• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

51/49% Fan ownership being considered by UK Government

Do you think the the 51%-49% ownership scheme would benefit the UK game?

  • Yes

    Votes: 25 83.3%
  • No

    Votes: 3 10.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • Total voters
    30

hlane17

Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
4,247

Interesting rhetoric from Westminster after the 6 PL teams announced intentions to join a European Super League breakaway.

One of the main options they are looking at is the German model of ownership, where investors are prohibited from owning a majority share in a football club.

What are people's thoughts on this? Surely can't be a bad thing when you consider our plight in recent years, us fans have had no say in the direction of our beloved club at all.
 
Last edited:
If the super league goes ahead (next season ?) , Would this keep us in the football league ? . Anyhow its going to be bad news for the smaller clubs.
 
If the super league goes ahead (next season ?) , Would this keep us in the football league ? . Anyhow its going to be bad news for the smaller clubs.
Talk so far suggests this is a replacement to the Champions League, but there is talk (although rumoured and highly unofficial) that the PL could boot out any team that joins the 'Super League'
 

Interesting rhetoric from Westminster after the 6 PL teams announced intentions to join a European Super League breakaway.

One of the main options they are looking at is the German model of ownership, where investors are prohibited from owning a majority share in a football club.

What are people's thoughts on this? Surely can't be a bad thing when you consider our plight in recent years, us fans have had no say in the direction of our beloved club at all.

Not sure if this is in the correct area so mods please move this thread if necessary
Let's hope that, if this does go ahead, they have the rule water tight and don't have loopholes that allowed for an RB Leipzig in Germany.

Also, investors/owners who have been involved with a club for over 20 years can apply for an exception to the 50+1 rule... which would apply to Ron for example... so that door needs firmly shutting.

Wonder how they'd be able to strip an 80% shareholder (for example) down to a maximum of 49%.
 
Unfortunately its coming from a bunch of people that tell people what they want to hear without any real intention of actually doing anything. The focus groups say this is what people want to hear ergo..

Getting from the start point to that model will be bring chaos and without substantial gov funding to underwrite many clubs going out of business. Certainly fewer professional clubs, fewer divisions in the professional game. i suspect many fans will somehow think that 51% ownership of clubs can be just given to them for nothing- with no implications. Investors will simply pull out if they cede control, and thats without the lack of guarantees fans will actually put their hands in their pockets to fund their share of the losses. Football clubs lose loads of money and that won't change overnight.
 
Let's hope that, if this does go ahead, they have the rule water tight and don't have loopholes that allowed for an RB Leipzig in Germany.

Also, investors/owners who have been involved with a club for over 20 years can apply for an exception to the 50+1 rule... which would apply to Ron for example... so that door needs firmly shutting.

Wonder how they'd be able to strip an 80% shareholder (for example) down to a maximum of 49%.
If the fans want to own the club then they will need deep pockets is the answer. Or it's a fast track to no club.
 
Unfortunately its coming from a bunch of people that tell people what they want to hear without any real intention of actually doing anything. The focus groups say this is what people want to hear ergo..

Getting from the start point to that model will be bring chaos and without substantial gov funding to underwrite many clubs going out of business. Certainly fewer professional clubs, fewer divisions in the professional game. i suspect many fans will somehow think that 51% ownership of clubs can be just given to them for nothing- with no implications. Investors will simply pull out if they cede control, and thats without the lack of guarantees fans will actually put their hands in their pockets to fund their share of the losses. Football clubs lose loads of money and that won't change overnight.
Without getting too political I can certainly see where you're coming from on the implementation.

As for funding too, I suppose the current economic state might not guarantee the greatest support from fans. Also with ownership comes responsibility, how might the fans handle this?
 
It sounds like a nice idea but how would this even work? If a club is worth £400 million what happens if there aren't enough fans to buy up £200 million worth of shares? It wasn't something the Bundesliga had to worry about because prior to the 50 plus 1 rule coming in private ownership of clubs wasn't allowed. If there's a realistic way of dealing with this problem then I'd be for it but I'm not convinced there is one.
 
How would this even work? If a club is worth £400 million what happens if there aren't enough fans to buy up £200 million worth of shares? It wasn't something the Bundesliga had to worry about because prior to the 50 plus 1 rule coming in private ownership of clubs wasn't allowed.
All the reason why I decided a thread on this might be worth discussing. As great as it sounds initially with the fans taking football in the direction they want it to go, setting this up in the first place would be a huge battle.

