Rangers chief executive Charles Green believes Scottish football should do "what is right financially" as the club await a vote on their future status.
Scottish Premier League clubs will decide on 4 July whether Green's 'newco' Rangers can replace the old club in the top flight.
Green's group will get a vote and Rangers need the support of seven other clubs to gain an SPL place.
"There is no easy solution," Green told the Rangers website.
Charles Green Rangers chief executive“We're not here to make huge profits and to pay those profits out in dividends back to investors”
"It's something we all have to deal with, we all have to take responsibility for and we all have to come up with something that works not just for an individual club but for the whole collective.
"We've always said that we bought the club because we want to play a team in Europe, we want to rebuild the image of this club and everybody wants to play in the Premier League.
"Whether that can happen is out of my control. It's in the hands of the other members of that league."
Should Green not get the necessary support, Rangers would have to apply to the Scottish Football League for the vacancy that would arise in Division Three after various clubs are moved up a division.
Fans of SPL clubs have expressed a desire to see Rangers' application turned down on grounds of sporting integrity, but club chairmen may also be influenced by the potential financial implications of the Ibrox side's absence from the top division.
"My emails are blocked at the moment with fans thanking me for saving their club but making it very clear that Rangers fans will unite whether we play in the SPL the First Division or the Third Division," said Green.
"I know that Rangers fans will not desert this club. But it's important, not just for Rangers but for the whole of Scottish football, because the financial implications for the whole of Scotland, not just for SPL clubs, is a massive, massive problem to face up to.
"I think some of the views we see and some of the comments are not based on business and, of course, the criticism I regularly get burdened with is, for me, every decision is about business.
"It's not about passion, it's not about commitment to a cause.
"It's purely about doing what is right financially because if there is no money - and that doesn't just include Rangers Football Club, it includes the SFA, SPL and the old mantra of going right down to grassroots football - we go out of business."
Meanwhile, Green insists his group, which bought Rangers' assets last week, is "not in here to make a fast buck and disappear".
Former director Dave King has expressed concern about cutbacks, while former manager Walter Smith, who fronted an unsuccessful attempt to gain control of the club, has also been lukewarm about Green's plans.
"The investors who have come in have seen this as an opportunity to rebuild the club, but they see this as a long-term investment," added Green.
"We will be announcing further investors in the next few weeks.
"I'd just like to clear up one issue. We're not here to make huge profits and to pay those profits out in dividends back to investors.
"But this club has to make a profit because any business, whether it's a football club, a petrol filling station or a corner shop, has to do that.
"If it doesn't make a profit, it goes out of business and we haven't spent all our time and resources to acquire this club then allow it to go back the same way within a year."
Julian Assange's leading supporters face losing £240,000 in bail money - The Guardian
Some of Julian Assange's most prominent supporters stand to lose up to £240,000 in bail money, provided to secure the WikiLeaks founder's freedom when he first faced extradition proceedings.
A leading criminal lawyer said that following Assange's decision to seek asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy in London and breach the terms of his bail, they would have to persuade the courts why they should not forfeit their money and prove they had done all they could to prevent him breaking the court order.
A group of celebrities and activists, including the socialite Jemima Khan, film director Ken Loach and publisher Felix Dennis, posted cash security of £200,000 to Westminster magistrates court with a further £40,000 as promised sureties when Assange was freed in December 2010.
"The people who have posted the money would have to go to court and plead their case as to why they shouldn't lose their money," said Oliver Lewis, partner at solicitors Powell Spencer and Partners. "There would have to be a pretty good reason why the money shouldn't be forfeited. Usually the court says 'thank you very much, you have lost your money'. You have to show that you have been vigilant and put every effort in to stop it happening."
Vaughan Smith, the founder of the Frontline Club for journalists, hosted Assange at his Norfolk home for over a year and stands to lose £20,000.
"It is not clear to me whether I have a liability but either way I am concerned," he said. "I do believe Julian genuinely feels he will be sent to America – and of course I think the money is important because it relates to the welfare of my wife and children, but they don't feel they are at risk of being sent to America.
"I remain a supporter and it is important we recognise he is a western dissident. There are a lot of people who believe the work he did at WikiLeaks was in the public interest."
Khan confirmed on Twitter that she had also posted bail money for Assange. "I had expected him to face the allegations," she said. "I am as surprised as anyone by this."
Tracy Worcester, the model and actress turned environmental campaigner, confirmed that she had put up a surety for Assange but said she had not yet been able to speak to his legal team about the latest developments and declined to comment further.
The human rights activist Bianca Jagger denied reports that she had contributed to the bail money, tweeting: "I would like to set the record straight. I didn't post bail for Julian Assange."
A spokeswoman for the courts service said it was normal for breaches of bail to be considered at the court that set the bail conditions in the first place, in this case Westminster magistrates court.
"What happens to the money will be decided by a judge if and when he is brought back before the court," she said. "It depends on what the police say about what they think a person has done and what should follow on from that."
Obama faces growing GOP super PAC financial power - The Guardian
JACK GILLUM
Associated Press= WASHINGTON (AP) — Major donors supportive of President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney spent millions of dollars last month to get their candidate elected. But outside political groups helping Romney are poised to account for a growing share of that fundraising largess.
Both Obama and Romney's campaigns showed strong fundraising hauls in May. Romney's campaign joined with the Republican Party to raise more than $76 million last month, outpacing Obama and the Democrats' $60 million haul during the same period.
Meanwhile, GOP-supportive "super" political committees — operating under relaxed campaign-finance regulations — are expected to bring in more than $1 billion this election, according to an Associated Press review of past campaign spending data and fundraising projections. That includes cash that outside groups have spent on expensive advertising critical of Obama.
The calculus raises the specter that Obama, who broke fundraising records four years ago by hauling in $750 million, may be the first incumbent president to be out-raised by his opponent. Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of cash but can't coordinate their efforts with the candidates they support.
One group, Restore Our Future, on Wednesday reported raising $8 million in May and $64 million so far. It spent more than $55 million to defeat Romney's opponents during the GOP primary, and it plans high-dollar financial aid from both Romney supporters and his former opponents' donors.
Indeed, the latest financial filings for one of the top pro-Romney PAC shows that while he was consolidating his position as the GOP favorite, backers of some of his opponents were shifting their financial allegiance to his cause — even as some of his loyal super PAC backers dug deeper to bankroll the committee's operations.
The biggest contributions to Restore Our Future came from a trio of firms linked to a Houston-based businessman who previously backed a super PAC supporting Romney rival Texas Gov. Rick Perry. The disclosures show that three companies based at the same post office box office in Dayton, Ohio, each gave $333,333 to the pro-Romney super PAC. Corporation records show the firms are headed by Houston businessman Robert T. Brockman.
Although super PACs are required to divulge major donors, loose disclosure rules allow contributors to withhold their names and mask their donations by setting up corporations to maintain their anonymity. One of Restore Our Future's early donors, Edward Conard, masked a $1 million contribution last year behind an unknown company, W Spann LLC, until public pressure forced him to acknowledge his name and affiliation with Romney's former private equity firm, Bain Capital.
Meanwhile, Obama's campaign reported $109.7 million in the bank at the end of May but spent more than it took in during the same period. The campaign collected $39.1 million and spent $44.5 million during the month. The Democratic Party, meanwhile, had $29.6 million cash on hand at end of the month, raising about $20 million during the period and spending $14.6 million.
A super PAC working in Obama's favor, Priorities USA Action, reported raising $4 million last month. The group said their contributions in May marked its best fundraising month so far, while calling its financial support a sign of the PAC's growing momentum.
Even with outside financial strength, Romney is taking few chances at being outspent by his opponent. His campaign is hosting a gathering this weekend for contributors who have raised tens of thousands of dollars apiece for his campaign.
---
Associated Press writers Stephen Braun and Ken Thomas in Washington contributed to this report.
Follow Jack Gillum on Twitter at http://twitter.com/jackgillum
No comments:
Post a Comment