Here's a thread on BigSoccer about fans owning a team. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=534888 http://myfootballclub.co.uk/ In the UK version, 49,172 have signed up at $70 each to buy a club and run it. Their goal is 50,000. That would equate to $3.5 million to run the team. Maybe a similar situation could happen here in the States. Positive: 1) The Victory will be on sale for cheap (maybe as cheap as $1). If I remember correctly, Chelsea was sold for $1 like some 20-25 years ago. 2) Huge fanbase because of huge owner base. The merchandise, sponsorship and shirt sponsorship will be good. 3) Media coverage because of this novel idea. 4) With the right marketing, the team can average 3000-4000 to break even. 5) Soccer fans around San Francisco would be more involved if they also own part this team. 6) Kezar stadium (10,000 capacity) is great for soccer. Also, work with SSV. They know how to get things done, not to mention a huge base for potential owners. 20,000 owners x $50 a year = $1 mil. Add in revenue from tickets, merchandise, sponsorship, this team might break even.
Here are the recent media for this UK version of it. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6703957.stm http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/sports/turning+fantasy+football+into+reality/625347 http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/07/23/the_football_club_with_50000_m.html http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/2007/07/fan_power_50000.html http://www.abcnews.go.com/Sports/story?id=3318668&page=1 http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/11556/Want+a+striker?+Have+a+vote http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/07/crowdsourcing_soccer http://www.springwise.com/lifestyle_leisure/crowdbuying_a_soccer_team/
I don't see why it can't be done in the USA, especially in San Francisco the home of Silicon Valley. We don't even need to have 3 millions, probably around 1.5 million instead. At 50 dollars a person for ownership we would need to get 30,000 people to sign up. Is it doable? Maybe people can buy a share at 50 dollars/share if someone whats to kick in 250 dollars for example.
It's worth a look. However you'll have to get some bigger investors on board. I'd buy in for 250 bucks or so which realistically I think should be the minimum buy in. 50 might be too low to buy in with just because you're not going to find more than 1000 people or so interested at first. That said is the interest realistically there to pull this off you think? I mean the Vics don't exactly draw like gang busters.
I was looking more at this idea. I'm not sure a USL-1 Victory team would be realistic with this plan. But a USL-2, PDL or NPSL team might be doable. Here's the minimum requirements for operation of teams in the USL. http://www.uslsoccer.com/docs/aboutusl/franchise/Min Standards.pdf
Supporter trusts (supporter ownership) is very common in leagues all over Europe. When owners such as Piterman flush a team down the toilet the fans take action to keep their team alive. The difference is that these teams have a solid supporter base that are passionate about there team. The Vics have about maybe forty or fifty die hards that would be willing to buy in. Now if those fans could come up with the $$ for the team and operating costs they could over time as the fan base grows sell shares to fans and investors, thus creating a supporter trust and hopefully a successful organization. Small business loans are also an option. a link to a supporter owned club: http://www.dumbartonfootballclub.com/supporters_trust/
The problem is the SEC. You get more than I think 50 investors and you need to be publicly traded, which can't work for the kind of business model of a soccer team. So a large number investing a small amount won't work, but a small group of people investing real money could do it.
Just set it up like the Packers are. Make it publicly traded, but set limits on the amount of shares anyone can own and make them have neutral value.
For that to work you need tens of thousands of people to be willing to buy essentially worthless stock, just because they want to keep the team around.
Yes, but the Victory struggle to get 1,000 people to buy a $12 ticket, so where are all these shareholders going to come from?
It was just a suggestion I think. No one realistically assumes it will happen. The only thing that will save the team is some white knight owner buying the team. Or some white knight owner letting the current team fold then replacing it with a new franchise to avoid the debt the Vics have undoubtedly racked up.
I think the point if we do a joint ownership is to think BIG not SMALL. Don't just look for people in San Francisco or even the Bay Area. There are people all over the World that would love to own a piece of a San Francisco soccer team! Think about it. Some guy from Germany wants to visit San Francisco and had the excuse to tell his wife "but i want to see my team i own play in San Francisco" and it works out OK cause he get to see soccer and she gets to enjoy time in a world class city! The sky is the limit. And what would it hurt to get it set up and try it? If it works it works! If it doesn't than everyone gets their money back.
While I do think Pleasanton/Livermore/Dublin area would be perfect for USL2 or PDL, USL1 should be in cities with national name recognition.
I agree. However it's unlikely anyone will come up with the money on this short of a notice to save a USL1 team. More likely they'd let it fold and restart the team as a USL2 team in SF or a USL 2 or PDL team outside the city. I don't think they can keep the Vics in SF as a PDL team however due to the territorial exclusivity that USL teams get at each level. And I'd assume the Seals have SF locked up. However the east bay is always an option.
Seals have the East Bay locked up as well. Five county PDL territory: Marin, SF, San Mateo, Contra Costa, and Alameda.
Not to mention the fact that the Seals had the rights to San Francisco for a USL-1 team which we waived so that Piterman/Alaves could come in and play hoping that they could fill the void and be successful at a level which was unrealistic for the Seals to play at.
No disrespect to the Seals, but that is kind of ridiculous. In Southern California, there are 6 PDL teams in a 3-county region (Ventura, Los Angeles, and Orange), but in the Bay Area one team gets exclusivity over 5 counties?
No disrespect taken. I was shocked when I first saw the territorial rights as well. Back in the early '90s, when the league was first starting up, there were several Bay Area teams at the PDL level: SF All-Blacks/Seals, Palo Alto Firebirds, East Bay Red Riders, SF Bay Diablos, North Bay Breakers, and the San Jose Hawks. And now that same territory, which back then held 7 teams now only holds two: Seals and Frogs. Personally I think it is bad as it eliminates the possibility for local rivals. Travel costs are one of the Seals largest expenses. If there were eight teams in the Northern California region (defined as Fresno to Chico) it would eliminate most over-night trips for the team, whereas now they only have one or two same day trips per season.
The whole idea of territories for this kind of thing is just stupid. There's no way any PDL team will saturate its potential marketplace and having local rivalries increases interest substantially. USL2 doesn't exist in the western US at all, so that's not an option unless there's a big expansion there... I wonder if the Seals would be interested in moving back up to USL-1 to take over, should the Victory not continue?
Seals had first dibs on the D-1 rights when Alaves first signed the memorandum of understanding with the league. We declined to exercise those rights as we simply didn't have the financial wherewithal to make a go of it at the D-1 level. The Seals are locally-owned and we are a 100% volunteer organization, zero payroll. We do the best we can with the limited resources at our disposal. It's truly a labor of love. Now if there is a white knight out there interested in dropping a cool million to take the Seals up a notch then feel free to PM me and we can talk Even if you don't have a million but want to be part of our organization at its current level, feel free to drop me a line.
It seems to me that Western divisions of PDL are quite overpopulated at this moment. It would be nice if USL-2 will massively expand to the West Coast, by promoting some of those PDL teams.
I'd buy $50 into the Vics, and maybe even $100 depending on how good of a mood I am in. I think it is very important to keep soccer in San Francisco for this league. While it pisses me off at some of the things this league does, for the most part, I love the USL, and I want it to survive and become big time. People keep saying the Vics could hardly draw in 1,000 people. Ummm... And how much marketing did this team do??? Piterman did not test the waters in San Francisco very well at all. I wish an owner, with little deeper pockets came in and took over. Rebrand the team name to the San Francisco Victory (naming a team California in San Francisco?!?!?!), and hold 25% ownership to the fans. It could work. It really really could work.