Big Spliff

Hi mate, I clicked and it took me to the gersnet main site. I went to newsnow on my own but can't see it listed. These sites are both new to me, am i missing anything? or can you explain how they work/link in to newsnow please? thanko mucho

haha nobody bit :fish:

welcome guys. at least one more to come that I know of!

Welcome Norris. Enjoy!

Fuck sake mate, you'll never get a job with the Chairman if you're gonna insist on fucking questioning things all the time Seriously, what your comments show is that it's all well and good talking about a concept (and although a concept may be sound), real support means answering real questions. I've got some off the cuff answers for you, but I'm not trying to pretend that I've thought through all the mechanics - partly because some of it will be tricky and will need creative ideas about how to get round potential obstacles. It needs discussion, collaboration, detail, description, direction, facilitation, pulling together the best people and the best ideas. That's all part of the process as far as I'm concerned. Having said that, I think we need to start with an idea; a vision, if you will. If we like it, we try to work out how to achieve it. I think that now more than ever, the club needs a new vision. We need to build up our ideas, whatever they may be, so that courses are charted and obstacles avoided or swept aside. The reason the RST (for example) has disappointed to an extent is that enough people simply haven't bought the vision, or even seen the necessity to buy a new vision. That needs to change - it will change. Hopefully everybody who is interested is thinking hard - and somebody will come up with that special something. It'll happen.

I post (constructively I think) on FF a lot. As well as coming over here, I've also registered on RM and VB, as well as CDL and Union Bears recently. If ever you want to see evidence of a divided support....... :box: I like it here so I'm gonna stick around.

thanks bud, I clearly need to address these issues more thoroughly.

Indeed but let's see what happens!!!!

I take your points (and I wouldnt say you are wrong at all), and anyway I couldnt begin to guess what anybody with �£5m to invest in Rangers would want back! In this model though, your �£5m gives you; the opportunity to invest in the new dawn of a "new club". to be an executive member in the new executive board. the chance to get involved and share risk with fellow high-investors the chance to be the senior partner, who effectively pulls all the big strings. (there's lots of cudos, publicity, status in there without room for dictatorship) the opportunity to make reasonable % profits providing financial preformance criteria is met. the opportunity to re-sell your equity on the market at at time, at no loss if the club is run 'correctly' If there is an underlying business model, then I believe the club can run in a way which means it simply does not lose money. That being the case the downside risk would be relatively limited - all other things being equal. Anybody putting in �£5m would rightly want to be clear about that before going ahead, and be prepared to put in some time to ensure thats exactly what happens, at the same time as helping the club to prosper. For very high net-worthers, they are not staking 10's or 100's of millions. �£5m is fairly modest sum to some of the people we might be looking to attract, and we only need a handful. Remember also that the Exec Board does not run the club day-to-day. The professional management team they appoint do that - experts in their fields. Its more of a supervisory board if you like. At the end of the day though, its not a money-making exercise - people with �£3m-�£5m 'to tie up for a few years' can find plenty of other ways to do that. This fact may be a killer for some, but you never know. The concept may not even need �£5m people. If �£1m makes you top-tier, then that's all fine too.

Christ you must be some f*cking pain in the arse for them to offer you your money back just so you'll go away!!!!!

Mark, thanks for feedback etc. I knew it was a bit of a rant and could have been clearer! Here's what I meant; Let's imagine there are 5,000 'members'. The members vote an Execitive Board, which would initially presumably be led or largely constituted by the small group who would put in �£5m each. From the exec board, one is elected (let's say a senior partner) to lead the group including hiring and firing the entire operational/professional services management team. Everyone is a member, whether you put in �£5m or �£1k. All members get a vote. The Exec are given the first 3/4 years uncontested in return for investing in the club. None significantly outweighs the other or has too much control. In the event that things go badly and an exec member is voted off after 3/4 years, they are entitled to remain as a member/owner, albeit not as an Exec. If they wish to sell their shares, they do so - they do not just take their money with them, as they've already put it into the club in the form of equity. In terms of financial incentives for these guys, what I meant was a) entering into something which they believe will not simply be loss-making, hence the need for a coherent plan/business model to be established and implemented from the word go; b) a range of indirect 'benefits' such as use of facilities, resources etc, ; and c) the possibility that their membership may actually increase in value (albeit possibly with certain caps in place possibly linked to RPI or FTSE or whatever), on the back of a successful business emerging. Ideally, all monies stay in the club, but some might want at least small returns which might be reasonable in the circumstances (looking gift-horses in the mouth etc) Thanks again for asking, I unreservedly welcome the highlighting of any flaws or suggestions to build around and evolve a model like this into something which seems plausible. At the same time I am totally open to binning this for a better solution if there is one. I hope I've cleared things up a little?

