CONFIMRED - The final countdown

[UpThePrem]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but what's stopping Dai from handing all of the football club to his sister who, I assume, passed the owners test with him. If he's not a director or owner, can she take on both roles?

[Snowflake Royal]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but what's stopping Dai from handing all of the football club to his sister who, I assume, passed the owners test with him. If he's not a director or owner, can she take on both roles?

Well she'd have to agree to it and she's already walked away from the club once, passing her part to him.

She'd have to pass the Owners & Directors Test now, along with proof of funds, which is doubtful.

And she'd have to prove that Dai would have no involvement in the club, which would basically be impossible, because it's clearly just an administrative 'fine the lady'.

[bcubed]

I think a fan owned phoenix club would find it harder to compete than AFC Wimbledon did and similarly Exeter at their low point (not a phoenix but had to rebuild from penniless). There’s a lot of non League wealth now and no real controls or limits.

If we are to go down the phoenix route, we should hope for better governance at that level so that our size would give us a natural advantage and we don't get financially outgunned by some ego trip to take Truro to the Championship.

Wimbledon were fortunate in having a nearby ground to play in. We would have to go to Maidenhead to find anything remotely similar. There's no remotely adequate alternative ground.

When clubs lose their ground it's much harder to recover.

Ground share would be a good option. If anyone would want a non league club alongside their league club. MK Dons? Be handy for me

[bcubed]

There's a step by step guide to starting a new community club here

https://thefsa.org.uk/fan-resources/res ... 0they%20do.

[Sanguine]

'Run if you hate Dai Yongge'.

Appreciated this sign held by someone at the bottom of the road up to the Stadium yesterday, at the Half Marathon.

[El Diablo]

Am I right in thinking Couhig only has security over Bearwood and the Stadium? So Dai could sell the club to Platek now and kick the can down on the road on the real estate assets until the court case in June has occurred?

Correct.

[Snowflake Royal]

Am I right in thinking Couhig only has security over Bearwood and the Stadium? So Dai could sell the club to Platek now and kick the can down on the road on the real estate assets until the court case in June has occurred?

Correct.

I mean, he could sell the lot, all he has to do is put enough of the proceeds in Escrow to cover the potential court outcome. Why delay selling part of the club when you can do that.

[stealthpapes]

The one thing the court case did do is show there really is nothing significant blocking the sale

[Uke]

The one thing the court case did do is show there really is nothing significant blocking the sale

One significant thing only!

[stealthpapes]

The one thing the court case did do is show there really is nothing significant blocking the sale

One significant thing only!

Blocking - as in external issues.
Obviously.

[Mr Angry]

Dai has to know that he either sells now, or is sat on something that will be utterly valueless at the end of the season.

Worst case scenario as I see it is that we drop down to National League South.

[Sutekh]

Dai has to know that he either sells now, or is sat on something that will be utterly valueless at the end of the season.

Worst case scenario as I see it is that we drop down to National League South.

Logic doesn’t appear to be something that concerns too many of his decisions sadly.

If a phoenix club is the result of all this I would be very surprised to see the National League members voting to allow the club to take up residence as high as that level.

We can but wait…

[Crusader Royal]

National League, including it's North/ South tier, is quite a high standard now. I'd say that's the level you implement something, and clubs getting promoted in need to clear the bar off the pitch too.

And Exeter are fan owned and pass the test in EFL already. I would presume the test would be proving business plan and governance to show the fan trust is suitable. I think a fan owned phoenix club would find it harder to compete than AFC Wimbledon did and similarly Exeter at their low point (not a phoenix but had to rebuild from penniless). There’s a lot of non League wealth now and no real controls or limits.

If we are to go down the phoenix route, we should hope for better governance at that level so that our size would give us a natural advantage and we don't get financially outgunned by some ego trip to take Truro to the Championship.

Implementing an owner test at Nationall League level would be impossible. There are many ownership’ models and some clubs have no owners at all !

Fan ownership is still an owner. No club has no owner at all. Who is making the decisions to find a pitch and some players?

FA requirement is that to enter the pyramid at the very bottom you need a club secretary. So that is a formal position to start off with, and that secretary will have been appointed by someone. Then as you climb higher, you expect some sort of Board or Trust. These people might all be volunteers or part time, but they all constitute a form of governance that represents ownership. And if you can't provide that clear picture of who actually owns the club, you would fail.

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

[Sutekh]

Implementing an owner test at Nationall League level would be impossible. There are many ownership’ models and some clubs have no owners at all !

Fan ownership is still an owner. No club has no owner at all. Who is making the decisions to find a pitch and some players?

FA requirement is that to enter the pyramid at the very bottom you need a club secretary. So that is a formal position to start off with, and that secretary will have been appointed by someone. Then as you climb higher, you expect some sort of Board or Trust. These people might all be volunteers or part time, but they all constitute a form of governance that represents ownership. And if you can't provide that clear picture of who actually owns the club, you would fail.

