A Horse With No Name

You know if you asked some Rangers fans i'll bet quite a few would say "just put the names in a hat and feeking draw one..." Well, it's getting that way!

They say we're young and we don't care, before too long our troubles...

....babe, i got you babe...

Obsessed. What would they talk about if we were gone

They go on these programmes and are practically in meltdown WE DON'T NEED RANGERS, WE DON'T NEED RANGERS, WE DON'T NEED RANGERS! Just wish Dalziel or whoever would just say to them "what the fekk are you all on talking about them for then"

You get the feeling certain institutions will be filling up if we go to the wall. They'll be sitting back with their straight-jackets on saying WE DON'T NEED RANGERS, WE DON'T NEED... just as the nurse sticks a needle in their arm...

I was referring to your threads.

I knew you were - i did try and put a smiley at the end of my remark but i was on the blackberry so couldn't put the tonque out smiley for some reason. Bloody blackberry is running very bloody slow too must take it in to shop and get them to sort it...

Yes, casey your meaning wasn't lost on me!

It's either Celtic or Communism.

I've forgotten more about Marxism than these cunts will ever know!

Amazing how many Celtic fans are allowed on Radio Clyde to talk about Rangers and state the above without them being asked IF YOU DON'T WHY ARE YOU ALL ON TALKING ABOUT THEM!

Still no mention of them cheating the Taxman AYE IT'S NO FAIR NA'ER IT IS

I mind drinking with a few guys in Paisley RW and they said he was in that pub getting some stories from old timers and apparently only got them half a pint. The guy said if RM had been at the Somme the only rifling he would have done would've been through dead soldiers pockets! :-) probably not true, but it did add weight to all the other tales...

I think it was the Assembly, rather than the Trust, that were actually recommending McElroy as a rep on the creditors committee.

 

I was also surprised when I saw his name being mentioned and wasn't sure that he was the ideal candidate.

He's (from my experience) a skin flint - tbh I think he's been wearing that jacket since Graeme Souness arrived! Jesus the stories I've heard about him. No doubt about his credentials but I stopped getting the Historian ages and that last book of his was a rip off, not only had he not corrected the mistakes pointed out to him, there was actually more! Christ he had players scoring in games they hadn't played, playing in games after they left....

He's preferable to Mason but AT WHAT PRICE? I don't trust people that covet money to that degree! In my last dealings with him he said how great my file was, saying how much time it saved him and asked me if I had a ticket for the game then offered me one of his seats - I was ready to head and he stuck out his hand for 20 sobs! :-). No problem parting with the cash but I've had guys on the bru wanting to buy me pints etc.

Money, seems to be the driving force for far too many folk!

I'm beginning to wonder if the dream was in fact a nightmare as I've just read the RST are recommending Robert McElroy to be nominated as some sort of Rep!

Anybody who's had any dealings with this man will know what a penny pincher he is! If this guy volunteers for anything he'll be looking to earn cash! I would hope this role isn't money paying but I just can't see it!

It's really looking bad this dream some of us have. I'm a lifetime member of the RST but I think (to allay fears) they must rule out those that arouse suspicion, from positions of power, and that means McElroy and others!

Would I fork out my life's savings to line the pockets of McElroy and his wee cliche of Tories... If push came to shove I'd get into bed with the devil to save Rangers, but I suspect unless they stand back from positions of power if Paul Murray is successful, the amount of cash fans put forward will drop NOT RISE to £15-30M.

If PM gets the bid (and I hope he does) these people need to act for the greater good! Maybe Brian Kennedy would be a better option after all? God, I'm getting a sore head. :sowsuser:

I've NEVER used the term sir in connection with him what others call him is of no interest to me. I do though feel we need (if we survive) to get his name away from our club so need to rename Auchenhowie after one of people who never shamed the club - I'd go for Wilton myself!

If Rangers don't survive and loose the history the for me it won't matter a toss I won't be supporting a newco! Any money I would have spent on Rangers would be spent abroad in extra holidays.

Another factor to be thrown in is world-wide support, Hamburg are a great club but because they have a good economy their good people aren't all disappearing to other areas of the world!

The German people also wouldn't fall for this reverse sectarianism where to PROVE you didn't hate Catholics you had to employ more of them than their % of population. Their Tax people wouldn't have shyed away from taking Celtic on re Lying about gate receipts for fear of fallout.

