Over 33,000 Season books now sold!!

[Rangersitis 0]

Supporters will be there tomorrow.

 

Fans will be waiting for a Gazzalaudo signing. See you in about five years, lads, if you're lucky.

 

There is of course nothing wrong with being selective about the product you pay to watch. That's the individual's choice. But that individual is not a supporter.

 

 

Personally, I'm not at all bothered about what label I'm given, nor whether big stars are signing, indeed the way Warburton seems to be going about his business is most refreshing - just the way things should have been handled in division three. What really grates are the '£50m to challenge Celtic' soundbites that were made by King pre-election and so far all that has been seen are a couple of secured loans.

 

They would get my full backing if they would just tell the fucking truth!

[Rangersitis 0]

There are various problems in trying to sell season tickets nowadays:

 

1. The 'political' stuff will still be putting people off.

2. The football quality has been awful.

3. TV coverage and free streaming websites.

4. Ever changing kick-off times.

5. Cost.

6. There's no real reason for buying a season book when you can pick and choose games (i.e. no Celtic tickets).

7. People are out of the 'habit'.

8. Lack of ticket flexibility.

 

 

 

Now there are a few positives for the club to build on:

 

1. New manager.

2. New players.

3. New board.

4. Choice of seats.

 

 

I would have liked to have seen the club add to these pros by introducing rover season tickets in certain areas - i.e. let people sit where they want within certain areas. Further, why not have flexi-tickets - i.e. you buy a 5/10/15 match ticket and use it when you like including cup games and or friendlies?

 

Football clubs have to be more accommodating and innovative nowadays. The Broomloan Front, Copland Rear and/or Club Deck could easily have been used as a test for ideas like the above. Instead, outwith a few games, we'll still have 10-20,000 empty seats each week.

 

 

Some great points, Frankie. Well said. They should be taking you on to give them real insight about what needs to be done rather than returning favours.

[calscot 0]

I refuse to be lectured to by someone who doesn't even go to games

 

I knew someone would come out with an incredibly sanctimonious and completely illogical reply. First, no-one is lecturing you, second, I do go to games - and when I go to games because I LIKE going, and the logistics are conducive. If you're offended by me, as my whole point is aimed that those who DON'T LIKE going, it seems YOU don't like going.

 

My own personal reason for not going to many games (which even those with the slightest of observation skills should be able to work out) is because I live 450 miles away, NOT because I live near enough and don't ENJOY watching the game. And now I'm being sanctimoniously attacked by someone who I assume by his reply who chooses not to attend games but DOESN'T have have that distance problem.

 

but would rather watch on illegal internet streaming sites but

 

What ARE you on about? It seems, unlike you, I would rather GO to the games - what bit of that don't you understand? Weirdly I get slagged of by a couple of strange people on here because I don't watch the shit, illegal streams... There's always some whack-job who wants a pissing contest no matter what.

 

I will return once I see real change happening. All 'investment' so far has been just that - done in a way so as to secure at least some sort of return. The loans are secured against shares, how many shares, nobody knows.

 

This is so irrelevant to my post, I don't know where to start.

 

My point again, which is there for you to read once you calm down and get off your high horse - you can choose from many reasons not to go to Ibrox, but the basic one that doesn't wash for a "supporter" is - "I'm not going because I don't LIKE watching Rangers. I don't ENJOY it". Get it yet?

 

McCall was a lazy appointment and ended in predictable failure.

 

Not many predicted it, and in fact I was one that warned that there's a lot more gone on that manager can easily overcome, and that it also wouldn't be as easy as some thought to be massively better than McCoist. I recall you pretty much argued the opposite at the time so don't get your "predictable".

 

As for "lazy", I think that shows a glib understanding of the situation.

 

The FAPP tests are irrelevant.

 

They are relevant to the effort that these directors are having to put in rather than just being a keyboard warrior. They are relevant to some of the delay that makes a restless support impatient.

 

They wanted a smaller squad and the cull was nowhere near severe enough.

 

You would really need to elaborate that point. I would question both the motivation

 

The acquisition of Warburton is the biggest positive for the board. Whether he will be expected to perform miracles with loans and bargain signings ala PLG, only time will tell.

 

I believe the expectations of miracles will be more likely to come from some sections of fans rather than the board. I also believe the resources available will be criticised for being to much by some and too little by others, but will probably be about right for the combination of income and ambition, with the knowledge that some level of overspending now, could mean greater rewards in the future.

 

There have been two signings so far, with neither of them that interesting.

 

For you maybe.

 

They were engaged with certain fan groups all the way through. The appointments of Chris Graham and James Blair were not a coincidence, although at least the latter got there on merit.

 

I agree but it only adds to my points.

