Jump to content

 

 

calscot

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,722

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by calscot

  1. calscot
    I'm expecting a Wonga type loan with payday being season ticket day. It can only realistically be done once though, so I then expect a share issue halfway through next season when it looks like we'll be promoted to the Premiership. In my opinion and layman view, that should be when King steps in - the existing shareholder will have little choice as it will mean either watering down their share holding or having a large share of a company in administration. I can't see it panning out another way. I think we need King's money to survive and he knows it, but he wants the power for his money and so is playing the hard balled, long game. The incumbents don't want to give away control of their gravy train and so are currently resisting his advances, thereby creating the poker game that is playing out.
  2. calscot
    There is a difference between A treble and THE treble. If we win three trophies, it's A treble, simples. If we won a double of the SPL and Scottish cup, plus the Europa cup a short time ago, that would also have been A treble. Trying to say it isn't a treble just smacks of Celtic minded desperation. If they had any rational way of thinking it would not bother them as it's not THE treble, nor a treble they can play in. But when you think about it, they can't even call a Premiership win a Single as it really just doesn't count when you cheat your way to a title by eliminating the competition. This season, they will win nothing of any note, maybe that's why they're so shit scared of a team they hate winning a treble.
  3. calscot
    I think times have really changed. I remember about 20 years ago, the Internet was getting off the ground and every day I'd be trying about 6 or 7 different news sites desperate to find Rangers news and transfer information. It was a time when transfer news was fun as it was during 9iaR and the start of the CL, so we had money to burn on famous internationals and have what seemed like a huge squad. Papers and their online analogs would usually only print stuff that had some substance as they'd only so many column inches to fill and so would use them to cover all teams. There was little room for unsubstantiated rumours for all clubs. But I suppose, people like me and others had an insatiable appetite for this kind of news and a premium phone line company started to fill the void (Club Call?) with any tenuous rumours (although premium phone calls were not for me). This eventually went online for free but with monetisation from adverts. I think they were cornering the internet market and so everyone else had to join in to keep circulation numbers up and with tons of online space compared to a paper, they could afford to quickly reprint and rehash any old information that became available and if there was a dirth of that, they could just start making it up. So then the likes of NewsNow came along to aggregate this news and we became overwhelmed with what started out as a ton of repetition of the same copy from the likes of Reuters with the odd tweak and then regurgitation of the crap that was either rumour or just made up to fill the gap. Now we just have a load of rubbish to make a headline so you will click on it with tenuous connection to a misinterpreted quote or leading question like "Would you ever consider going back to Rangers?" answered with a cautious, "Well, I'd never rule it out completely", becomes, "X lined up for a return to Rangers". The thing that makes it worse is with the position we're in, transfer are neither interesting due to the low quality and free nature (as well as being limited to a couple of days plus one small window in two years), nor desired, with the latter due to the other rumours of us running out of money imminently. NewsNow is now full of absolute pap mixed in with Rangers hating editorials which come across as sheer propaganda. The only light in the overwhelming darkness are some of the better fans' blogs from the likes of here and TRS. We've gone from being desperate for news to being disdainful of the sea of excrement that we're confronted with and it's no wonder that forums are thriving while newspapers are dying.
  4. calscot
    I don't think you'll find 20k people willing to sacrifice £180-240 a year. That's almost a season ticket these days. Maybe a tenth of that. That said, when we get promoted to the premiership, I hope the boycotting of other grounds leaves about 5k fans with a load of money in their pockets.
  5. calscot
    Re-reading the OP, it seems clear that all MacGregor was doing was trying to look after himself and his money. It was nothing to do with helping Rangers.
  6. calscot
    You seem to be arguing in a contradictory way here, and missing the whole point on morality. You tend to be more focused on what someone is entitled to do rather than someone doing the "right thing", whatever that may be. If you are willing to TUPE but decide you want to help the club, then what is there to stop you mutually cancelling a contract that your employer can't afford if they can't get a fee? How is that materially different from just walking away? Morally it's far more admirable. We are talking retrospectively and hypothetically here, so there is no risk. This is an ethical question, not a how to look after yourself and forget about everyone else question.
  7. calscot
    Kind of reminds me of news now rankings. They have absolutely nothing to do with the quality or even relevance of thecontent, it's the headline that gets the clicks. Want to be top? Just write a headline something like, "Rangers on the brink of disaster."
  8. calscot
    Headlines are usually only tenuously related to the interview these days and it's even worse when you have a media full with an anti-Rangers agenda. No matter what a player or manager says, they are going to make up an extreme headline to sell the paper. Journalism is an extremely low quality aspect of writing now.
  9. calscot
