Tell you what, if the club was more angled towards the community, you'd be more likely to have future owners who wanted to continue such a legacy. It's how I could get behind a Trust takeover in the future - re-orient the club towards the community, and then move it on to somebody who could add some cash behind the initial impetus. As it is, however, while we talk about investment opportunities behind stadiums and the like, we tend to attract carpet-baggers. Back in the day, it was SISU, attracted by the lure of a quick Premiership buck. Then we had the likes of property developer Haskell being shown around the Ricoh... Surely the question should never be what we can do for potential owners, but more what they can do for us? And what we should always want is somebody/ies who want to embed the club in its community, who want to give it that identity, who want it to be a social organism first. The rest of your post is exactly what I'm getting at, though. What makes a club? And what makes a club isn't, really, the owners... although ultimately they have to put into practice whatever its people want. It should, however, be a benevolant dictatorship, where owners listen to fans and ask how they can be helped.