Jump to content

 

 

buster.

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,902

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    103

 Content Type 

Everything posted by buster.

  1. buster.
    Embarrassing invented excuse to cover his own bad management of players. Mostly relatively meaningless games played against plumbers and postmen. I mean it's not as if Daly was adding anything, he was running himself into the ground with no end product. Mr. I'd like to do it the 'Sporting Lisbon/Ajax way' but the truth is that I have a thing about injury prone 30 year olds, is taking us no-where. Rangers,.........the definition of an Omnishambles..........boradroom, dressing room, treatment room.........the multi-layered gravytrain that needs your money.
  2. buster.
    A wee aside. Just looked at the board and the thread immediately above this one, 'A statement to the stock exchange'. It had 1314 views with 'Time4_Change' beside it as last poster on thread..........weird !!!
  3. buster.
    Firstly, the board are acting primariliy in the best interests of the shareholders of RIFC, the holding company. These interests centre on financial gain for said shareholders of holding company. The football club (a wholly owned subsidiary) is the vehicle through which most of this is channelled. The supporters of whom are what may be regarged as the 'cash cow'. We are going through a process with differing stages (see Portsmouth, Leeds, Coventry etc.). The first 'blatant robbery' stage is over and is replaced by a more measured approach. Principally because there was no money left and the 'cash cow' was starting to ask questions. We now have a board that has part of the 'first stage' ('onerous contracts' are in part still running) and part of what may be regarded as 'new' post AGM. ie. Laxey Partners. Both are using the football club as a vehicle, as or in an attempt to make money. The bottomline and where they have the supporter over a barrel is that the football club, as it stands needs the blue pound to survive but every pound that goes in will essentially be divvied up between the football club and 'sp.iv interests'. The other thing to remember is that in time the assets will go. No conspiracy theory, it's how these people operate.
  4. buster.
    What is undoubtedly correct is that there have been conspiracies wrt Rangers over the past few years. The exact nature/detail of what has happened may never be known in full but it is more than reasonable to lay down facts known, make interpretations from them and open it up to the messageboard for conversation. You are welcome to label it 'conspiracy theories' with a dismissive air but when many, like yourself were championing Mr.Green, I was being told that my getting on the case of Mr.Green constantly was conspiracy theories that were OTT.
  5. buster.
    Fair enough but if you disregard the print media, then all the more reason to concentrate on the substance of the issue.
  6. buster.
    Thank's for the replies. Given recent history and timing, what do you think/is your gut feel ?...Misleading or Innocent Mistake. If AIM investigate and they find out 'foulplay' of some kind, they don't necessarily make it public. In fact the club could already have been investigated and fined and we don't know.
  7. buster.
    Further to post 45. Without going in deeply I'm getting at the continuation (May 2012) Rizvi / Green&Co (Today) Rizvi / Morgan (declared rep. for the mysterious as per Houssami/BPH) / Green in shadows / Easdale . IMO Rafat Rizvi (RR) was one of the initial people behind Green and the raising of the money to purchase the assets. ie. behind at least one of the mysterious groups eg. Margarita. Deloitte said in May 2012 that they wouldn't touch anything with RR involved. He had to be hidden/ behind offshore company (layers). There is alleged leaked correspondence between Green&Co and Rizvi from May 2012. Green fronts the con to get as much money in and out as soon as possible whilst at the sametime setting up onerous contracts for continual bleed and to act as financial 'mines'. Green works his ticket / becomes toxic (with CW re-appearence and exits May 2013). Mysterious shareholders need representation on board to replace Green, so cue letter of requisition (May 2013) for the appointments of Chris Morgan and James Easdale..and for the removal of Malcolm Murray and Phil Cartmell. 9th of July 2013 MM and PC leave the board and James Easdale appointed. Plus Strand Hanson appointed NOMAD & broker. Note. Cenkos probably left the building because without MM they didn't want to risk their reputation further. August 2013 sees Green return (uses P&M report as justification) and Daniel Stewart get their foot in the Ibrox door immediately/broker. (Green had wanted DS from the beginning/IPO but MM had vetoed it). WS (chairman) leaves as soon as CG returns. DS get the NOMAD gig in late September and start with annoucements on Greens shares. With DS on board, the sp.ivs have familiar faces near and more 'leeway'. Note. That Jack Irvine/MH has always been on this precise side of the fence. eg. He briefs against Graham Wallace.
  8. buster.
    I would say that diverts us from the important issues surrounding yesterdays regulatory notice.
  9. buster.
    So you concede that the current board alongside Stockbridge, may have been deliberately misleading the support and the markets. You ask why Stockbridge would want to do the club (RIFC) any favours. 1. Because the club were complicit to a degree in how things were played and he benefited. 2. Because the contacts that helped finance the purchase of assets and have previously employed BS elsewhere (pre Rangers) are still involved (eg. Blue Pitch/Margarita) .... ie. a network of sp.ivs that he will want to keep in with and may still be benefitting from. It is useful to look into the background of 'players' involved, their tie-ins as it helps illustrate the CONTINUATION from June 2012 to the present boardroom (including major influences).
  10. buster.
    I doubt it was "incompetence". Not because I took as gospel the gushing praise he received from present board members but because he has a history of 'innocent mistakes' that suggest less than forthright honest behaviour. eg. The wording of resloution 9 / fans group meeting.
