No8. Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Ashley doesnt need European exposure for his brand through Rangers..a minnow in European terms..in minor European competition. He gets massive wworldwide exposure of his brand through owning one of the bigger EPL clubs. That coverage dwarves anything Rangers will get in Europe. He will not invest in the team and couldnt care less if they are successful. TBH the average daftie you see walking about your local high street wearing a replice top cares little either. They probably couldnt find Ibrox witg an A-Z and a tour guide! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 If Ashley cared about on field success he would have made sacking the football management team his priority and not sacking Nash and Wallace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Ashley doesnt need European exposure for his brand through Rangers..a minnow in European terms..in minor European competition. He gets massive wworldwide exposure of his brand through owning one of the bigger EPL clubs. That coverage dwarves anything Rangers will get in Europe. He will not invest in the team and couldnt care less if they are successful. TBH the average daftie you see walking about your local high street wearing a replice top cares little either. They probably couldnt find Ibrox witg an A-Z and a tour guide! You are either missing the point being made here or I am misinterpreting your responses. Ashley, through his involvement with TRIFC, is EXTENDING his brand coverage. It is simply an additional marketing vehicle to further increase his revenues. The added bonus for him is that it (the Rangers Brand) is already established, so no start up costs, has a large existing customer base, so no market research or product trialing needed and was CHEAP to buy. If things go as I suspect you will soon be getting your quadrouple bigot-fest matches against Celtic and sufficient funding to be relatively competitive at a domestic level. Is that not enough after these last few years !? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I'll try.... (mug) Ashley needs The Rangers to be sufficiently successful to keep the merch flowing. This is achieved by keeping the Football Club near, or at the top, in the domestic game. This can be achieved at relatively little cost (in Ashley Terms) Winning, or competing, for Premiership titles will be the mainstay of his income streams. The massed support are easily pleased in that regard and will reward Ashley with sales of shirts, scarves and all the associated Trade Marked goods. Brief Euro forays at the minor UEFA Cup Level, as opposed to the Big Boys Competition, will also do for Ashley as it's still European exposure for his "Brand". Success or failure in that comp will matter f**k all to him. Unrestrained spending to chase CL involvement is no longer the raison d'être at TRIFC. So.... you see.......... it IS good for your club and its supporters. Unless Alan Pardew appears.... Edit: Typo 'Asley' to Ashley. Time will tell if it's Assley Of course he will base the whole show on the Premiership and the domestic cups. A single european victory in a defunct cup is hardly a basis for claiming to be the most successful club in the world. Talk about 10 IAR and you will have the bears drooling themselves to death. With prize money just about covering the wages of the coaching staff and the nights in fancy hotels, these will soon be for the chop. The playing staff will probably be slimmed down considerably come January and maybe even have a player-manager. Young players brought into the team, in fact, everything which should have been done at the start if Dumb and Dumber had done their job correctly. The The Rangers will be so lean it will be as though there had never been a pie consumed at Ibrox...sorry The Sports Direct Arena. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I still like Mike Ashley's Sports Stadium or MASS for short Mike Ashley's Associated Rangers Sporting Enterprise has a certain ring to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenockRover Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Of course he will base the whole show on the Premiership and the domestic cups. A single european victory in a defunct cup is hardly a basis for claiming to be the most successful club in the world. Talk about 10 IAR and you will have the bears drooling themselves to death. With prize money just about covering the wages of the coaching staff and the nights in fancy hotels, these will soon be for the chop. The playing staff will probably be slimmed down considerably come January and maybe even have a player-manager. Young players brought into the team, in fact, everything which should have been done at the start if Dumb and Dumber had done their job correctly. The The Rangers will be so lean it will be as though there had never been a pie consumed at Ibrox...sorry The Sports Direct Arena. Had to tidy that up a bit - was tough to read Agreed. Let there be no doubt, Ashley is a boardroom bully of gigantic reputation. If anyone talks of "Tradition" or "History" or "Rightful places" and the need to spend heavily to maintain them they will be sidelined quicker than an Ebola victim and made about as popular. This, POTENTIALLY, is precisely what is needed for them to begin their real "Journey". Why in the name of god can they not see this ?