Topic: Share Liverpool fc Do we Know if they are ready to make a bid?

[hoonin]

Their recent success is largely down to Laporta as president, not because they are fan owned. Under Gaspart they were fucking awful.

This goes back to Gregs point though, about the members having an input into the control of their club.

There's no guarantee of success whether you are supporter owned, over leveraged by vultures or controlled by a benevolent local. At least with the supporter owned model you have no reason to complain and are limited to waving white handkerchiefs in protest

[Alan_X]

But in response to somebody saying fan ownership is pie in the sky and will never work I say take a gander. 
It is working and to be honest if we're coutning European Cups then this time next month they could be squarely on to be 1 behind us.

I understand that, we shouldn't get all dewy-eyed over Barcelona though and think they are where they are  at the moment because of their ownership model. Laporta is doing really well at the moment but if they slip up in the next couple of years maybe the fans will turn on him and elect a Perez-type who promises the socios the moon on a stick. Laporta is only the third elected president of Barcelona. One of those was successful in patches - primarily because of Johann Cruyff, the second was a disaster and Laporta seems at first glance like a great President, overseeing amazing success and one of the best teams the world has ever seen.

Except that he lost a vote of no-confidence in 2008 - over 60% of the socios voted against him - so it's a bit unfair to offer the treble they won last season as proof that the nutters won't take over the asylum. If the nutters had got just a few more votes, Laporta would have been out on his arse and Pep Guardiloa might never have been appointed.

There's a new Presidential election this year at Barca - let's see what happens.

[El Ninos Black Eye]

I understand that, we shouldn't get all dewy-eyed over Barcelona though and think they are where they are  at the moment because of their ownership model. Laporta is doing really well at the moment but if they slip up in the next couple of years maybe the fans will turn on him and elect a Perez-type who promises the socios the moon on a stick. Laporta is only the third elected president of Barcelona. One of those was successful in patches - primarily because of Johann Cruyff, the second was a disaster and Laporta seems at first glance like a great President, overseeing amazing success and one of the best teams the world has ever seen.

Except that he lost a vote of no-confidence in 2008 - over 60% of the socios voted against him - so it's a bit unfair to offer the treble they won last season as proof that the nutters won't take over the asylum. If the nutters had got just a few more votes, Laporta would have been out on his arse and Pep Guardiloa might never have been appointed.

There's a new Presidential election this year at Barca - let's see what happens.

I don't think Laporta is standing anyway or can't stand as his term is up. Pretty sure I saw an interview with him before the Arsenal game saying he wasn't running in the next election.

[Alan_X]

I don't think Laporta is standing anyway or can't stand as his term is up. Pretty sure I saw an interview with him before the Arsenal game saying he wasn't running in the next election.

He isn't - couldn't be arsed to change the post.

[Degs]

I understand that, we shouldn't get all dewy-eyed over Barcelona though and think they are where they are  at the moment because of their ownership model. Laporta is doing really well at the moment but if they slip up in the next couple of years maybe the fans will turn on him and elect a Perez-type who promises the socios the moon on a stick. Laporta is only the third elected president of Barcelona. One of those was successful in patches - primarily because of Johann Cruyff, the second was a disaster and Laporta seems at first glance like a great President, overseeing amazing success and one of the best teams the world has ever seen.

Except that he lost a vote of no-confidence in 2008 - over 60% of the socios voted against him - so it's a bit unfair to offer the treble they won last season as proof that the nutters won't take over the asylum. If the nutters had got just a few more votes, Laporta would have been out on his arse and Pep Guardiloa might never have been appointed.

There's a new Presidential election this year at Barca - let's see what happens.

But it comes back to the point where the fans have the voice and the power to change things if they don't see fit.
Forgetting on the pitch highs and lows they have the power to change it off the pitch, they are part of the club not just chumps who walk through the gate and spend 40 quid in the gift shop and leave.
It's a luxury we don't have, and even if a sugar daddy is to come in and bankroll success like Abramovich down at Chelsea wouldn't it be sweeter if it wasn't down to hand outs and it came from the people of the club.

At this point in time it is pie in the sky because of the absurd amounts of money involved but fan ownership isn't something to be dismissed out of hand, it has done wonders of late for Barca and they always have the option of booting a President out at some point.  If we were fan owned we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.

[jp2]

Great stuff by Alan over the last 2 years. I do think the ultimate goal should be fan ownership - just as SOS has put it. Like most of you I've been terribly disappointed by Share Liverpool. Poor vision, leadership and management. (A theme with the club recently)

My ownership fantasy would include a small portion of the club offered to fans by a new owner (5-10%) with an option for greater and greater shares as years pass.

