Fans owned club | Page 3 | Vital Football

Fans owned club

I think we are a million miles from being fan owned at Gills.

Lowering the expectations a bit do we feel valued as fans, do we think we have voice and are listened to. That would be a start.

Lots of chat about the trust recently. Does the club value their input?
 
Last edited:
The only reason Medway is average on salaries is that vast numbers travel to work.It is a commuter town.Put it anywhere else in the country and that figure would change dramatically.

The figures were median not mean Chris. Your point of higher London salaries skewing the data is valid but the use of median addresses that.
 
A successful club is one that operates sustainably engages with and is enjoyed by its fans. That's it.

Barcelona and a number of other European clubs are not strictly owned by fans but they do get to elect a president. That's not necessarily as good as it sounds. Part of the problem with Barcelona and Real Madrid is that prospective presidents outbid one another to gain support and that has led to unsustainable debts and the calls for a super league.

Many of the Barcelona members share a season ticket with numbers of others and only attend a handful of games. It's a model with pluses and minuses. There are a myriad of different models and details in Europe. At Marseille several supporters groups own and sell blocks of STs and dispense the income as they see fit. It makes for great spectacle at the stadium, organised displays and chanting and frequently spills over into mayhem. It's fun but I doubt our public would stand for it and it diminishes the amount of cash that boards can waste on silly wages.
 
No way would Scally accept £1M! He owns the ground, and I think he wants what he thinks that is worth, as well as any other assets.
I think a way of raising money, would be to be the council onside, and for a developer to build our stadium, including housing and other amenities, like shops and a hotel. Similar to what Southend are doing, albeit a few years too late. I know that is what Scally trying to do, but he also still wants to have control over everything to do with the development. Then we can sell off our ground for Priestfield Park or whatever the flats that were to be called, and then Scally can have his share money. How much will Scally sell his shares for..?
The ground - and what GFC is worth - is a bit murky.

From Accounts May 2002
"The freehold property was professionally valued at £13,950,000 by Dunlop Heywood Lorenz of Manchester."
And this amount was reflected in the Assets of GFC.


From Accounts May 2003
Much comment about ITV Digital
Also:
"£12 million has been expended (on) development of the ground""

IIRC, the £14m valuation seemed high at the time.
And more than enough to cover that £12m "development of the ground" !

Apparently that valuation was on the basis of a 2nd Tier Club with 2nd Tier income.
Some years later, valuation for housing etc, was less - due to demolition costs
(£8 million perhaps ?)
....but see 2020 valuation


From Accounts May 2008
Corporate Restructuring....
"Priestfield Stadium was sold by the football club to Priestfield Developments Ltd for £10,000,000. GFC used the funds from this sale to reduce the agreed overdraft facility to £3,300,000."

Debt with Bank of Scotland was also transferred to Priestfield Developments.

The Accounts of Priestfield Developments May 2008 show:
"Bank Loans - £10,100,000"

By 2017, Priestfield Develpments had been dissolved


From Accounts May 2020
Fixed Assets shown with a Net Book Value of £4,641,638 (which appears to include some other property owned by GFC for many decades)

"The stadium was valued on an alternative use basis on 31 May 2019 by C Honeywell of Lambert Smith Hampton."

But from those accounts it is not clear whether the stadium alone is valued at a mere £1,000,000 !
Link here:> GFC Accounts 31st May 2020 (link not working)
Try this link :>>
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00039175/filing-history

And what happened to the loan from B of S ?
Was it written off ? (some, all ?)
Or is it still lurking in a connected company ?

For many fans to invest (another) £1,000 each (or whatever) may require a bit more transparency.
 
Last edited:
The ground - and what GFC is worth - is a bit murky.

From Accounts May 2002
"The freehold property was professionally valued at £13,950,000 by Dunlop Heywood Lorenz of Manchester."
And this amount was reflected in the Assets of GFC.


From Accounts May 2003
Much comment about ITV Digital
Also:
"£12 million has been expended (on) development of the ground""

IIRC, the £14m valuation seemed high at the time.
And more than enough to cover that £12m "development of the ground" !

