Steadily down?

In retrospect, 2003 was a peak year at West Ham; not on the playing side (where they were relegated from the Premiership), but for supporter involvement in the management of the club.

Some long-term shareholders had decided to decrease the size of their holdings and these shares became available for purchase by supporters. This trend was not altogether welcomed by the directors who increasingly found themselves having to account for their decisions. As many of the new shareholders only owned a single share and took advantage of their right to attend general meetings, these events became less cosy and predictable. Especially so as some of those present were not always certain of the procedures to be followed. But they were cetainly liveley and interesting gatherings!

The opportunity for the ordinary supporter to be a shareholder disappeared at the end of 2006.

West Ham United Supporters Trust was formed in late 2001 and at its peak in 2003 had some 300 members. As previously mentioned on this site, it had its problems and only really flourished in a crisis. Its last recorded gasp was in January 2005. It must be admitted that there does not at the moment appear to be any great desire to build a long-term body to represent West Ham supporters.

Also at this time, the Hammers Bond Company (an unincorporated association of bondholders of West Ham United plc) was active. In November 1991, the Hammers Bond had been offered for sale in connection with obtaining finance for the development of the Boleyn ground. Although only 808 bonds were sold, the Bond Company became mainly a social organisation which could communicate the views of the bondholders to the football club management. Not perfect, but it certainly seemed to be effective.

Sadly, after the AGM in May 2008, nothing has been heard of the Bond Company. Letters and phone calls to West Ham have so far proved fruitless.

At the end of 2003, 'Whistle' appeared on the scene but after publication of the infamous 180 questions sent to the West Ham chairman, Terence Brown, in April 2004, the writs began to fly which, from the company's point of view, had the desired effect. 'Whistle' was silenced.

In the year ending 31 May 2006, the total emoluments paid to Terence Brown were over £1 million, about twice as much as might have been paid to the Chairman of a FTSE 100 company at the time.

On 21 Novemeber 2006, the sale of West Ham United plc to Eggert Magnusson and Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson for £85m was agreed. On 13 December 2007, Gudmundsson bought out Magnusson's holding. In June 2009, ownership passed to CB Holding, which was controlled by the Icelandic bank, Straumur.

In January 2010, David Gold and David Sullivan bought a 50% interest in the club, with an option to buy the remaining 50% in four years' time. The company was valued at £105 million including debt.

So not a very encouraging decade. But at least Premiership status has been retained, even if ordinary supporter ownership seems further away than ever. Perhaps this is the dark cloud before the silver lining.

Why did West Ham United Supporters Trust fail?

West Ham United Supporters Trust (referred to as WHUST) is the trading name of West Ham Supporters' Society Limited, IP29300R, first registered on 24 October 2001 and now dormant.

These notes are based on the only documents (no longer available) which could be found on the web. The information provides an insight into the likely reasons why WHUST has not survived. This is of obvious importance to WHAM! who would not wish to repeat any mistakes made by WHUST.

At the WHUST AGM in September 2003, it was made clear that the Trust "could not veer from its pro-fan agenda and therefore could never join the anti-Brown campaign".

It is likely that the fate of WHUST was sealed from that date as the West Ham Board, and the fans, realised that the 'revolutionary' forces did not have enough votes and the support of major shareholders to bring about change.

Weaknesses of WHUST revealed in the documents available

1. A shortage of active members
Amanda Matthews (who re-appears later in connection with the "Stand up, sit down" campaign) says that, of the original members, only two remain. On 15 January 2004, she appeals for more help for the 8 active members.

2. A lack of focus
It can't make up its mind if its main purpose is to raise funds to buy shares so that it can influence the football club or to act as a forum for the whole range of opinions you can expect from football fans.

3. Poor use of the resources it does have
Much effort is spent in replying to every point raised by fans on the website.

4. Some dotty ideas
These probably appear as a consequence of other weaknesses. For example 'we do have a healthy amount in the bank at our disposal, which we have earmarked to use to double our membership, in doing so will then be able to invest in more shares'.
But supposing this does not produce any new members? Or very few? What then, with no funds, is the future of the trust?

5. A lack of financial control
There is no indication that priorities have been properly assessed and finances directed accordingly, in other words having a plan with a realistic budget.

6. A lack of influence
As someone pointed out (18 September 2003), with just over 300 members at £20 each for each of the two years the Trust has been running, the total raised equals £12 000. Spending just half of that could have bought (21 May 2003), at £3 a share (including dealing costs), 2 000 shares. The Trust had 200!

Every effort has been made to ensure that the facts in this analysis are accurate and that the comment is fair. If you would like to discuss the matters raised, please respond, either on this site or by direct communication.