[DonkeyWan]

I think there is some confusion here, there is a big difference between fan ownership (supplying a small amount of cash to take a stake in the club and become a shareholder - how does that work, do you receive a dividend? Are you expected to supply more capital if the club requires it? How do you even qualify as a 'fan'? Enough money and a scarf?) and all the difficulties that entails, and fan input into the running of the club, a la Barcelona, where voting rights are linked to tickets.

[Alan_X]

At this point in time it is pie in the sky because of the absurd amounts of money involved but fan ownership isn't something to be dismissed out of hand, it has done wonders of late for Barca and they always have the option of booting a President out at some point.  If we were fan owned we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.

I've never dismissed it out of hand. I just think that the obscene figures involved rule out any possibility of democratic one-fan-one-vote ownership of one of the top Premier league Clubs. At the other end of the East Lancs Road the "Red Knights" have reached the same conclusion and are putting together a consortium of rich supporters with fan shares tacked on for credibility (and if you're cynical make up hat they can't raise themselves). Our best hope is for legislation like the proposed Labour plan for 25% guaranteed fan ownership of clubs shares.

Personally I'd hate the Spanish model of elected Presidents. As I said, Laporta narrowly survived a vote of no confidence from the fans before appointing Pep and achieving their current success. On a straight majority vote he'd have been out on his ear. And at Madrid, the Presidential elections result in ridiculous de-stabilising parades of promised managers and star players from around the world. I'd prefer one or more elected fan representatives on the board with professionals running the club.

[Degs]

I think there is some confusion here, there is a big difference between fan ownership (supplying a small amount of cash to take a stake in the club and become a shareholder - how does that work, do you receive a dividend? Are you expected to supply more capital if the club requires it? How do you even qualify as a 'fan'? Enough money and a scarf?) and all the difficulties that entails, and fan input into the running of the club, a la Barcelona, where voting rights are linked to tickets.

There is no one set fan ownership model.

[GoldenAgger]

What do we know about the German model. They have had wide and lengthened success that may differ from the spanairds are doing.

[Alan_X]

What do we know about the German model. They have had wide and lengthened success that may differ from the spanairds are doing.

The German 50+1 rule was brought in after the Kirch fiasco. Even if Sky was to go tits up I doubt there is the political will to force something like that through here. Without legislation it'll never happen sadly.

[Franky]

Don't even want them to be honest. A low profile owner who runs the club as a club, not some sort of funhouse for the fans. All this 'run our own club' is bollocks imo, 100,000 unqualified fans pulling the club in whatever direction their fancy takes. No thank you.

Yeah, look how low has Barcelona fallen with this fan-ownership non-sense...

[xerxes1]

In principle, I would love to explore fan ownership and make it work

But lets look at the facts. After three years, Share Liverpool have got nowhere, SOS ( whom I support) are no further forwards than SL - and the starting gun on new owners has been fired.

There is no popular groundswell on RAWK for fan ownership, let alone a consensus on what the model should be. We will be competing with multinational businesess with expert legal and financial teams in place, and need to be credible in that environment.

I fear that IF this was going to take off, a consensus, and a way forwards would have emerged by now.

[Niru Red4ever]

In principle, I would love to explore fan ownership and make it work

But lets look at the facts. After three years, Share Liverpool have got nowhere, SOS ( whom I support) are no further forwards than SL - and the starting gun on new owners has been fired.

There is no popular groundswell on RAWK for fan ownership, let alone a consensus on what the model should be. We will be competeing with multinational businsess with expert legal and financial teams in place, and need to be credible in that environment.

I fear that IF this was going to take off, a consensus, and a way forwards would have emerged by now.

Instead of a full fan ownership we can look at having a stake. This is essential to prevent a repeat of the current mess.

[Alan_X]

Instead of a full fan ownership we can look at having a stake. This is essential to prevent a repeat of the current mess.

I agree with that, the problem is that we should have been preparing for this moment a year ago at least. It's not just the competition we're up against as xerxes says, it's the fact that there is nothing in place, no effective leadership and no communication with the club.

Although I understand how and why it happened, losing the conduit to Purslow might prove to be an own goal.

[rossipersempre]

Although I understand how and why it happened, losing the conduit to Purslow might prove to be an own goal.

