Match Thread [FT] Hibernian 3 - 3 Rangers (Igamane 4, 19, 74)

[Bluedell 5,716]

2 hours ago, CammyF said:

That's the board's job. 

 

You have no confidence in the board but yet you want them to be the ones to find a new board/owners?

[ranger_syntax 4,464]

Some very clear evidence of confusion.

[RANGERRAB 3,845]

28 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

We wanted Murray replaced and ended up with Whyte and Green. The "replace them" message isn't helpful when the likelihood is replacing them with someone worse for the club and is not interested in "keeping the lights on".

 

Keeping the lights on is a fairly major point and the alternatives are to sell players and vastly reduce the wage bill and therefore the squad quality, which is the easy answer and may end up having to be the solution as you are correct in that it can't go on indefinitely, but kudos to the board for delaying the inevitable as long as they can. 

 

Yes, we all want better players on the park and better in the board room but we don't have any quick fixes.

 

In terms of external debt we owed around £3m to Premier Division Support Fund and under £1m to a bank.

 

Just asking for a replacement board, who would probably be worse for our club and may end up selling players or selling the ground, is dangerous. Be careful what you wish for.

We have half a dozen ‘major’ shareholders each with around 10-15% shareholding. Ideally a couple of these would sell up, ideally to other ‘ major’ shareholders 

[CammyF 8,585]

32 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

You have no confidence in the board but yet you want them to be the ones to find a new board/owners?

Well I can't find them can I.

 

We'll just wait around for new shareholders to appear out of thin air. Meanwhile the current crop will run us into the ground. 

 

[CammyF 8,585]

46 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

We wanted Murray replaced and ended up with Whyte and Green. The "replace them" message isn't helpful when the likelihood is replacing them with someone worse for the club and is not interested in "keeping the lights on".

 

Keeping the lights on is a fairly major point and the alternatives are to sell players and vastly reduce the wage bill and therefore the squad quality, which is the easy answer and may end up having to be the solution as you are correct in that it can't go on indefinitely, but kudos to the board for delaying the inevitable as long as they can. 

 

Yes, we all want better players on the park and better in the board room but we don't have any quick fixes.

 

In terms of external debt we owed around £3m to Premier Division Support Fund and under £1m to a bank.

 

Just asking for a replacement board, who would probably be worse for our club and may end up selling players or selling the ground, is dangerous. Be careful what you wish for.

Comparing what happened with Murray / Green / Whyte is completely different from what I'm suggesting and I think you know that. 

 

Sir Duped knew exactly what he was doing selling to Whyte. 

 

For everyone suggesting that I'm wrong in wanting new shareholders/board/investment not one has shown how the current incumbents are going to get us out of the mess they got us into.

 

That's very telling. 

[buster. 5,349]

On 05/01/2025 at 13:15, buster. said:

Igamane is due a hat-trick.

There hadn't been a top flight hat trick in Scotland since May 2023 before Igamane struck yesterday.

 

@Rousseau should award me 50 points in the predictor and I can make a start. A sort of joining in the January window 😁 

[Bluedell 5,716]

2 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

We have half a dozen ‘major’ shareholders each with around 10-15% shareholding. Ideally a couple of these would sell up, ideally to other ‘ major’ shareholders 

I doubt existing shareholders will want to spend cash buying existing shares.

[Bluedell 5,716]

1 hour ago, CammyF said:

Comparing what happened with Murray / Green / Whyte is completely different from what I'm suggesting and I think you know that. 

 

Sir Duped knew exactly what he was doing selling to Whyte. 

 

For everyone suggesting that I'm wrong in wanting new shareholders/board/investment not one has shown how the current incumbents are going to get us out of the mess they got us into.

 

That's very telling. 

Nobody is saying that the existing board haven't messed up things but at least they have the club's best interests at heart and are continuing to fund us out of their own pockets.

 

You appear to want to sell to anyone that is willing to take over, and what's to stop someone coming in and financing the purchase through debt. You think that the Whyte situation is totally different but I'm not sure why. If an American venture capitalist came in, for example, they may appear to be wealthy and the deal looks good on paper but what's to stop them selling Ibrox and using the cash from that to finance the deal and not put a single penny of their own into it? The Glazers did something similar with Man Utd, albeit with a different set up for finance, but the club has ended up financing its own purchase. It's virtually impossible for the current shareholders to put safeguards in place to ensure the club isn't financially raped post-sale.

 

I can't tell how the current board can get us out of the mess we're in, but I can show how new owners could make things even worse.

 

You haven't shown why you think any new shareholders would do any better than the current ones, and wouldn't put their own interests before the club's. There's a huge risk in getting new owners and given what's happened to us over the past 25 years, is it really a risk we should be taking?

 

[CammyF 8,585]

1 minute ago, Bluedell said:

Nobody is saying that the existing board haven't messed up things but at least they have the club's best interests at heart and are continuing to fund us out of their own pockets.

 

You appear to want to sell to anyone that is willing to take over, and what's to stop someone coming in and financing the purchase through debt. You think that the Whyte situation is totally different but I'm not sure why. If an American venture capitalist came in, for example, they may appear to be wealthy and the deal looks good on paper but what's to stop them selling Ibrox and using the cash from that to finance the deal and not put a single penny of their own into it? The Glazers did something similar with Man Utd, albeit with a different set up for finance, but the club has ended up financing its own purchase. It's virtually impossible for the current shareholders to put safeguards in place to ensure the club isn't financially raped post-sale.

 

I can't tell how the current board can get us out of the mess we're in, but I can show how new owners could make things even worse.

 

You haven't shown why you think any new shareholders would do any better than the current ones, and wouldn't put their own interests before the club's. There's a huge risk in getting new owners and given what's happened to us over the past 25 years, is it really a risk we should be taking?

 

Where have I said I want to sell to "anyone". I haven't. 8n this debate, I wish people would stop misrepresenting what I am saying. 

 

We have two options -

 

stick with the current board / shareholders who've overseen continued gross mismanagement and hope they get things under control. 

 

Attract investors/shareholders who will run the business successfully.

 

Both have risks associated with them but the current incumbents hardly fill me with confidence. 

 

 

[Bluedell 5,716]

9 minutes ago, CammyF said:

Where have I said I want to sell to "anyone". I haven't. 8n this debate, I wish people would stop misrepresenting what I am saying. 

You didn't put any provisos on who they should sell to in the posts that I quoted/read, but I haven't read the whole thread.

 

12 minutes ago, CammyF said:

We have two options -

 

stick with the current board / shareholders who've overseen continued gross mismanagement and hope they get things under control. 

 

Attract investors/shareholders who will run the business successfully.

 

Both have risks associated with them but the current incumbents hardly fill me with confidence. 

Agreed that they both have (large) risks and the current incumbents don't fill me with confidence either, but the downside risk of new owners looks too large to me. at least at present. 

 

At least the current guys appear to have acknowledged their short-comings by bringing in what appears to be a competent CEO.