TheWee BlueDevil 0 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 (edited) I think that what might be missing from the media reports is something along the lines of The UoF presented the conditions set out by Ibrox 1972 Ltd for the payment of pledged ST money to the Club in response to which "A proposal was made by Mr Wallace that whilst the board would not grant a security, they could consider giving a legally binding undertaking which would protect Ibrox from sale, sale and leaseback, or as any form of security for a loan or other finance,". That said, it is clear that the Board have duly “considered” and rejected the proposal to offer “legally binding undertakings…… in relation to Ibrox and Murray Park.” I think it is perfectly understandable that the Board would view those who have renewed as “loyal”; but I would agree that the inference that those who have not renewed are not loyal is unfortunate to say the least; if for no other reason because it seems that a large majority of them plan to go game to game on a selective basis and whilst that might not be viewed as wholehearted support, it is certainly not disloyal. I have mentioned before several times that the Board just don't get the fans psyche. That said it must surely be absolutely clear now to all who have or had intended pledging their ST money to Ibrox 1972 Ltd (yes, even GS ) that that is a futile gesture. The Board knew full well before meeting the Union Of Fans they were never going to do this. What was the real purpose of their little charade? Edited May 18, 2014 by TheWee BlueDevil silly typo 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,307 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I think there needs to be some serious strategic thinking done about our plight. Some will back this current board to the ends of the earth. To them, the current regime IS Rangers and they will be loyal to it come what may. They need to be ignored while those who have concerns about this regime think about ways to counter or pre-empt the moves it is likely to make. You seem to be advocating an alternative to the status quo which simply isn't there at present 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 You seem to be advocating an alternative to the status quo which simply isn't there at present The ideal alternative is fan ownership. The RST is working in this direction, but no-one is sure how quickly it will happen. It may indeed take longer than we would wish. In the meantime, we could see Ibrox and/or Auchenhowie sold. With this regime, it is impossible to rule this out. It is therefore vital that someone thinks about what we should do if it is attempted. The idea that we should just wait and see is as daft as it is misguided. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 The Board new full well before meeting the Union Of Fans they were never going to do this. What was the real purpose of their little charade? I'm sure you are right about that in relation to security because that was stated previously. Without being a fly on the wall it is difficult to know obviously. Whilst I'm sure that the UoF statement was accurate it may not have been complete as I suggested and it may not have reported the discussions in chronolgical order. It is possible that the Board were trying to establish if something short of granting security over Ibrox and Murray Park to Ibrox 1972 Ltd would be acceptable to the UoF. It seems from the UoF statement that that may have been the case. Who knows who said what first. It may well have been the UoF who said something like well what CAN you offer then and Wallace may have responded well the Board MIGHT consider........ It could just be of course that they wanted to be seen to be listening and there may have been some who were prepared to compromise (as has been suggested elsewhere). In any event they have made their position quite clear now so Mr King may as well dissolve Ibrox 1972 Ltd. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,061 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 That said it must surely be absolutely clear now to all who have or had intended pledging their ST money to Ibrox 1972 Ltd (yes, even GS ) that that is a futile gesture. As futile as your attempts to find a sugar daddy to pony up? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,307 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 The ideal alternative is fan ownership. The RST is working in this direction, but no-one is sure how quickly it will happen. It may indeed take longer than we would wish. In the meantime, we could see Ibrox and/or Auchenhowie sold. With this regime, it is impossible to rule this out. It is therefore vital that someone thinks about what we should do if it is attempted. The idea that we should just wait and see is as daft as it is misguided. Fan ownership won't happen not in the immediate future anyway. Where did all the scaremongering about selling Ibrox & Auchenhowie come from anyway? Is there any concrete evidence this is being considered or is it just made up? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 The Board new full well before meeting the Union Of Fans they were never going to do this. What was the real purpose of their little charade? I would imagine it was to pull some supporters over the line to buy a season ticket by making them think a truce was on the way. This board is playing a game with the supporters. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I think that what might be missing from the media reports is something along the lines of The UoF presented the conditions set out by Ibrox 1972 Ltd for the payment of pledged ST money to the Club in response to which "A proposal was made by Mr Wallace that whilst the board would not grant a security, they could consider giving a legally binding undertaking which would protect Ibrox from sale, sale and leaseback, or as any form of security for a loan or other finance,". That said, it is clear that the Board have duly “considered” and rejected the proposal to offer “legally binding undertakings…… in relation to Ibrox and Murray Park.” I think it is perfectly understandable that the Board would view those who have renewed as “loyal”; but I would agree that the inference that those who have not renewed are not loyal is unfortunate to say the least; if for no other reason than it seems that a large majority of them plan to go game to game on a selective basis and whilst that might not be viewed as wholehearted support, it is certainly not disloyal. I have mentioned before several times that the Board just don't get the fans psyche. That said it must surely be absolutely clear now to all who have or had intended pledging their ST money to Ibrox 1972 Ltd (yes, even GS ) that that is a futile gesture. we are closer than ever. season ticket renewals are incredibly low. they are talking. if we can get even passable numbers this is a shoe in. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 we are closer than ever. season ticket renewals are incredibly low. they are talking. if we can get even passable numbers this is a shoe in. If it was going to happen it would have been done by now 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 As futile as your attempts to find a sugar daddy to pony up? Not sure where that comes from FS? I can confirm that I'm not looking for a sugar daddy for ANY purpose. Now a big sugar mama, perhaps........... 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.