Rangers Banter Archive February 07 2014

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


07 Feb 2014 21:32:22
THE Club has received many calls in recent days from fans, shareholders and other interested parties with regard to the contents of an Irish-based internet blog which has published numerous allegations about the business affairs of Rangers Football Club.

The Club wishes to make clear that these allegations are totally inaccurate and that the Chief Executive and Board of Directors are fully focussed on the restructuring and rebuilding of Rangers Football Club as previously announced.
The Club has decided to make this statement as unchallenged, ill-informed and inaccurate comments are damaging to the reputation of Rangers Football Club.
Graham Wallace
Chief Executive Officer

People were moaning for statement there it is and well done the gers tonight, to think there was so called fans wanting us to get beat tonight makes ye sick

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Sammy 1974 - statement from the CEO saying that bloggers allegations are unfounded - odd that

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

To Sammy 1974, odd that, odd. what

Agree0 Disagree0

If they can make a statement on that why can't they make a statement on the clubs financial position and if short term or long term funding it would galvanize the support to rally round the cause even better help to get rid of the spectre of green/stockbridge/khan and all there hangars on

Agree0 Disagree0

Well done Mr Wallace and well done Ally and the team- again I did enjoy the match tonight- pity we cannot play Dunfermline every week.
Great to see two class acts in Templeton and Sheils hit form even Cooperboy will have to admit Templeton's touch was on the money tonight.
Only one moan tonight could Jig or somebody have a word with Black and tell him to clear off when we have a free kick? How many opportunities will he be allowed to waste?
Otherwise great stuff!

Agree0 Disagree0

If he does not reply then it must all be true. If he does reply then it all must be true. McCoist gives an opinion and he gets pelters. McCoist doesn't give an opinion he is dodging the question.
Nit pickin

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Feb 2014 07:17:12
Sounds good on the one hand, but on the other hand I don't remember a previous statement about "restructuring" the club. Does anyone else? And what do you think he means by that?

Agree0 Disagree0

Everybody is entitled to have an opinion but they also have the right to say nothing even ally

Agree0 Disagree0

Nbear yes he was great but that is what I want from him every game I know he has the talent but he has been poor for a while I hope this is him back to where he was last season even Black had a better game so happy Wallace is still with us and hope he is with us for long haul think we need cover at centre back fingers crossed for a home tie if we can get through that it's home again for semi but let's not look to far ahead there are better teams than us in there but so happy you gave me a mention someone must read my posts

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Feb 2014 11:45:22
Just been re-reading wallace's statement. Anyone else feel slightly uneasy about the reference to "Irish-based"? Surely the correct term would've been "Ireland-based", if any such reference was really needed at all? Is this just an innocent mistake of poor grammar, or is it an attempt to pander to the worst elements of our fan base? I'll probably get pelters for this but seriously it reminds me of the kind of rhetoric that Green started to use to (successfully) dupe that section of the fans. Distasteful IMO.

Agree0 Disagree0

Pauline - the normal outcome from admin is that shares are delisted, as shareholders (many people don't grasp this) are the actual owners of the company, they are the last to receive anything, if indeed there is anything left in the pot for compensation of the loss of their shares

Agree0 Disagree0

Dear JG. and lw - hey guys "odd that" is now a real phrase - ta.

Anyway to the official press release from our club (6-0 :).

"The Club wishes to make clear that these allegations are totally inaccurate"

wow - odd that!

No exactly a line by line rebuttal, anyone think this is the minimum £500 press release statement??

Why even bother mentioning bloggers posts. unless they being read by fans, shareholders and investors. now we know why the bloggers site was upgraded to NEW FASTER servers this week - to cope with the load.

Blogger states statement coming - it did - blogger states we can't get finance (no statement to say we can or have? ). blogger thought Wallace would walk - looks like he did not.

but bloggers get few sources and glimmers and need to draw conclusions - which could be false and tomorrows chip wrappers.

So odd that there is even mention that one lone blogger (who is being covered on the share sites) is causing so much grief. really.

Just refute the alegations one by one, and show they baseless.

otherwise we all sit and think. does his have start of a new story, a second admin. because if we can't get finance and we running at a loss - its only a matter of time.

When one blogger has this effect on a 140year old business - you know we in trouble.

No mention of lawsuits - so there are kernals of truth in his allegations sufficient to stop any legal cases.

You can only sue if its false and groundless. a modicum of truth and you cannot sue.

So I take it we can't get finance, and we on brink of collapse (15% pay cut is a big clue).

