Fan Ownership

[Ed the Wool]

With everything coming up rosy with Kenny taking over, I wondered what was happening in terms of allowing fans to own a part of the club.

 

From a dispassionate point of view, what has become noticeable about our club is the fans really do have power if they pull together. There is a limit to the extent this can be healthy for a club, but it's now surely beyond argument that the fans have a stake in LFC, whether this is reflected in shares or in terms of attendances or buying merchandise.

 

I don't want this to drop off the agenda, I think it's something we should push for.

 

 

Would be interested in views or information if anyone has it. Is it still on SOS/Share Liverpool's agenda?

[Elm0]

I dread to think what would happen if an SoS style board got hold of the club.

[RedBilledChough]

I believe ShareLiverpool/SOS still hope to get a stake in the club and a seat on the board in exchange for an injection of equity. If, for instance, 80,000 fans were to pay £500 each, they'd have £40,000,000 to invest in the club and gain a stake, 10% say, on behalf of the fans.

 

Whether or not FSG would be interested is another matter, but I certainly believe it's worth pursuing.

[heighway]

I believe ShareLiverpool/SOS still hope to get a stake in the club and a seat on the board in exchange for an injection of equity. If, for instance, 80,000 fans were to pay £500 each, they'd have £40,000,000 to invest in the club and gain a stake, 10% say, on behalf of the fans.

 

Whether or not FSG would be interested is another matter, but I certainly believe it's worth pursuing.

 

But how would it actually work in practice? Everyone here is passionate about Liverpool yet we see strongly divergent opinions on issues such as players/management/tactics/new stadium etc etc. So how would a "fan rep" on the board go about representing fan opinion when that opinion is often divided?

[RedBilledChough]

But how would it actually work in practice? Everyone here is passionate about Liverpool yet we see strongly divergent opinions on issues such as players/management/tactics/new stadium etc etc. So how would a "fan rep" on the board go about representing fan opinion when that opinion is often divided?

 

Appointing a delegate who'd need to go back to the membership as each issue came up for instructions would be wholly impractical so I'd imagine there'd be annual elections to select the fans representative, with each candidate standing on a particular platform. Once elected to the board they'd vote independently but always be accountable to the electorate. They would be binned next time elections came round if fans/stakeholders are unhappy and there'd need to be a mechanism to dismiss them early in the event of obvious misconduct.

 

Same as any elected representative (councillor, MP) is accountable, ultimately, to their electorate.

Edited January 10, 2011 by redjersey

[Elm0]

you cant do that with a paid directors role surely?

[RedBilledChough]

you cant do that with a paid directors role surely?

No reason for it to be a paid, executive role anyway. It wouldn't be a full time job.

[New York Red]

It will never happen.

[JonShar]

I dread to think what would happen if an SoS style board got hold of the club.

 

THIS.

[RedBilledChough]

It will never happen.

Who knows? There's no reason ShareLiverpool/SoS shouldn't aspire to it and at least try to make it happen.

 

For LFC, £40m, even £30m in fresh capital isn't to be sniffed at.

Edited January 10, 2011 by redjersey

[New York Red]

Who knows? There's no reason ShareLiverpool/SoS shouldn't aspire to it and at least try to make it happen.

 

For LFC, £40m, even £30m in fresh capital isn't to be sniffed at.

 

Their organization never impressed me. The amounts of capital that would need to be raised is beyond their reach IMO and I don't know if FSG would want to dilute. I don't think they would.

Edited January 10, 2011 by New York Red

[magneto]

SOS should never have merged with ShareLiverpool (or whatever arrangement they had if you don't want to call it a merger).

[Falconhoof]

I think SOS will struggle to maintain its membership now. It was originally formed in protest at Hicks and Gillet. If Werner and Henry continue to run the club with the dignity that they have shown so far, and with debt off the books then people won't have the same motivation to stay in a union. People were desperate to get back to just following the football and not having to concern themselves with the other stuff.

If we are well run then I can't see tens of thousands wanting to stump up the cash mentioned in this thread for very limited influence.

[Stew F]

I think SOS will struggle to maintain its membership now. It was originally formed in protest at Hicks and Gillet. If Werner and Henry continue to run the club with the dignity that they have shown so far, and with debt off the books then people won't have the same motivation to stay in a union. People were desperate to get back to just following the football and not having to concern themselves with the other stuff.

If we are well run then I can't see tens of thousands wanting to stump up the cash mentioned in this thread for very limited influence.

Aye well put.

Fan ownership only becomes an issue if the fans don't trust the owners. See us / Man U. In those circumstances people are only too willing to fork out £500.00 to feel they are doing something to undermine untrustworthy owners.

In the current climate (seemingly trustworthy owners) personally i'd rather put the £500.00 towards my next seasie.

 

By way of a disclaimer though. If they turn out to be shchit houses, who do I make the cheque payable to?

[Chili Palmer]

I think SOS will struggle to maintain its membership now. It was originally formed in protest at Hicks and Gillet. If Werner and Henry continue to run the club with the dignity that they have shown so far, and with debt off the books then people won't have the same motivation to stay in a union. People were desperate to get back to just following the football and not having to concern themselves with the other stuff.

If we are well run then I can't see tens of thousands wanting to stump up the cash mentioned in this thread for very limited influence.

 

I certainly think there is a place for a supporters union.

[Falconhoof]

I certainly think there is a place for a supporters union.

 

Thats certainly not something i'm going to argue against. People will make up their own minds is all i'm saying and I can't see the motivation for mass membership.

[aka Dus]

It will never happen.

 

You're always such a breath of fresh air in these discussions.

 

We've proven in the last 12 months that fans can help make things happen, where there is a will.

 

Aye well put.

Fan ownership only becomes an issue if the fans don't trust the owners.

 

 

 

Not in other countries, where NOT being part of the ownership entity of the club you support would almost be considered deviant behaviour!

 

 

 

 

SOS should never have merged with ShareLiverpool (or whatever arrangement they had if you don't want to call it a merger).

 

Why? Surely uniting all interested parties into one body was a smart thing to do?

[New York Red]

Fans witholding their support of the team and using the internet brilliantly is one thing.

 

Getting 100,000 fans to fork over five hundred quid each is a completely different story. particularly with the caveat of one man, one vote thrown into the mix. That utopian ideal makes the whole idea laughable.