bennett Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Seething that we can't have a mike Ashley specific thread but anyway here goes my opinion on the situation:- I know 99.9%of you will disagree with me but do you t think a man that's worth £2 billion will really be a danger to your club?? I really think rangers have been saved here. I'm just curious as to what you think of my above statement so please discuss. You could always start one but this thread covers anything and everything anyway. Edit - Just noticed the benevolent Mr Z's post about this Edited October 27, 2014 by bennett 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Seething that we can't have a mike Ashley specific thread but anyway here goes my opinion on the situation:- I know 99.9%of you will disagree with me but do you t think a man that's worth £2 billion will really be a danger to your club?? I really think rangers have been saved here. I'm just curious as to what you think of my above statement so please discuss. I'll tell you my objection to Ashley: he is in it for Ashley and not for Rangers and will always put his commercial interest over the good of the club. Now I know that a few Rangers fans will look at his billions and hope we get a bit of that but, honestly, the overwhelming majority of us are sick of the 'sugar daddy' mindset and just want a club run by a competent businesses people for the good of the club rather than personal gain and where they can run the club through balancing income and expenditure. Fuxake, it wouldn't be difficult to make Rangers a successful and self-sustaining Scottish club based on selling 35,000+ season tickets PA plus additional revenues from TV and merchandising plus some bunce from a European humping now and then and I am sure a load of fans would be delighted with that. ie a model wherein we payed our way and won or lost by dint of our success on the park. The 'Ashley problem' is that he may have shored us up for another month or two but that we're still beholden to someone who has an agenda other than putting Rangers first. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I agree that it is ridiculous that we must turn to the BRALT and sieve through the posts to find the Ashley discussion. Easily a topic that can be discussed in its own thread rather than this brain numbing monstrosity. Ashley and what he means for Rangers, has been pretty much the only topic of discussion in here since Saturday morning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geronimo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I'll tell you my objection to Ashley: he is in it for Ashley and not for Rangers and will always put his commercial interest over the good of the club. Now I know that a few Rangers fans will look at his billions and hope we get a bit of that but, honestly, the overwhelming majority of us are sick of the 'sugar daddy' mindset and just want a club run by a competent businesses people for the good of the club rather than personal gain and where they can run the club through balancing income and expenditure. Fuxake, it wouldn't be difficult to make Rangers a successful and self-sustaining Scottish club based on selling 35,000+ season tickets PA plus additional revenues from TV and merchandising plus some bunce from a European humping now and then and I am sure a load of fans would be delighted with that. ie a model wherein we payed our way and won or lost by dint of our success on the park. The 'Ashley problem' is that he may have shored us up for another month or two but that we're still beholden to someone who has an agenda other than putting Rangers first. Fan Ownership 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I'll tell you my objection to Ashley: he is in it for Ashley and not for Rangers and will always put his commercial interest over the good of the club. Now I know that a few Rangers fans will look at his billions and hope we get a bit of that but, honestly, the overwhelming majority of us are sick of the 'sugar daddy' mindset and just want a club run by a competent businesses people for the good of the club rather than personal gain and where they can run the club through balancing income and expenditure. Fuxake, it wouldn't be difficult to make Rangers a successful and self-sustaining Scottish club based on selling 35,000+ season tickets PA plus additional revenues from TV and merchandising plus some bunce from a European humping now and then and I am sure a load of fans would be delighted with that. ie a model wherein we payed our way and won or lost by dint of our success on the park. The 'Ashley problem' is that he may have shored us up for another month or two but that we're still beholden to someone who has an agenda other than putting Rangers first. Like, say Dave King 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Now I know that a few Rangers fans will look at his billions and hope we get a bit of that but, honestly, the overwhelming majority of us are sick of the 'sugar daddy' mindset I honestly believe you've got this wrong. I'm sure it's an accurate picture of how you feel as an individual, but I don't for a moment think there's widespread appetite for ditching a 'sugar daddy mindset'. The courting of King and the evident grief over his departure would suggest the mindset remains alive and well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I honestly believe you've got this wrong. I'm sure it's an accurate picture of how you feel as an individual, but I don't for a moment think there's widespread appetite for ditching a 'sugar daddy mindset'. The courting of King and the evident grief over his departure would suggest the mindset remains alive and well. You really do have a fixation about King, i don't think many fans expected him to win anyway = i know i never. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I'll tell you my objection to Ashley: he is in it for Ashley and not for Rangers and will always put his commercial interest over the good of the club. Now I know that a few Rangers fans will look at his billions and hope we get a bit of that but, honestly, the overwhelming majority of us are sick of the 'sugar daddy' mindset and just want a club run by a competent businesses people for the good of the club rather than personal gain and where they can run the club through balancing income and expenditure. Fuxake, it wouldn't be difficult to make Rangers a successful and self-sustaining Scottish club based on selling 35,000+ season tickets PA plus additional revenues from TV and merchandising plus some bunce from a European humping now and then and I am sure a load of fans would be delighted with that. ie a model wherein we payed our way and won or lost by dint of our success on the park. The 'Ashley problem' is that he may have shored us up for another month or two but that we're still beholden to someone who has an agenda other than putting Rangers first. Don't believe you either. Anyone give me a wee list of all those people who did claim to "put rangers first". At least Ashley won't be lying to you when he silently pumps every brass farthing out of nuRangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geronimo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) I honestly believe you've got this wrong. I'm sure it's an accurate picture of how you feel as an individual, but I don't for a moment think there's widespread appetite for ditching a 'sugar daddy mindset'. The courting of King and the evident grief over his departure would suggest the mindset remains alive and well. King wouldn't be a sugar-daddy. He's not got anywhere near enough "quantum" (chortle) to continually fund Rangers himself, to the extent he appears to be claiming, for such a prolonged period of time. Don't believe you either. Anyone give me a wee list of all those people who did claim to "put rangers first". At least Ashley won't be lying to you when he silently pumps every brass farthing out of nuRangers. The Fans Edited October 27, 2014 by Geronimo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The Fans No you sat on your arses or lashed out at the media and the authorities. You put x-factor and probably some chips first 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) I'm sure Ashley will be pretty ruthless in cutting costs when it's him that's footing the bill or his profits that are being eaten into. He's never going to be paying someone else's skim money on the top of onerous contracts either so I suspect we'll see some big changes. Whether that's genuine austerity or just saying "f**k it", ripping up contracts then calling the lawyers in to tidy up the mess, we'll see. Either way I think staying at the Lochgreen before Killie matches is now officially out. Or let them go to Admin, release the players, claim the car park and offices for default on the £2 million and come out it with a leaner club with more assets to MASH Edited October 27, 2014 by thenolly 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 You really do have a fixation about King, i don't think many fans expected him to win anyway = i know i never. The majority on here wanted him to, whether it was expected or not. Fan groups backed him too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 King wouldn't be a sugar-daddy. He's not got anywhere near enough "quantum" (chortle) to continually fund Rangers himself, to the extent he appears to be claiming, for such a prolonged period of time. King claimed he'd be happy to put in £30m. In Scottish terms, that would make him very sugary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Wragg Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Seething that we can't have a mike Ashley specific thread but anyway here goes my opinion on the situation:- I know 99.9%of you will disagree with me but do you t think a man that's worth £2 billion will really be a danger to your club?? I really think rangers have been saved here. I'm just curious as to what you think of my above statement so please discuss. Saved? Yes. Going forward in the way fans demand when they're in the top league (ie. spending whatever it takes to finish above Celtic and win the title)? Mibees aye, mibees naw. When Ashley's costcutting starts might be when the natives get restless again if there is a period of general stability over the next few months. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podlie Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Seething that we can't have a mike Ashley specific thread but anyway here goes my opinion on the situation:- I know 99.9%of you will disagree with me but do you t think a man that's worth £2 billion will really be a danger to your club?? I really think rangers have been saved here. I'm just curious as to what you think of my above statement so please discuss. Think your spot on myself. Think he's worth between 3.5 and 4 billion. Rangers just petty cash to him, the fact that he's not a Rangers man probably do that club the world of good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Think that was the QC that was arguing they were not. Hey numbnuts, don't even think of involving me in your stupidity by using me as a get out clause. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERSOUTH Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 .......... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im_Rodger Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Can some decent admin unlock the mike Ashley thread don't want to go into anything else bar mike Ashley. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I honestly believe you've got this wrong. Don't believe you either. Since The Mint's ill-fated and self-underwritten rights issue where most potential investors called for an extended bargepole since the standard 10' pole was to too short for the length of berth they wanted we have been a corporate basketcase. Given a choice between yet another investor with an eyes to the main chance and the (now pipedream) of a sensible investor who wants to ape Mr Micawber I know who I'd go for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Can some decent admin unlock the mike Ashley thread don't want to go into anything else bar mike Ashley. Can some 'decent admin' lock NSFW, please? 2 girls 1 cup seems tasteful even compared to that image 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.