buster.
-
Posts
14,194 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
111
Everything posted by buster.
-
It's been a growth industry in recent years but then we have only poured petrol on the fire. Scottish football and more specifically the constantly active 'fault line' between all things Rangers and Celtic is what really makes this inevitable. From their pro-active moves to maximise damage on our club (eg. from early 2012: 'sporting integrity' bandwagon) to our reactions. It transends reallity and helps those directly invloved in the ensuing fog, to get away with what they do. It is a godsend to the likes of Jack Irvine and ultimately those who he works for. I would have said 'paid for' but the truth is that, as is customary, it's us the support (the cash cow) that indirectly pay. Neither is it going to change.
-
Last night's BBC piece showed in 7 minutes what has been happening these past few years. A media using two sides of an argument without serious recourse to relevant independent expertise. The argument coming from Haggerty being more precise with detail but tripping itself up in a couple of places. This reflecing the Celtic-minded websites. The argument coming from Craig Houston being very generalised and easily challangable. Generally, this reflects the Rangers social media. Confrontation: The first casualty of war is the truth. Makes it very easy for those in the midst of it all. Wholly unsatisfactory and inadequate coverage. Video link of last night https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkfQB62ANRQ
-
Of the more than 15,000 that take part in the predictions page where the Gersnet League is included, not one picked 1-7, although one did pick 3-7 (perhaps in the memory of Di Stefano?).
-
How would they benefit from any 'compensation'? Do you really think some of the Blue Pitch and Margaritas of this world want increased focus upon what has went before ?
-
The board of RIFC won't consider it their fight. They are there to act in the interests of the shareholders who in the great majority want to make money out of the cash cow (the support) of a wholly owned subsidiary (TRFC).
-
The board of RIFC won't want anything to do with such issues that may concern TRFC unless they can harness them in such a way that gives them (RIFC) a net gain of some kind. The board of RIFC are treading carefully because they are nervous if a support become militant and sniff metaphorical blood because it may end up focusing on them. In the recent past, the board would have 'rode the wave' of discontent towards the authorities with strong words but little action. It served a short-term 'smash and grab' stage of the ongoing process very well. We should be wary of confused anger clouding other current issues with RIFC/TRFC.
-
That doesn't make sense to me ! When Green was CEO of RIFC (or post asset purhase), that owned the club (TRFC), the BTC wasn't an issue. -------------------------------------------- The article is imprecise as Green wasn't CEO at the time. He was trying to get money together to meet the 8.5M that a CVA would have required. However the BTC was still a red herring given that the CVA was never going to be approved and this would have been known at the time of Green speaking to Shepherd (see below). http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/rangers-in-crisis-freddy-shepherd-ready-1128202
-
In their defence you could say that they, their friends and associates are actually trying to inject some ironic humour into the situation or put another way,.... rip the p**h. Significant that they didn't want to mention money (in their usual corporatespeak of 'passionate fans backing the club').......... but instead used "energy and reslove" Funny that the "energy and resolve" falls on deaf ears when directed towards RIFC and of occasion may even result in lawyers letters in protest of the same "energy and resolve".
-
Most of them coming from and being caused by the boardroom of RIFC, their friends and associates along the way. "Energy & resolve"........are they too embarrassed to mention money ?
-
Of all the supporters groups / organisations that we have, it's been the SoS who have gone to the heart of ongoing issues and brought visible action to the 'party'. It's little wonder that there are supporters interested in discrediting them. Some of whom will look to discredit anyone or group who threaten the status quo / ongoing executive board (of holding company) and it's business. This, in part is down to the sown and nutured divide that Irvine and SDM created. Toxic Jack having a much easier job thereafter (just look at the last three years+). Some posters have a history of being directly involved in division regards supporters groups, posionous relationships thereafter and some say 'scheming'. It is predictable but rather ironic that those with this DNA like to preach on such matters. SOS have shown us that at this time, Action rather than decades of 'experience' that leads no-where (or worse) has been the order of the day. More power to their arm and less attention paid to those who seek to divert attention and discredit.
-
I'm not shy to have a go at the board but if I want to be balanced in my criticism, then AMcC has been and is the equivalent to 'fools gold', on and off the pitch.
-
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.
-
Born Under a Union Flag: Rangers, Britain and Scottish Independence
buster. replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
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 !!! -
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.
-
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.
-
Fair enough but if you disregard the print media, then all the more reason to concentrate on the substance of the issue.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I would say that diverts us from the important issues surrounding yesterdays regulatory notice.
-
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).
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Chief Football Operations Officer, Club Scouts, Where Are They?
buster. replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
Can't remember who it was exactly but it was obviously going to be a Green/Blue Pitch friendly appointment. -
Chief Football Operations Officer, Club Scouts, Where Are They?
buster. replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
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'.