Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Like many Rangers fans I enjoyed the Sir David Murray years, (remember when it was about the football and we never discussed finance!)so many great memories, and yet this current crisis can, and should be easily be blamed on SDM. SDM ran up the excesses, the fate of Rangers was entangled with the rest of his empire, and when the empire was under threat, Rangers were sacrificed to save HIS empire and sold to the Charlatain that was Craig Whyte.Post SDM the fan base, now being awake to the fact that financial performance is as important, or more important, than performance on the park, to the longevity of the club clamoured, almost demand, that never again should we be put through the pain of financial mismanagement:The club had to work within its means,The fans should have a greater voice, andThe club had to be more transparent in its financial dealings.One of the great foundation stones of the Charles Green plan of the future was that no single person should ever own Rangers again, and no single owner should have even more than 10%. This seemed eminently sensible. Charles also gave us, the fans, a chance to buy into the club with an IPO and the fans, now collectively own 12% of the club.So here we are 18months after Mr Green took over, we have broad based ownership, we have the beginnings of fan ownership, and yet all we seem to have is turmoil amongst fans, board and the shareholders. Is this what broad based ownership looks like?So now we have Dave King on the horizon, and I get the feeling that many fans want him to take control of the club. Is this a good idea? I have nothing at all against Dave King. If he wants to invest, and is now free to do so, the cash is welcome, his financial acumen is unquestioned, but he does have the cloud of his tax dealings hanging over him. (Not that having past tax issues in new to the club, nor even current major shareholders!). My real question though is what model do we fans want for club ownership? Do we want broad spectrum ownership (GC Model), Fan ownerships or a single majority owner (sugar daddy / dictator?) style of ownership?Do we really want to go down the route of having a single, club owner? We have been there, seen that, done that. We enjoyed some of our most successful periods under that type of regime, and we suffered through one of our worst times based on the consequences of such ownership. We now have broad based ownership, but that (on the evidence of the last 12 months) seems to have caused, or highlighted, the many schisms, in both the shareholder and fan base.There is no doubt that one of the major sources of turmoil in the shareholder base is the conflict between the need to generate a return or to invest on the park. Institutional investors are NOT in Rangers to make the club successful, they are in it to make a return on investment – and in concept many fans have no issue with this as, in theory, the best way to generate a high return, is to deliver a successful club. However, perception has it that certain shareholders have found alternate ways to get the return and that is to take cash as quickly as possible out of the club. Some members of current board seem guilty of this but not all of them, and those that seemed to get the real quick buck have now departed. It is unfortunate that this leaves suspicions of the current board members and their intentions for the club and has led to external shareholders (alleged shareholders!) trying to oust this board.Now whatever the rights and wrongs of all these shareholder shenanigans all it has done is create a lack of stability. The one thing we fans crave now is stability, and this brings us back to the subject of a single majority owner, a sugar daddy, a plaything for the rich. Dave King, McColl, Ashley, Wheelan all names mentioned but do we want that or do we persevere with broad based ownership ? It looks like Dave King is in prime position to effect a ‘sugar daddy’ style ownership, he is a man that seems to like control but will he stick to a broad based ownership model or go the majority route? – The overlying question has to be, as fans, what is best for Rangers? This current turmoil is not conducive to future success, but we have seen the pearls of a dictator style owner!Personally, I would like us to carry on down the broad based ownership route, it gives us some voice, it demands transparency, and I think the shareholder battles will die down and we should give this model a try, perhaps with Dave King as a strong Chairman we can achieve stability without the need for him to take a majority position. Time will tell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
allgers 735 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Would Dave King the Chairman not suffice to drive us forward, we need stability in the boardroom, we need a strong figure who can drive things forward, would that person have to be a majority shareholder.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 DK has described fan ownership as unworkable a pipedream and a nonsense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 Would Dave King the Chairman not suffice to drive us forward, we need stability in the boardroom, we need a strong figure who can drive things forward, would that person have to be a majority shareholder..The person who 'leads' the club will need to be a strong figure , especially if not the majority shareholder, but Strength oft comes fromPower , is there a risk that if DK ( or any single person) is the owner then we could end up once again in a weakened position. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 DK has described fan ownership as unworkable a pipedream and a nonsense.I sort of agree with that, but that's different from there being a broad base of shareholders ( like we have now) SDM was a majority owner and look where that took us Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 DK has described fan ownership as unworkable a pipedream and a nonsense.I sort of agree with that, but that's different from there being a broad base of shareholders ( like we have now) SDM was a majority owner and look where that took us Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
