Jump to content

 

 

buster.

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    14,194

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    111

 Content Type 

Everything posted by buster.

  1. buster.
    At Rangers they give their CEO a 100% bonus for his time if it sees both the share price and ST numbers cut in half.
  2. buster.
    Probability is that Brazil will play Spain or Holland in the next round. I can't see the hosts being allowed to go out at that stage. Not any old hosts, we're talking Brazil in a country that is simmering with rage and if the host nation goes out early then you'd probably find protest numbers grow by a large percentage.
  3. buster.
    People take their own economic decisions and make their choices. However and IMO, funding the executive board is like giving tacit approval to a process that will have Rangers join the list of Coventry, Leeds, Portsmouth.... The alternative isn't clear or painless but we'd at least have a chance to build a solid and honest base, allbeit we might need to take a step or two backwards first.
  4. buster.
    Even South Korea (host nation) made the sem-finals in 2002 and their best player was the man in black. This WC gives off similar vibes.
  5. buster.
    Be careful with Brazil,........they do have a very influential player who dresses in black.
  6. buster.
    They may plan to get to the autumn and look to raise equity as per business review but:- - would need 75% vote at an EGM. - would be using monies raised for working capital in good part. - would be a very difficult sell
  7. buster.
    Seem to be saying no need for the widely reported share issue of 43.4M shares to existing shareholders. Also saying that further cutbacks on the business review proposals to be implemented. What other plans will they have to make up what is a significant shortfall ? Auchenhowie ? What this may point to is sp.ivs not wanting to buy more shares but perhaps using the family silver instead.
  8. buster.
    As for wages, I think that at this point, the overal numbers for ins and outs will be fairly even.
  9. buster.
    I agree regards getting the message over, allbeit there were limitations on how direct it could be. There are other contributory reasons, both through mistakes and ongoing strategy from the 'other side'. It's been hungry corporate sharks with executive power and professional spin against a relatively amateur & disorganised effort. However, you play the ball from it lies and look forward. I currently see the support needing to hold the executive board to account for a variety of reasons.........and a board who misleads, lies and ignores them and depends on breaking the resolve of the large 'middle rump' who didn't renew.
  10. buster.
    I partly understand that but think that the matter at hand concerns current the executive board and the support. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- One thing I'd mention regards your post is that past efforts by those you mention have come up short for a variety of reasons. Included within them is a lack of support from the fans. Their strategies have often depended on the fans coming together to help force the issue. If the fans continue to fund on the ongoing situation they will reap what they sow. They have been doing so for years and we see what the harvests look like today. Now the fans could say that this wasn't made black and white, mixed messages, that communications were greyish at times and they'd be right but there comes a time when thinking people should get a idea of what is going-on. The problem now is that we're in so deep we're looking at relative misery at best. It'd be fair to say that we've failed pretty much at all levels and that there is no-one willing to dig 'extremely deep' to have the sp.ivs leave the building in the straightforward manner. Now you have a business/club that will divvy up money between the football club and 'others'.....and one that will lose it's training ground and eventually stadium along the way. One (TRFC), that will fade away if it continues in the same vien.
  11. buster.
    Aswell as the control over purse strings you talk about........ If the executive board manage to establish more 'control' and with it have enough supporting to pass the 75% mark then they can look to an EGM and then an equity fund-raising issue that would include giving the sp.ivs an opportunity to award themselves cut-price shares and push down the overal average paid between the current proposal and a post EGM (successful).
  12. buster.
    Taking King out of it for a moment, the UoF independently seek real engagement, answers and transparency from the executive board. It would seem something that is in the interests of the support in general and is the actual tangible matter in which the support can actually play a part. There is much more of an urgent and timely onus on the actual executive board to be transparent rather than someone who may or may not play a part in the future.
  13. buster.
