OWNAFC: How a fan ownership ‘revolution’ descended into disaster With many users disappointed and desperately seeking refunds, OWNAFC has been described as ‘the Fyre Festival of football club ownership’

It would be fair to say that OWNAFC promised big things to its users. An app which, in its promotional material, talked up “the biggest revolution in football since the dawn of the Sky Sports era in 1992”, it sold a dream of fan ownership and collective democracy which was meant to change the face of football as we know it.

On the homepage of OWNAFC’s website, three questions were asked: “Do you have what it takes to run a real football club? To manage a budget of up to £8.5million? To be a part of making football history?” It was Football Manager in real life, but with the added emotional resonance of football by the fans, for the fans.

Come the end of February, OWNAFC started to receive national media attention. It was the subject of a feature on the BBC, in which OWNAFC founder Stuart Harvey claimed: “It replaces the boardroom nonsense we see at many clubs with the people that matter.” That was followed by somewhat more cautious articles in The Sun and The Times, with criticism of the concept gaining traction. Still, OWNAFC was reported to be in talks with three non-league clubs, then reported to be nearing a takeover at Northern Premier League club Hednesford Town.

Only a few days later, OWNAFC’s Twitter and Facebook accounts vanished, its website went down and, via the app, the ‘OWNAs’ received a message stating that OWNAFC had “ceased trading” with immediate effect owing to “harassment from users on social media platforms”, “threats made against the children of directors” and “an ongoing online smear campaign”. It was a sudden and unexpected implosion, which surprised even OWNAFC’s most vocal critics.

So what happened?

Fan power?

From the beginning, OWNAFC co-opted the language of fan power and fan ownership. The promotional brochure offered a “once-in-a-lifetime chance to be at the forefront of a whole new generation of football club owners” and, in an echo of the popular rallying cry often attributed to former Celtic manager Jock Stein, stated: “Football is nothing without its fans”.

Nonetheless, the app did not offer fan ownership in the traditional sense. Instead, the premise was that the online community of OWNAs would take over in an existing football club – with an existing fanbase, not all of whom would be on board necessarily – and make day-to-day decisions through the app, including making new signings, selecting the squad, managing staff, planning training sessions and setting admission prices.

Once this premise was widely publicised, criticism began to mount. Initially, the most common objection was that OWNAFC would be taking over an existing football club, however small, and using a community institution with its own history and heritage as a vehicle for a digital experiment. What’s more, a similar experiment had been tried before and failed in disastrous fashion. In 2008, Ebbsfleet United were subject to a takeover by MyFootballClub, a website which offered members shares in the club and – much like OWNAFC – the power to decide major decisions via online vote. From a peak of around 32,000, MyFootballClub’s membership declined precipitously to the point that, in 2013, the club was in dire financial trouble and was only narrowly saved from oblivion after the majority of its shares were transferred to a supporters’ trust.

In his interview The Sun, Harvey claimed to have 3,500 people signed up to OWNAFC. Users paid either £99 or £49 to become OWNAs, with the price coming down after early investors had joined up. This, naturally, led to questions over the advertised budget of “up to £8.5m”, given that it could not have raised much more than £170,000. Soon enough, Supporters Direct issued a statement expressing unease about the potential takeover at Hednesford, saying they were “concerned that the lack of meaningful engagement with the club’s existing supporters… a business model similar to that of MYFC [MyFootballClub] means that a repeat of the ultimately failed takeover of Ebbsfleet United back in 2008 is likely.”

Alongside this, Twitter users @uglygame and @AgainstLeague3 started to scrutinise OWNAFC more closely. The latter managed to communicate with Harvey via direct message on Twitter, resulting in a rambling Q&A which threw up more questions than it answered. Most pertinently, Harvey claimed that shares would be “allocated” to OWNAs when a takeover was completed and that “the shareholders will own the football club in its entirety”, a claim which appeared to contradict OWNAFC’s brochure and its assertion that “the legal entity that will own the club is OWNAFC Limited… all OWNAs will have the option of buying one share within the club at the nominal value.”

