RST involved in new takeover bid?

[wabashcannonball 0]

Ewan is stirrin it big time, says the trust is raging six months of secret negotiations up the swanee, because of a leak, how did they no get a better plumber, at least we know it wasn't the Masons they were dealing with, cos we don't leak, yer Grannies secrets are safe with us. :spl:

[maineflyer 0]

Ewan is stirrin it big time, says the trust is raging six months of secret negotiations up the swanee, because of a leak, how did they no get a better plumber, at least we know it wasn't the Masons they were dealing with, cos we don't leak, yer Grannies secrets are safe with us. :spl:

 

Six months? Maybe six days.

 

Six months ago the RST was talking to an entirely different Only Show In Town..... not that he turned out to more than a mirage either.

[maineflyer 0]

Is it just me or does this read like the people who wrote it actually believe they represent a significant number of Rangers supporters. As for "consult and involve" ...... well you know what I mean, it's like a visit to Make-Believe Island.

 

Statement issued by the RST

Tuesday, 30 March 2010

 

Rangers fans are by far the biggest financial investors in the club and the Trust has always believed that wider fan ownership and involvement are essential components in delivering a stable, secure future for Rangers.

 

In recent months we have been involved in discussions with a number of parties to that end, but for legal reasons we are unable to comment on the detail of these discussions. The discussions and the parties with whom they have been held necessarily must remain confidential until it is appropriate to put this information in the public domain. However, we are absolutely committed to securing the best possible future for the club and the support. For the avoidance of doubt the Trust has not sought advice from any potential backer nor have we employed the services of any professional adviser.

 

We will continue to pursue these initiatives and seek to consult and involve Trust members and the wider Rangers family at the appropriate time. In the meantime, we ask for fans' continued patience as we seek the most positive outcome.

[pete 2,499]

To be honest i think we possibly could get a lot of people willing to pay 15 pound a month membership but to get that many to put 600 pound up front is a different kettle of fish.

[Frankie 8,674]

 

Statement issued by the RST

Tuesday, 30 March 2010

 

Rangers fans are by far the biggest financial investors in the club and the Trust has always believed that wider fan ownership and involvement are essential components in delivering a stable, secure future for Rangers.

 

In recent months we have been involved in discussions with a number of parties to that end, but for legal reasons we are unable to comment on the detail of these discussions. The discussions and the parties with whom they have been held necessarily must remain confidential until it is appropriate to put this information in the public domain. However, we are absolutely committed to securing the best possible future for the club and the support. For the avoidance of doubt the Trust has not sought advice from any potential backer nor have we employed the services of any professional adviser.

 

We will continue to pursue these initiatives and seek to consult and involve Trust members and the wider Rangers family at the appropriate time. In the meantime, we ask for fans' continued patience as we seek the most positive outcome.

 

Appreciate it isn't easy to say too much but that was hardly worth waiting for.

 

As has been asked several times recently, how do you plan to consult and involve the wider Rangers family?

[wabashcannonball 0]

Appreciate it isn't easy to say too much but that was hardly worth waiting for.

 

As has been asked several times recently, how do you plan to consult and involve the wider Rangers family?

 

 

The very nice young chap at the SE as of 8.55 am this morning has nothing flagged up for any announcements with regard to Rangers bid ( announcement according to some faces before midday today), seems like periods of excusitivity etc are anything but. What a pantomime throughout.

[maineflyer 0]

You have to admire spirit but fans' vision isn't going to work

 

Published Date: 31 March 2010

By Tom English

IF YOU'RE a humble fan, it's easy to understand what might appeal about owning a stake in your football club, especially nowadays when you see what is going on at great institutions like Manchester United and Liverpool.

 

The financial woe that lies ahead of both of these terrific clubs is hard to quantify, but the suspicion is that there's a major financial explosion coming down the track for the pair of them. You don't need to be the economic brain of Britain to understand and be shocked at the level of debt they are both operating under. The pair are being run by non-football people and they have become fiscal basket cases.

 

At Rangers, they've been through the wringer on the finance front. Their supporters have lived something of a double life this past year, worrying about the restrictions on the budget that continues to threaten an exodus of their best players, and also their manager, while at the same time rejoicing heartily at their new-found dominance in the domestic league after three seasons under the thumb of their now beleaguered rivals across the city.

 

Since the club is for sale, it is no wonder that some in the grassroots are trying to put together a deal that delivers it from the possible grip of an unknown quantity. The Rangers Supporters Trust has taken it upon itself to forge a plan. A fans buyout is the nirvana they're chasing with all the hope, and frankly, the futility of someone tracking the end of a rainbow in the anticipation of finding a crock of gold. You have to admire their spirit, but this vision of theirs just isn't going to work.

 

People at Ibrox are paying lip service to it, but privately they don't see anything like this happening, not because they don't want it, but because it just doesn't add up. It only makes sense in the hearts and minds of fans who are concerned about the way their club is going. But in the cold analysis, nobody who matters at Rangers really and truly believes there is a future in this.

