Insert Name Here aka The Ownership Thread

[Wilso8948]

Well, you tell me brains, if an entity has 51% and the other only 1%, who is going to have the final say on picking a marquee?

Sarcasm doesn't work well on the internet does it..

[Frodo]

Sarcasm doesn't work well on the internet does it..

Puppies or GTFO!

[Bon]

Puppies or GTFO!

If I wasn't on my work computer, I'd like to post a picture of some "puppies" that I can only assume we would all like to see..

[stopper2]

Or it could go all tits up with board infighting and ownership disputes and people undermining each other for control ala Manly Sea Eagles

So what do you suggest, just rely on the one owner who has deep pockets and hopefully sticks around?

[The Camel]

So what do you suggest, just rely on the one owner who has deep pockets and hopefully sticks around?

I do not have the magic answer, I was just pointing out that sticking 2 plus business parties together in running a sporting club is not always beer and skittles.

[stopper2]

I do not have the magic answer, I was just pointing out that sticking 2 plus business parties together in running a sporting club is not always beer and skittles.

Yes for sure, you no doubt will have disagreements, that's human nature.
However you'd probably avoid farcical situations like the one we had years ago when Con just went ahead and signed Jardel because he could and didn't have to answer to anyone.
Out of curiosity checked out Victory's ownership structure (as they are the A League's benchmark), they in fact have over 20 equity owners who all have shares in the club. Two owners left last year and there was talk of their shares bring offered to Members but the Chairman ended up buying them.

[plague]

Yeah see I don't think it would it would be a disagreement if I had the 51% I'd be like "**** yo opinion I'm doing it my way" every time.

If you're gonna give an asshole 51 then give him the whole hundred he might be a little more cautious if it's all his coin.

[De-Champ]

So we supposedly have two very interested parties interested in buying our club; the Ledman Group (Martin Lee) and the US consortium led by Von Schmauder. Other clubs have ownership structures in place where there are more than one person/group with a stakehold in the club i.e Victory, SFC (Frank Lowy himself has or used to have a stakehold in SFC) and Phoenix.
Why then doesn't FFA do a similar thing with the Jets?
Going by the reports that Lee's proposal is much more advanced and that his Ledman Group has the deepest pockets, give him the majority stakehold and 51%.
The Von Schmauder consortium would have 33%, local businesses who want to have a stakehold could make up 15%, which would leave 1% for paying Members who want to be more than just season ticketholders and have some sort of input.

Share the expense of running the club around so we don't have to rely on just one person, one owner with hopefully deep pockets to keep financing the club year after year. Con and Tinkler sould be lessons that show that a "one owner" ownership model just does not work in Newcastle.
In years to come, who knows if the club goes from strength to strength and becomes a viable and sustainable entity, then you might have the situation where the local business entity want to increase their stakehold for example, which ultimately is what we should be aiming for in the long-term.

Works in theory but not in practice. Why would I put up say 33% for no say as the guy that has 51% has you and every one else outvoted all the time.
You keep quoting victory as as example, how do you know how victory operates. My guess is that Dipietro has all the sway at victory, the others are just there and go along with anything he says/does.

[stopper2]

Works in theory but not in practice. Why would I put up say 33% for no say as the guy that has 51% has you and every one else outvoted all the time.
You keep quoting victory as as example, how do you know how victory operates. My guess is that Dipietro has all the sway at victory, the others are just there and go along with anything he says/does.

So it doesn't work in practice? Football clubs all around the world are run in this way, businesses all around the world are run in this way where many people have a stakehold in it but at the end of the day one person has to have the final say on matters....so what, that's life.
But hey, it won't work in Newcastle for the Jets because plague and De-Champ say it won't!!!
I'm not saying I know how Victory operate in regards to decision-making etc and how much power Dipietro has but like I said their ownership consists of over 20 equity owners and would I be right in saying they are probably the benchmark in regards to how a club should be run in the A League?

Maybe Martin Lee is the answer but we all thought Tinks had very deep pockets too when he took over. Who is to say if Lee takes control that his empire has a downturn in a few years to come, which would leave us back to square one again.

[MFKS]

Stopper is right

The split ownership is just democracy at work

The world operates this way

You can have the best idea and be out voted by idiots who have the numbers

I am all for the carnage you can get having a diversified ownership

On the other foot it means the little guys can hold the big guys to account and keep them honest

[hawk]

God I hope a name like this is our coach

[plague]

So it doesn't work in practice? Football clubs all around the world are run in this way, businesses all around the world are run in this way where many people have a stakehold in it but at the end of the day one person has to have the final say on matters....so what, that's life.
But hey, it won't work in Newcastle for the Jets because plague and De-Champ say it won't!!!
I'm not saying I know how Victory operate in regards to decision-making etc and how much power Dipietro has but like I said their ownership consists of over 20 equity owners and would I be right in saying they are probably the benchmark in regards to how a club should be run in the A League?

Maybe Martin Lee is the answer but we all thought Tinks had very deep pockets too when he took over. Who is to say if Lee takes control that his empire has a downturn in a few years to come, which would leave us back to square one again.

Man you don't even understand your own posts let alone the work of others.

[plague]

Stopper is right

The split ownership is just democracy at work

The world operates this way

You can have the best idea and be out voted by idiots who have the numbers

I am all for the carnage you can get having a diversified ownership

On the other foot it means the little guys can hold the big guys to account and keep them honest

This is a great summary.

Problem is we can't find any suckers to give up 51, 33 or even 1 percent worth of cash.

If you can find them, good luck. What some of us are saying is, if you've got someone wanting to put the 100% in, who gives a shit.

[monz6]

We own blue tongue stadium hahaha

[plague]

We own blue tongue stadium hahaha

and Ernie Merrick.
Can we borrow against these assets?

[MFKS]

This is a great summary.

Problem is we can't find any suckers to give up 51, 33 or even 1 percent worth of cash.

If you can find them, good luck. What some of us are saying is, if you've got someone wanting to put the 100% in, who gives a shit.

As for your suckers for your diversified ownership model.

Whether they can be found is really irrelevant.

The clowns selling the club have NFI and are interested only in the rich bloke carrying the entire bill model

If they had any brains when they sold WSW they would have created a Fan ownership component

They have shown lip service to that idea with Newy as well

[De-Champ]

So it doesn't work in practice? Football clubs all around the world are run in this way, businesses all around the world are run in this way where many people have a stakehold in it but at the end of the day one person has to have the final say on matters....so what, that's life.
But hey, it won't work in Newcastle for the Jets because plague and De-Champ say it won't!!!
I'm not saying I know how Victory operate in regards to decision-making etc and how much power Dipietro has but like I said their ownership consists of over 20 equity owners and would I be right in saying they are probably the benchmark in regards to how a club should be run in the A League?

Maybe Martin Lee is the answer but we all thought Tinks had very deep pockets too when he took over. Who is to say if Lee takes control that his empire has a downturn in a few years to come, which would leave us back to square one again.

Yes you are correct!!!! Packer owns 51% of crown casinos...but I'm sure there is someone out there that owns 1% of crown that is telling him what to do.

[Premy]

The Krauts have it right.
51% owned by members 49% owned by rich blokes.

Problem is that rich blokes in Australia don't want to own 49% of a Football Club.

[boz-monaut]

new money are the only ones stupid enough to throw money at a football club

new money in Australia often means mining jerks who rip everyone off (e.g. Tinkler, Palmer)

as a horrible rich man once said "You only get one Alan Bond in your lifetime, and I've had mine" - the Jerks have had their Alan Bond

[GazFish35]

And the fans can't afford the 51%