Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'fail'.
-
Posted Today, 07:02 PM SEPTEMBER 26, 2014 / BILLMCMURDO The boardroom saga rumbles on at Ibrox with the news that Rangers CEO Graham Wallace has had talks with representatives of Dave King. My understanding is that these representatives were Paul Murray and George Letham. No big surprises there but this is where we enter into the Twilight Zone once more. When contacted by a prominent daily newspaper, I am told that Dave King denied that these men were his representatives. Which begs two questions: 1) Why are these men purporting to represent Dave King? 2) Or is Dave King being economical with the truth? We could also ask why he is, if he is., Given that Rangers fans want transparency and that this requirement for transparency is often spoken of by Messrs Murray and King, surely it would be very much in the interests of both these men to clear matters up for the fans. In a nutshell, is Paul Murray representing Dave King in talks with Graham Wallace? This opens up a whole raft of other questions. Why is Graham Wallace speaking to Paul Murray? Is he doing so with the backing of fellow board members or has he “gone rogue” and if this is the case, what can be done to stop him? It is no secret that there is a rift in the boardroom and this is not something Rangers fans want to be reading about, especially in anti-Rangers outlets. I personally am fed up of all the cloak and dagger, which is playground stuff. We need men leading us, not boys. Yes, confidentiality is often necessary in business dealings but you can’t call for transparency to score points while being furtive and even deceitful. If Paul Murray is representing Dave King, fans should be told and not lied to. The whole matter hinges around Dave King’s now legendary £30 million to invest. Is the £30 million for real or a mythical figure that keeps Dave King in the limelight while deceiving the Rangers support? Even if Kings’ 30 mil is real and in place for investment, other questions need answering. These include a very important one i.e. Is that it? Is the 30 million all there is or is there more to follow? Not as a possible but something far more concrete? I mean, are there other investors lined up or does King himself have more in reserve? Just as vital is the question: What role does King want for his investment and can he get it? There are huge question marks over King’s suitability as a director of RIFC PLC both from the stock market perspective and from that of the SFA and SPFL. King needs to answer those for his own sake and others. Should King fail to get a directorship, is he happy to take a back seat and does this also mean there is a very real prospect that he will fall foul of AIM regulations concerning “shadow directors” who hold no office but exercise inappropriate clout? Can King’s ego handle being just a good guy investor with no hands-on power? I see the papers are waging a campaign against Sandy Easdale attempting to pressure him not to block this mooted Dave King investment. Easdale may be crazy to try and block this investment if it saves the club but he would be crazier still to rely on it given how precarious it appears to be. The fact that he is active in seeking alternatives is indicative, not of a churlish anti-King prejudice but of commendable business prudence and responsibility. As I wrote previously, Rangers require a custodian. Both Dave King and Sandy Easdale may have a lot to do to convince fans they can fill that role. Being more honest with the Rangers fans would be a good start. http://billmcmurdo.w....the-kings-men/
-
...that is the question facing Sons of Struth members as Rangers woes continue The Sons of Struth protest group this week polled its 1,500 members over whether to stage a boycott of Rangers. The controversial move has divided opinion among followers of the Ibrox club. Many believe it is the only way to achieve change at the troubled Glasgow instutition. Others are of the opinion that it will do further damage to a club facing serious financial problems. Matthew Lindsay of SportTimes spoke to Craig Houston of SoS and asked him about their plans... ST: Why are you polling your members about a potential boycott of Rangers? CH: It's quite simple. In the year the Sons of Struth have been in existence, a lot of people have asked us: "Do you want to boycott?" But we have always been of the opinion that it is a big ask to say to a fan they can or cannot go to watch their team. So we haven't spoken about it in any great detail. But over the last two weeks that has changed with the stories about Rafat Rizvi and the stadium naming rights being sold to Mike Ashley for just £1 coming out. The number of people who are asking us, both online and in person, if we would have a boycott, has multiplied. More and more folk have been raising the issue. There are a lot of angry Bears out there. In the last few weeks we have set up a Sons of Struth membership scheme and we now have over 1,500 members. With the feedback we have been receiving, we thought it was fair and democratic to ask our members their views. We have not told anybody to boycott. We are simply asking their views on it. But, unlike the club, we will listen to what they have to say. ST: What are you asking Sons of Struth members? CH: We are asking them three things. Do they think there should be no boycott? Do they think there should be a one-game boycott? Or do they think there should be a boycott for the rest of the season until change is made? We have also asked them about the prospect of boycotting Sports Direct and McGill's Buses. ST: What change would you like to see? CH: We believe if Sandy Easdale leaves Rangers Football Club we would be better placed to attract investment. In an ideal world we would like the entire board to change. But in reality that is not going to happen. It is a big ask to get rid of every director in one fell swoop. We are aware of people who are willing to invest money in the club. We believe the only people stopping them from doing so are Sandy Easdale and those investors whose proxy votes he holds. ST: But Sandy Easdale lent Rangers £500,000 last year to keep them afloat. And he hasn't called in the debt. Where would the Ibrox club be now without him? CH: Probably in exactly the same situation. I am quite sure if he wasn't involved that somebody else would have put up the money. Certainly, he isn't the first director to do so since we went into administration. One ex-director put his own money in to pay the electricity bills when we were waiting for funding to come through. It is not a new thing. But Sandy Easdale is the first person to have loaned Rangers money at a time of need who has required security on his loan. ST: Why are you targeting Sports Direct? CH: Mike Ashley took a deal that any businessman who does not care about Rangers Football Club would have taken. But we do not want Ibrox to be renamed - for a pound or any other sum of money. Ashley could exercise his right to name the stadium the Sports Direct Arena or he could sell the rights to another company in the years ahead. Rather than wait until that happens we will, if it is the wish of our members, be proactive. We will hit him in the pocket. We will give him £2 if he makes the agreement disappear. He will double his money. ST: You have just over 1,500 members. But the Rangers support is hundreds of thousands strong. Who cares what you think? CH: Nobody in the boardroom, anyway! Seriously, though, if you put all of the Rangers supporters' groups together they would still be in a minority. The vast majority of fans are not part of any official organisation. But the Sons of Struth have members who are different types of people and who are different types of personality. So they represent a broad cross section of the Rangers support. If the majority of them want to take action and boycott I think it is fair to presume the majority of supporters want to. When the Sons of Struth was just two people strong we still managed to get over 30,000 people to take part in red and blue card displays at Ibrox. If the consensus among our members is to boycott then we will put it out to the wider fan base. ST: So if you do decide to stage a boycott what exactly will you do? CH: You are putting the cart before the horse there. Our members might come back and say we shouldn't take any action. But it would be foolish to think we have not discussed what to do in the event