So thats that done then is it?

[andy steel 0]

I suppose it comes down to the level of ambition you're willing to tolerate. I would trade fan ownership for some years of limited success, but it would have to be with the ultimate goal of producing players on a Dutch style model, and so ensuring as far as possible, some success. No point the fans owning a 2nd division team, I suppose. But remember, if our aim is little wider than domestic - and it is for the foreseeable - then the small incomes mentioned by board members would just about suffice. It's not as if we're up against big spenders in the SPL. We would just have to be better at producing players; better at playing; better all round.

 

And maybe, bit by bit, you scramble up a rung of the ladder, and bit by bit the income increases through player sales and European money. Or, at some point in the future, league restructuring puts us in a better place re:TV money. The point is, fan ownership isn't just a wishy washy dreamscape, in which everything is rosy - some kind of footballing Utopia. It represents a chance to take the club into totally different waters, in which we will have to find answers to questions we don't even know yet! New challenges in a new world!! Doesn't that sound a bit more exciting and interesting than another 3 home games against Motherwell?

 

But I have to admit, I can see just about no-one going for this. I only wanted to point out that not everyone was unaware that fan ownership had consequences for the team on the pitch, but that nevertheless it's a vibrant and stimulating alternative to what is becoming, frankly, the League of the Living Dead.

[craig 5,199]

If we could attract 10,000 at �£100 per season and the club could operate within its current limits then the fan contribution would pay off the �£1 million in debt that the club have agreed to pay off each year.

 

That would at least keep the club within its remit/obligation with the bank and would ensure that the club remains in business. The downside is that I can see many fans not wanting to participate in simply paying off debt.

 

However, if sold the right way then paying off the club's debt is as integral to the club's future as buying new players. Reducing the debt by �£1 million each year by fan contributions you are also saving an element of interest - at say 10% interest rate paying off that �£1 million also saves �£100,000 in interest per annum.

 

Ultimately we want to be rid of the bank and that would certainly assist. I don't think that obtaining �£1 million a year extra from the fans would be a huge task to be honest.

 

But the dificulty will be in trying to get over the perception hurdle some will have that all they are doing is paying off the debt that SDM, in his financial mismanagement, heaped upon us.

[maineflyer 0]

What worries me is that almost all of the debate so far has been about corporate and structural issues aimed at returning Rangers to a position of relative financial strength, be it through fan ownership or otherwise. While some form of financial stability must be found, and everyone recognises this, it doesn't necessarily correlate fully with the effective running of a football club.

 

We have more than one fundamental problem to solve at Rangers. They may be related but they are not the same thing. For twenty years we have sat under the Murray template, using money to buy performance, which has led in no small measure to our financial perils. What we have largely ignored are several of what would be considered core functions at better-run clubs - such as youth development, an effective scouting network, coaching that improves skill and tactical awareness rather than simple fitness, progressive management, public relations, care of the supporter through direct engagement and fostering unity between club and support.

 

These are not issues that call for huge funds but they do call for informed and diligent running of the football club. We could start fixing most of these things tomorrow, whoever owns the club, and everyone should be asking why this isn't happening right now. I'd advise we stop fretting about fan ownership and start concentrating on the ability of any form of ownership to deliver a well-run football club.... because we've not seen that at Ibrox for a very long time.

[Union City Blue 0]

If we could attract 10,000 at �£100 per season and the club could operate within its current limits then the fan contribution would pay off the �£1 million in debt that the club have agreed to pay off each year.

 

That would at least keep the club within its remit/obligation with the bank and would ensure that the club remains in business. The downside is that I can see many fans not wanting to participate in simply paying off debt.

 

However, if sold the right way then paying off the club's debt is as integral to the club's future as buying new players. Reducing the debt by �£1 million each year by fan contributions you are also saving an element of interest - at say 10% interest rate paying off that �£1 million also saves �£100,000 in interest per annum.

 

Ultimately we want to be rid of the bank and that would certainly assist. I don't think that obtaining �£1 million a year extra from the fans would be a huge task to be honest.

 

But the dificulty will be in trying to get over the perception hurdle some will have that all they are doing is paying off the debt that SDM, in his financial mismanagement, heaped upon us.

 

Paying off this �£1m pa over 18-19 years is the least of our worries. 10% interest?

[craig 5,199]

Paying off this �£1m pa over 18-19 years is the least of our worries. 10% interest?

 

Was used as an example UCB.