bossy 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Sorry, I'm a late arrival to this thread and haven't read it all but do Celtic need Rangers? They've received all their season ticket money and they're still selling tickets to the general public. All that they're missing out on is merchandise money from the pie stalls. Celtic have a problem in that their season ticket sales are down 23% over a five year period and their average gates down about 19% over the same period. To what extent is this to do with Rangers we don't know. Their 2014 numbers will give us a much better indication of the financial impact of not having Rangers in the same league. Of course, the advantage to Celtic of not having Rangers in the same league is access to the CL and they have clearly made the most of it. But what happens if they fail to qualify next year and their ticket sales are down? Rangers are in somewhat of a different situation. Our gates have held up much better despite being relegated to the lowest division. Our problem is more one of mismanagement than it is structural. On the face of it, Celtic appear to have a structural problem in that 20% of their gates have disappeared despite no real change in their league or European situation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Bluebear, if the club falls into dangerous hands under a fan-ownership model, we will have elected them and we will be able to dispense with them at a following election. Democracy isn't perfect but it's far better than random self-invited ownership. Rab, you are correct. Dave King is not a a supporter of the fan ownership model. If he takes over the club one day, though, I will expect him to approach the fans for extra cash while he retains control. A poster on here is convinced he doesn't want control. Time will tell. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk Hildy - point taken and agreed that democracy isn't perfect I have strong views that democracy has become much less of a perfect beast in recent years. Our Brave New World is altering its implementation in many ways a- and none of them as yet for the benefit of true democracy. Regarding Rangers, one only has to look back at the run up to the AGM to understand how fans and media persevere in attempting to skew the democratic process. Selection of fan representatives in the future would make the last few weeks look like a Teddy Bears' Picnic There are elements of our fan base who are blinkered to their own forums and driven by the agendas of a few. I think its extremely naive to put our trust in "Mother Democracy" making sure that everything will turn out perfect. Some people need to do a lot more research and put their ideas of findings out there for debate. As I said, there are elements of our support who, if they had ultimate control of the Club, would willingly morph it into an identity that I would not wish to be a part of. A hell of a lot can be done in the period between yearly elections. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Bluebear, in a future presidential election at Rangers, every member of the club, and there could be 50,000, 60,000 or 100,000 of them, will have one vote each - no matter how much wealth they have. Fan groups that are fifty or a hundred strong will only have as many votes as they have members of the club. One member - one vote. Imagine what discussions were like in the British government when the idea was first mooted that every man should have a vote in elections. Like you, many would have had serious doubts about proceeding with such an idea, but when we look back we wonder why it took so long for enlightenment to dawn. When we eventually go down this road, we'll wonder why we were so lacking in confidence, so subservient, so trusting to luck that the right leader would always emerge, and so naive in believing that it was an appropriate way to look after our club and deliver it into the future. Rangers is a rotten borough. It's time to make it a fully functioning democratic club fit for the present - and the future. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 And on that note, Hildy, I admire, and will endeavour to foster, your optimistic outlook on the New Year and the future. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Bluebear, in a future presidential election at Rangers, every member of the club, and there could be 50,000, 60,000 or 100,000 of them, will have one vote each - no matter how much wealth they have. Fan groups that are fifty or a hundred strong will only have as many votes as they have members of the club. One member - one vote. Imagine what discussions were like in the British government when the idea was first mooted that every man should have a vote in elections. Like you, many would have had serious doubts about proceeding with such an idea, but when we look back we wonder why it took so long for enlightenment to dawn. When we eventually go down this road, we'll wonder why we were so lacking in confidence, so subservient, so trusting to luck that the right leader would always emerge, and so naive in believing that it was an appropriate way to look after our club and deliver it into the future. Rangers is a rotten borough. It's time to make it a fully functioning democratic club fit for the present - and the future. I repeat my earlier question to you - what do you intend to do with our existing shareholders ? Would you compensate them for the shares they bought last year? How much annual finance will your 'supporter-owned' model generate for the club? How would it generate borrowings as all businesses need to do from time to time? Might sound a great idea in theory but it would be a total disaster in practice in our predicament in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Rab, whether it's Dave King, BuyRangers or you or me that wants a controlling interest in the company, enough shares have to be bought to go over 50%. No-one with shares in the company will lose out unless the company crashes again. When enough shareholders agree on a change of status, the process can begin with the help of professional advice and guidance. When the club is fan-owned, you'll be a member of the club rather than a shareholder in the company, and you'll pay an annual membership fee if you choose to - it's not compulsory. Those who are members will have a vote on who is going to be the club president, and Ibrox, for example, will not be sold without the consent of the membership. I'd be inclined to set the membership fee really low to maximise uptake - £2 a month (£24 a year) - but I believe that different categories of membership should be made available to those who are happy to put more money into the pot - but no matter how much they put in, it must always be one member - one vote when elections come around. All fan-owned models should be looked at before a decision is reached on which one is best for us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Hildy - all the best but I don't think asking people for £2 per month would generate nearly enough finance. This is Glasgow Rangers not Cambuslang Rangers we're talking here 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 (edited) By the away, Rab, we have a predicament just now because rogue ownership visited it upon us - and we let them. It will happen again one day if we don't take steps to prevent it. And that means fan ownership. Edited December 31, 2013 by Hildy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 £2 a month is £2.4m a year on top of season ticket money if we can get 100,000 members - and as we are Glasgow Rangers and not Cambuslang Rangers, this figure is not unrealistic. We'd also have a club that was not a vehicle for profiteering by its uninvited ownership. Money would not be leaking out the club to goodness knows where. Take care, Rab, and have a good one. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 £2 a month is £2.4m a year on top of season ticket money if we can get 100,000 members - and as we are Glasgow Rangers and not Cambuslang Rangers, this figure is not unrealistic. We'd also have a club that was not a vehicle for profiteering by its uninvited ownership. Money would not be leaking out the club to goodness knows where. Take care, Rab, and have a good one. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk You too bud.All the best for 2014 0 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.