that the majority of our members back a boycott. We have a few ideas kicking about. ST: Ally McCoist has stated his Rangers team will perform better with a full support behind them. Aren't you concerned a boycott will harm the side on the park? CH: Unlike a lot of Rangers supporters, I was at the League Cup game against Inverness Caledonian Thistle at Ibrox on Tuesday night. There were just over 15,000 in the stadium. So it was at a third of its total capacity. But that didn't seem to affect the players too much. I certainly respect Ally McCoist's view. It would be far better to have a full stadium behind his side. But I don't think fans boycotting games will impact upon the players too much, if at all. ST: Rangers are in a precarious position financially. Won't a boycott do further damage to a club you say you love? CH: If we do decide on a boycott it would not surprise me the club said investors had been put off getting involved due to the actions of the fans. But we have been told that investment is lined up by two separate directors in the last year and we only started talking a boycott in the last couple of weeks. Everything gets blamed on the fans. It is scandalous for anybody to suggest the actions of Rangers fans are detrimental to the club. In the last two years we have filled stadiums week in, week out. We have bought approximately 100,000 season tickets. To suggest we have put the club in peril is laughable. Certain people within the club should have a long, hard look at themselves for suggesting that and questioning the loyalty of fans. If our members feel a boycott is the best course of action to take then it will send a message to the board. It will underline they are not happy with the conduct of a certain individual at the club or with the naming rights to the stadium being sold for £1. We will talk to them in pounds, shillings and pence. Hopefully, they will then take action. ST: What has the reaction to a potential boycott been so far? CH: It has been a mixed bag. A lot of Rangers fans are already boycotting Ibrox of their own freewill. You only have to look at attendances to see that. They are the "not a penny more" camp. They made the decision we are asking our members to consider now before this season kicked off. Others have not gone to games for two or even three years. They want more people to take their stance. They are telling us: "Great. We hope you do this." But some Rangers fans want to go and see their team regardless of who is running the club and what is going on. No matter what the result of our survey is, I would not dictate to any Rangers fan not to go to a game. ST: Why don't you protest in a way that won't damage the club or the team? CH: If somebody can tell me of a protest that is guaranteed to work we will do it. No matter how crazy or bizarre. We have staged marches, have put postcards addressed to the chief executive through the door of Ibrox, have had John Brown hand in an online petition, have held red card protests and blue card protests. If somebody can suggest something else we can do that will have positive results then we will do that. When you go to a game as a football fan you are entitled to air your view. If the right-back has a shocker and scores an own goal then you can have a pop at him. I reserve the right to criticise the board if I think they are not having a good game. Many people feel that giving more money to Rangers just now is akin to giving an alcoholic you love a bottle of gin. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/to-boycott-or-not-to-boycottthat-is-the-question-facing-sons-of-struth-180991n.25356637
-
In a relatively short time the changes that have taken place in our country, and at our club, have taken the breath away. Our club has survived after a prolonged and unforeseen crisis but it belongs to strangers now and is almost as remote from supporters as London is from Glasgow. Scotland is on the brink of fundamental and irreversible change and whether it remains within the UK or goes it alone, things will never be the same again. Those who grew up thinking that Rangers and the Union were forever must have been visibly shaken by this cataclysmic turn of events. Identity is important to us, and having already endured a period where our football club almost died, we are now seeing Britishness at the cliff-edge. Coming on top of the shocking collapse of our banking institutions, this is a bizarre period in our lives. It seems that nothing is forever any more, and much of what is dear to us is under threat. Even the Church of Scotland is languishing. It seems to have slipped back in the country's pecking order behind another strand of Christianity, the Catholic Church. Like Rangers, this cornerstone of society has seen better days. When the 21st century chimed in, who expected this? Inside a relatively short time, our world has been turned upside-down. The Church always had a fight on its hands to retain flock, but the Scottish parliament, which was specifically designed to stop nationalism in its tracks, has completely failed to do it. Within the Rangers family, the widespread belief that the club was immortal has been smashed, and the idea that two 300 year-old banks could fail was thought to be too outlandish to be seriously contemplated. Here we stand, days before a vital referendum, and much of what, historically, has been important to us, has either changed, is presently changing, or could change in the not too distant future. The iconic Union Flag, perhaps under a new name, could be redesigned if Scotland becomes independent, and no-one can be sure what currency we are going to use or even if the Queen will still be our monarch in another ten years. The times, they are a changing - and much faster then we ever thought possible. If Rangers gets through this period, I wonder, how much will it have to change to be at ease in this new era?
-
ANGRY Rangers fans are on the brink of staging full-scale boycotts of the club’s matches – amid new calls for Sandy Easdale to be axed as football board chairman. And brassed-off fans could also stop giving money to companies linked to the Glasgow giants – including McGill’s Buses and Sports Direct. The Sons of Struth protest group believes there is growing support among its members and other supporters for this drastic action. Sons of Struth founder Craig Houston confirmed his organisation is to poll its 1500 members over whether to boycott games and businesses. He said: “The feedback we have received from members and other fans is overwhelmingly in favour of boycotting games and businesses. “A very low percentage of fans have faith in the board. Every time a new revelation emerges we ask what we can do other than holding red and blue card demonstrations to highlight our unhappiness that is legal and this is one route we can go down.” “But there has to be a silver bullet moment where you say enough is enough. If that results in boycotts of your team, certain sports shops, certain transport or insurance companies, so be it.” The move comes after it emerged that shareholder Sandy Easdale had met with Malaysian businessman Datuk Faizoull Bin Ahmad and convicted fraudster Rafat Rivzi this week. Easdale was pictured with Rizvi, who is wanted by Interpol for corruption, money laundering and banking crime, in Glasgow. Last night the Union of Fans called on the Rangers board to remove Easdale over the visit. A statement said: “Mr Easdale has dragged our club’s name through the gutter once too often. Perhaps he feels his association with a man wanted by Interpol is acceptable. It is not. “Graham Wallace, Norman Crighton, David Somers and Philip Nash must dissociate the PLC board from this further attempt to involve Rizvi in Rangers’ affairs.” However, Rangers last night denied the meeting was connected with investment in the club. An Ibrox spokesman said: “The visit was organised as part of ongoing discussions between Rangers and Malaysian club Felda United with regard to a youth development partnership. “Mr Rizvi arrived without our prior knowledge. He is an advisor to Mr Bin Ahmad. Media reports suggesting Mr Bin Ahmad is in discussions with Rangers regarding anything other than youth development are untrue.” Meanwhile, other reports in England last night claimed Mike Ashley is prepared to sell Newcastle United for £230million so he can boost his stake in Rangers. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/ranger...048n.25297080?
