Jump to content

 

 

Thinker

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,735

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Thinker

  1. Thinker
    I don't think anyone is claiming we're getting value for money from the playing staff budget. We should be able to spend the amount we have on players with plenty to spare though - It ought not to be over budget and wouldn't be an overspend if the rest of the business was being run properly.
  2. Thinker
    I suppose (and maybe I'm clutching at straws) the difference would be that folks like Stockbridge negotiated their contract through cronies, none of whom ever had the slightest intention of serving Rangers' best interests. McCoist accepted the contract he was offered and (I believe) despite failing pretty miserably has genuinely tried to do his best. We also have to ask; Why is the club struggling to fulfil Ally's contract? We should be able to afford it, but can't only because of the way the afore-mentioned cronies have mis-managed the business side of things. I think Ally needs to explain himself though - whether or not he's been selfish depends on what he's going to do with his pay-off. For all I know his intention might be to split it amongst the other employees who were made redundant with minimum recompense.
  3. Thinker
    Cuts were needed from the start, but I'm not sure if the ones they're making now are the correct ones, and they definitely don't seem to be being done in the correct manner.
  4. Thinker
    Aye but, like I said, that would be fine if he was sitting on his hands doing nothing. He's not though. He's been cutting deals with the club that rip us off. These clearly aren't the actions of a potential saviour.
  5. Thinker
    No, we don't know, but we can judge him by his actions so far. If he'd behaved in a neutral kind of way it's possible I'd be with you, but the fact that he's been actively hindering our progress doesn't really bode well, does it?
  6. Thinker
    So far it seems like Ashley has pumped money out of the club. What makes you think he'll change direction?
  7. Thinker
    If you don't mind me asking, where are you getting this information from? And why the drip feed?
  8. Thinker
    I'd feel worse about Ally taking a pay-off if I thought it would otherwise be spent on something worthwhile. If McCoist doesn't take it, the money will probably just get wasted on some other ****trocious outrage.
  9. Thinker
    I've a mate at work who I chat to quite a bit about the club's predicament, and he's always been anti-boycott (plus anti-King, anti-RST) and has always advocated a "wait and see" attitude towards the (various) board(s). He's also been anti-McCoist for quite some time, and the one piece of criticism he'll always concede about the board is that they should have replaced Ally long ago. It's the one thing that has the potential to shift him from his "uber-loyal" standpoint. For whatever reason, pro-board, and anti-"Rangers-men" beliefs seem to go hand-in-hand for many (not everyone though). If Mike Ashley (or his representative) refuses to take action over the manager it will make it perfectly plain even to the most bloody-minded King-hater that he has no interest in building the club. The board will lose a sizable chunk of the small support they still have. Are they trying to alienate absolutely everyone? Or don't they care? How low does their approval rating, the crowd and their profits have to fall before it bothers them? Nothing about this makes sense to me. How can letting every single aspect of the club go to the dogs benefit them? Surely they'd be better off selling up? It's like buying a bus and letting it rust on the driveway. No ones going to pay for a ride in it if they let it turn into a total banger. Are they hoping they might be able to salvage a few parts to sell as spares?
  10. Thinker
    Perfectly sums up how I feel about things (it was 1-3 against Hibs, though). My other major disappointment with Ally is that we've been counting on him to keep an eye on what's going on inside the boardroom. He hasn't done that - he's just backed whoever's had control of his budget.
  11. Thinker
    The whole "Paki-gate" incident was deliberate wasn't it? He just wanted to GTF out before the wheels fell off.
  12. Thinker
    Regardless of your opinion of the Uof or the RST you can't really defend the Sports Direct deal though can you? Even if you feel the onerousness of it has been exaggerated by some to enhance their argument, it's still clearly a rotten deal for the club. And what do you think can be taken from that with regards to MA's intentions towards our club? Why would someone who wants to take us back to the top sign a deal which rips us off?
  13. Thinker
    No new shirt for me this year either. Strange as this may sound, I'm not especially bothered if my Rangers shirt isn't great quality (it only has to last a season) as long as the inflated profit margins go to the club. And if Ashley had offered us a decent retail contract (not even a generous one, just a fair one) my house would probably be full of Sports Direct stuff. He's the commercial genius not me, but is this really the best way to boost SD sales? Maybe he's expecting an upturn in business due to Rangers-haters wanting to support the shop that's shafting us.
  14. Thinker
    We've all been watching MA (as far as we've been able to - the visibility isn't great). What has he done so far to win our trust? Based on his actions up to this point, what grounds are there to believe he has Rangers' best interests at heart? For example, do you think the Sports Direct deal has been good for the club?
  15. Thinker
    At least there's an admission that retail deal hasn't been normal up to this point. On the face of it this seems like a small victory.
  16. Thinker
    I'm pretty sure the former gersnet accounts Reaper and Crucible were rm's Bawsburst - either that or his colleagues. The cynical, blatant spin crap didn't wash on here and the ban hammer fell pretty quickly. In actual fact, I'd proabably prefer to have my baws burst than have to read his guff on here.
  17. Thinker
    What exactly happened? I'm assuming that the "challenge" was that a group of fans decided to let the Easdales know what a disgrace they feel they are to the club - with a few expletives thrown in. I'd be hard pushed not to say something if I walked past them. I'd try to keep it broadcastable, but I wouldn't feel bad about pointing out that I think they're doing an appalling job in front of their 14 year old son. I may even say to the boy, "Try not to turn out like your old man. Making money isn't everything. Honesty and integrity are more important."
  18. Thinker
    To be fair, it's not just our support. I'd estimate upwards of 90% of all facebook and twitter posts are basically just idiots needlessly sharing their stupid, pointless, poorly-informed opinions. It's just a 21st century way for empty vessels to make noise.
  19. Thinker
    I suppose the main difference is that Whyte didn't have a pot to piss in. Ashley does have a pot, but pisses wherever he pleases.
  20. Thinker
    Ashley must be on dodgy ground here. The SFA have shown before that they are a law unto themselves and can do what they want without worrying especially about the legality of their actions.
  21. Thinker
    I don't know - maybe I'm feeling particularly paranoid this morning. But what's the point of anything Ashley's doing? He's driven a lot of fans away already yet still seems to be trying to gain more influence.
  22. Thinker
    I wish I could disagree with you, but leaseback is looking like the only thing that makes sense with regards to Ashley's motives. The ultimate onerous contract. There are barriers to him owning the club, but he's never been directly interested in that anyway - just the advertising and merchandising opportunities that come with it. I could be wrong, but I don't see anything in the SFA rules to stop him owning Ibrox - or would this count as influence? Could anything be gained by petitioning the SFA to insist they enforce their rules and force him out?
  23. Thinker
    It must be as obvious to the politicians in Westminster as it is to you that if they don't follow through on their promises they'll be heading towards further discontent and another referendum. What they need to do is address the real concern behind the referendum - that the UK system of government is long overdue an update. It needs to be modernised, less centralised, and accessible to all. It's not a question of Scotland versus the rest - there's a common desire for change across the UK. If they take heed of this it'll be a better place to live for all 63 million of us. If they make the right changes - ones that result in more prosperity and equality - then the desire for independence will fall away.
  24. Thinker
    That would be excellent! There doesn't seem to be anything which would prevent it:
  25. Thinker
    Justice is served!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.