There is, of course, a significant difference between being allocated a share and having the option to buy one, not to mention a club being owned by shareholders and being owned by a single entity, namely OWNAFC Limited, which is listed on Companies House with Harvey as sole director. As pointed out by @uglygame, there was confusion among users over the exact nature of the product. In his interview with The Sun, Harvey said of OWNAFC’s users: “We sell them the concept for £49, which includes licence fees to use the technology and a shareholding within the football club.” Prior to the completion of a takeover, then, the product was effectively nothing more than a license to use the OWNAFC app.

To add to the confusion, in his Q&A with @AgainstLeague3, Harvey seemed to suggest that he would be allocating shares in OWNAFC Limited. Asked whether he would put himself in a position where his directorship could be terminated by a vote, Harvey replied: “Yes 100 per cent that will be done. This is a concept I have founded. If I get voted out then this is fine.”

Rapid deterioration

From this point onwards, things went downhill very quickly. On March 6, the same day as OWNAFC appeared in The Sun, Hednesford Town issued a brief statement saying that a takeover deal would not go ahead. Manager Nicky Eaden told the Express & Star that working under the constraints of the app would have been an “impossible job” and suggested he would have quit had the takeover been completed, though supporters on the Hednesford Town fan forum seemed circumspect. Internal criticism among OWNAs started to intensify, not least on an unofficial OWNAFC Facebook page. Several OWNAs noticed that the original terms and conditions on the OWNAFC website had been changed without consultation, removing a reference to refunds for those who became OWNAs before 6 January should no offer be made to a club before or on 1 March.

Unsurprisingly, a significant number of OWNAs began to get cold feet as a result of the unilateral change to the terms and conditions. Multiple OWNAs have told i that, having requested a refund, they were subsequently blocked by OWNAFC on social media and in some cases removed from the app without warning. Of numerous OWNAs who contacted i, only one has received a refund (albeit partial). This has only led to a further deluge of criticism, with one Twitter user referring to OWNAFC as “the Fyre Festival of football club ownership.”

On top of that, multiple OWNAs have alleged to i that they received correspondence from Harvey which was aggressive, unprofessional and, in several cases, abusive or intimidating. One OWNA, who would prefer to remain anonymous, told i that “things got ugly after the Hednesford deal fell through” while another said that “the PR of OWNA was atrocious”, citing OWNAFC’s increasingly belligerent social media presence. Several OWNAs have alleged that Harvey demanded the unofficial Facebook group be taken down on account of it becoming “toxic”, threatening to discontinue the business if the group was not disbanded. Correspondence shown to i appears to corroborate this.

When OWNAFC’s website went down and the brand disappeared off social media, it seemed like the culmination of a crisis. Not only were OWNAs sent a message via the app to say that the company had ceased trading, they were told that no further updates would be made until 12 March, that emails would be not be viewed and would be deleted, and that the business could be sold or potentially placed in the hands of liquidators. According to multiple OWNAs, communication via the app leading up to this announcement was inadequate. One OWNA, who joined up not long before things went sour, told i: “The app never worked. There was never a single meaningful question or update.”

‘Business as usual’

Amazingly, despite all this, OWNAs received a message via the app at the beginning of this week which stated: “OWNAFC Limited can confirm that, after meeting with its legal representatives, business is continuing as normal.” While OWNAFC has not returned to social media, its website is once again functional and, at the time of writing, still states on its homepage that OWNAs will have the chance to manage a budget of up to £8.5m. Around the time that functionality was restored, i attempted to get in touch with Harvey to ask him about the allegations made by OWNAs about his behaviour behind the scenes and running of the business. He responded, confirming by email that “the business is up for sale and there are interested parties.”

Harvey refuted the idea that there could be any confusion over the product, suggesting that the OWNAFC brochure made it absolutely clear that users had paid £49 for a license to the app and the option of buying a share in a football club at a nominal value. Though he admitted to unilaterally altering OWNAFC’s terms and conditions, he argued that he was allowed to do so under those same terms and conditions.

