Shedding the light on Germany’s unique 50+1 ownership model

Football in Germany enjoys widespread popularity due to its top-tier play, the highest average attendances in world football, affordable ticket prices, and a vibrant fan culture. A significant factor contributing to this is the 50+1 ownership rule.

Borussia Dortmund CEO Hans-Joachim Watzke famously once said in 2016 via the Bundesliga website:

“The German spectator traditionally has close ties with his club, and if he gets the feeling that he’s no longer regarded as a fan but instead as a customer, we’ll have a problem.”

The 50+1 rule safeguards this – the rule refers to the requirements that club members hold 50 percent plus one additional vote of the voting rights to ensure a majority. Essentially, it means that clubs, and consequently, the fans retain the final say in their management, rather than external influences or investors.

According to the German Football League (DFL) regulations, football clubs are prohibited from participating in the Bundesliga or the second division if external investors hold the majority control.

Essentially, this means that private or commercial investors cannot take control of clubs and implement measures prioritising profit over supporters’ interests. The regulation protects against irresponsible owners and preserves the democratic traditions of German clubs.

Historically, German football clubs were non-profit institutions managed by member associations, and private ownerships was entirely prohibited until 1998. The introduction of the 50+1 rule that year helps explain why debts and wages are kept in check and why ticket prices remain significantly lower compared to other major European leagues.

It should be noted that clubs have adapted to these changes in different ways, resulting in various forms of member ownership. Many Bundesliga teams are legally structured as limited or joint-stock companies, established as subsidiaries of the main club, which often includes other sports departments and/or women’s teams, to manage the men’s first team. Some of these companies are even publicly traded. Clubs in leagues below the DFL-regulated Bundesliga and Bundesliga 2 also follow similar approaches, partly to ensure compliance in the event of promotion.

Using Bayern Munich as an example, the shareholders of the men’s first team (FC Bayern München AG) are the members’ club (FC Bayern München e.V. – 75%), Adidas (8.3%), Allianz (8.3%) and Audi (8.3%). With Bayern’s now 300,000+ members being the largest membership of any sports club in the world, it is not difficult to comprehend why they are one of the well structured football clubs in the world, by primarily being debt-free which German clubs are.

In Germany, discussions of financial issues or Financial Fair Play violations are virtually non-existent, whereas news of economic struggles and FFP sanctions is common in other European leagues.

German football fans have turned their passion for football and for their clubs into power and forcing change whenever they are not content with a decision such as when the DFB confirmed that Bundesliga football would be televised on Monday night, fans boycotted the initial Monday night matches, it was then cancelled by the DFB.

While private investment could elevate German football to new heights, the fans are opposed to it.

It’s the fans and their principles that make football in Germany so special. The 50+1 rule may appear outdated in the modern era, but it’s a model that many fans have advocated for in other places. Football is for the fans, and in Germany, things are as they should be.

The 50+1 rule would greatly benefit the decisions and the structure of football in the Isuzu UTE A-League men’s and Liberty A-League women’s with all the controversy that has plagued the game over the years. If there is transparency and communication between member fans and the clubs hierarchy, it would put the priority of fans to the top as they are the most important aspect of where the revenue comes from and would improve the decision making process.

For members of an A-League team, they are essentially ticket holders with some additional rights and privileges that non-members lack. However, these do not involve any participation in the club’s management.

From the football landscape in Australia where the fans are often unhappy with the relationship between them and their club’s ownership, German football seems to have got that blend working positively.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Marie-Louise Eta makes history as new Union Berlin head coach

In an historic appointment, Eta will take over as head coach of Union Berlin until the end of the season.

History in the making

Previously the first female assistant coach in Bundesliga history with Union Berlin, Eta will now take the reigns of the men’s first team on an interim basis.

Currently, the club sit in 11th place in the Bundesliga table, but with only two wins so far in 2026, relegation appears an all-too-real prospect, and one which the club is desperate to avoid.

“Given the points gap in the lower half of the table, our place in the Bundesliga is not yet secure,” said Eta via official media release.

