Zappa 0 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 End result = No Kris Commons at Ibrox, transfer window closure coming in about 5 days. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,457 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I would have liked to see Commons sign as I think he might improve our team,however I don't think not signing him means we will not win the league 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gers4Life 0 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Tbh I can't see us bringing in anyone and if we do it will be a panic buy, wish lloyds banking group would get the hell out our club, also wonder if lloyds are banking on a record number of renewals when the seasons tickets are sent out for renewal.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I am still struggling with all the blame being levied at Lloyds. SDM, Bain et al were the ones that put us in the shit we are in. Sure, Lloyds supported the club in clocking up those debts but they have never been there to run the business. It appears to me that the internal club management at the Board level have not had a proper short, medium and long term business plan in place which takes into account best, most likely, and worst case scenario. If they had you would surely be led to believe that we would be left with a debt which wouldnt cause us business problems. Has any of us yet stopped to think that if Lloyds left us to run the business as we see fit then we could be even FURTHER IN THE SHIT ? Very few of us think Bain does a particularly good job as CEO - so why would we then think that he should be left with free reign to handle the club's purse strings without being reviewed as to what he is doing ? On the face of it Lloyds are hurting, if not crippling, us. However, it could just as easily be the case that they are actually saving us from ourselves. After all, since SDM took control of the club we have virtually NEVER been stable - even during 9IAR we were clocking up debts which have proven (with hindsight admittedly) unsustainable. FFS, SDM and cohorts took us to almost 80 million in the red, went through a "short downsizing period", had to underwrite 50+ million of a share issue to clear that debt, said we would never get ourselves into the same position again... and them promptly went and got us in the same position again...... Perhaps, as I say, Lloyds may actually be saving us from ourselves. In any other business Martin bain would likely be sacked for being an integral part of taking the company to the bring twice - but we actually reward him with bonuses - you couldnt make it up. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,457 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I am still struggling with all the blame being levied at Lloyds. SDM, Bain et al were the ones that put us in the shit we are in. Sure, Lloyds supported the club in clocking up those debts but they have never been there to run the business. It appears to me that the internal club management at the Board level have not had a proper short, medium and long term business plan in place which takes into account best, most likely, and worst case scenario. If they had you would surely be led to believe that we would be left with a debt which wouldnt cause us business problems. Has any of us yet stopped to think that if Lloyds left us to run the business as we see fit then we could be even FURTHER IN THE SHIT ? Very few of us think Bain does a particularly good job as CEO - so why would we then think that he should be left with free reign to handle the club's purse strings without being reviewed as to what he is doing ? On the face of it Lloyds are hurting, if not crippling, us. However, it could just as easily be the case that they are actually saving us from ourselves. After all, since SDM took control of the club we have virtually NEVER been stable - even during 9IAR we were clocking up debts which have proven (with hindsight admittedly) unsustainable. FFS, SDM and cohorts took us to almost 80 million in the red, went through a "short downsizing period", had to underwrite 50+ million of a share issue to clear that debt, said we would never get ourselves into the same position again... and them promptly went and got us in the same position again...... Perhaps, as I say, Lloyds may actually be saving us from ourselves. In any other business Martin bain would likely be sacked for being an integral part of taking the company to the bring twice - but we actually reward him with bonuses - you couldnt make it up. Who has all the answers?, SDM. Where is all the money we have earned going?,SDM. It is time for SDM to come out from whatever stone he is hiding under and give us Rangers fans some answers, I won't be holding my breath. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Lloyds might not have been the ones who knocked us down, but they seem to be the ones kicking our head while we lie on the floor... Murray's and Bain's culpability does not absolve Lloyds for their overly heavy handed measures which are causing more problems than they are solving. If you have an overweight child you can put them on a sensible calorie deficit diet or you can go for a crash diet where you virtually starve them and they can hardly function - Lloyds may not have been responsible for the child being fat but they have chosen a route which would have them reported for child abuse... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Who has all the answers?, SDM. Where is all the money we have earned going?,SDM. It is time for SDM to come out from whatever stone he is hiding under and give us Rangers fans some answers, I won't be holding my breath. I very much doubt SDM has made even a net penny profit out of Rangers finances - more like a huge loss after his �£50M share issue. SDM is responsible for a lot of the ills at our club, but accusing him of stealing money is only clouding the issue. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Lloyds might not have been the ones who knocked us down, but they seem to be the ones kicking our head while we lie on the floor... Murray's and Bain's culpability does not absolve Lloyds for their overly heavy handed measures which are causing more problems than they are solving. If you have an overweight child you can put them on a sensible calorie deficit diet or you can go for a crash diet where you virtually starve them and they can hardly function - Lloyds may not have been responsible for the child being fat but they have chosen a route which would have them reported for child abuse... The thing is, we owe Lloyds money and they are entitled to get their money back as they wish. They don't give much thought to how we perform on the pitch as long as they keep getting back what we owe them. It must've got to a stage where Lloyds thought 'enough is enough'. I don't blame Lloyds in the slightest. They're a business after all and need to look after number 1. The overweight kid you're talking about is doing alright considering he's been starved on his "crash diet". Also, Lloyds gave us �£4m to spend on Jelavic and �£1m to spend on Beattie to I doubt they need reporting for child abuse. It's the men in charge at Ibrox who take the blame, not Lloyds. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Lloyds might not have been the ones who knocked us down, but they seem to be the ones kicking our head while we lie on the floor... Murray's and Bain's culpability does not absolve Lloyds for their overly heavy handed measures which are causing more problems than they are solving. If you have an overweight child you can put them on a sensible calorie deficit diet or you can go for a crash diet where you virtually starve them and they can hardly function - Lloyds may not have been responsible for the child being fat but they have chosen a route which would have them reported for child abuse... If you loaned me money and I went out and wasted it by heamorhagging it all over the place would you be happy to let me continue as per usual ? If I then went out and borrowed money from Frankie to pay you off you would be happy enough, right ? You would more than likely release a huge sigh of relief that you had your cash back. Then, a couple of years down the line you have again loaned me a ton of money which has, again, been used somewhat wastefully. In all honesty, would you not want to recoup that money as quickly as you can ? Of course you would. And before you suggest that the heavy handedness of Lloyds will prevent the club from paying the cash back.... given the level of debt if Rangers went bust Lloyds would get their money back by selling the full playing squad, Ibrox and Murray Park. For them they can be as heavy handed as they like because they will be able, one way or another, to recoup the money. We are where we are because of SDM et al, NOT because of Lloyds. Lloyds are doing exactly what they are entitled to do - they are looking to call in the debt owed to them. The club management should never have got themselves into a position where they would struggle to repay its debt. Debt, to an extent, is a good thing - but you must be able to service both the interest and the capital. It seems we can do that, but it also seems that we dont have the finance to do anything further than that - so Lloyds are making sure that we dont go further into debt, which is obviously their right as financiers of the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Anyone can do what they are "entitled" to do but that in no way makes it "clever", "right" or "sensible" or most of all - immune from criticism. Everything you say is fair enough, except that we should lay off Lloyds for what they are doing. I don't quite get your scenario either - most of the debt is of a mortgage type, and as we haven't defaulted on a single interest or capital payment, I really think it should be taken out of the equation for any "bad" debt. The rest of our debt is well within our previously agreed overdraft and so again I can't see how it's such a big thing. Not only that, Rangers current income should allow a greater amount of spending - at least to replace lost personnel when we're already understaffed, if nothing else. I keep having to repeat my point that there is a difference between prudence and going too far - I think Lloyds are doing the latter, and yes, they are entitled to do it. What has REALLY changed is the ownership of the bank and (since the banking crisis) the way they do business. They have pushed themselves to virtual bankruptcy and almost taking the country with it, through stupidity, greed, profligacy and lack of business acumen - and now want to get rid of what they see as increasingly risky football debtors. I'm sorry but the likes of Lloyds accusing Rangers of being rubbish with money is about as pot, kettle and black as you can get. The fact they think they can advise anyone how to run a business is laughable - and I think they are showing themselves up in this case. I realise that Lloyds are "entitled" to act like chunts but that doesn't mean I should forgive them for being a bunch of chunts! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.