forlanssister 3,114 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Just so I'm clear on this - the accounts include money from Sports Direct, that we haven't actually received and which we have no control over when it will actually be paid to us? It appears that is the case. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Am I way off the mark in beginning to sniff a merchandise boycott? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 It appears that is the case. Presumably the rules regarding audits allow this, but morally it is wrong 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 so in reality our loss is £8 million, + the non recurring costs they were on about, however much they are? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thickas 0 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The market appears more than happy with the published interim figures, surely the only opinion place that counts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The market appears more than happy with the published interim figures, surely the only opinion place that counts.[/quote The market was happy with RBS, BoS and Enron ...remind me how they worked out. If the economic collapse of the past few years has taught us anything, it is that the market and reality are usually poles apart. Didn't you get banned the last time you were here? Pretty sure I recognise the posting style. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The market appears more than happy with the published interim figures, surely the only opinion place that counts. Hi Mr Easdale 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The board are inherently responsible for commercial income etc. Surely you can accept that? Yep. Now you tell me who out there was willing to do better deals with us in that area. I assume no-one on here has the answer to that (for obvious reason, but likewise does anyone actually expect that the board just sat there and let it all happen while doing nothing? At the end of the day, these chaps want their investement (no matter how large or little) increased, not diminished. You say that it was highly unlikely that the income would increase. Why? Why would a year's further trading not give the board more opportunity to increase income? Why should it not at least stay the same as it was in the previous year? It's 6 months of trading and you are correct. I tried to make reason why there was no increase, rather than do the simply stuff and blame the board no matter what. As I intimated above, sometimes you get the feeling that for some* the world rotates about Rangers and anything that does not look good is always our fault (be it board, club, or manager). That's not how it works. *And that is just a general remark not aimed at you. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Seems fairly encouraging, a key point being that season ticket boycotts/withholding is a no go if you don't want us in trouble again 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Hi Mr Easdale We're not yet FF and long may it continue, don't you think? 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.