    If, as expected, we beat Albion Rovers, we still have to see what happens in the other games. As has been shown by our quarterfinal rivals, anyone can beat anyone on the the day - although I think lightning striking twice for a bottom tier team will be too much to ask. If all goes well we will have a packed home game against sides from which only one team has won against such a big crowd this season. There is a chance of a top 6 Premiership side to face, but only Aberdeen are showing any sort of real form, with ICT being the perennial consistent side, with the two others even failing to gain half the points available to them. That suggests that if we are equivalent to an average top tier side we easily have a 50/50 chance of beating the Tayside teams. When you look at DU and StJ's away record they have won 5 games between them out of 24 with 9 draws and 10 losses. Hardly intimidating stuff. Remember this is against all Premiership sides. I think we have more like a 60/40 chance of beating these two. Inverness are a bit better at 5-3-3 and so may be harder for us to beat and we didn't do so well against them last season. Aberdeen are the only ones who seem to have a really good record this season, lying second in the league and in the League Cup final as well as beating Celtic to get to the Scottish Cup quarters. They will be the really tough one but depends on their form and attitude. There would be far more pressure on them to beat us than any time since the 80's and that could affect them. I think if we're to play them, I'd rather it was at Ibrox in the semi. I think it all depends on how the semis come out in the wash and who we get in the draw. The final will in my eyes be a toss of a coin in who wins, no matter who is there. There is no team that stands out enough to expect to win.
  10. calscot
    I thought it was a pretty thoughtful, wise and balanced interview with a fair dose of modesty. Some of his on-line critics maybe could do well to take note of that sort of standard.
  11. calscot
    About £50-60k is a bit of a drop in the ocean for the club finances anyway. I do think it's important that more shares are in the hands of fans and ironically this is a far cheaper way than a share issue.
  12. calscot
    Are you a primary school teacher as you are very into setting one-off tests defined only by you? Our first team didn't blow it against Forfar as we weren't allowed to pick them; it was pretty much the youngsters that blew it, the ones that some people want to play every week. But then, when extrapolating your "tests", it seems every team in the country has failed. Do you pass all your "tests"? I can vouch that you pass the Negative Nancy test. We've played 30 games this season and lost one, and that one happens to be the only one that you count. If nothing else, it must be pretty miserable to have that kind of philosophy.
  13. calscot
    Agree - it keeps sounding like a "What have you done for us lately?" type thing. Two other massive differences is that King was not in a position to invest until recently, and has promised to invest in the next share offering. So why is there criticism of him not investing now? The McCall didn't invest when he made his move, King has not made his move yet. If a proper opportunity comes along and he doesn't invest, then maybe the criticism is valid. This guy has made supposedly hundreds of millions of pounds and he's being criticised by Joe Blog no marks for not attempting a hostile takeover just because they think he should. Let him play his hand, first, McCall played his and it was weak, there is plenty of reason for King not to put his cards on the table just yet. If there is a share issue in say a year's time and he invests millions then a lot of people are going to look pretty stupid. If there is and he doesn't then they will be vindicated if premature. To me it's a bit like someone who got their round the last time it was their turn, and as it's coming around again says he'll get the next round after this. Then in the middle of the current drink, before it's time for the next one, people start calling him a tight git. Anyway, I agree that the £20m he spent last time, gives him some time to decide when to invest and the right to some opinions along the way.
  14. calscot
    Great positive thread after a good performance to get us to the quarter finals and Celtic out as well... oh wait. I'm not sure how good a manager Ally is but I can say that I've never seen such a poor level of support on a Rangers forum.
  15. calscot
    I would have expected 50k for the Ramsden final. 42k of us 8k of Dunfermline. For the league cup, 23k max - 18k Aberdeen and 5k ICT. I think we can tell it's deliberate. Firstly, they would never give us home advantage, secondly, they don't want us trashing CP, thirdly they want to keep our income low. For the league cup it's just more money in Celtic's coffers plus trying to maintain the illusion that it is a premier ground as well as keeping them on the map. They can't give it to us as they need to keep our income as low as possible.
  16. calscot
    If the club are top equal on points, what is the problem? He's done better than a lot of Dundee managers. I have no idea if he's a good manager or not.
  17. calscot
    Don't know the circumstances and it doesn't really explain it, but reading between the lines, am I right in inferring that Laudrup wouldn't commit long or even medium term so they prefer to bring in someone who will?
  18. calscot
    I think we have about as much chance of winning a cup as John Greig and Jock Wallace did in the 80's, except in a game against Celtic. And they won three. The main difference is that Celtic have five times the budget as us. We may never be favourites but we've not won the cup loads of times when we have been. It's how the teams play on the day. It makes no difference to me what a Tim thinks about our chances. What will be will be. The piece is only there to noise us up whether it proves to be true or not, and best ignored. If we can give Newcastle a good fight then in my opinion we've at least a 50-50 chance of beating an SPL side who are of far lower standard albeit a cup game is different from a meaningless friendly. In the end there is absolutely no evidence one way or the other. We do have a bigger budget but we have to pay more for the same standard of player as SPL sides. We're used to playing a lower level of opposition every week, but we're also used to winning and have a huge crowd on our side. A lot of people may not rate our manager, but I don't see a surfeit of geniuses in the Premiership. I'm not really looking forward to the cup games as I can see the excessive derision from home and away if we lose a tie and bugger all praise if we win. But in the end our priority is to win the league and move to the next stage.
