The Definite Article

Who owns the Dons Trust Bill? Someone must, right? Come on... face up to it. Who owns the Dons Trust? You can do it... come on... just a little more...

Bath, sorry you seem to have forgotten how to read, I'll try typing more slowly, its an IPS therefore doesn't have owners, it is a society that adminsiters subscriptions, but is not owned by anyone.

So you're saying that no one owns AFC Wimbledon. Bwahahahahahaha.

Seriously Bill, you look ridiculous here. Ultimately someONE has to own a company, it cannot be OWNED by no one. The Dons Trust is the ultimate owner of AFC Wimbledon and the Dons Trust is owned by... its members. We decide the Trust's actions, we elect its board.

The Dons Trust IS its members, as without them it doesn't exist.

However much you may hate it, Wimbledon's fans own the club through the Dons Trust. We own the club. Live in your absurd world of denial if you must but them's the facts.

Ultimately someONE has to own a company, it cannot be OWNED by no one.

----

I think what Bill is trying to tell you notPlough is that a " Industrial and Provident Society" is a society not a company under the Companies Act in the strict sense.

Or then again.

No Bath, there are plenty of societies that are not owned by anyone.The Co-op being the largest. Just try walking out with a bottle of milk and say "I don't have to pay because I am the owner, therfore this is my milk" and the staff will soon call the police.

The society owns AFC Wimbledon and if look all through the Dons Trust Pages where it talks about the IPS and FSA regulations, it mentions members and supporters and fans, but not owners. Nor does the Dons Trust Constitution mention ownerseither.

You subscribe to the Dons Trust, which owns the club, but you don't own the Dons Trust.

I own my football club. I'm a member of the Dons Trust and it owns the club.

It is simple Bill, but you just can't accept it. Quibble all you like about member/subscriber/owner, it really isn't important. The football club is under the control of myself and the other members. That's all there is to it. I call that ownership - you call it whatever you like, it doesn't change the facts about who owns and runs the club - we do.

And it's still infinitely better and with a better future than the corrupt, outdated system that you subscribe to.

Quibble all you like about member/subscriber/owner, it really isn't important

---

Seems to be to you.

Bath, if you are the owner and run the club why did you let Danny Kedwell go. he was the captain and leading scorer, surely as the Owners you could have convinced him to stay. What did he say when you asked him?

As far as what I subscibe to being corrupt what is wrong with the Radio Times, it has interesting articles, quite good telly listings and as I subscribe to it, I obviously own it as well.

Bill, I had taken the sensible decision, along with my fellow fans and club owners, of enabling the board and management team to take decisions about the playing staff - that's what we employ them for.

What a cop out. I see you are retracting (as usual) from your previous claims Bill is wrong.