GiGi Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I'd wager you £100 they will vote no. I'd wager £1million they don't and another million on top of that that you would never pay up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can't imagine any of the chairmen voting against this. There's always a chance Romanov might but it would depend what side of the bed he got out on I reckon. The fans of the clubs would almost to a man vote to keep them out. Celtic fans are fucking dreaming if they think their board would vote to exclude "Rangers". They know they need them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanni tikklar Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Not really. They cannot meet their running costs and owe HMRC £9m is "current" VAT/Paye. Thats the point.. How is 9m going to put rangers in admin.. Dunfermline are in 9m debt!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can someone explain how a "new" Rangers would be allowed into the SPL. At the expense of who? Dunfermline? Ross County? Whatever happens with Rangers, first assumption is that they at least finish the season, if they do then relegation and promotion should work as normal. If rangers restructure or come up with an acceptable structure as a new club or a continuation of current club, then new rangers will as poz says get in. If Rangers are liquidated before the end of the season, then all bets are off, presumably they should drop to third division with teams that are due to be relegated surviving. It may kill off te SFL playoffs though. However a fudge will happen to keep the sky deal in my view. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Sensible Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 From the St Mirren perspective, a lot will depend on the timing. At present our BoD largely consists of a 'consortium' who are seeking to sell their shares - amounting to 52% of the total and therefore a controlling stake in the club. They have valued these shares at £2M. For me, and many others, this is an overinflated notion of the worth of those shares, and the absence of serious and viable bids might go some way towards reflecting this. Here is the thing, though. Having set the bar high, the current BoD (again, largely consisting of the selling consortium) would be preoccupied with ensuring, insofar as they have the influence, that the club remains an attractive investment. I fear that they would regard our placing in an SPL minus Rangers as less attractive to any potential buyer(s). I would abhor such a position, and vigorously campaign against it, but I'm under no illusions that this would have any bearing on their position, and it could be argued that they would only be doing what most would in their place. What would be the position of any new BoD. Well, as we have little notion as to whom would make up that BoD, then there is little point in speculating. At a wild guess, it will depend upon how concerned the new directors would be as to a potential firestorm on the part of the club's support base. To give Stewart Gilmour his due, he has actually called me to personally discuss concerns I have raised with the club (most recently concerning the 10 team SPL proposal). I don't think he'd call me this time, though.... The consortium will would vote to let Rangers in because they want £2m. The new directors would vote to let Rangers in because they are Rangers fans. -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 From the St Mirren perspective, a lot will depend on the timing. At present our BoD largely consists of a 'consortium' who are seeking to sell their shares - amounting to 52% of the total and therefore a controlling stake in the club. They have valued these shares at £2M. For me, and many others, this is an overinflated notion of the worth of those shares, and the absence of serious and viable bids might go some way towards reflecting this. Here is the thing, though. Having set the bar high, the current BoD (again, largely consisting of the selling consortium) would be preoccupied with ensuring, insofar as they have the influence, that the club remains an attractive investment. I fear that they would regard our placing in an SPL minus Rangers as less attractive to any potential buyer(s). I would abhor such a position, and vigorously campaign against it, but I'm under no illusions that this would have any bearing on their position, and it could be argued that they would only be doing what most would in their place. What would be the position of any new BoD. Well, as we have little notion as to whom would make up that BoD, then there is little point in speculating. At a wild guess, it will depend upon how concerned the new directors would be as to a potential firestorm on the part of the club's support base. To give Stewart Gilmour his due, he has actually called me to personally discuss concerns I have raised with the club (most recently concerning the 10 team SPL proposal). I don't think he'd call me this time, though.... Twice over recent seasons I have felt the need to send a polite letter to Stewart Gilmour - voicing concerns about the stadium move, and then concerning the 10 team SPL. He phoned me at home on both occassions, and we spoke for easily half an hour. I'm guessing, but I'd be very surprised if any other SPL Chairmen would do that. As to how we'd actually vote as a BOD? I stand by my original post - too many variables to say for sure. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the Chairmen will be asked to decide anyway. The whole perception of Rangers actually being a club everyone else cannot live without is changing on a daily basis. Public opinion (IMHO) is currently somewhere between 'hell mend them' and 'we feel sorry for the staff'. The more toxic Whyte and Rangers become, the more things could well change as tbe swingometer of opinion heads towards ' hammer these cnuts, and hammer them hard'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffcsam Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I'd wager you £100 they will vote no. This man wants a piece of the action 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Thats the point.. How is 9m going to put rangers in admin.. Dunfermline are in 9m debt!! Any creditor can ask for aministration proceedings to be started if they think the credit is unsafe. IIRC, Airdrieonians unravelled when one creditor (Barr Construction?) wanted £20,000 back 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can we please put the whole "diddies need the OF to visit 'cos of the money" nonsense to bed? Only once in the last five years have EITHER of the Ugly Sisters pushed attendance at TTOP over the 10k mark (while the one game we played against A*r, which was midweek and on TV, pulled in 11k+). The majority of their fans don't travel, and ours don't want to be in the same ground as those that do. Policing costs go through the roof, though, because Strathclyde's Finest know what they're capable of especially when they're out of their own middens. Let one die, and watch the other wither. Happy days, and a clean league at whatever level. It's not like ANY Scots team is going to trouble Europe anytime soon, so vote the cheats out and let their counterparts wonder where the "fans" went. The rest of us can start August with bigger ambitions than mere survival on the drippings from their slavering chops. KTID 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) I heard the Five Live debate this morning, they had some professor on saying that they needed to think about safeguarding jobs at Rangers. How many people to Rangers actually employ? Closing them down and opening a big Asda at Ibrox would probably increase the number of jobs in Govan. The jobs card is being played by many 'concerned' commentators and politicians. 9000 people are employed Peacocks, the High Street clothes retailer, yet I've not noted a similar degree of wailing, gnashing of teeth, and hand-wringing over their predicament as their employer entered administration. Woolworths employed 27,000, and could easily have been described as an 'institution' (you could certainly have referred to the Dumbarton branch as such given some of the casualties who frequented it), yet it was left to swing in the wind, and it's employees to take the hit. So it goes. I'm not unsympathetic to the ordinary employees of Rangers, but I'm afraid that I am of the opinion that they should no more be considered a special case than those employed by countless other companies who go to the wall. Let's be honest, though, the clamour to support the Rangers employees is a smokescreen. This is about politicians, PR, and votes. Edited February 15, 2012 by Drooper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Unlike Falkirk who are and always have been in perfect financial condition . Falkirk have twice found themselves in financial difficulty (1998 and 2011) both times we paid back every last penny to the people and companies owed. I wish other clubs would act with the same dignity. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dindeleux Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 An 18 or 20 team SPL will be one of the results of this - which i'm delighted about 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nofixedability Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can we please put the whole "diddies need the OF to visit 'cos of the money" nonsense to bed? Only once in the last five years have EITHER of the Ugly Sisters pushed attendance at TTOP over the 10k mark (while the one game we played against A*r, which was midweek and on TV, pulled in 11k+). The majority of their fans don't travel, and ours don't want to be in the same ground as those that do. Policing costs go through the roof, though, because Strathclyde's Finest know what they're capable of especially when they're out of their own middens. All fair points but would SKY / ESPN still pay to show all these matches over the course of a season? I doubt it. Of the Chairmen I would say only Romanov would be likely to vote against Rangers. It'll make things very uncomfortable for Lawell and Co. when all their fans are dreaming of no more Rangers and they bend over and vote to let them straight back to the top table and the status quo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invictager Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I actually think the clubs could vote no especially the likes of Hearts and Aberdeen but I am unsure if it is the clubs who get to vote. Rangers would deserve to be made to start again at the bottom and in a funny sort of way I think it would benefit them in the long run to do this. I would fully expect them to go straight through the leagues in 3 years and after those 3 years with reduced