Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 That just blew the fuse on my Troll Alert System. Try reading your own post history sometime it's worth it for the unintended humour value alone. What part of... ....are you have trouble understanding? It effectively means Ashley is withholding £2.72 million of the Companies money. Ouch :laugh: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 That just blew the fuse on my Troll Alert System. Try reading your own post history sometime it's worth it for the unintended humour value alone. Help yourself to an explanation of the word-combination: internet-troll. I doubt you would it use that liberal afterwards. What part of... ....are you have trouble understanding? It effectively means Ashley is withholding £2.72 million of the Companies money. Thanks for that info, I was not aware of that. I guess you can name better investors then? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Where do you get that from? Not from my reply. The "irony" here actually is that people wanted to bomb the board out for one reason or another, trying the not buying STs route this summer for starters. That this would harm the operation of the business (more than the "leeches" draining the club dry) was apparently secondary. The board said that it might have dire consequences and now that this has come to pass, what we and those boycot'ers stare at is a possible finance problem. Projected by the board, wanted by those who boycot'ed. 1+1=2 Suffer will the club. What I do not expect is that it will have the same dire effects as 2012, as far more parties are involved than one chairman and majority shareholder (without money). And neither of those want the club go bust and their investment to vanish. Doomsayers ... well, I take it you go back as far as Murray, Whyte and Co. here. No-one had any greater info back then, nor does many have now. Coming around now after watching your predictions come to pass is nice (as hindsight always is), but you sure have higher standards than that. What I maintain saying is that various things can happen from now on, so simply projecting all-impending doom is not exactly realistic. As for Ashley, he'd not be my first choice, but perhaps you can name someone or some company willing to invest instead? By the looks of it, he's the only one out there instantly able to help ... if he is inclined to do so. Are you not aware of how extremely difficult it is to push football fans to a point where they will give up long-held season tickets or to stop attending completely? Those running the club (into the ground) are to blame for everything that has unfolded, not the disenchanted support. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,186 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 The UoF will be the ones who will be labelled as toxic if/when such a plan is to be carried out. The PR machine will hit top speed. Pre-emptive counter-measures are advisable. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 The UoF will be the ones who will be labelled as toxic if/when such a plan is to be carried out. The PR machine will hit top speed. Indeed. The usual sources will attempt all sorts of smears and ignore the true nature of our situation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 Isn't that more like "maintaining the going concern status", rather than dire consequences? Not that the former is much better than the latter. In any case, the boycot did not help the financial footing of the club and I still deem it a bit rich that those boycotting slag the current board for not doing enough or not looking for investment - which obviously no-one can verify. Last year we needed £1.5m in loans with 36,000 sales This year we'd still need to pay these loans plus request the same again even if we'd achieved 36,000 AND we'd still have nothing left for proper investment. The board are completely responsible for investment and ticket sales. Stop blaming others for their poor performance. Wake up! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,186 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 That just blew the fuse on my Troll Alert System. Try reading your own post history sometime it's worth it for the unintended humour value alone. . I've come to almost look forward to DB's posts for some light relief. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Are you not aware of how extremely difficult it is to push football fans to a point where they will give up long-held season tickets or to stop attending completely? Those running the club (into the ground) are to blame for everything that has unfolded, not the disenchanted support. Dunno, but I said it before: do not interpret what you assume that I might be thinking. Whether people like it or not, the boycotting support is now part of the financial problems of the club. I'm not blaming it for any of the boards shortcomings as such whatsoever. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Help yourself to an explanation of the word-combination: internet-troll. I doubt you would it use that liberal afterwards. Thanks for that info, I was not aware of that. I guess you can name better investors then? How about George Soros? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 I've come to almost look forward to DB's posts for some light relief. That, BTW, is trolling. And, as I see, those who blame the board have apparently no answers either. Which curbs any constructive debate. @ frankie ... see post 58 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.