The Good Business Sense of SISU (1 Viewer)

[Deleted member 5849]

but who out there would acquire a club like ours to do that?

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.

 

---

[4waspsting]

My god we certainly need help...... but alas there is none

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

That's the point though. Arguing with SISU will always create disunity as we'll all different on what's right or wrong.

There are certain core principals separate to the financial we can all agree on, though. How to get there would create argument, but the basic principals, not.

And better to assert them, surely?

And that follows on to the below...



We can all agree that:

A club needs a home;

A club needs to be at one with its community;

A club needs an identity;

A club needs foundations;

A club needs to be more than a busines.

And so on.

Why even argue about what SISU have done wrong, and what they should do? Why not just point out this is what a club should be?

(And if RFC wants to sit there content that SISU have delievered them all then fine!)

Those basic principles won't change, whoever the owner is.

Deserves its own thread and a sign up to it

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

OK, to take up Northern's original post how about this as a thought?
I think (?) it is generally agreed the BPA would not be a long term solution but how about it being a short term one? Membership of CRFC costs £20 and there are currently less than 200 members. Whilst membership confers no constitutional benefits I know from personal knowledge that the members have a direct and effective input to the way the club is run. If a couple of hundred (or more) signed up is it possible that we could influence and direct the potential ground share proposal? It would give us a short term base and a heart for the club to work from. Thoughts?