Franchise FC

[PatMan]

Is MyFC any different to what Winkleman has done with MK Dons? Ignore the moving the club away bit (unless thats next on the agenda!) - am looking at the "I want a league club, but dont want to do it the proper way"

Rather than MyFC starting up their own side, recruiting players, finding a pitch/stadium and doing all that boring stuff like working their way up through the league system (which to be honest would be pretty dull and boring, and made very little news or got people interested) - All they have done is pick on a 'struggling' side and made them an offer they couldn't refuse!

 

Everyone in football will give you their opinion on MK Dons, will their opinion of Fleet be that much different?

[TopherPlus]

Or if you'd read the other billion posts on this topic, MyFC was approached by EUFC.

 

Hardly picking on a struggling side.

[Mackster]

Originally Posted By: TopherPlus

Or if you'd read the other billion posts on this topic, MyFC was approached by EUFC.

Hardly picking on a struggling side.

Hammam approached Winkelman, Wimbledon were a mid-table 1st Div(Championship) side.

No difference in my book

[PatMan]

Originally Posted By: TopherPlus

Or if you'd read the other billion posts on this topic, MyFC was approached by EUFC.

Hardly picking on a struggling side.

Billion posts, own the club, pick the team, get involved in transfers... spot the lie?

[TopherPlus]

There are enough issues going around without distorting the facts.

 

Saying that MyFC were predatory in any way is not accurate.

 

Hence my ironic use of exaggeration in saying a billion posts.

 

The point about MyFC being approached has been made repeatedly.

[PatMan]

Originally Posted By: TopherPlus

There are enough issues going around without distorting the facts.

Saying that MyFC were predatory in any way is not accurate.

Hence my ironic use of exaggeration in saying a billion posts.

The point about MyFC being approached has been made repeatedly.

You have missed the point completely - the question relates to Franchise football, and is the MyFC ethic any different from the way in which Winkleman used Wimbledon FC?
Every true football fan has a view on the sorry state of affairs that led to the creation of MK Dons at the expense of the existing side. If MyFC are football fans, how can they justify joining a scheme which is so very similar?

[Poultice]

20,000 plastics take over 800 reals and you don't call that predatory ?

 

OK, what about Bullying ?

 

Irony don't work in the Conference, that is very much a Big Boy tool.

[George Reilly's Hairpiece]

Originally Posted By: TopherPlus

There are enough issues going around without distorting the facts.

Saying that MyFC were predatory in any way is not accurate.

Please explain, as I'm a bit confused.

Being a supporter of a football team, I was under the impression that the fabric of the club is the supporters. In my opinion the club isn't represented by the board of directors, but by the hearty souls that follow their team week in week out, through thick and thin. So when you accept an approach from the directors of a football club, it is just them, not the club itself.

So how can you, MyFC Society Ltd, that march under a banner of giving the game back to the supporters, claim that you have in anyway not been predatory? Unless of course you will give the Fleet supporters the right to a referendum to decide whether they want you before you complete the deal.

[rsheard]

Originally Posted By: George Reilly's Hairpiece

So how can you, MyFC Society Ltd, that march under a banner of giving the game back to the supporters, claim that you have in anyway not been predatory? Unless of course you will give the Fleet supporters the right to a referendum to decide whether they want you before you complete the deal.

I've seen this idea discussed before and I think it's worth pursuing. First, a clarification. MyFC was prohibited from going to the public supporters and taking a poll because of the anonymity demanded of the process by the current board. To ignore that is disingenuous.

But suppose that's precisely what MyFC wanted to do now during the final due diligence phase. What's a reasonable way to do it? In other words, how do you define "supporter"? Everyone who claims he's one? Everyone who's attended a home game in the past year? Everyone who holds season tickets? Everyone who owns shares in the club now?

There would have to be an objective measure to determine whose opinion should count and whose should not. And I don't have an answer in mind. I don't know. But I would like your feedback on how that opinion can be objectively measured over the next few weeks of the due diligence process.

I have to assume since the majority shareholders came to an agreement that when EUFC calls for a full vote of the ownership, there won't be any real surprise. By sheer force of numbers their vote determines the outcome.

It's not quite so much a given for MyFC. I personally believe most members will vote to ratify the agreement, but there are a large number who want to have a real measure of supporter response before we vote.

[Trebor1975]

The similarities are there, including disregard for the original supporters, a desire to "chase the dream" and an insistence that "this is the modern way of things, move on".

[waggamick]

Trust or Trussed?

 

Who currently 'owns' EUFC?

I know it's a Trust...but how can 2 people control 80% of the Trust?

Does that make them de facto owners of the club?

I would have thought a better way to set up a Trust would be one vote per Trust member.

I get the impression that these 2 guys get 80% of the votes.

 

If that's the case then you have to define who has the say in the future of the club.

Should it be shareholders?

They put up a considerable amount of money to keep the club solvent so one would think they would certainly have a say.

 

Should it be supporters?

They buy season tickets, merchandise, etc, etc...and given their emotional stake, one would think they would have a say.

 

In a perfect world everyone would be accommodated.

 

In the real world I think you'll find that 'selling' your club to those 2 guys sealed your fate.

I'm not saying they don't have the best interests of the club in mind...they probably do...but letting them take a controlling stake in the Trust has allowed them to make the decisions.

 

They decided to chase MFC.

 

Do other Trusts allow individuals to take controlling interests?

 

[Trebor1975]

Ebbsfleet isn't owned by the club's trust.