-
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=12081166 Rangers have agreed formal terms of settlement with former Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad regarding his current court action. The sum agreed is significantly less than the total amount which Mr Ahmad had been granted permission to arrest. As part of the settlement terms Mr Ahmad has agreed to refrain from arresting funds in Rangers' bank account or in the hands of others pending the formal removal of the case from court. No such arrestment will now take place. The case will be formally taken out of court in the next few days. For further information please contact: Rangers International Football Club plc Graham Wallace / Paul Tyrrell Tel: 0141 580 8647 Daniel Stewart & Company plc Tel: 020 7776 6550 Paul Shackleton / David Coffman Newgate Threadneedle Tel: 020 7148 6143 Roddy Watt / John Coles
-
Not sure exactly when we'll get confirmation of the outcome of this today but we can use this thread for updates. First one is this: Sandy and James Easdale increase Rangers shareholding by £500,000 http://t.co/eumq4fMPGC
-
Chris Graham @ChrisGraham76 17m .@RFC_Union call on Rangers PLC board to remove Sandy Easdale as a club director immediately. #RFC pic.twitter.com/wIlX0SWgVu
-
MIKE ASHLEY is preparing to become the front-runner in an effort to save Rangers from another financial collapse. The Newcastle United owner has made positive moves to sell the St James’ Park club and bring to an end a troubled seven-year reign on Tyneside as he turns his attention to Ibrox. There is already interest in United – even at the asking price of around £230million – and any quick deal would allow Ashley to immediately focus on the Gers. News of the Sports Direct chief’s enthusiasm for stepping up his involvement with Rangers comes on the day fans are expected to hear how successful the board’s latest share issue – aimed at raising £4m – has been. But, whatever happens, it appears Ashley is keen to switch his football and business from Tyneside to Clydeside. Gers fans are now of a mood where any transparent ownership of the club would be welcome, even if there would be reservations over precisely what Ashley has in mind. He has been notoriously reluctant to splash the cash at Newcastle during his time in charge of the Premier League club, although Rangers wouldn’t need anything like the investment in players the English club require to compete against Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City. Ashley, of course, already has a stake in the Gers, along with the naming rights for Ibrox. But, until he sells Newcastle, he is pre- vented from increasing that to more than 10 per cent by SFA rules. UEFA regulations also stipulate the same person cannot own two clubs that might meet each other in European competition and, while neither Rangers nor Newcastle are playing in Europe, they could in the future. Now it seems Ashley wants to take charge of the Gers alone with, clearly, one eye on a potential return to the Champions League and the opportunities that would afford. But right now his focus is on selling the Magpies quickly – and the £230m asking price includes repayment of the £129m he is owed in the form of interest-free loans. Ashley paid just £134m to purchase Newcastle from Sir John Hall, above, and Freddie Shepherd in 2007. And, while the club has not officially been put up for sale as the uncertainty could destabilise the business and unsettle the team, there is interest from North America and the Far East in buying a club that posted a post-tax profit of £9.9m for the last financial year. That, however, has not been achieved without incurring the wrath of a lot of people concerned at his lack of investment in the team, a controversial shirt deal with payday loans company Wonga and a series of internal cost-cutting measures. The £40m spent on players this summer was paid for almost entirely by the sale of Yohan Cabaye to Paris Saint-Germain and Mathieu Debuchy to Arsenal. http://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/sport/football/509766/Newcastle-s-Mike-Ashley-set-to-bid-for-Rangers -
THE displays of the Rangers team on the park last week were cause for optimism down Ibrox way. Ally McCoist's side netted 12 goals in their two competitive outings and put their shaky early-season form well and truly behind them. The size of the crowds in the home games against both Clyde and Dumbarton, however, were reasons to look towards the future with trepidation. And the attendance at the SPFL Championship fixture with Dumbarton on Saturday afternoon was particularly alarming. For the league meeting with the Sons was perhaps the best chance so far to gauge what the turnout will be like at Rangers home games in the 2014/15 campaign. The Petrofac Training Cup matches with Hibs and then Clyde were always going to attract smaller crowds due to the stature of the competition and the size of the opposition. Much was made of the fact that only 11,190 supporters filed through the turnstiles in the 8-1 victory in the latter game last Monday. It was the lowest Ibrox attendance at a competitive fixture for 29 years. Yet that encounter with part-time opponents from the bottom tier of Scottish football was - despite Gers great Barry Ferguson being in charge of the opposition - expected to draw that sort of response. There were 43,683 in the Championship opener against Hearts a fortnight ago. But there were special circumstances surrounding that fixture. The League One flag was unfurled and the Govan Stand was renamed in honour of Sandy Jardine before kick-off. Plus, the first game against age-old adversaries Hearts after two long seasons of often uninspiring outings against our national game's lesser lights was guaranteed to put a fair few bums on seats. No, the Dumbarton game at the weekend was a far better barometer of what size the attendances - and, in turn, the gate receipts -will be for Rangers in the weeks and months which lie ahead. And the fact that only 31,175 turned up on a perfect afternoon for football must be worrying for both those who follow the fortunes and those who control the purse-strings at the troubled Glasgow institution. It was the lowest turnout at a league game at Ibrox since 24,177 fans watched Rangers defeat Falkirk 4-0 thanks to a Robert Fleck double and goals from Davie Cooper and Terry Butcher on December 13, 1986. A home game against Methil minnows East Fife around this time last year drew 42,870. No company can have nearly a quarter of their customers disappear in the space of 12 months without drastic consequences. Even if all of the 34,000 fans who bought season tickets to see Rangers in League One last season had renewed this summer, the club would still not have had enough money to see them to the end of this term. So for just how long will the Light Blues be able to limp along