Apparently that valuation was on the basis of a 2nd Tier Club with 2nd Tier income.
Some years later, valuation for housing etc, was less - due to demolition costs
(£8 million perhaps ?)
....but see 2020 valuation


From Accounts May 2008
Corporate Restructuring....
"Priestfield Stadium was sold by the football club to Priestfield Developments Ltd for £10,000,000. GFC used the funds from this sale to reduce the agreed overdraft facility to £3,300,000."

Debt with Bank of Scotland was also transferred to Priestfield Developments.

The Accounts of Priestfield Developments May 2008 show:
"Bank Loans - £10,100,000"

By 2017, Priestfield Develpments had been dissolved


From Accounts May 2020
Fixed Assets shown with a Net Book Value of £4,641,638 (which appears to include some other property owned by GFC for many decades)

"The stadium was valued on an alternative use basis on 31 May 2019 by C Honeywell of Lambert Smith Hampton."

But from those accounts it is not clear whether the stadium alone is valued at a mere £1,000,000 !
Link here:> GFC Accounts 31st May 2020

And what happened to the loan from B of S ?
Was it written off ? (some, all ?)
Or is it still lurking in a connected company ?

For many fans to invest (another) £1,000 each (or whatever) may require a bit more transparency.

Like I said, it's what Scally thinks it's worth. People can say what they think it should take to buy Scally out, but at the end of the day it's what Scally is willing to accept that counts.
You'll have to ask Wayne what happened to the BoS loan lol
 
There is a recognised formula for valuing a business LSB.
I suppose it depends on whether the seller is looking for top end or bottom end.
That is defined by the motivation of the seller.
It’s similar when selling anything.
When I bought our first house down here in Croyde, the seller was very keen to move back to the midlands so I made a bit of a cheeky offer and to our surprise, it was accepted.
When we bought the next one in Instow, they would not budge a fiver.
 
There is a recognised formula for valuing a business LSB.
I suppose it depends on whether the seller is looking for top end or bottom end.
That is defined by the motivation of the seller.
It’s similar when selling anything.
When I bought our first house down here in Croyde, the seller was very keen to move back to the midlands so I made a bit of a cheeky offer and to our surprise, it was accepted.
When we bought the next one in Instow, they would not budge a fiver.

Can you see Scally budging for a fiver? I can't.
 
I've always wondered how fan owned, or part owned clubs, work. I feel like it's mostly a motivation tool for the fans? Make them feel more part of it so they stay involved. That's obviously great but I don't think fans really have any control in reality?

I am a member of the Dons Trust, which owns a controlling stake in AFC Wimbledon. I've lived in the area for a number of years and they are very much my second team after Gills.

In practice what does that mean? The biggest influence is probably that I vote for the members of the Trust board. There's an election on at the moment and there are around 12 candidates standing for 5 places with a reasonable diversity of opinions about what the future of the club should be. They were also required to get membership approval for the sale of the old ground a couple of years ago.

The Trust board also survey members on broad questions. While obviously not binding these do seems to steer direction. For example there were some questions in the recent one about whether AFC Wimbledon should continue to fund a women's team, which is a significant decision that an owner like PDPS can make without any consultation.

Of course, passive members aren't making day to day decisions but it's definitely more than making fans "feel more part of it".
 
Of course, passive members aren't making day to day decisions but it's definitely more than making fans "feel more part of it".

That's what's missing for me at Gills. Too wide a divide between club and fans at the moment and for the first time I don't think it will resolve itself in time. I think both parties have overstepped the line and there isn't a resolution that brings both sides together. One has to go. As it stands that's the fans who disagree with him. The damage to the club will depend how many more join those who have made that decision.
 
I am a member of the Dons Trust, which owns a controlling stake in AFC Wimbledon. I've lived in the area for a number of years and they are very much my second team after Gills.

In practice what does that mean? The biggest influence is probably that I vote for the members of the Trust board. There's an election on at the moment and there are around 12 candidates standing for 5 places with a reasonable diversity of opinions about what the future of the club should be. They were also required to get membership approval for the sale of the old ground a couple of years ago.

The Trust board also survey members on broad questions. While obviously not binding these do seems to steer direction. For example there were some questions in the recent one about whether AFC Wimbledon should continue to fund a women's team, which is a significant decision that an owner like PDPS can make without any consultation.

