Police direct Gold Coast United fans after they stormed a closed off area of stadium. AAP Image/Dave Hunt.
The past few weeks have seen significant problems regarding A-League ownership bubble to the surface. A number of articles have been written and there is no doubt more intrigue yet to unfold.
The A-League ownership issue can be explored in terms of a number of different aspects.
Firstly, there is the cultural perspective to A-League ownership and the culture of bid/ownership assessment.
The FFA are excessively business-centric in their outlook, to the point where I am concerned that there is a Business groupthink problem.
During the bidding process for ownership of clubs there is often much talk about bidders having to satisfy “Business Plans”. However, a Business Plan is only one side of the coin.
Effective football club ownership is half a sociological exercise of sorts, and there is a deficit of football and sociological knowledge within the FFA.
There does not appear to be an extensive “sociological plan” on a par with the FFA’s “Business Plans” spelling out social engagement requirements of A-League owners or bidders.
Ben Buckley and Archie Fraser, and John O’Neill and Matt Carroll before them, both teams from AFL and Rugby Union, can hardly be expected to be able to scrutinise any prospective A-League owner on whether their club models will effectively enable teams to become deeply entrenched within their respective communities because they do not understand how football fans fuse with their clubs.
The cultural outlook of the FFA needs to be adjusted, where clubs are understood as joint cultural and Business institutions.
Secondly, there is the inter-related aspect of ownership structure.
Traditionally, the FFA have only preferred to deal with accomplished Business people in a private ownership model, people who speak the ‘same language’ and there has been no scope for alternatives.
This is now understood as being problematic as it obviously isn’t working as effectively as would be ideal. Now there is talk of broad based ownership models.
In terms of North Queensland Fury, the notion of getting a plethora of small and medium sized businesses to share ownership quite broadly is being seriously explored. This has merit as evidenced by the Central Coast Mariners model and hopefully can be practically implemented.
What I would like to raise is the place of supporter ownership and the prospective place of Supporters Trusts.
The organisation of the football fanbase is still at embryonic stage. Part of this is because in A-League terms FFA policies have not been conducive to fan communities and institutions developing around A-League clubs.
Normally, despite being smaller in numbers, Home Ends and active fan communities are where the organisational ability of fans traditionally develops.
Of course, the marketing language used over the years suggests the FFA merely see A-League as ‘spectators’ and in consumer terms only.
One gets the feeling that active fans are seen as useful for marketing purposes and product differentiation but need to be overbearingly controlled and limited because their culture is mutually exclusive to the family demographic predominantly on the wings.
There needs to be an adjustment in outlook.
Referring to the Bundesliga for a moment to illustrate the point, Each Bundesliga club has traditionally has a Fan Project attached, focuses outside of match times and aimed at ensuring stable relations between club and fans which helps to facilitate a rich but more moderate and non-violent of football culture.
Secondly, through Convertible terracing, standing and active fandom is not only encouraged but potently facilitated.
Far from being a “threat” that needs to be tackled with anti-terrorist firms with no background in football and banning orders, these are very important conduits to facilitating new youth fans into attending live football (as opposed to merely watching on television) and getting them “fixed” on the live experience so that they attend more consistently (and in turn tell others via word of mouth).
This, in turn, means a strong community develops around the club and extends outside of match times.
This can often be threatening, because after all it means fans are more able to organise in such a way to constructively criticise administrator policy which can be a nuisance, but it also ensures a healthily attended and vibrant national league which is the bigger priority.
In terms of supporters Trusts, although the Australian fan fraternity is still some way from having this capacity, a healthy community surrounding a club can give rise to the beginnings of a Supporters Trust which can also be joined by fans who sit on the wings.
If we take Eammonn Flanagan’s Canberra example, 2000 people pledging $200 is $200,000 and proof that there is some grassroots funding capability in this country based around a sense of community (as opposed to “franchise brand”).
$200 is the cost of only one away trip.
Considering the amount of money that goes into alcohol at matches as well, if a fan Trust in Australia was to have staggered payment system it shouldn’t be too difficult (in theory anyway) for highly motivated people to sustain annually on top of their season ticket costs.