with just over 20,000 season book holders and fewer than 10,000 turning up and paying at the gate on match days? There are ambitious plans for Rangers to hold another share offering in the very near future and the hope is to raise in the region of £4million of much-needed capital from that. But with shareholder Sandy Easdale and wealthy fan George Letham due to have loans totalling £1.5m repaid, financial experts have predicted that will only sustain the club until the end of the year. The ongoing lack of clarity over Rangers future off the field is overshadowing the fact that on it they appear to be getting their act together after some poor performances. They brushed aside Dumbarton with ease at the weekend thanks to strikes from Lee McCulloch, Darren McGregor and Nicky Clark. An own goal from Chris Turner aided their cause considerably. Bilel Mohsni, who was highly fortunate not to be red carded by referee Brian Colvin for his trip on Scott Agnew, also turned the ball into his net late on to give the sizeable travelling support a reason to cheer. That lapse of judgment by the Tunisian, though, could not wipe the smile from McCoist's face after a highly satisfactory performance by his charges from front to back. He said: "The skipper played in central midfield and chipped in with a goal, Nicky got a good goal and our right-back played well and scored a great goal. "To be scoring goals is always good. But to be scoring goals from different areas is an added bonus for us. "I was annoyed we didn't keep a clean sheet, but I thought the football was of a high standard. We created a lot of chances, scored four good goals, hit the post and had a goal disallowed. "It is consistency that is going to win us the league this year. That is what we have to work hard to get. "There are going to be a lot of difficult games for us in the months ahead and we have to be at our best every week." http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/deserted-seats-show-reality-of-angry-rangers-fans-voting-with-their-177533n.25139848
-
"A turbulent week at Ibrox has put the club's future once again at risk. RANGERS face an instant SPFL disciplinary investigation if they fail to pay their players and coaching staff at the end of the month, it was revealed last night. Former director Imran Ahmad’s court victory on Friday, freezing £620,000 of the club’s dwindling £1.2million cash reserves, leaves the beleaguered Gers board struggling to make payroll. Now, if they default, rules introduced two years ago on the back of Hearts’ problems leave them no wriggle room. The potential punishments only apply to the club defaulting on its football wages, not an administrative salaries they have. However with their staff due their cash in the bank on September 25, the last Thursday of the month, sources believe they could be cutting it neat with a monthly burden of around £700,000 to meet. Regulations E17 and E19, introduced by the old SPL and carried into the new SPFL rulebook, cover any breaches of remuneration to players, coaches and management. Any default will be hit by an instant registration embargo. They will also then be subject to disciplinary procedures, which allow the governing body sanctions ranging from a slap on the wrist to docked points to exclusion from the league. The Ibrox club’s hopes of avoiding that scenario now rest with the success of their forthcoming £4m share offer, although from that figure, they’ll have to deduct a six-figure sum for costs plus £1m to cover the loan given to them by businessman George Letham. Director Sandy Easdale claimed in our sister paper the Daily Record in midweek that he wouldn’t be calling in the £500,000 he had lent. However Mailsport understands Letham, who has already given the club one extension on the terms he agreed, which saw his loan fall due from season ticket money, is adamant he’ll now take what he is due because he would rather have his cash back than be left with the car park his money is secured against. Rangers also no longer have any regular retail income following their decision to outsource that branch of their business to Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct, a move revealed earlier this week when 51 staff from their stores were TUPE’d acros to the the billionaire’s company payroll. It’s believed that although SFA rules prevent the Newcastle United owner extending his shareholding in the club, he could yet bail them out with loan payments to tide them through the coming months. The potential cost of those, both financially and to the club’s powerbase, is still unclear." http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/revealed-rangers-face-immediate-spfl-4177789? Comment: I realize it may be scaremongering and "the Mailsport understands" sounds almost like "We hope...". It is all so familiar, sadly, this kind of communique
-
http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/272-rangers-being-held-hostage-stockholm-syndrome It’s been a stressful week for those interested in the well-being of Rangers Football Club. Not only does the club admit to the Stock Exchange that if the latest share offer is under-subscribed it will be unable to pay its creditors; we have key board members who represent the interests of the vast bulk of existing shareholders conceding that his and our CEO’s intentions are different, confirming a split at board level. Meanwhile the negative detail of each onerous contract placed upon the club are drip-fed to concerned fans on a week-to-week basis: from retail deals where the money is yet to be released to our struggling accounts to stadium naming rights which appear to be the result of self-interest rather than good value. Never has it been more obvious that our club is being held hostage to the whim of chancers. Yet, bizarrely, almost in a comedic fashion, we have some fans absolving these people of blame. Wikipedia describes Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, as ‘a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with them.’ The syndrome itself is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken in Stockholm, Sweden, in which several bank employees were held hostage in a bank vault from August 23 to 28, 1973, while their captors negotiated with police. During this standoff, the victims became emotionally attached to their captors, rejected assistance from government officials at one point, and even defended their captors after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. Ok, I’ll admit at the outset the analogy is a bit strong but if we examine the last few years – from the excesses of Sir David Murray to the actions of Craig Whyte right through to the present day incumbents, there are examples of the above. These include the eyes-wide-shut worship of Murray onto the lauding of Whyte’s supposed net-worth despite all the evidence to the contrary at the very outset to some fans insisting the ‘current’ board are not to blame for the club’s position now. Indeed, not only do we have bloggers continue to suggest Charles Green remains interested in the well-being of the club but we have various fans eager to hold their own as culpable in Rangers’ problems. Apparently it’s Dave King, the Union of Fans or Sons of Struth’s fault that the club cannot pay its bills. Similarly, possible investors such as Dave King who has proven his good intentions to the tune of £20million previously are mocked and pushed away. Conversely, some supporters are eager to extoll the virtue of Mike Ashley’s ongoing involvement despite many Newcastle fans being desperate to rid their club of him. He’s a billionaire they cry – without acknowledging the reason for his success is the kind of questionable retail and naming deals he strikes with clubs such as ours. Let’s be clear: the future of the football club is again in serious question and the danger should not be under-estimated. There has been a shortfall of at least 12,000 season tickets and it’s this lack of working capital that is directly impacting upon the club’s ability to trade. Thus, those that suggest the fans are to ‘blame’ for the financial problems are at least partly correct but the reasons are worth examining as well as the club’s inability to address this serious problem. Never has it been clearer that our money runs the club year on year – not Sir David Murray’s, not Craig Whyte’s and certainly not the anonymous investors currently in control of it. Therefore, engaging with the support should be a priority for any regime looking to make a success of the club. For all his faults, Murray realised this and while he was by the dominant partner in that relationship, we did have a nominal seat at the table and aside from a few small issues (comparatively speaking anyway!) crowds were always high and only his cowardice led to the Whyte debacle. Yet even in the dark days of that era attendances didn’t drop and after administration we had capacity crowd after capacity crowd. The same can be said after we fell to Division Three – our support did not dissipate and our loyalty should never be questioned. Not by anyone – least of all our own. Unfortunately the last year or so has seen attitudes change: not due to fans becoming lazy or greedy but because of a combination of factors. Firstly it become clear that much of the substantial monies raised in backing the Charles Green ownership were wasted and his associates less than ideal custodians of the club. In the face of this criticism, board changes were made and supposedly extensive reviews into the business carried out but the paucity of these contributions didn’t provide much solace. A poor quality (or at best inconsistent) product on the park wasn’t helping but promised changes highlighted in the review to address this have not been forthcoming. Thus, reluctantly, and by way of protest, many fans chose to withhold their investment and, if we’re brutally honest, that’s understandable. Generally, the last year has seen fans become ever more frustrated with their club and increasingly obvious evidence that the incumbent board – or more accurately the decision-making investment groups – cannot turn things around. Not just in terms of the £30million investment talked of in their empirical reviews but the kind of credible and transparent leadership required to rebuild trust in the boardroom and entice fans back to Ibrox. With almost 250 staff members and overheads of aging stadiums, training grounds and dilapidated white elephant buildings, is it any wonder a new administration event looms large on the horizon? Consequently, where does that leave us? Well, I’d suggest we have two distinct pathways ahead. One: if as seems likely, the share offer is subscribed enough to defer our problems to another day; we’ll have the fait accompli of 75% share-holding levels for approval of AGM/EGM resolutions related to the sale and/or leaseback of club assets ¬– such as the Auchenhowie training ground which has consistently been ignored by club representatives when talking about such revenue sources. Or, two: investment groups are able by way of this issue to consolidate their holdings enough to enable a sale to other interested parties. Now, I won’t try to predict the outcome but I’m certain both the existing ownership and the likes of Dave King and/or Mike Ashley will have planned for these eventualities over the last year. The events of the last week won’t be a surprise to them. What is easier to predict is that without one of these outcomes an insolvency event is inevitable as things stand. However, misguided suggestions that this may be an agreeable solution make me uneasy. For example, will onerous contracts be removed by this process, would ownership be guaranteed to change after it and what of the club’s league position after the fact? We don’t know so, simply put, no-one should look at administration with anything other than horror. On the other hand, neither should fans be emotionally blackmailed into providing what appears to be an ever-more toxic board and ownership with a mandate to stumble on in charge. The time for making excuses for these people has long gone. There is no defence of Charles Green and, whether he’s still involved now or not, his associates on the ‘current’ board are equally tainted by their deficiencies. With that in mind, what options are available to fans? Not many is the desperate answer. Yes we have worthy share initiatives like Buy Rangers and Rangers First but with further financial uncertainty abound, can we really expect fans to invest in shares after the events of 2012? Even so, we absolutely must consider such projects with an open mind but with the greatest will in the world, they’re arguably not a short term solution. Nevertheless, possibly buyers engaging with these groups going forward would go a long way to cementing the fans’ contribution in a better future. Indeed, it’s only through that kind of undertaking that we may finally achieve the kind of bond between supporters and ownership that has been missing for so long. Unfortunately, such a positive conclusion seems difficult to attain. The coming weeks and months will define the future and it may well be beyond the fans abilities to impact upon this. Nevertheless, neither should we be held to ransom by people who will never understand the love we have for our football club. We have a choice and while I’d never begin to tell my fellow fans what to do, at some point we have to stop identifying with people who don’t share our love for our club. In that sense Stockholm syndrome is not a workable survival strategy – it just prolongs our inability to escape from the status quo and it’s that kind of clarity every fan needs for our battles ahead. Either that or be held prisoner forever.
