Jump to content

 

 

buster.

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    14,154

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    110

 Content Type 

Everything posted by buster.

  1. buster.
    The real point (as per Forlan's answer) is that SD have control and if they want a 'deadlock matter' to arise, it will.
  2. buster.
    I'ii take a stab at an example (subject to correction / Forlan is the expert) An example may be that unanamous agreement between directors for paying dividends for a class of share cannot be reached and this creates a 'deadlock matter'.
  3. buster.
    SD have 49% in 'A' class shares which count double in any votes regarding financial matters. RIFC have 51%, in 'B' class shares Effectively SD control the joint venture. Read the document in post 32 for details of the latter.
  4. buster.
    Thank's FS ! So it becomes a wee bitty clearer (to me at least) why Ashely would want the IP rights on badge/trademark. If I follow, it would mean that royalty payments due to RIFC would be reduced or not necessary, dependent on what exactly Ashely could get his hands on. Thinking about it, the money withheld in the accounts. Could that possibly correspond in part with payments due to third parties who currently own part of our IP rights ? ps. just noted the last paragraph (I'm half asleep) which I don't know if standard for this type of JV. Could have significance it there is indeed 3rd party ownership as rumoured elsewhere.
  5. buster.
    Got you and that is only a percentage of one years profits or turnover IIRC. Following the money on a quick fag packet, would I be right in saying that Ashely is going to end up one, if not the biggest profiteer out of our whole mess.
  6. buster.
    Eventually found it half way down. http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/375 Forlan, I suppose we can't rule out the possibility that this money, in part or wholly has been made available to RIFC at some point in 2014 ?? The two directors on the Rangers Retail board representing RIFC just happen to be Wallace and Nash. Would it be allowed to have future Ashely directors from the RIFC board take the places of GW & PN on Rangers Retail? It says in the SH01 that to pay dividends you need a unanomous vote from directors to pay A and B shares.
  7. buster.
    If there was a significant figure still (owed) then that would be one hell of a liberty he was taking.
  8. buster.
    SB or anyone, is that 2.7M a current number ?
  9. buster.
    Note how the BBC have the joint byline after the DK statement, which they didn't fully reproduce or supply a link for. The shortened version being without the DK criticism for journalists.
  10. buster.
    If I had been younger and was geographically closer to the 'action' I would have got torn in about it years ago, but that wasn't the case. I think we've collectivelly failed at various, if not all levels and for the sp.ivs, it's been like shooting fish in a barrel.
  11. buster.
    I'm the same. It's not far from the stage where I'm going to wash my hands of it and spend my time on other more positive and less stressful/frustrating things. It's not good for the health. The Rangers I knew has all but gone.
  12. buster.
    Beware the difference between headlines and reality. Spin offensive on the way. "It's a new era and it's going to be great honest it is, just roll up and spend your money." Sold to you by those who sold every sp.iv who have passed through Ibrox and they expect us to fall for it again.
  13. buster.
    Posted the following yesterday, it's so predictable. First stage now in progress..............
  14. buster.
    Let's see, take a look at our financials over the last X years. Consider the standard of executive management we have suffered. Read the 120 day business review for an in-house opinion. ----------------------------------------------- Is it "strange" or unreasonable that supporters flag-up or are concerned about what some may think a wage that doesn't correspond with market value ? Given some of the 'beauties' of late, you really wonder if some are simply at it.
  15. buster.
    Whoever filed that piece (no byline submitted) is 'on the defensive' because he knows himself to be 'guilty' and/or is editing after Toxic influence. Such a statement shouldn't have had any omissions or at least been made available in full via an easily visible link. The omission only leads one to help confirm that certain individuals within BBC Scotland (IMO, McLaughlin and Lamont) were jounalists included in the DK reference to the Toxic conduit.
  16. buster.
    Here was me thinking that the club were cutting back on excessive player wages, although I don't know exactly when McGregor or his agent negotiated that figure and agreed to join Rangers. If you think about the situation, you are nearing 30 with a history of serious knee injuries and approaching the end of your contract. You are a run of the mill centre back at SPFL1 level, decent but not eye-catching good that English clubs have ever lined up in a queue to sign you, in fact you were still with Cowdenbeath in the third tier when you were 24. I can understand Rangers wanting a 'top tier centre half' to play in the second tier from which they want immediate promotion, fine. But why pay him 6K p/wk ? At St.Mirren he'd have been on how much ? I'd guess somewhere between 1K and 2K p/wk. Just say we'd offered 3,500, who would have offered more ? As for the way his contract is structured regards a second year kicking in after a certain number of games that he is available to play in. We could have the situation where his second year has kicked in and he gets another serious injury towards the end of the season. Now, it's probably this way because McGregor wants a resolution prior to January, so he has a better idea if he needs to look for another club, understandable but it seems all the concessions came from Rangers when they should have been holding the good cards. Of course there is another issue about him being played as right-back but another day.
  17. buster.
    That's one of the possible reasons but then it's not as if many Bears will base their take on what he has to say. Different sources ? Source(s) playing him ? etc
  18. buster.
    Here is a brief general outline of what may be going through the minds of Irvine and Bishop. - Ashely does deal / installs his man or men on the executive board (probably CEO) - Spin campaign regards new era / investment / new players / competing with Celtic at the top / Champions League - ie. Give Hope to those who need to hear it and will want to believe - tangible sweetener to show will and create momentum / possibly a new manager - continued spin / headlines about new players / sell STs and merchandise Therafter - sob stories about players who got away / need for youth followed by the road to no-where................ --------------------------------------------------------------------- ie. They think they can spin enough gulible fans the line to keep the numbers worthwhile for SD. Meanwhile further nurturing the division and creating the 'Real Loyal Bear' who will continue to spend their money.
  19. buster.
    Things will have to move more quickly than that because of the various deadlines looming.
  20. buster.
    Better than I expected but neither is it any kind of result. Interesting and worrying that Ashely would seem to be ignoring him.
  21. buster.
    IIINames appears to have 'flipped' a few weeks ago. Now that could be down to one of various possible reasons.
  22. buster.
    Richard Wilson @RichwilBBC "Long statement from Dave King. Will post, but in essence has provided all requested information and is still intent on providing findkng" "Key par" "In any transaction of this nature there are a number of interests to be consulted and considered. "The board has apparently engaged constructively on our proposal while advancing its own points as to what it believes is in the best interest of the club and its shareholders. Sandy Easdale has similarly apparently engaged constructively including highlighting some concerns. I have today responded to these concerns in writing. He will now consult with his co-shareholders and hopefully revert soonest so that we can proceed to agreement and the earliest possible implementation thereof." https://twitter.com/RichwilBBC
  23. buster.
    Proof of funds, ironic.....................Sir Duped/CW.......Irvine involved Fit & Proper, ironic........................CW / Easdale..........Irvine involved Not naming individuals, ironic........CG&Co.................Irvine involved The Judas Blogger........................................... .............Irvine involved Ripping the p**h Was there nothing from McLaughlin or Lamont on BBC ?
  24. buster.
    Yes, I reckon the cast list will be longer than Corination Street from start to present day. Poor Moshni, naebody cares
  25. buster.
    Hire a coach.
×
×
  • 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.