Appointment of Chief Executive Officer = no surprise!

[Thinker 887]

Ashley has made the bulk of his fortune by taking premium brands which were in the doldrums, and turning them into cheap, nasty shit that still sells. Just watch the season ticket sales rocket if/when promotion is gained, and with every extra seat that is filled, a strip or a scarf or a hat or a jacket is sold by SD and Mike Ashley makes money without having to devote much of his time to it at all. If the retail side is starting to make a loss, Ashley will have it offloaded pronto.

 

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.

[Rangersitis 0]

.. the way the enlightened fans give their support to the team these days, with all the boardroom rubbish and the dire fare on the field of play, there is little reason to believe that there will be any great increase in ST sales ... unless something changes at manager and player staff level. And that won't happen without investment.

 

Have you missed the excitement that has been generated by a one-off cup tie against Celtic? That will carry over into the SPFL.

[Thinker 887]

Yeah understand that just puts to bed the "we need to be a success" motto for him to make money. If as it says he already makes more through retail with us than with Newcastle. Also shows who will must likely sell the most merchandise abroad were his interests seem to be.

 

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.

[Thinker 887]

Have you missed the excitement that has been generated by a one-off cup tie against Celtic? That will carry over into the SPFL.

 

Not if we get horsed.

[trublusince1982 243]

The theory that points to his interest in Rangers being because of SD expansion into Europe doesn't stand-up.

 

yeah i agree, but that needs to be put in a form that leaves the majority of Ger's fans certain with no room for spin, counter argument or speculation that the likes of Irvine and his cronies can use to muddy the waters. Those figures show that without leaving any room for sway. Its now unarguable fact he doesn't need Rangers to be successful to make a return that is larger than the one he gets from Newcastle.

[buster. 5,183]

yeah i agree, but that needs to be put in a form that leaves the majority of Ger's fans certain with no room for spin, counter argument or speculation that the likes of Irvine and his cronies can use to muddy the waters. Those figures show that without leaving any room for sway. Its now unarguable fact he doesn't need Rangers to be successful to make a return that is larger than the one he gets from Newcastle.

 

The only way the message will get through for many will be when they see the fall-out in front of them and even then some will go along with the excuses to protect their own emotional stake in Ashely.

 

One of the tricks is to make X synonymous with the club.

eg. an attack on Ashely is an attack on the club and it's prospects.

 

The sad fact of the matter is that collectively, we aren't up to it and it has been shooty-in for the sp.ivs and shark.

Edited December 20, 2014 by buster.

[JohnMc 2,750]

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.

 

You're applying normal rules to someone who by all measurements is not 'normal'. I don't mean that as an insult, he's an exceptional person, clearly gifted in many ways, but not 'normal'. A normal person would fear becoming a hate figure and a full-scale revolt, Ashley doesn't. The Rangers support will continue to buy their kids shirts and themselves a top for five-a-sides no matter how we're performing, that's what he's banking on.

What big business has cottoned onto is that loyalty to a football club is entirely different to any other commercial venture. Man Utd sold more shirts than any other club in the world last year despite experiencing their worst season in two decades and having enormously unpopular owners. Rangers in the top flight, finishing top three, will consistently draw 30,000 plus crowds, we might think that poor, but it really isn't in the grand scheme of things. That's easily achievable if the club can stay solvent, we'll have a considerably higher turnover than every other side in the country bar one, on that basis any half competent manager can secure second or third. Ashley shouldn't need to invest any money to achieve that, simply make sure we don't go bust in the short term.

 

We're a minor gamble for Ashley, I doubt we take up much of his time or thinking, I assume he'll try and recreate the Newcastle model, where we're self-sustainable, breaking even, beyond that he's only interested in leveraging retail from us, there's plenty of evidence that how a team performs, the relationship the club has with it's support and how a club's directors behave has little bearing on that.

[buster. 5,183]

You're applying normal rules to someone who by all measurements is not 'normal'. I don't mean that as an insult, he's an exceptional person, clearly gifted in many ways, but not 'normal'. A normal person would fear becoming a hate figure and a full-scale revolt, Ashley doesn't. The Rangers support will continue to buy their kids shirts and themselves a top for five-a-sides no matter how we're performing, that's what he's banking on.

What big business has cottoned onto is that loyalty to a football club is entirely different to any other commercial venture. Man Utd sold more shirts than any other club in the world last year despite experiencing their worst season in two decades and having enormously unpopular owners. Rangers in the top flight, finishing top three, will consistently draw 30,000 plus crowds, we might think that poor, but it really isn't in the grand scheme of things. That's easily achievable if the club can stay solvent, we'll have a considerably higher turnover than every other side in the country bar one, on that basis any half competent manager can secure second or third. Ashley shouldn't need to invest any money to achieve that, simply make sure we don't go bust in the short term.

 

We're a minor gamble for Ashley, I doubt we take up much of his time or thinking, I assume he'll try and recreate the Newcastle model, where we're self-sustainable, breaking even, beyond that he's only interested in leveraging retail from us, there's plenty of evidence that how a team performs, the relationship the club has with it's support and how a club's directors behave has little bearing on that.

 

I don't think you fully apprecaite the state of play within our support after so much dishonest turmoil.

 

Yes, there will always be a base of unconditional followers but with every passing month, it is getting smaller.

Edited December 20, 2014 by buster.

[andy steel 0]

John - while the club being self-sustainable would be welcome, if your analysis is correct then the buying habits of Rangers fans must - absolutely must - change radically. Rewarding an owner who creates a permanent culture of mediocrity would surely be too far, even for us?

Edited December 20, 2014 by andy steel

[Rangersitis 0]

Not if we get horsed.

 

That is when Jack will launch the £5m/£10m war chest stories with revenge thrown into the mix. I can't help but be cynical as it is a fairground carousel that never stops.