The Failure of the Fans Groups

[Bluedell 5,346]

The Assembly needs to decide what it is, and what it wants to be.

 

At the moment it is an organisation for supporters clubs and the World Wide Alliance, with some additions (RST, blind, corporate) tacked on for convenience.

 

It does not represent season ticket holders, for example, and has no actual members as far as I can tell. It has organisations affiliated to it who have members but that does not make them members of the Assembly per se.

 

It needs to demonstrate its independence and make it clear who it is trying to represent and become more democratic and accountable.

[Frankie 8,153]

The Assembly needs to decide what it is, and what it wants to be.

 

At the moment it is an organisation for supporters clubs and the World Wide Alliance, with some additions (RST, blind, corporate) tacked on for convenience.

 

It does not represent season ticket holders, for example, and has no actual members as far as I can tell. It has organisations affiliated to it who have members but that does not make them members of the Assembly per se.

 

It needs to demonstrate its independence and make it clear who it is trying to represent and become more democratic and accountable.

 

Yeah agree with that.

 

Despite its 'official' status, the Assembly could be the organisation to unite the supporters and find a true democratic and accountable body. It has good resources, finance and the involvement of most 'formal' organisations. Yet, like its member organisations, seems to lack focus and is too thinly spread to make a real difference.

 

That point has been made to them, and senior members agree, but little has been done to address this failing. I'd like to see them - along with the club's support - open a proper debate into what is expected of such a group whilst seeking advice on how to constitute it properly in order to make every Rangers fan represented and able to contribute.

 

As is the case with the Trust though, that would mean people putting their own involvement/influence at risk so prevarication instead of participation could sum up their recent performance.

[Union City Blue 0]

You don't open a business of this size unless you know you have customers/shareholders committed to its survival/success, you don't spend mega bucks on business plans before you have viable finance on a more than maybe basis.

 

A viable business plan/prospectus would have to be done by professionals, that would cancel out and rightly so ANY Rangers supporters body.

 

It would effectively remove any sembelance of power from said bodies in a fan buyout, that power would lie with the fans/shareholders and rightly so.

 

The proposed buyers the fans should finance everything, through a professional source/legal/accountants, the fans elect a board of say 6, with the professional overseer having a casting vote.

 

It isn't rocket science, but I don't think it will ever happen....to many people want to hold onto their little bit of perceived power.

 

Viable finance is probably upwards of �£45m. Huge money.

 

Nobody will raise that or anything like it without incurring significant costs and (hopefully) producing a viable, sellable business plan.

 

You won't be able to produce a business plan without doing DD (end even then you might not).

 

You won't get to do DD without first having huge money.

 

The entry fee is believed to be �£33m.

 

Suggesting that this is not being done because people are trying to hold onto perceived power (what power btw?) is absolutely staggering.

 

 

We don't believe that it's possible to buy the club, invest and cover potential liabilities purely as a result of grass-roots fund-building, at the moment. As frustrating and inconvenient as that is, that's what we believe. That's why different approaches are favoured i.e. selling the idea that the Rangers support at large will be happy to partner with credible buyers and will put in a lot of money. As soon as they're ready, we're good to go and - to a man - they all know that. The right man with the right plan will enjoy massive support from the RST (whether you believe that matters or not) and hopefully everyone else. Of course, the Trust - being a Trust - will try to advance the case for part-ownership in return for supporter investment, and with it a meaningful way for structures to be put in place whereby people can be openly and democratically elected by all other supporters to serve on the Board of the club.

 

Anybody we've spoken to has an assumption that Rangers fans will can be viewed 'as one' and will pull together if required. This is undoubtedly true if we all like what we hear and no exaggerated talk of divisions amongst the support will get in the way of that. Any positive vision presented by credible people with access to the required money could go right over the heads of any fans groups and directly to the supporters via the mass media - although they will no doubt hope for and appreciate backing; and if we all like it, we'll quickly remember that we're all on the same side.

