the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 if we as fans dont demand the best who will? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 There's a fair argument arrogantly demanding the best helped get us where we are now (and I know there's plenty of other factors before you start getting into them.) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 the dividend could be the thin end of the wedge if we arent careful. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,553 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Come on now BD, how can this even compare to ticketus? That was never sustainable for the club to have any kind of future, it wrote off three years of the main source of working capital. It's an extreme example, I'd agree, but it's a similar principle. We are getting cash in now being repaid from future income. Yes in an ideal world we'd have some mega rich guy giving us money as a gift but it's not going to happen, unless the club is crippled in any way by it I'm very open minded about people making cash, after all the club may not have existed beyond the summer. You've argued well and have made a lot of reasonable points. I guess it boils down to disappointment in the way that the whole thing is being set up. I had presumed, perhaps foolishly, that the share issue was solely to raise cash for the club and plenty of fans were willing to invest on that basis. The club could be well run and there could be future increases in share value allowing investors to get their money back if required. I'm also disappointed about not being able to invest in the club. I want to be a shareholder in Rangers Football Club, not a holding company. It now appears that the investors MAY be just acting as a bank and they will get interest paid to them as well as having the upside of potential share value increases and the associated tax benefits mentioned earlier in the thread. If that's the case then it's no better than Celtic's preference shareholders. It seems that Green is not being that upfront about his plans. I think a bit more clarity would help. I'm not looking at this with my business hat on. I'm looking at it as a fan who doesn't want part of his season ticket money to go to shareholders. At the end of the day there may not be a big difference in the way that the club is being financed compared to bank funding, and it's not logical to differentiate between interest and dividends but I'm a fan and I'm not logical. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 He's a thought.... In order to purchase shares in the Football Club, would it not then need to become a business entity??? If so...what happens if it again experiences financial hardship - the CLUB dies, rather than the holding company!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) It's an extreme example, I'd agree, but it's a similar principle. We are getting cash in now being repaid from future income. You've argued well and have made a lot of reasonable points. I guess it boils down to disappointment in the way that the whole thing is being set up. I had presumed, perhaps foolishly, that the share issue was solely to raise cash for the club and plenty of fans were willing to invest on that basis. The club could be well run and there could be future increases in share value allowing investors to get their money back if required. I'm also disappointed about not being able to invest in the club. I want to be a shareholder in Rangers Football Club, not a holding company. It now appears that the investors MAY be just acting as a bank and they will get interest paid to them as well as having the upside of potential share value increases and the associated tax benefits mentioned earlier in the thread. If that's the case then it's no better than Celtic's preference shareholders. It seems that Green is not being that upfront about his plans. I think a bit more clarity would help. I'm not looking at this with my business hat on. I'm looking at it as a fan who doesn't want part of his season ticket money to go to shareholders. At the end of the day there may not be a big difference in the way that the club is being financed compared to bank funding, and it's not logical to differentiate between interest and dividends but I'm a fan and I'm not logical. I don't disagree at all that it's not the dream model from a fans' perspective, I suppose I'm still pretty scarred by all that has gone on and am reasonably happy for a period of stability. We'll get out of the lower leagues and it won't take much more for us to be the 2nd highest side. I imagine being able to overtake Celtic again is the main worry but these things tend to go in cycles and Rangers will get back to the top eventually, although you can't rule out them breaking the consecutive titles record. The Rangers fan businessmen just didn't show the desire to buy the club (even if the D&P conspiracies are to be believed the boat was not pushed out) and none have made proper moves to buy Green and co out so far, the McColl thing was a £600k profit not taking separate fees into account. The chance will still be there to take control in the future, they'll need to give the investors something good but I'm sure the wealth is there for the likes of Dave King to manage that. Though for now we have what we have. Edited December 10, 2012 by simplythebest 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuznetsov 0 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 so we are being screwed again then? seems bomber was right. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,097 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 so we are being screwed again then? If you've read the prospectus and came to that conclusion I'd find it difficult not to concur. seems bomber was right. More akin to not proven. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,553 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 He's a thought.... In order to purchase shares in the Football Club, would it not then need to become a business entity??? If so...what happens if it again experiences financial hardship - the CLUB dies, rather than the holding company!!! It is a business entity. The Rangers Football Club plc. We are being asked to buy shares in Rangers International Football Club plc, a totally different company. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,553 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 so we are being screwed again then? seems bomber was right. Don't agree that we are being screwed. We are seeking finance from investors rather than banks and potentially paying interest to them indirectly rather than paying a bank interest or preference shareholders dividends. Green's been quite upfront about it, but he just hasn't explained it all in the finest detail. As for Brown, I think it's been proven that he was talking shite. 0 Quote Link to post 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.