forlanssister 3,097 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I wasn't referring to you at all FS, seen you post plenty about the team, manager and other things i.e. the disabled facilities. I didn't take it as a dig at me rather I took it as a general observation, the reply should be viewed in the same manner. I'm referring to posters who have signed up recently and literally only ever talk about Charles Green, seen it on RM a few times as well. Maybe it's an old fashioned view that you sign up to a football forum to discuss football and issues surrounding it (of which financial matters are one) but that's why I just find it odd. Although in the end it's none of my business what people choose to talk about, I suppose I rather naively hoped we could move further on after surviving the summer. I honestly look forward to that day too, but alas there is still a fair amount of travelling to do before we reach the end of that particular road whether we like it or not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I honestly look forward to that day too, but alas there is still a fair amount of travelling to do before we reach the end of that particular road whether we like it or not. My worry is that the travelling will never end though. Green and co will leave at some point I know but if the next owners aren't The Blue Knights, Dave King, 100% trustworthy Rangers men etc with zero interest in profit then does the cycle just start all over again? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 My worry is that the travelling will never end though. Green and co will leave at some point I know but if the next owners aren't The Blue Knights, Dave King, 100% trustworthy Rangers men etc with zero interest in profit then does the cycle just start all over again? it will always be better to have owners who aren't taking money out. better still if they are putting it in. thats been the case for 140 years and will be for ever more. have you read the story of the guy who put in 200 quid or so in the 1920's to stop us disappearing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 it will always be better to have owners who aren't taking money out. better still if they are putting it in. thats been the case for 140 years and will be for ever more. have you read the story of the guy who put in 200 quid or so in the 1920's to stop us disappearing. The current ownership put money in for the purchase and to keep us running until season ticket sales could start, unless cash came out of thin air. We've already spent more on the playing squad than we really need to for this level so I think some may be pleasantly surprised at our transfer activity in the future, but it has to be sensible also. Haven't heard that story, but like I said the people now did also stop us from disappearing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 http://blog.thegallantpioneers.co.uk/wp/?p=226 here it is. its just a daft example but it shows that ideally we have rangers men of substance who can put in cash when needed. if green isnt taking a dividend and is only making cash on share uplift and runs us prudently theirs nothing wrong with that either. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 it will always be better to have owners who aren't taking money out. better still if they are putting it in. thats been the case for 140 years and will be for ever more. have you read the story of the guy who put in 200 quid or so in the 1920's to stop us disappearing. I disagree with this. This is an incredibly simplistic approach to take. So... you would prefer we had someone owning and running the club and putting money into it.... than someone taking money out of it ? Am I right so far ? So, hypothetically...... What if there was some footballing and/or business visionary out there who just KNEW how to make us a self-sustaining club via merchandising, branding, globalisation etc etc..... but he would only do it if he was given a shareholding and a dividend ? Whilst the person who owns us and is putting money into us has absolutely NO IDEA how to move the club forward as a club OR as a business. So in the former instance you have someone who is taking money out of the club but who could very plausibly have the club making more money that it EVER has. In the latter you have a club floundering from a business perspective and relying on a sugar daddy to keep pumping money into the club (sound familiar....) just for the club to remain afloat ? You can pick the sugar daddy all you want.... I will go with the person who is looking to progress us as a club such that we are actually self-sustaining, rather than having to rely on the sugar daddy model. Taking money out of the club does NOT have to mean that the club is not benefitting. It can be a WIN-WIN even if somebody is taking money out of the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 it will always be better if the owner is not taking money out. the quality of the owner is a separate issue and the better the are the better for us. you will never be able to tell if one owner could do better so keep it simple no dividend 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 it will always be better if the owner is not taking money out. the quality of the owner is a separate issue and the better the are the better for us. you will never be able to tell if one owner could do better so keep it simple no dividend It wont though. By having only an owner who wont take money out you potentially lose out on many, many better owners who could have done a vastly better job but wouldnt get ownership because they want compensated. Kind of like hiring a CEO - a CEO can make or break a company.... take one and pay him peanuts and you are LIKELY to get a poorer CEO than if you paid going rate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 yeah but its a pointless argument its like saying if we signed goodwillie last summer we would have made the cl and not gone into liquidation. it might be true but its just as likely we would have dropped out and been in liquidation earlier. how do you judge what an owner can do or is doing over another. dave king could say if i had bought rangers they would still be in the spl or i can make 5 million a year more than green. how do you ever judge if thats true. if he comes in and revenue jumps 5 million green can say it would have gone up 7 under me. green could say right now so what if im taking out 2 million im earning 5 more than anyone else could possibly earn. how would we ever know if thats true. you cant test it. so set down a best practice and stick to it. thats sensibly that no dividend should be paid. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 It wont though. By having only an owner who wont take money out you potentially lose out on many, many better owners who could have done a vastly better job but wouldnt get ownership because they want compensated. Kind of like hiring a CEO - a CEO can make or break a company.... take one and pay him peanuts and you are LIKELY to get a poorer CEO than if you paid going rate. The CEO doesn't have to own the club though. If there's a business genius out there who think they can make Rangers a wealthy self-sustaining business that's great, but they don't have to own the club. Their remuneration can be tied to performance if that's what they desire. There is nothing stopping the club going out 'to the market' and finding a great CEO, we just don't need to hand him/her the keys to Ibrox. 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.