You keep avoiding to answer my question directly by bable about how it is today. I understand that NFL is an antractive league at the present time. As said before , different ways in different places. Maybe a a variety of combinations of selected from clubs, associations and supporters could be one solution for some. Other places that might not be a good ide . Some places maybe the marked is a good idea. .
So by doing theese things you automaticly asume that it is a status symbol. You say: They were definitely people there that were more interested in being seen. Seen by who and why ? Dont missunderstand , i do not have much left over for people more focused on phone in the stands. But if a person sitting in the calm parts of the arenas enjoying a good game and at the same time have to send a mail . Then i think he should be alowed to do so.
Then maybe it could be an idea to let the important part of the game and a club to have some influence on how things are done then ? Like ticket prices , kick off , terraces/no terraces and so on.
I think that fans should be listened to. The owner has the final say though. Ticket prices - Problem is that fans are going to want ticket prices as low as possible. That will affect my ability to put a competitive product on the field. Because if revenue is low - I can't spend on the players I want. Does Apple allow I-Pad/I-Phone users to decide the price they want to pay? No. Do they engage with customers to find out what their needs are to offer solutions. Yes. Kickoff times - As an owner I have some control over that, but, The league my team plays in has accepted a television contract that drives revenue with ESPN and Sky Sports. The revenue I get allows me to again purchase and pay good players to have a competitive team. In terms of terraces ( my team plays in the Premier League!) they are not allowed. I know that you have cited several examples of standing. I thought FIFA and UEFA outlawed standing? I think fans should have a voice and clubs should listen. However, listening doesn't mean you always get what you want. Anything that drives revenue will be difficult to have a voice in. I have said this before, fans if they think ticket prices are too high can not show up. That is well within their right. fans have every right to vote with their feet (not showing up), or their wallets (not buying tickets).
UEFA outlawed standing areas for European competitions. The Germans convert terracing to seating for Champions League, etc.
If I own the club, you can make me a nice fat juicy offer to BUY the club. I doubt Chelsea fans will vote out Roman Abramovich! Chelsea is an actual club.
UEFA outlawed standing for a reason I am sure. My guess is there is no standing at the World Cup either, or other FIFA events
If that were the case I could run against Abramovich in the next election and get him out of power without spending a single dime. English clubs started out as clubs, but the current setup is more like a hybrid between that and a franchise system.
I know some MLS teams have standing areas in their stadiums. AFAIK, there is no league rule about this, one way or the other. It's left up to the individual clubs and of course local laws. It seems like that would be a good approach in Europe, rather than a UEFA blanket mandate. But, given some of the horrible things associated with standing terraces in the bad old days, I can't really blame UEFA for passing such a rule. Many of the most restrictive rules in European soccer stadiums came about because of fan stupidity. The terraces used to be a place where women, minorities and respectable working- and middle-class people wouldn't, or couldn't, go.
Yeah, that's the thing - as soon as you have an owner the entire club thing becomes somewhat shaky. What I wanted to point out originally - you always go on about how it's the owner's right to set prices, etc., and fans should vote with their wallet. If your club has no owner the whole thing works somewhat differently.
So how many clubs in the Premier League have no owners? Chelsea are still a club right? I believe they call it Chelsea Football Club?
I don't think he's trying to say a club has no owner, I've taken it as a club being owned by shareholders, the fans as opposed to a single individual with Chelsea, Manchester United, etc. You can't vote the board out of Chelsea, you don't have any votes. German clubs require that no individual can own more than 49%.
That's another problem with the whole debate; it's gotten centered only on the Premier League. There are so many more leagues out there. The entire world does not revolve around the EPL.
So if a person owns 49 percent, I am assuming the majority owner makes the decisions? See not talking about the Premier League.