Dave Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11152863/Rangers-supporters-demand-SFA-acts-to-prevent-Mike-Ashleys-tactical-strike.html As predicted by Telegraph Sport last week when Ashley took his shares in Rangers towards the 10 per cent mark, the Newcastle United owner used his strengthened position to make a move on the club by asking for an extraordinary general meeting to be held to remove Graham Wallace, the chief executive, and finance director Philip Nash. Ashley wants rid of the two executives who blocked his attempt to use such assets as the club crest and the Rangers trademark as security for a £10 million loan which he offered on Sept 12. Wallace and Nash, as The Daily Telegraph revealed yesterday, support the efforts of Paul Murray and David Letham, two wealthy Rangers supporters who are trying to put into place a funding package involving Dave King, the former Ibrox director who had previously stated his interest in mounting a takeover bid. God I fucking hate this cunt. Every day I wake up and hope he falls under a bus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 I'm actually happy that other people are suffering too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 If only it was Celtic. His mansion would be rubble within days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Couldn't happen to a more horrible bunch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 If he wants to buy then hurry the fuck up and sell us, if he doesn't want to sell us then stop pissing about with another club. He's like a married man who wants to shag some other lass every so often but wants to come home to his wife and kids. Time to make a choice mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 God damn spell check. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Still says "an married man" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antz1uk Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Hasn't he got a history of buying up struggling brands, such as Dunlop Slazenger and Lonsdale, when they are at a low value. Not sure what his track record is at turning those brands around or not, but if I were a Rangers fan I would be looking into that. I think his intentions with Rangers may be completely different to that when he bought us. I still believe he bought us primarily as an advertising vehicle with added benefit of giving himself a plaything and the chance to prove the experts who said you could never make money out of owning a football club wrong. With Rangers, I think it's pure business, how much can he make out of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Even just selling the shares will make him a lot if they get back into the SPL and Champions League. Haven't a clue what he's planning but no doubt he'll make millions and Rangers will hardly benefit, if at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yplasterer Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Would be utterly thrilled if he bought Rangers outright. (Context: I don't like them and I quite like us). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 I hate Ashley but i think he'll be decent for them, as scottish football is about his level. In comparative terms if Ashley was doing to Rangers what he's done to us they'll probably start pissing the SPL again in no time. Premiership clubs its different though obviously due to the level of opposition and the fact that 19 other clubs won't stop still, and also the sheer amount of money needed to realistically achieve success. If he totally cheapens the brand and history of Rangers then obviously thats s*** (for them) mind. That's what he does best though isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Doesn't the Udinese owner also basically own Watford & Granada? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 They're more radge than we are. One of them might end up killing him. We can only hope any way. I hope they look forward to 0-3 home defeats to Celtic. Don't even joke about that if they get beat 3-0 off Celtic at home he will die within minutes. That's the definition of win-win Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Doesn't the Udinese owner also basically own Watford & Granada? Yep, and they loan out players like it's going out of fashion. I can't see Uefa stepping in to stop Ashley doing owt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Not stopping people is basically UEFA's whole deal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Let's just say that Ashley wants to own Rangers and it compelled to sell us because of the SFA 10% rule (that may or may not apply). What is the absolute worst case for us? (just so that I'm prepared for that and therefore anything else is a bonus) The worst I could come up with would be selling (or "selling", as it were) to a nominee in one of those dodgy leveraged buyout deals such as the crooked Yanks at Man Yoo or Liverpool. And also attached some sort of 50-years-for-£1 deal to all the SD stadium advertising. We're all hoping he'll leave, but many think he' a cunt who has a "personal", vindictive issue with the fans - if that's true, how badly could he screw us over on the way out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Rather have IS than Ashley, at least they believe in something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hudson Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Rather have IS than Ashley, at least they believe in something. So does cAshley £££££££££ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Let's just say that Ashley wants to own Rangers and it compelled to sell us because of the SFA 10% rule (that may or may not apply). What is the absolute worst case for us? (just so that I'm prepared for that and therefore anything else is a bonus) The worst I could come up with would be selling (or "selling", as it were) to a nominee in one of those dodgy leveraged buyout deals such as the crooked Yanks at Man Yoo or Liverpool. And also attached some sort of 50-years-for-£1 deal to all the SD stadium advertising. We're all hoping he'll leave, but many think he' a c*** who has a "personal", vindictive issue with the fans - if that's true, how badly could he screw us over on the way out? Except it's all completely irrelevant, like saying 'What if I had the queen coming over dinner, should I spend more time dusting or hoovering?