Possible new powers for fans owning part of their club

[L G]

I think Labour are just hanging on the coat tails of the BBC report on fans and the cost of tickets published this week.

I don't think so. One of the people pushing it, Labour MP Tom Greatrex, has been doing so for a number of years, and I've attended SD/FSF meetings in the past where he's talked about it. So it's not just an opportunistic policy.

It could be argued that we've already had fans on the board (look how that worked out).

I think the way forward is for a fan to be a liaison between the club/board and fans. Just one person, no group and no agenda.

The club has a supporter liaison officer - Rick.

The Labour proposals say - and SD's view is - that Supporter Trusts are the 'formal' fan liaison. But I think you'll find any supporter group, or individual, will get a response if they choose to contact Rick or Martyn Starnes.

If people want to get more closely involved in this issue then, as Green Rhino urges, please consider standing for the Trust Board in the upcoming elections.

Tim

Rick?
As in our head of communications?
A supporter liasion officer. with his views on the supporters!
nice. :facepalm:

 

[Brixton 'ill Pilgrim]

Reeks of one of those promises made in the run up to an election that would never be fulfilled.

How can the Government impose people onto the board of a private company?

It happens in most countries Andy. For example, in nearly every EU state (I think the UK and Lithuania are the two exceptions) companies are required to appoint representatives of the workforce or trade union on to their board.

The proposal for supporters on boards sounds very sensible but it is unsurprising that anything proposed by politicians is treated with a degree of scepticism.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

I think Labour are just hanging on the coat tails of the BBC report on fans and the cost of tickets published this week.

I don't think so. One of the people pushing it, Labour MP Tom Greatrex, has been doing so for a number of years, and I've attended SD/FSF meetings in the past where he's talked about it. So it's not just an opportunistic policy.

It could be argued that we've already had fans on the board (look how that worked out).

I think the way forward is for a fan to be a liaison between the club/board and fans. Just one person, no group and no agenda.

The club has a supporter liaison officer - Rick.

The Labour proposals say - and SD's view is - that Supporter Trusts are the 'formal' fan liaison. But I think you'll find any supporter group, or individual, will get a response if they choose to contact Rick or Martyn Starnes.

If people want to get more closely involved in this issue then, as Green Rhino urges, please consider standing for the Trust Board in the upcoming elections.

Tim

As I hinted, I think the liaison officer should be a fan from outside of the club. Rick is a fan of Argyle but he's also an employee.

 

[Tim Chown]

I think Labour are just hanging on the coat tails of the BBC report on fans and the cost of tickets published this week.

I don't think so. One of the people pushing it, Labour MP Tom Greatrex, has been doing so for a number of years, and I've attended SD/FSF meetings in the past where he's talked about it. So it's not just an opportunistic policy.

It could be argued that we've already had fans on the board (look how that worked out).

I think the way forward is for a fan to be a liaison between the club/board and fans. Just one person, no group and no agenda.

The club has a supporter liaison officer - Rick.

The Labour proposals say - and SD's view is - that Supporter Trusts are the 'formal' fan liaison. But I think you'll find any supporter group, or individual, will get a response if they choose to contact Rick or Martyn Starnes.

If people want to get more closely involved in this issue then, as Green Rhino urges, please consider standing for the Trust Board in the upcoming elections.

Tim

As I hinted, I think the liaison officer should be a fan from outside of the club. Rick is a fan of Argyle but he's also an employee.

A one-man PASB! :think:

 

[Andy Holland]

I think, considering the contempt towards the fans shown by the communications department at times, it's ludicrous that the position is filled by one of them.

 

[memory man]

Talking of contempt, in view of the high level of contempt towards politicians, why is there even a debate on what is clearly populist (Thanks QG), vote-catching hypothetical nonsense. Milliband may be better devoting his time to trying to work out he will run a country properly, before even considering interfering with the running of football clubs.

 

[IJN]

Defies belief doesn't it?

They've cottoned on to the fact that football fans can unite, can lobby, can galvanise and some smooth talking, initiative creating sop has decided this would be a good idea.

One of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. Up there with Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Communism. Great in theory.