So many areas where Hamburg and Rangers aren't on level footing mate...

One will have to compare some facts though:

Imtech Arena capacity: 57.000 - Hamburg population: 1.799.144

Ibrox Stadium capacity: 51.100 - Glasgow population: 592.820

 

Some grand teams aside, much of the support comes from the region a team plays in, and Hamburg alone has about thrice as many inhabitants as Glasgow. So by comparisson, we are roughly on par with their use of capacity. Furthermore, you have to consider that the attendance figures in Germany grounds are pretty good, even at teams who have next to nothing to play for (Hamburg, Kaiserslautern).

Christ has Glasgow's population dropped that much!

There are other factors on top of those you mentioned. Aren't prices at German grounds set at levels agreed with fans as part of their structure? In my opinion our fans wouldn't (and haven't) kicked up a fuss over prices, as long as they were actively engaged and kept in the picture should we start playing youngsters (with a spine of experience coming from players like Sir David of Weir) then I'm sure they'd be happy that things were being addressed and not just this fool hardy approach of relying on CL money.

Also, isn't the German economy in far better nick than most? Also fan satisfaction is better in Germay as they aren't ignored in the way we are re agenda against Rangers and us the fans! Example: If fans were treated with contempt by ticket staff / Stewards / Police then people would be sacked or in the case of the Police answers sought at the highest level! The Police in Germany are brand new and only adopt heavy handed measures when everything else has been tried! Compare German Police to those in Spain / Portugal - feeking aniimals!

Zappa, I'm not arguing for 100% fan ownership, for me starting at 5-10% and working towards 51% would start the process I think is necessary IN SO MANY WAYS NECESSARY!

Wasn't that the Oscar Wilde quote - 'We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars'? If not I think it's been ripped off.

Thanks much appreciated. Yes I now remember the OW quote, the song lyrics are in that area but maybe I've got the band wrong - lost the tape when moving house...

Providing that an outcome is achieved!!!!

 

Lets not forget the old saying: Too many cooks, spoil the Broth!!!!

 

How many other industries have customer representation on their boards??? Do Sainsbury's, M&S, Amazon etc. Yet they still listen to their customers (Fans??) and do what it required.

The outcome is always achieved by democratic decision making - if fans only own 25% of the club they should expect 25% of the vote. As for fans that buy season tickets or go to a handful of games, they should have Reps too because no one who puts money into Rangers should be ignored.

As for these stores / businesses I'm totally against the analogy. If Rangers FC were a simple business the store would have went bust long ago - tell me of a branch of Tesco that allows outsiders too come in and call the 'customers' dirty orange barstools, or would sit back while newspapers and scumbags like Keevins etc continually slate their customers?

Customers of stores get something material for parting with cash - what we get in return for parting with cash is something completely different Darthter... ;-)

IMO nothing that the current fans trusts don't do atm. Just because the views would be put across in a boardroom instead of a, well covered, press release doesn't mean there would be anymore action on those views than there is now. I think that having so many fan organisations as we do now just proves that all fans cannot be kept happy.. they all have differing opinions on Rangers matters (which I believe is a good thing) but if only 1 could be represented at board level then that would cause disruption, again only my opinion.

As you say a spread of opinions is good - I'd go further and say lively debate and argument is good - the thing that matters most is the structure of fan participation. I'd argue the only worthwhile structure is the old style Soviets, with every board member accompanied by a couple of delegates who made sure the board member wasn't ignoring his or her mandate. The board members would have to change at regular intervals as would the delegates.

There would be regular meetings of us 'lesser shareholders' where the minutes were given of the board meetings. There's lots of ways to ensure our needs are met and our concerns addressed but for me the most important thing is that there's continual change of personnel to ensure we don't get certain people hugging power and doing a Joe Stalin!

Some may say "look what happened to the Russian soviets but the simple answer to that is how could their Soviets have developed and grown in confidence when the Whites and counter revolutionaries where occupying most of their time and killing the workers!

All about structure - same as team tactics, variation is important to ensure everyone is heard and not just those with imposing personalities. WE'D ALL HAVE A PART TO PLAY.

This gets more and more complicated in terms of the ramifications! I recall reading in one of the broadsheets about a week back Withey saying he left that company and was ashamed of the part he (without knowing it) played... that would seem to suggest they'd win a court case?

