Accounting for supporters: developing a new supporter focused reporting framework for the English football league

Summary – This thesis argues that a new supporter focused reporting framework is required in the English football industry to help improve the governance and management of clubs through increased accountability and transparency. Justification – The recent Fan Led Review is the latest report to highlight the poor governance practices of many football clubs in England. It made 47 recommendations for improvements, but paid very little attention to accountability and transparency as part of the solution. Accountability and transparency are powerful tools to elicit improved performance and should be seriously considered as part of the solution. This thesis fills the gap by recommending improvements in this area. Aims – This thesis has three main aims. Firstly, to identify the reporting needs of loyal, engaged and informed supporters of EFL clubs. Secondly to evaluate whether current reporting practices meet those needs. Finally, to recommend a new reporting framework, and provide a draft concept report, suitable for supporter focused accountability. Methods – Eleven key informants took part in a three stage process. Firstly, one-to-one interviews identify participants’ reporting needs. 25 focus group sessions then reviewed current reporting practice, and finally developed a new reporting framework. Findings – Participants expressed reporting needs in four key areas: Financial, Governance, Sporting and Social factors. Current reporting is found to be lacking in providing the level of accountability to satisfy supporter needs. Justification of the need for the reporting framework was provided based on a football club being a special business, having social accountability, the need to improve behaviour and redress of the social contract between clubs and supporters. Recommendations – Recommendations for a new supporter focused reporting framework are provided for each section and a concept report also provided. The recommended reporting framework is not intended to be a definitive end point, rather an exercise to stimulate debate and a starting point to negotiate an appropriate level of reporting with clubs, owners and directors

The End of Ownership: Personal Property in the Digital Economy

An argument for retaining the notion of personal property in the products we “buy” in the digital marketplace. The open access edition of this book was made possible by generous funding from Arcadia – a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin. If you buy a book at the bookstore, you own it. You can take it home, scribble in the margins, put in on the shelf, lend it to a friend, sell it at a garage sale. But is the same thing true for the ebooks or other digital goods you buy? Retailers and copyright holders argue that you don\u27t own those purchases, you merely license them. That means your ebook vendor can delete the book from your device without warning or explanation—as Amazon deleted Orwell\u27s 1984 from the Kindles of surprised readers several years ago. These readers thought they owned their copies of 1984. Until, it turned out, they didn\u27t. In The End of Ownership, Aaron Perzanowski and Jason Schultz explore how notions of ownership have shifted in the digital marketplace, and make an argument for the benefits of personal property. Of course, ebooks, cloud storage, streaming, and other digital goods offer users convenience and flexibility. But, Perzanowski and Schultz warn, consumers should be aware of the tradeoffs involving user constraints, permanence, and privacy. The rights of private property are clear, but few people manage to read their end user agreements. Perzanowski and Schultz argue that introducing aspects of private property and ownership into the digital marketplace would offer both legal and economic benefits. But, most important, it would affirm our sense of self-direction and autonomy. If we own our purchases, we are free to make whatever lawful use of them we please. Technology need not constrain our freedom; it can also empower us.https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1114/thumbnail.jp