So, where do we go from here

[Alfie]

Just interesting to read David Johnston's views on consolidating at this level for a couple of years. He obviously Shares MGs ambitions

"Where do you see the club being in two years?

In those two years we’ve got to get into the Conference and have a sustainable club. I’d like to think we could get out of the Conference, but it all depends on budget.

I’ve seen stuff around, people saying things like ‘it’s okay if Martin Gray leaves, we’ll just stay at this level, or whatever’, but I don’t see it that way and I’m prepared to discuss that with the fans.

Football is a competitive game and you’ve got to think about your squad. They want to play at the highest level they can, the staff have played at a higher level and they want to get back there. If you’re saying that you’re content to stay at this level then you’re not going to attract the best players, and at that point you’re on a downward slope and the club begins to go backwards, gets into financial difficulty and goes out of operation, and we can’t allow that to happen.”

It seems to be clear that our CEO and manager share a vision for the club which requires (endless?) budget increases so that the club can continually progress - there seems to be an assumption that 'not progressing' = ' a downward slope' leading to financial difficulties etc etc

I believe that evidence at all levels of football suggests the exact opposite - financial difficulties occurs when a club spends beyond its means chasing the dream of promotion - which must then be followed by more spending to get another promotion, or simply to cover the extra costs arising form the first promotion - in our case moving from a regional league (even with the likes of Brackley in the north) to a national league would incur extra costs with little or no increase in revenue. There is little evidence in our case that promotions have increased our revenue.

I don't like conspiracies but you could argue that it is in our CEO's/manager's interests that we fail to raise the money for the seats either thru our own efforts or the lack of willing sponsors - it would be used to say that we cannot fund ourselves as a fan financed club - that we need outside invstment - and by chance I have people willing and able to help us out - all they ask is that you forget this 'fan owned' nonsense and let the people with the money call the shots.

I really do fear the club is heading/being manoeuvred into a position where sufficient people will buy the 'invest or die' scenario and be prepared to sacrifice the benefits (and limitations) of fan ownership for the promise of increased budgets offering on the field success in the next few years.

[lo36789]

I really do fear the club is heading/being manoeuvred into a position where sufficient people will buy the 'invest or die' scenario and be prepared to sacrifice the benefits (and limitations) of fan ownership for the promise of increased budgets offering on the field success in the next few years.

I have a little bit of faith that those who are actually paid up investors will want to protect their investment. It needs 75% of people who have put their own hard earned money in to vote for a change in the articles to give an external party the necessary power.

[liddle_4_ever]

I really do fear the club is heading/being manoeuvred into a position where sufficient people will buy the 'invest or die' scenario and be prepared to sacrifice the benefits (and limitations) of fan ownership for the promise of increased budgets offering on the field success in the next few years.

I have a little bit of faith that those who are actually paid up investors will want to protect their investment. It needs 75% of people who have put their own hard earned money in to vote for a change in the articles to give an external party the necessary power.

It all comes down to how the supporters group allocate their votes. If they put their full weight behind the majority votes then wouldn't need a massive percentage of our fan base to vote for external investment in order for it to pass. However if the supporters group allocate their votes proportionally I can't see it passing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr_Tibbs]

I really do fear the club is heading/being manoeuvred into a position where sufficient people will buy the 'invest or die' scenario and be prepared to sacrifice the benefits (and limitations) of fan ownership for the promise of increased budgets offering on the field success in the next few years.

I have a little bit of faith that those who are actually paid up investors will want to protect their investment. It needs 75% of people who have put their own hard earned money in to vote for a change in the articles to give an external party the necessary power.

It all comes down to how the supporters group allocate their votes. If they put their full weight behind the majority votes then wouldn't need a massive percentage of our fan base to vote for external investment in order for it to pass. However if the supporters group allocate their votes proportionally I can't see it passing.

lo's correct, he's talking about a vote on a Special Resolution (between DFCSG members at a General Meeting) and not a vote taken by the Supporters Group as an entity.

Nice thread title.