I don’t think that 60,000 putting in $1000 would necessarily be out of the question, because people would be buying into being owners. And you wouldn’t have to necessarily even get 60,000. Probably when you start raising serious money say 30 million or 40 million, you could start get corporate sponsorships, since it would be a non-profit organization. I’d like to see someone try. Portland or St. Louis would be the ideal cities to try it, in my opinion. Maybe with Portland, start by buying the USL Timbers with the idea of getting the idea out there, and then bring it to the next level. It might take 3-4 years to raise that kind of cash, but it would demonstrate the depth of commitment of the fan base in a city.

They should move them to St. Louis, move the KC Royals anywhere else in the country, but they can have the Chiefs.

Because fan ownership does not, in any way shape or form, fit into the vision of the people running MLS. It’s their club, they don’t have to let you in if they don’t want to, and there’s no way they want to accept a supporter’s trust/MYFC type setup.

Also, you have no chance of getting 6000, never mind 60,000 people to stump up anything like that kind of money anywhere in this country.

Also, neither Barcelona nor the Green Bay Packers *began* life with tens of thousands of people pitching hundreds or thousands of dollars in to become “co-owners”. From much smaller beginnings…

It it somewhat interesting to note in this context that the soccer/football leagues that have seen the most “forced relocation” in recent years have not been operated on the North American franchise model, but are rather “old school” leagues like those in Scotland and England, who have used stadium regulations on minimum capacity, security and the like to effectively force teams to play elsewhere (see, e.g., Gretna having to play at Motherwell, which is 75 miles away, or Inverness Caledonian Thistle having to play at Aberdeen, which is 150 miles away) or alternatively refuse promotion that they had won on the field (several examples in the English Conference, and in Falkirk’s case, be denied promotion even after agreeing to move). While these are intended to be temporary measures, they can end up having a lasting effect on a club’s fortunes (and in Gretna’s case are likely to be permanent in retrospect, given the club’s current plight).

Would I like the possibility of a USL side (like Montreal or Rochester) making it to the MLS for a season? Absolutely. But I don’t see it happening.

I just don’t like the idea of East Coast vs. West Coast, that’s all…

That’s an interesting idea about fan ownership, too, though I think that MLS wouldn’t actually allow it. The NFL, basically the model MLS lusts after, has banned not-for-profit ownership for decades (the Packers are grandfathered in). MLS would take a lot of convincing.