Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

MyFootballClub

mk12

Well-Known Member
Has anyone heard about this before? It has been reported here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6914775.stm

For the first time in football history, fans have the opportunity to buy and then take control of a professional football club – both on and off the pitch.

Every MyFootballClub member will have an equal say in team selection, player transfers and the running of the club.

Members will own the club through their MyFootballClub Trust, and together they will attempt to guide their football club to success.

When you pay your membership fee, you will become a member of the MyFootballClub Trust. Your Trust will purchase a controlling interest in the football club, in effect making you a joint owner of your football club.

The MyFootballClub membership fee is £35. £27.50 will go towards purchasing a football club, buying new players and other club expenditure. £7.50 will go towards the administration of the MyFootballClub Trust and the building and management of the MyFootballClub website"


It seems a bit...dodgy.
 
mk12 said:
TOP 15 CLUBS
most voted for so far

1 Leeds United
2 Nottingham Forest
3 Cambridge United

:D

with the money they are likely to raise, they could only really afford a conference club
 
It'd an intriguing idea, and i'm a little tempted to join along. I could be a lot of fun.

Not what happens when the fans don't turn up & the players wages need paying tho, do the members has to cough?
 
I jined ages ago, haven't paid my £35 thou.

more interested to see who they might buy first really. As far as i'm aware there's 2 conference teams and a division 2 team who have said they are willing to be took over in this manner.

However I wouldn't want to give 1p let alone £35 a year to fund leeds united, so i'm not paying up just yet.
 
Swindon were on the list of possible clubs that I saw in the paper the other day. I fucking hope it's not us.
 
It's a good idea. There's several sports teams in the USA that are run on a similar basis (from way before the web, too) - eg. the club was in trouble and the fans bought it, and continue to run it.
 
I've joined but not paid.
I'd love it if it was Nots Forest as suggested as a possible in the Beeb article.
 
it's a nice idea but i wouldnt ever want to see it happen at my club. would be better in my opinion if they started a team from scratch and tried to get it to rise through the pyramid. can't think of anything worse than having my teams affairs voted on by a bunch of middle class cunts who just want to do this for some kind of weird kick/social experiment.
 
Crispy said:
It's a good idea. There's several sports teams in the USA that are run on a similar basis (from way before the web, too) - eg. the club was in trouble and the fans bought it, and continue to run it.

The Green Bay Packers spring to mind.
 
The only thing i don't agree with is the picking the team part. Just employ a boss and let them get on with it.
 
When I was last unemployed, I wrote a fictional book about this exact same topic. The book was shit but the idea was pretty much identical. The twist at the end was the team that got bought ended up relocating to be more convenient for the 'shareholders' to actually watch....
 
marty21 said:
with the money they are likely to raise, they could only really afford a conference club


EA Sports are also contributing an undisclosed sum towards the purchase fund.
 
strung_out said:
it's a nice idea but i wouldnt ever want to see it happen at my club. would be better in my opinion if they started a team from scratch and tried to get it to rise through the pyramid. can't think of anything worse than having my teams affairs voted on by a bunch of middle class cunts who just want to do this for some kind of weird kick/social experiment.

How, exactly, have you managed to discover the class of the supporters involved?
 
ade said:
The only thing i don't agree with is the picking the team part. Just employ a boss and let them get on with it.

You aren't a true football fan.

Any fan on the terrace will tell you that they know best about who should play at that the manger's team selection is illogical.
 
I signed up a few weeks ago.

Paid my £35 etc.

Will give it a go for a year and see how it pans out.

Makes a novel change from Fantasy Football / Football management games on the pc, nothing more, nothing less (for me, at any rate).

I voted to buy Cambridge, the infrastructure at QPR would make it interesting, but the bloke opposite me at work totally hates the idea and he's a Cambridge fan so...
 
This is a really fucking horrible idea. Really really horrible - its bad enough that businessmen with no attachment to club, community or even country can come in and take on a club for their own ends, but now they become franchises for people on the internet with £35?

someone mentioned this system works well in america? I'm not surprised, the idea of packing up a 'franchise' and moving it to a different town works well over there - its fucking horrible when it happens here and it drives communities apart

thats fucking sick IMO.

ETA: Crispy may have been talking about fan run clubs - a different matter - to this 'any cunt with £35' balls
 
No-one is going to want their club to be taken over. I think the only circumstance where fans would accept it is, if it is literally a choice between this or extinction. It won't matter if the team do well I don't think - i reckon fans will be hostile. They will (rightly) feel they should have more of a say than someone whose only commitment to their team is to pay a one of £35 fee. It's possible that a fan who has invested thousands over the years could end up with less influence than Ron from Margate whose daughter bought him a share because she thought he'd like it.
 
Chorlton said:
This is a really fucking horrible idea. Really really horrible - its bad enough that businessmen with no attachment to club, community or even country can come in and take on a club for their own ends, but now they become franchises for people on the internet with £35?


thats fucking sick IMO.


£35 a year membership fee - the money goes into the clubs funds.

£7.50 towards club administration
£28.50 into the kitty for transfers / wages etc.

That's going to amount to maybe and extra £2m a year on top of their existing revenue streams. On top of that, there will be extra revenue from increased shirt / ticket sales, not to mention any further endorsements they attract due to all the publicity.

eta: the company has been set up as a Friendly Society registered with the FSA. It's a not-for-profit organisation.
 
Final said:
£35 a year membership fee - the money goes into the clubs funds.

£7.50 towards club administration
£28.50 into the kitty for transfers / wages etc.

That's going to amount to maybe and extra £2m a year on top of their existing revenue streams. On top of that, there will be extra revenue from increased shirt / ticket sales, not to mention any further endorsements they attract due to all the publicity.


why are you telling me this? do i look like someone who gets horny on club finances?
 
butchersapron said:
What happens when some bigger beast offers people more money to sell? Are there clauses etc?


Like all other friendly societies, it's one member-one vote, not one share-one vote.

And all profits have to remain within the company, there are no dividends paid out to the shareholders / members.
 
butchersapron said:
What happens when some bigger beast offers people more money to sell? Are there clauses etc?


I think that there are provisions against that and against people profiteering of shares - doens't make it alright tho
 
Back
Top Bottom