Will it act as a spur for the two bidders (maybe the intention?)

Will HMRC want more or want to defer their decision?

Can someone delete my related thread please.

I don't think Hamburg not having success is misleading or that the linkage falls short at all. You yourself made the linkage with Hamburg and I've seen many other fans who want more fan ownership and involvement in Rangers mention Hamburg and their supporter participation model, but the simple fact is that all their club is doing is managing to tick over without winning anything. I'm pretty sure that Hamburg fans are very ambitious and would like to win something, but the cold hard truth is that the club has struggled in their league for years. The sad-but-true definition of success for a club like Hamburg in the Bundesliga is occasionally managing to finish in 3rd or 4th place in the league and get some European nights, but it doesn't happen very often for them.

 

All I'm really saying is that a high level of fan ownership and/or membership as well as the possibility of more involvement in the decision making of the club isn't necessarily the best thing for the club. In fact, despite the romantic myth of the German fan ownership models being something to strive for, a good number of massive Bundesliga clubs have been in deep shit because of it and close to total collapse. There's at least two sides to every story.....

 

At the end of the day, all most of us want right now is for Rangers to survive as a club and get out of this mess without the formation of a 'newco' and NONE of the bidders should be telling the fans via the media that they guarantee that won't happen because they simply can't. The Blue Knights couldn't guarantee that and neither can any of the other bidders.

Not totally sure the point you're making but one thing I'd like to return is an 'if' scenario. I'd say that if the model that's in place there in Hamburg was in place here with Rangers and if they had the support we have (not just in Glasgow) in place in Germany then personally I feel the future would be promising for both our clubs.

I know you and every Rangers fan with half a brain is as concerned as I am about our situation but I remember a good socialist pal of mine giving me a tape of a band (think they were called The The) and there was a great set of lyrics about the stars being at their brightest when you're lying in the gutter, for me we should never loose sight of the potential Rangers FC (in the right hands) has.

For me only fan ownership will let us realise that potential. I apologise if my views on this seem arrogant when discussing the current situation - my only excuse is that I feel time along with an open mind has given me a wisdom. There you go, an apology but nothing humble about it. ;-)

I may be wrong but for me it looks like developing into Groundhog Day all over again.

Guesswork & summation are pretty much all we have just now. However, some is from fantasy, some is based on what info/facts are available.

 

If the BK's had the £500k - why would that initially try to get it from Ticketus??? The "facts" as we have them say that Ticketus refused to give them the cash, then over the course of the weekend, the BK's did manage to raise the required funds from consortium members. Then withdrew - WHY???

 

Having 3 bidders at the table is far healthier than having 2....hence why the admins would want them to reconsider. If the BK's understand the importance of speed...why not just pay the money & get on with it???

The less options you have the easier the choice - that's why they whittled it down to three bidders! If even D&P understand that then surely it's obvious?

When I go into the shop to buy a bike it takes me an eternity - the process gets simpler because I whittle it down to 3 or 4 but when I get it down to 2 then it's sorted pretty quick!

What are the ramifications of that?

On a sidenote, I did not exactly promote fan ownership when talking about membership schemes. What it does is keeping loyal people giving money to the club and having at least some say in how that money is spent.

They will also be there to insure the board don't use 'iffy' business practices!

Big fan involvement was central to the BK's bid - simply coz they didn't have the money to fun the running of the club themselves.

They would have started with a loan from Ticketus to cover them initially until the share issue, then use money from the share issue to firstly pay back ticketus, the whatever left being used to run the club.

 

The reason I don't think Ticketus put up the £500k was possibly due to not having a guarantee of getting it back!!! If the BK's didn't win control, who was going to pay the £500k???

 

It at least appears that Miller & Ng have funds available without securing further loans/debts. Ng has previously stated the the funds required are already in place!!!

As did Whyte!

There's a lot of guesswork in your write up there so I'll give you some too! I think they did have the £500k I just think their main concern was not giving these thieves (Admin) more excuses to drag their feet, ie they understand the importance of speed! To prove my point (well, it's how I see it) they've stated TBK's were in a good position and hoped they'd reconsider!

Some body is gonna have to force these people to walk away - if Millar withdraws don't be surprised if they find more pre texts to stall! If these guys were painters and decorators we'd have seen them in crimewatch!

