BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 If the SFA were to introduce a rule like the 50+1 they have in Germany would make our task a lot easier, and I think it would be welcomed by many clubs. Alternatively something set into the law of the land would help: Much as I hate the word "Green" (when linked with football at least), this proposal would very nearly win my vote! https://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/campaigns/fan-ownership/ This is highly unlikely at best. The SFA can do lots of things but they can't override company law. Most UK clubs are private limited companies, owned by shareholders and operated by a Board of Directors. The shareholders and their directors are not going to give up ownership easily. It's true that German clubs started as fan owned organisations often sports clubs, much the same as in the UK, but German history, politics, and culture has evolved differently to the UK where the political culture especially has been much different. It's true that there are some examples of clubs 51% or more owned by fans but these tend to be the smaller outfits like Stirling Albion, Clyde and East Stirling or essentially new clubs like AFC Wimbledon and Portsmouth (75% owned by the Trust and 25% by high net worth fan-investors) in England where you were starting with a blank sheet of paper. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 You can't be serious. Ashley wants us to be successful in Europe so much that he has allowed a complete novice to be appointed as manager at a time when automatic promotion can still be achieved. None of us would have appointed McDowall to the position because we are desperate for the club to be successful - a lot more than Ashley seems to be. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 (edited) If fan ownership is eventually achieved, I'd like to see Rangers being member-owned - not shareholder-owned. I'd happily allow different tiers of membership, but one member - one vote would be the deal. Millionaires and modest-incomed people would have an equal say at election time. It would be useful if a model was created to demonstrate this. I would like to see the day when Rangers has no shareholders - just members with one vote each. Supporters Direct has all the models you would ever need but the circumstances have to be correct. Currently the only road to ownership is by buying enough shares and I think I have demonstrated that that is a very long way off indeed. Even if fans owned 100% of the shares I doubt that legally they could turn the Club into a members only organisation. I am fairly sure that that would be an entirely new entity but that is a other debate as would be the status of such an entity. A degree of Fan influence might be an achievable objective if a combined 5% could accummulated and perhaps some kind of umbrella fans shareholder group could be formed if the RST & RF can't get their acts together. Edited December 23, 2014 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 (edited) You can't be serious. What other objective would Ashley have in buying shares in Rangers other than to promote SD and how better could he do that than by ensuring that the Club is successful? Edited December 23, 2014 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 Ashley wants us to be successful in Europe so much that he has allowed a complete novice to be appointed as manager at a time when automatic promotion can still be achieved. None of us would have appointed McDowall to the position because we are desperate for the club to be successful - a lot more than Ashley seems to be. Kenny McDowall is a highly experienced coach, much more so than Ally. That said I would accept that the reason for his appointment is more financial than for any other reason but that was forced by Ally who made his own position untenable, so there is no money for another manager on the payroll at this time. I would have had Davies but there is no guarantee that anyone can come in now with the players we have and get promotion automatic or otherwise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 You can't be serious. It has to be a piss-take. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 Kenny McDowall is a highly experienced coach, much more so than Ally. That said I would accept that the reason for his appointment is more financial than for any other reason but that was forced by Ally who made his own position untenable, so there is no money for another manager on the payroll at this time. I would have had Davies but there is no guarantee that anyone can come in now with the players we have and get promotion automatic or otherwise. McDowall: "There's not a whole load I can change because everything Ally was doing was with my backing." Not even one game in, and he comes out with this. How utterly depressing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 The fans had the opportunity to buy the company out of insolvency Boycotting the Club by not attending matches is completely counter productive Ashley is in this to make money for SD but in order to do that he has to make Rangers successful first in Scotland and then at some kind of level in Europe. but I am confident that the time of ludicrous bonuses not based on financial performance is over. utter shit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 utter shit. Care to expand on that? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 Care to expand on that? he doesn't need us to be successful, he just needs us to continue by doing just enough. he's made plenty the last two years without spending a penny towards establishing a decent club or infrastructure. now the shit is hitting the fan he will cut costs to match reduced revenue and do the minimum possible to convince fans he's altruistic. don't confuse that for a need of us being successful . 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.