Welcome mate, I followed a similar path the other day! :cheers:

I was thinking that!

Cool thanks, I'll do that and get it back to you. I appreciate that there may be little new in here, but sometimes its a different combination of the best existing ideas that provides a spark. I'm not particularly aware of who floated a similar idea in the past, or what the details were - I'd like to look at what's already been done if at all possible.

Thanks Frankie - If you tell me when you need it, I can write it "properly" , I was just on a rant there Hopefully will get some thoughts/discussion when people have time (or inclination:))

cheers, must have missed that!

I dont recall either Dell, but I could be wrong. Communication is acknowledged by all parties as a problem where the Trust is concerned, pretty much always has been.

Hiya mate; itââ?¬â?¢s rather rushed (believe it or not!) but here you go, in response and to yours and other recent posts too - If we are talking about club ownership, the 'conditions' I refer to set the tone for would-be investors - this is really important. I'm using a bit of licence here to illustrate the points, but here goes! The conditions look something like this; Consortium A group of high net-worth people approach SDM & a price is agreed for the club. The 'people' must be a credible bunch acting in concert, fronted by someone who will command the respect of fans. Let's say a Sir Tom Hunter figure, or a Bannatyne, or even a Gordon Smith. Dont want to get into the merits of these people just now, its just for the sake of discussion. Funds The club is 'worth' circa Ã?£50m. This seems ridiculous in the current climate for a business which has demonstrated repeatedly that it does not make money outside of extraordinary conditions (and even then..... ), and it seems clear that the current regime appear to have maximised future revenue to the best of their abilities. SDM has said he'd be "easy to do business with", and he wants out asap. So lets say the negotiated price is in the region of Ã?£40m with arrangements in place to structure a portion of this in some favourable way. So we need, say Ã?£25m now + Ã?£15m over 5 years (ignoring interest). Our 'Execs' (aside from putting in say Ã?£5m each for partly-emotional reasons) must also have a financial motivation. Any group must be able to run the business as an inherently profitible one, which i believe is possible. The club needs to be restructured early on, so that waste is eliminated and revenue maximised. Management Team Our ââ?¬Ë?Execsââ?¬â?¢ identify and hire a management team to run the club. Quality professionals on say Ã?£150k per year are appointed to run Marketing, Operations, Finance, HR, Communications, Development etc. A CEO is appointed, say Ã?£300k. Big hitters. The best people for the job. Remember we are only a Ã?£50-70m club and itââ?¬â?¢s not exactly c complicated business to be in is it? You only see your customers once every 2 weeks for Christ sake, they ALL want to be there, there is NO competition for these people to wander off to. What a dream! Our ââ?¬Ë?Execsââ?¬â?¢ stand for confirmation/election, and agree to be re-elected on a 3 or 4 year cycle. They are responsible for the performance of the management team they appoint so they can hire and fire. They stand or fall based on re-election by the wider membership, who will judge based on performance over the period. The wider membership may vote in keeping with their proportional investment. Votes are cast anonymously on-line, or by postal proxy. The team manager is a key appointment. The club will be run on the basis that it maximises its resources, and really concentrates on youth development. Its scouting network is taken seriously because unlike most other large clubs, there is a fundamental obligation/necessity to rely on it. Itââ?¬â?¢s not optional and not something we bail out of. It becomes the heart of the culture of the club. Rangers becomes known as the place to be for excellent youngsters, and we play them in the team. Presented properly in the right context, I honestly believe fans would support that, under a credible new leadership. Compare this to the apparent Ã?£6-7m of salaries in the squad who are surplus. These people are culled, taking one-off hits (yet) again and the club vows never again to go down this road. The team manager is obviously a key to all this. Identifying and supporting this man is crucial. Revenue The whole stadium experience is professionally reviewed which a view to maximising revenue - especially on match-day but also across the week. How many people buy burgers and pints outside the ground? Why do they? Would they buy from the club if the product was easily accessible, priced correctly, served by smiling blue-noses (even rotating volunteers!)