 

Trusts are groups representing a club's supporters that aim to have control of their community's club on a democratic basis. Most clubs are still working towards that aim - some have achieved it, some have seats on the board and a stake in the club, most trusts are in effect attempting to get to either of those two stages.

 

They are democratic one-member, one-vote organisations that have been around much longer than MyFC.

 

The real difference is that where trusts are in control of the club the trust members elect a board which then runs the management of the club, rather than day-to-day management decisions being voted on directly by all of the members through votes. Strategic issues are still decided by the membership, though.

 

You can find out more, including whether the club you actually support has a trust, at http://www.supporters-direct.org/

 

It's not a radically new concept: a version of it applies at most clubs in Spain, for example, including Barcelona and Real Madrid.

[JohnB]

Originally Posted By: George Reilly's Hairpiece

So how can you, MyFC Society Ltd, that march under a banner of giving the game back to the supporters, claim that you have in anyway not been predatory? Unless of course you will give the Fleet supporters the right to a referendum to decide whether they want you before you complete the deal.

LOL - Its MyFC - the Ltd company is a different thing - as I have explained to you in other threads.

No - MyFC hasn't been predatory - Ebbsfleet approached us. If your directors do stuff you don't like - talk to them and the other share holders. Afdter all, they should be keeping track of what is going on, even if only to protect their own holdings

Hold a referendum? Nope *grins* no need. It is clear that there are a few very vociferous people on here who are completely opposed to anything to do with MyFC. Interestingly, some of the loudest are supporters of other teams

In my (admittedly) short visit here, the majority of Ebbsfleet supporters who have posted, have said MyFC is an option they are prepared to go along with - they aren't sure of it, but they are prepared to give it a go.

I can understand people aren't sure of it, and I can understand why some people are strongly anti the idea. But democracy is not all about everyone getting their own way, it is (in some ways unfortunately) about the compromise that everyone makes on their ideals to work out a way forward.

[Trebor1975]

You see, this is what gets me: MyFC claim to be about the fans but really they're behaving just like any other group launching a takeover. It's all being done at a director level, although the deal will of course need approval by the shareholders in both companies (which, in MyFC's case, involves supporters of other clubs).

 

All very odd, really, and I can't see much difference between what's happening at Ebbsfleet and an Abramovich or a whatsisname at Manchester City launching their takeover bids. People like that like to interfere in team matters, and the MyFC people want to do the same.

 

There's nothing revolutionary about MyFC at all, except for the fact that ownership is more diverse than with other "big money" takeovers and it's on a smaller scale. It's just a different set of people coming in and wanting to "play football".

[rsheard]

Originally Posted By: Trebor1975

All very odd, really, and I can't see much difference between what's happening at Ebbsfleet and an Abramovich or a whatsisname at Manchester City launching their takeover bids. People like that like to interfere in team matters, and the MyFC people want to do the same.

There's nothing revolutionary about MyFC at all, except for the fact that ownership is more diverse than with other "big money" takeovers and it's on a smaller scale.

And unlike any of those other examples you cite, MyFC offers you the opportunity to be an equal share in it as well. Your vote would count as much as mine, or Will Brooks', or anyone's. That's a fairly significant difference right there.

[Trebor1975]

It offers the opportunity to be part of a conglomerate that interferes with the running of the team. As I said, there's no real difference with those big-money sole owners except that your chance of having your voice heard is in proportion to your investment (ie small).

 

People coming in from the outside and meddling. It's the history of football, and MyFC are just a different colour of that history.

 

I just hope it doesn't tar the good reputation of fan ownership that Supporters Direct has been building up.

[Slartibartfast]

The only way to have held a vote for the true Fleet supporters would have been to turn up unannounced at a home game before the news broke and canvas the fans.

 

[John Pearce]

Originally Posted By: rsheard

Originally Posted By: Trebor1975

All very odd, really, and I can't see much difference between what's happening at Ebbsfleet and an Abramovich or a whatsisname at Manchester City launching their takeover bids. People like that like to interfere in team matters, and the MyFC people want to do the same.

There's nothing revolutionary about MyFC at all, except for the fact that ownership is more diverse than with other "big money" takeovers and it's on a smaller scale.

And unlike any of those other examples you cite, MyFC offers you the opportunity to be an equal share in it as well. Your vote would count as much as mine, or Will Brooks', or anyone's. That's a fairly significant difference right there.

If you think that you are either naive, blind or just plain stupid?

[JohnB]

Originally Posted By: Slartibartfast

The only way to have held a vote for the true Fleet supporters would have been to turn up unannounced at a home game before the news broke and canvas the fans.

Or to come here and make a rough count of people's opinions

There are a few very loud nay sayers (including some from other clubs) however, in my short time here - the majority of posters have been neutral to reluctantly positive. There are a lot of people saying things like "I am not sure about it, but I will go along with it" - through to "I am not sure about it, but it looks like it will get us out of the rut".

I don't get a sense of overwhelming support for MyFC on these boards - BUT I do get a sense of quite high levels of acceptance and a level of quiet optimism from a number of posters. But then - its only a minority of large share dealing in football clubs that have positive support before they happen.

[Slartibartfast]

Unfortunately even though the mood of many on here does seem more positive now than on Tuesday there is no guarantee that our opinions any representative of the rest of the Fleet fans.

 

The regular posters on this forum , until last week, numbered less than a hundred and the onl thing that we ever agreed on was that we disagreed with each other.