|
|
Dons Trust Elections - Questionnaire 2010
| Q01 |
If we are not promoted this season, do you think we should try to get a league place and / or go professional (i.e. take on full-time players) as soon as possible, whatever the cost (financial or otherwise)? Is fan ownership non-negotiable? |
| David Hall |
The issue of going fully professional is a difficult one but actually something which I think we appear to be handling reasonably well this season given our unexpected success and the amount of injuries we seem to be accumulating. Like everything I think we need a proper evaluation of the costs of the options of a continued mix and going completely full time. Terry and his team will obviously have their views on this and I would be surprised if this hasn't been the subject of serious discussion and consideration already with Erik.
Against the extra costs we also need to carefully assess the income we can generate from going up - and if we don't - as a consequence of going full time.
The other thing to say is that going full time doesn't necessarily mean better players, just fitter players. There are many very good players at our level who can't afford to go full time because their daytime jobs are more lucrative and often offer better prospects!
There seems to be a mixed experience at other clubs. Some seem to be managing better than others and we need to keep a watchful eye on how others do it - and learn from their successes and their mistakes where appropriate.
The issue of fan ownership may be partly linked in so far as a new owner may be able to bring in significant extra investment - initially. However from a personal perspective I would prefer the club to stay in the hands of the DT. However benign and rich an individual owner - or consortium - may seem at the outset, circumstances change and we all know what happens when their business empires begin to crumble. There are different reasons why people get involved in wanting to own and run a football club and getting behind their motives is quite important.
There are of course the occasional unscrupulous owners who see it as a property deal - collapse the club and sell off the assets for housing or some other commercial use. But most people don't do it to make money - they're deluding themselves if they are! They'll do it as a plaything, a bit of a power trip - and sometimes because they genuinely want to leave a legacy and get some respect from the community.
I think that one of the reasons we run our affairs so well is because we are set up the way we are. That and the outstanding quality of leadership and integrity we have within those who have been running the club. We're not reckless because we don't have some sugar daddy pumping money into us. What we have is a lot of good will from the fans and a huge amount of voluntary effort.
The danger with bringing someone in with lots of cash to invest is that we dilute that good will and that voluntary effort. Suddenly when things go wrong it becomes us and them again.
Having said all that I think we should always keep our door open to proposals. I think that one of the roles of the DT Board is to filter any such proposals and then put any serious ones back to you, the members. But personally speaking it would need an awfully convincing pitch to make me, as a member, give up DT ownership.
|
| |
|
| Mark Davis |
I'm ambitious for this club to go further up the pyramid. How quickly? I think we can quite easily sustain a few years in the BSP, if need be, before fans start to become impatient. Promotion at whatever cost? Of course not. Football is littered with clubs whose owners have thrown caution to the wind and come a cropper. You can pick up the pieces once (as we have done). Twice would be really hard.
For me, fan ownership is a big part of what makes our club special. If our 3,000 supporters were carbon copies of me, then we'd all keep on supporting AFCW in the BSP (if we didn't make it to the League) without being willing to exchange ownership of the club for League success, and would even withstand the odd downward blip in our fortunes.
So, does that mean there are no possible circumstances under which it would be right for the Trust to sell the club? That's harder to say. Imagine a scenario in which further success eluded us and, bit by bit, the 2,999 supporters who aren't carbon copies of me started to drift away. Gates reduce further, playing budgets fall, the club starts to drift down the leagues - you can imagine the spiral. Is there a point at which remaining "fan owned" starts to feel a bit hollow, when there are only 150 people preserving the Wimbledon traditions by bothering to turn up and watch and only 50 of them are DT members? My honest answer to that is that (1) that would then be an issue for the membership to decide, presented with the options. I'd defend their right to choose to remain fan-owned in such a circumstance if that's what they wanted. However, (2) I'm not sure, in all honesty, how often I'd be part of the 150 crowd watching (I wouldn't mind the football so much, but the lack of atmosphere would pretty much kill it for me). Maybe, as one of the 50 remaining DT members, I'd want to hear what else was on offer.