But the issue at the moment is that there are no longer many highly motivated people left as disillusionment from negative fan experience breeds apathy and down in Melbourne.
The positives of a Supporters Trust is that it means there is less of a vacuum if a Tana, a Bianco, a Matheson or perhaps a Palmer pulls outs.
Meaning less FFA money to prop up the club but also maintains engagement of fans.
Les Murray has suggested a more “community based model” as in Spain in some of his recent blogs such as “give fury to the people”.
Although well intended, this has problems. The fans should be more involved than merely voting for President.
As is the case with the lower tiers of English football, the aim should be to purchase and maintain annual investment in enough of the “Franchise” to be able to have a position on the clubs board.
As well as bringing rich football knowledge and connectedness to the grassroots they also bring continuous scrutiny on club decisions (hopefully avoiding prohibitive pricing), and a platform for constructive scrutiny of the FFA’s governance performance.
Hopefully this will avoid the amateurish mistakes that have come about due to a deficit of football people.
Not to mention enough influence over relations with other stakeholders, such as stadiums.
The fact that fans are actually now invested in the structure of the game will mean they have responsibilities, plus an interest in maintaining non-destructive behaviour at matches as well.
Although it may seem like a “Pipe Dream”, it is becoming increasingly clear that there needs to be a tweaking of the governance structures and cultural outlook if football and the A-League is to be healthy and vibrant.
Ora
Guest
Not really the right thread but couldn't find a suitable one, Wellington and New Zealand football fans are pumped with the extension of the Phoenixs licence for another 5 years
AndyRoo
Roar Guru
that looks very similar to Rugby League "memberships". Recently the word membership now also means season ticket holders but prior to a couple of seasons ago mebership normally meant voting rights and no relation to ticketing.
Nelson
Guest
Something from elsewhere, from a Dresden fan: "To be a paying member don't mean to own shares of your club. If you are a club member you have a suffrage on members' meetings. You can vote people in offices. You discuss the condition of your club. It's like having a seat in a parliament. Every member has one vote ! For example ( SG Dynamo Dresden ): - ordinary membership 72 € per year - reduced membership 36 € per year ( people under 18; severely handicapped people ) - sporty active members 120 € per year - family membership 140 € per year Currently we have 5.250 paying members." A club like Melbourne Victory wouldn't have much difficulty in getting as many or more to sign up as voting members for an extra $100 per year. I'm sure fans of most other clubs would jump on to this. The benefits of more and direct community involvement are obvious. On the business side, in this league and this market an extra half a million dollars coming into a club every year would be a handy revenue stream.
Cpaaa
Roar Pro
This is a great piece NUF, with great ideas. Because this is a new concept in Australia, any suggestions about club ownership needs to be put out there. "Of course, the marketing language used over the years suggests the FFA merely see A-League as ‘spectators’ and in consumer terms only"......sadly this is too true and the football fan knows this, empty seats dont lie.
Axel V
Roar Rookie
About that basketball fad, have you noticed that alot of people have become re-interested in NBA and are talking about it again? Either it's come out of nowhere or it's because we can watch it on FTA TV.
Midfielder
Guest
I think the idea has a lot of merit... if you combine a number of local business with a core fan group they will provide heaps of funding... Recently I looked at a model... where a single large investor say a Con or Clive put in some money and to this was added the local business's and fans... The key issue's are two fold .. first the local business & fans must have board seats and a say in the club ... second funds are needed each side must agree in advance with guarantees to top up their percentage..
Sam
Guest
FFA should be going to the clubs and associations all around Australia in each city and region. Hand out family friendly deals. Make families enjoy a good day out at the game. Make it worthwile attending. People enjoy this feeling of belonging. We should make kids who play football watch our sport first and others second. There should be a feeling that you are a part of the football (round ball) culture in Australia. We don't have this culture yet. Even rugby union is ahead of us in this area. In other words get the kids who play (and their families) out to games, whatever it takes. A culture needs to be created before the crowds will be satisfactory.
