Manchester United's Google+ page looks fantastic, with over 7000 followers and great engagement. The only problem is that isn't offical - and Manchester United has no plans to launch on Google+

All submissions are individual opinions, not those of the companies for which they work. And if you're into Google+, why not add Communicate magazine to your circles)  

Steve Kuncewicz, solicitor

I’d certainly ask them to remove any reference to the page being “official”, simply because it isn’t. It’s hard to see how the fans behind it could really object (apart from potentially in the moral sense!). But there’s a big difference between using a club’s brand as a ‘badge of allegiance’ and making money from it - the former may be permitted in limited circumstances. Even though MUFC could probably sue if the brand is being used to make a profit, and the effect of that use could be ‘damage’ to the brand as a result, they’d need to balance that against the massive potential PR fallout. Clubs are working hard to build up their engagement with fans, and this may ultimately be worth more commercially than being seen to protect their IP aggressively and indiscriminately.

Tristán White, Legal and General

They should certainly be concerned about the Google+ page being subheaded as “Official”, but more importantly they really should reconsider why they do not plan to launch a page of their own, as they are missing out on a valuable communication tool. The last thing they should do is try and get the page shut down. If I were Manchester United, I would take a leaf out of Coca-Cola’s book: engage with whoever set up the brand page and take them on in an official capacity.

Drew Benvie, Hotwire

What sports clubs rarely have time to consider is the medium term impact of emerging media platforms. Google+ is good enough for Obama, so it won’t be long until a slew of brands follow suit. But until it poses an urgent opportunity or threat, we will no doubt see this left on the periphery.

Tom Mason, Delineo

If I were MUFC, I’d remove this page. Regardless of intentions, it’s not wise to have an unofficial party claiming to speak on behalf of the brand and, while it’s great to have advocates championing the company, you can’t risk someone riding roughshod over your online presence. It’s squeaky-bum time.

Simon Henderson, Centrica plc

This case highlights how quickly brands and businesses have to act in registering new social media channels. I was surprised to read that it isn’t an official site, particularly as Manchester United has very good Facebook and Twitter accounts. Any solution needs to engage and harness the enthusiasm of the fans. Perhaps Manchester United could turn this into an opportunity through some kind of collaboration? How this would be regulated is another question – it’s a challenge many of us are addressing in enabling stakeholders to participate in building and developing meaningful communications activities.

Drew Spencer, Wireworks

I don’t blame Manchester United for not having a particular Google+ strategy. However if the page is truly full of good, engaging content, they should endorse it, let their fans control it, and engage with it as and when necessary, like Coca-Cola did with their Facebook page. Joseph Tripodi wrote: “Accept that consumers can generate more messages than you ever could.” Nobody will be more passionate about expressing their love of Manchester United than the people that took it upon themselves to set up a beautiful, well designed Google+ page. The hard work’s already done, all the club has to do now is engage with it. If they don’t do that, then it’s a wasted opportunity...