| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 10:47 - Apr 1 with 1220 views | Juzzie |
I don't know the context of Mr Hooper's posts on X but part of the problem is with modern social media etc. it gives people an opportunity to maybe be OTT. A lot of online stuff is unacceptable. How do you stop it?
People should be allowed to criticise etc but it must be constructive, not abusive.
But mainly..... who the fk would be a football club (particularly outside of the PL) owner? Sounds like it's just not worth it these days. |  | |  |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 10:54 - Apr 1 with 1201 views | GaryHaddock |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 10:47 - Apr 1 by Juzzie |
I don't know the context of Mr Hooper's posts on X but part of the problem is with modern social media etc. it gives people an opportunity to maybe be OTT. A lot of online stuff is unacceptable. How do you stop it?
People should be allowed to criticise etc but it must be constructive, not abusive.
But mainly..... who the fk would be a football club (particularly outside of the PL) owner? Sounds like it's just not worth it these days. |
Abuse: No
Negative Comments and Remarks: Fine
The letter in that article doesn't mention abuse. Imagine if Nourry banned everyone who made a negative comment or remark on here.
In regards to who would own a football club below the PL, it's people with Hubris and ego who think their talent for knocking shit sportwear out can be translated to running a football club, or those who just want to exploit and liquidate. |  | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 10:59 - Apr 1 with 1178 views | joe90 |
A couple of questions...
1: How did the club lose £2.8mil getting promoted?!
2: Why were the fans abusing the chairman and his family?
3: What were the comments that were said that got Hooper banned?
I'm not against fan ownership, but even clubs like AFC Wimbledon have foreign investment propping them up. I feel there's a bigger issue of football just not being sustainable. |  | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:12 - Apr 1 with 1106 views | Juzzie |
If Mr Hooper has just been critical and not abusive then I'm sure he can challenge the banning order. Though that costs money which he might not be able to afford and maybe if the club does get sold in the summer the new owner can rescind it. | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:15 - Apr 1 with 1101 views | GaryHaddock |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 10:59 - Apr 1 by joe90 |
A couple of questions...
1: How did the club lose £2.8mil getting promoted?!
2: Why were the fans abusing the chairman and his family?
3: What were the comments that were said that got Hooper banned?
I'm not against fan ownership, but even clubs like AFC Wimbledon have foreign investment propping them up. I feel there's a bigger issue of football just not being sustainable. |
Yeah there is a difference between fan governance and fan ownership illustrated by AFC. | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:26 - Apr 1 with 1058 views | nick_hammersmith |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:14 - Apr 1 by GaryHaddock |
Operational costs is a bit misleading. It’s the wages arms race that is making that £14m loss not the stationary or electricity bill.
These are choices that the club / ownership are making. I do appreciate that making a £14m cut to transfers and wages wouldn’t go down well with fans but that’s probably a attitude adjustment we as a fans need to make. |
Yeah, I'm massively over simplifying it, but I think for the PL at least there were only 5 or 6 clubs that had more money coming in than going out.
I remember West Ham being one, but mainly because they got the rental of the London stadium for free.
I'm not sure how you effectively change salary structures for players without all 92 clubs buy in. We already saw a few renegade clubs try to start their own 'super' league, so I'm not sure it would ever work.
I don't know where we got to the world where a youth team player with no chance of first team action could be a millionaire (not talking about QPR here) |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:43 - Apr 1 with 996 views | Juzzie |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:26 - Apr 1 by nick_hammersmith |
Yeah, I'm massively over simplifying it, but I think for the PL at least there were only 5 or 6 clubs that had more money coming in than going out.
I remember West Ham being one, but mainly because they got the rental of the London stadium for free.
I'm not sure how you effectively change salary structures for players without all 92 clubs buy in. We already saw a few renegade clubs try to start their own 'super' league, so I'm not sure it would ever work.
I don't know where we got to the world where a youth team player with no chance of first team action could be a millionaire (not talking about QPR here) |
You'll never get all 92 clubs to buy-in to the idea of a unilateral drastic cut in salaries. Someone (a few probably) will always break rank then they'll have the head start over everyone else while the others catch up, probably in the next transfer window. That's 'great' for a season maybe but then it'll all be back to the same again and if those clubs that broke rank haven't won anything it'll all be for nothing. Even if they have won something, the damage will still have been done.
I think we're at the point where the majority of clubs should really just cut their cloth and at least be solvent and existing.
