dave.j Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 1355522316[/url]' post='6893433']Well that is because he spends 99% of his time on a anti rangers thread agreeing on a pile of shite with other anti rangers minded folk like you, if he was brave enough to start talking about his own supposed team then I am sure his fellow fans would quickly tire of him Says the guy averaging 21 posts a day! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 (edited) Excellent candidate for irritating P & B poster of th year 2012 awards though Come on Tedi, all this false modesty. You know you are a shoo in for this award. 3073 posts since the end of July 2012. 5 months = 600 posts per month. 30 days per month = 20 posts per day. And only 50% are repeats. Keep this level of activity up for 2013 and you will arguing with yourself. Oh, hang on, you are doing that already. (Sorry should have read the previous post. It is 21 a day. ) Edited December 14, 2012 by thelegendthatis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 and another from the same site, showing that we have some interesting debate going on despite the stereotypical brush that everyone wants to paint us with First of all I suppose it's worth mentioning that I won't be contributing to this current IPO. This is mainly because I'm a young man with little control over my own finances currently and I already have a season ticket very generously paid for. £500 is not cheap for most people so it's unlikely to be happening for myself this time, unless I win a something on a scratch card or lottery tomorrow! However, that is personal circumstance and something we all need to consider. What I have considered, because this share issue is very important for the club, is the prospectus. The aim of the prospectus is of course to sell the idea of buying shares in Rangers and answering pertinent questions. My own conclusion is that 122 pages manages to do that very well. First of all, there is a definitive list of shareholding that shows as promised and hoped for (by many anyway) we aren't under any huge majority control from one owner. The mention of 'trust' and 'holdings' may possibly be something to put people off. However, the shareholding of these investment groups is not big enough for there to be any huge influence, and frankly some individuals will not want their name in the public domain for the sake of a small stake. I consider such a stand understandable when you look at the amount of obsession there is surrounding Rangers out there. Further shareholders and investors show that there are some very reputable and serious names in there, testament to the long attempts by Charles Green and co to encourage investment and very good proof in my opinion that this is not just some con. The prospectus also provides transparency about questions over loans and dividends. There have been short term loans which I assume were to help with the funding shortfalls when the club was initially purchased, after all it must be remembered season tickets did not start selling until August and under administration the club had run of money. Dividend policy is also outlined and shows that it is not guaranteed at the moment but will be considered for shareholders in the future. To my mind this is just evidence of the successful attempts to attract institutional investors. We need to face reality and accept that unless these people are fans of RFC then they are unlikely to want involvement without good opportunity of return. There is possible rise in their share values but that will depend on many factors, even simply that they can't know who will necessarily buy them. Dividends will provide a decent form of security for them and of course, how much they get will depend on how well the business is going. For the business to thrive Rangers need to keep on progressing on the park, where we are can only work for so long especially with our very demanding fan base. But at the same time we have to be run with much greater financial prudence than we have been in the last decade or so, it may not be liked that businessmen can benefit from that but it's also the only way we can assure Rangers are around for the next 140 years. The prospectus has a very important line as well on page 15 that outlines, if the SPL title stripping farce goes ahead, "the legal basis for any such sanctions" will be "strongly challenged by the RFCL Group or the Rangers Group." Green has talked about this before but to see it confirmed further in the prospectus is very encouraging. The whole idea of honours being taken away is important to us as fans because it's what our club has achieved but clearly it is also important to the business side as it devalues the product that RFC is. If the whole thing is as much a kangaroo court as we all expect I look forward to the response. The size of our club has always been known and acknowledged by anyone with a fair mind and the prospectus further outlines just how good the Rangers brand is and can be. The size of our wonderful worldwide fan base is out lined by the high number of supporters clubs, online users and subscribers. The media opportunities are talked about through more figures of things such as the facebook page and mentioning the broadcasting of all matches live abroad. As the prospectus says it seems clear that there is much revenue to be created through further use of online media, and investment in the share issue can help develop this. The same section