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hi No.8 remember that time sevco asked for a financial penalty from the SFA, rather than a sporting one? They got their fine then later complained that a financial penalty was unfair when Hearts didn't get one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hi No.8 remember that time sevco asked for a financial penalty from the SFA, rather than a sporting one? They got their fine then later complained that a financial penalty was unfair when Hearts didn't get one. Just like he's forgot the SFA rewriting their rule book to separate companies and clubs so that rangers could "survive" in the Orcs eyes, just a matter of weeks before liquidation of the club? Yeah, no help at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 This is pretty much spot on. Now can all those championing the Ashley cause explain to me how this is good for the Football club and more importantly to me the supporters? Because the football club may have ceased without it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Rangers received absolutely no help from the footballing authorities and never asked for any. Decisions went to the vote and IMO the clubs themselves voted the correct way. It was the SPL clubs that tried to bully the lower league clubs in to allowing Rangers into SFL 1. Something i and every Rangers supporter i know was dead set against. You're right to point the finger at the SPL clubs for their bullying. You're wrong however to absolve the SFA of blame here. Regan was not remotely impartial. "Slow lingering death" was his line and it was a truly despicable abuse of position and power. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Jackanory Dave So, give me the date they rewrote their rule book. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 You are either missing the point being made here or I am misinterpreting your responses. Ashley, through his involvement with TRIFC, is EXTENDING his brand coverage. It is simply an additional marketing vehicle to further increase his revenues. The added bonus for him is that it (the Rangers Brand) is already established, so no start up costs, has a large existing customer base, so no market research or product trialing needed and was CHEAP to buy. If things go as I suspect you will soon be getting your quadrouple bigot-fest matches against Celtic and sufficient funding to be relatively competitive at a domestic level. Is that not enough after these last few years !? You're spot on here. After what's happened and was in danger of happening again, surely Ashley should look like a saviour, albeit a slightly unsatisfactory one. I've no real idea why they can't see it either. It's presumably a pride thing whereby they can't accept being exploited like this, but again, given recent history, this sounds minor as there's at last potentially something mutually beneficial about this latest brand of exploitation. Genuine question: Is the prospect of being run sensibly, sustainably, not actually attractive for Rangers fans? He'll want the club pretty strong. He'll want the place to be lean. He'll want the football team efficiently managed? His motives are selfish, but is that such a problem? Seriously, I don't understand why Rangers fans are not gloating about this. I suspect my fun on here is nearing an end. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 No.8 must have a first class degree in revisionism. The finest exponent on this forum imo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 What rule was rewritten in September 2012? September? Administration started in February and liquidation started in June. Did the SFA publish their revised rules in September? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 No.8 must have a first class degree in revisionism. The finest exponent on this forum imo. Fair enough. Were Rangers forced to pay the oldcos footballing debt? Did the newco receive the footballing debts owed to the oldco? Did the SFA go against UEFA advice and move the closing of the transfer window forward. Did they withhold Rangers licence? Was it not the SPL...Including your club...who tried to force the lower league clubs into putting Rangers into SFL 1. Something 90+% of Rangers supporters opposed. I wanted SFL3 From day one. No revisionism. Rangers were placed fairly where they belonged. The added penalties i have highlighted were just kicking us when we were down. Of course there are ither examples such as the illegal transfer ban that they later forced on the club. If you are denying any of these examples i would say you are the one trying to re write history 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Remember the transfer embargo that didn't kick in until the transfer window closed allowing you to spend a couple of million on Templeton? Rangers never had a transfer embargo and Templeton did not cost a couple of million either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Fair enough. Were Rangers forced to pay the oldcos footballing debt? Did the newco receive the footballing debts owed to the oldco? Did the SFA go against UEFA advice and move the closing of the transfer window forward. Did they withhold Rangers licence? Was it not the SPL...Including your club...who tried to force the lower league clubs into putting Rangers into SFL 1. Something 90+% of Rangers supporters opposed. I wanted SFL3 From day one. No revisionism. Rangers were placed fairly where they belonged. The added penalties i have highlighted were just kicking us when we were down. Of course there are ither examples such as the illegal transfer ban that they later forced on the club. If you are denying any of these examples i would say you are the one trying to re write history Are you just ignoring my point about the reprehensible dishonesty of Regan in attempting to influence the SFL vote? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 wake up Regan. WAKE THE f**k UP AND SAY SOMETHING YOU CLOWN ! Dinna worry Peter will sort it all out, he's the man. The only thing they can do is suspend the license, but they wouldn't have the guts The SFA will not allow this to happen, don't believe Jacks spin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Are you just ignoring my point about the reprehensible dishonesty of Regan in attempting to influence the SFL vote? It was SPL chairmen who attempted to influence the SFL vote. please stick to facts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 It was SPL chairmen who attempted to influence the SFL vote. please stick to facts. Only the SPL chairmen? Or are you maybe both right? 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.