Fan ownership of Rangers

[Super Cooper 0]

Hi guys, this thread has come about from a discussion on another thread and brings up a decent talking point i think. It is about fan ownership and whether you support it or not and whether you think it would work at Rangers.

 

Personally i am against it completely but it is clear some people think it would be a good idea, i am interested to hear their opinions on why they think that, who knows, maybe i can be swayed.

 

The reason i am against it is because i believe our fans are too fractured, i believe we have far too many fan groups and i believe we have too many people speaking on behalf of the fans who have no idea how the average fan on the street is thinking. I don't believe our fans as a whole could agree on so many important things which the club rely on. We have seen for the last few years how split our fans can be with their opinions on everything from Paul Le Guen and Eck to Walter Smith and Ally McCoist. We have seen it on trivial things like our song sheet and who should make our next kit or do the catering at Ibrox, the renaming of our training ground or even the stadium. There never seems to be any agreement on anything. I believe there are too many different opinions and not enough of a majority vote who please the support as a whole. I believe because of the infighting, disagreements and fractious nature of our support any fan ownership model would well and truly be the end of Rangers. I believe it is that serious.

 

I am a fan of the one man band, i am a fan of the David Murray style ownership, although not that man himself. I want a powerful man in charge. A man with Rangers at heart but with drive, desire, ambition and a knowledge of football.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Super Cooper

[j1mgg 0]

One of the main problems I see is that we have these fan groups/people that get on tv and it is portrayed they speak for all of us, when the different groups all together are lucky if the have 10000 members, and a large bulk of that is because you automatically become a member by being part of a RSC.

 

I just want the team to be ran more like a business so that we don't have to ever get back to the stage of relying on a run in Europe or stuff like that.

[plgsarmy 111]

I obviously disagree. The fans have put more money into the Club than anyone else and we are still on the outside looking in, without any say whatsoever in the way the club is run. I believe that the club showed be owned by the people who love it most and that's us. Don't confuse fan ownership with fans running the club. You employ the best people to do that, people with a proven track record. Fans would be elected to the Board based on what they have to offer. They could put themselves up for election and make a case for why they would be the best person. The fans would then vote for them, or not as the case may be. That's how a democracy works. wouldn't be voting for whether or not to sack the manager and things like that but the people representing us would know that if they weren't doing their jobs properly then they would be voted out.

 

There will always be fans disagreeing and I think the fans who are speaking out are just ordinary fans. The one owner model may be successful in some ways but what happens if that persons circumstances change as he needs money, what happens when they die and their heirs have no interest in the Club. We are left vulnerable and open to being bought by charlatans and shysters and then we are back to square one. The only way to ensure the future of the club is for thefans to own it. All my opinion of course.

[der Berliner 3,282]

Yes, if it is done in the correct way from top to bottom. The sad thing is, that the latter rarely is the case, no matter where you look.

 

Ideally, I'd like to see a figure like King or McColl pulling the major strings, yet working in accordance with a board of fan representatives, financial, and club people.

[Guest govansw1]

I obviously disagree. The fans have put more money into the Club than anyone else and we are still on the outside looking in, without any say whatsoever in the way the club is run. I believe that the club showed be owned by the people who love it most and that's us. Don't confuse fan ownership with fans running the club. You employ the best people to do that, people with a proven track record. Fans would be elected to the Board based on what they have to offer. They could put themselves up for election and make a case for why they would be the best person. The fans would then vote for them, or not as the case may be. That's how a democracy works. wouldn't be voting for whether or not to sack the manager and things like that but the people representing us would know that if they weren't doing their jobs properly then they would be voted out.

 

Agree with all you say except Fan representation on the board.

 

There will always be fans disagreeing and I think the fans who are speaking out are just ordinary fans. The one owner model may be successful in some ways but what happens if that persons circumstances change as he needs money, what happens when they die and their heirs have no interest in the Club. We are left vulnerable and open to being bought by charlatans and shysters and then we are back to square one. The only way to ensure the future of the club is for thefans to own it. All my opinion of course.

 

Agree with you except fan representation on the board.

[plgsarmy 111]

Agree with you except fan representation on the board.

 

Can I ask why?

[Darthter 542]

As the OP has stated, I think that the fan base is far too fractured for this to be successful.

 

A couple of years ago, everyone was calling for an end to a single owner of the club - they didn't want a "dictatorship". Everyone wanted the shares split across multiple parties. Now that we have that scenario, a lot of fans don't want it - the common question being "who owns us?". Folk are wanting a wealthy benefactor to come in & plough £m's into the club with nothing in return.

 

If fan ownership was brought in, I can see folk complaining about which fans group (possibly) is the main driving force etc. This has already been shown with the RST - not a popular group among some fans.

 

Middle ground is the only way forward. Ownership split between multiple, wealthy Rangers people in the most part, with the odd neutral body in there for some balance. A clear line of communication with the fans is also a must - possibly with representation on the board at some level.

 

Also, one clear body/banner for the fans to get behind. A body that is well run & organised that all fans can be proud of and eager to join.

[Guest govansw1]

Can I ask why?

 

If the Board do their job properly and to fan satisfaction then they get to carry on with the good work. No need for a Fan rep.

Of course going into the detail of Fan Ownership will be considerable. ie do the Directors have a time limit on the Board.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

look at dortmund.

 

given the crap we have had as owners of late its a must.

[Guest alfiebass]

I don't believe that fan ownership would work for a club of our size. How could the fan base generate enough capital year after year? Don't forget a club like Swansea will get more in TV revenue in one year the we probably get in five or six, unless that is you would be happy with Rangers being a typical Scottish win a trophy every ten to twenty years club then fan ownership is a non-starter. To compete we need serious financial muscle behind the club.