-
RANGERS fan George Letham has reluctantly agreed to give the Ibrox board a short extension to repay the £1million loan that was due last week. The wealthy supporter stepped in to lend his boyhood heroes the seven-figure sum earlier this year as chief executive Graham Wallace was forced to seek a quick fix to the Gers' cash crisis. As part of the agreement, Rangers were scheduled to give Letham his money back by the close of business on Friday, but after the Light Blues announced plans to raise around £4m in a share option last week, the prospect of him receiving his money appeared bleak. SportTimes understands Letham held full and frank discussions with Wallace on Saturday and agreed to a short extension to allow the under-fire board more time to come up with the money. With cash reserves running low at Ibrox, a refusal from Letham would have left Wallace and his fellow-directors with a huge financial headache. But after stepping up to the plate to help Rangers in their hour of need in March, the lifelong Light Blue was not prepared to pull the rug from under the board's feet at this time. The full extent of the Gers' financial plight was laid bare in a statement to the Stock Exchange last week when the board admitted that the future of Rangers International Football Club plc would be 'uncertain' if all 19 million of the new shares were not snapped up by existing investors in the coming weeks. Any funds that are raised will be used to pay off Letham's £1m loan and the £500,000 deal that was agreed with Sandy Easdale, both of which were secured against the Albion car park and Edmiston House. The Ibrox board originally clinched a deal with major shareholders Laxey Partners but that move came under huge criticism from supporters after it was revealed the Hedge Fund would collect £150,000 in interest payments for the short-term loan. Rangers had a cash balance of just £4.2m at June 30 this year, but with £2.7m of that unavailable as use for working capital, the board have been forced to issue more shares in a bid to repay Letham and Easdale and provide much-needed money for the coming weeks. With the financial picture once again bleak at Ibrox, boss Ally McCoist was unable to make any last-minute moves to bolster his squad before the transfer window closed last night. The Gers' two most valuable assets, Lee Wallace and Lewis Macleod, remain at the club, but seven players have gone out on loan - Barrie McKay (Raith Rovers), Calum Gallacher (Cowdenbeath), Danny Stoney (Stranraer), Luca Gasparotto (Airdrie), Robbie Crawford (Morton), Tom Walsh (Stenhousemuir) and Craig Halkett (Clyde). http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/letham-gives-rangers-extra-time-to-repay-1million-loan-178673n.25212709
-
What can this board do to pacify the fans? Is there anyway the directors can turn both the finances and the trust of the supporters around? With the club unable to repay George Lethams loan and the stark warnings from London that the investors may not support the short sighted share issue to the level required (75% uptake or the issue will not proceed). The fact that the club couldn't convince or provide 2 potential investors to underwrite the share issue let alone see any of the controlling investors (BPH Marg and Laxey) put their hand up to do so, then what is next should the share offer fail? Mr Letham has gracefully given the club a short time to re pay his loan and I can't see this being done if as it looks, the share issue doesn't provide enough capital. Does the immediate future of our club rely on this short sighted offering? If it fails will the directors be in the unenviable position of declaring insolvency? It certainly looks like it. One thing has been missed by many board apologists since Fridays announcement, why with the finances in such a state did it take so long for the board to even attempt to seek this small investment via share sales? With the amount of accountants at our club surely one of them must have been able to see this coming sooner and not left it till the last possible minute to panic. Did they maybe want the season ticket sales to finish before setting the alarm bells as I see no reason that fans have been able to predict even with 100% st renewals that the club would not get through this calendar year without investment. I spoke to Mr Wallace as far back as February and asked him what the club would do should the season ticket sales not reach the required level and I also asked him at the same meeting why not do a share issue now if one was available. Mr Wallace at this time suggested waiting as the price would be higher later in the year. I raised an eyebrow at this claim as I would have thought the less cash in the bank would surely not increase the share price but Mr Wallace has vastly more experience than me and I wrongly took his word on this. Maybe he didn't gauge the reaction to ST renewal notices that were working their way to postboxes at this time I have no doubt that the board apologists will say " aye it's because of the low season ticket sales they need the money and it's the fans fault they can't raise the dough" REALLY? The season ticket deadline was back in April and the board have had almost four months to react to the results, my goodness that's around 120 days which seems to be the normal reaction time round our boardroom to do anything these days. My prediction and that shared by many others is, if the share option fails to reach the 75% buy in, the fans will be blamed for not buying enough ST and putting the directors in this position, then the shareholders will be blamed for not bailing them out and the outcome will be "we needed to do a deal on the training ground/ cheap deal on naming rights to get us out of trouble, we are a good shiny new board" I actually feel sympathy for a director or two at this time because not only are they struggling to keep the lights on, they have to contend with in fighting and power struggles in the boardroom which will no doubt be also hampering their efforts to do the right thing I haven't even touched the "where's the promised investment?" question which has been promised now by both sides of the boardroom split. All this drama going on while a potential investor has declared the willingness to invest £30m but can't even be giving financial information when he's been asked to underwrite a share issue. The mind boggles. Sort out your boardroom differences, cut the crap and spin and pick up the phone. It's good to talk and you did claim you're "ready to listen". Craig https://www.facebook.com/SonsOfStruth
-
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=12066370
-
Bill Leckie; Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. If they don’t heed those words as the vultures circle Ibrox once again, then hell mend them. First time their club went to the wall, they manned the barricades to protect it from a big, nasty outside world. For that, no matter what other thoughts you have on the matter, their loyalty surely deserves to be applauded. But now? Two-and-a-half years on? If, despite being given a second chance to repair the horrendous mistakes of the past, a club with this level of support goes into administration AGAIN? Sorry, but if it was me I wouldn’t give them another penny. On Saturday, once more, thousands turned up brandishing red cards to express their unhappiness at the way the love of their lives is being mismanaged. And, once more, those responsible for the mismanagement laughed up their sleeves at the pointlessness of the protest. Because to brandish those red cards, you have to pay your money to get inside the stadium. Which hands yet more cash to the people you’re protesting at so they can go ahead and waste it. Listen, what do I know? They’re not my club and the one I do follow has never been to the heights Rangers have reached to suffer such a humiliating, disorientating fall. I’m just someone looking in and wondering how the hell, in all good conscience, Bluenoses can carry on regardless if and when the accountants take over the asylum once more. Actually, don’t answer that. It’s not a can of worms that’s worth opening, this We-Are-The-People, Rangers-Till-I-Die, stick-your-fingers-in-your-ears-and-sing-Follow-Follow mindset. So, for what it’s worth, let me instead pass on my suggestion for what they should do if their club re-enters the abyss. Sod it. Turn their backs on it. Give it, as a man on the other side of Glasgow once said, not one more thin dime. And instead, invest in the future of Scottish clubs who DO run their affairs honestly and who DO have respect for those who click the turnstiles. Go and back your old skipper Barry Ferguson as he tries to make things happen at Clyde. Go and see what another ex-player in Gary Bollan’s doing with Airdrie. If you’re from Fife, go and watch East Fife or Cowdenbeath. If you’re in Angus, hand your tenner to Arbroath or Brechin, Forfar or Montrose. If you donÂ’t want to give up your wee jaunt over from Northern Ireland, get off the ferry and stroll up to Stair Park. There’s been a school of thought among some these last couple of years that Rangers being forced to do the grand tour of the colonies meant the lower divisions should have been grateful for the gate receipts and the TV handouts. For me, this always got it the wrong way round. It was those inside Ibrox should have been thankful that they were in still in business and ABLE to head for Elgin and Berwick and Stranraer. Now, as fresh financial catastrophe looms, I’d put it to Rangers fans that they could do far more good for far more people if they stopped pouring money into what has long since ceased to be “their” club and started drip-feeding it to those who genuinely are the game’s lifeblood. Why? I’ll give you three good reasons. One, those halfwits in your directors’ box shouldn’t be trusted with the remote for the telly, never mind your wages. Two, that 30,000-odd of you spread among the country’s 20-odd part-time clubs would not only create better atmospheres but also help to cement football in communities for the long term. And three? You might just get to relax and enjoy the game, rather than always being angry and stressed about it. Watching Ayr United play Stenhousemuir might just extend your life. The alternative to this is a simple one. Stand your ground and, by your very presence, condone the halfwits in the directors’ box. Two-and-a-half years on from that first administration and the liquidation that followed, these halfwits need to scramble together £4million in a matter of days to keep their heads above water. To achieve this, they may need to flog their saleable players before the transfer window closes, which will hamper your hopes of promotion back to the top flight. If they don’t raise the money, they stand to suffer a 25-point deduction as punishment for a second spell in administration, all but ending those promotion hopes. How, with the wages they pay and the crowds they attract and the sheer intimidatory force of their name that is a two-goal start against far smaller opposition, can this possibly be? How the lumping hell can the people running a club the size of Rangers be handed the chance they were to start again, to build sensibly, to tool up for their return to where they want to be, and yet fail so utterly miserably? How? The clue is in the word halfwits. So maybe I’ve got this all the wrong way round. And it’s those Ibrox directors who should be sent to the outposts of the footballing empire instead. Maybe Graham Wallace and the Easdales and whoever else is a player in this embarrassing saga are the ones who need to go out into the real world and see how real football people operate. Trust me, if a month shadowing the treasurer at Albion Rovers didn’t shame them into living within their means, liquidation’s too good for them.
