03 Aug 2026 07:18:46
Apologies to those I maybe irritated last night was in a foul mood and utterly fed up. Hoping today is better and we get some good news. But doesn't seem like it as seems our fab owners who've botched up so much already aren't spending the way they promised and we're totally dependent on getting big sales.
Please give us some good news and reason to be more positive.
03 Aug 2026 08:19:01
"The Grinch". ⬆️😉🤣👍
{Ed001's Note - I always wondered what the Grinch did when it was not Xmas.}
03 Aug 2026 08:25:08
Genuine question, why wouldn't we be dependent on sales?
I see this banded about often as if it's come as a shock to most.
It's pretty obvious.
03 Aug 2026 08:40:42
It's probably because some well known posters have previously posted that we are "cash rich", and are not dependent on sales.
I never believed that, as regardless of how well off our owners are, we still have to work within our limits. Unfortunately, there are some who are stuck in this fantasy that we are a wealthy club with cash to burn. We are not! We are a business, who continue to lose money, and must work within our means.
Our new owners have no emotional connection to Glasgow Rangers, and are in it for business purposes only.
Do you really think they'd spend without knowing where they can replace it? They probably did that last season, and it came back to bite them in the arse, so I really don't see them doing that again.
We all crave these quality players, but unless we generate money from transfers out, it is not happening. I have the fear we will need to strap ourselves in lads, as this isn't going to be pretty this season.
03 Aug 2026 08:53:11
EHL, u yourself said earlier signings weren't dependant on Raskin money, for example. Not in any way saying we shouldn't try and balance the books, obviously, and shouldn't go down that road again. But money has been raised in other ways too.
Season tickets, investment, prize money, Europe, etc, for example. They also promised there would be more investment into the team. And there was money set aside from last year, like Olsen, unless we never really had that at all.
03 Aug 2026 08:58:10
Of course we are dependent on sales. The club was broke. Big squad, big wages. We need money in, if you're running a business correctly. No brainer!
03 Aug 2026 09:00:34
In any business u have to be frugal and not extend your means. Look where throwing money got us previously.
Gd post Sista. 👍
03 Aug 2026 09:08:18
Get Derek McInnes in. Get Lawrence Shankland signed, so our owners have delivered that, so a bit of patience, please, Kaiser. The window is still open, watch this space.
03 Aug 2026 09:09:31
Or maybe is it because they blew a big chunk of this year's budget way overpaying for players and smashing league transfer records last year that's left us in a mess with little to spend?
03 Aug 2026 09:11:26
Bang on the money there, Sunshine, and when you question it, they seem to take offence.
It's blatantly obvious we need to sell first!
It is a rumours page after all, and only a small percentage will be right.
03 Aug 2026 09:37:35
I think it's always been said that there is some money to spend, but we need to sell before we can buy due to the sheer size of the squad.
03 Aug 2026 10:25:23
All this just makes the recruitment 'strategy' seem more baffling.
Why spend £5m plus on Pandur and £4m on Drago when there's no money to invest in the areas screaming out for it?! Maybe Pandur turns out to be a long term upgrade on Butland. But it was hardly the biggest priority area to make a change in.
Always going to be some mess with the amount of change we've had off the field, and starting pre-season recruitment with one manager and finishing it with another. But does seem a bit like we've spent all our money on areas that didn't really need it and none at all on the gaps that can be seen from space.
03 Aug 2026 10:27:30
You only need to look south at how it works.
Newcastle - billionaire owners, but can't splash the cash how they would like.
Hull - promoted to the riches of the EPL, and need to watch what they spend.
03 Aug 2026 10:29:50
My apologies again then Ehl, for mixing u up with someone else then mate. 👍 Was said a lot regarding Raskin or others not stopping the Dahl deal or even money for Ferguson, so that money must be available if true.
03 Aug 2026 09:58:21
When it's down to squad size, maybe not the best idea to buy multiple players for where we're already overcrowded then. 🤷
03 Aug 2026 09:58:30
Until we clear our feet with the players we can't seem to get rid of, it's always going to be like this. Then, until we start selling players for serious profit, we're caught in a vicious cycle that we can't seem to get out of.
03 Aug 2026 10:07:34
Sorry Kaiser, that's not something I said.
I've been pretty consistent in trying to dampen the excitement around transfers and spending big.
What I did say, and, maybe this has been taken out of context, was something along the lines of the priority deals we were working on weren't dependent on a sale.
03 Aug 2026 10:44:50
It's not a problem Kaiser mate, but now you know what happens when you go out back and howl at the moon. 🤣
03 Aug 2026 11:01:23
I've got to back Kaiser up here, a few did say the Dahl deal wasn't dependent on Raskin sale.
From Andrew Cavanagh himself,
"It's not been nearly good enough and we need to be better," while promising "a summer of substantial change."
Which is why, so far the substantial change he mentions feels so far underwhelming!
03 Aug 2026 11:56:31
A few did, Stig - but not me.
03 Aug 2026 13:45:31
No, I'm not saying you, EHL.
To be honest, I just remember reading the posts, couldn't tell you the names of the posters.
As it's been banded about a few times.
And, to be quite honest, I actually thought it came from the club officially, but can't find that official statement, so I must have been mistaking thinking that.
Either was we I sales are competed to help bring in fresh faces and more creative players can be added.
03 Aug 2026 18:51:18
There was posters on here that kept saying Rangers did not need to sell anyone before they had to buy. This included Dahl. They specifically said that Raskin did not need to be sold in order for the Dahl deal to go through.
I highlighted that this contradicted what was being said on the Rangers Review (who do have the inside track much of the time). Someone told me "You're listening to the Rangers Review too much".