He denied blocking fans on social media and revoking their access to the OWNAFC app on account of them asking for refunds – calling these claims “lies” – though he also pointed out that as per the terms and conditions: “We may terminate or suspend your account immediately, without prior notice or liability, for any reason whatsoever.” He denied that he had issued correspondence that was aggressive, intimidating, abusive or unprofessional, though i has seen correspondence which appears to contradict this.

Asked whether he would be issuing refunds to those OWNAs who want them in light of developments over the last few weeks, he stated that he did not intend to and was under no obligation to do so. Harvey also claimed that an offer for a club had been made and accepted before 1 March, which would mean that even under the original refunds clause users would not be entitled to their money back. Nonetheless, the current OWNAFC terms and conditions still state: “The price once paid is final and no refunds are offered or given for any reason other than if a takeover is not completed within three months of a club accepting our offer.” Given that he claims an offer was accepted, though no takeover has been completed, users will presumably be entitled to a refund when that three-month time period elapses. He refused to make further comment on this.

When asked whether, in the eventuality that he sells OWNAFC, all the money paid by OWNAs up until now would be transferred to the prospective buyer, Harvey stated that any transfer of funds would depend on the terms of any sale and that there would be running costs in the interim. He also stated that the OWNAFC website had only gone down on account of a server problem and that OWNAFC had not returned to social media because of threats made against him and his family. He declined to provide evidence of these threats, stating that it was a matter for the police.

In the meantime, multiple OWNAs told i that they were considering legal action against Harvey. Some have sought chargeback via their banks, while others have threatened to take him to small claims court. While several admit that there was robust dissent and criticism on the unofficial OWNAFC Facebook group, none recall threats being made against Harvey’s family. Asked what the ideal solution from here would be, one OWNA says: “I want to see everyone get a full refund.” Another says: “Honestly, the only solution from here is to refund all that signed up under false pretences and we can put it behind us. There is no way I can continue to work with OWNAFC in whatever capacity.”

Absence of trust

Whether or not OWNAFC is sold in the near future, it is hard to see how the app can survive its whirlwind PR disaster. With the concept so reliant on collective engagement and enthusiasm, the alienation of so many OWNAs makes the chances of it succeeding seem remote. That’s not even taking into account future takeover talks with clubs. How many will continue to see OWNAFC as a credible source of investment?

While outsiders criticised the fundamental premise of OWNAFC and its vision of fan ownership, the fact remains that many of the OWNAs who have contacted i still believe in the idea they thought they were buying into. “It started off well, everyone who was involved came across as really passionate and wanted to make this a reality,” one OWNA says. “This concept can work, you just need the right people with the right attitude.”

Though those OWNAs who are still without refunds have generally received little sympathy on social media and the concept has now been roundly monstered in the press – not least in The Daily Mail, which went with the characteristically unsubtle headline “Giving power to a bunch of cyber nerds is fatally flawed” – there is a sad footnote to the OWNAFC story. One OWNA contacts i to say that he was recovering from a nervous breakdown at the time he saw the OWNAFC story on the BBC and “naively was genuinely excited about it and the way it was presented… I feel if I wasn’t so vulnerable I wouldn’t have done it.”

Another OWNA tells i: “I joined as I wanted my son and I to enjoy supporting and being a small part of a lower league team, as we can’t afford to go to watch our local team Bournemouth every week.

“The only people this is going to impact are genuine football fans trying to do good… Everyone interested should just go support their local non-league team. Something I will now do.”

Speaking to OWNAs, what comes across is that, when they first signed up for OWNAFC, they did so with the best intentions. In the end, the reality has proved to be very different to the expectation. Hednesford Town fans, at least, seem to have escaped the situation relatively lightly. As one wrote on their club forum in response to the news that the OWNAFC takeover had failed: “A salutary lesson for all.”