 

There is an argument that fans should raise money first, but until there is an indication that this is welcome and fits in with something that is achievable and desirable overall, what is the point in fans raising �£10m or whatever when you don't know what you'd do with it? If there's some movement elsewhere, maybe things will happen.

 

Souness, Gough, Numan, McColl, Gordon Smith, Park, King and anyone else you care to mention feel the same way and that's why we don't all have the types of people we need fronting it right now. It all needs to fit together.

 

There are significant systemic and structural problems associated with buying and enabling RFC to thrive and prosper. The HMRC issue is one of them and LBG's insistance that they are settled in full is another.

 

Rocket science, it isn't. But with so many 'players' and complications involved its proved to be more difficult to resolve than anyone has been able to handle so far. That included Lloyds, Johnston, Muir, Murray, Park, King, Ellis and anybody else for that matter.

 

Having said all that, I still believe it'll happen at some point and I'm still hopeful that the Rangers support will be able to become meaningfully involved in the club, to whatever extent it wishes to be. Still working on it.

 

* this particular post doesn't seek to address structural issues within the Rangers support or fans' groups because the particular scenario I'm discussing assumes they will be largely irrelevant.

[Frankie 8,153]

Thanks for that post UCB - it's good to know that our hope that people like yourself were working hard in the background wasn't misplaced...

 

While I'm sceptical that we can achieve ultimate ownership, I do think there is an opportunity to initially raise substantial funds via an open, democratic and accountable membership scheme. Such a scheme has its own pitfalls of course but I feel it is a logical and possible first step to something more exciting in the longer term.

 

Now, as Bluedell and I mentioned earlier, such schemes have been investigated and not far from competition before and I'm hoping your post is an indication that these have been revisited and able to be amended enough to get past the concept stage into something tangible.

 

The names who are interested in backing/taking part in such a scheme are exciting and the type of figureheads required to give immediate credibility to the project. I'm not as confident as you that existing fan organisations (and associated problems) will be irrelevant but, like you, I do hope most fans would be able to see past such stuff in order to take the steps required to have a proper say in the club's future.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Viable finance is probably upwards of �£45m. Huge money.

 

Nobody will raise that or anything like it without incurring significant costs and (hopefully) producing a viable, sellable business plan.

 

You won't be able to produce a business plan without doing DD (end even then you might not).

 

You won't get to do DD without first having huge money.

 

The entry fee is believed to be �£33m.

 

Suggesting that this is not being done because people are trying to hold onto perceived power (what power btw?) is absolutely staggering.

 

 

We don't believe that it's possible to buy the club, invest and cover potential liabilities purely as a result of grass-roots fund-building, at the moment. As frustrating and inconvenient as that is, that's what we believe. That's why different approaches are favoured i.e. selling the idea that the Rangers support at large will be happy to partner with credible buyers and will put in a lot of money. As soon as they're ready, we're good to go and - to a man - they all know that. The right man with the right plan will enjoy massive support from the RST (whether you believe that matters or not) and hopefully everyone else. Of course, the Trust - being a Trust - will try to advance the case for part-ownership in return for supporter investment, and with it a meaningful way for structures to be put in place whereby people can be openly and democratically elected by all other supporters to serve on the Board of the club.

 

Anybody we've spoken to has an assumption that Rangers fans will can be viewed 'as one' and will pull together if required. This is undoubtedly true if we all like what we hear and no exaggerated talk of divisions amongst the support will get in the way of that. Any positive vision presented by credible people with access to the required money could go right over the heads of any fans groups and directly to the supporters via the mass media - although they will no doubt hope for and appreciate backing; and if we all like it, we'll quickly remember that we're all on the same side.

 

There is an argument that fans should raise money first, but until there is an indication that this is welcome and fits in with something that is achievable and desirable overall, what is the point in fans raising �£10m or whatever when you don't know what you'd do with it? If there's some movement elsewhere, maybe things will happen.

 

Souness, Gough, Numan, McColl, Gordon Smith, Park, King and anyone else you care to mention feel the same way and that's why we don't all have the types of people we need fronting it right now. It all needs to fit together.

