Now 2-1 ...

For those who might be interested it's currently Radcliffe 1 - Hebburn 1 after 26 mins.

Totally agree with OI's post - the commercial rate for an unsecured loan to the DT would be well over 10% (as they themselves have effectively admitted). If people want to lend to them at 5% as a donation (or below-market rate loan if you prefer) then that is fine - but we shouldn't pretend that this would be a rational investment as it isn't (ie nobody other than an AFCW supporter or someone who doesn't understand risk would even consider this as an investment). Ironically, probably the one thing that might make it a good deal would be Trigger's scenario of a deep-pocketed minority investor waiting to buy in, who would essentially agree to fund our losses (and hence would in practice, even if not in theory, would have control of the club)

Silk, it's just another financial product which you earns a return on based on a) the time value of money at a given point, and b) the risk associated with it

The risk free 5 year bond rate is currently about 4.7%, you then add your risk factor on top of that. The fact that we know we'd be paying double figures for a commercial loan give you an idea what the risk factor is (and Plough Lane Bonds are not secured against the ground). I'd want 12-15% to invest in an organisation such as the Dons Trust on a purely commercial basis.

Investment grade bonds/ non investment grade? Secured/ unsecured ? Maturity of bond? Theres a lot of variables, where does the 4-5% figure come from ?

At least your investment in a bank/Building society is covered by the FCA for 120k.

The average rate for investing in bonds is 4-5% so we are giving a competitive rate if we are offering 5%. I think some people are confusing the return you get from bonds and the amount of interest you pay on loans. The only question you have to ask is if you trust the interest and original stake will be paid.

Maybe they’re not interested in playing the bureaucracy game RK and feel that administration is a far easier and faster route to ending fan ownership. The board have already shown that they’re willing to go outside the constitution and outside of members’ wishes (Proxygate) so why bother playing those silly games?

Naz - not piggy backing off a men’s team but owned by a sugarmummy worth 1.1 billion. Many of our fans would hold their noses up at that…

* Which is a shame, because Ryan Hall and the then management EXCEPTED they seem an okay club.

If both us and Bromley go down we will play them again next season

Yeah you mentioned trams last night, Meadow. I thought about getting home that way but couldn't easily work out a way to get to Croydon or wherever to then get the tram to Wimbledon. Oh well, looks like we may not play them there again in the near future. Another Sutton. Which is a shame, because Ryan Hall and the then management they seem an okay club.

Naz, I got two trams and a bus and it took just over an hour. The return journey was a nightmare as some buses were diverted near Hayes Lane. I walked down to Hayes station and picked up the bus there. I got home just after midnight.

There appears to be a large volume of fans against fan ownership and for selling out, so my question would be, why haven't they organised themselves to present n candidates to give members a real alternative?

I used to be 100% behind fan ownership. I am no financial expert but it now seems to me that we are up the creek without a paddle. I have transferred my original shares to my son so would prefer a takeover now rather that getting sod all for them in administration, but either way for the sake of the club surviving (and possibly even prospering, who knows) I hope there is someone out there who sees the potential of a a club with a unique history in a prosperous and well known part of the nation's capital.

Was that on the secret Discord, Laurence?

Who is the ESG chair ? Laurence, many thanks for doing that - most kind.

Good to see my request on your behalf has been actioned, Timmy. James L did say this yesterday about a new chair: There is a chair and we will be announcing imminently.

An ESG Chair has been appointed.

**correction, it looks like the delayed start to the elections has been updated here [Link]

All I know is that my £500,000 is not being rolled-over. I want it repayed on due date, thank you.

Things Im disappointed with - no august newsletter, no August DTb meeting summary, no comms on the elections being delayed, no announcement of an ESG chair, no update on investors 5 weeks on (MB said 3 weeks).

Feels uncomfortably similar to the 2019 three wise mine scenario in that in the coming weeks (arbitrary timeline some bloke on Twitter reckons he knows the details and comes across as a bit clique so he may well do) members will be presented with a vote to approve some minority investors but with the footnote that if we vote against then the club goes into admin or heavy interest debt (the thinly veiled threat in the comms today was that that would be secured against the stadium but someone on here or maybe Twitter suggested that that alone is a restricted action vote - may have been Stu from the 9 Years podcast?) so again it’s a “the beauty of Dons Trust Democracy renewed and independently investigated by The Friends Of The Dons Trust (members carefully selected by The Dons Trust Independent Independent Investigator Selection Group) but once again with a gun to your head and at the last minute.

Certainly see the bond as a bond and not a donation. But I do understand Nick W’s concern over what language our official comms use over the bonds. I’m totally unaware of what the risk is with administration. If someone puts in £50k tomorrow and then the club goes into admin next week, is that money then gone? I didn’t think it worked like that but admit to not being up to speed with the latest bond details.