Itwiznaeme Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Tom Irish is a fcukwit Same as yourself then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Was wanting to respond to a reasonable posting from Billy (a Rangers fan) but can't find his post, or can't be bothered wading through the 'they have it in for us' postings. We can argue about the potential world market for Sevco Rangers, and there will be a real figure somewhat south of the one Green will pump at us. The home crowds they are getting are impressive. The column inches they still get is amazing. And there is a chance of £20mill being pumped in to pay off current shareholders, build a bar, and ....well I'm not too sure what else. The passion and commitment of the old Rangers fans is outstanding. However many seem to think the world is against them, or at least those who are not 'one of them'. They also state on here that there are many ok guys who support Rangers. What gets me is why, why oh why did the fans not get together and buy Rangers through Duff & Duffer when they had a chance. We have had the sham supporter group under Paul Murray, the McColl talk of an offer that lasted all of about 2 days. But such groups are led by dodgy characters who will play the 'I am one of you' to get the supporters on side. But will always be in there to make a good financial return. The better way I refer to is a group of real supporters, set up as a cooperative or some such. After all if it works pretty well for Barcelona why not Rangers? To get the club has cost Green is next to sod all (in net terms - I am sure someone has the figure). And with the AIM listing to come he will soon expect to move into profit. So Rangers fans. Rather than bleat on about Alex Thomson, Craig Whyte, or the keyboard heroes like myself, please tell me why your many fans couldn't get together, pull the promise of say £10million together, get a couple of serious negotiators on board, and get the club into your own hands. That way you could move beyond being ripped off - as you have been for the last 20 years, take the club the way you want to see it go, and have something you you genuinely belong to, that also belongs to you. The chance was to escape the clutches of the greedy self serving big time charlies. That chance was missed. Why?. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Honestly unless the Bears organise themselves and do it quickly (and not the RST) then the simple truth is that they are going to arrive at a situation where they will have to stump up or watch their club enter ADMIN2. Green will simply press ahead with this sideshow and deflect questions for detailed answers (remember he has NO OBLIGATION TO DO SO nor to produce any meaningful prospectus and let's face it if his plan all along was to float this early - WHERE IS IT?) until the doomsday hour approaches. Unless the Bears put pressure on him to provide detailed answers, sooner rather than later, then he will simply sit back. The Bears cannot simply 'wait and see' as they will only be faced with one scenario .. stump up or watch the inevitable. They may as well make their choices now as some have so admirably done on here (I'll pay my £500 or whatever sum .. write it off and pray for the best) as the circus will roll on until that moment is upon them. I think the term is they are 'caught between a rock and a hard place' .. They either face that reality or take action now (what that entails is not for others to figure out). I think my post (just below yours) is saying the same thing but in a different way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Honestly unless the Bears organise themselves and do it quickly (and not the RST) then the simple truth is that they are going to arrive at a situation where they will have to stump up or watch their club enter ADMIN2. Green will simply press ahead with this sideshow and deflect questions for detailed answers (remember he has NO OBLIGATION TO DO SO nor to produce any meaningful prospectus and let's face it if his plan all along was to float this early - WHERE IS IT?) until the doomsday hour approaches. Unless the Bears put pressure on him to provide detailed answers sooner than later then he will simply sit back. The Bears cannot simply 'wait and see' as they will only be faced with one scenario .. stump up or watch the inevitable. They may as well make their choices now as some have so admirably done on here (I'll pay my £500 or whatever sum .. write it off and pray for the best) as the circus will roll on until that moment is upon them. I think the term is they are 'caught between a rock and a hard place' .. They either face that reality or take action now (what that entails is not for others to figure out). The first thing they need to cure in their mindset is anyone who asks questions or shows any sign of opposition to the clubs hierarchy is not necessarily an enemy. The danger isin't Charles Green the danger is them acting with a critical response to his vision (sales patter - call it what you want). English highlights the phenomena and so have many other journalists, pundits, bloggers and casual posters for those who say they don't follow everything Green is saying why aren't Bears on the different Rangers websites persuading others rather than defending their club on here. i don't know in THE rangers new entity are in danger of going into administration again but I can clearly see that the figures Green is quoting are totally flawed, so you have to be suspicious of anyone clearly not being totally honest. Can I ask a question of those who believe Green's business plan , then you must believe those who bought over the club are only interested in a profitable return, how long will it be for them to get that return if they are talking about restructuring not just domestically but in Europe. We are not talking about a few months here. Plus any deal with tv companies and domestic leagues would have to be honoured, it is pure fantasy. Not