David V.
Guest
It works in Spain, Barcelona are a membership-driven club. In England, we've seen fans' trusts take over at a few clubs. It's worked well for Exeter but has been disastrous for Stockport.
NUFCMVFC
Guest
I understand it may seem far fetched and it is some way off as it simply isn'tpractical in Australia, but the idea needs to be raised so there is openness in the future. Supposedly Geoff Lord for example put $500k into MVFC originally, if 2000 Canberrans can get about $200k it isn't too far off and is probably the kind of amount some of the prospective small businesses in Townsville are probably pledging, I think a Supporters Trust would be able to have a place in a quite broad ownership structure (probably as a more minor partner not the entire club but with their place nevertheless) alongside small businesses or whatever. I still think it would be good to have someone who owns a bit more than others and stands above the rest to give direction because if the spread is too even that can lead to crippling infighting... A bit surprising to hear only 40k members across the league, considering MVFC had about 20k or so...But if a few thousand people from Melbourne and Sydney can afford an away trip in the region of $200 at Finals time then if they are really motivated they should be able to theoretically put a similar amount into maintaining ownership. Of course a lot of people aren't really used to that idea in Australia. But my point is I think it needs to be discussed and included in any discussion of adjustment to ownership models because there may be a practical place in the future for it and it may be feasible and advantagous to the league
NUFCMVFC
Guest
Perhaps there is something to look at, I think North melbourne is a good example, where the members basically revolted and stopped the AFL moving them to GC permanently because of "target market" reasons. Also, I thkink as we have seen with MVFC and Geoof Lord, he is an AFL man (ex Hawthorn president) and he has done very well, there is a bit of a balancing act because where JON and Buckly and their compatriots would have some good understanding is how to connect with generalist sports fans in this country, which we can see with the start of the A League being a "commercial success". As we have seen with 40-50% of MVFC's members also being members of AFL clubs for example this certainly has its place and the expertise is just as necassary as having people who understand football fans The crucial issue is that we are out of the "startup" phase and it is not merely just a case of opening up generalist sports fans to coming to the A League - which they tackled with the "new football, old soccer" line, but the crucial issue now is one of retention and stopping the A League from becoming a fad like Basketball was. This requires a different understanding, and the ability to engage the 50% or so that are football fans, the point here is that you need a good solid strong core of football fans to underpin a stable attendance, then you top that off with the icing of generalist sports fans who are open to the A League attend more casually. In this dynamic, fluctuations in attendances are within smaller parameters, which has beneficial knock on effects...The issue is if you disengage the core element it undermines core attendance more severely because you are losing committed people on top of the casuals. The issue with committed people is that they are the ones who know the dates of games etc and are able to tell people within their friendship network via word of mouth (in the absence of blanket advertising marketing), but if these people aren't attending as much, neither are the other people they would have brought along before and so we see added momentum in spiralling attendance figures...
AndyRoo
Roar Guru
You can get people involved without actually giving them ownership if that is too hard to set up (especially when the clubs are still losing money). Drew Careys Seattle Sounders have a very good model.
Rob
Guest
As you say this discussion has been kicking around a bit lately and whilst it may be well intentioned it is also staggeringly naive from a financial perspective. Each and every club would require about 40k members in order to be self financing I read that only 40k memberships were sold across the entire league last year.
Kurt
Guest
I really, really don't want to start a code war here, but are you serious in saying that because Ben Buckley is from an AFL background he can't understand "how football fans fuse with their clubs"? I understand there are differences in the style of support between soccer and Australian Football, with the former giving greater emphasis to collective singing, chanting, and 'active support'. However I would think that AFL administrators know an enormous amount about how fans develop a sense of connection with their clubs. I'm consistently intrigued that soccer fans are looking to Germany for guidance on community ownership models when they've got such a good model here in Australia to draw from. That's not to suggest that the AFL membership model is entirely transplantable to soccer, but surely there must be something you can take from it? Or is simply to difficult to acknowledge the strengths of a competitor?