Jump to content

 

 

Hildy

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,747

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Hildy

  1. Hildy
    Andy, why even bother with a parallel scheme? Why waste time and energy setting up a scheme whose function is to ape one that already exists? If 'we are the people', why do we need to factionalise to achieve a worthy aim? Surely there must be one idea that people can get behind without setting up a variety of models? BuyRangers already has around half of one per cent of the company. The first step has been taken. The first brick is in place. Fans keep crying out for unity, and yet here we have another example of the support splintering instead of banding together to make the goal achievable as soon as possible. It makes no sense. Hearts and Dunfermline fans seem to have managed to focus their energies. It's time we did the same. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
  2. Hildy
    The culture has already started. BuyRangers has around 2,000 people already signed up. That's where my money is invested - and I won't be spending a cent on any other scheme. As previously stated, we have the tools already in place to work towards fan ownership so let's use them. Incredibly, we now have two singing sections - how many investment groups does the support actually need? Answer: one. Let's work together on this - not as forums and groups - but as Rangers fans with a common goal.
  3. Hildy
    Christine, it's sad to see the hatred and bitterness that an element in our support seems unable to rise above, but within the Rangers-supporting culture, sadly, it goes with the territory. Keep the RST flag flying because it is our best hope for a better future. Do not be disheartened by the anger. It is misguided and ultimately, destructive. Let the detractors bellow their hot air. It advances the Rangers family not one jot. At best, it keep us marking time in the bad place that we have been delivered to, but at worst it sets us back and adds to our woes. Good luck to the RST, and may you long be associated with it.
  4. Hildy
    Plgsarmy, good luck for the future. I hope the RST can get over any difficulties it is having and play an important part in the future of the club.
  5. Hildy
    No, we should not. Hopefully they will select Ibrox - but I expect them to opt for Parkhead.
  6. Hildy
    That's a good post, amms. People who object to fan ownership sometimes give out about it being a socialist model and out of tune with the capitalist society we inhabit. My politics are right of centre. I am comfortable with capitalism, which is still one of the best ways to organise society. It does not offend me to see companies making profit and to see individuals making and accruing wealth. I don't endorse Labour wanting to raise the top tax level to 50%. If it was up to me, I'd reduce it even further. I cannot envisage a set of circumstances where I'd contemplate voting Labour. But when it comes to football clubs, which are about identity and the collective, and in particular, our football club, which is almost a national monument, it is obscene that it can fall into the care of people whose priorities lie elsewhere. Companies chasing profit come and go. They may last a hundred years and sometimes more, but in the end they tend to collapse or wither and die. This will happen to Rangers, too. It is inconceivable that Rangers will survive over hundreds of years when its ownership is left to chance. Those against fan ownership are holding the door open for rogue elements to come in and kill the club from within - while at the same time hoping that only upstanding and impeccable individuals will dare to walk through. This isn't just careless. It is inexcusably crazy.
  7. Hildy
    Let me be clear - if there have any dodgy dealings within the RST, that is entirely unacceptable. Organisations such as this have to be above board and seen to be above board. Those upset by accusations about the conduct of certain RST board members - I presume they will not want Dave King at Rangers. As has been widely documented, question marks have been raised about some of his financial dealings, too.
  8. Hildy
    "One David Murray" Remember this? In the better times under his tenure he was looked up to and idolised as though he was incapable of erring. The support was entirely comfortable in forelock-tugging mode. It believed in the man to such an extent that dissent was viewed as intolerable. Murray had the support in the palm of his hand - to question him was to be disloyal - and anti-Rangers. This was the Rangers support at its shameful worst. This was the Rangers support cowed and obedient. Sir David Murray was God. Dissent was blasphemy. One David Murray.
  9. Hildy
    Selmy, the Trust has been strong enough to build a near 2,000 strong group of Rangers fans in its BuyRangers scheme. And that was achieved against a background of denigration from within our own support. It is a monumental task to win over supporters to fan ownership when there is a culture of obedience to the man in the big house. People who want a democratic member-owned club will continue to fight for it because the alternative is what we have now, and could be again and again until the damage becomes irreparable.
  10. Hildy
    Has the Trust made mistakes in the past? Absolutely. Will it make mistakes in the future? Most certainly. Have mainstream political parties made mistakes over the years? Of course they have. Does it terminally devalue them? Of course not. The Trust is a vehicle to be used by the support to win ownership of the club. It will have times when it is strong and times when it is weak. It is your Trust. It is for you to make it what you want it to be. We've seen Rangers ravaged and scandalised in recent times, but do we give up on it and seek another club to support? Never. Stop looking for deities and start living with the practicalities, flaws, failings and benefits of what has been created to make the experience of being a Rangers supporter better than it has ever been in the modern era.
  11. Hildy
    Andy, a fan-owned club would still be open to investment from wealthy fans, indeed wealthy fans could stand for election to be the club president. Dave King parted with £20m when SDM owned it. Why would he not do the same when it is in the charge of the Rangers support and professionally run? With a bad owner, we have someone who can stay in position for a lifetime. With a bad president, we have someone who can be removed democratically after four or five years. We are running a colossal risk at the moment, and it has started to hurt us. The dream owner of Rangers is not a billionaire Arab. It is you and me and a hundred thousand others.