 

There are significant systemic and structural problems associated with buying and enabling RFC to thrive and prosper. The HMRC issue is one of them and LBG's insistance that they are settled in full is another.

 

Rocket science, it isn't. But with so many 'players' and complications involved its proved to be more difficult to resolve than anyone has been able to handle so far. That included Lloyds, Johnston, Muir, Murray, Park, King, Ellis and anybody else for that matter.

 

Having said all that, I still believe it'll happen at some point and I'm still hopeful that the Rangers support will be able to become meaningfully involved in the club, to whatever extent it wishes to be. Still working on it.

 

* this particular post doesn't seek to address structural issues within the Rangers support or fans' groups because the particular scenario I'm discussing assumes they will be largely irrelevant.

 

This is getting hard work.......perceived is the clue in power, all fans bodies are out of their depth as far as buyout scenarios go, professional financial people would have to be involved, whither you or I think fan buyout is a pipe dream is irrelevant, the wider fan base should be able to have a say on that matter.

 

As it stands there are to many chiefs and not enough indians, it doesn't appear that situation will change anytime soon.

 

ETA. why do people keep repeating the nonsense that the bank " LBG's insistance that they are settled in full" ?

Edited June 23, 2010 by wabashcannonball

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I am Really enjoying the debate about the lack of leadership and direction from our various supporters groups.

 

Going round the various forum as I do, I believe the rank and file Bears feel their voice and aspirations are not being heard at any level. Whether this be in the corridors and offices of power at Ibrox, or at committee level of our supporters groups.

 

Debates like this one are few and far between, Someone must get our voice and ideas heard to the powers that be and to the movers and shakers like your good selves. If someone or some group could get their ideas for fan representation into some form of draft document. Then get this document out to all Rangers forums as an sounding board to the general support.

 

I feel this document would be well received from our supporters and some good ideas could then be discussed and thought out, then added to the document for return to it�s originators for further update. This would have the triple effect of letting the rank and file Bear feel they have had some involvement in any initiative, also that there is someone working on their behalf.

 

Plus it would give us some hope for the future, that Hopefully one day we may get genuine participation in the future running of our beloved club.

[chilledbear 16]

''Debates like this one are few and far between, Someone must get our voice and ideas heard to the powers that be and to the movers and shakers like your good selves. If someone or some group could get their ideas for fan representation into some form of draft document. Then get this document out to all Rangers forums as an sounding board to the general support''.

 

 

If A said yes, B would say no. It needs someone to cut out the deadwood and bruise a few egos, before anything can be done.

[Union City Blue 0]

 

ETA. why do people keep repeating the nonsense that the bank " LBG's insistance that they are settled in full" ?

 

It isn't nonsense - at least not as far as the Ellis deal was concerned. They wanted to be taken out completely.

 

It's hardly surprising - it's a variation of what they did with the �£150m debt for equity swap in MIH, the only difference being that they would then sell Rangers to Ellis, because they don't want to own a football club.

 

Before you start pasting in stock market text, I'm not saying LBG currently "owns" Rangers' equity.

 

Anyway, it's all water under the bridge now so it doesn't really matter. Whether or not LBG's 'call' on Rangers has changed, and to what extent, I honestly don't know.

[Frankie 8,153]

With Murray Estates going on about �£1billion developments at Ratho again yesterday, I'm sure LBG will be sweating over a different moonbeam at the moment...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10397389.stm

[Zappa 0]

With Murray Estates going on about �£1billion developments at Ratho again yesterday, I'm sure LBG will be sweating over a different moonbeam at the moment...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10397389.stm

.

Interesting stuff!! I love the green housing development idea and solar power in particular is the way forward, so the housing plans sound commendable in that regard. Something tells me that SDM is underestimating the "power" of Scotlands energy suppliers though, because none of the energy suppliers are interested in providing us with the necessities for gathering our own free energy. The energy Co's are certain to do anything and everything in their power to block any kind of catalyst to wide-spread adoption of free energy systems such as solar and planning the development of thousands of solar houses is definitely in the catalyst category.