Exactly.

But you just said the club needs to get closer to its fans. In the face of evidence that this is something the club actually does reasonably well in the context of SL, you're now saying it doesn't matter. Which is it?

To be honest, he meets himself coming back half the time.

I will not disagree with anyone in regards of the latter statement; In fact, I pray for it every season.

My post was in reply to Sebasteenos' post claiming the club would be 'closer to the fans' by the Allams taking over.

Not really. They don't take any dividends, that much we know. Apparently their loans have been repaid, so they don't get any interest. The fact that FC make any profit at all, in the context of the other financial "performances" in SL, the fact we spend the cap, there or thereabouts, we pay transfer fees, run a reasonable sized academy and pay a commercial rent for a fancy stadium, would suggest the board don't dial in for a monthly FC conference call from their yachts in the Caribbean, all paid for by us. It's possible, but unlikely, IMO. The alternative scenario is that they actually enjoy being on the board of a SL club and have its best interests at heart, and their valuation takes that into account. Ridiculous I know, but it is a possibility.

I'd be for a change,

Looks like the Allams at some point will have a share issue at City to let fans own a share of the club...

Would not want this to happen, the board have turned the club around financially when a lot of other clubs are going to the wall. They are doing a good job all round apart from the playing side. Now if i had concrete proof the board were to blame for our onfield situation then i would have a different view.

yes but with their debts how long do think they will manage it for?.

If they do it for the love of it then fair enough.

However, the title of this thread shows that whoever owns the club, the fans regard it as belonging to them. Reporting profits shows the board in a good (competent) light - reporting [ubig[/u profits might get a few backs up. I doubt they're getting rich necessarily, but if they're not taking wages, dividends or consultancy fees at all that would be a selflessness somewhat at odds with the public image.

Oh - [iequivalent[/i of a commercial rent.

Which contradicts most peoples views on our board. Kath especially.

Personally I am not for a change. Sometimes steady progress builds a long term sustainable position rather than the short term glory that throwing cash at it does. Repaying the directors loans will have given them a cash income over the past few years (and is more tax efficient than drawing a salary or dividend) and the capital value of their shares will have risen on the back of an improved net worth. Our investment in youth and quality british players is a more sustainable investment than short term imports.

Would ownership of the club allow the rugby lease to be varied to our detriment? If Allams owned both clubs and the ground then they would hold all the cards - would it be cheaper to buy the club and do this rather than try and buy out the lease?

If it aint broken, dont fix it - and for me it isnt broken (save for the odd cup or two!).

I have no issues with the board, and believe they have done a fantastic job turning our club around.