The 50+1 Rule

The 50+1 rule is the best known feature of German football's ownership. In outline it means that the members' club must keep a majority of the voting rights in its professional team, so that outside investors cannot take control. It is much discussed abroad and fiercely debated at home. This chapter explains the rule, its history and exceptions, and the arguments on each side, which are set out neutrally. Names, dates and details are from general knowledge and flagged for checking, since the rules and their interpretation have changed.

What the Rule Says

Where It Came From

• Before the rule. For most of the league's history clubs were associations and could not be sold, which in effect secured member control (check).
• Late 1990s. The DFB allowed clubs to move their professional teams into capital companies, to raise money and limit financial risk, and the 50+1 rule was set to keep member control as part of that change (check the year, usually given as 1998).
• The idea. Members, not owners, should decide the club's identity, name, colours and location (check how supporters and officials explained it).

Exceptions and Variations

• Leverkusen and Wolfsburg. Bayer Leverkusen is owned by the pharmaceutical company that founded the works club, and VfL Wolfsburg by the car maker, under an exception for firms that have funded a club for a long period (check the length of time and the wording).
• Hoffenheim. The local businessman Dietmar Hopp, who had backed the club since its youth days, was allowed a controlling stake after a decision in 2015 (check the year and the reasoning).
• Bayern Munich. The club is controlled by its members' association, with minority shares held by large companies (check the shareholders and their stakes).
• RB Leipzig. The club is controlled by a small number of members, closely linked to the drinks company behind it, and is seen by some as following the letter but not the spirit of the rule, while others disagree (check the structure and the arguments).

The Arguments

Views differ widely; these are the main points on each side (check what each side actually says):

• For the rule. It protects clubs' identity and local roots, keeps decisions with members and fans, and discourages owners who buy a club, run up debts and leave. It is also credited with the league's low ticket prices and large crowds.
• Against the rule. It limits investment, which may hold back clubs against richer foreign rivals; it treats clubs unequally through exceptions; and some argue that clubs should be free to choose their own owners.
• The legal side. The Federal Cartel Office has examined the rule and has said it is in principle acceptable, subject to conditions and consistent application (check the decisions and dates).
• Fan protest. In 2023-24 a plan to bring in an outside investor in the league's media rights led to protests in the stands, including thrown items, and the plan was dropped (check the details and the outcome).

Exercises