UOF Statement (10/9/14

[buster. 4,808]

forget the shareholders. they are the problem. if they want value in their shares they need us.

 

There were always two strands regards effective control.

 

1. Enough shareholders support that gave executive control.

 

2. Continuing control of revenue stream (enough fans to keep servicing onerous contracts and the like).

 

 

IMO you'd need both to have a chance of success.

ie. regards your proposal,.. a more radical, louder, effective and numerous effort from fans to turn the heads of sufficient shareholders.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I have addressed in saying that we're running out of money anyway, or do you disagree with that?

 

Do you still not understand the meaning of non-sequitur? You're doing it again.

[D'Artagnan 173]

here is my plan.

 

we boycott, those with season books demand refunds (they won't get them but the demand will be noted). no one attends matches. instead we form peacful pickett lines outside. no one uses mcgills buses or sports direct, no one buys anything from any sponsor.

 

we demand an independent board of people who we know will act in rangers best interests. john bennet, george letham, walter smith, etc.

 

we agree that once that's in place and in control we will flood back on a game by game basis.

 

this could all be over pre hibs at the end of the month.

 

we also make it clear that the boycott continues post a pre pack admin.

 

GS

 

You have failed to address the issues which Frankie raised earlier in this thread re alternatives/contingency.

 

Frankie is not alone in questioning the logic of individuals calling for a boycott, failing to either take responsibility or offer alternatives given that the likely consequence of such action would be admin 2 for our club.

 

The other problem you will have to contend with is the lack of both visible and vocal leadership from King. When did we last here from him and what are his intentions ? Is admin 2 his end game plan ? If so do we have cast iron guarantees that he will, in such a situation, finally launch his bid for control ?

[the gunslinger 3,366]

GS

 

You have failed to address the issues which Frankie raised earlier in this thread re alternatives/contingency.

 

Frankie is not alone in questioning the logic of individuals calling for a boycott' date=' failing to either take responsibility or offer alternatives given that the likely consequence of such action would be admin 2 for our club.

 

The other problem you will have to contend with is the lack of both visible and vocal leadership from King. When did we last here from him and what are his intentions ? Is admin 2 his end game plan ? If so do we have cast iron guarantees that he will, in such a situation, finally launch his bid for control ?[/quote']

 

I made my aims clear. That's the alternative

[buster. 4,808]

GS

 

You have failed to address the issues which Frankie raised earlier in this thread re alternatives/contingency.

 

Frankie is not alone in questioning the logic of individuals calling for a boycott' date=' failing to either take responsibility or offer alternatives given that the likely consequence of such action would be admin 2 for our club.

 

The other problem you will have to contend with is the lack of both visible and vocal leadership from King. When did we last here from him and what are his intentions ? Is admin 2 his end game plan ? If so do we have cast iron guarantees that he will, in such a situation, finally launch his bid for control ?[/quote']

 

There is no magic solution that I can see on the horizon, we are in a desperate place and nor do we want to pay what is in effect a 'spi.v tax' and eventually be taken to the same place, losing the assets on route.

 

So when you talk of (viable and realistic) alternatives, lets hear them if you have any...........

[D'Artagnan 173]

I made my aims clear. That's the alternative

 

 

Well you have outlined your plan - but you have added a caveat throughout the thread that you dont want those with a criminal past involved.

 

So does that then exclude King ?

[craig 5,199]

Because i'd like to get out of this without admin actually needing to happen, there's still a chance for that if King comes in offering them a way out

 

King has already said he wont be lining their pockets.

[forlanssister 3,050]

Is it worth possibly killing the club to get this change?

 

What's killing the club is the avarice of Greenco not the actions of the fans.

[D'Artagnan 173]

There is no magic solution that I can see on the horizon, we are in a desperate place and nor do we want to pay what is in effect a 'spi.v tax' and eventually be taken to the same place, losing the assets on route.

 

So when you talk of (viable and realistic) alternatives, lets hear them if you have any...........

 

On the absence of magic solutions we agree,

 

But if people are going to engage in a course of conduct the consequence of which is likely to be admin 2 - I would like to know there are some assurances that our club will emerge from that.

[buster. 4,808]

On the absence of magic solutions we agree' date='

 

But if people are going to engage in a course of conduct the consequence of which is likely to be admin 2 - I would like to know there are some assurances that our club will emerge from that.[/quote']

 

No alternatives then !

 

Due to the direct and indirect executive control and their management we are in a perilous state. It has taken the club on a journey of sp.iv control and the creaming off of many, many millions of pounds, onerous contracts, farce, looking at Ashely (already of onerous) to take us forward, talking to our new youth scout Rafat Ritzvi (of Interpol / fraud & possible faceless 'investor').............I could go on and on and on.....

 

.........and you say that the support would be to blame ?

There wouldn't be enough money to get to the end of the season regardless.

 

This board will take us to a dark place regardless and at the same time relieve us of our main assets.

The only doubt would be timescale.