TV money and other revenues the SPL clubs would actually be weaker than they are now as none of them will do anything in Europe to make any money. The idea they will rise to compete against Celtic are laughable. At worst Celtic will downsize a bit and only win by 15 or 20 points rather than 30. Rangers will be forced to develop a youth system giving younger players a better chance of game time and therefore experience leading hopefully to new home grown talent being found. In the beginning your "fly by night fan" would disappear leaving only the hard core but this would still be far in excess of anything the rest could muster and on return to the top level I am sure most would return leaving a new Rangers a much improved business model and a platform to compete for the title once again. All of the above is of course dependent on getting shot of the crook currently running the place as I would not give him another penny of my money. So for this fan at least I hope they do vote no. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can we please put the whole "diddies need the OF to visit 'cos of the money" nonsense to bed? Only once in the last five years have EITHER of the Ugly Sisters pushed attendance at TTOP over the 10k mark (while the one game we played against A*r, which was midweek and on TV, pulled in 11k+). The majority of their fans don't travel, and ours don't want to be in the same ground as those that do. Policing costs go through the roof, though, because Strathclyde's Finest know what they're capable of especially when they're out of their own middens. Let one die, and watch the other wither. Happy days, and a clean league at whatever level. It's not like ANY Scots team is going to trouble Europe anytime soon, so vote the cheats out and let their counterparts wonder where the "fans" went. The rest of us can start August with bigger ambitions than mere survival on the drippings from their slavering chops. KTID You had 11K for survival Saturday v us too. Fcuk the old firm we don't need them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) Celtic would be the first to vote yes. In fact, they'd be most likely to propose it I'd wager you £100,000 they will vote yes. Celtic would be the first to vote yes. Am I right in thinking Celtic are the only club where a board member has categorically stated 'We don't need Rangers'? Edited February 15, 2012 by The OP 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 If you work for a morally bankrupt organisation like Rangers you deserve all you get. No sympathy from me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nofixedability Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Am I right in thinking Celtic are the only club where a board member has categorically stated 'We don't need Rangers'? I would believe a football Chairman implicitly. They never lie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoBNob Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Thats the point.. How is 9m going to put rangers in admin.. Dunfermline are in 9m debt!! Pretty much all our money is owed to Gavin Masterton, he probably won't be calling that in any time soon. If he did we'd be fucked though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can we please put the whole "diddies need the OF to visit 'cos of the money" nonsense to bed? Only once in the last five years have EITHER of the Ugly Sisters pushed attendance at TTOP over the 10k mark (while the one game we played against A*r, which was midweek and on TV, pulled in 11k+). The majority of their fans don't travel, and ours don't want to be in the same ground as those that do. Policing costs go through the roof, though, because Strathclyde's Finest know what they're capable of especially when they're out of their own middens. Let one die, and watch the other wither. Happy days, and a clean league at whatever level. It's not like ANY Scots team is going to trouble Europe anytime soon, so vote the cheats out and let their counterparts wonder where the "fans" went. The rest of us can start August with bigger ambitions than mere survival on the drippings from their slavering chops. KTID Correct. We get crowds that are pretty much the equivalent to those of OF matches when Morton come calling, FFS (or certainly would be for a genuinely competitive match). Whatever notion people have as to how the rest of us might suffer should Rangers shuffle off this mortal coil (even temporarily), I think it would be worth it. Well worth it. There is currently two tiers in Scottish football at any rate. The OF, and the rest. Celtic might have a problem if the demise of Rangers were to come about (which it won't). The rest of us would, at worst, be obliged to take stock of our operational contingencies, and make provision accordingly. I would derive much more pleasure from watching a genuinely compeitive match against Morton or Partick Thistle, than I do from enduring the mutant hordes invading the town. The days of oohing and aahing at the Larssons and Laudrops are gone. Rangers and Celtic bring very little in the way of exceptional quality to the Scottish game. TV money simply feeds the delusion that we are better than we are. Level out the playing field, and the vast majority of football supporters in the country will still enjoy going to support their team. 0 Quote Link to comment 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.