mentions the potential of our magnificent stadium; I talk more about this in the next paragraph. Arguably the most important section in the prospectus outlines where the IPO money is in fact going to go. There have been some fears so I find it very encouraging that the money is all going to go into the club, even if there are some dividends much later down the line that will only happen if this share issue cash can help Rangers thrive. The first part mentioned is upgrades to Ibrox stadium, which seems to come to around £9 million. This may seem to be rather a lot of money but I think it is absolutely essential for us to maximise the potential of our biggest asset. Now I love Ibrox, we all do. But over the last few years, most likely due to our lack of spare cash, it has been neglected badly and in many ways fallen into a shoddy state. As well as upgrades there are plenty of repairs and licks of paint that need done, as I said Ibrox really should be our biggest asset so money spent on it is money well spent. There is of course the planned moving of the ticket office into the current club shop and Edmiston House being used as the new location for the shop and other things, most likely bars and/or restaurants. These plans are excellent and will provide much easier use of these facilities for fans as well as bringing in yet more revenue. Just think how great it'll be to just be across from Ibrox having a bite to eat rather than in Govan somewhere, or having to get something inside the stadium? The use of the share issue cash in these projects is spot on to help develop the club in the long term. Further uses are shown to be "other identified projects" which shows that we are not standing still in ways to improve the club; details of these will no doubt come out when further on. "General working capital purposes" is another place where the money will go and this will relate to an inevitable increase in our wage bill and need for transfer fees as we aim to get back to where we belong. The club being back at the top and in Europe is outlined in the prospectus as the aim, our lower league journey should be over before we know it and cash flow situations at football clubs can be interchangeable, so working capital is vital, the IPO will provide extra to go along with the usual sources such as season ticket sales. The wages of our board staff as well as team manager are also outlined. The wages are rather basic with some good bonuses added in, a positive for me as this will continue to motivate all the people concerned to keep working as hard as possible for Rangers. The cash paid to people like Green, Stockbridge and Ahmed to manage Rangers as a proper business will be well worth it in comparison to packets that have been dripped out to average and/or injured players the last few years, and of course you're going to have to help motivate with decent wages. Ian Black wouldn't be here if we had not offered him much more money than he would likely get elsewhere, same for likely most of our summer signings. And when you think about it, can Green be begrudged a happy retirement if he leaves Rangers in a healthy state having come in with us at our lowest ebb? The prospectus outlines the visions and plans for Rangers going forward and they will see the club thrive on and off the park. It's an exciting time, I outlined at the start of this article why I won't be investing right now but I certainly hope to in the future. The opportunity to be a further part of the adventure going forward is fantastic one. A very good an honest post Tedi, even if you did "Borrow it" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 GIRUY thread? To paraphrase the The Rangers fans: You can post whatever shite you think is proof, to us, your club is dead. But you see,that's the whole point. Your opinion or indeed anyone elses' opinion on the club continuity does not matter one iota. All Rangers and the support are interested in is that the club historical continuity from 1872 going forward has been recognised in a football context by the appropiate football authorities,FIFA,UEFA,SFA and SFL in order that the past successes are recorded alongside the future success of the club in a continuous timeline in the annals of Scoottish football. Which it obviously has been recognised as such by those appropiate footballing authorities. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 And on days like today it is a GIRUY thread Administration. Liquidation. 3rd Division. Joke Manager. Aye. GIRFUY 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Says the guy averaging 21 posts a day! Be fair, he's got a lot of catching up to do. You may find this hard to believe, given his depth of knowledge of all things P&B, but Tedi didn't actually join P&B until shortly after the Tribute Act got a license to play. Apparently, just after this, Tedi got a whisper when he was in the pub and rushed home to log on. At no time since his old club started sliding down the stank had he seen or heard of such a site. What are the chances, funny old world, who'd have thought it, etc...