The "Fans' Rights" Debate

It's so easy for all of us to sit here and pump out the same old stale posts about how these players should go at the end of the season and who should stay, yadda yadda. It's a good way to get this stuff off your chest, but at the end of the day it doesn't do anything.

If you're pissed at our transfer campaign, the way we're playing, etc., your wallet speaks the loudest any day of the week. We fans have considerably more power than meets the eye.

Milan is a private club and belong to Silvio Berlusconi. This is general problems of most Italian clubs. I think that clubs like company. they must have modern corporate system. it's the trend of football.

I share your analisys on Milan being a private "associazione sportiva". But consider that we can't really say we're just spectators or custumers. Milan is bigger than that. It's not a car or a boat. It's a part of this country sportive history, a symbol of Milan and Italy around the world. You can't quantify these elements in economical terms.

This team belongs to everyone, not just the owner. It's like an art masterpiece, which has an owner (regarding the material item ) but in the meantime belongs to mankind for what concerns its cultural or artistic worth.

If Bill Gates buys Leonardo's Atlantic Code, he can't destroy it just because he's the legal owner. On that item all mankind has an interest, and it belongs to human race as a whole.

What would football be if there weren't fans following it ? Therefore, my conclusion is that leading a club is not a completely private affaire.

Originally Posted by Giovanni

If Bill Gates buys Leonardo's Atlantic Code, he can't destroy it just because he's the legal owner.

From a moral stand point, of course not... but legally, as you know, he can literally wipe his a$$ with it... remember the Japanese tycoon who buried himself with a paint... as masterpice, can´t remember which one...

Originally Posted by SANT

From a moral stand point, of course not... but legally, as you know, he can literally wipe his a$$ with it... remember the Japanese tycoon who buried himself with a paint... as masterpice, can´t remember which one...

The subject is complex. I hope you have a bit of patience to read my post.

--------------------
I don't think he could. It depends on the legal systems you consider.

In Italy our Constitution (art. 42 Cost. ) recognise private property, but also says that "laws guarantee it and establish its limits, in order to make it have a social function ".

Art. 41 says : "the economical private activity is free, but it can't be followed against a social utility ".

I knew the episode of the Japanese man, but we must say that many legal systems put big limits to private property.

The model of private property without any limits is typical of XIX century, and its roots must be found in the classic economic theory of Adam Smith and in the rise of individualism in the modern societies.

In the XX century this paradigma of property has been strongly limited by the legislation of modern States, which put big limits to property in every field of the private laws.

In a nutshell, contemporary owners can't do whatever they want with their property (especially for things that have a cultural value ), unless we consider non western countries or countries whose legislation is far from our model. "Individualism" is a social and economical paradigma who has developed just in western countries or in those countries which followed this model. It's an exception, as Karl Polanyi demonstrates in "The great transformation".

The "social function of property" in the italian Constitution shows it: property can't be administrated against a social interest, which is the cultural interest in this very precise case.

When I read this thread I felt compelled to register and provide my opinion.

Like many have said, Milan is more than a private sporting club. To us fans, it represents a belief, a culture, a hope. We "purchase" this product, and we show our support for this "product" time after time because it represent something more. Players in turn should feel privileged to play for this shirt, priviliged to honor the name, priviliged to put in a good performance and commitment for the fans. Club management, players, coach should honor us and in turn, we shall honor you. The relationship is mutual and if you separate it into a private property/club then you remove the thing we call passion.

Forza Milan.

We have the right to complain and try make our voices be heard, we have the right to not go to the stadium and we have the right to make our demands be heard. But the owner has the last word.

Sometimes I do believe we "over whine" about anything each time something we would want to happen doesn't (like when one single loss or some bad results here and there makes us go all mad and hit the panic botton, or when the team doesn't acquire the players we want eventhough we were near to close the deal), and that's why we aren't running the team (if not we would be the chaos of what Zamparini is) at least I hope no one like that ever runs the team. And I also believe that no one is there holding a gun to our heads to buy tickets and merchandize (we do it cause we want to,at least I believe most of us have done it without thinking it will go to help the team's economical status and we are all well aware that failures happen).

We also have to remeber that Milan is not only a senior football club and that AC Milan's only interest don't rely on football only. Of course the finantial, marketing, even political (can't say Berlusconi hasn't use it in that way) part of AC Milan have most of the time a direct impact with our status in the senior football departement, but sometimes those aspects have to be taken care before the senior football part. I don't know if I explained myself well in this.

Yes, private entities do have to hear their customers demands, and in many cases respond to them (hey after all "the custumer is always right"). But a football team is way more difficult to handle (to satisfy most of its clients) than say Microsoft basically because if Microsoft screws up with one program then the client just returns it and gets a new good program. When a football team screws up (and it will, and it will happen in front of millions of eyes) you can't return it and get a new good one.

Also I like to remark that the management could hear us, buy all the elements we, fans, think we need (at least the ones that most people are in common grounds), we can have a fantastic team, a great coach, wondeful preparation, wonderful bench, great instalations, the best in medical staff that doesn't guarantee success nor lack of crisis.

Originally Posted by Giovanni

The model of private property without any limits is typical of XIX century, and its roots must be found in the classic economic theory of Adam Smith and in the rise of individualism in the modern societies.

thanks for such a detailed explanation...
Using Adam Smith's theory, we could only hope that the "INVISIBLE HAND" can correct the problem...

Although us fans could be qualified as a social group, I doubt we could we perceived as "society".

Originally Posted by Mediolanum

When I read this thread I felt compelled to register and provide my opinion.

Like many have said, Milan is more than a private sporting club. To us fans, it represents a belief, a culture, a hope. We "purchase" this product, and we show our support for this "product" time after time because it represent something more. Players in turn should feel privileged to play for this shirt, priviliged to honor the name, priviliged to put in a good performance and commitment for the fans. Club management, players, coach should honor us and in turn, we shall honor you. The relationship is mutual and if you separate it into a private property/club then you remove the thing we call passion.

Forza Milan.

That's exactly why Berlusconi a few years ago refused to quote Milan on the Stock Exchange. It would have become an economic administration, losing all the family aura.


-------------------


@Sant : i think fans have no "rights" in a technical meaning, but legitimate expectations. These expectations are legitimate because fans are a vital and crucial part of football movement, despite they don't take a formal part to club administration.

Clubs administrate their business without considering fans from a formal point of view, but they definitely do in a substantial way. They consider fans role as a fact that has effects in the football dynamics.

Therefore, we can't talk of a "Fans Statute", although fans voice is nonetheless well recognised and considered by clubs, especially because a big part of club moneys come from the fans.

Originally Posted by Giovanni

@Sant : i think fans have no "rights" in a technical meaning, but legitimate expectations. These expectations are legitimate because fans are a vital and crucial part of football movement, despite they don't take a formal part to club administration.

Yep, I agree... now, using the same argument that gives us a right, gives us the power to exercise that right, and that is consumption... and once again, we return to Mr. Smith and to the Law of Offer and Demand... we can't legally force a decision, but we can influence those who can by means of reducing our demand... the problem is, like with the rest of the self regulated market theory, that human nature is not logic, is passional... we will still buy the shirts, and the tickets, and watch the games on TV...

fortunadtely, Milan's managers (Berlusconi, Galliani, Braida, etc.) are all as big fans as we are... and they will also do the best they can to see Milan where it should be.