[Blue Moon 1,113]

Personally, I'm not at all bothered about what label I'm given, nor whether big stars are signing, indeed the way Warburton seems to be going about his business is most refreshing - just the way things should have been handled in division three. What really grates are the '£50m to challenge Celtic' soundbites that were made by King pre-election and so far all that has been seen are a couple of secured loans.

 

They would get my full backing if they would just tell the fucking truth!

 

The truth and reality is that we are in the Championship for another year. I never at any time thought King was going to splash 50 million in one season and would be horrified if he did. Those days are over. My understanding was that he said it would take us £50 million to get back to where we were.

 

I am assuming that sum covers many things, such as the stadium repairs, players, management, scouting, administration etc etc.

 

It is also sensible to take stock of season ticket sales and crowd numbers before making any major investments. As he said, we have at least 3 transfer windows before we are back in the Premier League.

 

Income is also affected badly by the retail deal which sticks in everyone's craw.

 

I am glad to see the manager buying youngsters cheaply. I think he has the right idea and hopefully some of them will move on and give us a healthy profit. Whether they will be good enough we will just have to wait and see.

 

For now, I am giving the new board and management team my full backing.

[Rangersitis 0]

The truth and reality is that we are in the Championship for another year. I never at any time thought King was going to splash 50 million in one season and would be horrified if he did. Those days are over. My understanding was that he said it would take us £50 million to get back to where we were.

 

I am assuming that sum covers many things, such as the stadium repairs, players, management, scouting, administration etc etc.

 

It is also sensible to take stock of season ticket sales and crowd numbers before making any major investments. As he said, we have at least 3 transfer windows before we are back in the Premier League.

 

Income is also affected badly by the retail deal which sticks in everyone's craw.

 

I am glad to see the manager buying youngsters cheaply. I think he has the right idea and hopefully some of them will move on and give us a healthy profit. Whether they will be good enough we will just have to wait and see.

 

For now, I am giving the new board and management team my full backing.

 

 

I'm not asking for £50m to be spent in one season and I would be horrified if if took £50m to get back to where we were. Money should be spent on improving the whole structure of the club to ensure that we don't end up back where we were!

 

The season ticket sales are irrelevant as King said that he is underwriting the £13m.

 

The retail deal is of course curtailing revenue and there are no signs that anything is being done to improve things. Why has the deal proposed by the Three Bears been taken off the table when it could be used to repay the £5m and claw back at least some of that shortfall? Why has the outrageous 7 year rolling contract not had the timer started on it?

[craig 5,195]

Personally, I'm not at all bothered about what label I'm given, nor whether big stars are signing, indeed the way Warburton seems to be going about his business is most refreshing - just the way things should have been handled in division three. What really grates are the '£50m to challenge Celtic' soundbites that were made by King pre-election and so far all that has been seen are a couple of secured loans.

 

They would get my full backing if they would just tell the fucking truth!

 

You do realize that they need to fully analyse the carnage that they have been inherited ? You do realize that putting a Prospectus together for a share issue isn't something that gets knocked out in a couple of days, especially as they don't have a vehicle for it just yet ?

 

Just because you don't like that 50 million quid hasn't been invested yet doesn't mean it wont. They have already stated just a couple of weeks ago that a fresh share issue "will take place in 3 or 4 months" (which, whether you believe it or not, IS actually how long it can take to get a Prospectus out, depending on the circumstances and situation of the entity).

 

How about you give them even the 3 months on the shorter end of the timescale before suggesting they are telling lies ?

[craig 5,195]

I'm not asking for £50m to be spent in one season and I would be horrified if if took £50m to get back to where we were. Money should be spent on improving the whole structure of the club to ensure that we don't end up back where we were!

 

You may be surprised to see how much it will actually cost. Were some not saying that stadium repair work could cost as much as 5 million - does that even take into account the need to upgrade (at significant cost) the disabled facilities (FS, I recall you mentioned this before, correct ?). Then the playing squad, scouting infrastructure, youth development - I don't think it would be as much as 50 million either - but wouldn't be surprised if it was north of 30 million.

 

The retail deal is of course curtailing revenue and there are no signs that anything is being done to improve things. Why has the deal proposed by the Three Bears been taken off the table when it could be used to repay the £5m and claw back at least some of that shortfall? Why has the outrageous 7 year rolling contract not had the timer started on it?

 

To start the timer on that 7 yr notice period could prejudice any negotiations they are attempting to have with SD. I'm no lawyer but could it be that by not giving notice we are trying to leverage ourselves ? I really don't know. We also don't necessarily know if the notice hasn't been given - remember, Ashley enforced confidentiality through the courts on his retail dealings. Regarding simply repaying the 5 million - why would that make sense ? The loan is interest free and without a defined repayment date. Further, what are we losing from SD having 76% of the retail profits ? Virtually nothing because the Club receives VERY LITTLE of the retail profits anyway. I would be willing to wager that the profits we are losing is less than the interest we would have to pay on a 5 million loan should we have to obtain it at commercial interest rates. So, if my assumption is correct, it is financially advantageous to the Club to keep the loan and forego the retail profits at this point.