I suppose funds to plug the gaps and allow fan ownership to begin would come as government grants or loans, although this would be controversial to spend so much on one sport.

Raising money would be easier for larger Premier League clubs with international fanbases, these clubs would be those who needed 200+ million to buy up shares.

Smaller clubs like our own Southend might struggle more as we could still need cash in the millions, especially if there is no bailout for club debts accrued by investors.
 
I think fan ownership would benefit it. Just have to look to Germany with their model and the number of clubs that signed up to the ESL (currently stands at a big fat 0)

However, Not sure how this would work in principle. I've got some spare cash, but not enough to purchase a club. You would have to go some way to manage to purchase 10% of the shares in some football clubs, let along 50%.

It would be interesting to see if the German clubs have always been part fan-owned of if something came in legally to give the supporters trust a share, with an executive being voted onto the board to represent the fans.
 
It would be interesting to see if the German clubs have always been part fan-owned of if something came in legally to give the supporters trust a share, with an executive being voted onto the board to represent the fans.
German clubs were always fan owned, in fact the 50 plus 1 rule was introduced in order to allow some private investment into clubs, prior to that league rules said clubs had to be 100% fan owned.
 
As supporters of a club which has been beholden to the inconsistencies, whimsies and decisions of one man and one man alone for 23 years, I am staggered that anyone on here would vote no to this.
 
Let's hope that, if this does go ahead, they have the rule water tight and don't have loopholes that allowed for an RB Leipzig in Germany.

There was no loophole. Anybody else is allowed to own the 49%. Just happens that RB Leipzig and Hoffenheim have a sole owner of 49% where as everyone else doesn't.

You could introduce this here but it wouldn't change much. A Chelsea or Man City could have 51% fan ownership and their current owners 49%.
If anyone here seriously thinks the fan representatives on the board would say no when AbuDhabi or a Russian oligarch said 'hey guys, so here's £200million we're going to buy Neymar' etc etc Or they'd turn down a $5billion TV contract that gives 1% to the clubs in divisions below them, then I think you're deluded.

The thing that is needed more in this country is continental, especially Italian, style rules around financial mismanagement, court hearings for unpaid bills, HMRC being preferential creditor and so forth. We certainly wouldn't have had 19 court dates if we'd been chucked out of the league after 3.
 
There was no loophole. Anybody else is allowed to own the 49%. Just happens that RB Leipzig and Hoffenheim have a sole owner of 49% where as everyone else doesn't.
But that's the problem, in Leipzig's case most people aren't allowed to own the 49%. The loophole Leipzig have exploited is that the only definition of a 'fan' for this rule is that they are a member of the club, for most clubs being a member just means paying a few quid for a membership fee every year, clubs like Dortmund have hundreds of thousands of members as a result. Leipzig on the other hand charge over a thousand euros for membership and they reserve the right to reject your membership application without giving a reason. As a result there are less than 20 'fans' that are members of RB Leipzig and it just so happens that almost all the 'fans' have strong ties to Red Bull. Technically Leipzig's owners only have 49% of the shares but the other 51% are owned by their mates and coworkers, so in reality they have 100% of the shares.

Hoffenheim's owner has 96% of the shares, not 48%. His ownership is extremely controversial, basically you can apply for an exemption to the 50+1 rule if you're a private investor that has been continuously funding the club for over 20 years. Hoffenheim were historically a sixth division amateur side so this continuous investment was pennies to the owner (I'm not sure he was even involved in the club's running, it was just regular donations to a club he played for as a teenager) but since he'd been continuously investing for so long he met the criteria to be allowed full ownership of the club.
 
Last edited:
In Germany they rely on sponsorship from German companies, which is much higher than PL clubs

I remember reading a good account comparing Bayern and Man U...Bayern were well behind in TV money, ticket money and matchday generated income. But i think it was Adidas with sponsorship that took them well past United for total income.
 
AS all SUFC fans know greedy owners care nothing for the fans.FWIW I don't think of them as "owners" at all,merely as "custodians" of their clubs on behalf of the fans.


Do the "custodians' ride on a unicorn and get to marry a handsome prince?
 
Back
Top