 

When Jim McColl, the chairman of Clyde Blowers and supposedly Scotland's richest man, dynamited the RST's dream of him leading them into a bright new dawn, David Edgar, the Trust's chairman, responded by saying that the plan was "not predicated on the involvement of any one individual."

 

We should look at the numbers here. The RST seems to be suggesting that it can raise �£30million to clear the Rangers debt. This would be made up of, say, 20,000 fans forking out a �£600 lump sum while committing themselves to �£15 every month for five years. Their season ticket is on top of that again. In theory, that gets Sir David Murray out the door and the club into fans' ownership. Then what?

 

According to their exploratory document ââ?¬â?? the bullet-pointed version of it that appeared in print at any rate ââ?¬â?? it seems that RST has allowed for a one-off payment of Ã?£10m-Ã?£12m to secure player contracts and then Ã?£8m-Ã?£10m a year for operating costs. So that's about Ã?£52m they need in the first year of ownership. Without a McColl or a Dave King or a Graham Duffy ââ?¬â?? remember him? ââ?¬â?? to stump up some significant coin, the burden that will fall on fans is potentially savage. Divided between 20,000 members, it comes to Ã?£2,600 per head. Say they get 40,000 supporters to commit, it's still Ã?£1,300 plus your season ticket in that first year.

 

If there was an investor in the pipeline, at a huge stretch you might see how this might be do-able. If there was somebody willing to take over 49 per cent of the club, leaving the fans with 51 per cent of the control (and the cost) then the numbers wouldn't be so horrific. But there isn't anybody. Duffy didn't want to inject significant money into the club. McColl doesn't want to invest anything bar his expertise, which is vast, but which won't pay the bills. King is mired in the complexities of a legal wrangle with the South African revenue authorities and is in no position at the moment to throw money at his beloved club.

 

The last time Rangers went to their fans looking for money, in a shares issue, it was a dismal flop. The fans rationalised it by saying that the reason they didn't respond in bigger numbers was because of Murray's presence at the head of the club, but that's an iffy argument. Maybe there's an element of truth in it. And maybe there's truth, too, in the theory that enough of them didn't invest simply because they just didn't fancy parting with their hard-earned cash.

 

When we hear about fans buyouts we tend to gravitate towards three examples; Barcelona, Hamburg and Espanyol, the latter pair being the ones that the RST saw fit to examine closely in a public meeting earlier in the season. It invited representatives from both clubs to address a group of Rangers fans.

 

Barca have managed supporter ownership really well, not all that hard given their extraordinary revenue streams they have at their disposal and the fact that they have nearly 180,000 members chipping in annual subscriptions. Even still, they amassed huge debt. Only yesterday did they settle a tax bill of 60m, a figure they say will put a major dent in their spending in coming seasons.

 

Hamburg and Espanyol are better examples for Rangers. They're ticking along fine in Germany and Spain, but the financial burden on the supporters of both of these clubs per season is less than half of what it might be on the average Rangers fan.

 

And there is another difference. Hamburg and Espanyol are unlike Rangers in one key sense. They don't come from a culture where winning is everything, their supporters do not demand trophies. They are content to compete, to hang about on the periphery of the big boys. Hamburg manage it effectively enough. Espanyol find it a struggle these days. They're sitting 14th out of 20 in La Liga. They're well run and their fans are happy that the club is in safe hands, but would Rangers people be sated in the same way?

 

Buying the club will require an eye-watering amount of money, with or without a sugar daddy. Running the club and making it successful on the pitch will require more again. Wanting to control the club you love is an understandable desire, but the finances just don't stack up. They never will. For now, there is but one player in this saga and it is Andrew Ellis. He hasn't gone away. Not yet. Soon we will know if he wishes to take it further. He's got a week to make a bid. Ellis remains the only show in town.

[plgsarmy 111]

You have to admire spirit but fans' vision isn't going to work

 

Published Date: 31 March 2010

By Tom English

IF YOU'RE a humble fan, it's easy to understand what might appeal about owning a stake in your football club, especially nowadays when you see what is going on at great institutions like Manchester United and Liverpool.

 

The financial woe that lies ahead of both of these terrific clubs is hard to quantify, but the suspicion is that there's a major financial explosion coming down the track for the pair of them. You don't need to be the economic brain of Britain to understand and be shocked at the level of debt they are both operating under. The pair are being run by non-football people and they have become fiscal basket cases.

 

At Rangers, they've been through the wringer on the finance front. Their supporters have lived something of a double life this past year, worrying about the restrictions on the budget that continues to threaten an exodus of their best players, and also their manager, while at the same time rejoicing heartily at their new-found dominance in the domestic league after three seasons under the thumb of their now beleaguered rivals across the city.

 

Since the club is for sale, it is no wonder that some in the grassroots are trying to put together a deal that delivers it from the possible grip of an unknown quantity. The Rangers Supporters Trust has taken it upon itself to forge a plan. A fans buyout is the nirvana they're chasing with all the hope, and frankly, the futility of someone tracking the end of a rainbow in the anticipation of finding a crock of gold. You have to admire their spirit, but this vision of theirs just isn't going to work.

