26th of foot 5,931 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Do these shares not also hold a guarenteed redemption figure as well , ie they can never be sold for less than the buying price . I am sure that was one of the great selling points when the likes of Martin O'Squeal and Eddie Jordan were buying them In MON's penultimate season, I remember the Herald(the living, beating heartbeat of ra Sellik at the time) reporting he had several hundred thousand preferential shares and received a Dividend of �£200,000. Further, the season after he left, the Herald reported he was in receipt of �£80,000 as a Preferential Share Dividend despite selling most of his shares when he departed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 And sorry for hijacking Cal's thread... No problem, it's gratifying to get the good feedback and of course always worthwhile to discuss and praise the better writers than me on here, especially those that are far more regular and produce the best pre-match analysis on the net. I usually just start off with a quick point about something, start rambling, think of connected things and then realise I should re-organise it, and suddenly it looks a bit like an article. So for me they kind of happen by accident. - which is also why I don't do too many... So thanks for the feedback guys, and thanks to the other writers on here who put most so called "professionals" to shame. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,218 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 I usually just start off with a quick point about something, start rambling, think of connected things and then realise I should re-organise it, and suddenly it looks a bit like an article. So for me they kind of happen by accident. - which is also why I don't do too many... Probably the same method for me actually...! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 As is often the case I'm probably missing the big picture, but I have to commend you on the title. Second to coming up with a decent idea, one of the biggest problems I find is coming up with a decent title for it. I usually bottle that and let Frankie sort it out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 An excellent piece indeed. Well done, Calscot - must be nice for you get praise occassionally!! I know this makes sound like a dick - well, I am a dick I suppose - but 'hoards' should be either 'horde' or 'hordes'. You know, like Genghis Khan. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest southsidebear Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Apologies for hi-jacking the thread, but Shellik's crowd figures are the "official" ones released to the media. The real figures (that they release to the cops and safety people) are different. Their attendance the other night was 38,338 This has been the case on several occasions this season. I believe Rangers are actually attracting higher attendances than the hooped horrors. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 29, 2010 Author Share Posted January 29, 2010 Apologies for hi-jacking the thread, but Shellik's crowd figures are the "official" ones released to the media.The real figures (that they release to the cops and safety people) are different. Their attendance the other night was 38,338 This has been the case on several occasions this season. I believe Rangers are actually attracting higher attendances than the hooped horrors. I suspected this due to the round numbers they keep releasing while everyone else quotes to the last man. They started this a long time ago to cover up something like a 6,000 attendance and then got the press to claim Rangers had an 8,000 attendance when it was something like 12,000. The press came to their number by using a quick scan of the stadium and estimating... They could be in worse trouble than we thought. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 29, 2010 Author Share Posted January 29, 2010 As is often the case I'm probably missing the big picture, but I have to commend you on the title. Second to coming up with a decent idea, one of the biggest problems I find is coming up with a decent title for it. I usually bottle that and let Frankie sort it out. Yeah I'm not very good at that either and tend to come up with a Ronseal type heading... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,218 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Apologies for hi-jacking the thread, but Shellik's crowd figures are the "official" ones released to the media.The real figures (that they release to the cops and safety people) are different. Their attendance the other night was 38,338 This has been the case on several occasions this season. I believe Rangers are actually attracting higher attendances than the hooped horrors. Thanks for the clarification. If a list of the real figures were available for comparison's sake that would be most helpful. PM if preferred... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 29, 2010 Author Share Posted January 29, 2010 An excellent piece indeed. Well done, Calscot - must be nice for you get praise occassionally!! I know this makes sound like a dick - well, I am a dick I suppose - but 'hoards' should be either 'horde' or 'hordes'. You know, like Genghis Khan. Yeah, not a word I use often so my homophone (is that a pink iPhone with a Shirley Bassey ringtone?) sneaked through. Where's an editor when you need one... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.