The RST's Takeover Plans

[brissybear 50]

I have serious doubts about it tbh.

We still need a sugar daddy, do not see where the transfer kitty will come from.

[papaguy51 912]

Too many things to answer, I'd expect the RST and/or McColl to have something a bit more 'planned' laid out at this point.

We cannot base our situation on that of other fan-owned club, such as Hamburg. They get so much more money from Die Bundesliga, television, sponsoring and advertising in comparison to us.

Getting the £30m is all fair and well, but once the CL becomes incredibly difficult to get into, where does the money come from then? How do we buy players and pay wages?

[gandhisflip 5]

The bottom line is that an ownership proposition will supercede the importance of the RST by its very nature. It will be for the whole support to buy into, when the detail is delivered (if it is) it will be clear how the scheme works and how the administration of the club will work.

Imho a workable version will feature people at a level working directly for the club that are top professionals in their given fields-it won't be punters or RST members etc etc. It will be clear how voting would work and what factors would trigger a fan vote.

Getting ownership of the club is only the first hurdle. Whoever owns the club will need to have a viable strategy of how the club can progresss and sustain success in very trying circumstances.

Still we have supporters saying oh I don't trust this, I don't like that-we seem to be utterly focused on individuals appearing that are going to deliver us a golden dawn. Last time I checked the club had been up for sale for years. The Ellis deal may go through, he may be succesful (I hope he is if he is the man) but the ownership model may well be a viable model at some stage in the future-it shouldn't be dismissed.

Here here Zimmy. It works for Barca and Hamburg but because someone's chips have been pissed in at some point by the trust it's difficult to get a reasoned response on here.

It seems some of the more "conservative" bears would rather we were bought by a 3rd rate property developer.

It's really not that difficult to get your head around guys. IF (and it's a big if) the Rangers fans were willing to raise this money (i certainly would) then we would only give our money if there was a detailed business plan in place for the running of the club, the voting procedure was detailed, etc. Im sure the people voted into roles would be experienced in their field e.g Campbell Ogilvie as secretary, Donald Findlay for honorary vice chair? :-)

As to the daft question about transfer cash - Rangers need to be run on a self sufficient budget. We average £50m per year as a turnover. With a proper business model we can run on that and make a 10% profit each year to be re-invested in the team/infrastucture. It's not rocket science.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

I have serious doubts about it tbh.

We still need a sugar daddy, do not see where the transfer kitty will come from.

Not to mention all the people who would need to donate £1500, where the hell would they come from ?

[ZimmyGer 1]

The herald has done fairly well out the trust since October, i doubt they would be trying to scupper anything for them...

You need to explain to me then how this helps the ownership process. You already see a million questions being asked before the thing is ready. The clock will now tick etc etc. It is not a scenario imho that helps getting this launched at all indeed it may cause severe damage for a variety of reasons.

It is quite clear this is not what the RST wanted so you'll need to clarify further for the hard of thinking like me.

[papaguy51 912]

It works for Barca and Hamburg but because someone's chips have been pissed in at some point by the trust it's difficult to get a reasoned response on here.

Is that perhaps because Barca turnover not a kick in the arse off £120m every year? Hamburg aren't exactly struggling either.

[Scott-RFC 308]

Total fantasy stuff in my opinion

[ZimmyGer 1]

I have serious doubts about it tbh.

We still need a sugar daddy, do not see where the transfer kitty will come from.

Not to mention all the people who would need to donate £1500, where the hell would they come from ?

Now you are just being daft. You don't think a sizeable amount of fans could invest in Rangers to own the club?

Murray launched a variety of schemes over the years for a lot less in return. He did it many times.

It won't be easy to sell because it is a new way of thinking but there is no doubt in my mind the potential is there to make it workable, easily workable

[papaguy51 912]

I think it's 'easy workable' at all.

We couldn't even sell out our ground for CL games at £40 a pop.

[ZimmyGer 1]

Total fantasy stuff in my opinion

That's it buggered then

[gandhisflip 5]

Too many things to answer, I'd expect the RST and/or McColl to have something a bit more 'planned' laid out at this point.