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Feb 2014 13:44:55
@10 Thanks for trying to answer my question JG but are you not perhaps mixing up administration and liquidation? In liquidation the company is wound up, ceases to exist, so the shares are delisted and shareholders (who I do understand own a company, that's what they have a share of) get whatever pittance is due to them from the pot. But administration is different is it not? And not every admin ends up in liquidation. In a "successful" admin the company isn't wound up, it remains a going concern and emerges from admin as the same company - and surely with the same shareholders? Where and why in that process would shares be delisted and shareholders given something in return from some pot?

Agree0 Disagree0

@3 in my mind no statement was required but the board decided to make one anyway, anyone who takes these blogs a a reliable source rea, lly needs to have a think to themselves

Regarding financial statements, companies don't make these every week or month, there is an annual account year end 30 June and there will be interims up to 31december which we will see next month

It's called business practice, show me any company who makes financial statements at the drop of a hat

@11 I ant going to respond, if you believe the bloggers that's up to you

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Why do the board reply to a blog, but refuse to reply to fans asking about blue pitch, etc. do rangers hold the deeds, but not actually own them?

Agree0 Disagree0

JG fans, shared holders and potential investors FORCED the board to respond to this blogger.

Seems THEY ALL READ HIIM. odd that.

Why would fans, share holders and potential investors not look at facts and figures. and look at mere speculators. but if the blog releases info no-one else will dare then people will read it - as we see.

The Sun splashes story and no comment, journalist asks this week if our VAT is paid and response is "No comment".

A lot of what that blogger says is pish, but lots of what he said was denied before, and happened!

I believe facts - and with each statement released to AIM our shareprice has fallen. so even raising new funds via shares is diluted.

Very little good positive news from our club to counter genuine fan concerns (so genuine they read bloggers sites).

Agree0 Disagree0

@9 what? If you are based in Ireland then you are Irish based, if your based in Scotland your scottish based England English etc etc, those terms are used daily

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 19:27:35
Team v Dunfermline tonight: Bell - Faure, McCulloch, Mohsni, Wallace - Aird, Black, Law, Templeton - Shiels, Daly

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Come on then rangers keep that performance going in the 2nd half

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

There you go JG
First minute

Agree0 Disagree0

I must say football bit better tonight dunferrmline defendind a bit weak

Agree0 Disagree0

Well done gers controlled the game good victory

Agree0 Disagree0

Ed 039 - missed it as well, I was through at the fridge getting my refreshment in

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Good score - but not a great spectacle. far too many empty seats for what was a walkover.

4-0 and just 10, 124 fans in stadium?

Agree0 Disagree0

A terrible wet an windy night a friday at that and tickets not covered by season books look at parkhead today with good kick off time the top tear was shut I think nineteen thousand for game on friday and also on council telly is jolly good

Agree0 Disagree0

In response to my fellow bear Sammy 1972. I refuse to give some of owed gate money to a a team who voted us out before their was a court decision on any tax matter

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 18:10:10
hearing about the no of shares changing hands I don't think the club will end up in administration there may a lot of people or instituitions dumping shares for every share sold so far there has been buyers so to my mind nobody who buy theb shares in such quantities to lose them in an administration 2p inthe pound situation because the club is in a far position than it has been in last few years that's my take on the situation on the otherhand I could be wrong by a country mile

Believable0 Unbelievable0

07 Feb 2014 21:33:15
OP I don't think adminstration means that shareholders get a 2p in the pound offer. What for? Surrendering their shares? I don't think that's what happens. You're thinking of what happens to creditors I think. So lots of share trading doesn't indicate things on way or the other as regards likelihood of administration. isn't it possible that some are buying them at the current price, will hold on to them during an admin, then wait til they rise again on the other side? Could be wrong, maybe someone who knows about these things could enlighten us. Does administration necessarily spell bad news for shareholders who are in it for a long term investment?

Agree0 Disagree0

Paulineblue - from past experience, a shareholder in a company that has gone into admin, gets heehaw, so the op has a valid point here,
why would institutional investors continue to buy shares in RIFC if they think that a 2nd admin is, on the cards and they would loose their investment?

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

I had shares in the last debacle 48k if administration had been sucessfull I might have got acouple grand as it was it was a case of what charlie got at the scramble he haw

Agree0 Disagree0

08 Feb 2014 07:29:29
I can see that in a liquidation there would be an issue about what the shareholders would "get" for their shares. But how does that become an issue in administration? Seriously I don't understand that and thanks for the replies above but none of yous answer that. Why can't a shareholder just hold on to their shares during the administration process (watching their value plummet on the stock market) then keep hold of them as the company emerges from administration and watch their value rise again on the stock market, then sell them at a higher price later on, or indeed just keep hold of them (as a fan would)? You guys seem to be suggesting that administration somehow means a shareholder loses their shares and "gets" something (a paltry amount) for them. that's liquidation is it no? I don't think that's what happens in administration?

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 16:15:55
Spivs in, spivs out, Ally's in, Ally's out, the never ending debate goes on here without any conclusive consensus.

Change of subject, I hope we have a good and strong referee tonight and have fewer of our players in hospital by match end. Pity that McLeod and Clark are injured but maybe just as well.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

07 Feb 2014 09:42:26
Boy the bookies don't take much of a chance, we are playing a load of mince, struggling through each game and the best odds on winning 4-0 tonight is 10/1, it is a nonsense and just to prove how following this team affects your brain that is my bet tonight.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Wonder what the price is for a sending off. Il be surprised if there's 22 on the park at the final whistle tonight.

Agree0 Disagree0

11/4 a sending off

Agree0 Disagree0

Well that me, probably down in both, but he ho that's what happens when you are wrapped up in one team

Agree0 Disagree0

Lw - enjoy the winnings, my brain was effected as well and I ended up betting us to score 5 + goals and wee temps to score a brace, a wee break here or there and it could have been! maybe next time

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Op good for you mate I hope you had a healthy enough wager enjoy it like the result eh

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 08:02:00
I've been told that it's impossible for the fans to buy the club - buy out rules mean once you buy 30% of the shares you have to bid for the rest and pay the top share price of the last 12 months- so the other 70% would cost 90p+ a share. Anyone confirm

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Fans buy a club?what has happens to Dave Kings money or was that just another load to keep the fans happy or distracted for a short time

Agree0 Disagree0

There is rules but I don't think its as low as 30% murray had to to that when he purchased shares from marlbourgh but the supporters don't have to buy all shres in one name it could be split into different sections but under same umberella I think

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 10:36:08
Why should we buy our own club when we should have investors like Dave king remember him

Agree0 Disagree0

07 Feb 2014 11:39:48
#3 Yes, the old wait and hope for for someone else to fix the problem routine that's served us so well recently?

Agree0 Disagree0

All you bears should, just walk away from the mess and start again. It's the only way

Agree0 Disagree0

The only way the fans will ever be able to "own" the club is if the financial institutions who own Rangers decide to sell up. Now, I wouldn't imagine they will want to sell when the share price is so low, so maybe they have other ideas. The club is sliding down a slope at an alarming rate and there are now more rumours surfacing of VAT not paid, CE getting ready to walk, not enough money to pay anything, stadium repairsupgrades costing millions and of course the asking of everyone to take a pay cut. Today the club are in court to try and defend an written agreement they had with their former commercial director to pay him 5% of all contracts he brought in, another potential £500k loss. All in all it is Armageddon all over again and still there are people on here posting about buying players as if nothing is happening. This all happened 18 months ago and heads were buried in the sand, maybe time is right to pop up and see the daylight and what is going on under your very noses. Are the financial people who own Rangers waiting for this so they can sell the assets? They are worth a lot of money to the right buyer and please don't say that won't be allowed to happen as the people calling the shots only care about money, not trophies and certainly not about fans.

Agree0 Disagree0

Walk away and start again Joe how do you suggest we do that? There's no walking away from the club you love trust me.

Agree0 Disagree0

Mullad - nothing is impossible but the price of the mandatory offer depends when the shares to reach 30% were aquired, it can vary between the last three months or the last twelve months

Now you may have seen me posting previously that we don't need or even want the fans to own 100% of the club, what we need is enough fans to own shares as to have a significant voice at the AGM or EGM and even a representative on the board, remember fans already hold between 8-10%

to achieve a significant holding, we don't need any specific group buying shares on behalf of fans,
If anyone wants to make a difference just go and buy shares whenever they can, there has never been a better time, then come the next AGM or any EGM's, fans who hold shares and want to combine their small vote into one large block vote, could be done, or either that you just go along and vote however you want.
We could have
The Integrated Moritorium of Shareholders (maybe need a better name than that though) that abbreviation may already be in use

This would also do away with the need for a mandatory offer after 30% was reached

@2 - any organised fan group would be classed as a "concert party" under the takeover rules

@3 - that's one of our main problems, you don't believe any fans need to be involved in the ownership but you want someone else to own it and then tell the owners how to run the business and the club!

@5 - how much do you really wish that would happen, some of the doom mongers might but the large majority of us
Dont do walking away Joe

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

If the v a t had notbeen paid with the clubs past history with h n r c they would descend ote club like avenging angels with winding up orders and everthing they could fling

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with jg thinking and what he states is100% correct the amount of times its stated our club they don't want tobuy shares but want to tell the board how to run the club the old adage applies put your money where your mouth is

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent