Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

Yeah, while it may be useful to know how many joined the UoF fund, the most important number here is the lack of renewals.

 

Club would be unsustainable on such incredibly low numbers.

 

... if the club needs the money up front and not via a "instalment"-like pay at the gate rate. Somesuch would be possible if we had any sort of monetary fall-back option, which isn't the case just now.

 

If the UoF and the board get to an agreement here, it might very well sway quite a few more people to renew or buy a ST, despite there is no de facto change in the club's leadership (which this whole "enterprise" could not have hoped to achieve anyway ... and possibly never intended to).

Link to post
Share on other sites

In light of McMurdo's latest offering where he's trying to throw Wallace under the proverbial Greenock bus, one does wonder if this possible split is more pronounced than we think.

 

Haven't yet read it but as you know McMurdo is the mouthpiece for the Easdales and more to the point, the proxies behind Easdale.

 

His blog can be a good indication of what is simmering as he is fed info/spin from the sp.ivs to relay to the wider support with a particular spin.

 

 

edit.

Just read it and yes the man in the middle (GW) must be moving away from the Easdale/Blue Pitch line.

 

It may be because Wallace thinks it too toxic, having too many ties/links to the age of 'onerous contracts'.

Edited by buster.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong I hate the football side as much as anyone, and I think Wallace needs to make serious steps to improve it. But I know i'd hate it more if we didn't get the required result next season, being in the lower leagues was meant to be a temporary thing after being put there for non-footballing reasons against our will, failure to get back to the top league in the first attempt would be a disaster for our image if anything.

 

The point is we can't go into a new season like this, so unless King bites the bullet and buys a significant shareholding then I think people have to take a step back.

 

The whole situation with Dave King needs to be brought to a conclusion one way or the other.

He has to buy some sort of shareholding if he's serious about gaining control(which does mean paying existing shareholders) & a new shares issue has to offer first refusal to existing shareholders meaning he's perhaps not likely to get control by that way.

If he's not prepared to buy shares/invest then he really should just walk away as he'll cause longterm damage to the club

Link to post
Share on other sites

In light of McMurdo's latest offering where he's trying to throw Wallace under the proverbial Greenock bus, one does wonder if this possible split is more pronounced than we think.

 

We saw what happened to Mather when he began to think he actually was the CEO of Rangers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We saw what happened to Mather when he began to think he actually was the CEO of Rangers.

 

The over-riding message is that as heavily suspected, the root of our problem (post administration) is still there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt that those who think that by renewing they are helping Rangers are doing so genuinely, and there's no doubt that those who think that not renewing are equally genuine.

 

Suggesting 'the other side' needs to take a closer look or remember the football is a daft, personalising distraction which can't be proved online anyway & is therefore a total waste of time, other than to try to score a hit or something equally childish.

 

Going back to some earlier posts about walk-up numbers being reasonable next season due to the calibre of the opposition, I haven't missed Hearts, Hibs or anyone else since we got the heave and the prospect of seeing them again next season fills me with no anticipation whatsoever. It's not as if we've moved to the conference and could face some decent sides playing decent football. It's just back to the same old crap teams I was bored rigid with antebellum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Sandy Easdale has and is being put forward/marketed/spun as the medium-term custodian.

At least this is the continual message that shines through from actions and propaganda.

 

What is vital to bear in mind here is the continuation from the overtly and now indisputably toxic times at Ibrox to the latest incarnation of the board.

 

 

This would suggest that at least some of the Easdale proxies want to stick around and perhaps even continue to benefit from 'onerous contracts' amongst other things.

 

That's wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's wrong.

 

You are entitled to your opinion and you may or may not be right,..... or indeed somewhere in between.

 

If you can be so categoric then I'm sure you'll be able to expand and tell us what is 'right'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • 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.