Think that was the end of SOS as a group given credence within the club as it stands currently. However, Purslow is on borrowed time at the club, and will be the first to step down when a new owner arrives.

My own view is that we forget the concept of fan 'ownership' or even representation on the board. No longer viable or realistic. And I say that as an ex-SH. The best we can hope for is an open line of dialogue with the new owners, along the lines of the RTK initiative, except with a broader remit regarding how the club is run. Not dissimilar to how many ultra groups in Italian clubs are given an opportunity to voice their thoughts to the hierarchy, except obviously without the more sinister sides of collectives like that.

[Graham Smith]

Think that was the end of SOS as a group given credence within the club as it stands currently. However, Purslow is on borrowed time at the club, and will be the first to step down when a new owner arrives.

My own view is that we forget the concept of fan 'ownership' or even representation on the board. No longer viable or realistic. And I say that as an ex-SH. The best we can hope for is an open line of dialogue with the new owners, along the lines of the RTK initiative, except with a broader remit regarding how the club is run. Not dissimilar to how many ultra groups in Italian clubs are given an opportunity to voice their thoughts to the hierarchy, except obviously without the more sinister sides of collectives like that.

First bit wrong, second bit a little righter.

I doubt Purslow will be here much longer and even if he is the Union isn't going away and he'll have to work with us.

He's desprate to get their own "supporters' panel" off the ground to manage opposition.

The Union's isn't going to disappear.

[xerxes1]

I doubt Purslow will be here much longer ...........The Union's isn't going to disappear.

My view Graham is that we should aim to identify, and get alongside a serious bidder, who can do the hard work of negotiating and buying the club, with them then agreeing to sell a portion of the club to us, as and when we can raise the cash, for some agreed benefits.

Such a plan means that we have no need to worry about the professional side of things, whilst having plenty of time to raise whatever such a fans plans might realise. Maximum publicity for the minimum of pressure.

[Oscar3]

Im Quite pissed off with SL at the moment.They were harping on about "When the Time comes we will be ready".Where are they now?Where is the plan?They should be acting on Broughtons statement but we havnt heard a thing from them.Personally i like the idea of a direct debit system with interested fans paying say 20 quid per month.At least that would get the ball rolling and show definate interest.
Does anybody know what happened at Celtic a few years ago?I believe the fans bought 49% for 50 million.

[Oscar3]

I would love SOS to kick this off.I wonder if that might get some of the pledges made to SL to join Sos?Tenner to join and 20 quid per month if you want to be apart of it!

[dazben93]

How do i get in touch with the people who run sos and share liverpool?

[Billy1561]

Share Liverpool have sent out the latest email. Not much to get excited about really. Just said they had contacted the club as soon as they found out it was for sale and would inform us when they knew of anything concrete.

[Niru Red4ever]

Share Liverpool have sent out the latest email. Not much to get excited about really. Just said they had contacted the club as soon as they found out it was for sale and would inform us when they knew of anything concrete.

Got the same mail. Its similar stuff that they have put up on website.
I believe SLFC is dead. Instead the list they have got should be used to mobilise support. Maybe SOS can help.

Its essential that we get some stake in the club.

[Paul Gardner]

How do i get in touch with the people who run sos and share liverpool?

Contact details for all the committee members of SOS.

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/union-roles.html

[shankspirit]

Some of you, don´t really know what has and is happening at Barcelona, let me resume what that is:

Joan Laporta is a lawyer with strong Catalan independist party, political aspirations.
He first came into the Barcelona circle in 1998 when he joined candidate Angel Fernandez in those elections they lost to Josep Lluis Nuñez.

Later that year he founded the Elefant blau platform in an attemp to kick out Nuñez as president of the club he got the support of 25000 supporters but was unable to beat Nuñez with over 40000 supporters who remained as president.

In 2000 he joined publicist Joan Bassat in another elections but lost to Joan Gaspart (Nuñez´s vice president)

After the some bad seasons under Gasparts presidency, Laporta decided to form his own group, a different one than Bassats, just in case election were asked for.

