We are ranked 89th out of the 92 clubs for Fan Engagement. When Radrizzani took over we were 54th.

Fan Engagement Index - Think Fan Engagement
 

We have compared the tenets of the three publications on Fan Engagement and also contrasted these to the much heralded (by Angus Kinnear if nobody else) Leeds United Supporters Advisory Board (SAB). There are subtle differences in parlance across the three, which may see some duplication, but also argument and subjectivity. 

The Premier League Fan Engagement Standard was promoted heavily on the Club website, but Ken Miles of the FSA criticised it on the basis which is how our SAB was organised.

There is 'nothing to prevent the CEO from selecting the Fans Advisory Board' which makes the Premier League Fan Engagement Standard 'Totally inadequate' .

 This is of course how our SAB was formatted and we are therefore able to demonstrate how this works in practice (see below on ST's) and how it fails in comparison to Clubs with effective fan engagement.

Tracy Crouch MP, the author of the seminal report, the Fan Led Review goes onto say the Premier League had 'kicked fan engagement into the Long Grass'.

Comparisons of the Fan Engagement Proposals 

The three publications are;

• Fan Led Review of Football Governance (the Crouch Report) - Coded F
• The White Paper- A sustainable Future -Reforming Football Governance - Coded W
• Premier League Fan Engagement Standard - Coded P

Leeds United's Supporters Advisory Board - Coded L

The Fan Led Review suggested that there was 'Universally bad fan engagement' throughout football which has led to the White Paper, and if Leeds United are 89th out of 92 just how bad are we ?

A fundamental pillar to both the Fan Led Review and the White Paper is the establishment of an independent regulator, and this intersects with fan engagement processes, for example on the sale of the ground the regulator would consider this and take into account the fans opinions. There therefore has to be an established consultative process with the supporters in respect of this. The Premier League, Fan Engagement Standard does not mention the Regulator and of course Angus Kinnear described it

'Enforcing on football a philosophy akin to Maoist collective agriculturalism ( which students of the Great Leap Forward

will know culminated in the greatest famine in history) will not make the English game fairer,

it will kill the competition which is its very lifeblood'

Kinnear mentioned that the White Proposals were a danger to the clubs sustainability in the Annual Accounts (coming in the week when JKA has cost us upwards of £40m). He is on his own, none of the other Clubs CEO's have deemed it worthwhile mentioning.

Aspects of Fan Engagement

• Golden Share  F
• Mechanism for selection of Fan Board independent from the Club F W
• Reserved Seats for Golden Share, EDI, Youth and International  F
• Fan elected directors F
• Clubs not to able to withdraw or suspend Fan Engagement  F W P
• Clubs not to be able to exclude members F W
• Members elected in line with basic democratic principles F W
• Members to match demographics of the fan base W *
• Members subject to retirement by rotation  F
• Cascade of Information by Board Members P
• Designated Secretary for Fan Board P
• Veto over heritage assets F W P
• Consultation over the sale of the stadium W P
• Board Level Official attending meetings F W P L
• Quarterly Meetings  F W L
• Six Monthly Meetings F W P L
• Published Fan Engagement Report F P
• Published terms of Reference F W P
• Establishment of Working Groups on particular issues P
• Discussions on Business Plans F W 

* demographics are clearly information that the club only holds 

Unless there is independence on membership, agenda, and minutes then the Fan Board becomes a siphon for the clubs propaganda.In addition there should be strict rules for Fan Board Members. They should also not be able to accept any largesse, favour, and privilege from the club and be able to communicate, without restriction any discussions and their contact details should be published.

Fan Engagement has been loosely defined by the White Paper , and further diluted by the Premier League and that provides the opportunity for Clubs to take advantage of the structures.

Below all three standards is the LUFC SAB.

The Golden Share idea has been dropped by the White Paper, which Brentford has adopted.

Example of Leeds United SAB fan Engagement from the published minutes

The section on Season Ticket renewals.

Some organisations had made belligerent public comment about the price rises, however the minutes synthesised this into an 18 word statement as they are written by the club,

'SAB members reported on some of the negative feedback from the recent Season Ticket Announcement' 

So no public detail of the feedback, was it positive or vitriolic ? What was the position of the Supporters Club and LUST in the meeting etc ? It gives the appearance of acceptance by those organisations. What would our members think if our opposition was portrayed in such a way ?

In complete contrast...

Angus Kinnear was allowed 250 words in the minutes to state the Club's position with several questionable statements. There is no evidence that these were challenged by any members of the SAB and appears to allow several disingenuous comments;

• Second cheapest, we are in fact the sixth most expensive
• 12 years of no price rises and then goes on to have a match cost comparison (prices rose per match when we were promoted). The choice of 12 years ago is very misleading, as Ken Bates had hiked up prices to the highest in the EFL and was higher than all but six clubs in the Premier League. It was a decade of price increases in one season. It also ignores the discount that Cellino implemented for not making the play offs
• Repeats the statement that the ST are cheap compared to other leisure pursuits which is incorrect
• Promotes the value of the Exchange system to the supporter when the Club gains the difference from the season ticket price per game and the new general admission price. Supporters, if unable to renew for any reason, lose any credit built up in the Exchange system 
• States the price increase is fair, not when compared to most clubs with several clubs not increasing prices at all

These statements were not challenged by the SAB members, or at least the minutes do not show that they do.

Finally, members of the SAB ask a couple of questions but these are presented in such a way that it appears that the members are subliminally appreciating the need for price rises, ( price differentials for loyalty and why there was no price rise on relegation when there were more games )

The minutes make interesting reading, not only as a working example of Kevin Miles' point about a fan Board being CEO appointed, but demonstrate the problems of the minutes being prepared by the Club. They become part of the Club's narrative.

Other sections of the minutes follow a similar pattern of almost propaganda.

Will Angus Kinnear persist in his strategy of not complying even with the watered down, and totally inadequate Premier League Standard? Maybe we will make 92nd next season or possibly the full time appointment of a Supporters Liaison Officer, something we have continually asked for, marks a change in strategy or ownership.

Brentford, who probably have the closest fan engagement model to the White Paper, were able to absorb cost increases and did not increase Season Ticket Price. The club did not use an external organisation, like V12, for Season Ticket financing after consultation, but have operated an internal scheme run by the Club for the benefit of their supporters at no extra cost. This clearly demonstrates the value of effective fan engagement for supporters and something that we need to see at Leeds United under the new ownership.

CM