You have to imagine: After the annual general meeting of FC Bayern two members stand up to talk. A member stands on a chair in the hall and speaks to a crowd of people who crowd around him – a touch of revolution. The member speaks, among other things, about the racism scandal on the campus of FC Bayern, so a relevant topic in the club. Why is he standing on the chair? Because his speech was no longer allowed – President Herbert Hainer had ended the meeting with loud boos and protests. The other Bayern member who wants to talk is Uli Hoeneß. He doesn’t stand on a chair, but goes to the microphone on the stage. But after a short pause it goes down again. Stunned by what happened in the past five hours.
What happened? Well: The topic of Qatar has flown around the ears of FC Bayern, and the club is largely to blame for this. Not or not just because he would have signed the sponsorship contract with Qatar Airways, that’s been the case since 2018. But because those responsible avoid a debate about it, do not want to lead it, sometimes actively stall it. And when that happens on the open stage, as was evident on Thursday, you get the receipt.
Because it was above all how the issue was dealt with that led to the escalation. Oliver Kahn, as CEO of the AG, managed in all seriousness not to even mention the word “Qatar” in his first speech. Although it was absolutely clear that it would be the big hot topic of the evening. Herbert Hainer, president of the association, mainly referred in his speech to the fact that the debate had to be conducted objectively, thereby implying that it had previously been conducted irrelevantly – which in essence was simply not the case. When member Michael Ott, whose application for the early termination of the contract with Qatar Airways was the starting point of the current controversy, is penned, consoled, and sometimes condescendingly treated – then statements and actions of FC Bayern are simply in stark contrast . Incidentally, Ott was no longer allowed to speak later either.
The main question is whether FC Bayern takes the votes of its members seriously – or not
One cannot justify one’s own Qatar engagement with the willingness to enter into dialogue and then largely refuse to enter into dialogue in the general assembly. Ott had submitted the application on time, then received no response from the association as to whether it would be admitted, he went through the courts. Immediately before the event, the Munich Regional Court decided that the general assembly was not responsible for the matter. The board of directors of the AG concludes sponsorship contracts, the association “only” sits on the supervisory board.
Stunned in his own hall: the former Bayern president and club patron Uli Hoeneß (center).
(Photo: Ulrich Gamel; Kolbert-Press / dpa)
Now, even as a critical member, you first have to accept such a decision by the regional court. Whereby one could subtly note that it was Hainer, the president of the association, who announced at the meeting that it had not yet been decided whether to extend with the state airline. But so be it. This question is only marginally about legal details, it is not about association and stock corporation law. It’s about the question of how Bayern is dealing with the issue, whether it takes the voices of its members seriously or at least gives the impression that it is doing so. It is not enough if Kahn refers to “compliance requirements”. After all, he still said that you take the subject with you and that you can always do things better.
It may well be that it played a role in the escalation that the event took place as it did. Namely under strict hygiene requirements, so that mainly those fans and members came into the hall who are critical of the Qatar issue. It may be that with 5000 members present there would have been a different mood than with 780, as Vice President Dieter Mayer suggested.
But that doesn’t matter in the result. The general assembly is a decision-making body of the association. Who is there is there and determined.
And if those who determine are treated the way they are treated, then as an association you shouldn’t be surprised if your own proposal to change the statutes fails in the vote with a crash. When a member submitted a motion that the club should admit to respecting all internationally recognized human rights and campaign for the respect of these rights, the whole management voted against it. Presumably out of spite. Respect for human rights was also included in their own application. But you have to catch such a picture again first.
In order to do that, FC Bayern urgently needs to question its own communication strategy when it comes to Qatar. Presidium and board of directors leave the basketball hall damaged, “Hainer out” and “Board out” calls are not yet to be voted out, they are not necessarily representative. But maybe not to be ignored. The tactic has proven counterproductive.