Confidence Needed

I always have doubts when discussing the ownership model of our club and how its run because of my volunteer roles at the club, but it's been nagging away at me this week since reading the members resolutions for the forthcoming SGM on 1^st November and the survey released by the Dons Trust regarding the potential of allowing further equity to be made available and reducing our current ownership of 75% + 1. 

 

So lets get this in early that my views in this blog are my own and not reflective of anyone at the club. 

 

This time of year is always busy for the Dons Trust with the elections taking place and the potential movement of people from its board and then bringing them together for the start of the year. Six places are available this time round with half of them being a three-year term, rather than the standard two years, although that is now being challenged by the 7^thmember resolution at the forthcoming SGM. 

 

Out of all the Member Resolutions on the agenda for November’s SGM, the third is the most intriguing one for me. It’s a Vote Of No Confidence (vonc) in the current Dons Trust Board (DTB). As mentioned earlier, six of them are up for reelection if they choose to stand, which we won’t know for a couple of weeks. I will be straight early on and say that my initial thoughts are that I would vote against this, if I decide to renew my Dons Trust membership, which seems to be a yearly conundrum for me these recent years. 

 

The reason I will vote against it is I see no plan for if this vonc passes as we struggled to have a contested election in 2022 and I know that some people only stood to ensure there was a contested election. For me that is not a reason to stand as the commitment needed for the DTB is massive and I strongly feel that anyone standing has to be all-in for the two or three years ahead. 

 

A vonc for me means that the Dons Trust members need confidence and that makes me ask what areas of the club they require more confidence in? 

 

What areas of the club are the DTB responsible for?

 

What will a vonc change?

 

These are some of the questions I have, and I will be interested to listen to the views of the people presenting this motion at the November SGM, although my concerns are that the DTB have changed the voting for the meeting to either voting in person or sending a proxy by email or mail. This means that people will be voting before hearing the reasoning of the motions and potentially something that may change their mind. I have realised from previous motions raised that listening to the debate in the meeting have changed my mind and I wouldn’t be surprised if this could be the case on the six motions raised. I am also hoping for a strong turnout in numbers at the meeting as this is the most motions we have had on any one night and these need to be debated, as the previous numbers of under 100 at these meetings make them very boring and rather uneventful. Whilst the Fans Forum was hectic, it’s the biggest number of people I have seen in a meeting about the club and it was really good to be at, even if it did get heated due to the feelings at the end of the season. 

 

In one of the three other motions for the evening the Operation Board (PLC) have been named and either asked for more participation or questioning of the decision for the PLC Chair. One of the challenges I have had in recent years is what are the PLC responsible for, because like anyone I have questions on how we are run or who has made a decision. My basic understanding is the PLC are responsible for day-to-day operational decisions., with the PLC Chair also managing Craig Cope, Johnnie Jackson, Micheal Hamilton and the incoming Managing Director. The decision of Mick Buckley being asked to stay on a PLC chair is questioned in the 8^th Members Resolution. For clarity I have known Mick for many years, and he was very supportive of our podcast and our request to have some additional access to club for interviews etc back in the Kingsmeadow days. I also get on well with Mick and enjoy our regular chats about the club we both love, and I have no doubt the love for the club he has and that gives me great confidence that he is a good chair in addition to his business knowledge from his career away from Wimbledon. I understood fully why the DTB asked for Mick to stay on as PLC Chair in light of the recruitment of a Managing Director being needed and to provide stability needed at the club. My understanding is that PLC Chair role is a two day a week position and I am not sure if that is all we can afford or if that is the timeline required for a PLC Chair of a business generating nearly £9m annually, but it does seem to me that it must be very challenging to do the role for two days and I have no doubt it is a full time role. I was disappointed in Mick’s role in the Fans Forum in May, and he admitted as much in the recent official podcast interview and conceded that with all the stuff going on at the end of the season, the preparation for the meeting wasn’t what it should have been, and he didn’t read the room as well as he would have liked. I am please Mick has said this and it doesn’t surprise me either, and from the role I had in the evening live stream, the preparations weren’t great as I turned up without any idea of the structure and I learnt some lessons from it, that if it was to be asked to do it again, I would raise. 