We cannot base our situation on that of other fan-owned club, such as Hamburg. They get so much more money from Die Bundesliga, television, sponsoring and advertising in comparison to us.

Getting the £30m is all fair and well, but once the CL becomes incredibly difficult to get into, where does the money come from then? How do we buy players and pay wages?

What happens in that scenario if the club is debt free and owned by the supporters is much more palatable than that same cirucmstance if we are still in hock to Lloyds.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

The bottom line is that an ownership proposition will supercede the importance of the RST by its very nature. It will be for the whole support to buy into, when the detail is delivered (if it is) it will be clear how the scheme works and how the administration of the club will work.

Imho a workable version will feature people at a level working directly for the club that are top professionals in their given fields-it won't be punters or RST members etc etc. It will be clear how voting would work and what factors would trigger a fan vote.

Getting ownership of the club is only the first hurdle. Whoever owns the club will need to have a viable strategy of how the club can progresss and sustain success in very trying circumstances.

Still we have supporters saying oh I don't trust this, I don't like that-we seem to be utterly focused on individuals appearing that are going to deliver us a golden dawn. Last time I checked the club had been up for sale for years. The Ellis deal may go through, he may be succesful (I hope he is if he is the man) but the ownership model may well be a viable model at some stage in the future-it shouldn't be dismissed.

Here here Zimmy. It works for Barca and Hamburg but because someone's chips have been pissed in at some point by the trust it's difficult to get a reasoned response on here.

It seems some of the more "conservative" bears would rather we were bought by a 3rd rate property developer.

It's really not that difficult to get your head around guys. IF (and it's a big if) the Rangers fans were willing to raise this money (i certainly would) then we would only give our money if there was a detailed business plan in place for the running of the club, the voting procedure was detailed, etc. Im sure the people voted into roles would be experienced in their field e.g Campbell Ogilvie as secretary, Donald Findlay for honorary vice chair? :-)

As to the daft question about transfer cash - Rangers need to be run on a self sufficient budget. We average £50m per year as a turnover. With a proper business model we can run on that and make a 10% profit each year to be re-invested in the team/infrastucture. It's not rocket science.

A reasoned response would be to point out that market conditions in spain, germany and scotland are massively different so it's a pointless comparison.

Barca for example have an estimated 11.2 million supporters, one of the biggest tv deals in the world, favourable dealings with local councils, favourable tax laws to allow them to attract top players at a cheaper cost that the ukn or Italy (for example)and still until recently they ran into massive amounts of debt and were bailed out by some of their larger contributors.

We wouldn't have any of those luxuries but would still expect our club to compete at home and sit at the same table as Barcelona in europe.

My opinion is there is no appetite for this scheme amongst our support and nowhere near the amount of fans required will touch this with a barge pole. I also believe we would run into ongoing funding problems without the back up of even a "dodgy property developer" to back us up.

This is about the scheme for me not the RST.

[ZimmyGer 1]

I think it's 'easy workable' at all.

We couldn't even sell out our ground for CL games at £40 a pop.

That's not exactly the same thing is it?

[gandhisflip 5]

It works for Barca and Hamburg but because someone's chips have been pissed in at some point by the trust it's difficult to get a reasoned response on here.

Is that perhaps because Barca turnover not a kick in the arse off £120m every year? Hamburg aren't exactly struggling either.

I dont think you are getting the concept Papa Guy? Hamburgs turnover is around the £100m mark on average, ours is nearer £50m. That wouldn't change for Rangers whether a "sugar daddy" (that doesnt seem to exist) or the fans bought Rangers. Aside from a couple of people (even Roman isn't doing it at Chelsea anymore) there people don't exist. They certainly don't want to buy Rangers.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

I have serious doubts about it tbh.

We still need a sugar daddy, do not see where the transfer kitty will come from.

Not to mention all the people who would need to donate £1500, where the hell would they come from ?

Now you are just being daft. You don't think a sizeable amount of fans could invest in Rangers to own the club?

Murray launched a variety of schemes over the years for a lot less in return. He did it many times.

