A lot has happened at TSV 1860 Munich in the past twelve years, but one thing has remained the same: investor Hasan Ismaik is betting that 50+1 will fall. And since then he has repeatedly threatened to take legal action against the regulation. In 2011, Ismaik became an investor in the then second division club, and the cooperation agreement stipulated that he and his company HAM International could immediately take control of the club if 50+1 was eliminated. The 50+1 rule ensures that the registered clubs and their committee members elected by the members have power in the German clubs over investors. Ismaik probably assumed it would fall soon, but that hasn’t happened in a dozen years. And now there was a date that was supposed to cement it.
On October 9th, the 36 professional clubs in the first and second Bundesliga should have voted on the 50+1 rule – the outcome would have been foreseeable: the rule should remain and be placed on a secure basis, exceptions should no longer be permitted. However, according to the German Football League (DFL), a bias application by HAM International against a decision-maker from the Federal Cartel Office has now led to a “postponement”, probably to December 9th.
The fact that Sixty, as a third division team, is involved in the events at all is because anyone who can demonstrate a legitimate interest can be invited; This is what both the registered association and the investors did at TSV 1860. While the DFL, according to its letter, assumes that the application will only postpone the matter for two months, HAM International submitted a much more far-reaching application to the Federal Cartel Office: The office should start examining the regulation completely again.
As Spiegel Online reported, it is about a decision-maker in the process initiated by the DFL, which essentially confirmed the admissibility of 50+1 and is therefore the basis for the upcoming DFL decision. The decision-maker is an active football fan himself. According to HAM International, this was kept secret from those involved in the process, but through an inspection of the files it has now emerged: One of the three people responsible for the process is a member of an Eintracht Frankfurt fan club and is identified as a cashier on its website. And that fan club – along with several other fan clubs – signed a declaration advocating the continued existence of the 50+1 rule: “In the end it’s about even more money being passed on to the same profiteers,” it says. “For us fans,” if 50+1 is eliminated, “football will not be any better and our social responsibility will not be strengthened.”
One question is whether membership in the 50+1 critical fan organization already existed and was known during the check
In 2018, the assessor reported internally to the Federal Cartel Office that he was a member of Eintracht Frankfurt. A spokesman for the authority said in writing that the question of “possible bias due to club membership” had already been examined “ex officio at the beginning of the proceedings” and was answered in the negative. Due to Ismaik’s application, “we feel obliged to examine this again in accordance with the existing rules of the Federal Cartel Office.” However, during the examination, membership in the fan organization, which was apparently critical of 50+1, was not yet passed. In response to SZ’s request, the press office of the Federal Cartel Office said: “The reporter in question joined one of over 1,000 Eintracht Frankfurt fan clubs in June 2019 and has been a board member since September 2021, particularly responsible for looking after the fan club’s social media channel , which reports on the fan club’s visits to Eintracht games. The alleged activity as a cashier is an error on the fan club’s website.” The fan club “aims to create a supra-regional network of Eintracht Frankfurt fans who want to attend home games together and organize away trips.”
It has been discussed for a long time among the fans and members of TSV 1860 whether action by HAM International against 50+1 would be enough for the eV to terminate the cooperation agreement with Ismaik. The answer was always: no. The wording of the treaty is probably not sufficient for this interpretation. In the current case, some Lions fans are again calling for termination, but this time too it will not happen. However, protests in the fan curve are predictable, which are likely to overshadow the home game against SC Verl this Saturday (2 p.m.).
The blog operators respond that the contested claims were not made in the text at all
Especially since another dispute continues, which can be traced back to the power struggle between the shareholders – between the professional football KGaA and the eV-affiliated blog sechzger.de, which criticized the transfer behavior in the summer in an article with the participation of investor representative Anthony Power. As announced by KGaA managing director Marc-Nicolai Pfeifer, the operators received a cease-and-desist letter from a lawyer and a request for a counter-statement by Thursday at the latest – which they had not yet complied with by Friday afternoon. Instead, they replied in a letter, which is available to the SZ, that the disputed claims were not made in the text at all.
For example, contrary to the accusation in the warning, the author did not claim that the former Türkgücü managing director Max Kothny was involved in transfer activities “on behalf of TSV 1860 Munich”: “Reporting, the (…) activities of Mr. Kothny or Mr. Power, do not have to be of legal interest to TSV 1860 München & Co. KGaA and certainly do not constitute a corresponding claim for injunctive relief.” As far as the alleged advisor to coach Maurizio Jacobacci is concerned, the article only contains the wording that the person “posed” as an advisor. With regard to the statements made, the blog operators would be “sufficiently prepared in the event of an emergency in court proceedings (…)” and could “provide appropriate means of credibility or provide evidence,” they write.
At the press conference for the game against Verl, managing director Pfeifer appeared on the podium and briefly made it official that the KGaA was now taking legal action against the article. The matter was “clearly dealt with internally” in order to then “strongly reject” the allegations. Jacobacci added: “People are being blamed who have invested a lot of time and done honest work. My question is simple: with what motive?” Anyone who “sullies” innocent people must provide evidence; the article also damages the 1860 brand: “What we are accused of here between the lines is wrong and a lie, and Sixty doesn’t deserve that.”
Pfeifer then quickly left the podium. And a little later, Jacobacci hesitated for a while before answering a question from a sechzger.de reporter – about SC Verl’s tactics.