If we use ground capacity as a barometer (clubs will always punch higher or lower but we have to have something to base upon) then we have the 50th biggest stadium in the country meaning upper 3rd tier football until we can have a 25k stadium and fill it regularly to get the income needed to compete just in the Championship.
It does worry me with the US ownership dominance in the PL they will potentially push for a closed shop. Again, taking stadium size into account as well as club appeal then you can forget the likes of us, Brentford, Bournemouth or anyone with under 30k stadium.
They'll figure a way to get those pesky 'smaller' clubs already in the PL out of it before they close it. | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:46 - Apr 1 with 988 views | GaryHaddock |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:43 - Apr 1 by Juzzie |
You'll never get all 92 clubs to buy-in to the idea of a unilateral drastic cut in salaries. Someone (a few probably) will always break rank then they'll have the head start over everyone else while the others catch up, probably in the next transfer window. That's 'great' for a season maybe but then it'll all be back to the same again and if those clubs that broke rank haven't won anything it'll all be for nothing. Even if they have won something, the damage will still have been done.
I think we're at the point where the majority of clubs should really just cut their cloth and at least be solvent and existing.
If we use ground capacity as a barometer (clubs will always punch higher or lower but we have to have something to base upon) then we have the 50th biggest stadium in the country meaning upper 3rd tier football until we can have a 25k stadium and fill it regularly to get the income needed to compete just in the Championship.
It does worry me with the US ownership dominance in the PL they will potentially push for a closed shop. Again, taking stadium size into account as well as club appeal then you can forget the likes of us, Brentford, Bournemouth or anyone with under 30k stadium.
They'll figure a way to get those pesky 'smaller' clubs already in the PL out of it before they close it. |
This is why strong regulation is so important.
If they won't do it voluntarily they should be forced. | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 12:47 - Apr 1 with 869 views | nick_hammersmith |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:46 - Apr 1 by GaryHaddock |
This is why strong regulation is so important.
If they won't do it voluntarily they should be forced. |
I'm not sure how you do it though. Don't Chelsea hand out money to parents for the kids at the puppy farm for new cars/houses etc in lieu of signing on fees etc? | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 13:35 - Apr 1 with 794 views | hantssi |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 11:43 - Apr 1 by Juzzie |
You'll never get all 92 clubs to buy-in to the idea of a unilateral drastic cut in salaries. Someone (a few probably) will always break rank then they'll have the head start over everyone else while the others catch up, probably in the next transfer window. That's 'great' for a season maybe but then it'll all be back to the same again and if those clubs that broke rank haven't won anything it'll all be for nothing. Even if they have won something, the damage will still have been done.
I think we're at the point where the majority of clubs should really just cut their cloth and at least be solvent and existing.
If we use ground capacity as a barometer (clubs will always punch higher or lower but we have to have something to base upon) then we have the 50th biggest stadium in the country meaning upper 3rd tier football until we can have a 25k stadium and fill it regularly to get the income needed to compete just in the Championship.
It does worry me with the US ownership dominance in the PL they will potentially push for a closed shop. Again, taking stadium size into account as well as club appeal then you can forget the likes of us, Brentford, Bournemouth or anyone with under 30k stadium.
They'll figure a way to get those pesky 'smaller' clubs already in the PL out of it before they close it. |
I’ve been having this conversation for years with a pal of mine, also an R’s fan, they really want an 18/20 team closed league, something like this;
4”big” London teams
2 from the West Mids, say Villa and Wolves
2 from the East Mids, say Forest and Derby (for the rivalry)
2 from Manchester
2 from Liverpool
Newcastle and Sunderland
Leeds and Sheff W (for the rivalry)
Saints and Pompey (again for the rivalry)
And finally, perhaps Norwich and Ipswich |  | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 14:32 - Apr 1 with 708 views | Juzzie |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 13:35 - Apr 1 by hantssi |
I’ve been having this conversation for years with a pal of mine, also an R’s fan, they really want an 18/20 team closed league, something like this;
4”big” London teams
2 from the West Mids, say Villa and Wolves
2 from the East Mids, say Forest and Derby (for the rivalry)
2 from Manchester
2 from Liverpool
Newcastle and Sunderland
Leeds and Sheff W (for the rivalry)
Saints and Pompey (again for the rivalry)
And finally, perhaps Norwich and Ipswich |
IMO geography/rivalry, especially in the 'lesser' clubs, doesn't mean much as I reckon most of the global 'fans' don't have a scooby where they are (let's face it, it's why West Ham have shoehorned 'London' into their badge and stadium name in order to monopolise the thought process they are London's club) or who their rivals are so I reckon that would rule out Norwich & Ipswich and can only see Portsmouth figuring because they are American owned. They'd probably finish bottom but that doesn't matter without relegation to worry about.