Of course, passive members aren't making day to day decisions but it's definitely more than making fans "feel more part of it".
Cheers blueworm, that's very interesting to hear.

Are there ever surveys about contentious issues or are they ones that generally see the fanbase aligned so as not to create division? Not sure how close the vote was but I see they kept the ladies team?
 
That's what's missing for me at Gills. Too wide a divide between club and fans at the moment and for the first time I don't think it will resolve itself in time. I think both parties have overstepped the line and there isn't a resolution that brings both sides together. One has to go. As it stands that's the fans who disagree with him. The damage to the club will depend how many more join those who have made that decision.
If we had a miraculous change in luck and nicked the last playoff spot and went to Wembley, there would be about forty thousand there.
It’s all about the team, results and what happens on the pitch.
The chairman is irrelevant if the team is successful in my opinion.
 
If we had a miraculous change in luck and nicked the last playoff spot and went to Wembley, there would be about forty thousand there.
It’s all about the team, results and what happens on the pitch.
The chairman is irrelevant if the team is successful in my opinion.

I agree that it masks it. Success masks underlying problems. When we aren't successful the issues stand out more. No one disagrees with that.

The problem is they are both self reinforcing. The more successful we are , the more fans we have, the more budget there is, the better the team and the more successful we are.

The opposite also applies and we are in that downward spiral.

Now someone has to intervene and change the direction.

The current owner can't. I think we've all reached an agreement on that.

You could ask the fans to blindly back the club - that needs trust and belief in the owner.

From my perspective that's why I did by donating my two years worth of season tickets and renewing this year. Eventually you stop believing and trusting in the leader. Too much promised and not enough delivered. New leader required.
 
Cheers blueworm, that's very interesting to hear.

Are there ever surveys about contentious issues or are they ones that generally see the fanbase aligned so as not to create division? Not sure how close the vote was but I see they kept the ladies team?
There are contentious issues for sure. The biggest point of debate in the current election is probably whether to consider diluting the current 75% stake that the Trust has in return for third party investment.
 
<edited<
£600k (20%) might be raised from sale of shares to fans. That equate to 600 fans forking our £1k on average.
£2.4m (80%) would be raised by a loan secured against the club’s assets.

It might cost £120k per year in interest payments to the bank each year (btw - the club is paying £60k interest today in interest to Three Directors Ltd).
>edited<
And with a nod to Blueworm and Wimbledon....
A share issue isn't the only way to invest in GFC.

A bond issue would be possible.
(A bond usually pays interest and lasts for a specific number of years - e.g. 2% for 5 years.
Fans might be willing to lend GFC money at zero interest - or interest related to profitability - or with merchandise instead of interest
)


And while Bond holders don't usually get a vote like a shareholder - they get repaid before shareholders in the event of liquidation (and bondholders may get a vote during liquidation).
So no dilution (#) by Scally''s successor.

(# In a bad liquidation bond-holders might suffer a "hair-cut" - but are still ahead of shareholders who may end up with nothing.)

Or a hybrid e.g. a Convertible Bond - that provides an option to convert into shares at a pre-determined price.

If it comes to it, fans ought to be surveyed for their risk/reward appetite.
 
I'd love to read his pitch on why buying a bond would be a good idea, especially after the share float.

Each to their own but absolutely zero chance for me.
 
I'd love to read his pitch on why buying a bond would be a good idea, especially after the share float.

Each to their own but absolutely zero chance for me.

I assume that Tarian was proposing an alternative way to fund a buyout of Scally‘a shares; as opposed to helping Scally raise more cash.
 
If we had a miraculous change in luck and nicked the last playoff spot and went to Wembley, there would be about forty thousand there.
It’s all about the team, results and what happens on the pitch.
The chairman is irrelevant if the team is successful in my opinion.

I 100% agree with this.

Best example for me is Man United, there were loads of people up in arms at the Glazer takeover in 2005, setting up FC United etc - which all largely died down or got ignored at least when they carried on winning titles under Fergie, signed Ronaldo and Rooney, and won the CL in 2008.

Now that United aren't doing particularly well on the pitch, they're suddenly noticing how crap the owners are once again etc.

Same with Gills, same with anyone.