    Martin Williams of The Herald and Bill McMurdo are examples of the above. Levels of corporate governance at Ibrox are in the gutter apart of course when it comes to not saying anything to the fans. Mr.Wallace brings us plastic intiatives regards communication & engagement whilst refusing to engage on anything meaningful. Mr.Wallace tells us everything is fine when there is a disconect with a large number of the support (revenue stream) and frantic meetings are held to try and agree on a stance that will present a stable image. Mr.Easdale, a convicted fraudster that some say is like a 'shadow director' of RIFC, tells us things are 'fragile', watches the share price tumble and buys a large block of shares before it recovers. (Note that the co-incidental doorstep interview used one of Irvines BBC conduits, Lamont who happened to have a cameraman with him) Mr.Toxic buzzes around like a fly around shite. A look at his client list of the past reveals a rogues gallery who prey on the vulnerable (an MO that Merlin (in his guise as preacher) isn't a stranger to). Restricting it to Rangers you have the remits coming from SDM, CW, CG&Co, Easdale&Co. Now you have the club/Easdale misleading the support about Irvine. When Irvine is involved, you can be sure no good will come to the club, as per his long involvement has helped facilitate the chain of events that have brought us to where we are today.
  14. buster.
    From the The Daily Mail, 20/8/2013........ "In a statement, Jack Irvine - spokesman for The Easdale family - said: 'Charles Green has given first refusal of his shares to Sandy Easdale as he promised. Sandy may take all or some of the shareholding depending on the strategic requirements of other potential investors.'" Full article at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2397944/Charles-Green-stand-Rangers-role-sell-shares.html
  15. buster.
    The board has it's priorities. 'Spin before you Scout'
  16. buster.
    Confuse, Divide and Control to order. This stems from those in and around the board.
  17. buster.
    Wishing for objective and quality reporting from the redtops is futile and anyone doing so should know they are wasting their time. Is it not a greater shame and importance that we can't believe a word that comes out of the Rangers boardroom ? And regards transparency, are the VB ready to expand on issues they discussed with the board a few weeks ago ?
  18. buster.
    It has been mentioned that Ally's 'wagecut' was or was probably a wage deferral. Forlan was central to this discussion and IIRC was of the opinion that deferral most likely. This could mean it getting increasingly difficult (financially) for the board to terminate Ally's contract. More if's and but's. However, if the footballing strategy mapped out in the business review is to be seriously implemented, I can't reconcile it with Ally and his staff staying.
  19. buster.
    Finance isn't Jackson's bag but I read the article and as a layman don't see anything that makes me think he refers to anything other than the 43.4M shares as per business review. Especially given that he doesn't mention anything about the need to call an EGM and that he states the offer will be made to existing shareholders. The question is what do they plan to do with the money. Is Ally safe ?...he's certainly insulated himself regards a pay-off, it'd probably cost 7 figures, including wage deferrals.
  20. buster.
    Frankie, I'm no financial expert but it looks to me as the 8M headline refers to the 43.4M shares, as per solution to ST shortfall in the business review. Perhaps Forlan or Bluedell could tell us. The sp.iv process of taking advantage of a distressed company was always going to have different stages, people involved and MO's. As for theories going forward, look for the way that makes the sp.ivs the most money and could be termed as doable, all things considered.
  21. buster.
    It'll be in the interests of the mysterious shareholders, friends and associates to keep the show rolling as they will be earning from 'onerous contracts' and the like. However if they want to do that they will have to reduce the costbase or you keep throwing money down a blackhole and the same solvency problem keeps returning. To reduce the costbase you need to spend money paying people off or settling contracts. Now if the sp.ivs are forced to look at settling 'onerous contracts' of their own, friends or associates then I wonder if a fair portion of the money that would come into the coffers and then go straight back to them ? If they reduce the costbase, they may call an EGM to try and enable them to carry out an equity fundraising share issue (different from the share issue to existing shareholders as per DR story/8M headline/ see below). Here they would probably dangle carrots. They can't have it all ways and this was always going to be the problem. ie. Rangers don't generate enough revenue to service 2 gravytrains and function as a club. The 'sp.iv process' will hope the fans will drift back and finance their ongoing, legal and slowburn robbery. Meanwhile the assets will be lined up and sooner or later, it'll be their turn to keep the show rolling. The corporate vultures continue the process of sucking what they can out of a distressed company. They don't have a happy ending. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Business Review (April 2014) Re. Share issues I think the 8M headline (DR) refers to the 43.4M shares in 3rd paragraph. Approx.........43.4M @ 18.5p = 8M
  22. buster.
    Bump for the Marshalls. Obvious gig for the poster WATP_Greg !!
  23. buster.
    Bump for the Marshalls. Obvious gig for the poster WATP_Greig !!
  24. buster.
    Aye, all mine are now in aswell. Is the prize anything to do with a couple of weeks in Bermuda ?
  25. buster.
    The Super Abundance Preacher receptive to cheques who happens to have a mini-PR consultancy aswell. Billy Bullshit could be an accurate moniker.
×
×
  • 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.