It'll be predominantly based on appeal/history.
Liverpool
Man Utd
Man City
Arsenal
Everton
Spurs
Chelsea
West Ham
Newcastle
Aston Villa
Wolves
Leeds
Forest
Sunderland
Portsmouth (only because of US ownership)
Southampton (only because of Portsmouth. Saints are UK owned, for now)
I wouldn't even be surprised if they find a way to try and shoehorn Rangers & Celtic in there too.
There's your 18.
34 game season and lots of time left over for 'exhibition' games in Saudi or the US, far east etc.
[Post edited 1 Apr 14:38]
| | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 15:54 - Apr 1 with 596 views | stevec |
This concept of fan ownership always makes me laugh, simple mathematics tells you it’s unachievable.
Take our losses, as a lower end Championship side, which are somewhere around the £15mill mark every season.
If we could put together 1000 fans in ownership, they’d each have to find £15000 a season to cover the losses. Does anyone seriously think we can find that many fans willing to blow fifteen grand a year just to own the club. No chance.
A more manageable figure, say £1500, you’d need 10,000 fans owning the club. Again, no chance of that happening.
And that’s all based on buying the club for a penny, which again, it ain’t happening.
It’s a rich mans game. We could all make that easier by asking for our ticket prices to be hiked up to help towards the losses. We could ask the club to pay no more than £100 grand a year to any players who join the club, refuse to pay any player more than that. Of course, none of us ever do that, not even our staunch socialists amongst the support base.
In the end, we’re all quite happy to let someone else pick up the tab, just be honest, admit this, and hopefully we can end these fan ownership threads for good. |  | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 16:38 - Apr 1 with 530 views | GaryHaddock |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 15:54 - Apr 1 by stevec |
This concept of fan ownership always makes me laugh, simple mathematics tells you it’s unachievable.
Take our losses, as a lower end Championship side, which are somewhere around the £15mill mark every season.
If we could put together 1000 fans in ownership, they’d each have to find £15000 a season to cover the losses. Does anyone seriously think we can find that many fans willing to blow fifteen grand a year just to own the club. No chance.
A more manageable figure, say £1500, you’d need 10,000 fans owning the club. Again, no chance of that happening.
And that’s all based on buying the club for a penny, which again, it ain’t happening.
It’s a rich mans game. We could all make that easier by asking for our ticket prices to be hiked up to help towards the losses. We could ask the club to pay no more than £100 grand a year to any players who join the club, refuse to pay any player more than that. Of course, none of us ever do that, not even our staunch socialists amongst the support base.
In the end, we’re all quite happy to let someone else pick up the tab, just be honest, admit this, and hopefully we can end these fan ownership threads for good. |
'This concept of fan ownership always makes me laugh, simple mathematics tells you it’s unachievable'
Bit of a roundabout this. You say it's impossible, you get shown it's not, you ignore it, we bring it up again, you say it's impossible.
Your example is just one, very narrow model. No one is saying it's happening at QPR. This is about Yeovil and the topic broadly so you don't need to panic. | | | |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 17:31 - Apr 1 with 468 views | LazyFan |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 16:38 - Apr 1 by GaryHaddock |
'This concept of fan ownership always makes me laugh, simple mathematics tells you it’s unachievable'
Bit of a roundabout this. You say it's impossible, you get shown it's not, you ignore it, we bring it up again, you say it's impossible.
Your example is just one, very narrow model. No one is saying it's happening at QPR. This is about Yeovil and the topic broadly so you don't need to panic. |
I wonder how the majority of Bundesleague clubs that have 50% fan ownership do it?
I mean, what have "zee jermans" ever won? |  |
| |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 09:02 - Apr 2 with 300 views | TheChef |
| ‘Fan Ownership is a Bad Idea’ on 17:31 - Apr 1 by LazyFan |
I wonder how the majority of Bundesleague clubs that have 50% fan ownership do it?
I mean, what have "zee jermans" ever won? |
Thanks for that Harry. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.