Togeteher with some young businessmen,  as Sandro Rosell who become his confident and trusted man, and was later named vice president. Rosell provided the support of other important catalan young businessmen

In 2003 when Gaspart quitted as president of the club due to bad results and image,
elections were established. The elections are remebered as those with most candidates:
Joan Laporta, Lluís Bassat, Jaume Llauradó, Josep Martínez-Rovira, Josep Maria Minguella and Jordi Majó

All surveys said winner would be Lluis Bassat supported by important people of Catalan society and said Pep Guardiola would be Sports director if he won

Laporta was the last candidate to announce his intention to go to the elections, with his circle of young businessmen( Called the Powerpoint Generation, speaking fluent Spanish, Catalan and English)

Elections were finally on June 15th and results were: Joan Laporta: 27.138 (52,57%); Lluís Bassat: 16.412; Jordi Majó: 2.490; Josep Martínez-Rovira: 2.388; Josep Maria Minguella: 1.867; y Jaume Llauradó: 987

Laporta become the 4th youngest preident in Barcelona´s history at 41 years old

With the support of Cruyff´s advice he sacked 12 players and signed Ronaldinho  (27 millon euros), Quaresma (6m €), Rafael Márquez (5 m€), Luís García (4 m€), Mario (2,4 m€), Rustu (0 €), y Gio Van Bronckhorst (0 €). and after bad results he signed Edgar Davids on loan from Juve in Jan

He sacked Antic as coach and tried to sign Hiddink, but could not reach an agreement with PSV as the wanted to pay less that what he already earning in Holland, Then he went for Koeman from Ajax, but would not want to pay any fee to the dutch team, and finally he went for rather unexperienced Frank Rijkaard

In his first season as pres he only won the copa cataluña, but supporters went back to the stadium and in the second part of the league the team played 17 games in a row without loosing.

Laporta was critizised for increasing the price os Season tickets 40%

In 2005 They won the first league and had a very serious boardroom crisis. 16 players were sacked (Andersson, Cocu, Davids, Kluivert, Luís Enrique, Luís García, Mario, Óscar López, Overmars, Quaresma, Reiziger, Ros, Rustu, Santamaría, Saviola, Sergio García) and spent 67,5 millon euros on 9 players (Samuel Eto'o, Deco, Edmílson, Giuly, Belletti, Silvinho, Larsson, Maxi López and Demetrio Albertini). on 14th of may 2005 Barcelona become league champions. Notsoever differences among the board become more evident
Proffesional jealosy over Rosell was deeper and deeper as supporters gave Rosell all the credit over the sport success as signing Eto´o and Ronaldinho

On June 5th only 15 days after it´s biggest success 4 important members of the board (Sandro Rosell, Jordi Monés, Josep Maria Bartomeu y Jordi Moix) quitted form their positions, later a fifth did so too Xavier Faus.

They all said Laporta had changed and some board values had disappeared, like democracy, team work and transparency to darkness totalitarism and power ambition

Laporta will not go to next elections as he wants to get involved with politics.

Obviously he has used the presidency of Barcelona to jump to politcs.

Just a lil part of the story, laporta also said he signed Beckham, it was on Manure´s website too, and we all know what happend later.....

[Alan_X]

Some of you, don´t really know what has and is happening at Barcelona, let me resume what that is:

Thanks for posting that - I think people get all misty eyed about Barelona without realising what the facts are. I knew some of that but not all.

[GoldenAgger]

Why do we think SLFC is dead?

[Alan_X]

They still exist, but they have mishandled things so badly I doubt they could possibly get enough support to put a bid together.

[Alf]

Why do we think SLFC is dead?

The club have been looking for investment for a fair while and they haven't come forward.

[GoldenAgger]

The club have been looking for investment for a fair while and they haven't come forward.

the club have been looking for 100 milion investmenT to work with the yanks for minimal stake in the club. No one in the world was dumb enough to get invovled. I'm happy SLFC didn't get involved. Otherwise I'd think they were fucking idiots to get involved with the yanks. They don't want to be in bed with those clowns and we should celebrate that.

I am curious about how they have mishandled things. I'm not saying they haven't just am not upmon their doings aside from the occasional email.

[Alf]

the club have been looking for 100 milion investmenT to work with the yanks for minimal stake in the club. No one in the world was dumb enough to get invovled. I'm happy SLFC didn't get involved. Otherwise I'd think they were fucking idiots to get involved with the yanks. They don't want to be in bed with those clowns and we should celebrate that.

I am curious about how they have mishandled things. I'm not saying they haven't just am not upmon their doings aside from the occasional email.

Christian Purslow made it clear when he spoke to SOS that the club was up for sale. Share Liverpool have had months to act and haven't.

[GoldenAgger]

Christian Purslow made it clear when he spoke to SOS that the club was up for sale. Share Liverpool have had months to act and haven't.

Mustve been something the press and the entire world failed to pick up on

they're doing something now. Alot more than people whinging on a message Board.