[Rangersitis 0]

You may be surprised to see how much it will actually cost. Were some not saying that stadium repair work could cost as much as 5 million - does that even take into account the need to upgrade (at significant cost) the disabled facilities (FS, I recall you mentioned this before, correct ?). Then the playing squad, scouting infrastructure, youth development - I don't think it would be as much as 50 million either - but wouldn't be surprised if it was north of 30 million.

 

 

 

To start the timer on that 7 yr notice period could prejudice any negotiations they are attempting to have with SD. I'm no lawyer but could it be that by not giving notice we are trying to leverage ourselves ? I really don't know. We also don't necessarily know if the notice hasn't been given - remember, Ashley enforced confidentiality through the courts on his retail dealings. Regarding simply repaying the 5 million - why would that make sense ? The loan is interest free and without a defined repayment date. Further, what are we losing from SD having 76% of the retail profits ? Virtually nothing because the Club receives VERY LITTLE of the retail profits anyway. I would be willing to wager that the profits we are losing is less than the interest we would have to pay on a 5 million loan should we have to obtain it at commercial interest rates. So, if my assumption is correct, it is financially advantageous to the Club to keep the loan and forego the retail profits at this point.

 

 

"The announcement from the Board suggests that the SD facility is interest free but the loss of revenue to the club from the transfer of 26% of the share capital in RRL and 50% of the shirt sponsorship proceeds from 2017/18 equates to an annual interest rate significantly higher than our offer and probably in double digits.

 

"Security for the SD facility involves the club's registered trademarks and a floating charge over the club's assets. This is disadvantageous to the club compared to the security required under our offer.

 

"It appears that the only measure by which the SD facility could be considered favourable to our offer is in respect of the quantum and duration of the second tranche of £5m but there appears to be some uncertainty as to whether this will actually be required and it is subject to further due diligence by SD.

 

"We fail to see how the SD facility can be described as better for the club than the funding offer we made. It isn't and should not have been accepted if the best interests of all the shareholders were considered. Acceptance of the SD facility will do nothing to repair relationships with the fans which is critical in improving the revenue streams of the club."

 

The Three Bears disagree with you, or at least they said they did.

[Rangersitis 0]

You do realize that they need to fully analyse the carnage that they have been inherited ? You do realize that putting a Prospectus together for a share issue isn't something that gets knocked out in a couple of days, especially as they don't have a vehicle for it just yet ?

 

Just because you don't like that 50 million quid hasn't been invested yet doesn't mean it wont. They have already stated just a couple of weeks ago that a fresh share issue "will take place in 3 or 4 months" (which, whether you believe it or not, IS actually how long it can take to get a Prospectus out, depending on the circumstances and situation of the entity).

 

How about you give them even the 3 months on the shorter end of the timescale before suggesting they are telling lies ?

 

 

I didn't mention the share issue. Is that the only way to provide funds? As you have introduced the lack of a market, that brings up another of King's claims which didn't pass muster once the deed was done.

 

You must have me mixed up with somebody else with your "Just because you don't like that 50 million quid hasn't been invested yet...."

 

Out of interest, and I have posed this question on here a few times without reply, how much will this share issue pull in, not counting what has already been spent?

[craig 5,195]

The Three Bears disagree with you, or at least they said they did.

 

And perhaps they have changed their minds now that they are actually on the inside and have actually seen the nature of the commercial contracts and that loan agreement.

 

Is Park not on the Board ? T3B are represented on the Board I thought. So if they STILL believe the statement they made above why haven't they pushed King on it ? Or perhaps the collective have now agreed that by not repaying the 5 million the Club has at least some leverage over SD ? Or perhaps you are suggesting that King is a dictator, making all the decisions in isolation ?

 

It could just as easily be that T3B now believe that holding that loan rather than repaying it is in the best interests of the Club in terms of leverage. Clearly Ashley doesn't like the fact we haven't repaid it as that was patently clear in in his EGM requisition. So he would prefer it was repaid, which suggests it is in the Club's best interests to not repay it.

 

Neither of us know for sure which is the best course to take as neither of us have viewed either of those contracts. The difference is that I am, for now, continuing to place my trust in the new Board until they prove otherwise (and I am sure that ALL contracts with SD will be very delicate - the spaghetti junction which no doubt Green and Ashley connived to ensure that it would be fraught with danger to terminate said contracts) which means giving them some time to navigate the mess. You, on the other hand, have decided to take the "King tells lies" attitude, which is of course your prerogative.