D'Artagnan
-
Posts
1,590 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Everything posted by D'Artagnan
-
Well surely if you are producing an alternative top which is to be bought in preference to the official shirt from the club store - then notwithstanding the amounts involved we are depriving the club of potential revenue ?
-
“There must be some kind of way outta here Said the joker to the thief There’s too much confusion I can’t get no relief Business men, they drink my wine Plowman dig my earth None were level on the mind Nobody up at his word” Where is it we are trying to get out of ? I would respectfully suggest a rock and a hard place. As many of you know I’m not often given to profanity – but quite simply – what an absolute clusterfeck. There is a civil war engulfing us with our boardroom the battleground. As in every conflict the collateral damage is considerable. On one side we have a board who have failed to impress, fail to convince the Rangers support they have our club’s best interests at heart and on the other side we have the challenger in the shape of Dave King, who appears to be being given considerable latitude in his own failings and lack of clarity, as a consequence of his previous investment in our club. And of course that collateral damage I referred to is manifesting itself not only in a season ticket boycott, but also in the form of a “protest shirt” whose purpose is to deliberately prevent incoming revenue from the sale of club merchandise. It’s easy to say that such ventures deprive the board of money and as anti-board protesters I’m sure that provides the conscience with a fairly robust moral platform for such action. But at what point does it not only deprive the board, but also our club and a manager wishing to strengthen a squad ? Having deliberately deprived the board of regular and essential revenue are we then to hold them to account for failing to enhance our playing squad ? Good Lord. Before anyone starts harbouring feelings of sympathy for the current board allow me to remind you of the 3 critical questions I tweeted about the other week, which as yet remain unanswered. 1. Why did our club have to secure additional funding after CEO Graham Wallace assured us only weeks earlier there was sufficient money in the account. 2. Why have the board not moved to dispel allegations by the Daily Record that our credit/debit card facility was removed re season tickets due to the financial incompetence of the board and not as was suggested in the review – due to threats of an imminent boycott. 3. Why does it appear the Rangers Football Board, or persons serving thereon, have the ability to overrule the PLC board, when circumstances dictate. At the forefront of much of the angst against the current board have been the Sons of Struth. Since its inception this group have campaigned on a platform of opposing any sale or leaseback of Ibrox Stadium. Perhaps this groups 3 original aims and objectives are worthy of a refresh. 1. Keep the stadium in the club’s name to avoid Coventry situation 2. Have clear accounts which prove the proper running of the club 3. Have a board that keep the club off the front pages and who themselves are beyond reproach. To date however the Sons of Struth have not shared with the wider support the circumstances which gave rise to their fears which suggested our stadium may be subject to a sale and leaseback. Why cant those demanding transparency of others lead by example ? Surely if there is evidence which suggests this current board are planning such an option for our stadium it is something which should be shared with the wider support not only made available to a select few ? In fact would the sharing of such information not in fact be in this group’s interests in convincing the undecided within our support of the unsuitability of the current board ? I have spoken previously of our need for our support to find an enthymeme – a point where there is common agreement and we can move on from. Surely the status and destiny of our 2 biggest assets – Ibrox and Auchenhowie – can provide such a point of common agreement. All along the watchtower Princes kept the view While all the women came and went Barefoot servants, too Outside in the cold distance A wildcat did growl Two riders were approaching And the wind began to howl How long before the Princes stop being onlookers, or begging for the scraps off the master’s table ? When will we start campaigning on behalf of ourselves and the vision and aspirations we have for our club instead of using our energies and efforts to do the bidding of others ? When will we realise that the way outta here is to take control of our own destiny, and rely upon ourselves rather than upon others ? As Buy Rangers, Rangers First and Vanguard Bears continue to do that which Dave King seems to find impossible – buy shares in our club – its becoming less and less a question of “if” but rather a question of “when” ? Many music critics have commented on how Dylan’s All Along the Watchtower mirrors the words of The Book Isaiah Chapter 21 :- Prepare the table, watch in the watchtower, eat, drink: arise ye princes, and prepare the shield./For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Go set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth./And he saw a chariot with a couple of horsemen, a chariot of asses, and a chariot of camels; and he hearkened diligently with much heed./…And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, with a couple of horsemen. And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground. I truly hope I live to see the day when Babylon falls at our club.