It won't be easy to sell because it is a new way of thinking but there is no doubt in my mind the potential is there to make it workable, easily workable

You're being daft if you think they could find that amount of people to buy a membership in the club. How long has the trust being going (with it's main aim of buying the club for the supporters) and you can count its members in hundreds....how long has gersave being going and what % of the club does it own ? How many people attented the recent conference concerning this issue where representitives from hamburg etc were there to discuss this subject against the backdrop of the trust leaking stories to the herald saying we had x amount of days to save the club ?

Face facts no one is interested in this sort of scheme for rangers or anywhere in Scotland.

[GreigRFC 36]

[ZimmyGer 1]

The bottom line is that an ownership proposition will supercede the importance of the RST by its very nature. It will be for the whole support to buy into, when the detail is delivered (if it is) it will be clear how the scheme works and how the administration of the club will work.

Imho a workable version will feature people at a level working directly for the club that are top professionals in their given fields-it won't be punters or RST members etc etc. It will be clear how voting would work and what factors would trigger a fan vote.

Getting ownership of the club is only the first hurdle. Whoever owns the club will need to have a viable strategy of how the club can progresss and sustain success in very trying circumstances.

Still we have supporters saying oh I don't trust this, I don't like that-we seem to be utterly focused on individuals appearing that are going to deliver us a golden dawn. Last time I checked the club had been up for sale for years. The Ellis deal may go through, he may be succesful (I hope he is if he is the man) but the ownership model may well be a viable model at some stage in the future-it shouldn't be dismissed.

Here here Zimmy. It works for Barca and Hamburg but because someone's chips have been pissed in at some point by the trust it's difficult to get a reasoned response on here.

It seems some of the more "conservative" bears would rather we were bought by a 3rd rate property developer.

It's really not that difficult to get your head around guys. IF (and it's a big if) the Rangers fans were willing to raise this money (i certainly would) then we would only give our money if there was a detailed business plan in place for the running of the club, the voting procedure was detailed, etc. Im sure the people voted into roles would be experienced in their field e.g Campbell Ogilvie as secretary, Donald Findlay for honorary vice chair? :-)

As to the daft question about transfer cash - Rangers need to be run on a self sufficient budget. We average £50m per year as a turnover. With a proper business model we can run on that and make a 10% profit each year to be re-invested in the team/infrastucture. It's not rocket science.

A reasoned response would be to point out that market conditions in spain, germany and scotland are massively different so it's a pointless comparison.

Barca for example have an estimated 11.2 million supporters, one of the biggest tv deals in the world, favour dealings with local councels, favourable tax laws to allow them to attract top players at a cheaper cost that the ukn or Italy (for example)and still until recently they ran into massive amounts of debt and were bailed out by some of their larger contributors.

We wouldn't have any of those luxuries but would still expect our club to compete at home and sit at the same table as Barcelona in europe.

My opinion is there is no appetite for this scheme amongst our support and nowhere near the amount of fans required will touch this with a barge pole. I also believe we would run into ongoing funding problems without the back up of even a "dodgy property developer" to back us up.

This is about the scheme for me not the RST.

The concept is the same though. For me the ownership of the club in the current climate is paradoxically the minor point-the bigger challenge is how any owner devises a strategy that allows us to develop and sustain success in the current situation. It is a massive challenge.

Your funding scenario is flawed as we see currently, SDM cannot muster up any further funds for the club-unless you have a billionaire in charge then the funds will need to be self generating-the club itself and its turnover are what will allow investment in the team or credit at the bank-our current bank woes are related to SDM's empire not Rangers per se. So you are barking up the wrong tree.

Look at Celtic-their top man is worth a shed load yet they will struggle to invest in the team in any serious fashion-why is that? Their debt is going up but they will need to live within their means and state as much.

The capital behind the ownership is a red herring imho.

[papaguy51 912]

I think it's 'easy workable' at all.

We couldn't even sell out our ground for CL games at £40 a pop.

That's not exactly the same thing is it?

No, but we don't have a model to work on.

As GCL has pointed out, basing this on Spanish or German economic conditions is utterly, utterly pointless in terms of finances.

We could learn from them (and I believe a rep from the Hamburg committee was over in Glasgow now long ago speaking to us about it) in terms of the day-to-day running of the club, but my concerns lie in the future financing.