[Alf]

Mustve been something the press and the entire world failed to pick up on

they're doing something now. Alot more than people whinging on a message Board.

Oh well I'm on the Share Liverpool mailing list and I have money to invest so I'll wait and see what they come up with. Feel free to fill us in as you are clearly ITK.

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/Minutes-from-Christian-Purslow-and-SOS-Meeting.html

http://www.shareliverpoolfc.co.uk/

New Hope in Our Hearts      PDF      Print      E-mail

The long-awaited declaration that Liverpool FC is for sale is tremendous news. As soon as we heard it, ShareLiverpoolFC contacted the Club to reaffirm our commitment to getting involved in negotiations. After all, any potential owners must realise by now the value and importance of getting Liverpool fans on board, regardless of possible future regulations on fan representation. The new Chairman, Martin Broughton has indicated a willingness to hear what the fans have to offer.
The responsibility to find the right owner for our Club is a heavy one and we call on the current regime to make the right decision - and what can be better than to give those who care most about the Club - us, the fans - a real stake in its future? We would not just own the Club, we would be the Club.
We will email those of you who are registered on our database as soon as we have any concrete update on our negotiations.
ShareLiverpoolFC supports the democratic ownership of Liverpool FC by its fans. If you would like to become involved with ShareLiverpoolFC and wish to register your interest please register using the tab above.

[GoldenAgger]

.... I'm not saying they haven't I just am not up more than their doings aside from the occasional email.

[Oscar3]

My latest email fom Shareliverpool,

The 2009 financial statements published last week for the club and its parent companies Kop Football Ltd, and Kop Football (Holdings) Ltd, highlight the precarious financial situation that the club finds itself in as a result of the debt introduced by the present owners. The need for change of ownership and an immediate reduction in the ever increasing levels of debt is absolutely paramount.

Examination of the accounts reveals some key issues that illustrate this point.

 Crippling interest payments
The group suffered having to service over £40 million in interest and similar charges in the last financial year (up from £36.5 million in 2008). That equates to 22% of the club’s annual turnover, spent merely on servicing the debt, not repaying the capital.
As the main trading company in the group, clearly this group cost has a direct impact on the club.
Over £8 million of this was interest and charges due to the parent company, owned by Hicks & Gillett, for loans it has made to the Holding company.
The group has suffered over £70 million in servicing the debt owed to the banks over the last two years for which accounts are available.
Around £45 million pounds has been spent on a stadium that doesn’t yet exist
The high cost of arranging finance under Hicks & Gillett
Closer scrutiny of the “interest payments and similar charges” reveals the high costs of refinancing the short term credit facilities forced upon the present owners. The club’s bank debt at the end of Jul 2009 was £233 million, but it suffered more than £70 million in interest and similar charges over the previous two years.
These finance and interest charges equate to over 20% of the club’s annual turnover (paid over two years) spent on arrangement fees, charges, consultancy & advice etc. All this cost just so that the owners can effectively renew their loan arrangements.
Unsustainable Debt Levels
The amount of net borrowings increased by £58.8 million in the last accounting year.
The amount of debt owed to the banks actually decreased by £27.7 million last year, but the amount of debt owed to the parent company (Hicks & Gillett) increased by £86.5 million.
Interest on the parent company’s loans accrues at 10% APR. Unfortunately for LFC this is approx 5% higher than the interest payable on the bank loans that have been paid down.  (Worryingly, a note in the accounts states that none of this interest has yet been paid to the parent company. Is it building up like a time bomb for future cash flow or is it a negotiating tool to ensure the maximum extraction of cash from the club when they finally depart?)
Over the past two years the net level of debt in the company has increased by £107 million (An increase of £51.6 million in 2009 and £55.5 million in 2008). In the same period the company made losses of nearly £100 million.
The company made a net loss before interest and taxation of nearly £21 million in this period (£15.2 million 2009 and £5.7 million 2008)
But these losses increased to nearly £100 million for the period, with the £76.5 million paid in interest and similar charges by the company (£40 million 2009 and £36.5 million in 2008)
Could it be that the increase in debt (£107 million) has largely been taken on to enable the company to continue to pay the interest and charges (£76.5 million) on its existing debt? If so, time must surely be running out on Hicks & Gillett’s business model.
The club cannot afford to continue to suffer the impact of such a large amount of its profit on servicing the debt. Bear in mind that the principal reason that the debt exists in the first place is to reimburse to the present owners their costs of acquiring the club. If the debt had been built up financing a new stadium, or spent on developing the squad to ensure success on and off the pitch, we might expect to see some increased revenue to help meet the interest payments.
Bear in mind also that the record losses posted for 2009, were done so despite the club generating record turnover on the back of enjoying its best ever season in the Premier League. It is unlikely revenues will be as high in this current financial year, or next year for that matter, but it is extremely likely that debt and losses will continue to rise. The need to change the ownership and debt structure has never been greater.
How does this affect our plan?