-
I would encourage anyone not already a member to join now The below will be being emailed to all members shortly. We encourage all Rangers Fans world wide to now participate in at http://www.rangersfirst.org'>http://www.rangersfirst.org We are the People and this is our time. Dear members > > As you will have gathered the Club issued an Open Offer today regarding the issue of 19,864,918 new Ordinary Shares in Rangers International Football Club PLC. > > The full details of that issue can be found here: > > http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exch ... d=12066370 > > We would ask that you have a read of it all. > > Rangers First was set up to collectively buy as many shares in the PLC as it could, with the hope of at least reaching 5% ownership which in a PLC is significant as it would allow Rangers First to hold any PLC board to account via the calling of a General meeting. > > Rangers First can confirm that it has already written to both Graham Wallace and the NOMAD (Daniel Stewart & Company PLC, who has confirmed reciept) that it is in a position to “invest beyond our pro-rated pre-emption rights” and that Rangers First would “wish to be added to any Excess Application Facility for the purchase of additional shares” > > Upon reflection on todays statement the Rangers First steering group has concluded that it is most appropriate to continue on our policy of buying shares and will as we indicated in our letter seek to take up as many as possible. > > However as is made clear in the Clubs own statement there are severe risks if this share issue is not taken up and this will not be the last share issue and so we presume these same risks will also attach as concerns to the further share offers to follow. Rangers First is set up as a democratic organisation and so the Steering Group wish to put the democratic process into action and have our members confirm by vote that they are happy for Rangers First Steering Group to continue its share purchase policy and take up as many shares as it can in this share issue. > > All members will be sent a vote in the next few hours which will be open over the weekend. > > This is another chance for Rangers Fans to take a significant stake and have significantly more influence at our Club. From the statement this will be the first of a number of equity raises so now is the time to sign up, get you family, home and abroad signed up, get those you go to and watch the game with signed…..get every Bear you have ever known to sign up to Rangers First > > http://www.rangersfirst.org Please consider taking out a Life membership of Rangers First for £500 (this can be passed to your children one day) or joining for a monthly fee of as little as £5 per month (U16 free) Selling all the 1872 life membership would raise enough for Rangers First to buy over 5% of the Club and reach our Stage 1 > > > We are the People and this is our Time!
-
missed 2 penalties, otherwise it would have been 6-1 and the return game beyond doubt.
-
Next year will see us enter the Premiership hoping to reclaim our crown as King of Scotland. I am looking for some help in this thread from you guys please. I am looking at our revenue in the lower leagues and what we used to bring in when in the SPL and looking at how we are going to get back there, so some fag packet maths. When in the SPL our average revenues were £25m Gate Receipts and Hospitality £3m Sponsors and Advertising £5m Broadcasting rights £5m Commercial income £2m Other operating income That is us, without European football. A £40m revenue club. That is what we averaged over the last 15 years or so when not participating in Europe. This is where we will need to be at least next season to just compete i believe. Our operating expenses averaged out at £45m per season. Every year. Staff costs including wages and salaries averaged at around £30m of that £45m. 75% of turnover from above. This means that we were always pissing against the wind, needing European football. It's easy to see here trouble was always inevitable as we could never quite get the costs down to a sustainable level. When in the lower leagues our average revenues were £12m Gate receipts and hospitality. £740k Sponsorship and advertising. £1.5m Retail £700k Broadcasting £900k Commercial £1.5m Other revenue. Around £17.3m revenue as a lower league club with costs at almost double that incredibly. As a comparison, Celtic turnover over £50m in any given year without European football but obviously have a much higher operating cost base. Merchandising costs them £9m per annum but they bring in £15m Football operations brings in £30m but costs them anything between £46m and £50m including £40m in staffing costs as of last year. Multimedia and other commercial brings in £10m and costs them £2m This shows how important European football is to them as well. Without it they run at a similar loss to what we did. European football is imperative to both clubs. So anyway, i would like to know how we are going to go from a club bringing in less that £20m to a club who must bring in at least double that in the next 12 months, whilst keeping our operating costs under control. The wage bill will undoubtedly need to increase too. We are already running at a loss. Averaged out at around *£400k per month. You can see where the differences are but just how easy will it be to go back to the former revenue streams? What do you think guys? *worked out from recent 120 day review.
