Sons of Shankly Meeting?

[alunevans]

Anyone go? I was rehearsing so couldn't. Would appreciate a report though from someone who was there

[Rafa Shankly]

found this on TLW



They are:-

CONSTANT AIMS

* To represent the best interests of our members and by extension the best interests of supporters of Liverpool Football Club on both the local and international level
* To hold whoever owns the football club to account


IMMEDIATE AIM

* To rid the club of Tom Hicks and George Gillett


SHORT TERM AIMS

* To institute a functioning structure for the Sons (Spirit) of Shankly
* To create long lasting relationships with all aspects of Liverpool FC's supporting community
* To improve the quality of service for Liverpool FC's supporters
* To improve the standard and value of travel arrangements for Liverpool FC's supporters


MEDIUM TERM AIMS

* To work with any relevant agencies to improve the area of Anfield
* To build links with grassroots supporter groups both home and abroad


LONG TERM AIM

* To bring about supporter representation at board room level


ULTIMATE AIM

* Supporter ownership of Liverpool Football Club

Pushing forward, as soon as we have the facility, (Bank accounts, paypal etc) Union Membership, subs, getting membership, subs etc.

And then after that, we move forward on planned actions for our members, travel benefits, future meetings etc

[marcgerard]

The meeting was pretty well supported and better organized than I feared. The aims, posted by Rafa Shankly, were discussed as well as the ownership issue and there were a number of good points made from the floor.

Regarding the ownership issue the aim of removing Gillett and Hicks was given a great deal of time with a number of suggestions for action, the boycotting of games, the club shop and online store being discussed in depth. Perhaps more interestingly Prof Rogan Taylor was there and gave an update on the share scheme initiative. The figure of £5000 per share, he felt, was more dependent upon the numbers rather than set in stone, although the scope for it to be significantly reduced is small. But his argument regarding safeguarding the club and removing debt was one of the more persuasive of the day.

The Sons of Shankly (soon to be Spirit of Shankly) hopes to act as a union and therefore protect its members interests. One of the speakers on the platform, whom I think posts on YNWA as Knox Harrington, made an impassioned speech; one of the concerns being the area around the ground. In short it seeks to act as a pressure group for those affected by the club be it the fans or those living close by.

I was quite happy by the proposals put forward and felt that the meeting was constructive in putting forward the ideas it wished to represent and whom they wished to represent, the notion of it being a 'Liverpudlian' issue rather than a 'Scouse' one was put forward a number of times.

Hopefully this idea will take hold, in an era when football (especially at Premiership level) is rapidly becoming a corporate concern and the needs and wishes of the ordinary supporter becoming weaker in the ears of the clubs then some form of collective action and/or representation is needed. Maybe yesterday was a small but significant beginning.

[alunevans]

was the rogan taylor project discussed. are there any links between them either formal or informal?

have they approached rogan or the share lfc scheme.

i note their ultimate aim is ownership of lfc by the fans, which is the share lfc idea too.

so i'm wondering if they've approached share lfc.

also, what sort of leverage where they talking about with the clubs owners. it seems to be modelled on a trade union template. the members of a trade union withhold their labour to harm the profits of their boss, and that threat is how they have leverage in terms of negotiations. what sort of leverage and actions did the SoS meeting discuss to gain similar leverage for the fans they aim to represent?

also, is there any way of contacting them as i'd like to make some form of initial contact with SoS myself

ta

al

[marcgerard]

I think the Rogan scheme is the one that the SoS group are endorsing, but I think with the numbers at the meeting and the ambiguity regarding the position of Gillett and Hicks it was nt voted on. But the fact he was on the platform would suggest that there are definite links there.

You are correct, it is being formed on the lines of a Trade Union and yes that does leave problems regarding leverage. Part of the Aims of the SoS wish to have some form of representation on the board, but this does nt answer the question of how that will happen. However, with greater numbers participating then the greater the power of any collective action; so on this point I would say wait and see. After the meeting there was a march to the ground, my feeling was that we received quite a lot of support, especially as we walked down Oakfield, but those we passed did nt necessarily join in. I suppose like any movement many will see how things look to be panning out first.

There is now a website but it has nt been updated, I do nt know if you are on YNWA but maybe it might be possible to PM those present from the thread? Regardless this is the address..

http://www.sonsofshankly.com/

[alunevans]

So Rogan was on the platform? That's good news. It's good to see the various autonomous groups coming together.

Did Rogan speak? What did he have to say?

[marcgerard]

His was perhaps the most interesting aspect of the meeting. Firstly, there is a press conference some time this week when he will go into detail regarding the plans. The impression I got was that the initial publicity was about seeing whether there was enough interest to make the idea feasible, it appears now that he thinks there is.

There are a number of, unspecified, ex-players that are supporting the project; some of whom will be helping to publicize the share scheme. The figure of £5,000 per issue is a ball park figure but that it is totally dependent upon the level of interest. So far he believes that there is £84m of willing investment just from the initial publicity and believes that this will increase.

To a question from the floor about the £5,000 figure he said that with more pledging to buy shares this will decrease, but that the figure also represented a realistic figure of the amount of money that would be needed and the amount of shares that the initative could support, logistically, so say if each vote had say 500,000 voters then each vote would be that more costly and time consuming. But where he was most persuasive was in his argument that not only would this safeguard the club's interests it would also make it debt free and that a club with significant equity was almost unique in modern football.

It is nt a unique scheme, as is well documented, within European football but certainly in regard to British football and the scale of Liverpool's importance and size it is.

He also seemed very enthused about the idea of group shares, believing that this would open up the scheme to more people.

I presume the details to be announced will regard how the board and chief executive will be elected and what interests the board will have, hence I believe the link between the ShareLiverpool and SoS. Personally I would rather we did not go down the road of extravagant promises that seem to feature in Club Presidential campaigns on the continent so I hope that there is some kind of safeguard regarding how funds will be spent; but this speculation on my part.

[alunevans]

Interesting stuff Marc. Thanks for the report back.

How did the meeting end? Was there any resolution to do anything etc?

[marcgerard]

I am not sure just how the meeting ended as I went to the toilet! I think that there was support for a picket at the Club Shop, although this was only on match days and the shop at the ground as far as I am aware. Personally I am not sure how well that will work as I do nt know anybody that goes to the shop on a match day and I presume those that do would not be easily be dissuaded; I would just look at the queue and leave it. There was vocal support for some kind of protest at the end of the match but I do nt know how that went as I was in the Centenary, and besides I would imagine there was more than enough to protest about regarding what had gone in the game......

I think the hope is that through word of mouth and the pieces in the local media that there will be a ground swell of support. There were a number of cameras and quite a few journalists, I was on the same row as Brian Reade for example. As I have said there was a march to the ground and that was well photographed too, hopefully the word will get out and support will grow.

[AFII]

Jay Mac on postive, direct action

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM3xv669Dp4

[AFII]

Neil A on the long and short term aims of The Liverpool Supporters Union

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVOrd1O60qc

[AFII]

Sons Of Shankly Neil A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nol2alwRoWs