Hereford United has gone, Hereford FC is coming. And there's a lot of discussion how the new club should be set up. (It's still being discussed ten years later)
On Thursday January 16th 2015 a meeting to discuss took place at the Welsh Club. In the lead up to that meeting several articles were posted on BN. Below is one of them.
Open Letter To Hale/HUST From Save Edgar Street
The supporters running the SaveEdgarStreet blog (http://saveedgarstreet.com/) have posted an open letter to Jon Hale and Chris Williams.
BN is pleased to reproduce it in full.
This blog has written to Jon Hale and HUST Chairman Chris Williams
with our views on the partnership proposals put forward by Hale and
HUST last week. We wish to propose some changes that will see an
increase in the element of fan control at the newly formed Hereford FC.
We believe the current proposals create a deficit in fan control where
ownership is proposed to be a 50/50 split. To counter this we propose a
solution of our own that would empower fans, through a HUST membership
card, to choose the club chairman each year.
We publish our letter in full below. If you agree with our suggestions, or even if you don’t, then please email the HUST Board and tell them. The only way of being sure your voice will be heard is to tell them directly. Don’t rely on forums or others, tell them directly yourself:
Chairman, Chris Williams: chairman@hufctrust.co.uk
Vice-Chair, Martin Watson: liaison@hufctrust.co.uk
Secretary, Chris Olesky: finance@hufctrust.co.uk
Here’s our letter:
Dear Mr Hale and Mr Williams,
I write to you ahead of Thursday evenings open meeting of Hereford United Supporters Trust where proposals for a phoenix club will be discussed. Whilst there is broad agreement with the principles of an investor/trust partnership there are a number of key points that we believe would benefit from amendment.
Firstly, let us thank you both for working hard on developing this proposal and bringing it to the fans. Your dedication and motivation to bring this proposal forward is what gives us every chance of success as we move forward. The identification of a benefactor who is prepared to invest in the club for no return is a coup. Well done.
This blog is grateful for the work that you and your colleagues have put into this proposal. Because of your work the phoenix has every chance of rising from the ashes of the disaster that was Hereford United 1939 Ltd.
On the whole your proposals are broadly acceptable and it is clear that many fans support your proposal as it stands. But to us, and a significant number of others, there is one element of your proposal that needs strengthening. That is the element of fan control/ownership.
Many are asking ‘Why if HUST can own 50% of the newco shares is it outnumbered in the Board Room?’. ‘Why is HUST only allowed to own 50% of the shares? Why can’t it own 51%?’.
We’ll start of by saying that we, personally, can live with HUST holding a 50% share. A 50/50 split will mean that the supporters can never be outvoted on key issues and the supporters can’t railroad other partners without some support from the wider shareholding. This means that compromise will be required in periods of stalemate. Some may view this as an unnecessary frustration but we view it as essential if we are to create a genuinely fan run club. We won’t always all agree but we’ll always have to find the most acceptable way forward. Even if it means changing our minds.
What is important to us is that this principle of compromise and working together is reflected in the Boardroom. Currently the proposals ask fans to agree to a 7 person board. 3 Members of HUST and 4 others, which for the purposes of this letter are presumed to be spaces for Mr Hale and the 3 remaining parties in his consortium. This would give Mr Hale’s group a majority for when it comes to making day-to-day operational decisions for the club. A majority that would come without a majority shareholding. This is a sticking point to a significant number of fans and one which many compromises have already been suggested. Today we will suggest some compromises of our own because as it stands we will not vote ‘YES’ for the existing proposal. Whilst we support the overall principle of the Hale/HUST partnership we find it difficult to understand why HUST should be in the minority on the Board of Hereford FC if it is to be a 50/50 business/fan partnership.
In the spirit of accepting the 50/50 ownership split and the compromises this will require during the clubs future we would like to propose a compromise of our own. It retains the heart of the current proposal but adds one key detail that will give HUST Members control over one key matter: the Chairman of the Board.
We publish our letter in full below. If you agree with our suggestions, or even if you don’t, then please email the HUST Board and tell them. The only way of being sure your voice will be heard is to tell them directly. Don’t rely on forums or others, tell them directly yourself:
Chairman, Chris Williams: chairman@hufctrust.co.uk
Vice-Chair, Martin Watson: liaison@hufctrust.co.uk
Secretary, Chris Olesky: finance@hufctrust.co.uk
Here’s our letter:
Dear Mr Hale and Mr Williams,
I write to you ahead of Thursday evenings open meeting of Hereford United Supporters Trust where proposals for a phoenix club will be discussed. Whilst there is broad agreement with the principles of an investor/trust partnership there are a number of key points that we believe would benefit from amendment.
Firstly, let us thank you both for working hard on developing this proposal and bringing it to the fans. Your dedication and motivation to bring this proposal forward is what gives us every chance of success as we move forward. The identification of a benefactor who is prepared to invest in the club for no return is a coup. Well done.
This blog is grateful for the work that you and your colleagues have put into this proposal. Because of your work the phoenix has every chance of rising from the ashes of the disaster that was Hereford United 1939 Ltd.
On the whole your proposals are broadly acceptable and it is clear that many fans support your proposal as it stands. But to us, and a significant number of others, there is one element of your proposal that needs strengthening. That is the element of fan control/ownership.
Many are asking ‘Why if HUST can own 50% of the newco shares is it outnumbered in the Board Room?’. ‘Why is HUST only allowed to own 50% of the shares? Why can’t it own 51%?’.
