It looks like the future brings with it a few choices, with at least four bids (perhaps more depending on which source is to be believed) being lodged for the club.
The Blue Knights, American consortium, Brian Kennedy, perhaps a Middle or Far East consortium and let’s not forget (as if we could) the outside possibility of a situation which finds Whyte coming back (if he's brave enough that is).
So my thought is this: what is best for Rangers going forward?
My fear - and I guess I share this with many Rangers fans - is that the thought of a single owner, or a rich consortium fills me with dread. I mean, yes, someone throwing money at the team again would be nice I suppose, but do we really want to go down that road again and end back at this dead end looking down death's door for a second time? Have we learned anything from the way this has all panned out?
What about foreign ownership? Well it's worked well for some teams while others have had fan protests at what they thought was the diluting of club traditions, where the ownership appear always to be distant and unreachable but show up when the trophies start to come in like some military general looking for the kudos from the sweat and hard work of others. It's easy when the brown stuff hits the fan: foreign owners can remain distant while we have to deal with some mealy mouthed lickspittle only interested in their own job/salary that has no care for us fans (or should that be customers?)
Fan of another team or sport? Brian Kennedy is a rugby man (much like Sir Minty) but he's also a Hibs fan, too. You have to ask, why a Hibs fan is looking to buy a club from Glasgow with absolutely nothing in common with the team he purports to follow. It's a strange one and despite the creditable social conscience comments from Brian I honestly don't think I'd be comfortable with someone in the mould of David Murray who is name-dropping Rangers legends to make him sound more appealing, and we have to hope - as indeed Kennedy indicates – that this is a option only palatable if all else fails.
So looking at single owners, foreign owners and owners who aren't really fans of the club, I'm pretty sure we've been down this road before with our previous custodian Sir David Murray, who ticked all the negative boxes I've mentioned.
So what's the answer?
Well as reluctant as many may be about it, Paul Murray and his consortium seem to be the most viable option from a fan point of view. A consortium lead by a Rangers fan and former director of the club along with businessmen and investors who are all Rangers fans, with the promise to have proper fan representation on the board seems to be the way forward and what we as fans should be seeking. But as always, caution is the key. We need detail on all of the proposed schemes before committing. We must demand something for our money in the event of a capital injection and emphasise our continuing status as a chief financial backer of the Club.
In the end, the only thing that truly matters is that the club survives and strives. As I've said, I don’t think that will happen in the long-term under foreign ownership but as fans, we are the ones any new owner should have at heart.
What do you think? Which model of ownership strikes you as inherently preferable? What are the problems with each type? What is the future for the Rangers’ ownership?
Discuss it here:
http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=851074
Source: FOOTYMAD