 

People at Ibrox are paying lip service to it, but privately they don't see anything like this happening, not because they don't want it, but because it just doesn't add up. It only makes sense in the hearts and minds of fans who are concerned about the way their club is going. But in the cold analysis, nobody who matters at Rangers really and truly believes there is a future in this.

 

When Jim McColl, the chairman of Clyde Blowers and supposedly Scotland's richest man, dynamited the RST's dream of him leading them into a bright new dawn, David Edgar, the Trust's chairman, responded by saying that the plan was "not predicated on the involvement of any one individual."

 

We should look at the numbers here. The RST seems to be suggesting that it can raise �£30million to clear the Rangers debt. This would be made up of, say, 20,000 fans forking out a �£600 lump sum while committing themselves to �£15 every month for five years. Their season ticket is on top of that again. In theory, that gets Sir David Murray out the door and the club into fans' ownership. Then what?

 

According to their exploratory document ââ?¬â?? the bullet-pointed version of it that appeared in print at any rate ââ?¬â?? it seems that RST has allowed for a one-off payment of Ã?£10m-Ã?£12m to secure player contracts and then Ã?£8m-Ã?£10m a year for operating costs. So that's about Ã?£52m they need in the first year of ownership. Without a McColl or a Dave King or a Graham Duffy ââ?¬â?? remember him? ââ?¬â?? to stump up some significant coin, the burden that will fall on fans is potentially savage. Divided between 20,000 members, it comes to Ã?£2,600 per head. Say they get 40,000 supporters to commit, it's still Ã?£1,300 plus your season ticket in that first year.

 

If there was an investor in the pipeline, at a huge stretch you might see how this might be do-able. If there was somebody willing to take over 49 per cent of the club, leaving the fans with 51 per cent of the control (and the cost) then the numbers wouldn't be so horrific. But there isn't anybody. Duffy didn't want to inject significant money into the club. McColl doesn't want to invest anything bar his expertise, which is vast, but which won't pay the bills. King is mired in the complexities of a legal wrangle with the South African revenue authorities and is in no position at the moment to throw money at his beloved club.

 

The last time Rangers went to their fans looking for money, in a shares issue, it was a dismal flop. The fans rationalised it by saying that the reason they didn't respond in bigger numbers was because of Murray's presence at the head of the club, but that's an iffy argument. Maybe there's an element of truth in it. And maybe there's truth, too, in the theory that enough of them didn't invest simply because they just didn't fancy parting with their hard-earned cash.

 

When we hear about fans buyouts we tend to gravitate towards three examples; Barcelona, Hamburg and Espanyol, the latter pair being the ones that the RST saw fit to examine closely in a public meeting earlier in the season. It invited representatives from both clubs to address a group of Rangers fans.

 

Barca have managed supporter ownership really well, not all that hard given their extraordinary revenue streams they have at their disposal and the fact that they have nearly 180,000 members chipping in annual subscriptions. Even still, they amassed huge debt. Only yesterday did they settle a tax bill of 60m, a figure they say will put a major dent in their spending in coming seasons.

 

Hamburg and Espanyol are better examples for Rangers. They're ticking along fine in Germany and Spain, but the financial burden on the supporters of both of these clubs per season is less than half of what it might be on the average Rangers fan.

 

And there is another difference. Hamburg and Espanyol are unlike Rangers in one key sense. They don't come from a culture where winning is everything, their supporters do not demand trophies. They are content to compete, to hang about on the periphery of the big boys. Hamburg manage it effectively enough. Espanyol find it a struggle these days. They're sitting 14th out of 20 in La Liga. They're well run and their fans are happy that the club is in safe hands, but would Rangers people be sated in the same way?

 

Buying the club will require an eye-watering amount of money, with or without a sugar daddy. Running the club and making it successful on the pitch will require more again. Wanting to control the club you love is an understandable desire, but the finances just don't stack up. They never will. For now, there is but one player in this saga and it is Andrew Ellis. He hasn't gone away. Not yet. Soon we will know if he wishes to take it further. He's got a week to make a bid. Ellis remains the only show in town.

 

Mmm. Quoting Spiers one day and Tom English the next. Now what do they have in common?

[maineflyer 0]

Mmm. Quoting Spiers one day and Tom English the next. Now what do they have in common?

And you're inference is what exactly?

 

Seriously, instead of silly offloads in my direction, why don't you talk to the articles themselves - or answer Frankie's questions in the earlier posts? Assuming, that is, you have any more idea than Spiers or English what's actually going on.

[Frankie 8,674]

Mmm. Quoting Spiers one day and Tom English the next. Now what do they have in common?

 

Expected negative media coverage from the usual suspects aside, why not counter their efforts by answering the more constructive concerns of those genuinely interested in what you have to offer with this plan?

 

As has been asked several times recently, how do you plan to consult and involve the wider Rangers family to maximise the chances of success for fan ownership schemes?

 

People like Spiers and English are easily swatted aside by showing them the proof of the pudding. By only moaning about their coverage it actually lends credence to their claims.