Hamburg are really struggling in the Bundesliga.

 

They've been getting steadily lower league finishes for about the past 5 years and this year they are in a relegation battle.

 

Their average finishing place in the league since the turn of the century is about 7th or 8th and this season could be their worst finish in over a decade.

 

They haven't been German champions for almost 30 years.

 

Maybe their club is well run and their fan ownership model has made them financially sound, I really don't know.

 

What I do know is that despite having an amazing support and a nice large stadium with superb attendances, their club is not getting any success.

 

The utopian dream of fan ownership of Rangers (if it were to come to fruition), would never guarantee a successful club, so be careful what you wish for.

Re them not having success. That can be misleading in terms of who owns and controls a club! What it comes down to is ambition and that's where your linkage falls short.

As a fanbase we are very ambitious and would never settle for mediocrity. I feel the only way to plug the financial gap between what we pay good players and our income is to increase the capacity at Ibrox. Now, before folk rush to let me know we're skint I DO KNOW THAT! What it will come down to is a realistic appraisal of our situation and that means a good manger and playing youngsters for quite a few seasons to finance that, it'll mean the manager and board coming out at the outset to make it clear a period without trophies (probably) lay ahead.

Fans need to look at the situation realistically and if they really want success they need to play a canny game - there is nothing Rangers do better than playing the underdogs and the right attitude can pay huge dividends. If the fans don't like it then we should give them the choice of paying some sort of extra levy or do it our way.

You get what you pay for in this world, and for far too long our fans have been DEMANDING success by spending money we don't really have - we either have a medium to long term view or we continue down the same road that leads to the same place! In other words we'll see just how ambitious our fans are - TIME FOR A REALITY CHECK!

Im not as disappointed as some today on hearing the news that TBK's dream is over (for now anyway).

 

All that has mattered to me is that the club does not go into liquidation and get the 3 year Euro ban which will have an impact on everything at our club for many more than the 3 years of no decent income.

 

The news that Bill Ng is now the clear front-runner and also does not want to go down the liquidation route is fine with me. The fact his consortium is not scraping around trying to stump up enough cash to get them through until a share issue can be done, but has the cash to put together a strong CVA and finance the club properly from the start is the main thing for me at this time.

 

Obviously we do not know too much about him or his consortium or his plans for the club, as he has chosen to keep his cards close to his chest until he gets the job done.

 

perhaps if TBK had done something similar and not boasted about their Ticketus deal they would have got there.

 

Im trying not to be too critical of TBK as they are genuine Rangers fans who tried to do their very best to save the club from liquidation, and while (for now at any rate) their bid for control seems to have failed, they should be thanked for putting a substantial amount of their own time and money into the project, and we would hope that any plans they had for the club would be discussed with Bill Ng at a future date to see if there is anything that can be taken on for the good of the club.

 

We should be above getting into a slagging match over who backed who and why. None of that is even slightly important. The important issues were that the winning bidders did not go down the liquidation route, and that we come out of administration with a workable CVA and the club can move forward and start to prepare for next season.

 

That is all that really matters at this stage.

Yes, that's the important bit, but I suspect the others want liquidation and ONLY AFTER D&P TOLD THE OTHER TWO to put forward PR, only then did these other two go on about the importance of keeping our history!

If Ng was really a Rangers man he'd not have to be told by these chancers the Administrators!

I can give you a shit ton of DV stats if you want, but staying is not a mitigating factor no. However as Der Berliner has requested an end to this, we should leave it there. No need for caps, I still disagree with you.

I agree to disagree.

How much "control" the fans would have had is surely questionable? What was he willing to give? A token seat on the board?

 

It seems to me that there was no formal commitment about the fans having any level of control.

The level of control we got would've equated with the level of financial support we put forward. The pledges amounted just over £13m so we'd've had a big say!

Also bd, I feel HMRC would've been very accommodating had the fans been at the forefront - I feel (unlike the media) they understood that in no way were we the Rangers support at fault for Murray's control of the club and that had they been easy on us they could put that forward as justified rationale for an easy approach.

Now, we just don't know... Will they have suspected Whyte involvement with the yanks? Will they be hard hearted if they think Whyte will be getting cash for SPENDING £1?

Fan involvement would have laid the ground for an easier way out for HMRC.