  19. calscot
    But did they give value for money? There is a difference between handing your company the same contract that would need to be given to someone else, than to do things like give a huge, Wonga type arrangement fee for a pay day loan.
  20. calscot
    Yeah, the management NEVER pick our academy players for the first team, just ask: Fraser Aird Darren Cole Robbie Crawford Scott Gallacher Luca Gasparotto Chris Hegarty Kane Hemmings Kyle Hutton Andrew Little Lewis Macleod Kyle McAusland Barrie McKay Andrew Mitchell Kal Naismith Ross Perry Daniel Stoney Tom Walsh Oh wait...
  21. calscot
    Off topic, but could people please remove their automatic signatures; I can't be the only one who's pretty irked by continually reading, "Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk".
  22. calscot
    I agree, but when you buy shares in a football club, you spend an amount you can afford to fully lose. It's not about making money, it's a sentimental investment. I'm talking around the 100-200 pound mark. Or you could have a membership scheme of say 50 quid which means you are guaranteed to lose it all immediately and then again every single year.
  23. calscot
    I personally will NOT join in the RST scheme, partly because they have not convinced me over the years despite being a member for a while, but mostly because I would have to pay for membership, I don't see how I actually own any shares, I would have little influence on how my money would be used, and I've no idea how I would get any money back if I decide to leave. I think there many people who feel the same and so why stop them doing something different that suits them better but still helps towards the goal? My proposal wasn't for a "scheme" per se, and whoever is not interested in it then makes absolutely no difference to it or me. I just thought it was an idea that could appeal to a lot of people who want to actually own some shares in the club for sentimental value, to help the club get into the ownership of the fans and actually to have a say in how the voting power of the shares are used. The points are that after buying them, they are yours until you sell them or they become worthless, no-one can take them away. You could easily lose money but you may also accrue value in them if the price goes up, or they might stay around the same, which gives you the option of cashing them in if you're in a tight spot. You don't have to keep paying to use them and you can easily remove your proxy at any time if you don't like the way it is being used. You don't have to worry about another body's solvency or other factors either. Basically it's just very simple. All you have to do is buy as many shares as you like and proxy them to whoever you like, if they are able to use it. That's it. You are fully in control of your investment. It's about getting lots of independent fan shareholders together to wield some power. If there are 50 of these that combined are big enough to influence the running of the club then it's better than one that isn't. I think I'm probably going to buy some shares anyway so it doesn't make much difference to me. I've been a member of RST and at no time felt part of it, or felt I had any influence. I do feel that on here. I certainly wouldn't proxy my shares to them unless there is some large change in my perception of it as an organisation. When you force everyone into the choice of one Marmite scheme then you're chances of success are low. People like freedom of choice, to have control of their investment and to have some voice for their hard earned money.
  24. calscot
    Why not start here? We need a focal point for any shareholdings and for that you need to feel you belong and that you have a communication channel. Online forums seem ideal places for this - they even have built-in voting systems. I think there is a problem where people don't like putting their money into something and then losing control of how it is used, and that seems the biggest hurdle for the RST. I think what we could try at Gersnet is have a bunch of us buy up some shares from a few hundred to a 1000 each - and at 27p a share (plus a £12 set fee so 326 shares for £100) it's a good time to do so. We then elect a representative from on here and proxy our votes to them. Then try to grow it from there. If other forums do the same, the fans' shareholding would start to increase. The premise is to do block voting and so sort out the general feeling of the shareholders, have a few votes and then trust the representative to honour that. The trick is to go with the majority and not throw the dummy out if that's not 100% what you agree with. The strength is in the numbers. But the beauty is that if you're really unhappy you can remove your proxy at any time and possibly join another forum. You are in control of your shares, always own them and can also sell them if that's what you wish. To create an avalanche, you can start with a snowball... It's all about starting a culture.
  25. calscot
    As a layman I still doubt administration is a possibility this year with season ticket income not too far away. At worst it should not be difficult to borrow a few million in a short term loan at a crap interest rate which could be guaranteed by the likes of the Easdales. We could then easily survive for another six months or more, but if the losses are not stemmed, THAT would be when the money would really start to run out and it would be harder to bridge the gap without new investment. I'm very confident we're safe from admin until the at least the end of this year, no matter how little money we have now.
×
×
  • 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.