Rangers: The truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth

[Frankie 8,198]

Recently, I've been redesigning the history archive section of the Gersnet website (re-launching very soon). While data entry is never the most exciting of jobs, working through every season of the club since 1872 wasn't the laborious task it could have been given the amount of fascinating facts surrounding Rangers.

 

From dozens of legendary club figures to last day title successes and triumphs in Europe, the club has it all. Of course, it has had many, many challenges along the way. From its very inception where four young lads knocked a borrowed ball about the banks of the Clyde, to tragic stadium disasters which will haunt us forever. And we're facing such a challenge now - one that threatens the very existence of Scotland's most successful football club.

 

First of all, I think it's important to note that believing everything said in muck-raking tabloids and other less than impartial media sources is a foolhardy business. There are always two sides to every story and you don't always get that when people are vilified in the papers. As such, the obvious ejaculation every time a negative story arises about our club (or its owner) must be dodged when viewing the bigger picture. Unfortunately for Craig Whyte, it's now getting to the stage where said picture isn't all that big at all.

 

Of course, the historic HMRC issues he is facing were not of his making so those attempting to suggest he is culpable for them just because he took the challenge on are not being wholly fair. Similarly, former directors questioning where he obtains his funds are not just ironic but distasteful given their own part in the club's perilous state.

 

Paul Murray and Alistair Johnston may think they're enlightening the support when talking to the Daily Record and BBC Scotland but where was their own 'vigilance' when their former board collectively contributed to the situation we're in now? Instead of pointing the figure at the present incumbent and asking the ordinary Copland Joe to act (and do what exactly?), why not offer alternatives which the support can buy into (literally if necessary)?

 

Moving onto the current board and while they're correct to defend themselves from unfair (or hypocritical) criticism; open letters and shareholder circulars may say a lot but actions speak louder than words. The Whyte era is in its infancy but, bad press or not, the lack of forward progress is worrying. I sympathise with the new owner in that he is clearly restricted with regard to the HMRC noose ever-tightening round his neck. However, he knew the situation before he bought the club so there must be plans to deal with whatever outcome the tribunal judges decide.

 

The main question Rangers fans have is what are those plans? With no AGM in sight, audited accounts still not published and shareholder letters that are open to interpretation; Whyte has to do a lot more to show he's the man to put our trust in. Obviously, until the tax judgement is known, he may want to keep his powder dry but it is becoming more and more difficult for our fans to take the man on his word - when his word has been shown to be less than reputable so far.

 

For example, while removing the Lloyds effect was always going to mean a different cash flow source, what what are the terms of the Ticketus arrangement, why are we several years down the line in advance payments and what happens if we do default? Is this the case of going from the frying pan to the fire or utilising a more efficient borrowing facility? Whyte's lack of transparency doesn't inspire confidence in the latter. There are many more questions needing answered and not everything can be blamed on the previous owner.

 

Now, I don't think many Rangers fans are asking for tens of millions to be pumped into the club. The lie of the land has changed and the excesses of the 1990s are long gone. We cannot and should not attempt to compete financially with other leagues. In that respect, Whyte is correct to highlight the fiscal vacuum that appears when we fail in Europe. We must cut our cloth accordingly. Thus, selling key assets such as Jelavic when we do fail isn't a surprise but an absolute necessity to avoid increasing debt again (not that we know what debt we carry). However, just because we may be unable to spend the millions of before, doesn't mean our ambitions should change.

 

No-one is saying it is easy to achieve the holy grail of being successful while making the club a profitable business. That takes investment, innovation, hard work and commitment - virtues that have been missing on and off the field at times this season. Ally McCoist may well be be unhappy that Jelavic hasn't been replaced but his (and his players) poor performance so far contributed to the shortfall.

 

What is important now is the reaction to the situation we find ourselves in. What the club has missed most this century is genuine leadership. Rangers Football Club didn't get to 2012 through accident but by great men playing their part in delivering and maintaining success. I sincerely hope Craig Whyte will be one such person. To his credit he has stepped forward to address the unforgivable risks of Sir David Murray and the previous regime. His background may not be perfect and he will make mistakes. However, if he's honest with the fans and involves them then the future can be a positive one. Guiding Rangers away from the precipice is easier said than done but it can and should be possible with a great man

 

And, that's the crux of the debate. No matter what Sir David Murray said or did; no matter what Craig Whyte says or does; the long term security of the club should be paramount. This year Rangers celebrates 140 years since it was founded by our gallant pioneers. This could also be the year it ends and it's up to Craig Whyte to ensure the unthinkable doesn't happen. Yet, so far his performance has been unconvincing and misleading. He needs to do more to show us he is capable of being another great Rangers man. Our fans should not apologise for expecting more.