 

[Old Gunner]

Defies belief doesn't it?

They've cottoned on to the fact that football fans can unite, can lobby, can galvanise and some smooth talking, initiative creating sop has decided this would be a good idea.

One of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. Up there with Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Communism. Great in theory.

I'm not happy that the idea has come from a politician--but I think there is a seed of an idea here. Whether it is through board representation or some other route it is important that fans have an effective voice. I do remember receiving a fair amount of stick as one of the few supporters of goal line technology (and greater use of technology generally if I am honest) when it was suggested about 10 years ago and that debate has moved on a bit---I suspect in time this particular idea will come to fruition in some shape or form.

Even Santa Claus has his fans

 

[JonB]

Defies belief doesn't it?

They've cottoned on to the fact that football fans can unite, can lobby, can galvanise and some smooth talking, initiative creating sop has decided this would be a good idea.

One of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. Up there with Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Communism. Great in theory.

Yep.

There are two main issues that make this fanciful, political tosh for me.....

The first is that company law - the legislation that governs the way in which business in our country is run - would need to be radically changed. Company directors & Board members have very specific responsibilities in the UK & need to take decisions in line with those responsibilities. They also have legal & financial liability should things go wrong. In chief, fans have different objectives.

The second issue is who would this person / these people be? My (admittedly pretty poor & scarring) experience on the PASB leaves me very doubtful that we could ever find who could represent the fan base at large AND who is suitably skilled to perform at Board level. In my view, there was only one or two of my ex-PASB colleagues who could possibly do this & they were subject to some pretty foul behaviour.

Just one other thought - we currently have a fan who is President of the club, yet this position is ridiculed by some. Why would a fan Board member be different (a moot point I know, given that as I've said above, I can't see it ever happening successfully)?

 

[IJN]

Exactly John.

I remember when a picture of you appeared on GoS in the DB, the usual suspects completely and utterly pulled you to pieces for that, you had threads and threads dedicated to how you had sold out.

Even last week someone on here referred to Chris as the 'supposed President' (or something very similar) and that's a bloke who has spent hundreds of hours, if not thousands, helping the club at all levels, and still he comes in for trolling stick.

Why anyone would take that position is beyond me, and that's from a chap who has a skin of a rhino when dealing with such pond life.

Pure theory, no thought given and something akin to the desperate rubbish announced during the week before the Scottish referendum.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

The government have now hopped aboard the fan ownership bandwagon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29699104

 

[esmer]

I don't think the biggest issue is a fan sitting in the boardroom it is the financial and commercial transparency which is far more important. Giving the fans the legal right and mechanism to access the full financial situation (budgets, profitability, debt situation etc) of their club would be very welcome.

 

[Brixton 'ill Pilgrim]

Defies belief doesn't it?

They've cottoned on to the fact that football fans can unite, can lobby, can galvanise and some smooth talking, initiative creating sop has decided this would be a good idea.

One of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. Up there with Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Communism. Great in theory.

Yep.

There are two main issues that make this fanciful, political tosh for me.....

The first is that company law - the legislation that governs the way in which business in our country is run - would need to be radically changed. Company directors & Board members have very specific responsibilities in the UK & need to take decisions in line with those responsibilities. They also have legal & financial liability should things go wrong. In chief, fans have different objectives.

The second issue is who would this person / these people be? My (admittedly pretty poor & scarring) experience on the PASB leaves me very doubtful that we could ever find who could represent the fan base at large AND who is suitably skilled to perform at Board level. In my view, there was only one or two of my ex-PASB colleagues who could possibly do this & they were subject to some pretty foul behaviour.

Just one other thought - we currently have a fan who is President of the club, yet this position is ridiculed by some. Why would a fan Board member be different (a moot point I know, given that as I've said above, I can't see it ever happening successfully)?