Up until now, dealing with owners who have been both unrealistic in their valuation of the club and unwilling to deal with a fan owned shareholding partner has resulted in a stalemate. We know that this stalemate has been intensely frustrating.

To press forward without a realistic chance of securing a shareholding in the club would be extremely costly. The costs involved in the collection of the financial pledges of the Share Liverpool FC registrants and the administration of these funds are extremely high. Prohibitively high, when the unwillingness of the owners to deal, means that the possibility of the funds having to be returned unused is too great. However as the situation changes at the club so too does our situation.

In one sense the publication of the accounts merely reinforces what everyone already knew, that the owners need to sell up quickly as they do not have the finances to carry on running the club. However the scale of the debt and the costs of servicing it add urgency to the situation.

We have begun a series of informal conversations and confidential meetings with club officials; with Barclays Capital and investment bankers. We cannot conduct this process ‘in public’ but need to engage with key players and prove our ability to maintain confidentiality. We feel very positive about the situation going forward. The prospect of acquiring some significant fan equity in the Club appears to be sharper and more encouraging than ever before.

Ironically, as the general situation of the Club gets worse, our prospects  get better. The Chinese are right to translate the word ‘crisis’ as ‘opportunity’. We can almost tangibly feel the prospect of real engagement moving towards us. 

We may very shortly reach the point where we can table a bid. When that happens  we need to rely on all of your support, not only in providing the funds to purchase the club, or a significant share thereof, but also in helping this project reach as many Liverpool fans as is physically possible. As things currently stand, ShareLiverpoolFC can only offer shares for sale in UK & Ireland (regulated by the Financial Services Authority in UK), but there are many thousands of Norwegians fans who may wish to take part.
WE ARE VERY KEEN TO HEAR FROM ANY OF OUR NORWEGIAN REGISTRANTS - PROBABLY LAWYERS - WHO HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE OF GAINING RULINGS FROM THE NORWEGIAN FINANCIAL REGULATION AUTHORITY. IF SO, PLEASE GET IN TOUCH WITH US DIRECTLY.
Only by securing a meaningful level of fan ownership of our club can we ensure that the debacle that is currently being played out is never repeated at our football club.
Many thanks.

ShareLiverpoolFC.

[kavah]

^ interesting. I wonder who they are speaking to?

[jwilgar]

^ interesting. I wonder who they are speaking to?

Don't know but this is the best news for ages.  Seems like we have a real chance to get soem form of fan ownership.

[xerxes1]

I have always supported the principle of tring to secure some fan ownership.

Sadly, I think that SL are "playing to the gallery" here. There has never been anything stopping any fan group from securing funds and or pledges to make either an outwright bid, or a bid in partnership with a third party, for the club. That has not happened.

The Club are not going to gift us full or part fan ownership, it will have to be bought.

[majestic_11]

I know they mentioned before about having one share in Liverpool and it was about £500 or something.

I am just a man off the street so no nothing about these procedures, but why can't they set up a trust fund to purchase the club and supporters donate what ever they can afford towards that trust!

Any diviends the trust has a right to can be reinvested back into the club! I think the trust should have one major representation who will take our seat on the board, someone like Phil Thomo, yes we won'thave a direct inputt into the club( which aint a bad thing) but u know someone like Thomo will always put the club first..............

[jwilgar]

I know they mentioned before about having one share in Liverpool and it was about £500 or something.

I am just a man off the street so no nothing about these procedures, but why can't they set up a trust fund to purchase the club and supporters donate what ever they can afford towards that trust!

Any diviends the trust has a right to can be reinvested back into the club! I think the trust should have one major representation who will take our seat on the board, someone like Phil Thomo, yes we won'thave a direct inputt into the club( which aint a bad thing) but u know someone like Thomo will always put the club first..............

The basic idea is a share for £5K but 10 people could "chip in" £500 each for a share.  The concept was one person can have one voting share but the revised proposal (last year) could see wealthy individuals buying non voting shares which have a small return of 2%.  Shares cannot be traded so no-one could buy shares to gain control of the club.