? Bars/food outlets in the concourses, knocked through to the paved areas outside? Proper smoking areas arranged. Merchendise on sale. Nice working TV's. FP's mingle. Sense of community. Fans would arrive earlier, use it and spend more. Talking of merchandising, how many people have tried to buy Rangers gear and cant? Its ridiculous. Distribution and merchandising deals need to be done which maximise availability and revenue. A hybrid of the Celtic/Rangers model if you like. We have the best deal on paper - they have the best distribution. You can get a Celtic, Man U or Chelsea top in every sports shop in the UK, why not Rangers? Our 'Exec' go public. The story is that they intend to buy the club with fan's help. SDM is seen to be participating and generous relating to structuring of payments etc. The story is positive. A credible new future is defined. They have raised Ã?£25m with plans to provide the additional Ã?£15m. They need fans to match their Ã?£40m to reduce debt, to build a reserve and to fund player purchases. Fans are asked to contribute. Scenarios I've seen suggested which fit this model are 8,000 x Ã?£5k or 4,000 x Ã?£10k. If the big boys were not fully available these numbers could be tweaked to raise more. Fans (either as individuals or as businesses) can buy shares and become ââ?¬Ë?membersââ?¬â?¢ . Caps are in place to prevent anyone contributing more than say 5% (Ã?£2m). Some type of distribution model is worked-up to spread ownership. Shares are for sale at, say, Ã?£1000 each. Companies can buy these too. In return members benefit from a variety of things; Firstly, access to the stadium. Ibrox is vastly under-utilised, nearly every day of every week. What if your company put in Ã?£10,000 as a one-off investment (donââ?¬â?¢t forget tax offset, meaning the cost is actually Ã?£7k)? You have lifetime access to Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park. Good quality access, where you are treated like a member, not someone who has no real right to be there. You can book meeting rooms, seminars, tours etc. The place is kitted out with wi-fi, state of the art communications systems. The stadium is full of lounges and restaurants etc, what if we could use them? How many bluenoses organise meetings in Glasgow hotels in a year and at what cost? I must have spent Ã?£5k on meetings in the last 2-3 years and Iââ?¬â?¢m by no means a meeting-junkie. A new members community springs up, they can cross-promote their products to each other, and to the wider fan-base. They can use each otherââ?¬â?¢s services. They can harness collective purchasing power. Etc etc etc. There is something tangible and worthwhile for them to invest in. We are near an airport, a city centre, a developing business community, visitor attractions, motorway, subway blah blah. Ibrox as a business hub. What a dream! And Murray Park. ââ?¬â?? how might it be used more effectively? I believe there are thousands of businesses and individuals worldwide who would contribute to such a concept if the conditions are right. I really do. The absolute key points in all of this are; 1)the business and concept is attractive enough for people to want to invest, 2) the business plan is coherent 3) there is a top quality management team. This post is too long and lacks a bit of structure, so Iââ?¬â?¢m going to draw a line under it for now! Hope you find it (if not all new) then at least worthy of discussion. Obviously, the more you write the more holes there are likely to be but I'd be very interested in any thoughts. (flaws as much as positives) Cheers!

IMO, its all possible but the points raised here are all huge ones. Capital and security are a pre-requisite. The organic fan-ownership model may work over a couple of lifetimes at the current pace, but its obvious that it's going nowhere fast and isnt going to make a dent in itself. What is needed is for a large injection from a group/groups, supplemented by supporter cash. The starting point needs to be sufficient to clear the decks and provide reserves. This could perhaps be structured over a period of time in the right conditions. An executive board would need to be elected, probably based on share ownership. Provided no shareholder had too much control this shold not necessarily be an issue - albeit a difficult transition. There needs to be a handful of real LEADERS involved, people who can demonstrate their credibility and credentials to the rest of the support and other shareholders. The Exec board goes up for re-election periodically. It appoints a management team, a professional management team which runs the club, from marketing to operations, to finance, to football. The Exec board hire and fire. I know it takes a leap of faith, but without that and a plan to go forward what else have we got? SDM, or the next SDM? No thanks.