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

Would presume that any league regulations would be most interested in whoever controls the “purse strings” of a club, be it a standard ownership model or fan ownership.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Implementing an owner test at Nationall League level would be impossible. There are many ownership’ models and some clubs have no owners at all !

Fan ownership is still an owner. No club has no owner at all. Who is making the decisions to find a pitch and some players?

FA requirement is that to enter the pyramid at the very bottom you need a club secretary. So that is a formal position to start off with, and that secretary will have been appointed by someone. Then as you climb higher, you expect some sort of Board or Trust. These people might all be volunteers or part time, but they all constitute a form of governance that represents ownership. And if you can't provide that clear picture of who actually owns the club, you would fail.

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

That is still an ownership model. The test would assess whether you have suitable governance to control funds earned through revenue and provided by members, and that nobody on your committee has bankruptcy on their file, criminal convictions etc.

[Crusader Royal]

Fan ownership is still an owner. No club has no owner at all. Who is making the decisions to find a pitch and some players?

FA requirement is that to enter the pyramid at the very bottom you need a club secretary. So that is a formal position to start off with, and that secretary will have been appointed by someone. Then as you climb higher, you expect some sort of Board or Trust. These people might all be volunteers or part time, but they all constitute a form of governance that represents ownership. And if you can't provide that clear picture of who actually owns the club, you would fail.

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

Would presume that any league regulations would be most interested in whoever controls the “purse strings” of a club, be it a standard ownership model or fan ownership.

I know this is going off tangent but most clubs raise money to support themselves on a season by season basis, there are no investors, no one pumping money in. And there is no owner of ANY sort. Making a club committee member submit to a barrage of financial tests would just be absurd !

[Crusader Royal]

Fan ownership is still an owner. No club has no owner at all. Who is making the decisions to find a pitch and some players?

FA requirement is that to enter the pyramid at the very bottom you need a club secretary. So that is a formal position to start off with, and that secretary will have been appointed by someone. Then as you climb higher, you expect some sort of Board or Trust. These people might all be volunteers or part time, but they all constitute a form of governance that represents ownership. And if you can't provide that clear picture of who actually owns the club, you would fail.

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

That is still an ownership model. The test would assess whether you have suitable governance to control funds earned through revenue and provided by members, and that nobody on your committee has bankruptcy on their file, criminal convictions etc.

Why should having a criminal conviction stop you being on a football club committee ? Likewise bankruptcy ? You’d probably not want someone who has been bankrupt as your treasurer but no reason why they can’t be a perfectly good match secretary… clubs already have to account to members for their finances, you publish accounts that are audited.
It’s hard enough for clubs to get dedicated committee members already, start putting unnecessary regulation in place and you’ll send perfectly good clubs to the wall.
Yiu also have to find someone to carry out these thousands of checks, the FL don’t have the people to do th8ngs properly and the lower leagues for sure have neither the people or funds to do it.

[Snowflake Royal]

Of course not every club has an owner ! I’m on the committee of a club that was playing at NLS until a couple of years ago and we have no owners. We are a members club, you pay an annual membership fee to join and no one can have more than one membership ( and hence all members have equal voting rights). We have an elected chairman and an elected committee who make decisions. No one ‘owns’ the club and you are just muddling up very different things and are just wrong !

That is still an ownership model. The test would assess whether you have suitable governance to control funds earned through revenue and provided by members, and that nobody on your committee has bankruptcy on their file, criminal convictions etc.

Why should having a criminal conviction stop you being on a football club committee ? Likewise bankruptcy ? You’d probably not want someone who has been bankrupt as your treasurer but no reason why they can’t be a perfectly good match secretary… clubs already have to account to members for their finances, you publish accounts that are audited.
It’s hard enough for clubs to get dedicated committee members already, start putting unnecessary regulation in place and you’ll send perfectly good clubs to the wall.
Yiu also have to find someone to carry out these thousands of checks, the FL don’t have the people to do th8ngs properly and the lower leagues for sure have neither the people or funds to do it.

Because it's evidence of dishonesty. Same reason it's relevant for the owner of a club.

[Dirk Gently]

The usual governance model for community owned clubs is a two-tier one - there is the "Membership Organisation" (Wimbledon ISA, Morton Club Together, Foundation of Hearts, Exeter City Supporters' Trust, Seadogs Trust, etc) which people belong to and contribute to, on the basis that no member has more than one vote. STAR was setup as an Industrial & Provident Society with this model in mind.

That membership organisation then owns various assets, such as football ground, football club, training ground etc etc - they appoint the directors, but each of these is a separate company in its own right, it's just owned by the membership organisation, that appoints directors and sets the direction.

But legally the directors of the Football Club Company are the ones who will need to be vetted etc (and, incidentally, be banned from placing football bets!), and legally they are a quite different company from the membership organisation that owns the majority of their shares.

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Dai has to know that he either sells now, or is sat on something that will be utterly valueless at the end of the season.

Worst case scenario as I see it is that we drop down to National League South.

Most recent comparison Bury are currently in the North West Counties league which is tier 9.....and they were kicked out a few years ago.