Utterly divided support

[GovanAllan 0]

With you at the forefront. Your hatred for the consortium was the opposite side of the coin to those championing them.

 

Somebodies got to ask questions of the so called second coming that is The BK's, because nobody else seems to be doing it.

[Guest Guardian]

I consider some sort of Newco inevitable and have done so for a while. I'm sure TBK have too.

 

They have given the fans the impression they are the only folk who can deliver a CVA solution and avoid liquidation.

 

To me that's dishonest, deceptive and manipulative

 

The fans accepted Millers Newco cos it was upfront. I cannot see them meekly accepting a back-door liquidation by TBK when their hopes are dashed.

 

Of course by then they'll have no choice.

[BlueMazza 0]

*Dives in*

 

I have no affiliation to any official supporters groups, I stay away and do my day to day Rangers support by myself. I Don't join because I don't always agree, and this saves me having to argue a lot.

 

The banners were stupid, whoever did them & I don't care who wrote them. I've said before 'Yank' is fairly offensive so regardless, they were out of line.

 

I do wonder if some people understand that in business, it's not always about coming out and speaking immediately to the fans. Dingwall might (and I say might as I have no idea) think he is incredibly important and in a way he is, but he is not when it comes to settling the business end of things. He's good to have on board to help talk with fans, he's not essential to run the club.

 

Everyone should calm down. Someone has to gain ownership of the club, they need a few days after being named PB to get things in order etc and if due diligence in involved they can't discuss anything!

 

That's my ramble, as you were.

[BlueMazza 0]

With you at the forefront. Your hatred for the consortium was the opposite side of the coin to those championing them.

 

That's unfair. I never championed the BK's either. I felt/fell they lack the financial clout and appear incapable of organising anything so far.

 

Being Rangers minded does not make you a good person to run a football club.

[amms 0]

Whether it's been engineered or not we're reaching the stage where almost anyone who could 'rescue' the club will be welcomed by a decent percentage of the support.

This process hasn't so much shown that we are a divided support, all supports have divisions, but that we've got a large section who are apathetic to issues of ownership, corporate governance and what Rangers should stand for. Too many are still looking for a oil sheik or oligarch to come to the rescue and plough millions into the club. That's both unrealistic and not preferable, for me at least.

It has surprised me that more has not been said by the bidders about where they see Rangers in the future, how they are owned, how they'll be run, where we'll play and what kind of club we'll be etc. The Blue Knights have tried to an extent but even they've failed to get past the initial stages. No one has sold us a vision of the future yet, that's surprising and suggests perhaps some of them don't actually have one.

[Frankie 8,151]

Whether it's been engineered or not we're reaching the stage where almost anyone who could 'rescue' the club will be welcomed by a decent percentage of the support.

This process hasn't so much shown that we are a divided support, all supports have divisions, but that we've got a large section who are apathetic to issues of ownership, corporate governance and what Rangers should stand for. Too many are still looking for a oil sheik or oligarch to come to the rescue and plough millions into the club. That's both unrealistic and not preferable, for me at least.

It has surprised me that more has not been said by the bidders about where they see Rangers in the future, how they are owned, how they'll be run, where we'll play and what kind of club we'll be etc. The Blue Knights have tried to an extent but even they've failed to get past the initial stages. No one has sold us a vision of the future yet, that's surprising and suggests perhaps some of them don't actually have one.

 

Agree with all that.

 

The problem bidders have is that if they reveal too much of their strategy, they're open to others claiming it as their own or endangering creditor agreement.

 

However, there's a fine line between that and being unable to gain the trust of the support beforehand.

[Tannochsidebear 2,315]

The RST are not to blame here. Along with the other main supporter's organisations they backed the BKs. They did that openly and transparently. What has transpired today suggests that they were right to do so. To blame Miller pulling out because of a few banners and some nasty emails is stretching credulity. IMHO, Miller backed out because his business case didn't stack up. It really is as simple as that.

 

Searching for scapegoats amongst other Rangers fans really isn't good enough.

 

I must correct this that I see popping up everywhere nowadays.

 

The RST were the ONLY Rangers organisation to come out and fully support TBK to the exclusion of all others. The Association and Assembly's position was, and has always been, that any bidder who got PB status and saved the club from liquidation would get their support.

 

MD only speaks for his own organisation, does it well, and they have decided to jump in full steam ahead with TBK, as is their right, but the other organisaitons are being more cautious as there are a lot of things about TBK bid that dont work, and even more that still have to be answered, so that is why the other main groups have not backed any one bidder publically to the exclusion of others.

[caseyjones 0]

Somebodies got to ask questions of the so called second coming that is The BK's, because nobody else seems to be doing it.

 

I don't disagree that questions need to be asked of all bidders, but anyone with a partisan view towards/against certain parties won't be interested in listening to the answers given.

[caseyjones 0]

That's unfair. I never championed the BK's either. I felt/fell they lack the financial clout and appear incapable of organising anything so far.

 

Being Rangers minded does not make you a good person to run a football club.

 

I have no affiliation to any group either. I simply will not be part of any future which involves a newco. That's not to say that any group who follows a straight CVA route would get my unqualified backing.

[caseyjones 0]

I must correct this that I see popping up everywhere nowadays.

 

The RST were the ONLY Rangers organisation to come out and fully support TBK to the exclusion of all others. The Association and Assembly's position was, and has always been, that any bidder who got PB status and saved the club from liquidation would get their support.

 

MD only speaks for his own organisation, does it well, and they have decided to jump in full steam ahead with TBK, as is their right, but the other organisaitons are being more cautious as there are a lot of things about TBK bid that dont work, and even more that still have to be answered, so that is why the other main groups have not backed any one bidder publically to the exclusion of others.

 

I didn't read of any opposition to the Miller bid despite it being a newco, something which Andy Kerr previously stated was an unacceptable option. Have they too shifted their opinion?