Supporters Funding

[TFF]

It's easy to just dismiss this out of hand, but you do realize that by doing so you have no right to criticise anything the board do with regard to club finances?

What?

[Svlad Cjelli]

It's easy to just dismiss this out of hand, but you do realize that by doing so you have no right to criticise anything the board do with regard to club finances?

What?

Correct, sadly. Unless we ever get proper supporter ownership and/or participation (as in Germany, Spain etc) Reading FC is simply a business offering a product to consumers, and those consumers have the option to purchase or to not purchase that product. Nothing more! That's the legal situation.

Morally it ought to be quite different, as many supporters feel that their relationship with the club they support is quite different (when did you last hear of someone having their ashes scattered outside Tesco's) - but it's not at all different as things stand now.

[TFF]

Yes yes, no right to oppose or vote against a decision of the board but no right to criticise? Wow.

I can dismiss the OP's idea out of hand because it's fanciful nonsense. If you can find 10,000 supporters who will stump up £100 each (of course, you won't) you'll raise a cool million. Donate that to the club and they'll buy who? Half a Matt Mills? Quarter of a Shane Long? And the wages?

Dreamland.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Certainly have a right to criticise, and if enough do it the club will take notice - but only it there are commercial reasons to do so.

The club has no obligation to take notice.

[prostak]

Koln are by no means a massive club. The fans didn't buy Poldi all by themselves, but raised €1m to assist the club with the purchase. Even if it doesn't go to fund a specific player, a different board setup could allow a say in where money raised does end up. As Svlad pointed out, a seat on the board would not be possible under the current setup, but given that Madejski is trying to sell, I certainly don't think the whole idea is worth dismissing entirely.

A knock-on effect of greater fan participation could be greater respect for football supporters. While we're not made out to be criminals to quite the same extent as fans of the 80s were, I still feel an unease at (for instance) how often the police see fit to photograph entire sections of the stadium, just in case something happens. We could gain a new credibility by helping to shape how clubs behave, pro-actively spearheading community involvement and reclaiming the sport for fans. It's a dream, yes, but as long as people think the cost of a season ticket is the limit of their participation, it will remain so.

[Wimb]

Bigmike/Wimb - I had actually anticipated just that answer in the thread where I originally mooted it. The public accounts show that your season ticket 'donation' doesn't even cover the wage bill, so leave that one. Do you expect the right to dictate the plot of Hollywood films in exchange for your 8.50 down the multiplex? I spent a tenner in Sainsbury's earlier - am I allowed a go in a board meeting now?

I'm increasingly of the opinion that many Reading fans are everything rival supporters accuse them of being - on the whole a bit feckless, very consumer-minded and priced out of Stamford Bridge. God knows what would result if the club ever went back into serious financial trouble - undoubtedly some form of car-park gathering of 20 or so, but what then? It's easy to just dismiss this out of hand, but you do realize that by doing so you have no right to criticise anything the board do with regard to club finances?

Some valid points Prostak but my argument wasn't so much that I donate just through a season ticket (of which I don't have btw) but in that if I want to help the club in other ways then that's what merchandise sales are for etc and that my other proposed idea would be a more sustainable and beneficial to the club then fans chipping in small sums to a 'warchest' as Snowball suggested.

But beyond that, if your season ticket/match ticket money isn't for helping maintain the playing squad then what else is it for? you pay money for the service of watching a football match at the Madejski stadium, the money you pay helps pay for stewards, the stadium, its staff AND the players themselves who are providing the 'product' that you're watching. This is the reason why Reading charge £25, Lancaster in the Unibond Division One charge a tenner and Chelsea charge £50 because of the different product you get to view. If our ticket money + other income doesn't cover the wages then it's not the fault of the season ticket holder it's the fault of the club for having a wage budget outside of its income streams.

And actually by paying your £8.50 you do have a say in what films get made and how because your attendance directly influences what types of films are and are not made. If the film you're supporting makes money then others like it get made, if not they don't. A similar point with Sainsburys, as a customer you have a limited amount of power based on where you shop, I'm not saying its massive but as ASDA would say, every little helps. By your own reasoning If you were an individual member of a 10,000 man supporters trust of a football club how much more power would you get on an individual basis?

I think you'll find that the fans are anything but feckless and consumer minded, but simply living in the realities of Championship football today. As others have rightly pointed out, the sums needed to meaningfully conduct a Championship transfer/pay a wage are almost certainly beyond the financial means of a small fanbase such as ourselves. More to the point, the club has gone out and consistently signed players to help support the squad and the type of signing you're talking about 'to make the game day experience more enjoyable' is the sort that would cost millions, not just thousands. This isn't League 1 or 2 where £300k is going to go out and get you a game changing player, we are now in the top half of the Championship where those types of players cost seven figures.