allgers 735 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 The person who 'leads' the club will need to be a strong figure , especially if not the majority shareholder, but Strength oft comes fromPower , is there a risk that if DK ( or any single person) is the owner then we could end up once again in a weakened position.You could argue that DK owning Rangers would be single Fan ownership, SDM was never a Fan of Rangers, indeed he tried to take over Ayr before he came to Rangers. Anyway we need a Chairman, can anyone think of anybody better than DK. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 You could argue that DK owning Rangers would be single Fan ownership, SDM was never a Fan of Rangers, indeed he tried to take over Ayr before he came to Rangers. Anyway we need a Chairman, can anyone think of anybody better than DK.No DK seems an ideal Choice but there were Many fans on here, and I include myself, that fully backed SDM until, with hindsight, we saw the folly of one man calling the shots - no matter how good DK 'a intentions if he goes for majority shareholding is that good for the club ? Do we not want better oversight than we gave SDM ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnberry18 3,204 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 DK has described fan ownership as unworkable a pipedream and a nonsense.He's not wrong there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 No to fan ownership it's an utterly stupid idea that will ruin the club We can't even agree on the manager or the socks never mind something important and pressing That's before rebels with agendas that might squirm their way in too Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnberry18 3,204 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 The dynamics of fan ownership are deeply flawed. If you were going to have fan ownership then it's no grand to say that something along the lines of a constitution would be needed; it would also raise questions about how autonomous the board would be, and various other matters. A very big no from me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumnockbear 2,446 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 No to fan ownership it's an utterly stupid idea that will ruin the clubWe can't even agree on the manager or the socks never mind something important and pressingThat's before rebels with agendas that might squirm their way in tooSpot on mate Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shankillblue1 349 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Single majority, end of and rid us of all this shit from the self obsessed so called fans groups! An oligarch will do fine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameron1873 538 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 I don't think a out right fan ownership is feasible.However, there is definitely a good opportunity imo for fans to contribute more through something like this.It seems win-win to me if done right. Rangers gets more income, while the fans feel more secure in knowing they could have a serious say in he club. The biggest problem I see is the wide spread differing opinions within the support with regards to what the clubs identity is and what decisions have to be made Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glowingmonkeyhead 62 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Fan ownership is a pipe dream and unless your Real Madrid with 250,000 fans contributing along with some serious rich people who want to be the club president it wont work.What we need is some like King who can take a major stake but with serious players like McColl, Easdale's and a few others putting up and being on the board. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 Single majority, end of and rid us of all this shit from the self obsessed so called fans groups! An oligarch will do fine.Like SDM ? And what happens when said rich person is no longer rich - like what has happened to a few English clubs, hearts, etc? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky True Legend 2,682 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 No problems when Lawrence was the owner. Problems started (imho) when Marlborough inherited as he stated, if my memory serves me right, that he had no real interest in Rangers. So we are OK while King is in charge. What happens after him? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian 4,281 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 I was all for the broad base approach but recent events have shown the inherent weakness in the systemIt is incredibly open to chancers coming along and conniving to gain enough votes to force their way onto the board. Like now, even when they fail, it is incredibly destabilising on the club and divides the fans. If King takes over, these sorts of shenanigans will endNot before time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace 3,645 Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Fan ownership IS still my ideal goal. The fans own the club but appoint a board who run the club on a day to day basis. The board operate under an ethos that the fans seek eg Live within our meansHave home reared youth at the heart of our team Play attractive football by appointing a manger who's teams play in that mannerI'm sure there are other options but that's my ideal, having a sole owner ala SDM took us to the brink of destruction when HIS funds ran dry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 Fan ownership IS still my ideal goal. The fans own the club but appoint a board who run the club on a day to day basis. The board operate under an ethos that the fans seek eg Live within our meansHave home reared youth at the heart of our team Play attractive football by appointing a manger who's teams play in that mannerI'm sure there are other options but that's my ideal, having a sole owner ala SDM took us to the brink of destruction when HIS funds ran dry.Fan ownership would certainly require rules or a constitution - especially on the chooce and tenure of a manager Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.