Efford's Law - to give fans rights to buy shares on the order paper for next Tuesday

But which fans? Judging by some of the comments on here I'm not sure I would want certain people on the board of my club. You know the ones who go blah, blah, blah week in week out about how M.Duchatelet is getting it right all the time.

razil said:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmagenda/fb150701.htm

bill to give football fans right to buy shares and be on boards of clubs is on the order paper for next Tuesday

Unlikely ever to become law though - as with most Private Member's Bills.

MrOneLung said:

what a waste of time and money.

As a Millwall fan, Efford is used to it.

He was probably, necking Czech beer, with Prague & Riviera in The Long Pond.

Some scathing comments about him as well.

I had shares in Charlton ! About £1,000 worth. They were cancelled and I got nothing ! So will not be bothering again !

kentaddick said:

RaplhMilne said:

I had shares in Charlton ! About £1,000 worth. They were cancelled and I got nothing ! So will not be bothering again !

if you expect to make any money by investing in shares in a football club you deserve to lose that money.

Thanks for that tip Richard.

So nobody apart from @razil is interested to actually discuss the merits of Clive Efford's proposals?

.

As an Addicks supporter for more than half a century the proposals interest me, supporter representation on the board, share ownership - yes please. Would these proposals have made any difference to the Blackpool fc situation? - I dont know, but feel these proposals are worth supporting.

Understand Clive Efford has put a lot of time & effort into this, although given the political situation post-election, doubt it will become law.

Note; No club shares have to be given to fans. Up to 10% have to be made available to be purchased by the properly constituted Supporters Trust -as I understand it.

kings hill addick said:

I've not read the bill but presumably there would have to be a minimum share holding for a seat on the board, and that shares would have to be purchased at 'market value'.

If this is not the case I'd be worried and if it is I assume that it excludes all but the very, very wealthy.

Also how would the losses be funded? Would the small shareholders have to sell their houses to match the injections needed each year?

Very good points KHA.

Let's just consider RD's purchase of Charlton. Ignoring the debt he also took on, let's say the purchase price for 100% of the equity was £20m and we are currently losing £5m a year. He has to offer up to 10% equity to supporters groups - so £2m (assuming the £20m he paid was a fair market value, although valuing a private company isn't easy!). Those who stump up the £2m (if they can be found - unlikely they will be able to borrow to purchase a loss making business), now have to fund 10% of the annual losses as well (£500k). They, perhaps like Roland, are gambling that the £20m will increase significantly in value if we were to gain promotion so those supporters groups can cash in. Or they are in it for the long-run stumping up £500k every single year for the privilege of having a 10% stake that gives them precisely bugger all say in the running of the club.

I think there are some flaws in Efford's objectives - unless I've completely missed the point.

bobmunro said:

kings hill addick said:

I've not read the bill but presumably there would have to be a minimum share holding for a seat on the board, and that shares would have to be purchased at 'market value'.

If this is not the case I'd be worried and if it is I assume that it excludes all but the very, very wealthy.

Also how would the losses be funded? Would the small shareholders have to sell their houses to match the injections needed each year?

Very good points KHA.

Let's just consider RD's purchase of Charlton. Ignoring the debt he also took on, let's say the purchase price for 100% of the equity was £20m and we are currently losing £5m a year. He has to offer up to 10% equity to supporters groups - so £2m (assuming the £20m he paid was a fair market value, although valuing a private company isn't easy!). Those who stump up the £2m (if they can be found - unlikely they will be able to borrow to purchase a loss making business), now have to fund 10% of the annual losses as well (£500k). They, perhaps like Roland, are gambling that the £20m will increase significantly in value if we were to gain promotion so those supporters groups can cash in. Or they are in it for the long-run stumping up £500k every single year for the privilege of having a 10% stake that gives them precisely bugger all say in the running of the club.

I think there are some flaws in Efford's objectives - unless I've completely missed the point.

Yes, you have nailed the flaw in his particular plan, and doubtless some MPs with a brain and an understanding for football will point it out to him. It will work though, in the lower divisions. The Swansea guys only had to find £50k, to get their 20%. Swansea is profitable, and the Trust have agreed to dividends. They use the dividend money to ensure they can participate in any increase in capital proposed, so that they retain their 20%.

I agree this isn't going to work for a club of Charltons market value. But at least it's being discussed in the only place where change can be enacted.