Would you want the fans to run the club?

hellava_tough

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
7,084
Thought I'd start a fresh topic of discussion, during this distinctly stagnant finish to the season.

So a number of clubs in Europe are 'owned' and run by their respective fans. The key positions within the clubs are voted on by the fans and they also have a say in some of the more important footballing decisions.

In the rather unlikely scenario that a billionaire were to buy Spurs and then give the club, lock stock and barrel, to the fans, would you be happy with this?

Or is it better that a more 'typical' owner runs things?

Anyway, over to you.
 

thebenjamin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
7,012
Not run by the fans, but I do think the model of the club being owned by the fans and prospective presidents vying for control by presenting a manifesto of what they would do in their period in charge, is a good one. A democracy where supporters can vote them out if they don't deliver. Rather than the dictatorship we currently have. As fans we have zero influence over anything that happens at the club, which I don't think is a good thing. It's slightly insane, if you think about it. We all spend so much emotional energy on something over which we have no control whatsoever. It's basically an abusive relationship.
 

DiVaio

Active Member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
192
It's happening only in Spain. Also, our fans for example would pay ~60m more for our transfers last year than Levy.
 

cliff jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
2,476
Let’s run it as a not for profit, with all revenues reinvested

rename the ground White Hart Lane
Slash ticket prices, including concessions in all non corp areas
Appoint BusConductor as lifelong head coach
 

Nine while nine

Ciao Bela
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
3,266
Would I want Spurs fans to run the club? No.

Is there some merit in bringing them into aspects of the decision-making process as a committee of taste? Possibly.

It's not that Levy doesn't fuck up some of the big decisions, but, all things considered, I reckon he fucks up far fewer than a rag-tag bunch of fans would make. However, when it comes to the smaller decisions, that's where I think he has a tin ear. I appreciate some of these have a financial angle - the red sponsor, the furlough scheme, the cost of season tickets - but it wouldn't hurt to have him listen to fans before he made a decision from time to time.

If nothing else, we'd have been spared that shirt with the yellow armpits and, better still, we'd have been spared the horror that was Evil Chirpy...

 

McArchibald

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
817
Yes - absolutely

It'd be a bitch electing the right boardmembers from amongst ourselves. But simply knowing that the performance of the first team will be number one again in everyone's thinking (and that by our toils we're not making some rich knob even richer) will make it all worthwhile...
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,113
Fans owning club - No.

Fans owning a portion of club, and having representatives on the board - Not adverse to that
 

SUIYHA

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2017
Messages
786
Plato's Republic goes into detail about why democracy is fundamentally flawed, and it would apply in situations like these. In a nutshell, his view is that most people are uninformed about important issues (in statehood terms these are things like economics, military strategy, conditions in other countries, ethics etc), and the majority are not motivated to learn about these things in any great detail, so they instead get suckered in by demagogues and promises of shiny new toys. He has the analogy of a ship, in which instead of putting all of the decisions to a democratic vote, the ship should have a trained captain, a trained navigator, someone who understands about supplies management etc taking the lead with it all.

Knowing the impatient nature of our fans, if we had taken widespread votes on things in the last couple of years - we'd have most likely blown our entire transfer budgets on Saido Berahino and Leandro Damiao, kicked Danny Rose out of the club before he got good in 2014, and appointed Frank De Boer instead of Pochettino. Yes Levy has made plenty of mistakes in his time but we should acknowledge that there is a lot more that goes into running a football club than those of us on the outside will ever see.

I would be in favour of a fan elected representative sitting on the executive board at all times though. That would work, although how they would go about running for that kind of position is a complicated issue.
 

carpediem991

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
6,011
Thought I'd start a fresh topic of discussion, during this distinctly stagnant finish to the season.

So a number of clubs in Europe are 'owned' and run by their respective fans. The key positions within the clubs are voted on by the fans and they also have a say in some of the more important footballing decisions.

In the rather unlikely scenario that a billionaire were to buy Spurs and then give the club, lock stock and barrel, to the fans, would you be happy with this?

Or is it better that a more 'typical' owner runs things?

Anyway, over to you.
Well, in Germany there is a rule that at least 51 % of the club must be owned by the Club and its members.
I think personally that is a good thing and prevents (a bit) that clubs are being made as toys of some owners, who barely care about what the club stands for and leave it in a complete mess after selfish decisions and running the club unhealthy.

Important is though that not the screaming fan in the stands makes the decisions but that they vote for qualified people in the top spots, who have knowledge, experience, network and all what it takes, to run the club succesfully. And for that person it is important to install people for the transfer/footballing decisions and let them do without having a say other than budget.
Every three years the club members should vote about the people in the highest positions. Can they continue, or is it best to vote for change.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,113
Well, in Germany there is a rule that at least 51 % of the club must be owned by the Club and its members.
I think personally that is a good thing and prevents (a bit) that clubs are being made as toys of some owners, who barely care about what the club stands for and leave it in a complete mess after selfish decisions and running the club unhealthy.

Important is though that not the screaming fan in the stands makes the decisions but that they vote for qualified people in the top spots, who have knowledge, experience, network and all what it takes, to run the club succesfully. Every three years the club members should vote about the people in the highest positions. Can they continue, or is it best to vote for change.
There are exceptions though

Bayer Leverkusen - Bayer majority owned
Wolfsburg - VW majority owned
RB Leipzig - Red Bull 100% owned, either directly or by directors that work for Red Bull.
Hoffenheim, founder of SAP owned, and those latter 2 have caused of lot of resentment there
 

Stamford

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2015
Messages
1,017
Absolutely yes. I like the German system. I dont want massive changes in all honesty, my biggest concern is the pricing out of younger fans and the lack of respect for football fans at grounds
 

carpediem991

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
6,011
There are exceptions though

Bayer Leverkusen - Bayer majority owned
Wolfsburg - VW majority owned
RB Leipzig - Red Bull 100% owned, either directly or by directors that work for Red Bull.
Hoffenheim, founder of SAP owned, and those latter 2 have caused of lot of resentment there
I know they did and they made a bit their way around the rulings. And of course they are more or less disliked by the rest of the german football fans.
But the rule with 51% applies for them as well. I think RB Leipzig has tricked a bit. They are a club with only 5-10 members if i got it correctly and don't accept anyone more so they have the power.

RB was also declined to call the club RedBull Leipzig. So they call themselves RasenBallsport Leipzig, inventive fvckers.

They all have strong financial partnerships, but its not possible to put unlimited money into them. The league has a controlling system that there are no sponsoring deals that are completely over the top.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,113
Indeed they are, but all the "fan members" of the club are also members of the Board of Red Bull, meaning in effect they 100% control the club.
 

WinksyBoy

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2020
Messages
19
I think there should definitely be some sort of fan representation on the Spurs board. Perhaps someone from the board of The Trust?
 
Top