Fotbawmad Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Option 3, Or the master stroke when the club needs money again Green will then say to the fans him and his consortium will sell out the rest of the consortium's shares to the fans so they will own 100% of the club.Can you imagine the Rangers fans response to that ? "TAKE MY MONEY ! WE WILL OWN OUR OWN CLUB" this ensuring that they get the club and the consortium take the new share money and the fans are left with a club in crisis. All of the above mean the fans get ripped off and most likely someone other than the fans will own the stadium & Murray park ! somehow like what happened to Sheffield Utd !. Haha, can't believe I never thought of that one. The end game is almost certain that Sevco/Sevco 2 will be renting their facilites, which will make it impossible to compete with Celtic and in Europe for the next 10-30 years. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10 CC ICT Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think there's something about the Rangers support, that might enable them to be screwed twice. I think we, as Rangers, are actually capable of being screwed thrice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Genuine question... Do you see the 'team' as seperate to the 'club' as seperate to the 'company'? Or do you split your loyalties? OK so that's a bit of a fishing trip and has been debated many times before on here. Most football clubs in Scotland existed before they became 'companies'. Thus it is perfectly reasonable to separate the two. Sorry, fell asleep Wasn't a total fishing trip. It was to see if, after the repetitive ''it was the company not the club that died'' , when Admin 2 happens, would there be a spin on ''ah but it was the club that died this time, we support the team''............ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Sorry, fell asleep Wasn't a total fishing trip. It was to see if, after the repetitive ''it was the company not the club that died'' , when Admin 2 happens, would there be a spin on ''ah but it was the club that died this time, we support the team''............ Admin doesn't mean the end of either a company or a club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 This may have been asked but if so I can't find it amongst all the tit for tat stuff that keeps erupting so apologies if so. This is not a jibe , it's a serious question. Is the share issue for shares in the club (as stated) or the company and how can you tell? If it is the club and it has future problems would it then be the club that disappears? Does anyone know? Is it a prospectus thing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 This may have been asked but if so I can't find it amongst all the tit for tat stuff that keeps erupting so apologies if so. This is not a jibe , it's a serious question. Is the share issue for shares in the club (as stated) or the company and how can you tell? If it is the club and it has future problems would it then be the club that disappears? Does anyone know? Is it a prospectus thing? Depends on who you ask if the diddies and plastics are consistent they will say the same thing they are inseparable but if you ask the Zombies and they will show a level of inconsistency they will also say the same. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 This may have been asked but if so I can't find it amongst all the tit for tat stuff that keeps erupting so apologies if so. This is not a jibe , it's a serious question. Is the share issue for shares in the club (as stated) or the company and how can you tell? If it is the club and it has future problems would it then be the club that disappears? Does anyone know? Is it a prospectus thing? Pretty sure i've heard it decribed by CG in the MSM as shares in the Club. If so, then how is the share price determined in the future, as The Club doesn't trade. If you are buying a share in the assets of the Club, has CG transfered the assets from the Company to the Club. If it's shares in the Club, then you have no vote in how the Company acts. Would you even get an invite to AGM's etc? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Admin doesn't mean the end of either a company or a club. Not in itself But do you see a difference between club + team? Just asking in advance. Like. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Pretty sure i've heard it decribed by CG in the MSM as shares in the Club. If so, then how is the share price determined in the future, as The Club doesn't trade. If you are buying a share in the assets of the Club, has CG transfered the assets from the Company to the Club. If it's shares in the Club, then you have no vote in how the Company acts. Would you even get an invite to AGM's etc? That's the way I'm hearing it as well - the shares issue is for investment in the CLUB. Now, given the hardline company/club nonsense we've had to put up with from lots of Sevconians, it looks to me like Charlie is running a real scam on them here. There are, however, some other questions raised by this: 1. Is the club being offered for investment as a going concern, i.e. a trading entity in its own right? 2. If so, what is the company's role in all of this? 3. If Charlie hasn't been able to attract significant investment in rangers 2012 or whatever this week's name is, why would anyone other than the fans even think about investing now? 4. When it all unravels, how far from Govan will Charlie have to run to be safe? The last question may sound flippant, but if this lot get financially raped again, without even a pile of stolen trophies to show for it, the fans ain't gonna be happy... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) The AIM market floatation is all about raising money from as many sources (punters) as possible - hence the low level of buy in (500 quid) - in order to bulk up the finance of the Club, and by association of OWNERSHIP of that club, The Company. The "Consortium" already has shares in The Company, and with that, CONTROL of The Company (and, by association of OWNERSHIP, The Club) Now, as the AIM shares aim to raise £20m, they have an equivalent number of shares to offer, BUT crucially, they will be so dispersed amongst the buyers (due to the low entry price) as to render them useless in terms of having any voting power and hence control of The Club. If successful at this level, (and that is a massive IF) , The Consortium (OWNERS of The Club - as explained above) have three times the amount of cash as they "put in" to acquire Whyte's assets at RFC, the now famous £5.5m. Now the rub; If, as is likely in my opinion, the Consortium decide to suddenly say that "Fitba is indeed the wrong market to be in" they simply "Cash-In" their original controlling shares from the £20m pot and walk away after handing "control of the club" to some one person or group foolish enough to think they are getting a great deal. This leaves The Company/Club with double the amount of shares (which in the short-term will be valued as cash for purposes of Company/Club valuation) However, we all know, bears included, that the running costs of that monolith are eye wateringly bad for your health. It would not take very long for the Company that OWNS The Club to get into financial difficulties (again) and they would find very few (IF ANY) buyers for the Consortiums' now cashed-in shares, now floating about in the Company, to re-finance it's trading future. This leaves The Company vulnerable and (outside football) open to hostile take-over etc. In football however it means ONE THING... Again..... Sometimes the "light at the end of the tunnel...... is another fuckin TRAIN" Edited October 22, 2012 by GreenockRover 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookies Love Me Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Swedish Hoose Mafia are #2 in the charts this week. When the taxman takes over iBrokes will he rename it after the 70's kids programme: HECTOR'S HOOSE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 who'd have thunked it Matthew Lindsay@MattLindsayET Lennon added: "We've lost a lot of money from Rangers not being here - which made it imperative that we got into the Champions League." 4hMatthew Lindsay@MattLindsayET Lennon said: "For the whole of Scottish football - for the glamour, the energy, the exposure - it would be better if it hadn't happened." 4hMatthew Lindsay@MattLindsayET In today's @TheEveningTimes . . . Celtic boss Neil Lennon admits Rangers playing in the fourth tier has been bad for Scottish football. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 who'd have thunked it blah blah blah didn't read. Written bu Mathew Lindsay? Most likely be Rangers pandering shite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 who'd have thunked it Pretty much anyone. Celtic as a club would have Rangers back in a heartbeat. This can't come as a surprise, surely. It's not as if Lennon lacks previous for bawbaggerry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 didn't read. Written bu Mathew Lindsay? Most likely be Rangers pandering shite. What an immature attitude you have Dave (not Dhense), the Celtic manager actually makes some good points. Now Celtic may have recouped there money by making the CL but what about the SPL teams who weren't so lucky, what about them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Pretty much anyone. Celtic as a club would have Rangers back in a heartbeat. This can't come as a surprise, surely. It's not as if Lennon lacks previous for bawbaggerry. Careful mate, folk have had dawn raids from the polis for less than that Ye just cannae say things like that aboot wee Neily. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Careful mate, folk have had dawn raids from the polis for less than that Ye just cannae say things like that aboot wee Neily. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadSaint Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Psychopath? Ticks a lot of boxes...had them as players (Neil Cooper) but maybe never running the club. My link Glib and Superficial Psychopaths are often voluble and verbally facile. They can be amusing and entertaining conversationalists, ready with a clever comeback, and are able to tell unlikely but convincing stories that cast themselves in a good light. Egocentric and Grandiose Psychopaths have a narcissistic and grossly inflated view of their own self-worth and importance, a truly astounding egocentricity and sense of entitlement, and see themselves as the centre of the universe, justified in living according to their own rules. Lack of Remorse or Guilt Psychopaths show a stunning lack of concern for the effects their actions have on others, no matter how devastating these might be. They may appear completely forthright about the matter, calmly stating that they have no sense of guilt, are not sorry for the ensuing pain, and that there is no reason now to be concerned. Poor Behavior Controls Besides being impulsive, psychopaths are highly reactive to perceived insults or slights. Most of us have powerful inhibitory controls over our behaviour; even if we would like to respond aggressively we are usually able to "keep the lid on." In psychopaths, these inhibitory controls are weak, and the slightest provocation is sufficient to overcome them. But, their actions have a “cold” and focused quality about them, and return to “normal” is quick. A Need for Excitement Psychopaths have an ongoing and excessive need for excitement—they long to live in the fast lane or "on the edge," where the action is. In many cases the action involves the breaking of rules. Lack of Responsibility Obligations and commitments mean nothing to psychopaths. Their good intentions—"I'll never cheat on you again"—are promises written on the wind. Their performance on the job is erratic, with frequent absences, misuse of company resources, violations of company policy, and general untrustworthiness. They do not honour formal or implied commitments to people, organizations, or principles. Adult Antisocial Behaviour Psychopaths see the rules and expectations of society as inconvenient and unreasonable impediments to their own behavioural expression. They make their own rules. Antisocial behaviour may consist of phoney stock promotions, questionable business practices, partner or child abuse, and so forth. Others do things that are not necessarily illegal but are nevertheless unethical, immoral, or harmful to others: cheating on a partner, emotional abuse, bullying, to name but a few. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Psychopath? Ticks a lot of boxes...had them as players (Neil Cooper) but maybe never running the club. My link Glib and Superficial Psychopaths are often voluble and verbally facile. They can be amusing and entertaining conversationalists, ready with a clever comeback, and are able to tell unlikely but convincing stories that cast themselves in a good light. Egocentric and Grandiose Psychopaths have a narcissistic and grossly inflated view of their own self-worth and importance, a truly astounding egocentricity and sense of entitlement, and see themselves as the centre of the universe, justified in living according to their own rules. Lack of Remorse or Guilt Psychopaths show a stunning lack of concern for the effects their actions have on others, no matter how devastating these might be. They may appear completely forthright about the matter, calmly stating that they have no sense of guilt, are not sorry for the ensuing pain, and that there is no reason now to be concerned. Poor Behavior Controls Besides being impulsive, psychopaths are highly reactive to perceived insults or slights. Most of us have powerful inhibitory controls over our behaviour; even if we would like to respond aggressively we are usually able to "keep the lid on." In psychopaths, these inhibitory controls are weak, and the slightest provocation is sufficient to overcome them. But, their actions have a "cold" and focused quality about them, and return to "normal" is quick. A Need for Excitement Psychopaths have an ongoing and excessive need for excitement—they long to live in the fast lane or "on the edge," where the action is. In many cases the action involves the breaking of rules. Lack of Responsibility Obligations and commitments mean nothing to psychopaths. Their good intentions—"I'll never cheat on you again"—are promises written on the wind. Their performance on the job is erratic, with frequent absences, misuse of company resources, violations of company policy, and general untrustworthiness. They do not honour formal or implied commitments to people, organizations, or principles. Adult Antisocial Behaviour Psychopaths see the rules and expectations of society as inconvenient and unreasonable impediments to their own behavioural expression. They make their own rules. Antisocial behaviour may consist of phoney stock promotions, questionable business practices, partner or child abuse, and so forth. Others do things that are not necessarily illegal but are nevertheless unethical, immoral, or harmful to others: cheating on a partner, emotional abuse, bullying, to name but a few. Is this about a certain Kilmarnock fan now living in Yorkshire? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Rangers 2 Queens Park 0 BILL LECKIE at Ibrox Record breakers, ooo-ooo, record breakers, if you wanna beat the rest, you have to pass the test, Craig Whyte is a b*****d. Not quite the old Roy Castle number but you get the drift. Instead of the tune being played on an old trumpet this routine Glasgow derby win was orchestrated by Lee McCulloch and the music was as sweet as Walter Smith’s Blue Stratos. Nearly 50,000 punters crammed into Ibrox to watch this game. That’s over 40,000 MORE than witnessed Celtic scraping a win against St Mirren. The bonus for them was seeing their side reach the top of the league and how they enjoyed it. Of course those of a hooped persuasion will point to it being the bottom league and players get £7000 per week blah de fiddle-dee-blah. Bottom line is Ally McCoist is doing what he’s paid to do and producing WINNERS. And don’t give me that old Ray Clemence about Celtic playing Barcelona this week in the Champions League. As Neil Lennon boards the plane this morning about to face Messi and co he’ll need a few extra rolls of quilted bog roll whilst McCoist relaxes on the end of a large Cuban. Hell, he may even allow himself a cigar into the bargain. And that’s the rub-a-dub dub. Whilst we never stop hearing about the so-called big tax case and EBT’s, on the pitch Rangers are going about their business like a Labrador on All-Bran. It was there in the way McCulloch slammed in his two goals in front of that massive world record securing crowd. You wouldn’t have been surprised if Norris McWhirter himself had bolted onto the pitch and presented the big man with a medal. And that’s how you feel about Rangers these days. Breaking records, winning games, doing the job, etc etc. Of course you won’t hear that over at Parkhead where giving out praise is as rare as Walter Smith having an unpolished brogue. Instead it’s all about them, and how they are playing the best team in the world, how they are going to win the SPL. You know what, hell mend them. I’d rather focus on the rebirth of a genuine football force making its way back up the leagues than one which wouldn’t know integrity and honesty if it came up and bit them on the potato. Dedication, it’s what you need. And Rangers have it in spades. MOTM – Every one of the record-breaking 50,000 home supporters and Lee McCulloch The really sad part is I am only 65/35 % on it being a parody 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.