-
Expectations for the Financial State of the Club Going Forward
D'Artagnan replied to buster.'s topic in Rangers Chat
In all honesty BD I find it annoying that the issue of Ibrox & Auchenhowie S & LB - is even subject of debate. It should be completely non-negotiable and a sine die exclusion for any board of directors even contemplating it never mind actioning it - and every single director within Ibrox should be aware of this. -
I was referring to the reluctance of such persons to become involved up to now Frankie - perhaps the current situation will cause a change of heart from their normal reluctance
-
Oh dear. Seems your own little brand of nastiness can no longer be contained - please feel free to continue with the personal slurs and accusations - over the years Ive got used to the anonymous cowards - you know the type - those who hide behind the anonymity of the internet to have a pop at others. Or even worse - utilise a variety of different usernames across various forums. Did you really use the word "venomous" about others ?
-
Its a very pertinent point Time4change and probably a reflection of the recent fans engagement study - but the question is how do you either reach out to or connect, even represent a large swathe of people who by their own decision have elected to remain outside the various fans representative bodies ?
-
It was formalised several months ago BD
-
The problem being of course that so many of our more representative & rounded fans organisations have aligned themselves behind the UOF - thus making this type of exercise particularly difficult, hence my concern in the original post on this subject.
-
Its funny you know.....the repetitive nature of Zap's warning is partly due to your distasteful track record of turning any thread in which VB is mentioned into something of a "VB bashing thread". In fact I recall you requesting admin delete your account on here because you felt could not adhere to the admin rules for the site due to your hatred of VB ? Now that's what I call "extremist"
-
Its a fair point FS - the only one I can really recall is SDM. The problem is compounded by our disempowerment from all processes which means that many of the questions being asked are imho, superficial in any Q & A . Without access to vital and essential information then I think such a line of questioning is severely limited notwithstanding the fact without a lie detector attached to those being subjected to such questioning, you are left to take the answers provided in good faith.
-
The short answer is no I dont know but some of the rumours on various forums are certainly erroneous.
-
I'll be honest with you Oleg, in terms of gaining insightful information or getting to the truth - I actually think such meetings are a total waste of time. All our fans groups over the years have had various meetings with SDM, Whyte, Green etc - did it really do us any good in terms of getting to the truth ? The only benefit I can see from such meetings is holding them to account in the future when the answers they furnish at such meetings are not consistent with their actions.
-
Which is exactly the point I am making - to err is only human. I think all sides could learn from showing a bit of humility, especially when things are called wrong. Im still awaiting an apology from...well everyone...for the abuse I got for calling out Green ;-))
-
Im sure Shoredbear referenced a thread on FF, which would probably be right up your street. I dont do name calling or emotive language - I find it an obstacle rather than a conduit to effective communication.
-
So should we judge both myself and Chris Graham by the same standard ? - as both of us made exactly the same mistake.
-
Permit me to correct these misconceptions which some of you clearly harbour - VB are not "backing any horse" or giving "unconditional support" to the board. If you wish to believe that then by all means fill your boots - but in doing so you only serve to add to the misinformation which is already out there. I think you will find the ones backing a horse are those whose support of Dave King appears to be unequivocal. Perhaps we as a support should reflect if it really is the role of our supporters groups to ostracize themselves from meaningful, constructive or informative dialogue with the board - even if it is to raise concerns and seek assurances.
-
My eyes are open and here is what I see. Emotive language which doesnt help or articulate the debate in a helpful manner. Example - "Brothers Grimm" . Am I happy persons with such a poor public profile is at my club ? No of course not. But if we get get into a debate about the morality of the Easdales how does the suggested alternative King fare ? Pretty poorly - its a lose/lose situation. Green ? - I was getting pelters for warning about this guy when others were still lauding him so expect no defence of him from me. Our club is being run in an shambolic manner and the culture of excess which runs through it is an absolute disgrace - from boardroom to players to non-playing staff. I can think of no good reason why our fan ownership vehicles are not struggling to hold back the hordes. I have no wish or desire to defend Easdale - but I will defend truth & facts - who was the only person to offer interest free terms on the loans recently ?
-
Would you be good enough to provide details of this alleged "rape" ?
-
I think we should both claim "prophetic ability" in view of this thread Zap....
-
Im not sure about that Rab. Is the forthcoming share issue not just for existing shareholder's ? Would he not have to use a vehicle and be limited in what he can acquire ? BH will be able to clarify
-
Dont you think the results from the fans engagement study tend to support his assertion ?
-
Frankie You know I wouldnt say this to curry favour - and at times I have been critical and concerned re damage to TRS with one sided articles - quite simply your blogs have been some of the best and most balanced throughout this whole debacle.
-
Well I was - but I only felt it fair to blog on the question I had originally asked of him. It's their project and I felt it appropriate they should inform their members of its finer points.
-
Apologies STB - To answer the question i think the next move will be the launch of the website etc. Thereafter I think we will have to see what DK has up his sleeve.
-
Pray tell...what is telling, in fact very telling ? That Im not a big Dan Brown fan ?