taking the pish out of their plight but their club doesn't need anymore blowing smoke up its arse it needs a solid grounding with financial stability whether it takes 4 years or 14 years to return to a level Rangers were once at, makes no odds if your survival is guaranteed. When the Bunnet was at Celtic he told them exactly how it was going to be , he showed them a hard nosed business sense that they had never experienced that was the same sensibilities you require . (this isin't a pro celtic up thing, it is the best example of the pragmatical approach needed). But hey its their club not mine . Edited October 14, 2012 by FinnesTON 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Just tried to have a look at T'T'RangersMedia to see their take on share issue. Seems to be down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonableGeezer Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I think for most of the support, change is either too difficult a thing to comprehend or they have this almost dictatorial view of Rangers (more than a team, we are the people etc). The vast majority of the Rangers fans I know are in this complete denial mindset that its everyone else's fault and they're going to come back bigger and stronger and all us diddies are going to be sorry. Not one of them has even questioned the possibility that this might just be the final cut for Rangers/Sevco. I dont lay all the blame for this mind set on the fans though. They are the ones who will eventually suffer because of others actions. This is down to the media, the crooks who've seen Rangers as an easy way to make a quick buck and run. I reckon Mr Green is of exactly the same ilk yet the sense of denial is the very thing that will eventually finish them off. He's a spectacular master of the art of spin. Delusions of Grandeur will be the thing that hammers the final nail in the coffin. IMO. They wont change because they "are the people". Silly silly blinkered people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Are rangers fans right in the head ? This guy green more full of it than Craig whyte ,,,a euro leauge is comming because the EPL is dying on its arse? A potential audience of half a billion to watch rangers? We need 20million to get through the season but I'm still no telling who my backers are? SPL clubs will die without rangers? Just who are rangers planning to blame/death threat when it goes tits up this time? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) I think I asked that on here previously as well , but it might have somewhere else .. Really at a loss to explain it, other than they just all expect someone else to do it for them. There are obviously major obstacles and pitfalls, such as the difficulties of organising it and gaining the respect and trust of the other fans .. but to simply not try to float the idea does baffle me .. This could have been done even in the days of Murray when it was clear the club was in trouble and he could not offload it; long before the fall guy Whyte stepped in. That said anyone suggesting their is truth to the rumours and coming up with a plan would be labelled a Timmy conspirator and hounded out of the support. They have a habit of shooting messengers of doom and gloom. Celtic suffered a similar reaction with the Celts for Change and it was not a harmonious time by any means. However those within Celts for Change believed in what they were doing so carried on the fight whether others liked the message or the proposals they were delivering. Only they can explain why they cannot seem to grasp hold of any sensible ideas and run with them. I don't think the outcome really matters as the only think you can ask yourself .. Is did I do everything possible I could for the good of the club. I'd like to think if the situations were reversed I'd be devoting my time to something other than posting on here. Everyone has witnessed why this is unlikely to occur anyone puts their head over the parapet is branded a tarrier. Edited October 14, 2012 by FinnesTON 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 The first thing they need to cure in their mindset is anyone who asks questions or shows any sign of opposition to the clubs hierarchy is not necessarily an enemy. The danger isin't Charles Green the danger is them acting with a critical response to his vision (sales patter - call it what you want). English highlights the phenomena and so have many other journalists, pundits, bloggers and casual posters for those who say they don't follow everything Green is saying why aren't Bears on the different Rangers websites persuading others rather than defending their club on here. i don't know in THE rangers new entity are in danger of going into administration again but I can clearly see that the figures Green is quoting are totally flawed, so you have to be suspicious of anyone clearly not being totally honest. Can I ask a question of those who believe Green's business plan , then you must believe those who bought over the club are only interested in a profitable return, how long will it be for them to get that return if they are talking about restructuring not just domestically but in Europe. We are not talking about a few months here. Plus any deal with tv companies and domestic leagues would have to be honoured, it is our fantasy. Not taking the pish out of their plight but their club doesn't need anymore blowing smoke up its arse it needs a solid grounding with financial stability whether it takes 4 years or 14 years to return to a level Rangers were once at, makes no odds if your survival is guaranteed. When the Bunnet was at Celtic he told them exactly how it was going to be , he showed them a hard nosed business sense that they had never experienced that was the same sensibilities you require . (this isin't a pro celtic up thing, it is the best example of the pragmatical approach needed). But hey its their club not mine . While i have to commend you for a well written