[gandhisflip 5]

GCL - so in order to make you interested in any scheme it would have to have us competing with Barcelona?

They are, and will remain, 2 or 3 levels above Rangers for the foreseeable future. No one is saying we can compare to them.

Any scheme would involve the following:-

1. Getting the debt cleared off or down to an acceptable level (through the supporters raising funds). An acceptable level would be say £10m. So for examples sake let's cost that at £20m

2. Raising some initial investment funds to secure management team and key players on long term contracts. (Perhaps £6 or 7m)

3. Agreeing a budget and business plan. E.g. Wages to turnover ratio of no more than 50%. First team squad made up of 18 FT pro's and 8 youths.

4. Vote for board members and key executives (who would all have a manifesto of committments).

The benefits of this would be the bank of our back. Key people signed up (Smith, McCoist, Boyd). Any player sales would be reinvested back into the playing side rather than debt (e.g Boogie goes for £6m - transfer budget for 2010/11 is £6m).

[Muiry12 7]

Throw money at the problem guys!!!!!!!!

[ZimmyGer 1]

I have serious doubts about it tbh.

We still need a sugar daddy, do not see where the transfer kitty will come from.

Not to mention all the people who would need to donate £1500, where the hell would they come from ?

Now you are just being daft. You don't think a sizeable amount of fans could invest in Rangers to own the club?

Murray launched a variety of schemes over the years for a lot less in return. He did it many times.

It won't be easy to sell because it is a new way of thinking but there is no doubt in my mind the potential is there to make it workable, easily workable

You're being daft if you think they could find that amount of people to buy a membership in the club. How long has the trust being going (with it's main aim of buying the club for the supporters) and you can count its members in hundreds....how long has gersave being going and what % of the club does it own ? How many people attented the recent conference concerning this issue where representitives from hamburg etc were there to discuss this subject against the backdrop of the trust leaking stories to the herald saying we had x amount of days to save the club ?

Face facts no one is interested in this sort of scheme for rangers or anywhere in Scotland.

That again is not a correct comparison-attracting people to an organisation is different than saying-this is your club-do you want to own it, do you want to play a part in its future? Gersave has been a minor success-it is generating some cash at a time when the club isn't generating much-you name me another scheme invented for the fans for the club that has a cheque for £50K waiting to be handed over?

You are talking facts but there are no facts on the ownership model, it has never been presented to the support-if the deal is good, if the right people are in place, if pledges are made upfront, if the strategy for the club is good then imho it is more than viable.

[Stu1993 101]

unless we could get CL Money each year, which we cant by the looks of things in a couple of year then we will always struggle to generate money is its a fans buy out. We dont even receive half of what Hamburg get i would suggest.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

The concept may be the same but there are a list fo reasons why it is possible it may work at barca and real and germany but won't work in Scotland, most of those are to do with external funding sources for the clubs.

Attitudes are also completely different amongst the supporters of these clubs and there is an appetite for these sorts of schemes, that attitude does not exist in Scotland and i don't see that changing anytime soon.

Capital behind ownership being a good thing is a red herring in your opinion and you think my opinion is flawed...

[ZimmyGer 1]

I think it's 'easy workable' at all.

We couldn't even sell out our ground for CL games at £40 a pop.

That's not exactly the same thing is it?

No, but we don't have a model to work on.

As GCL has pointed out, basing this on Spanish or German economic conditions is utterly, utterly pointless in terms of finances.

We could learn from them (and I believe a rep from the Hamburg committee was over in Glasgow now long ago speaking to us about it) in terms of the day-to-day running of the club, but my concerns lie in the future financing.

In the current climate the club needs to be self-financing. That will be the reality however owns the club-Celtic are owned by gents in a lot stronger position than SDM-why aren't they throwing X millions to overturn us? How high will their debt go?

You have also totally contradicted yourself there-Hamburg can tell us how to run the club better but we cannot copy their ownership model? Sorry mate that is laughable.

[papaguy51 912]

All I'm reading here is that we'll clear the debt, then stand around looking at each other thinking: "So, how do we run a football club?"

Just as I said at the start, more questions and answers at this point hence the scepticism.