The Blue Order - For avoidance of doubt

[stewarty 2,025]

Although it may not be easy to tell, I'd imagine TBO numbers will naturally drop a bit.

 

One outcome that we might get if ST renewals are as low as rumoured, the Board will need to call upon existing investors for an interim share issue (as approved at the AGM), before they can go ahead with the larger share issue in the autumn. We would see whether or not the club's current investors are happy to back the current regime given what has happened since the AGM.

[buster. 5,183]

There's a large chunk of the support who think that the proposed actions will just have no impact. I wouldn't say that they fall into any of your three categories but I guess some may categorise them as naïve but that would be an arrogant attitude, shown by those who think that they know better than others.

 

I don't know if by "proposed actions" you mean 1872 Ltd. but I was looking at it from the angle of the supporter who doesn't think he can trust those that have executive control or the main shareholders behind them. Then deciding not to pay his money up-front but rather make game-by-game decisions, based on criteria that he sees fit.

 

A 'mind-set' that seems to be pushed is along the lines of "you'll make no difference".

Alone he or she wouldn't make a substantial difference but add up thousands of like-minded individuals and they would have the potential to make a material impact.

 

This brings me back to the longterm "Confuse & Divide" campaign that was sown and is nutured by those who want to best control the 'Blue Pound'.

 

 

I would agree that there is a degree of arrogance in my previous post but it is borne of closely watching ongoing events in and around Ibrox in recent years, very much including how the spin-doctors have pushed to develop mind-sets within the support, confuse & divide and it's effects over time. Without blowing trumpets, it is relevant to say I called both CW and CG&Co out as they walked in the door.

[forlanssister 3,114]

All this is doing is splitting an already divided support even further , and as BD says if your still going on a game by game basis the crowds will still be the same and they will still get the money the same , the only difference is that the original investors will have strengthened their position by getting more shares via the 43 million that the board can presently sell

 

Some investors may well come out stronger (which may not be as bad as it sounds) however even if they did go ahead with a rights issue for the 43m shares all that would achieve is a few more months grace before the excrement would once again collide with a rotating cooling device.

[buster. 5,183]

Some investors may well come out stronger (which may not be as bad as it sounds) however even if they did go ahead with a rights issue for the 43m shares all that would achieve is a few more months grace before the excrement would once again collide with a rotating cooling device.

 

Or they could hope to implement austerity to the nth degree (apart from boardroom renumerations, any 100% bonus and spin dept.).

 

The ongoing forseeable future ?

Expect/hope for 40,000 to pay and watch a Stuart McCall type in charge of a provincial budget, in an 'ambitious effort' to finish second.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Or they could hope to implement austerity to the nth degree (apart from boardroom renumerations, any 100% bonus and spin dept.).

 

The ongoing forseeable future ?

Expect/hope for 40,000 to pay and watch a Stuart McCall type in charge of a provincial budget, in an 'ambitious effort' to finish second.

 

I remain to be convinced that they can actually achieve the level of cuts necessary without harming the income stream that particular ship sailed some time ago.

[buster. 5,183]

I remain to be convinced that they can actually achieve the level of cuts necessary without harming the income stream that particular ship sailed some time ago.

 

I'd agree with that but I'd like to hear their pitch to institutional investors.

There were apparently some interesting exchanges in the court case on Tuesday which I might touch on later.

 

Do you think that the contingent liability may be getting in their way ?

[forlanssister 3,114]

 

Do you think that the contingent liability may be getting in their way ?

 

It's bound to have an effect irrespective of how spurious the claim is.

[buster. 5,183]

It's bound to have an effect irrespective of how spurious the claim is.

 

I referred more specifically to what may be termed an 'endgame' or similar involving the transfer or sale of assets.

[forlanssister 3,114]

I referred more specifically to what may be termed an 'endgame' or similar involving the transfer or sale of assets.

 

The Letter Before Claim has tremendous nuisance value whatever their 'endgame' is if it does indeed involve a transfer or sale of assets then it causes an impediment for all but the brave or foolish.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

would the letter before claim go away in an admin event?