Union City Blue

oh....never mind

OK, I'll try again ^^^^^ Please could you answer my questions too?

There are 3 main supporters bodies and they are united on this issue. As fan-ownership is, by definition, the 'territory' of a Supporters Trust it is only natural that the existing mechanisms to raise cash to buy shares sit 'on that side of the fence', if you will. Let me re-phrase it - the Trust will shortly be in a position to provide the actual financial vehicle, as well as playing an important part in the publicity and promotion of it.

Shroomz OK, I understand your questions but I would ask you to quantify them in some way please. Are you saying that even if the people in the RST with colleagues in the Assembly and Association come up with an investment vehicle that is legally and financially watertight, that is backed and managed by associates with impeccible personal & professional credibility, that is designed to filter large amounts of supporters cash into the future of Rangers FC and free it from the threatening clutches of the bank .... you predict epic fail simply because the RST is involved? If so, how can you quantify your "most people" statement?

(Some) interesting contributions on this thread. The RST has indeed "cleared its minds", if that's the right expression. What it is doing right now is asking everyone else to clear their's too because we are all going to be fully tested over the next few weeks and months. At the end of the day, the game has changed and its time for everybody in the Rangers Family to get together. Petty squabbles (and that's what they are) will simply create hot air, slow us all down and get us absolutely nowhere. There are plenty of people - members and non-members of the Trust - who feel the same way. The Trust is simply the vehicle for change, and everybody is, and will be, invited to play their part.

Market research is one thing - money on the table is another. As the former is short (and there is plenty of the latter being committed on a credible level), all things suggest that now is the time. 150 people or so (to my eyes) made the effort today to attend a very positive meeting, to hear about & discuss various models of fan-ownership. Those who were there understand the motivation and the energy we have here so I'm not sure whay you are asking about how proportionate that is to Manchester? (unless it's genuinely related to the market research question which I have tried to answer above ).

I note your other post, so I'll revert to this one. The Trust will alter Gersave and the cost will not be a problem. This is active WIP. I don't know what you mean about the Dave King comment, sorry. I'm not 100% sure where you are going with your unity question tbh. The fans' groups are obviously - and very clearly - united. I obviously can't speak for Mark or his website, so I don't know if he plans to arrange a website owners meeting. On your related point, people should attend if they are interested in getting fan ownership moving. It's not about Mark Dingwall and whether he backed someone else's idea in the past vs. whether you should back an idea he's involved with now. Surely?

It's the $64,000 question. How many will put money in, and how much? HSV's members pay 48 Euros annually, so going from zero to 52,000 in one go seems rather fanciful to say the least. Either way this gets you a couple of million quid every year, which will not do the job. What Rangers needs money-wise is; a one-off cash injection to rid the club of its debt, or restructure it over a long period. PLUS capital investment to improve the infrastructure and the team. PLUS (an unknown amount) to secure ownership of the shares from MIH. It's a big task and a big ask - and it may be that the fans can only contribute a portion of it in the first instance. But as nobody else is buying at the moment, it falls to us to do whatever we can. All of us.

I think the message today from abroad was that there are lots of different ways to set up your structures, and Rangers needs to find the best one for Rangers. HSV's seems like a fantastically well-organised structure (stereotypical jokes are allowed, I believe ). If we were to go down that route it would take a lot of time and voluntary work to put it into place. Everybody's very conscious that we need the right investment vehicle and the right people, aims, model and message; and that the initiative has credibility. I can't say who will be involved right now but I can say that when we go to the supporters we want it to be right. By that I mean right for the concept to get off the ground, fly and succeed. I do appreciate I'm being very general here, but the whole thing involves legal and accountancy advisors, the FSA and so on (each of whom are involved at the moment) and it is taking time to put the detailed plans together. And that's outside of considering the club, the bank, investors, the media and most importantly - the supporters. But we are making good progress on all fronts, so that's good news.

Don't think so mate, but I saw a podcast interview being recorded with the HSV guy Jens, so when that becomes available it should be worth a listen.

Family first mate, but I think you would have been intrigued by what the HSV guy had to say. It's a long story in reality, so I can probably only summarise. HSV have a Supervisory Board of 12 - 8 of whom are elected by the 52,000 members at their AGM, so the Members have the biggest and most important say about who's who. The Supervisory Board appoints a Board of Directors to actually run the club on a day-to-day basis. In my opinion, the barriers as far as Rangers are concerned are mainly cultural and philisophical. In Germany, the culture is very much 'club-oriented'; clubs exists to serve their interested communities and the communities ae culturally attuned to owning and running their clubs. Quite different to here, but a perfect fit for the ideaology of supporters Trusts. Having said that, there's no time like the present and hearing first-hand accounts of what can be achieved was fascinating. As someone said today, if the WHOLE COUNTRY can be run on a democratic basis (even with its imperfections), then its not beyond the imagination that a football club like Rangers could be too. I honestly believe that if we get sufficient momentum and a significant catalyst that this can definitely happen.