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 But you see,that's the whole point. Your opinion or indeed anyone elses' opinion on the club continuity does not matter one iota. All Rangers and the support are interested in is that the club historical continuity from 1872 going forward has been recognised in a football context by the appropiate football authorities,FIFA,UEFA,SFA and SFL in order that the past successes are recorded alongside the future success of the club in a continuous timeline in the annals of Scoottish football. Which it obviously has been recognised as such by those appropiate footballing authorities. Why? So you can continue to claim to be "The worlds most successful football team"? You're not even the most successful team in Glasgow 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 That's a bloody strange take on events of the last year. Even if we concede these latest 'victories' I still make it : Rangers 2 - The haters 27 (or thereabouts). I have to say that acceptance by this despicable, self-serving clique of big boys called ECA is as meaningless as it's predictable, but if it gives you pleasure, fill your boots. FWIW, I actually sort of accept continuation. For me, it's about fans primarily, and sadly they seem to have transferred over more seamlessly than any decent players did. That the old club died made it appropriate that the new version had to come in at the bottom. I can accept however that it's a new version of the same thing. It's that belief that makes me care so much about title stripping. For me - and I know this isn't the prevalent diddy view on here - Rangers still exist, but their shameful behaviour has left them diminished, vulnerable to loss of honours and at the mercy of a new owner about whom significant questions arise. That 2-0 scoreline was a bit of dry humour,i certainly wasn't expecting someone to jump in shouting 27-2 to us . ECA findings are accepted by FIFA and UEFA so i wouldn't say that they are meaningless to the World and European football governing bodies,whether you agree with them or not. As to the potential loss of honours,we are all well aware of this but at the moment nothing has changed re;that and indeed it may not change. However if the honours list remain as they are,should i shout 3-0 or 27-3. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Aye first 2 aside then the rest is indeed a barrel of laughs, still with Neil and teams like Arbroath in waiting we are guaranteed that on both sides Yeah. Ally's done so much Neil hasn't. Question Of Sport n that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Why? So you can continue to claim to be "The worlds most successful football team"? You're not even the most successful team in Glasgow No,just so that i and others can look back on the full history of the club from March 1872 going forward. One thing i don't do is look on us as "The Worlds most successful club",imo that's Real Madrid,although if you termed it "The Worlds most successful club domestically" then i may accept that description of The Rangers Football Club,founded 1872 continuos and ongoing. Btw Henrik,what happened to the Magee thread? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 But you see,that's the whole point. Your opinion or indeed anyone elses' opinion on the club continuity does not matter one iota. All Rangers and the support are interested in is that the club historical continuity from 1872 going forward has been recognised in a football context by the appropiate football authorities,FIFA,UEFA,SFA and SFL in order that the past successes are recorded alongside the future success of the club in a continuous timeline in the annals of Scoottish football. Which it obviously has been recognised as such by those appropiate footballing authorities. Fucksake, Youngsy,pointing and laughing aside, the main emotion most non-rangers fans are feeling is a horrified fascination that there is a group of football fans( whatever we think of rangers, the new club, or the whole Glasgow bigot-fest) who are almost begging to be relieved of their money by a shyster who, let's be honest, is as straight as a corkscrew. The man almost contradicts himself every other sentence, and does so on record to boot. Your club was mortally wounded by one saviour, and killed off by another. Now, even after the experience of Whyte and Murray, rangers fans are willing to throw money at the latest messiah, when his track record suggests he could teach the other two a thing or two about fraud. And for what? The titles don't belong to the new club. They don't even belong to rangers. They belong to Charlie. He said so, just the other day. "New club"? Well, Charlie said liquidation meant the end of the history. So did a lot of others, mind, but he owns the bricks and mortar now - that would tend to make his opinion count, no? As for the 1872 thing, whose idea was that, then? I can't remember any Centenary memorabilia being sold with that date on, can you? And shouldn't those numbers on the front of the stadium be getting altered? It wouldn't be a pathetic PR stunt aimed at boosting the IPO, would it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Yeah. Ally's done so much Neil hasn't. Question Of Sport n that And several women he wasn't married to...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 (edited) No,just so that i and others can look back on the full history of the club from March 1872 going forward. One thing i don't do is look on us as "The Worlds most successful club",imo that's Real Madrid,although if you termed it "The Worlds most successful club domestically" then i may accept that description of The Rangers Football Club,founded 1872 continuos and ongoing. Btw Henrik,what happened to the Magee thread? So why didn't you all celebrate in March? ETA: It would, if nothing else, have been a cracking hook to hang any fundraising efforts on. Edited December 14, 2012 by WhiteRoseKillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 What is it with fuckers feeling the need to quote screeds of text that make my eyes bleed? I left big school in 1977. When did they stop teaching folk how to write a precis? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Fucksake, Youngsy,pointing and laughing aside, the main emotion most non-rangers fans are feeling is a horrified fascination that there is a group of football fans( whatever we think of rangers, the new club, or the whole Glasgow bigot-fest) who are almost begging to be relieved of their money by a shyster who, let's be honest, is as straight as a corkscrew. The man almost contradicts himself every other sentence, and does so on record to boot. Your club was mortally wounded by one saviour, and killed off by another. Now, even after the experience of Whyte and Murray, rangers fans are willing to throw money at the latest messiah, when his track record suggests he could teach the other two a thing or two about fraud. And for what? The titles don't belong to the new club. They don't even belong to rangers. They belong to Charlie. He said so, just the other day. "New club"? Well, Charlie said liquidation meant the end of the history. So did a lot of others, mind, but he owns the bricks and mortar now - that would tend to make his opinion count, no? As for the 1872 thing, whose idea was that, then? I can't remember any Centenary memorabilia being sold with that date on, can you? And shouldn't those numbers on the front of the stadium be getting altered? It wouldn't be a pathetic PR stunt aimed at boosting the IPO, would it? Fucking hell,it's friday night,i'm on the whisky with friends and family,this is respite from them for a short time so i'm not getting right into this. Suffice to say the founding of the club was indeed March 1872 and i can say there wasn't any Centenary memorabilia with that date on it,i can say though that the true founding was the month and year mentioned,although i can say why the mistake came about but that's for another time. As for Green and his opinion,no it doesn't count when the relevant football authorities recognise the continuity,as for "his titles"when he moves on the titles will still remain where they've always been,at the club where they belong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 A very good an honest post Tedi, even if you did "Borrow it" Just had a better longer look at the figures posted in the prospectus towards the back (I missed them the 1st time) so your right I was wrong on that one Tedi, but a few things psrung out Although they are showing cash in the bank £4.186 million they had a £9.258million investment from financing activities(Page 53) so with out it a £5 million loss, but new club needed investment to start up the inital costs as all new companys do, The assets that they basing the value of the club on include the "Brand" at £18 million is that the badge, the name, seems alot but hey its a creative way used by accountyants to raise or lower a value of a company, The revenue for the period was £1.7 million (Not including the one off's) but the expendature for the same period was £5.487 million, so that effectively a £4 million loss for a FQTR or a £16 million loss for the year (Obviously before you subtract the 1 off investments Season tickets sponsorships etc), Wages at £3.5million a FQTR or £14 million a year (Seems rather high for 4th tier of football), the really strange one I saw was on page 61 Loan interest of £173000 or £700000 a year where as the only figure I can see as a payment in to justify anything near that figure of interest is the £9.258 so wonder who the loan is from especially as the club is "Debt Free" according to Charlie boy, I don't see loan repayments only interest payments. So is the £20 million share option going to pay the loan and the interest? The figures are cleverly displayed but any decent accountat could do that, they are not false or misleading in anyway just smartly done, showing the bare minimum required. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 1355525089[/url]' post='6893556']Fucking hell,it's friday night,i'm on the whisky with friends and family,this is respite from them for a short time so i'm not getting right into this. Probably best after the last time you got pished and came on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Anyway back to the point do they own the ground and murray park, I'm positive I heard Greene stating that he doesnt have the title deads or hadnt seen them when pressed. He said they had the albion car park but that also turned out to be a lie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 No,just so that i and others can look back on the full history of the club from March 1872 going forward. One thing i don't do is look on us as "The Worlds most successful club",imo that's Real Madrid,although if you termed it "The Worlds most successful club domestically" then i may accept that description of The Rangers Football Club,founded 1872 continuos and ongoing. Btw Henrik,what happened to the Magee thread? Ah the Magee thread. I fear the dark hand of the establishment was at work there. Namely Keith or Div 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Tedi takes this defending Rangers thing awfy seriously doesn't he? 0 Quote Link to comment 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.