buster. 5,261 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 It wasn't meant as an entirely rhetorical question. You compared Mr Ashley to a Trojan horse, which the Greeks used to steal entry into Troy and then destroyed the city. Why would Mr Ashley want to destroy Rangers? I don't think he would set about immediately destroying the club with sword and shield. It's more a case of making money and we've seen the effect of non-emotional 'investors' who want to make money. You could certainly argue that it would develop (or rather continue) into a slow burn destroying of Rangers as a competitive force at any reasonable level. The voting rights that SD enjoy over Rangers Retail in the joint venture, the pound paid for the Stadium Naming Rights and precedent at Newcastle Utd amongst many other things tends to show that MA wouldn't be good for the the longterm health of the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 I don't think he would set about immediately destroying the club with sword and shield. It's more a case of making money and we've seen the effect of non-emotional 'investors' who want to make money. You could certainly argue that it would develop (or rather continue) into a slow burn destroying of Rangers as a competitive force at any reasonable level. The voting rights that SD enjoy over Rangers Retail in the joint venture, the pound paid for the Stadium Naming Rights and precedent at Newcastle Utd amongst many other things tends to show that MA wouldn't be good for the the longterm health of the club. That's what the Trojans did though, immediately laid waste the city of Troy, so it wasn't a very good analogy now was it? Anyway, moving on - Can I ask you some questions: Do think that if and when Mr King invests money in Rangers (and by that I mean buys shares in the company) he would be doing so entirely because of his love of the Club or do you think he would want to get some kind of return on his investment at least part of which we are led to believe is his childrens' inheritance. Could you develop the argument "that it (Mr Ashely investing) would develop (or rather continue) into a slow burn destroying of Rangers as a competitive force at any reasonable level." If you had been Mr Ashley and been offered a deal to invest in the club in exchange for preferential voting rights over Rangers Retail and naming rights to the stadium for £1 would you have rejected that deal, saying sorry chum, that's way too generous? I haven't researched what Mr A has done at Newcastle so wouldn't like to comment on that since I'm sure in another two years you'll be casting up my opinion 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,261 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Can I ask you some questions: Do think that if and when Mr King invests money in Rangers (and by that I mean buys shares in the company) he would be doing so entirely because of his love of the Club or do you think he would want to get some kind of return on his investment at least part of which we are led to believe is his childrens' inheritance. Could you develop the argument "that it (Mr Ashely investing) would develop (or rather continue) into a slow burn destroying of Rangers as a competitive force at any reasonable level." If you had been Mr Ashley and been offered a deal to invest in the club in exchange for preferential voting rights over Rangers Retail and naming rights to the stadium for £1 would you have rejected that deal, saying sorry chum, that's way too generous? I haven't researched what Mr A has done at Newcastle so wouldn't like to comment on that since I'm sure in another two years you'll be casting up my opinion Ask some questions indeedy ! Isn't that a bit forward after your own refusal Originally Posted by BrahimHemdani I think I'll decline your kind offer. I can't comment on what precise return or intention DK might have. What I would say is that the significant difference would be that there is a genuine emotional attachment to the club and that there is a precedent that shows very significant monies being invested into Rangers by him. I would also say that I don't see him as a 'magic solution' and do recognise issues that may or may not come with him, especially how he would look to have the football operation run within a sustainable business model. Many of those who criticise the UoF / those who have chosen not to buy or renew ST's, tend to classify them all as 'Dave King supporters' which is inaccurate. They also try and dismiss or limit the effect that the lack of transparency and therefore trust from those in and around the RIFC board(s) have had on the heavy reduction in ST numbers, this is also inaccurate. What I think is accurate, is that the support want real change from the ongoing sp.iv process which Ashely would continue. With King that would be possible. Much of the support would like fan ownership, that would appear to be off the agenda and parked for the future. FWIW I'd prefer a club with a strong and active element of fan ownership. It may be that Dave King is the only realistic possibility to break the present cycle, I don't know if there are others waiting. However, I fear the 'game' is stacked against him as Ashely has been on the sp.iv inside since 2012 and is being lined up as the next stage. Regards Ashely, there is already much out there that points to why I think as I do (some material posted in the last few hours) and I may look to open a thread on it in the next few days. Be patient. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Ask some questions indeedy !Isn't that a bit forward after your own refusal I can't comment on what precise return or intention DK might have. What I would say is that the significant difference would be that there is a genuine emotional attachment to the club and that there is a precedent that shows very significant monies being invested into Rangers by him. I would also say that I don't see him as a 'magic solution' and do recognise issues that may or may not come with him, especially how he would look to have the football operation run within a sustainable business model. Many of those who criticise the UoF / those who have chosen not to buy or renew ST's, tend to classify them all as 'Dave King supporters' which is inaccurate. They also try and dismiss or limit the effect that the lack of transparency and therefore trust from those in and around the RIFC board(s) have had on the heavy reduction in ST numbers, this is also inaccurate. What I think is accurate, is that the support want real change from the ongoing sp.iv process which Ashely would continue. With King that would be possible. Much of the support would like fan ownership, that would appear to be off the agenda and parked for the future. FWIW I'd prefer a club with a strong and active element of fan ownership. It may be that Dave King is the only realistic possibility to break the present cycle, I don't know if there are others waiting. However, I fear the 'game' is stacked against him as Ashely has been on the sp.iv inside since 2012 and is being lined up as the next stage. Regards Ashely, there is already much out there that points to why I think as I do (some material posted in the last few hours) and I may look to open a thread on it in the next few days. Be patient. Thank you for your answers, I'll await the Ashley thread with great interest. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,815 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Guardian link does not work, thus you get the FF one Meanwhile ... Mike Ashley says he will not sell Newcastle until 2016 ‘at earliest’ (as of September 12th 2014) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,261 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Mike Ashley takes the Sports Direct route to running Newcastle United Guardian Link, click below http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/oct/03/mike-ashley-sports-direct-route-running-newcastle-united?CMP=twt_gu 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Mike Ashley takes the Sports Direct route to running Newcastle United Guardian Link, click below http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/oct/03/mike-ashley-sports-direct-route-running-newcastle-united?CMP=twt_gu “He’s not bothered what happens with the club as long as they stay in the Premier League and he’s got the worldwide coverage he needs. His heart is in what it brings to Sports Direct rather than what it brings the club.” To his critics, he buys distressed assets – once proud brands such as Dunlop, Slazenger, Karrimor, Lonsdale and Lilywhites – and sweats them for a few years before repeating the process. It has also been suggested that he is a man who will say one thing and allow his lieutenants to do another. A few highlights to gladden the heart 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Ashley is ruining Newcastle anyone can see that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 DB surely you're not going to back yet another one. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 7,229 Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 maybe Ashley and king could buy 50% each and run the club if we don't get some kind of stability we are heading down the road to ruin 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.