Not sure if many Gersnet people managed along to Ibrox today, although I did see TannochsideBear so no doubt he'll independently update everyone as usual. I have to say it was an excellent few hours and time well spent. Jens from the HSV Supporting Members provided a great insight into the structures in Germany and Hamburg in particular - "we make money to play football, we don't play football to make money". He also asked if we'd seen their last display which the Supporting Members paid for and of course got a huge round of applause! David from the Catalan Socialist party gave an inspiring account of Espanyol's journey from extreme adversity, highlighting "the power of the sentiment". James from Supporters Direct also presented and gave useful encouragement to Rangers fans in our search for ultimate supporter-ownership. Brian Donohoe MP chaired the meeting and Ian Davidson MP also attended. I believe the Herald, the Times, the Record, the Express and others were there, as was the BBC. The enthusiasm in the room was palpable and I know for a fact that a lot of people left more confident than ever that we can do this. Well done and thanks to everyone who came along and contributed. I'm hopeful and confident things will start to move in the next few weeks once things start to become clearer and the options get narrowed down.

"not desirable and not viable"...... DOOR CLOSED.

Yep, it's all about moving forward mate.

One thing I want to add is regarding supporters' groups 'infighting'. In the on-line environment, this is grossly over-exaggerated IMHO and in the real world this is hardly a topic of discussion for your average Rangers fan - and not at all inside the groups themselves as far as I'm aware. Aside from a relative handful of people having pops at each other on various websites, there is in fact, no 'infighting'. Things have moved on and we are living in different times now - this can be seen from the recent shows of unity in public statements between the Assembly, Trust and Association. Whilst structures and priorities means each organisation has specific aims and purposes, there is no 'infighting' and I think we'd all like it if it stayed that way. I don't see this as an issue going forward either regardless of how things pan out. IMHO there will always be fans' groups - although in what shape & in what role is obviously up for debate in certain circumstances. Even 1,000 (never mind 10,000) individuals emailing queries or ideas to a handful of people on the board of a fan-owned Rangers would be impractical although I guess that'd be one of the things up for discussion in the brave new world if we manage to get there. The exact model all have at the other end depends on an awful lot of variables and compromises will most likely have to be made at all levels to achieve the dream. It'll be interesting to hear more about that on Saturday actually. The priority is to aim high and seriously advance fan-ownership; pure and simple.

Some excellent discussion this thread, nice one gersnet! When you think this through, it is indeed complicated to work out but the great thing is the amount of ideas coming from us, the grass-roots of the support. It is full of dilemmas like OMOV vs some peoples' expectations that in return for, say, �£100k they get more of a say. We've already had people say they would invest such sums but would like proportionate voting rights. Should Rangers turn down this kond of money on the basis of OMOV or should Rangers find a way to accomodate all principals? Difficult one I think. Personally, I prefer OMOV if a way could be found. There are so many variables though - so now's the time to keep, listening, thinking and talking. Saturday is a perfect opportunity to do all three and more IMHO. Ok so here's a special offer I will buy and donate 2 tickets to gersnet posters for Saturday. Only condition is that you don't normally come along to supporters things i. e. RST, Assembly things etc. I say his because I know for a fact that the COLLECTIVE talent on-line is far greater than the sum of all those good people in various groups who currently volunteer to do whatever it is they do. The Rangers support, collectively, contains everything we could ever need. Either way - with talent or simply interest - anybody who's thought about, but never gotten round to, joining in 'for real' would be especially welcome. If you are lucky I will also buy you a coffee or a beer, but not both ;D Just shout! WATP

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5y2-U6Ll1Q]YouTube- JSC Sports 5[/ame] Here's what happened to it mate

The app seems quite good to me. Seems to move fast and it's definately user-friendly if you just have a few mins on the go or whatever. Good move!

I thought we were garbage. Pride was the last thing that sprung to mind.

Cheers Frankie, excellent! Will give it a try! iPhone Loyal

Big Eck seems to be linked with about half the Rangers team at any one time!

I think 1-1 but i'll go for; Jings (1) vs (4) Kings

Fair enough mate. David Edgar can take stick perfectly well btw - he gets it non-stop from the dark side for sticking up for Rangers. I suppose getting the piss take out of you and being called a thick c*nt & a liar toughens you up a bit. As I keep saying, if people Rangers fans want to spend time having a pop at David Edgar that's up to them. I just happen to think the enemy is somewhere else..... Can't say much more than that and probably won't now.

Fair enough mate. As I say, people are free to think whatever they will and if they don't like the Trust, they don't like the Trust. That's understood. The RST believes it is helping the club at this point in time by adding weight and publicity to the Lloyds situation.

Ok mate. I would guess that Lloyds might have hoped they would kill things off by 'clarifying', but it had to be shown that this was not the case.