If the club ever were to get into financial trouble and told the fans outright 'we need XXX amount to survive' then I'm positive that the fans of the club and the people of Reading would donate all they could to help the club. That's very different to asking people to donate to a group organised around the premise that 'a few of us think signing Charlie Austin might make us a little happier on a Saturday afternoon' or 'we think the away coaches should be cheaper'

Despite all of the above I do think it's a good thing to have fans so devoted to the club that they're prepared to go the extra mile and that is what STAR is for. STAR do have a seat at management meetings and regularly liaise with the club and relevant businesses to help get the best deals for Reading fans. You pay a small membership fee to STAR and that helps them carry out their business, of which in my own opinion they are doing very well.

As I said in my first post the only way to realistically increase the amount of transfer funds available is to increase the fanbase/attendance. By doing so you increase ticket revenue/merchandise revenue/the amount sponsors are willing to pay and media exposure that may help sway players into joining the team. As I suggested, go out and bring a mate along to the Madejski, they might hate it but they may well love it enough to 'donate' £350 next season in the form of a season ticket, then bring 2 kids along bringing in another £200.

[Forbury Lion]

If the club need transfer funds from the fans they can get them - just release another new kit and the fans with more money than sense will buy it. Alternatively, put ticket prices up by £1..... say 23 games, 10k attendance - £230k raised for transfer fees over a season.

If fans want to fund something then fund something for the fans or from the fans that the club won't spend on or for a worthy cause but not funding the clubs spend as it is a business, not a charity.

[Svlad Cjelli]

If the club need transfer funds from the fans they can get them - just release another new kit and the fans with more money than sense will buy it. Alternatively, put ticket prices up by £1..... say 23 games, 10k attendance - £230k raised for transfer fees over a season.

If fans want to fund something then fund something for the fans or from the fans that the club won't spend on or for a worthy cause but not funding the clubs spend as it is a business, not a charity.

Except that increasing the price may reduce the demand, and if it reduces attendences by just 2.5% it means they lose about it means they lose about £10k a game instead of gaining £10k.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Koln are by no means a massive club. The fans didn't buy Poldi all by themselves, but .

Any club that can average over 40,000 in the second tier have a considerably larger fan base than Reading.

[prostak]

True, but bear in mind the lower cost of tickets in Germany, so that doesn't necessarily translate into higher revenues. I realize that wasn't the point you were making, but I'd be very surprised if they have anything like the commercial clout of Bayern or Schalke. The figures for the Podolski transfer were something like €1m raised to reduce a €10m transfer, so you see the sort of budget involved.

I'd also love to see Charlie Austin's funny little face rendered in this manner -

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

True, but bear in mind the lower cost of tickets in Germany, so that doesn't necessarily translate into higher revenues. I realize that wasn't the point you were making, but I'd be very surprised if they have anything like the commercial clout of Bayern or Schalke. The figures for the Podolski transfer were something like €1m raised to reduce a €10m transfer, so you see the sort of budget involved.

I'd also love to see Charlie Austin's funny little face rendered in this manner -

They don't make the figures that the likes of Bayern or Schalke do, but they make considerably more than Reading do. Tickets are cheaper over there, but nowhere near so cheap that 40,000 crowds mean they bring in no more than Reading do getting 17,000. They also get nearly 50,000 now they are in the top division, and would probably get more if the ground was bigger.

It's the 4th biggest city in Germany, with a million people, and a fair catchment area around. The potential for them to raise cash through fan donations is much higher than here. Even if we had an iconic ex-player we could tempt back, we'd do well to raise a quarter of what they raised under the same circumstances.

It's also worth noting that they still only raised 10% of the fee. If Austin could be bought for £1 million, and even if we as fans could raise £100,000 it's hardly a given that the clubs would then shell out the other £900,000.

[Svlad Cjelli]

The essential difference is that in Germany (and Spain) the supporters own 51% or more of the Football Club (i.e. the club is a proper club - a members' organisation.) (*)

So the supporters aren't raising money to give it to a business owned by someone else - they're raising money for something that they own and believe in.

(*) The exceptions VfL Wolfsburg and Bayer Leverkusen, both of whom were subsidiaries of large companies before the 50% + 1 ownership regulations came about.

[Forbury Lion]

If the club need transfer funds from the fans they can get them - just release another new kit and the fans with more money than sense will buy it. Alternatively, put ticket prices up by £1..... say 23 games, 10k attendance - £230k raised for transfer fees over a season.

If fans want to fund something then fund something for the fans or from the fans that the club won't spend on or for a worthy cause but not funding the clubs spend as it is a business, not a charity.

Except that increasing the price may reduce the demand, and if it reduces attendences by just 2.5% it means they lose about it means they lose about £10k a game instead of gaining £10k.

There is a fine line to tread between supply and demand.