 

My only question on the motion is what plans we have to replace Mick, in terms of salary, recruitment of the role and also will we get someone to do the role being paid for two days when we all surely appreciate its more involved than that. I have full confidence in Mick and see no reason to replace him, if we are holding the Fans Forum against him when we all make mistakes surely. 

 

The PLC is such a massive role for the club, and I will be voting for the motion of the PLC to host two online ‘Meet the PLC’ meeting per calendar year. I would prefer one of them to be in person as I am not sure how much influence the DTB have nowadays, and they are simply an oversight board rather than making decisions. What is happening on the PLC is of more interest to me and I can’t remember when we heard from the others on the PLC that are representing the shareholders that have invested. 

 

I know this blog has no structure to it as I literally have so much rubbish going around in my head so apologies, but I personally worry about the direction this club is heading. We need a strong DTB to provide oversight and to be our link to the PLC, however recent years would seriously put me off even thinking of standing for the DTB as it seems a thankless task. To provide all those hours and have certain ownership of challenging areas, without the support of the members would seem difficult. We go into a period of having to manage the first rollout of Plough Lane Bonds (PLB) which could seriously challenge our playing budget if we don’t have a plan how to replay these. This is in part one of the reasons for the survey of releasing more equity with a vote planned in early 2024. 

 

Part of the document on the survey suggests that opening up the remaining equity to the 50% +1 level would pay off the £10m debt that is covered by the PLB. Releasing the debt would be a massive help and relive us from the annual £400k interest payments on the PLB. With the additional income from commercial and the benefit of increased payments from London Broncos who have successfully been promoted into the Super League, our financial picture is getting better year on year. 

 

But surely the question that needs to be asked is if we are currently struggling to sell the 7% equity, we currently have available, what confidence do we have in an additional 25% being sold and what safeguards do we have that one person doesn’t buy the whole 32% and become a significant player and, in a position, to stage a hostile takeover?

 

I have made no secret of my feelings that external ownership could be needed and my view of this has been tested with recent going on’s at other clubs and Andy Holt putting Accrington Stanley up for sale, but I still stand by the view that there are good owners out there, but naturally bad owners are the ones that hit the headlines. The Andy Holt situation intrigues me as it probably shows that the more successful you are, the more fans expectation levels increase. For the majority of Accrington’s history, they have been a non-league club, yet with success attracts new fans and they want/expect the same level standard of football etc. I sense that’s where we are at as Plough Lane is attracting new fans every season and they don’t remember us in 2002 at home to Chipstead or beating a very strong Luton Town in the Conference playoff, they see a team that was in League One playing the likes of Sheffield Wednesday and Portsmouth in a lovely stadium and that is the level they want or expect us to be competing at. We are currently expected to be 16^thin the League 2 budget table this season which means we are overachieving at present and also raises concern with some teams coming out of the National League with decent budgets will probably move us further down the budget table if we don’t do something. 

 

We are also hoping to keep our budget competitive by selling on players from our academy and jewels coming in, like Ali Al-Hamadi and James Tilley, but we will get periods where we just don’t have sellable assets and we don’t have external founding to cover those gaps. Relegation to the National League would see a massive part of funding for academy disappear overnight and really make our financial position extremely challenging.

So, I suppose back to the headline of this blog about confidence needed. We have so many elements to this club apart from what happens on the pitch on a matchday. 

 

We have an excellent role in the community with the foundation who regularly win awards and do so much every week away from matchday, we have a strong DLAG that people who interact with them see us as Wimbledon and anyone that has been down to our training ground recently, will see a vibrant and massive academy presence. I recently went to watch the U18’s vs Brentford at the training ground and the number of things going on amazed me and instantly reminded me of how well we are doing. Loads of games going on with different age groups and most of them walking around in Wimbledon training gear or kit. 

 

Whilst I appreciate fans need confidence, I am not so sure we are looking in the right place or even targeting the right people. We need to be united and behind the volunteers on our DTB to give them the enthusiasm and determination to represent us, and whilst I agree that we need more visibility from the PLC, they have massive decisions to make and are recruiting three Non-Executive Directors who will provide additional experience needed in the skill gaps we have. 

 

They say politics and football don’t mix and I am a strong believer in this and the politics around the club at the moment need to be resolved and let us all come together. 

 

We have some really challenging times ahead for the financial wellbeing of our club and whilst I am not against external ownership, some of the decisions we make now will shape us for the future with whatever model the DT members vote for.