piece, before i can take you seriously and not as just another wind up merchant there's a few things which need cleared up. These posting statistics of yours are shocking .... Active Posts:597 (4.64 per day)Most Active In:Rangers in the SFL (522 posts) Really strange but i wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you really were a Morton fan so i had a look on the 1st division forum and browsed the recent Morton related threads and surprise surprise you were awol If you clear this up then perhaps i can take your points in the proper spirit and not like those of someone with alias on a wind up mission. Bennett xxx -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I'm a WUM and doesn't answer questions I just give abuse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulo Sergio Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Wee Charlie Green is a deluded, despicable little toley. It's no big surprise though now that he is with Sevco. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Wee Charlie Green is a deluded, despicable little toley. It's no big surprise though now that he is with Sevco. Has had to apologise to Villa though Rangers: Charles Green apologises for Aston Villa remarks Rangers chief executive Charles Green has apologised to Aston Villa for comments he made last week. Green said a European league would be formed because "big teams can't keep subsidising small teams". And he posed the question: "How can Manchester United's revenues be £320m and Aston Villa, who are completely useless, get £250m?" Rangers said: "Mr Green has sent an apology to Aston Villa saying there had been no intention to cause offence." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Rangers: Charles Green apologises for Aston Villa remarks Oops beat me to it Wunfellaf. Edited October 14, 2012 by Bairnforever1992 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 While i have to commend you for a well written piece, before i can take you seriously and not as just another wind up merchant there's a few things which need cleared up. These posting statistics of yours are shocking .... Active Posts:597 (4.64 per day)Most Active In:Rangers in the SFL (522 posts) Really strange but i wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you really were a Morton fan so i had a look on the 1st division forum and browsed the recent Morton related threads and surprise surprise you were awol If you clear this up then perhaps i can take your points in the proper spirit and not like those of someone with alias on a wind up mission. Bennett xxx Bennett, Morton have been through a similar near miss and we also went down the buy big without the success while others like Hamilton, St Johnstone etc had a sensible business strategy , we have returned to a more sensible financial footing and the supporters are well aware that we will eventually have to go part time, this is not that big an issue as it is about the survival of the club in the long term. When I want to post on anything about my club I use our own unofficial site I don't need P+B to do that. The fact that you again treat myself and others with suspicion over the content of post makes it evident you will continue to further duped by any vulture wishing to eat over the carcass of Rangers. It makes no difference to me what occurs to your club but as a football supporter I have a certain empathy with any supporter. So I have answered, honestly your questions so why don't you do the same and if you have reservations it is no use keeping them to yourself you need to open that up with your fellow supporters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Rangers: Charles Green apologises for Aston Villa remarks Oops beat me to it Wunfellaf. All it states he didn't mean to cause offence not that he said they were useless or the fact they can emulate business figures like those quoted despite the extreme compedative nature of the EPL. This is another clumsy back pedal by Green, he needs to concentrate on the reality of his club gaining successful promotions and entry into the SPL before he can even consider Europe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiddy Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Rangers: Charles Green apologises for Aston Villa remarks Oops beat me to it Wunfellaf. I take it he's sent a letter to Chelsea. They've probably still to get a phone line into their place, never mind a broadband link. Look at Chelsea, they have a crap stadium and a reasonable training ground, but neither compare to what we have. Never mind I'm sure they'll find out around mid-morning Monday when the Postie eventually gets there.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Interesting take on things......(the links / facts are there Sevco boys, it is just about joining the dots, I really wish you lot would grasp this aspect) Just one other thing, if you don’t mind. Something I have never grasped. If Ticketus are not owed anything then what use is a floating charge to them. It would be a security over no debt. ================================================= D&P sought creditor claims for a CVA – which, of course, ultimately failed. I have seen no evidence (in fact, quite the opposite) that Ticketus made a claim – as an unsecured creditor – for the purposes of that CVA. In theory (if not in practical terms) Ticketus still have a valid contract with RFC(IA) that should see them paid according to the agreed schedule. Of course, they won’t be paid – but, as it stands, they appear to have no CURRENT debt with RFC(IA). It is only if/when Ticketus accept non-performance “as a repudiation, rescind the contract, and claim damages”, that the debt becomes something that the administrators or liquidators can deal with. Without a valid claim for damages, they cannot disadvantage the other creditors by allowing debt that is merely assumed. As I say, to my knowledge, Ticketus have not yet pressed that button. So the very big question is