We’ll start of by saying that we, personally, can live with HUST holding a 50% share. A 50/50 split will mean that the supporters can never be outvoted on key issues and the supporters can’t railroad other partners without some support from the wider shareholding. This means that compromise will be required in periods of stalemate. Some may view this as an unnecessary frustration but we view it as essential if we are to create a genuinely fan run club. We won’t always all agree but we’ll always have to find the most acceptable way forward. Even if it means changing our minds.
What is important to us is that this principle of compromise and working together is reflected in the Boardroom. Currently the proposals ask fans to agree to a 7 person board. 3 Members of HUST and 4 others, which for the purposes of this letter are presumed to be spaces for Mr Hale and the 3 remaining parties in his consortium. This would give Mr Hale’s group a majority for when it comes to making day-to-day operational decisions for the club. A majority that would come without a majority shareholding. This is a sticking point to a significant number of fans and one which many compromises have already been suggested. Today we will suggest some compromises of our own because as it stands we will not vote ‘YES’ for the existing proposal. Whilst we support the overall principle of the Hale/HUST partnership we find it difficult to understand why HUST should be in the minority on the Board of Hereford FC if it is to be a 50/50 business/fan partnership.
In the spirit of accepting the 50/50 ownership split and the compromises this will require during the clubs future we would like to propose a compromise of our own. It retains the heart of the current proposal but adds one key detail that will give HUST Members control over one key matter: the Chairman of the Board.
Our proposal is this:
- The newco should issue two types of shares. Lets call them ‘HUST Shares’ and ‘Hale Shares’.
- ‘HUST’ and ‘Hale’ Shares have an equal financial value and receive an equal number of seats on the clubs board. The Chair of the board will be able to make a ‘casting vote’ in the event of a tied vote.
- ‘HUST Shares’ have one key power that separates them from ‘Hale Shares’: they are able to appoint the Chairman following a vote of the HUST Membership. This right will exist irrespective of the number of ‘HUST shares’ issued.
- The Chairman can be any one of the appointed Board Members, i.e. a ‘HUST’ or ‘Hale’ shareholder appointment. If only one person stands then this could be dealt with by either: a) automatic appointment or b) they stand against a ‘none of the above’ option on the ballot paper. Whilst this is more time consuming at a point an election isn’t necessarily required, it delivers the candidate one thing: a mandate to lead. This shouldn’t be underestimated.
- The Chairman will have a one year term of office and is eligible for re-election.
- Consideration should be given to whether or not there should be a limit to the number of times one person can hold office.
I read a comment on an online forum where the Vice-Chair of HUST, Martin Watson, observed that as a consequence of the last six months Hereford fans have become radicalised. This is very true. We can use ourselves as an example of this theory. We never imagined running a secretive blog that would be used to debrief and discredit our former toxic owners. A blog that would be referenced in the national press, release controversial voicemails to the world and result in threats being made against us. The one thing that motivated us during this time was the prospect of creating a fan owned phoenix club to which the sorry situation that HUFC1939 found itself in could never be repeated. A club where the fan base was in control. The existing Hale proposals do not put the fan base in control. Which is why we call for these amendments, or similar, to be made.
We believe there are a significant number of HUST Members who feel the same as we do. That is: eternally grateful for the work so far but still wishing for some changes so that they feel like they can be involved in key decisions for the clubs future through a democratic process. To retain an element of control. For Hereford FC to be successful we need as many fans as possible to gladly back the phoenix club. In particular we will need fans to buy shares and donate money. If a significant proportion of fans are not reassured then the risk is they will not part with their hard earned. The club will need every penny if it is to succeed and one day return to the football league. It is important these people are not alienated. We believe that by offering parity of numbers at Board level and by democratically electing a Chairman each year then fans will feel sufficiently in control.
This proposal has implications for HUST too. Memberships are currently well into four figures. If HUST is to succeed in buying up 50% of the newco then there needs to be a continuous stream of income to buy shares. Income will come from the membership. But people will only remain members if they believe a membership card has a purpose. For example, we were members of HUISA when it was a genuine independent voice of the fans. We withdrew our memberships as it became a puppet of the club. HUST must ensure that it retains power in the newco and ensure that it’s members feel that they have a genuine say in the clubs future. This will be assisted by parity for HUST appointments on the Board and the HUST Membership being able to elect the Club Chairman each year. This will mean that each HUST Membership card buys a say in how the club is run and that it retains relevance, each and every years, as the new club moves forward.
There has already been much disappointment in the fact the name for the new club was chosen without fan input. Whilst the reasons for this have been explained and swallowed it was disappointing that this couldn’t have gone to a vote like at Salisbury and many other phoenix clubs. This level of disappointment is a reflection of the level input fans would like as our new club is formed. Whilst in practice fans cannot vote on every conceivable detail of the club it is important that control of truly strategic issues is left with the fans. What better way is there of doing this then letting the fans choose the leader? A once a year vote. It’s not too much to ask is it?
We ask that the comments and suggestions in this letter are not treated as hostile. They are meant as a helpful suggestion to find a way forward for our club at what is a vital time in the new clubs history. We are acting as a ‘critical friend’ not an enemy. The partnership proposed has promise but that does not mean it could not be changed. Fan engagement is critical. A once a year vote on the leadership of the club will give fans an important say on who leads the club and them as fans. Think about the importance of this. Many of us dreamt of a 100% fan owned club. Now this has gone this is the last way the fans can retain a genuine element of control.
Let’s start this club together and lets take it forward together. Lets be United behind Hereford FC.
Yours sincerely,
Freetown Kudos
On behalf of the SaveEdgarStreet.com team and Hereford FC fans everywhere.