Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
The Guardian
Owners may show same loyalty as fans if they faced 10-year commitment clause | Jason Stockwood
By Jason Stockwood,
10 days ago
Owning a club should represent a deep, long-term commitment to the communities clubs are rooted in. Photograph: Zac Goodwin/PA
In life, we all retain the right to change our minds. Sometimes we choose the wrong job, love affairs end and a once strongly held view about our membership of the EU can change with the passage of time. Football, of course, is different. As a general rule, once you have inherited your club, there is no change or cancel option. I was reminded of this at lunch just after we got involved with Grimsby Town. I made a speech that the two lifelong commitments you make are your marriage and your football club. Someone at my table locked eyes with me and said in all seriousness: “You can always change your partner if needed.” Maybe our lifelong commitment is to one thing only.
Those who share this view feel there’s something unusual about owners who move from one club to another in the same country, like someone trying to start afresh with a not-always-younger model. While I’ve never met John Textor (the co-owner of Crystal Palace and also owner of Botafogo, RWD Molenbeek and Lyon) or Rob Couhig (who sold Wycombe in May), it seems a bit odd in an English football context to see their social channels full of love for Palace and Wycombe respectively, and then think that allegiance could be shifted with the exchange of share certificates to Everton and Reading.
In my book, Reboot, I wrote about the process of seeking investors, outlining a hierarchy of needs that any entrepreneur should consider. At the top are the investors and owners you know well and really like, those who can add significant value to your venture – often referred to as “smart money”. These are the people whose values align with yours, who share your long-term vision for the outcomes you want to achieve, and who you genuinely want as partners for the next chapter of your story.
Next there’s what has been called “dumb money”, investors you can live with but who don’t necessarily bring much to the table beyond financial support. Finally there’s what I term “desperation money”. This is anyone willing to back you when you have no other options. This is usually the final throw of the dice to keep your business alive when all other options have been depleted. Ideally you aim for “smart money”, but in reality the alignment of values can be easily overlooked when you’re caught up in the whirlwind of negotiations, driven by the multiple shifting priorities of buyers and sellers.
This model also applies to football club ownership. Fans, unfortunately, often lack the information or power to properly vet potential buyers, especially when the club’s very existence is at stake. When your club’s future is on the line, the luxury of choosing an ideal owner evaporates if you are not given any choice at all.
Textor and Couhig are not the first owners to move from one English club to another. Robert Maxwell, Ken Bates, Ron Noades, Milan Mandaric and David Sullivan are among those who have owned at least two English teams, some of whom would inspire more confidence than others. While Maxwell’s history speaks for itself, Bates’s on-pitch success at Chelsea was followed by a torrid time with Leeds. Noades did very well with Palace, even if he couldn’t stabilise the club in the Premier League, and although he bizarrelye bizarrely made himself manager of Brentford, it could be argued that the club’s upward trajectory started with him. Mandaric, on the whole, had successful times with Portsmouth, Leicester and Sheffield Wednesday, albeit some less successful ones too. Sullivan has had relative success with both Birmingham and West Ham. With all these examples, at a minimum, caution is required.
Maybe Everton fans have already crossed the Rubicon on this issue with Alisher Usmanov who, after his time at Arsenal, never technically owned Everton but exerted significant influence . Amanda Staveley was involved as a Newcastle owner for less than three years. Although she didn’t own a majority, she was the architect of the Saudi PIF deal, and her short tenure and professed connection to the club, as set out in the Amazon Prime documentary, now look at best debatable. More pertinently, maybe Geordies don’t care, now competing at the top end of the Premier League while Staveley has moved on to her next project , rumoured to be Tottenham.
I sometimes wonder if I’m being overly romantic and genuinely don’t know how Grimsby fans would react if we suddenly introduced an anonymous billionaire looking to buy the club (we’re not, before our social channels explode). There should be a way for fans to properly assess majority investors, but when a club’s survival is on the line, the choice becomes almost impossible. Some fans don’t care whom the owners are, viewing them as little more than cash machines. These are the voices shouting, “Stump up, Stockwood!” or “Time for the owners to splash the cash” – both posted on social channels at varying times, irrespective of the owner’s financial constraints or whether investing can be done sustainably.
Beyond social media, most of the people I meet in person seem to care deeply about the alignment of values and want the “smart money” for their clubs. They want owners who are connected to the town or the club in some meaningful way. This connection doesn’t have to be through birth, but it should reflect a commitment to that club for the long term. Perhaps it’s time for regulation that prevents owners from hopping between clubs every couple of years, as this very act speaks to the increasingly transactional nature of owners’ relationships with the game.
Club ownership cannot be like upgrading your car or changing your house. It should represent a much deeper, long-term commitment to the communities in which those clubs are rooted. Perhaps it should require at least a 10-year commitment to ensure that owners have to live with the long-term consequences of all their near-term actions and decisions.
Since we took over Grimsby, we’ve encountered all types of owners and directors. Some superb and some who refuse to let us into their boardrooms because we don’t wear jackets and ties to watch football. Mostly we’ve met people who care deeply about the long-term prospects of their communities and understand that the real owners are on the terraces and will still be there long after we are gone. I sincerely hope that Everton, Reading and Tottenham are getting the “smart money” that their supporters need.
• Jason Stockwood is the vice-chairman of Grimsby Town
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.
Comments / 0