Darthter 542 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Rangers were NOT founded as a cash cow to make people profits and I can't see why that should change. Rangers should be run within its means and any profits reinvested in the club - not paid out to shareholders. ANY profit made by the club should be re-invested - definately.....however, it still makes it a profitable business!!! That has been the problem for so long, there has been no profit to re-invest & the owner was borrowing from the bank to keep the club afloat. As for the shareholders, if they want to make money out of the club, it should be by selling their shares at a profit - they should not be relying on annual dividends. For years Rangers have been making substantial losses on players - we buy high, sell low = loss. Compare that to Ceptic, they generally buy low, sell high = profit. The better the financials are run, the higher the value of the club, and the greater the return on share price!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 The problem I have with a profiteer is that he'll put profit before the good of the club. Would you prefer a doctor who is motivated by healing people and making the world a better place or one that is motivated by how much cash he can make? Everyone is motivated by cash - is that not why doctors were on strike the other week there??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Everyone is motivated by cash - is that not why doctors were on strike the other week there??? Not many people are actually motivated by cash. However, they ARE demotivated if they think they are undervalued. A doctor does not generally go to work thinking how much money he can make today. Their goal tends to be to help people who are unwell. Entrepreneurs on the other hand, have the main goal of making as much money as possible. That is their score in life. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,365 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Why would you think that that is palatable to anyone? Rangers have generally been, and the fans see it as, a non-profit organisation and he comes along and says he's going to line his pockets from us and at the same time he is the right person to lead us? I don't have a problem with people being incentivised. Our players are given bonuses, our manager is given bonuses. Green gets his from creating a successful company/club. Why do you do your job? Is it be paid? Imagine your local MP said he was just in it for the money and would be filing his expenses claims accordingly - would you vote for him? You must think so as he's obviously the most honest candidate. A poor comparison that will just divert the point off topic. Your number 6 is way more than enough to make him a hate figure. Just because someone is honest about shafting you, it doesn't make the shafting forgiveable. Why is he shafting us? He comes in, turns the club around, gets some shares as a bonus and leaves. I'm not sure how you turn that into shafting us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,365 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Rangers should be run within its means and any profits reinvested in the club - not paid out to shareholders. I agree and there has not been any suggestion that dividends will be paid. If they are then I will be against that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,365 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 keeping the club profitable and selling at a profit are fine. asset stripping or paying dividends are wholly unacceptable. it depends what green means by making a profit. of course he could make that clear. Agreed, and the impression given last night was that it was the former. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Cal mate there's nothing wrong with making money, it's how you make it that matters if Green can get the club running within its means and even making a profit good on him he deserves his 10% shares and a handshake when he goes because nobody else in Scottish football can manage it. Compare what Green will lift when he leaves about 2mill some reckon after he's put the club back on its feet, compare that to what Bain did to the club while taking more money out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Agreed, and the impression given last night was that it was the former. that's fine as long as its not just an impression. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,365 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone would support or even be prepared to tolerate Green & co when there are far betteralternatives if we only stick together and starve him of what he`s really after - our cash ! . I'm not aware of any better alternatives. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter 0 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I'm not aware of any better alternatives. Once we know where we're playing next year, the price will be set. Then we'll see once and for all whether there are any better alternatives or not. The wait is nearly over. 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.