as they get bored, run out of money or sell up, we will have been living beyond our means and will have a huge funding issue. If we want to live within our existing means we will need to cut the playing budget and find a level where our reduced income covers our costs to play at. The Plough Lane debt will need to be repaid, whatever choice we make.

TM, interesting stats. What about James Ledward?

doesn't that effectively say 'screw the 50.1 vote, we're going ahead anyway'? Good to see the sugar hit argument being loosely addressed. But feels quite predictable now... there'll be a vote with a gun to our heads, right?!

The panic button has finally been pressed. Why they are only proactively doing these things now is beyond me. [Link]

Finally the penny drops...

A player sell and we will probably lose JJ next year.. get some players in push for promotion, lap up the extra revenue the championship will give us for 1 season. Pay off debts.

Definitely looking at player sales in January. Just hope we can bag sufficient points by then...

Dons Trust update just sent out and looking for further investment. Stops short of saying how financially screwed we currently are..

575 tickets for Blackpool sold already

IF people elected on basis of hustings views it would be: Simon Hood 663 views Sam Spencer 624 Alex Folkes 414 Chris Atkinson 355 Martin Drake 342