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dontooner Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Not going to sell us unless is for Silly money Andy Carrol's style. The benefits of owning Newcastle to advertise for Sport Direct alone probably outweights making 100 million pounds on selling us. The reality is we are stuck with the fat ill asshole for 10 years to 20 years or more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Let's just say that Ashley wants to own Rangers and it compelled to sell us because of the SFA 10% rule (that may or may not apply). What is the absolute worst case for us? (just so that I'm prepared for that and therefore anything else is a bonus) The worst I could come up with would be selling (or "selling", as it were) to a nominee in one of those dodgy leveraged buyout deals such as the crooked Yanks at Man Yoo or Liverpool. And also attached some sort of 50-years-for-£1 deal to all the SD stadium advertising. We're all hoping he'll leave, but many think he' a c*** who has a "personal", vindictive issue with the fans - if that's true, how badly could he screw us over on the way out? Except it's all completely irrelevant, like saying 'What if I had the queen coming over dinner, should I spend more time dusting or hoovering?" How so? He is flexing his muscles in Scotland - he might very well decide they are a good investment given his history of buying shitty brands and building them up. Failing to heed the supposed 10% rule also follows history, considering he bought us without checking things like that and found himself having to shell out more than a hundred million pounds. How is contemplating a not-unrealistic scenario irrelevant on a discussion board? Especially considering he's fucked us over more than once, then examining the worst case is pretty fucking far from irrelevant, if you ask me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Let's just say that Ashley wants to own Rangers and it compelled to sell us because of the SFA 10% rule (that may or may not apply). What is the absolute worst case for us? (just so that I'm prepared for that and therefore anything else is a bonus) The worst I could come up with would be selling (or "selling", as it were) to a nominee in one of those dodgy leveraged buyout deals such as the crooked Yanks at Man Yoo or Liverpool. And also attached some sort of 50-years-for-£1 deal to all the SD stadium advertising. We're all hoping he'll leave, but many think he' a c*** who has a "personal", vindictive issue with the fans - if that's true, how badly could he screw us over on the way out? Except it's all completely irrelevant, like saying 'What if I had the queen coming over dinner, should I spend more time dusting or hoovering?" How so? He is flexing his muscles in Scotland - he might very well decide they are a good investment given his history of buying shitty brands and building them up. Failing to heed the supposed 10% rule also follows history, considering he bought us without checking things like that and found himself having to shell out more than a hundred million pounds. How is contemplating a not-unrealistic scenario irrelevant on a discussion board? Especially considering he's f***ed us over more than once, then examining the worst case is pretty f***ing far from irrelevant, if you ask me. Because the overall gain for SD owning Newcastle United vs Rangers outright are orders of magnitudes in difference. Calm down now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 He'll own both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Let's just say that Ashley wants to own Rangers and it compelled to sell us because of the SFA 10% rule (that may or may not apply). What is the absolute worst case for us? (just so that I'm prepared for that and therefore anything else is a bonus) The worst I could come up with would be selling (or "selling", as it were) to a nominee in one of those dodgy leveraged buyout deals such as the crooked Yanks at Man Yoo or Liverpool. And also attached some sort of 50-years-for-£1 deal to all the SD stadium advertising. We're all hoping he'll leave, but many think he' a c*** who has a "personal", vindictive issue with the fans - if that's true, how badly could he screw us over on the way out? Except it's all completely irrelevant, like saying 'What if I had the queen coming over dinner, should I spend more time dusting or hoovering?" How so? He is flexing his muscles in Scotland - he might very well decide they are a good investment given his history of buying shitty brands and building them up. Failing to heed the supposed 10% rule also follows history, considering he bought us without checking things like that and found himself having to shell out more than a hundred million pounds. How is contemplating a not-unrealistic scenario irrelevant on a discussion board? Especially considering he's f***ed us over more than once, then examining the worst case is pretty f***ing far from irrelevant, if you ask me. Because the overall gain for SD owning Newcastle United vs Rangers outright are orders of magnitudes in difference. Calm down now. I don't necessarily agree. Consider that he sold NUFC for an artificially inflated fee - and sold it to a friend who, essentially, borrowed it from Ashley and repaid it from earnings made by the club. This is not far removed from what many suspect Ashley is doing now (i.e. "trousering" the income the club makes). Consider that attached to the sale he included a ridiculous stadium advertising fee - many suspect that is the main motivation behind Ashley's ownership of the club at the moment, and he could conceivably continue that after he has left through such a contract. Buying Rangers would cost nothing, getting them into the CL would cost little more (and would be financed by the "repayments" from his friend). Rangers would them be playing EL football out of SD Stadium, Glasgow and would be worth considerably more than it what he paid for it. He could then sell it for a huge return or continue owning it and have more success for less investment than would ever be possible at NUFC. And if it weren't, he could always resume ownership of NUFC through an artificially deflated sale from his friend. Now, high finance isn't my field, but that seems to me to be a more profitable end-game than limping on in 17th position with a club whose fans hate his guts. He's doing something with Rangers - isn't it reasonable to consider how it might effect us? And not in the "maybe an Arab potentate will rescue us" kind of way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 The Scottish league is ruined, the only way the Scottish teams can actually imporve their finances would be to merge leagues. If that cant happen then I cant see anyone wanting to buy Rangers or Celtic as they are trapped in a dying league. Ashley just wants The Rangers name and merchandising rights for shirt sales etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts