Comment deleted by Site Moderator

It's like your own game of cluedo, one week you want them dead by toaster in a bath then the next it's to drop dead with a heart attack

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Dennis

To try and keep my response as short as possible

I do not see what is arrogant about warning people that the somewhat extreme action they were taking may not result in the only outcome that they wanted and appeared to think was inevitable due to their actions

I never once said Mike Ashley's loans were investment, that is a blatant lie and I challenge you to search these boards to find out where I said this

I keep hearing about damage done to the club by the old board

To me, that's a statement made by people who hark back to what the club was before 2012 and want to see the club become that again

I don't want that

I want the club to move on

In order to do that, we need to be a different club, that doesn't really on using every penny that comes in the door to be utilised just to keep our heads above water.

I advocate the club downsizing somewhat, and operating on a lesser budget, one that given our revenue streams, would be far more stringent but in the long run, put us on a much safer and long term sustainable footing.

That is not what appears to be happening under Dave King

A plan has been put in place where in 3 years time, if we are not playing in the top tier and getting European football income, we may be in trouble financially

I do not support that idea, and I never will

Under Ashley, he may have been robbing us blind, but we were never going to end up in a situation like the one I have just described, and there were no guarantees that we could not achieve things on the pitch while operating on a far reduced budget.

Under Ashley, he may have been robbing us blind, but we were never going to end up in a situation like the one I have just described, and there were no guarantees that we could not achieve things on the pitch while operating on a far reduced budget.





I'm sure Curly and Dennis will bite to this in the morning stevie..

comment by Stevie - time for real change (U11028)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
Dennis

To try and keep my response as short as possible

I do not see what is arrogant about warning people that the somewhat extreme action they were taking may not result in the only outcome that they wanted and appeared to think was inevitable due to their actions

I never once said Mike Ashley's loans were investment, that is a blatant lie and I challenge you to search these boards to find out where I said this

I keep hearing about damage done to the club by the old board

To me, that's a statement made by people who hark back to what the club was before 2012 and want to see the club become that again

I don't want that

I want the club to move on

In order to do that, we need to be a different club, that doesn't really on using every penny that comes in the door to be utilised just to keep our heads above water.

I advocate the club downsizing somewhat, and operating on a lesser budget, one that given our revenue streams, would be far more stringent but in the long run, put us on a much safer and long term sustainable footing.

That is not what appears to be happening under Dave King

A plan has been put in place where in 3 years time, if we are not playing in the top tier and getting European football income, we may be in trouble financially

I do not support that idea, and I never will

Under Ashley, he may have been robbing us blind, but we were never going to end up in a situation like the one I have just described, and there were no guarantees that we could not achieve things on the pitch while operating on a far reduced budget.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but what was the two tranche loan needed for if it wasn't because Rangers had been run into the ground? Yes the boycotts played a huge role in this - but if Ashley had gained overall control in the new year when he tried, the fans boycott would have in my opinion accelerated and maybe even gone to the stage of outright abandonment of being supporters at all for many.

Footballing targets were also fallen short on. To say it wouldn't have happened under Ashley is ignoring exactly what happened in my opinion .

I do share some of the views you outlined though.

Rangers should operate on a budget based on what it generates. Absolutely.

Rangers should be still be ambitious though. I'd like to get back to challenging for honours as soon as possible. But not at the expense of long term security.

I do tend to think though that had Ashley in 2012 overall control and not had likes of Green, Easdales etc involved then Rangers might have been in better condition than when King etc took over from the mess they inherited

"I'm sorry but what was the two tranche loan needed for if it wasn't because Rangers had been run into the ground?"

I dont believe the state the club was in was all down to Ashley ripping it.

Laxey Partners, a hedge fund sponsor, were the biggest shareholders in the club before the three bears bought their shares, and had a presence on the board that was ousted by Ashley.

Ashley could not buy shares and used loans to increase his influence at the club while he could not do it through increasing his shareholding.

It just so happened that we badly needed cash and he saw an opportunity to take us to the cleaners and get control of a huge football club for a pittance.

I've said it many a times and I'll say it again. How Ashley got control was never something I was going to lose sleep over, what happened under his tenure is what was important, and he was never at any point 100% in control of the club outright.

As I said had he not had to get in bed with others Rangers likely would have been in better shape over past couple years.

You cant just dismiss the period with Leach and Llambias as part of his plan to gain overall control and then say he'd never let going to the brink happen when it actually did with his people doing his bidding took the club to the brink and then say it doesn't count because he never had overall control.