Jon, I'm not a lawyer so you might be able to set me straight on this, but as I understand it, the specific requirements of Company Directors are far from clear. Certainly, there is an entire cottage industry of academic papers debating Directors' responsibilities according to the most recent Companies Act - and much speculation that Labour will introduce both an updated iteration of the Act and some sort of legislation to do with football if they end up leading the next Government. So these slightly pedantic problems could easily be ironed out. Personally, I don't see a conflict of interest between fans and other Directors, who both want the club to thrive in the long-term, other than when the Directors want to asset-strip and feather their own nests, in which case surely greater scrutiny from supporters would be a good thing.

On your more substantive point regarding the club president... firstly, supporters on boards would presumably be subject to some kind of democratic accountability (ie they'd be voted on) which would remove some of the grievances that some people seem to have with Chris Webb. Secondly, I'd say that Chris's role as a channel of communication between fans and the club has been generally very positive for Argyle. I don't think the vitriol of a few people on the internet who a) represent a tiny minority of Argyle fans and b) are idiots outweighs those benefits.

Finally, I understand why people are wary of a proposal put forward by politicians. But there is an air on this thread of cap doffing and thinking what could us simple fans know about running a football club, compared to sophisticated businessmen. That's a rather depressing sentiment in itself, but considering our experience with Sir Roy Gardiner, Keith Todd and Yasuki Kagami, it seems profoundly misguided.

 

[Old Gunner]

Defies belief doesn't it?

They've cottoned on to the fact that football fans can unite, can lobby, can galvanise and some smooth talking, initiative creating sop has decided this would be a good idea.

One of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. Up there with Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Communism. Great in theory.

Yep.

There are two main issues that make this fanciful, political tosh for me.....

The first is that company law - the legislation that governs the way in which business in our country is run - would need to be radically changed. Company directors & Board members have very specific responsibilities in the UK & need to take decisions in line with those responsibilities. They also have legal & financial liability should things go wrong. In chief, fans have different objectives.

The second issue is who would this person / these people be? My (admittedly pretty poor & scarring) experience on the PASB leaves me very doubtful that we could ever find who could represent the fan base at large AND who is suitably skilled to perform at Board level. In my view, there was only one or two of my ex-PASB colleagues who could possibly do this & they were subject to some pretty foul behaviour.

Just one other thought - we currently have a fan who is President of the club, yet this position is ridiculed by some. Why would a fan Board member be different (a moot point I know, given that as I've said above, I can't see it ever happening successfully)?

Jon, I'm not a lawyer so you might be able to set me straight on this, but as I understand it, the specific requirements of Company Directors are far from clear. Certainly, there is an entire cottage industry of academic papers debating Directors' responsibilities according to the most recent Companies Act - and much speculation that Labour will introduce both an updated iteration of the Act and some sort of legislation to do with football if they end up leading the next Government. So these slightly pedantic problems could easily be ironed out. Personally, I don't see a conflict of interest between fans and other Directors, who both want the club to thrive in the long-term, other than when the Directors want to asset-strip and feather their own nests, in which case surely greater scrutiny from supporters would be a good thing.

On your more substantive point regarding the club president... firstly, supporters on boards would presumably be subject to some kind of democratic accountability (ie they'd be voted on) which would remove some of the grievances that some people seem to have with Chris Webb. Secondly, I'd say that Chris's role as a channel of communication between fans and the club has been generally very positive for Argyle. I don't think the vitriol of a few people on the internet who a) represent a tiny minority of Argyle fans and b) are idiots outweighs those benefits.

Finally, I understand why people are wary of a proposal put forward by politicians. But there is an air on this thread of cap doffing and thinking what could us simple fans know about running a football club, compared to sophisticated businessmen. That's a rather depressing sentiment in itself, but considering our experience with Sir Roy Gardiner, Keith Todd and Yasuki Kagami, it seems profoundly misguided.

Well put--particularly the last para. I have sat on a few Boards myself (and still do) and I can guarantee that there are any number of people amongst the Argyle fan base who could fulfil the role.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Where does the transparancy come from. Any supporter who sits on the board may well get to find out the ins and outs of the club's finances but surely it would still be in the interst of the business that the detail of such information should remain confidential.

Will the rest of the fansbase accept from their representative that "things are okay financially" if that was the extent of the information being offered? Will we have faith in "our man on the board" if he adopts the policy of those who currently own and run our clubs?