 

That's the truth, the whole truth, of the matter.

[der Berliner 3,327]

Don't know, but for the love of *insert something that is important to you* I cannot understand what people want Whyte to say here. Speak publicly about confidential business dealings and strategies? The going on's behind his businesses with and beyond Rangers? Have you EVER heard any whispers about somesuch under/from Marlborough, Murray or from the Desmond figure beyond the Irish Sea? In times when HMRC et al look/-ed at our behaviour with eagle-eyes?

 

He comes out with essentially all he can and has to say at the moment, whether we like it or not. Whether we are the individual supporter or some thousand-strong association. It is IMHO essential that he does not spill any beans ahead of any verdict on the case, for each little bit he does will end up in the press and be turned about until it paints us and him in a bad light. That is what happened ever since he took over.

 

This is perhaps the most testing time for the club, but you do wonder - after all the debates that have been done about this - why people do actually fear for the existence of the club? It will not cease to exist, whether or not the verdict goes against us. Whether or not we get 250 points deducted for these next 12 years or whatnot. We took it all in our stride, these dozens of years of success under Souness, Smith, McLeish, Advocaat et al. We should be able to take the odd year of "failure" or "dispair" into our stride as well. Rangers are for life, not for the glory seasons.

[Frankie 8,198]

I don't disagree dB but like I say his performance is unconvincing and the HMRC issues shouldn't necessarily preclude him from showing us why he's the right man for the job. If he's so successful why not point to his successes - that would show us what kind of quality we can expect. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.

 

Generally I think I've been quite fair to him - especially given he has misled us on some issues and that is hardly confidence boosting either.

 

As for taking the good with the bad, of course we should. Again, as I highlighted there have been many bad periods in our history and moaning while winning 3 titles in a row would make some fans from the 60s weep at our spoiltness. However, what I'm asking Whyte to do is to be open and honest which will help us buy into his tenure.

 

If they're are to be a few years of no titles, European football or big money signings - fine, I can deal with that. But how does he see our future and what plans does he have to secure it. I'm not asking for every intricate detail - just some genuine leadership along with an indication of what he's made of.

 

As yet we've seen neither. That's the truth and we shouldn't hide from it.

[craig 5,199]

We should start a Gersnet whip-round. How long would it take us to get the 50 million to cover the potential tax liability ?

 

In all seriousness, if the fans had someone that they could trust, someone they could believe in to look after the well being of the club, I think that we could amass a fair amount of money to assist in the event that the club have to crystallise this debt.

 

The problem is that everyone is walking around with their head in the sand hoping for the best - there is nothing preventing the club (to the best of my knowledge) from creating an escrow account, which could be blocked from those actually running the club from touching, for fans to transfer money into as and when they have some excess funds floating around.

 

Perhaps it wouldnt amount to a great deal of money, but you just never know until you actually try. The point is, none of us want our club to die so we all need to be more pro-active (that goes for the club's custodians as well as the fans). We had, apparently, as many as 200,000 people in Manchester - that wouldnt have been cheap for ANY of them - if each of them contributed even 10 quid that is 2 million, 50 quid is 10 million - and there are many more who werent there that day who would no doubt contribute to the survival of Rangers.

 

I know disposable cash is at a premium these days for many. For those that COULD afford it, just think, a 10 quid standing order each month amounts to 120 quid a year (one less pint a week) - those 200,000 Manchester fans have just contributed 24 million in one year to the cause.

 

I know some will say "we didnt get the club into this mess so it isnt our job to get it out of the mess" and I agree with that. However, do we really just let our club die on a principle ?

 

I just think that we are all asking questions of Craig Whyte - perfectly valid questions - but we ourselves also need to be pro-active. If we could organise as a unit and collected sufficient funds (the RST would have been the perfect vehicle but that ship has sailed and needs its own thread) we could realise some fan power, obviously depending on how much we raise and how significant it would be to the survival of the club.

 

I know the above will have inherent flaws.... I really just couldnt help rambling aloud.

[Frankie 8,198]

Craig,

 

I'll email Rab and tell him to put a PayPal donate button on the new club website...

 

Seriously, I think your suggestion has merit but obviously there would have to be some accountability about who and when the funds could be accessed. That's when arguments start and we're back to square one.

 

I'm disappointed in the likes of Murray and Johnston. While I understand their concerns, they've not offered any alternative despite the insight and contacts they could provide.

[craig 5,199]

Craig,

 

I'll email Rab and tell him to put a PayPal donate button on the new club website...

 

Seriously, I think your suggestion has merit but obviously there would have to be some accountability about who and when the funds could be accessed. That's when arguments start and we're back to square one.

 

I'm disappointed in the likes of Murray and Johnston. While I understand their concerns, they've not offered any alternative despite the insight and contacts they could provide.

 

Nothing to stop the club accepting donations tot he cause - I would have them going direct to Lloyd Banking Group though

 

There SHOULD be accountability, absolutely. Not that I would suggest anyone for this job but Bluedell has a professional designation which requires strong ethics at all times. If he were interested and had the time he could be chairman of that. If done right you would have ALL parties working together - the Assembly, Trust etc with representatives from each ensuring that there is accountability to the process. You could also have a former player, high-profile supporter such as Park or even just have a lawyer or accountant, for example, heading it up and ensuring there is accountability and that funds are not being washed away on nonsense.

 

The funds should only be accessed when deemed absolutely necessary - i.e. to help pay for the tax liability. Certainly not for regular bills or "working capital". Again, I dont see that as being insurmountable - so long as the rules of access are created at the outset.

 

Expenses shouldnt be that extensive either given it would be, for the most part, a slush fund for assisting the club to survive. You could make it, effectively, just a bank account collecting funds on behalf of the club in the event that we have to pay this tax liability.

 

My point really is that we are ALL sitting on our hands and complaining about the current regime (which is legitimate concern) but NONE of us are actually trying to do anything about it by way of planning for the worst case scenario. I think we ALL fear the club having a liquidation event if we have to pay this tax liability - so why not get our fingers out and at least TRY to do something about it ??

 

Agreed Re Johnston, Murray and even Whyte - their concerns are valid but they arent giving us any viable alternatives - Johnston & Murray are simply saying that Whyte is the bad guy and is ruining the club..... but they are not giving any suggestions as to how to deal with that, and they arent giving any leadership either. As "concerned supporters" who once held some power at Ibrox you would like to think that they could, at the very least, in the background be working on something.

 

We really need to be more pro-active.

 

My point really was that if we have to pay 50 million quid or die I would rather we paid the 50 million. It wasnt the supporters fault, we ALL get that. But it is OUR club. Now, if we were told 2 years from now that we needed to find 50 million... if we used the previous 200,000 people as an example we would need them to stump up 250 quid on the spot. However, if we started a fund-raising drive NOW, those same 200,000 people would need to contribute just over 10 quid a month. I dont know about you but I certainly know which one would be preferable to me - the 10 quid a month.

 

Sadly, I recognise the idea is little more than a pipe dream !

[GovanAllan 0]

Frankie hits the nail on the head with arguements, would love to see the day we owned the club but the Rangers support is too split for it ever to happen we would spend months arguing about the what Bovril to sell.

[calscot 0]

I completely agree with what Craig is saying but also agree that what is stopping it is the lack of accountability. I also think that the supporters need something in return - even if it is the equivalent in shares in the club. It's difficult to donate money when it looks like it's a drop in the ocean with nothing in return for it and most other people not paying their share.

 

For the fans to pay £50M, I think we would be due 2/3 of the share holding of the club.

 

It's amazing to think that the fans who went to Manchester spent about £40M with countless others who didn't go who would have been willing to had it been a bit easier or cheaper.

 

The thing is, the glamour friendlies we had were effectively a whip round for transfer money and you actually got some entertainment for your dosh - but there wasn't a great take up on it even though it's a bit like a charity game - with Rangers being the beneficiaries.

 

Back to raising share money:

 

Perhaps in these days of internet social media a new form of fan ownership could be invented with full on-line voting for many policy decisions. Your vote is weighted by how many shares you have. There could be a new share issue every year as a "membership" fee which after paying back any tax bills, goes towards a transfer budget, with the vote weighting of old shares being diminished with a straight line "depreciation" over 10 years.

 

For electing the executive you could go down the party politics route having three parties that stand for different viewpoints and so you vote for the party. Anyone can join each party and they each select candidates for the executive election. The executive then have many autonomous powers for a set period but with some decisions requiring a general vote to keep things on an even keel.

 

There's a load of things we could do but it seems that it's easier to spontaneously organise an expensive trip with a booze up that benefits the trains, alcohol producers and Manchester businesses than coordinate anything that actually benefits Rangers.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I see on FF there is an active recruiting program going on for membership of the RST, i'm thinking of joining. I know a few on here on have history with the RST but do you think this would be advisable at this time? our club needs our support and i am eager to help in some way, is this a way of helping it?

[Gers4Life 0]

I'm in but only if we gain full control of the club and we get to run it!