EXCLUSIVE: Dons board member quits amid plans to shrink fan ownership for emergency stadium investment
AFC Wimbledon fans may have to accept they cannot retain their three-quarters share in the club after it emerged the club needs £11million to complete its stadium.
The Kingsmeadow outfit’s fan owners, the Dons Trust, has blocked anyone else owning more than 25 per cent since the League One side was created seven tiers of the football pyramid lower in 2002.
Investors are already lining up to pour money into the club to ensure the new stadium, at the club’s spiritual home in Plough Lane, is of the best quality. But they will insist on having more of a say in how their money is spent.
And if trust members block an injection of investment, the stadium which opens next year will be of poorer quality.
The agenda for a special December 9 meeting of the trust says: “Construction of the stadium is underway. We have not yet signed the main construction contract and are not able to do so until we have the necessary funding lined up.
“We do not yet have a firm offer of a loan. We are working hard to secure one but it is taking us longer than we expected to get there, and there is no guarantee that we will get what we are looking for.
“If we are to build the full phase one of the stadium for 2020/21, we need to be able to demonstrate to our contractor by January that we will have the funding available.
“There are individuals who are willing to provide us with capital. They have made clear to us that they have the long-term interests of AFC Wimbledon at heart and are not motivated by making a profit. They would bring deep and varied business experience to the relevant boards.
“Investors would require us to make major changes to the ownership structure and governance of AFC Wimbledon. They agree that the Dons Trust must have complete control over issues such as selling the stadium, relocating the club or changing our name, badge or colours.
“However, they are not content for the Trust to insist on retaining 75% voting control as this limits their rights and the club’s ability to raise more money if and when we need it.”
One trust board member, Rob Crane, has resigned his position as a result of the proposal, saying: “We are where we are. And unfortunately for me one of the things we as a club are now going to have to consider – bringing in external investment – goes against what I personally have for years been saying about how I believe a fan-owned club should be running itself.
“No matter how unpalatable it is to me, we’re going to have to consider that option in order to keep the Plough Lane dream and our club alive. But given my long-standing concerns, it’s not an option that I personally could stomach presenting to our members with my name attached to it.”
And some fans have already expressed their fears.
One said on message board Wombles Underground Press: “This is awful – it’s like being visited by a dreadful ghost from your past, and not a friendly one either.”
Another said: “The majority will be against though and we don’t seem to have left very much time. Dangerous to expect people to vote in favour just because you’ve given them no choice.”
Another added: “We voted to go back to Plough Lane, creditable ambition but the chickens have come home to roost. Whatever the outcome it will be a defining day in our history.”
But one said: “It looked a possibility from the moment only £1.4m (at under £500 per head) was raised by our 3,000 or so fans. A good effort but ….. Think it is quite an attractive choice as long as we get the necessary safeguards and are not overly precious about it.”
A spokesman for AFC Wimbledon said: “The stadium at Plough Lane is proceeding and we are fully
committed to returning to our spiritual home back in Wimbledon. The issue we face is that the
funding currently available to us will only pay for the bare minimum stadium. There are options for
doing more than that, including bringing in external investment, but quite rightly, it is a choice for
Dons Trust members, the owners of the club. We have presented the options to our members and
will be listening carefully to their views over the coming weeks.”
Pictured: Flats being built on the Plough Lane site by the Dons’ development partner Galliard Homes.
Everyone at the South London Press thanks you for your continued support.
Former Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick has encouraged everyone in the country who can afford to do so to buy a newspaper, and told the Downing Street press briefing:
“A FREE COUNTRY NEEDS A FREE PRESS, AND THE NEWSPAPERS OF OUR COUNTRY ARE UNDER SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL PRESSURE”
If you can afford to do so, we would be so grateful if you can make a donation which will allow us to continue to bring stories to you, both in print and online. Or please make cheques payable to “MSI Media Limited” and send by post to South London Press, Unit 112, 160 Bromley Road, Catford, London SE6 2NZ
£2.4 million was raised by just over 5000 fans not 1.4 from 3k. as a shareholder and dons trust member i am appauled at being kept in the dark on this and being given no time to sort alternatives and votes, that being said we knew we would need outside investment at some stage, but either have a 1 stand ground with less capacity than we have now is just wrong on all counts. as long as we have a strong foot hold in the club ownership then we should welcome the investment and make our once great club great again
Agreed with the above statement. This new CEO isn’t exactly doing the greatest of jobs. I think we haven’t seen any statements from him regarding the stadium. If the club wants to evolve then we must bite the bullet and get investment in. Providing we can have something similar to swansea , we could be part fan owned. If not we will be back in the non league, I don’t like it and are sceptical like everyone else but needs must .
I don’t see the issue here? AFCW already encourage a great deal of external investment through sponsorship and naming rights at the Cherry Red Records Stadium at Kingsmeadow. No complaints at these moves. So long as it is recorded that the club, through its fanbase, maintains control over certain sacrosanct issues like stadium moves, club colours etc or if they can maintain a 51% stake then I see no issue. There are other fan owned clubs higher up the pyramid than us. Let’s see what the investors demands or requirements are before we start wetting our diapers.