why?? We know that CW kept the floating charge alive when the HB0S debt was repaid and assigned it to Wavetower. This is a known fact. CW/ Wavetower have no valid debt associated with that floating charge. This has been asserted, on a number of occasion by D&P and is not really disputed. We are told (by both CW & Ticketus) that CW gave commercial & personal guarantees to Ticketus. We have no real reason to think this is not true. We are told that Ticketus have started legal proceedings against CW and Liberty. We can, I think, agree this is a reasonable action in the circumstances. We know that a floating charge was placed over the assets of Ranger Group (Wavetower) to the benefit of Liberty. This was registered some time ago and, again is not at issue. We know then, with a fairly high degree of certainty, that Liberty are the ultimate beneficiaries of the RFC(IA) floating charge (but have no associated debt) and that Ticketus have a potential claim against both Liberty and RFC(IA). From all of the aforementioned, and without too much speculation, we can deduce that Ticketus (with the acquiescence of CW) could convert their potential (as it stands at the moment) RFC(IA) debt of circa £27m to a debt secured by a perfectly valid and enforceable floating charge. Perhaps CW is playing hard-ball and Ticketus do not yet have control of the floating charge. Maybe he is looking for some pay-off before signing control over… perhaps. But, on the other hand, even with an enforceable floating charge, Ticketus will only see £1m – 2m of their £27m on the basis of the sale of assets at £5.5m. And lets look at that £5.5m sale. The current rateable value of Murray Park is £600k – for Ibrox it is £1.9m. http://www.saa.gov.uk/ What is rateable value? The Scottish Assessors give all non-domestic property in Scotland a rateable value, which is a legally-defined valuation of a property, broadly based on an analysis of annual rental values. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/local-government/17999/11199/brief-guide So, we have two properties – with legally-defined valuations that say they should command around £2.5m in annual rent. Say that £2.5m is too high. Say, to be conservative, it should be £2m. Say, you’re looking for a generous 20% gross return on your investment. If the annual rent is £2m, the property value is around £10m. In reality, £15m – £20m should be achievable in an open sale. So why were the properties sold for £1.5m? Charles sold £10m of STs and is looking to raise another £20m on the strength of the Rangers FC brand. It appears to me that the Rangers FC brand – and the other trademarks – have a value running into high seven figures.Why was the brand sold for £1 along with all the other aspects of “goodwill”? Why did they continue trading and the administration allowed to run a £4m loss? The only answer, that makes any sense to me, is that the administrators can “write-off” a larger amount of debt than they cost the creditors by trading at a loss and selling under-value. While everyone was fixating on the possibility of HMRC going against policy and agreeing a CVA, the real deal, I think, was done with Ticketus. It seems common sense, that the Ticketus investors were in a strong position to negotiate a deal with D&P that would see them get the assets cheaply by allowing the unsecured creditors to pick up some scraps. If I am correct, Ticketus will never make a claim against RFC(IA) if the sale to Sevco stands. If BDO threaten to undo the sale, Ticketus will threaten to make a floating charge claim against RFC(IA). If that claim stands up (and I see no reason it would not) Ticketus get everything up to £27m and the unsecured creditors get nothing. As this would be a worse result for creditors as a whole, BDO would not, in those circumstances, undo the sale. IMO, if D&P don’t have some “get-out”, they are on an extremely sticky wicket – both professionally and legally. I can see no other explanation for any of the apparently baffling events and decisions, than that the “confidential” part of the Sevco sale was that Ticketus would not claim on the CVA." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 it is just about joining the dots, I really wish you lot would grasp this aspect) Why would you give the slightest of flying fucks what we think or care about with regard to our club? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 While i have to commend you for a well written piece, before i can take you seriously and not as just another wind up merchant there's a few things which need cleared up. These posting statistics of yours are shocking .... Active Posts:597 (4.64 per day)Most Active In:Rangers in the SFL (522 posts) Really strange but i wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you really were a Morton fan so i had a look on the 1st division forum and browsed the recent Morton related threads and surprise surprise you were awol If you clear this up then perhaps i can take your points in the proper spirit and not like those of someone with alias on a wind up mission. Bennett xxx You pull this bit of deflection with a few other posters.... somebody puts up a legitimate , informative or pish-ripping bit of discussion and you wade in with ' you support Inverdiddy United, but 600 out of 800 posts are on the Rangers thread' So bleeding what? It doesn't detract at all from their Inverdiddy allegience. Possibly because this thread is The Place To Be on This Particular Topic and everybody migrates to it. I support Aberdeen and post mostly on AFC forums, only dropping by here to enjoy this fantastic thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 So bleeding what? It doesn't detract at all from their Inverdiddy allegience. We understand the fascination for our greatest of clubs. Really we do. We know you can't stay away from our club, and your response is 'so what'? Diddy clubbers - more to be scorned than pitied. -1 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.