charger77 Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Honestly, I'm not a fan. I know they represent the 4 Super Bowls the Packers have won, but something about those four diamonds on the corners of the ring just throws it off.I'm with you on this. Quote PotD May 11th, 2011looooooogodud: June 7th 2010 - July 5th 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted June 17, 2011 Author Share Posted June 17, 2011 Shareholder Ring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charger77 Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 How does once become a Packers shareholder? Quote PotD May 11th, 2011looooooogodud: June 7th 2010 - July 5th 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmd9 Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Wow that text on the front of the ring is terrible. I understand with the shape it is difficult to fit all that on there, but how the text warps around the corners is awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 How does once become a Packers shareholder?Wait for the next offering. In 92 years, there have been four so far - 1923, 1935, 1950 and 1997. Quote The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YessSir32 Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Hate the shareholder, the other is amazing. Quote Detroit Falcons (NABL) | Detroit Gears (UFL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted June 17, 2011 Author Share Posted June 17, 2011 The ring I posted is one of several styles (each at different price points) shareholders can buy. I'm trying to find good images of the others but haven't as yet.And yes, to be a shareholder you need to wait until they have another offering, if/when they ever do. I got in during the '97 offering for $1,000, buying at $200 per share, just so that, as the part-owner of one of the clubs, I could make a legal claim of interest in asking for certain documents/information from the NFL league office. I feel I've more than got my $1,000 back in the inside information and also the camaraderie among Packer fans worldwide to justify it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridenlow71 Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Anyone got a picture of the board of directors rings?I really hope they do another offering..I was only 13 in 97' so really didn't have money to buy stock Quote Part owner in the Green Bay Packers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 The ring I posted is one of several styles (each at different price points) shareholders can buy. I'm trying to find good images of the others but haven't as yet. That's pretty much it; the only other mens shareholder ring looks like an engraved wedding band. There are also three "fan" rings - I'll have pictures of those on my blog this weekend. Quote The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 There's also at least one season ticket holder ring, but I haven't been able to see that one yet. Any season ticket holders willing to share their pics? Quote The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakonius26 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Very cool. I love the circled '29 numbers. And Lambeau Field - I was hoping they'd put that on a championship ring again. Don't care for the distorted letters on the bezel, but that's what you get nowadays.Now... Let's see the shareholder rings! . If they're anything like the 1996 rings, they'll have the same shanks.I also like the football texture they have on both sides of the ring, that's really sharp, and the design is fairly solid, so I can't complain there either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Golden One Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Figured this would be good here also. I rearranged the rings by years, so you can see how they progressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridenlow71 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Shareholder RingHow much would I have to pay a shareholder to get one of these? Quote Part owner in the Green Bay Packers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted June 18, 2011 Author Share Posted June 18, 2011 Shareholder RingHow much would I have to pay a shareholder to get one of these? Buy mine and I'll make it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sproullie03 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Being a Steelers fan I hate the seeing the ring but that is definitely one nice ring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakonius26 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Those NBA Championship rings are terrible. After 1983, they lose not only the consistency, but also some of the designs just don't make any sense when including the franchise's history. The only team that seemed to stay grounded was the Spurs, but theirs isn't great either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridenlow71 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Those NBA Championship rings are terrible. After 1983, they lose not only the consistency, but also some of the designs just don't make any sense when including the franchise's history. The only team that seemed to stay grounded was the Spurs, but theirs isn't great either.See I disagree, I think all the ones before 83 were boring. It is nice to see that the teams started designing their own. But thats just me. Quote Part owner in the Green Bay Packers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
final_sun Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Something a little different, the Edmonton Trappers Pacific Coast League rings from '84, '96, and '97: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakonius26 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Those NBA Championship rings are terrible. After 1983, they lose not only the consistency, but also some of the designs just don't make any sense when including the franchise's history. The only team that seemed to stay grounded was the Spurs, but theirs isn't great either.See I disagree, I think all the ones before 83 were boring. It is nice to see that the teams started designing their own. But thats just me.I don't have a problem with them breaking the mold and creating their own, but of the designs are just awkward. Look at the Lakers 1985 ring... Black? Why not Purple? Or their logo like the Celtics did with their 1986 championship ring? By the way, they do it again in 1988. They had five diamonds for the five championships in Los Angeles, so why revert back to one in the 1988 championship ring?There's no doubt the rings prior to 1983 were boring, but I'd rather have something simple like that, compared to the crap they were producing occasionally after that year. It almost seems like instead of creating a ring that represents the journey and relates to the franchise's proud tradition, they chose to instead pick the design that simply looked good, and didn't fit at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridenlow71 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Those NBA Championship rings are terrible. After 1983, they lose not only the consistency, but also some of the designs just don't make any sense when including the franchise's history. The only team that seemed to stay grounded was the Spurs, but theirs isn't great either.See I disagree, I think all the ones before 83 were boring. It is nice to see that the teams started designing their own. But thats just me.I don't have a problem with them breaking the mold and creating their own, but of the designs are just awkward. Look at the Lakers 1985 ring... Black? Why not Purple? Or their logo like the Celtics did with their 1986 championship ring? By the way, they do it again in 1988. They had five diamonds for the five championships in Los Angeles, so why revert back to one in the 1988 championship ring?There's no doubt the rings prior to 1983 were boring, but I'd rather have something simple like that, compared to the crap they were producing occasionally after that year. It almost seems like instead of creating a ring that represents the journey and relates to the franchise's proud tradition, they chose to instead pick the design that simply looked good, and didn't fit at all.Ah yes I see your point Quote Part owner in the Green Bay Packers Link to comment 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.