  11. buster.
    The "yellow press" !! Tabloids are tabloids and they will always headline accordingly, sometimes with good reason and others to sensationalise.............but do you think the last few years have been generally exaggerated or have the media in general failed to grasp the fullextent of the ongoing nightmare in a timely manner ? It's all very well you and Mr.Hemdani criticising the media but perhaps in part this is the easy route to forgetting your own serious fundamental misjudgements along the way. I'd say what the support might be better off doing is trying to learn from their own mistakes rather than flagging up the supposed 'baddies' of eg. The Daily Record,...who many told us (including the club) were 'not to be listened to'. note 30: could some kind soul who isn't ignored by DB quote this post so as he has the option to read it, thank's ! For the benifit of Mr.Hemdani........... This note (30) is part of the post.
  12. buster.
    Here is a reply about "any of that". When accounts are published are they signed off on the page where the numbers/balance sheet ends or at the end after the relevant information (notes) that are added after the actual financial statements ? Your post seems to stretch into 'damage limitation'. Funny how this statement to the LSE was made and the latest Stockbridge 'affair' came to light once ST renewals were collected.
  13. buster.
    Can't remember who it was exactly but it was obviously going to be a Green/Blue Pitch friendly appointment.
  14. buster.
    This was done around the sametime as the head maintainance man at Ibrox was sacked or paid off. What links them is that both had input into financial outgoings over and above their own salary. One was simply cut, the other needed someone who was 'onside' or/and 'complicit'.
  15. buster.
    Graham Wallace: Day 229 229 days = 7.63 months Scouts: No Spin: Yes Bonus: Yes -------------------------------------------------------------- ps. In a strange kind of way DB mirrors how the board operate. He puts forward his interpretation and then 'ignores' those he may find 'awkward'.
  16. buster.
    Who knows where we'll be in 12 months. Circles may be squared.
  17. buster.
    I think the spate of 1 year contracts may have something to do with what the club have in mind regards football strategy, or at least on the face of it.
  18. buster.
    Graham Wallace was keen to emphasis his football experience at Manchester City and the contacts he had in the UK and Europe. 228 days after his appointment, we still have no Chief Scout or network whilst GW has already passed the post (last week) for his first bonus. As for Ally, he says.................. “You can get a boy at 18, 19 and say: ‘Right, it looks like we are not going to play you for 18 months but we are going to develop you’......................he doesn't have a clue. Welcome to the Rangers Omnishambles where highly paid Bullshit and highly paid Incompetence flourish. Please roll-up and fund it..........
  19. buster.
    It's ironic that something called 'Vanguard' touches on tabloid journalism and it's effects on Rangers in the summer of 2014,.............. whilst perversly pushing 'Vigilance' and by implication, suggesting the board are deserving of trust. 'Vanguard Vigilance' might have been better employed somewhat earlier (years ago) and in opposite directions to that of which they were preaching at the time. 'Rearguard Inverse Vigilance' may be a more apt term.
  20. buster.
    Rangers First buying 70,000 shares at around 30p each, as Stockbridge gets over 714,000 shares at 1p each is a good illustration of a 'loaded game'.
  21. buster.
    IF my auntie had baws.................. Represents the case that can be made in favour of AMcC as a football manager. Forget what's gone before and hope for the best but with no particular solid reason to do so.
  22. buster.
    Loads of money is the answer. Thereafter: - buy-out sp.ivs - sort-out onerous contracts - address issues both infrastructural and football However we need to change old habits and get better value for money out of every pound spent. Easy, now someone (supporter) go out and win the Euro millions.
  23. buster.
    The divisions go back years and became apparent during the SDM years. Irvine developed and nutured them. He pushed 'mind-sets', confusion and division preparing the ground so as to make his job and his clients remit so much easier. He was also cleaning up Craig Whytes 'google history' as best he could in August 2009, the same month as SDM stood down from the board at Ibrox.........With Muir (bank) and McGill (MIM) to come in shortly after. Despite working for CW as far back as 2006, Irvine allowed his old mucker and client, SDM............ to be duped by Whyte
  24. buster.
    Regards the 'match-by-match' opposed to a ST recommendation, it's only a recommendation. The individual will make his own economic decisions. Personally I won't be spending any money on the club/company. Whilst I respect the individual's right to decide, my personal opinion is that to give the executive board money up front would be a mix of wilful stupidity, blind loyalty and misplaced hope.
  25. buster.
    People are free to disagree, I'd welcome their input. As you alude to, solutions are difficult to envisage at this stage. What the sp.ivs want is for the support to become 'battle-fatigued', expect to write off X amount of ST's and continue a diluted show on the road alongside plentiful downward expectation management, moonbeams and gradual decline as further value is extracted. Alternatively someone may buy them out but precedent suggests that the various parties have very different numbers in mind when it comes to negotiations. Bottomline is that sp.ivs are in control and sp.ivs get involved so that sp.ivs can make money. Sp.ivs are good at what they do and have us stiched up like a kipper, laying 'mines' that make defending their position easier. On the other hand, the efforts against the sp.ivs have generally been found wanting (with some honourable exceptions). I think it fair to say that they saw us a particularly juicy and relatively easy catch. The reasons behind the relative ease is a story in itself.
×
×
  • 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.