‘I am delighted that the club has entrusted me with this challenging task. One of Union’s strengths has always been, and remains, the ability to pull together in such situations.”

Eta will begin as Union’s new head coach with immediate effect, and will be in the dugout for the club’s matchup against Wolfsburg this weekend.

 

A step into an equal future

Eta’s appointment signals a major step towards a more level playing field in the football landscape.

Furthermore, Eta joins other coaches including Sabrinna Wittmann, Hannah Dingley and Corinne Diacre who, in recent years, have blazed a trail for female coaches to step into the men’s game.

Wittmann currently manages FC Ingolstadt in Germany’s third division, and was the first female head coach in Germany’s top three divisions.

In 2023, Dingley became caretaker manager of Forest Green Rovers, and thus the first woman to lead a men’s professional team in England.

Diacre, now head coach of France’s women’s national team, managed Ligue 2’s Clerment Foot between 2014 and 2017.

 

Final thoughts

The impact therefore, is that Eta’s appointment will show future generations of aspiring female coaches that men’s football is an equally viable and possible pathway as the women’s game.

The time is now to level the playing field.

And while it may be a short-term role, its effect on attitudes towards equality and fair opportunities in the game will hopefully resonate long after the season ends.

The Participation Boom Councils Didn’t Plan For Is Hitting Football Hard

Football in Australia isn’t being held back by passion, participation, or community support. It’s being held back by local government failure. From a CEO perspective, the warning signs are no longer subtle — they’re screaming. Confidence towards councils is collapsing, clubs are done believing the rhetoric, and the people carrying the game every weekend are telling us the same thing: councils don’t understand football, don’t consult properly, and don’t plan for growth. This isn’t opinion anymore. It’s measurable. And it should embarrass every policymaker in the country.

Football in Australia isn’t struggling because of a lack of passion. It isn’t struggling because communities don’t care. And it certainly isn’t struggling because participation is declining.

Football is struggling because, at the local government level, confidence is collapsing. What is more, the people closest to the game can feel it.

Soccerscene’s latest survey on council readiness and football planning shows something deeply confronting: trust in councils is at its lowest point, and clubs no longer believe the rhetoric. Councils frequently speak about “supporting the world game” and “investing in community sport,” but the data tells a different story.

The people building the game every weekend, people such as presidents, coaches, volunteers and administrators, are telling us councils do not understand football demand, do not consult effectively, and do not plan for long-term growth. And that’s not an emotional opinion. It’s now measurable.

In our survey, over 61% of respondents said their council has limited or no understanding of football participation demand. Consultation outcomes were even worse: 74% said council consultation is inconsistent or ineffective. And when asked if facilities are being planned with long-term growth in mind, the answer should stop every policymaker in their tracks: more than 71% said planning is short-term or non-existent.

Results graphic from Soccerscene’s January industry survey:

This is not a small problem. This is a national warning sign.

Football is not a niche sport. It’s the world’s sport

Councils across Australia are making decisions as if football is still an emerging code, competing for scraps. That thinking is decades out of date.

Football is not only Australia’s largest participation sport in many communities – it is also part of the global economy of sport, the largest sport market on earth, and a cultural engine that connects Australia to Asia, Europe, Africa and the Americas.

When councils underinvest in football infrastructure, they’re not just failing local clubs. They’re failing an entire economic pipeline: participation growth, player development, coaching pathways, community engagement, multicultural integration, women’s sport, health outcomes, events, tourism, and commercial opportunity.

And yet, football is still treated as the code that should “make do”.

The Glenferrie Oval case: a perfect example of the imbalance.

Take the redevelopment of Glenferrie Oval and the historic Michael Tuck Stand in Hawthorn.

This is a major project with a total estimated investment of approximately $30 million, with the City of Boroondara allocating $29.47 million over four years to transform the site into a premier hub for women’s and junior AFL.

Let’s be clear: there is nothing wrong with investing in women’s sport. In fact, it’s essential.

But this investment is also a symbol of something football people have been saying quietly for years: councils understand AFL. Councils prioritise AFL. Councils know how to justify AFL.

They don’t do the same for football, despite its participation scale, multicultural reach, and global relevance.

Across the country, football clubs are being told there is “no funding,” that “planning takes time,” or that facilities “can’t be upgraded yet.” Meanwhile, we see multi-million-dollar grandstands, boutique ovals, and legacy infrastructure funded and delivered for other codes.

Football isn’t asking for special treatment.

Football is asking for fair treatment based on reality.

Councils are stuck in a domestic mindset – while football is global.

Here is the core issue: local councils are making decisions through a domestic sporting lens, while football operates in a global one.

Football isn’t just a Saturday sport. It’s a worldwide industry with elite pathways, commercial frameworks, international investment, and an ecosystem that Australia must compete within.

If councils don’t understand this, they will keep making decisions that shrink our competitiveness.

And this is where the stakes become real.

Australia is not only competing against itself. We are competing against countries like Japan and South Korea, who treat football as a national asset. They don’t leave football infrastructure to fragmented local decision-making without a clear national framework. They invest strategically, align education with delivery, and build systems that create long-term advantage.

We cannot keep pretending we are in the same conversation globally while our local facilities remain stuck in the past.

Clubs are carrying the burden – and it’s breaking the system.

The survey results point to a harsh reality: football clubs feel like they are carrying the weight of growth alone.

When asked what the biggest council-related challenge is, nearly 49% said funding is not prioritised, while others pointed to poor facility design, limited engagement, and slow planning processes.

This isn’t just an inconvenience.

It is creating volunteer burnout, club debt, stagnation in women’s participation, and barriers to junior growth. It is forcing clubs into survival mode – patching up grounds, sharing overcrowded facilities, and trying to grow in spaces that were never designed for modern football demand.

And when planning is short-term, the problem compounds. Councils aren’t just falling behind- they’re building the wrong solutions.

So what do we do? We stop reacting and start leading.

Football cannot keep waiting for councils to “get it” organically. That approach has failed.

What we need now is a national strategic response that is structured, intelligent, and relentless.

This is where football must learn from high-performing football nations  not just on the pitch, but in governance, philosophy, and decision-making.

A powerful example is Korea’s “Made in Korea” project, which was built to identify structural gaps, align stakeholders, and create a unified development philosophy. It wasn’t just a technical framework, it was a national alignment strategy.

Australia needs the off-field equivalent.

A National Football Facilities & Readiness Taskforce.

I believe the time has come to establish a National Football Facilities & Readiness Taskforce, made up of the most capable minds across the game and beyond it.

Not another committee. Not another meeting group.

A taskforce.

It should include leaders from football, infrastructure, urban planning, commercial strategy, government relations, and corporate Australia. We should be selecting the most intelligent and effective people in the country, not based on titles, but based on outcomes.

This taskforce should have one clear mission:

Educate, influence, and reshape how councils plan, consult, and invest in football infrastructure.

Alongside a taskforce, we need long-term strategic working groups embedded across the states, designed to:

educate councils on football participation demand and growth forecasting

standardise best-practice facility design and future-proofing

create consistent consultation frameworks

align football investment with economic, health and multicultural outcomes

build a national narrative that football is an asset rather than a cost

Because right now, the survey shows councils aren’t prioritising football for economic reasons. In fact, only 2.56% of respondents said councils should prioritise football due to economic benefits. This is not because it isn’t true, but because councils haven’t been educated to see football that way.

That is a failure of strategy, not a failure of the game.

This is bigger than facilities – it’s about Australia’s place in the world game.

If we want to be taken seriously as a football nation, we must build a country that treats football seriously.

Not just at elite level.

At local level – where the entire pyramid begins.

The message from the survey is blunt: football’s confidence in councils is collapsing. But within that truth is also an opportunity.

Because when trust hits its lowest point, change becomes possible.

The next step is ours.

We either continue accepting a system that doesn’t understand the world game – or we build one that does.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend