amms

I know we've done this before and we've established you're a brand hoare incapable of original thought (I'm kidding, relax) but seriously how can you describe Puma as a 'cheap rubbish brand' and your piece de resistance is 'no avenue to expand our brand worldwide'? Eh?

It's all very well using hindsight but if the SFA had blocked Whyte's takeover a huge swathe of the Rangers support would have gone to war with them. The SFA are culpable for many things, but I don't blame them for Whyte.

A falling out among thieves.

Macpherson gets ridiculed by some, but by fuck he can write. The more these questions are asked in an articulate and considered way the harder it'll be for some to dodge answering them.

Could this be posturing from SDM? Could he be doing this in the hope that a deal can be done where HMRC don't appeal and he drops his legal threat? If it was shown that a high ranking HMRC employee was leaking info it would be embarrassing for them and a good lawyer could point to it prejudicing him, MIH and Rangers, damaging his reputation and leading to business problems for him and his companies. HMRC might not fancy that fight.

I think his point is that just because we 'expect' a decision in our favour doesn't mean it'll happen. Legal justice and natural justice are often not in tune.

That's hysterical! Are they really staking out Ibrox with a long lens camera just to see who comes in and out. They are going to 'out' some poor taxi driver aren't they. I know nothing about McGill buses except the driver of one of their bus on the Clydeside Expressway one morning last week was a tosser, I won't hold that against them though.

Rangers are a family and family is in the blood. Sometimes you get pissed off with your family and you need a bit of space from them. But they are still your family and that never leaves you and when someone messes with them or they are in need you step up. Andy's blog post has gone viral and been read by a lot of people, he's still doing his bit for his family.

Hahaha, that clips hilarious!

He writes very well doesn't he. It'll be ironic if the only lasting legacy of their 'kill Rangers' campaign is a much more motivated, engaged and articulate Rangers support.

Brilliant stuff, well done. I don't believe 26th of Foot and Andy Steel are the same person but great minds clearly think alike. Andy's take on the Orwell Prize.

Hell hath no fury like a multi-millionaire embarrassed in public. Personally I don't think SDM will rest until he has a body for this.

Thanks mate, a full time sub-editor is ost welcome!

The camera angle used when Speirs made his denial was deliberate, the director chose to use that one because it clearly showed the reaction of the other two guests to what Speirs was saying. Had the camera simply shown Speirs face on, as it did for most of the piece, the audience reaction to what he said would be quite different. By showing the other guests reaction we were clearly told that what Speirs said was laughable as far as the others were concerned. Speirs was isolated on the programme, both metaphorically and actually, he sat alone and at a different angle from the other two guests who sat together. None of that was accidental, the director was making a subtle point which should be lost on no one. TV directors can make you look like a muppet or film star if the choose too. I expect Speirs to stick with the BBC from now on.

Excellent stuff, I enjoyed that.

I've finished my first draft of the Elgin preview. Will I post it in here initially?

I understand the lowest of the low are currently arranging a boycot of their next home match. We live in interesting times mate.

Not this season, or next. But in time if they alienate their support they will.

If they ignore their support they will, if they take them for granted they will. Have you seen there crowds this season? A year or so back I was privy to some market research Celtic did of their support. The single biggest issue affecting attendance at Parkhead was habit. I kid you not, when someone got out of the habit of attending it was very hard to make that person return on a regular basis. A large number of their support are breaking the habit currently.

Am I the only one feeling nothing but anger just now? Some fucker should pay for this.

No, no it wasn't. It was 15 minutes of information sensationalised and stretched out to an hour with some of the worst graphics seen this side of a former Soviet Republic on election night. How it won anything says so much about the TV industry in Scotland.

Gawd, that's a disturbing euphemism.

It's more complicated than that though. There are many ways of engaging a football support, it's much more than simply the football on the pitch. Scottish football is losing support for a whole variety of reasons. The 'quality' of football is certainly one of them but it isn't the only one. Price is a big factor, timing of games, the intransigence of owners and governing bodies, lack of empathy with through to downright hostility towards players, the list goes on. This belief that football clubs are businesses and they need market forces applied to them is simply flawed. My relationship with Rangers is like no other relationship with a 'business', as is yours. If what we want to create is a market forces led structure and club then eventually we'll have customers not fans, then where will we be? Rangers, and almost all successful, and indeed not so successful, football clubs, have existed and prospered for well over a century, far, far longer than most market led businesses I'd point out, because they didn't move with market forces and because they engaged with us on an emotional level. For Rangers to prosper we can't be market led, because if we are we'll lose out to clubs with smaller supports but much bigger revenue streams and potential earning opportunities. For Rangers to prosper we need to shore up our supporter base, engage with them and listen to them. We need to provide attractive, exciting football at affordable prices at times and days of the week that suit our support. All major decisions should be taken with our support in mind, by doing this we'll grow the loyalty and love for our club and in turn grow the club. People keep telling me we need to be run as a sound business like this is some sort of revelation, it isn't. For the vast majority of our history we were run as a sound business; but nobody got dividends. Being a director of Rangers should be a privilege afforded to only a select few supporters who can offer the club experience and guidance or something tangible like that, not an appointment based on the whims and interests of cockney wide-boys in Canary Wharf. It is my firm belief that if football in general, and Rangers in particular, go down the route of treating supporters as customers and the club as a profit driven business we'll eventually die. Not tomorrow, or next year but slowly over the next decade or two. I'm not trying to be melodramatic but it's our love for the club that sustains it, if we don't continue to foster that, to nurture it in the next generation the club will eventually die.

Look, we're not Sainsbury's, Sainsbury's entire goal is to create profit for their shareholders, that shouldn't be ours. If you as a customer are unhappy with Sainsbury's choice of dry goods you can go to Morrisons or Tesco, if you are unhappy with Rangers are you going to start watching Celtic or Motherwell? The two scenarios are simply not analogous and that's why this whole system is flawed.

No problem. Let's say we agree a new jersey sponsorship of say £10 million and decide to 'invest' only half of it in football and retain the rest as profit to be distributed to shareholders at the end of the year. That should see a rise in our share price whilst hindering our team. Let's say we've a young player with 18 months left on his contract who snaps his cruciate and requires expensive surgery and rehabilitation. He becomes an asset we can realise no potential from for at least 2 years, so we decide not to renew his contract. There are so many possible scenarios where the profitability of the club could be put before progress on the park. Remember that's what this is about, that's what drives the share price, not how well run we are, not how many trophies we'll win but how much profit we'll make. We're a football club not a utility provider, we shouldn't make a profit we should break even every year. Craig Whyte 'saved the club' once apparently. I'm deeply suspicious of anyone who views our football club as a way of making money for themselves. I've no problem with employees being paid, handsomely if deserved too. I strongly disagree with our club paying dividends to shareholders and I'm unhappy with people relying on their remuneration coming from a rise in share value. That's not how we should be rebuilding the club in my opinion. I'm not anti-Charles Green but I remain cautious of him. If the bulk of the shares are bought by supporters I'll be happy and wish him well, if they are bought by hedge funds and the like I think that will be to our detriment.