Picture 81-Willie Vass Shames Those in Charge

[Super Cooper 0]

I seriously doubt that Rangers can have an expensively remunerated management team, leading employees earning inflated salaries topped up with substantial bonuses, the level of player required to operate as we would expect, and also retain, maintain and run both Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park.

 

Even a trusted board will have a serious review to undertake - if we ever get one. Playing in Scotland and having three hurdles to negotiate before reaching the CL big money stage - if we succeed in the top tier - will mean very few windfalls to look forward to in the future.

 

Something will have to give unless the club can find a way to compete in an environment that is far more financially rewarding than this one. There are going to be some very tough choices ahead of us.

 

£40m per annum is what we have to play with in an average SPL year. That imo is enough to operate our club properly. Our problem has always been our wage bill being far too high.

[Hildy 0]

£40m per annum is what we have to play with in an average SPL year. That imo is enough to operate our club properly. Our problem has always been our wage bill being far too high.

I wonder what the cost will be to bring Ibrox back to an appropriate standard? In the last year or two, there have been rumours of £10m - £20m. With no CL windfall likely in the foreseeable future, the finances at Rangers are going to have to be meticulously examined, and it could be that a future board will decide to discard either Ibrox or Murray Park.

[Super Cooper 0]

I wonder what the cost will be to bring Ibrox back to an appropriate standard? In the last year or two, there have been rumours of £10m - £20m. With no CL windfall likely in the foreseeable future, the finances at Rangers are going to have to be meticulously examined, and it could be that a future board will decide to discard either Ibrox or Murray Park.

 

Both options should be fought off with every bone in our bodies. I don't believe either should ever be an option. We should stop giving out lavish contracts for a year or two.

 

Instead of giving the likes of Jon Daly £600k a year, give it to a maintenance firm to fix and upgrade our assets.

[Hildy 0]

Both options should be fought off with every bone in our bodies. I don't believe either should ever be an option. We should stop giving out lavish contracts for a year or two.

 

Instead of giving the likes of Jon Daly £600k a year, give it to a maintenance firm to fix and upgrade our assets.

I agree that our money should be better spent, but if the club struggles to compete with Celtic and watches as they do umpteen titles in a row, the option to unload a major asset will always be a topic that the club board returns to.

 

Margins that are too tight for too long put quite a bit of strain on directors, and if there is an easy option that makes the short term much easier for them, it may well be chosen.

[Super Cooper 0]

I agree that our money should be better spent, but if the club struggles to compete with Celtic and watches as they do umpteen titles in a row, the option to unload a major asset will always be a topic that the club board returns to.

 

Margins that are too tight for too long put quite a bit of strain on directors, and if there is an easy option that makes the short term much easier for them, it may well be chosen.

 

That would be the worst thing we could do IMO but I totally understand what you are saying and I do agree but would hate to see it happen.

[Hildy 0]

That would be the worst thing we could do IMO but I totally understand what you are saying and I do agree but would hate to see it happen.

I'm certainly not recommending it, but with the state of Scottish football and the condition of Rangers, it is the way the wind is blowing.

[Super Cooper 0]

I'm certainly not recommending it, but with the state of Scottish football and the condition of Rangers, it is the way the wind is blowing.

 

I am not a fan of blaming Scottish football because our club isn't rich enough or big enough to satisfy fans ambitions or to compete with Celtic. We can do alright if we are run properly but that seems to be the hard bit. We need owners with balls, brains and ambition.

[Hildy 0]

I am not a fan of blaming Scottish football because our club isn't rich enough or big enough to satisfy fans ambitions or to compete with Celtic. We can do alright if we are run properly but that seems to be the hard bit. We need owners with balls, brains and ambition.

What owner of the ones we have had - or are likely to have - would run Rangers as you would wish?

 

We've had Murray, Whyte, Greenco and the current board calling the shots, and while David Murray did well for a time, it didn't end well.

 

We might yet have King, who would probably keep McCoist. We could have had the Blue Knights, who would probably have kept McCoist. We could have had that chap from Hong Kong, who would probably have kept McCoist, of the American guys, who would probably have - you've guessed it - kept McCoist.

 

Are you still surprised that some of us want fan ownership? It's the only way we can have a club that will operate as we want it to.

Edited August 10, 2014 by Hildy

[pmu 0]

We hadn't even come out of admin and fans were already discussing where we would get the 20-50,million to beat celtic first year back in spl. Hell even wattie was at it. To even suggest that this was wrong way to go about our comeback was shot down as lacking ambition, Rangers will never be second best etc. I expect similar comments now..

Our recovery should have been based on spending for the level we were at plus a premium to ensure we were ahead at all times. Step by step with realistic goals and properly managed performance at all levels. If done right we could have been back at the top in 5-6 years. But thats not good enough for us is it? Instead we fucking daydream about sugar daddy's with a spare 50 mill sloshing around to bestow on our ally who will come good when he gets his hands on said 50 mill! Aye right!

Me - i would have been proud to follow our team, ups and downs as we hard worked our way back. Now i despise what we have become ( or maybe just continued to be), from boardroom to kitman. We are slowly losing the "soul" of the club we all grew up supporting. Worst for me is it's not just the money grabbing board etc, what else did we expect from them, but the supposed rangers lovers who have and still are destroying what little bit of dignity we have left..

[Super Cooper 0]

What owner of the ones we have had - or are likely to have - would run Rangers as you would wish?

 

We've had Murray, Whyte, Greenco and the current board calling the shots, and while David Murray did well for a time, it didn't end well.

 

We might yet have King, who would probably keep McCoist. We could have had the Blue Knights, who would probably have kept McCoist. We could have had that chap from Hong Kong, who would probably have kept McCoist, of the American guys, who would probably have - you've guessed it - kept McCoist.

 

Are you still surprised that some of us want fan ownership? It's the only way we can have a club that will operate as we want it to.

 

I guess my hope was that King would expect more from his manager and dispense of him the way Murray did with Walter, Dick, Eck and PLG.

 

The fans don't have enough money to have a big enough say in the club mate, to me that is pie in the sky stuff. I am a sole ownership guy, it just has to be the right guy.