Yes it was a ploy to gain a complete strangle hold on Rangers and it failed and left Rangers in ruins. How is this preferable or even any different to Rangers potentially overreaching with targets and spending in 3 years? You're holding the new board to account over something that hasn't yet happened under them whilst belittling what happened under the previous regime.

I get that you felt he was best option available. I felt the best option available was those that wanted the betterment of Rangers first and foremost in charge.

King and the 3 bears became the only group offering this option in my opinion and because of that I favoured them.

Well I personally feel the club is no nearer to or further away from the brink at the moment

Under Ashley, money was being put in to keep the place going.

The same thing is happening now

The only difference is that Ashley was using his money to gain more control and more influence in a form that was not shares, simply because the option of an increased shareholding was not available to him

King and the three bears have the luxury of being able to increase thier shareholding to whatever they want, and hence can loan the club money in return for equity at a later date, Ashley couldn't do that

It only failed under Ashley because bears took umbridge to Ashley taking money out of the club and started boycotting everything

We've just heard Dave King saying fans have to start spending money again if the club is to thrive.

That statement is no more true or false under any regime.

If the fans started boycotting just now, the King regime would be fcked

I didn't insist that Ashley was by far the best option....I felt he was an option, and possibly a better one given that whoever came in, would inherit the onerous contracts that were already in place anyway, and we could end up with a pi$$ed off Ashley on the sidelines with the clubs bass still in his grasp, still owed money, and hell bent on making life even more difficult for us because he had been deposed.

In some respects, that's now what we have

"I felt the best option available was those that wanted the betterment of Rangers first and foremost in charge."

I honestly can't help but scoff at comments like this

This is Dave Kings own words in relation to Ashley just yesterday

"Any businessman has to respect what Mike Ashley has achieved"

"You have to respect it because we are all in business for the same reason and that’s to MAKE MONEY and be successful."

Where did I say making money is wrong?

As far as I see it the Rangers board will struggle to make money unless Rangers as a business is improved. They need to improve the team to do this, improve the money generated.

People involved in football clubs making money isn't a bad thing. It becomes bad when it's all they're involved for.

I never once said Mike Ashley's loans were investment, that is a blatant lie and I challenge you to search these boards to find out where I said this
---------

your a liar

you did say it, after the Ashley 5 mill loan was announce at beginning of the year you wrote something along the lines of

" I cant believe some of our fans are so negative, what's wrong, we have just got some new investment into the club and we are getting 5 epl players on loan to help with our promotion challenge"


im not trawling through your posts to find it, I know you wrote it, and plenty of others have already confirmed it aswel.

your also writing things like "he may have been robbing us blind" but still believing he is an option for club and one that would a better option

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Two things

1- there's more to life than money, having more money than everyone else isn't the be all and end all for a football club

2- I am not posting lies, I continually said time and time again that my faith in Ashley was possibly misplaced and I could very very very well end up being wrong, but until there was enough evidence to suggest I was entirely wrong, I didn't write him off

The only people spouting lies, are those who posted the two comments above this one

"As far as I see it the Rangers board will struggle to make money unless Rangers as a business is improved. They need to improve the team to do this, improve the money generated. "

I guess that logic only applies to the King regime eh?

comment by Stevie - time for real change (U11028)
posted 20 minutes ago
"As far as I see it the Rangers board will struggle to make money unless Rangers as a business is improved. They need to improve the team to do this, improve the money generated. "

I guess that logic only applies to the King regime eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure what you mean?

Ashley with the retail deal is in a position to still make money even if Rangers aren't doing particularly well on or off the park.

Can King etc make money at Rangers other than by taking Rangers forward at this moment? I doubt it.

Well on the one hand you are telling me Ashley had the club in the brink, then on the other you are telling me he can rake it in through the retail deal

Care to tell me how he can make a mint out of a retail deal this is being boycotted by fans of a club that is skint, going to the wall and can't continue without multi million pound loans forever being fed in that can't be paid back to keep it going

My point was that this Rangers board at this time has a harder time seeing a financial return than Ashley would have.

If Ashley had gained total control he can still potentially make money without the team necessarily being all that good.

The boycotts will have impacted his making money. He probably wasn't making a mint last season but previously he probably was.

We've also heard that Rangers had to purchase unsold stock (whether factual or not is not entirely clear) but if it was then it's clear he wasn't ever losing money.

stevie I don't need to lie to show you up

your doing a splendid job of that on your own