Jump to content

 

 

Thinker

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,735

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Thinker

  1. Thinker
    And is that something which is unique to Rangers fans, or are there fanbases out there who would have collectively seen through Green, even though the guy they most trusted gave him the thumbs up? The point I'm making is that this shitty situation is not down to some flaw in the Rangers support.
  2. Thinker
    I'm not trying to say there is a difference. Boycott then at the risk of losing the club or boycott now at the risk of losing the club - it's not like we've missed a golden opportunity. Oh aye - and when Ally told us to back the club when Green took charge did you immediately dismiss that as bullshit? Did you expect all of us to disregard that statement?
  3. Thinker
    At what point should we, as fans, have taken control of the club and how? When we were in the midst of 9-in-a-row should we have been chanting "Murray out!". When SDM was selling up, should we have committed to buying then - when we were being constantly told that an unpayable tax bill was round the corner? Would Duff and Phelps have accepted a fan's group bid over Green's, and even if it had, would we have been able to plot the course through, or even tolerate the prospect of liquidation? It would be great if we were in control of the club, but the fact that we aren't isn't the fans' fault -yes, we have our problems with divisions etc. but regardless of that we've never had a chance to take control.
  4. Thinker
    ..and there may very well have been no Rangers. Just to clarify, are you saying that as soon as we realised that the club had survived and been placed in Div 3 we should have withdrawn our support? Based on Green being a dodgy character?
  5. Thinker
    How so? How would it have worked out?
  6. Thinker
    Would that have panned out any differently?
  7. Thinker
    How would that have happened?
  8. Thinker
    So is your argument that if you didn't campaign for fan ownership you don't deserve a football club?
  9. Thinker
    That's just not true. We queued for hours for season tickets, we marched on Hampden. Did those people not fight? We just weren't equipped to deal with corporate liars and conmen. We were the victims of a fraud when Whyte took over, and it's been a stitch up since then. What would you have had us do?
  10. Thinker
    I'll not financially support the club until it's being run by owners who show genuine ambition and build for the future, but as long as it still exists, Rangers will be the only club I care about. I'd more happily accept no football than a new Rangers.
  11. Thinker
    It's pretty easy to become a shareholder.
  12. Thinker

    AGM thread

    Thinker replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat

    Well done for asking that GD - It's the big question IMO. I just wish we (the crowd collectively) had stayed on that point and pinned Somers down for a clearer answer.
  13. Thinker
    Amongst all the bullshit, spin and opacity, how can you expect the fans to all see the same vision and come to the same conclusion you do? It's unrealistic to expect us all to pull in the same direction when we're wandering in a constant fog of disorientation. Even fan ownership requires a saviour of sorts - a leader charismatic enough to convince us all to sing from the same sheet. If he/she has a few bob him/herself, he/she's much more likely to succeed. (I added the gender option thinking of Budge, not because I want a ladyboy to own us - although for PC reasons I should add, that would also be fine providing he/she is the best man/woman for the job).
  14. Thinker
    Things have changed for the worse. Hopefully, someday we'll get the opportunity to change them for the better.
  15. Thinker

    AGM thread

    Thinker replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat

    I wish I was a more confident public speaker, because I would have followed up on the question from the guy who asked about the beneficiaries of the onerous contracts. That's the key to everything, IMO. Llambias should have expected a hell of a lot of hostility given that he's clearly a representative MASH - a definite onerous beneficiary. The Easdales should have expected a huge amount of hostility (probably did) as they represent BPH and MH who everybody very strongly suspects are also beneficiaries. There's also the association between CG (the architect of onerousness, and suspected BPH / MH shareholder) and Llambias when they did their cosy chat with the fans, which further damns all the above. I wish I had the ability to have spelled it out like that, because when it is the situation is utterly indefensible. There is no way they can expect us to ever trust them. (Well, there's one extremely unlikely way, and that's for Ashley to invest such a colossal fortune that all previous misdemeanours are forgotten about.)
  16. Thinker
    That's a fair point - they have been clearly identified by the vast majority of the support as bad guys though, and daren't show their faces around the club. I daresay they are still profiting from some of the onerous $pivco deals. The point I was really trying to make is that Mike Ashley is a different prospect from the characters of the last few years. His aim isn't to get rich quick, it's to engineer a situation that will see him grow richer year-on-year.
  17. Thinker
    You can only buy so much time with bullshit. I don't think we're in for another revolution of the merry-go-round - I think the attempt to shaft us will be different this time. My prediction is that we'll be given enough success to keep us sweet - so that MA's deals continue to be worthwhile. I also predict that the success will not be funded by investment, or fair payment by SD for advertising and retail, but by more loans that will be called in one day when MA is finished with us.
  18. Thinker
    Not if we get horsed.
  19. Thinker
    Since we went back to the bottom there hasn't been a year that we haven't been a success, technically at least. The performances have been poor but we've achieved our primary objective each time - and even so we're seeing support and therefore cash input fall. Should we actually fail for a few years, (i.e. not be champions), we'll be able to tell whether or not we need to be a success to be lucrative.
  20. Thinker
    I think DB has said as much, but for us to gain promotion will require investment, or at least, an improvement of the product. The same goes for Premiership success. It's not like making badly-stitched shirts that fall apart instead of quality 100% cotton ones. Success is a big part of the Rangers brand and there's no cheap, nasty substitute for that. I'm not saying MA realises this, but if he doesn't he'll fail.
  21. Thinker
    It may turn out you're right, but I honestly don't think I've over-estimated what fans will accept. The figures for the last few years are still riding on our determination to get to back the level we're accustomed to, and halt our biggest rival's 10 in a row charge. If Ashley's (or any other) regime renders those targets unattainable then the support will fall away very quickly IMHO. And, unfortunately, we're witnessing at the moment just how a badly mismanaged club can struggle. I don' think we'd make the top three in premiership right now - and MA's man has already set about cost-cutting. Even if MA were to invest enough money and effort to consistently make us runner-up every year I still think the support would dwindle. Not as rapidly, but year-on-year it would be less. And if he allows the "most domestic titles" record to be threatened there would be full scale revolt. In a way, Ashley's wealth makes it a lot harder for him to run us without ambition, because we all know he has the resources to make us champions if he felt like it. He would become a figure of hate if he allowed us to live in Celtic's shadow. The only scenario I can think of that makes sense is that, as we achieve an acceptable level of success, our debt to Ashley increases to crazy levels. (Newcastle owe him something like £250m IIRC). Fine for a while, but the day he decides he's out and gathers the debt, we'd be utterly ruined.
  22. Thinker
    There's got to be more to it than that though - MA can't coin it in year on year if we're not successful, because there will be very little cash flowing into the club and very little associated merchandise being purchased. There is only so much money he can make out of us and only for so long if we're not successful. We're not like Newcastle or Leeds or any of the other cautionary tales being bandied about - our circumstances are different, and there's an abvious success-related tipping point. For SD to make money from Rangers, us punters have to be spending money on Rangers. The bare minimum our fans will settle for is challenging for the title every year and winning at least half the time. If he doesn't even attempt to achieve that what percentage of the fans do you think will keep showing up? If he downsizes our operations so the Tims have things that we don't (a training ground, internet TV subscriptions etc.) how many fans will continue to support him with their cash? You're talking 4 figure attendances and no kids wanting to be seen dead in our kit. What's the point in owning that? He'd have been as well buying into Stevenage. Guys like Green, Stockbridge and Ahmad were quite content to misappropriate a couple of years' season ticket sales and the IPO money then scuttle off. The ride is over for them at that point. We're on the last possible year of that happening, so why would MA bother? It makes no sense. if he stays in control and he's not done something positive by ST renewal day though, he's wasted his time, because Rangers will be worth next to fuck all as a business.
  23. Thinker
    The thing about this is it must be clear to everyone he can only do this for a limited amount of time. Every season we finish without at least challenging for the title will erode the fan base and as a result there'll be a decrease in attendance and merchandise sales. Our TV and potential prize money is nothing compared to Newcastle's, so no significant income there. Can slapping his advertising on an empty stadium with a team of also-rans on the park, playing in a league no-one give's a shit about, really be beneficial for SD? The flow of cash into the club and through the brand will eventually dry up the way he's running things, because it depends on support - I honestly can't figure out what he has to gain beyond a relatively short-term leaching exercise.
  24. Thinker
    At least this is something that fans can unite against...
  25. Thinker
    And arguably the lowland Scot has more in common with the Geordie than they do with the highland Scot.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.