-
I'd tried to temper my bewilderment at our close season signings by reflecting on the often used mantra that "there is no substitute for experience". But having a manager with a propensity for playing just one out and out striker it seemed reasonable to question the wisdom of signing 2 ageing, albeit proven strikers, taking our total to 5. I suppose in some ways the fact we played with 2 up front today is a positive improvement - cherish it, its probably the only positive you will find in this article. With young Charlie Telfer exiting Ibrox and directing barbed comments at our manager's apparent unwillingness to blood youngsters, the departure of goalkeeper Scott Gallagher and the re-signing of the veteran and occasionally calamitous, Steve Simonsen does little to suggest that youth is to be the favoured option. One wonders how young Nicky Clark feels his development will fare as the least favoured option behind Boyd, Miller, Daly and given today's personnel selection, even Shiels. Why is this important ? Well if we do manage to successfully negotiate the championship, and I appreciate after today some are saying that's a pretty big "if"; rather than return to the top league with the nucleus of a young team we will instead be replacing ageing players in key positions. "Professors" of football often speak about the "spine" of a team - goalkeeper, centre back and striker. Of our current spine I see only Cammy Bell offering any kind of continuity in this regard. Which of course means new blood, a settling in period and that's before we find the readies for such an overhaul. Without wishing to induce further panic it's probably worth asking the question if there will even be the money for such an overhaul ? So what does all this experience get you for your money? Well not a lot judging by today's performance. You could forgive a schoolboy team for switching off after scoring and giving yourself a lifeline but a team brimming with seasoned pros? Furthermore how can it be that Nicky Law and Ian Black despite having countless games together under their belt, give the appearance they have never played with one another before? The booing of the formers man of the match award should serve as a warning to all at Ibrox that whilst we may be loyal we are certainly not gullible. Kenny Miller did what we have come to expect him to do, and were it not for the detrimental effect to Nicky Clark's development and the fact he is a short term rather than a long term answer, you would see this as a beneficial signing for the season, particularly if young Clark was paired alongside him. Kris Boyd I'm not so sure of. He somehow managed to look even less mobile than 1st time around, so much so, I half expected Police Scotland to bring the game to a halt and announce they had found Clyde, the missing Games statue. The progress and improvement of Lewis Macleod and Fraser Aird has been deeply satisfying for us blue legions, the former in particular showing particular potential. Could a few others have benefited from an extended run in first team football ? Some will remember Dick Advocatt recognising the potential of a young Barry Ferguson and building a team around him, sadly that will not happen so long as young Macleod finds himself played out of position on the wing We need to stop making excuses for Ally. Yes he has had to endure challenges no other Rangers manager has had to contend with but that really does not excuse signings which are devoid of long term vision, as well as tactics, team selections and substitutions which have us all bewildered. There was a moment today when the cameras panned to John Greig sitting in the stands, and on seeing his image on the screens applause echoed around the ground. John is a Rangers legend on and off the park. Unfortunately he was not a very good manager. I fear history may be repeating itself.
-
Suspect the Daily Record will make for interesting reading tomorrow. Will make us even more frustrated though. #justicefortherangerssupport Glad to see what looks like some things HMRC would rather stay unsaid are going to finally come to light. A couple of tweets tonight. Story here: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ex-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-being-3992415
-
Did anyone spot David Longmuir at game today? Wonder why he was there?
-
Letter sent to Rangers CEO Graham Wallace As we previously communicated with you, we contacted Graham Wallace in June requesting whether he still agreed over the "importance for clubs with ambition to own their own stadium and training centre". Sadly, we received no response so this week we have sent further correspondence to Mr Wallace. This is as follows: Dear Mr Wallace, Season Ticket Sales and the Future of Auchenhowie We note we have yet to receive a response to our email of 10/06/14 (copied below), and again write to express our concerns in regards to the above. Season ticket sales appear to be very disappointing, which is astonishing given that this season could see us return to the top flight, and will involve some potentially excellent matches against Hibs and Hearts, in what will generally be a much more competitive league. This is surely a reflection on how the fans view the performance of the board, and in particular, a reflection on some very real concerns fans have over the future of Ibrox and our training ground at Auchenhowie. We note the recent statement by the board as regards Ibrox, however, rumours continue to persist that the board are in the process of using Auchenhowie to raise funds in some way to bridge the gap left by the very disappointing level of season ticket renewals. As you are no doubt aware, the training complex is viewed as a symbol of the future by Rangers fans, and disposing of this asset in any way is likely to be counterproductive as it would lead to further disillusionment and detachment of the fans - who, it should be remembered, contributed significantly to the cost of the facility. We would therefore urge you to end this downward spiral and clarify how the board plan to address the apparent lack of confidence which the fans appear to have in them, and thus, hopefully, increase the level of season ticket renewals. We would hope an increase in season ticket uptake to a more realistic level would obviate the need for the board to resort to disposing of vital assets. We note that the first responsibility of the board is to the company and not to any individual or group of shareholders. With this in mind, you will recall the board's recent attempt to raise short term funding via a major shareholder, and that The RST was able to assist in procuring a significantly more beneficial deal for the company. Can you therefore confirm that we will be afforded a similar opportunity to obtain a better deal for the company should the board fail to raise season ticket sales and have to resort to using Auchenhowie to raise finance? We hope you will understand our concerns and the urgent need for a response. We will update members with any response we received.
-
He lost the vote but I'm surprised that seems to have been the end of it? I don't think much of him but it seems odd he has gone completely quiet. Am I missing something?
-
After a successful meeting with Glasgow City Council and Police Scotland today it would appear that subject to a few little details our application for a procession to Ibrox on the 19th July will be passed as acceptable. We will require the following volunteers from within the support to fulfil some council requirements. - Experianced marshals - Volunteer marshals - First aiders - Expectant numbers. I would love to hear from pipe or accordion band with a repertoire of Rangers songs In their play book. If you can help with any of the above or will be in attendance can you please let me know on this post or via PM Thanks Craig SoS https://www.facebook.com/SonsOfStrut...al_comments=14 L
-
Dont know if this has been covered or not , but who exactly is paying for this tour , we are taking a playing squad of 25 plus management and backroom teams , there must be the bulk of 40 plus in the party , yet we are playing basically junior teams by Scottish standards , so given we are struggling financially , the question is who's footing the bill for this little extravaganza