  12. Hildy
    You just nailed it there, Ser Barristan. I cannot disagree.
  13. Hildy
    Any new group that sets up in opposition to the RST will effectively be a splitter when people are crying out for unity. It would not attract or interest me.
  14. Hildy
    Andy, our door is permanently open for flawed, rogue, questionable, dubious and greedy ownership to walk in and create the kind of mess we have been painfully enduring these past few years. We can close it permanently with fan ownership - or leave it wide open forever. It's not a difficult choice. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
  15. Hildy
    Syntax, that is correct. Amidst the bluster, the RST actually got on with the job of putting a scheme in place to make fan ownership a reality. That's all I need. While others talked, they actioned a plan. Having another group to do a similar job would be a waste of time and energy.
  16. Hildy
    The RST exists to facilitate fan ownership. There is no need to complicate things further by having yet more groups. We've already had Rangers Unite which was about the most misnamed group of all time, and we still have the Assembly which was massively funded by the club in its early days because SDM feared the RST. The Association is a long-standing and valid group but the SOS isn't really a group at all. The RST needs to be further empowered by the support and BuyRangers requires to be given a hard sell. We do not need new groups who say they want fans to unite - but only exist because they cannot unite with existing groups. If Mark Dingwall was a problem for some at the Trust - he's gone now - so get on board. Rome is burning but we already have the tools to put out the fire. All we have to do is pick them up.
  17. Hildy
    Croak, fan ownership is the right way to go, but the bulk of our support prefers a deity to look up to rather than having faith in itself. Don't let that put you off. Join the RST, and maybe even stand for election to its board. Things may be quiet just now, but they can quickly heat up. Meanwhile, keep an eye on Hearts. They are attempting to work constructively towards a fan-owned future. Time will tell if they are successful.
  18. Hildy
    The mere act of asking the players to take a wage cut was naive. Not only were they bound to reject it, it demonstrated quite clearly that the club was not in a good financial state - and that meant that any bids for our players were bound to be less than generous. It's impossible to put an accurate figure on the damage caused by this request, but it will certainly have influenced potential buyers of our players to go in low. Circumstances play a part in the worth of any player, and our circumstances are known to be somewhat less than pristine. The moment a club asks players to take a wage cut, it effectively puts a SALE sign in the window.
  19. Hildy
    There are several scenarios. If he isn't punted at all, the board will look good for holding on to an asset after all this speculation. It is possible that they already know that he won't be leaving, but a scare story that he is won't do any harm at all - as long as he ends up staying. If he is punted on the cheap, which is likely if he is sold, the board will not look good at all. If he is likely to leave, though, the story becoming public is good because it might attract another club and set off a bidding war. That's the only way we'll get a half-decent price for the player. If he doesn't leave, I suspect this story will have been put out deliberately to make the board look good. If he does leave for a low fee, we'll have confirmation that the club is as badly run as many of us already suspected.
  20. Hildy
    When the club is known to be trying to cut the players' wages, and when rumours are rife that it is running out of money, any club wanting to purchase one of our players will bid low - very low - and so they should. I'd expect us to do the same if we were chasing a player whose club was rumoured to be under financial pressure.
  21. Hildy
    He's right. This has been a bad move for the player. Obviously, going to Rangers was a dream move in many ways, but he would have been better performing at a higher level, and with a manager who appreciates his talent more than Ally McCoist seems to. Not even getting a regular start in the third division must be soul destroying for the player. For his sake, he probably needs to move on.
  22. Hildy
    Brahim, that's why the ownership issue at Rangers should never be allowed to rest. Most Rangers fans may not seem to care about it, but when when the club actually gets defective ownership, it suddenly takes on new importance. We're seeing Hearts moving in the fan ownership direction now, and we can only applaud if they get it right and make it work. As for the main point of the thread, I suspect that we'll only retain both stadium and training ground if we can participate in an Atlantic League or something similar. If our future is to be Scottish football and only Scottish football, it's difficult to be optimistic.
  23. Hildy
    Zappa, a fan-owned club would be an ambitious club, extremely reluctant to part with its assets. A club under rogue ownership though - it'll do whatever it can to make a fast buck. We've now experience defective ownership, and look what it did to us. I hope lessons have been learned.
  24. Hildy
    Rab, don't you tire of seeking out others to blame for our problems? Don't you want to accept full responsibility for our ills - and successes? Supporters of Celtic duck responsibility habitually - it's what they do - and we frequently remind them of it. From Amsterdam to Dundee to Motherwell, they concoct excuses after excuse after excuse - and now we have joined them in pointing the finger elsewhere. It's true that we have enemies, and that we have had flawed owners, but we left the door wide open for them to invite themselves in. In these circumstances, it was inevitable that the club would fall into the wrong hands. If there is such a thing as the Rangers Way, surely it is to be responsible for our actions, and our inactions? We have many enemies - I cannot deny it - but perhaps we belong in their number due to our own negligence. Craig Whyte Mark II could take Rangers over tomorrow - and then we'd complain bitterly that the next liquidation event was nothing to do with us. On the contrary, it would be everything to do with us.
  25. Hildy
    Sir Barristan, you are correct. We are quick to apportion blame and depressingly slow to take responsibility for a club that plays such a big part in our lives.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.