So, a heretical and depressing picture, isn't it? Well yes, but I don't think it's going to happen. Thanks to our predecessor club and the past eight years, we've built up enough critical mass for implosion to be a small risk. But the point I'm making is this. We can make fervent promises about what we will never allow to happen. But making those fervent promises come true depends only partly on what we believe and, to a large extent, on the energy and skill we continue to invest in making AFC Wimbledon a success. Being a fan-owned club with a bullet-proof Constitution doesn't take those risks away. That's why, personally, I'll look as closely at the qualities that candidates bring to the Board as I will at their beliefs.
|
| |
|
| Nicole Hammond |
I think fan-ownership is non-negotiable. I'd like more facts from the financial side of things before I'd have an opinion on the first part of the question, but I wouldn't want us to do anything that would risk our current ownership structure. |
| |
|
| Kate Terriere |
We should definitely aim for league status and/or to go professional but not at 'any cost'. We should not make that change by adopting a high risk strategy - it has to be done in a measured way. We need to make sure the finances are in place and that the projected income is realistic and sustainable. We should not borrow money to fund players wages.
Fan ownership is non-negotiable but if someone offered the club a substantial amount of money then I believe the Board should at least discuss the opportunity and negotiate with that individual about alternative methods of involvement. This is particularly relevant where we will need to raise capital to fund a new stadium.
|
| |
|
| Kris Stewart |
I would always say no to "whatever the cost", especially "financial or otherwise". I think we should aim to get promoted, of course, but I think we should aim to get home, and we should aim to live within our means, as well. |
| |
|
| Lee Willett |
Fan ownership is non-negotiable: this will mean, however, that we will need to be more imaginative when it comes to addressing strategic issues like funding mechanisms for a new ground in Wimbledon. If we are not promoted this season, we should continue to steadily build the side as we have done this season: we would not want to risk stagnating, but I do not see us as having to be in a huge rush to get promoted. We have come a long way in a short time, and our patchy form at this level suggests we are not quite ready on the pitch for the step up, even if we could more than manage off the pitch. |
| |
|
| Stephen Cooles |
The 2nd part of that question is the simplest to answer. I believe fan ownership is non-negotiable.
The 1st part is not that much more complicated. We should only go professional when we can afford it, but of course try to get promotion as soon as possible. This should be done by living within our means. There are far too many clubs who have gambled everything on promotion in 1 go, and paid the price (we need only look at Portsmouth, Crystal Palace, Leeds and Southampton to see the dangers of that strategy).
I do not believe that football clubs have "natural levels" though. If Wimbledon believed that, we'd still be in the Southern League!
|
| |
|
| Tom Adam |
Nothing we do should be done “whatever the cost”. From Withdean 2000 in our early days to Portsmouth recently, we have seen what happens when clubs overreach themselves. We must not follow their examples.
As part of our financial controls, Erik has promised the Board a budget for going full time. I expect that the budget will be rigorously prepared. When we have seen it we can decide whether the figures show that the risk is acceptable or not. While not totally impossible it will be hard to go back on a decision like this so Management Committees recommendations need to be challenged thoroughly. It is one of the major decisions the new Board will need to take early in its existence – another argument for continuity of its membership.
Preserving fan ownership is the most important role of the Trust Board. Personally it is non-negotiable but I suppose that there may come a time when the Members democratically decide that they want to change perhaps to speed up our climb through the Football League. If that ever happens I will be very sad and I would step down from the Board as it wouldn’t feel like my Club any more.
|
| |
|
| Simon Bath |
I personally believe that there is far too much talk/hearsay from people who have no experience on such issues.
There is no need to rush into any decision such as this. I feel that the time to move professional, must first begin on a stable financial plateau. Fan ownership, for me is non-negotiable.
|
| |
|
| David Growns |
No - we should continue to grow organically as we are doing - chasing a dream is the road to ruin.
Fan ownership is non-negotiable.
|
| |
|
| Damian Woodward |
Fan ownership is non-negotiable. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t scope to take on an external investor who may want to sit on the PLC Board and who helps run and potentially takes a return from the football club. I personally do not want us ever to put ourselves at the mercy of anyone other than ourselves again, nor do I think we need to to progress. I trust Terry to present the options to us in terms of what we need to do to hit various objectives on the pitch. I just cannot see a situation where anyone would go for a decision ‘whatever the cost’. If we need more investment (outside of normal P&L and donors) then that should be presented back to the Members, with a clear business case for the various options.
|
| |
|
Christopher Gibbs |
We should never do anything 'whatever the cost' and fan ownership is non-negotiable |
|
