buster. 5,257 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 The ISDX Corporate Adviser is our new equivalent of an AIM Nominated Adviser, so either I'm missing something or I'm struggling to understand what all the fuss is about here. Zappa, I'm not an authority on such matters but I have a similar understanding as your goodself ! Forgive my sarcastic humour (obviously not very good ) aimed at our ex-nomads and Daniel Stewarts in particular. It's just that I find it somewhat ironic that some make so much noise about the lack of a NOMAD as if it had served us in the past as some great protection from sp!vs and the allegedly fraudulent. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Zappa, I'm not an authority on such matters but I have a similar understanding as your goodself ! Forgive my sarcastic humour (obviously not very good ) aimed at our ex-nomads and Daniel Stewarts in particular. It's just that I find it somewhat ironic that some make so much noise about the lack of a NOMAD as if it had served us in the past as some great protection from sp!vs and the allegedly fraudulent. Yes, I got your NOMAD related sarcasm and liked it too. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Zappa, I'm not an authority on such matters but I have a similar understanding as your goodself ! Forgive my sarcastic humour (obviously not very good ) aimed at our ex-nomads and Daniel Stewarts in particular. It's just that I find it somewhat ironic that some make so much noise about the lack of a NOMAD as if it had served us in the past as some great protection from sp!vs and the allegedly fraudulent. I would class the Nomad aspect as incidental Buster, the main factor is ensuring that assurances given to the fans are delivered, or alternatively assurances given are tempered with what is realistically achievable. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,257 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) I would class the Nomad aspect as incidental Buster' date=' the main factor is ensuring that assurances given to the fans are delivered, or alternatively assurances given are tempered with what is realistically achievable.[/quote'] If you class the NOMAD aspect as incidental and understand that "there may well be bona fide reasons why the promised Nomad is still not in place" which may or may not have something to do with legacy issues 'that were found in a desk drawer' post 6/3/15 then why ask for the club to spend money in January as some kind of vigilance test ? The board has mentioned the possibility of strengthening the squad in January with an eye on the following season. This doesn't necessarily mean throwing X amount of money at it. I'd have thought in part, some carefully scouted Bosmans might be a prudent option...........At the end of the day what is important is the relationship between the footballing management and the supporting executive, thus far it apears to be fine and we need no 'false tests'/deadlines to cause unrest. If financial challenges above and beyond the forseeable do eventually take hold, we will see them in good time and should judge circumstances/timelines when details come to light. Edited October 7, 2015 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 If you class the NOMAD aspect as incidental and understand that "there may well be bona fide reasons why the promised Nomad is still not in place" which may or may not have something to do with legacy issues 'that were found in a desk drawer' post 6/3/15 then why ask for the club to spend money in January as some kind of vigilance test ? The board has mentioned the possibility of strengthening the squad in January with an eye on the following season. This doesn't necessarily mean throwing X amount of money at it. I'd have thought in part, some carefully scouted Bosmans might be a prudent option...........At the end of the day what is important is the relationship between the footballing management and the supporting executive, thus far it apears to be fine and we need no 'false tests'/deadlines to cause unrest. If financial challenges above and beyond the forseeable do eventually take hold, we will see them in good time and should judge circumstances/timelines when details come to light. Its not a vigilance test - its asking for the assurances which were given to be delivered upon. And the reasons for that is that King himself said if we are to be challenging Celtic or competing in Europe, rebuilding the club, we were talking of it costing in the region of £30 million. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,257 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Its not a vigilance test - its asking for the assurances which were given to be delivered upon. And the reasons for that is that King himself said if we are to be challenging Celtic or competing in Europe' date=' rebuilding the club, we were talking of it costing in the region of £30 million.[/quote'] Forgive me for meddling but would it not have been simpler to say that in such a clear and concise manner back in your OP ? The way you have worded your OP and gone round various houses could make one think all kinds of things. I personally think it obvious that the board are running Rangers with at least one hand tied behind their collective back (for a number of reasons) and that Dave King can of occasion put forward an ideal scenario that may be subject to ongoing change because of circumstance(s). In this hypothetical case, I can understand if anyone says that they want to know the worst case scenario/full detail but you must also look at it from the POV of the directors, keeping the momentum going, playing politics with eg. MASH (of which we wouldn't know the detail), can't disclose everything, etc. Coming back to the money required to rebuild the club. I think instead of focusing on some once quoted figure, it's more important to see the bricks being put in place one by one. King talked of being competitive with Celtic next season when I personaly think that Paul Murray was being more realistic with timescales he had previously talked of. I'd add that what Dave King recently talked about regards 'oldco' may put another important factor into play with unknown timescales. Patience and Realism are required. We won't win the top tier next season, get used to it but enjoy the constructive and entertaining build that may result in something solid and even relatively wonderful. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Forgive me for meddling but would it not have been simpler to say that in such a clear and concise manner back in your OP ?The way you have worded your OP and gone round various houses could make one think all kinds of things. I personally think it obvious that the board are running Rangers with at least one hand tied behind their collective back (for a number of reasons) and that Dave King can of occasion put forward an ideal scenario that may be subject to ongoing change because of circumstance(s). In this hypothetical case, I can understand if anyone says that they want to know the worst case scenario/full detail but you must also look at it from the POV of the directors, keeping the momentum going, playing politics with eg. MASH (of which we wouldn't know the detail), can't disclose everything, etc. Coming back to the money required to rebuild the club. I think instead of focusing on some once quoted figure, it's more important to see the bricks being put in place one by one. King talked of being competitive with Celtic next season when I personaly think that Paul Murray was being more realistic with timescales he had previously talked of. I'd add that what Dave King recently talked about regards 'oldco' may put another important factor into play with unknown timescales. Patience and Realism are required. We won't win the top tier next season, get used to it but enjoy the constructive and entertaining build that may result in something solid and even relatively wonderful. There is a reason for going round the houses you refer to which will become evident if you are on twitter - the constant references to the selling of MP and Admin 2, thankfully in a mocking manner by most bears. These are emanating courtesy of an individual who formerly posted on a blog which some maintain were in receipt of payment to undermine the current regime from a PR company. With the demise of the RSL he has now flown the coop and branched out on his own. Its perhaps no co-incidence that many of the claims he is making are similar to another who was alleged to be on the Mediahouse payroll, and who most certainly is no friend of our club. One could be forgiven for thinking they were singing from the same hymn sheet - what is crystal clear is the motive is shared. Hence why i considered it worthy of mention. I think to date, with the exception of the Chris Graham situation & resignation, the board to date have done an excellent job. But I would like to see consistency of statment and vision - something you touched on in your last post in reference to King/Murray timescales - I would also like to see them deliver on statments or assurances they make, and this latter request is covered by consistency also. How can we hold one board to account for faiure to deliver on committments but not another ? I have to admit I was taken aback by King's comments re Oldco - and would acknowledge the point you make regarding timescales if this is pursued. I dont think Im alone in struggling to understand why King feels this necessary - perhaps you have a view on this. In reality, for me, its not about the money King promised or the Nomad - they are both incidental in as much as the real benchmark for me is having a board who keep their committments and promises to fans. I think that inspires confidence and trust and usurps those whose intent is malicious towards our club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 I didn't like the 'oldco' comments King came out with a couple of weeks ago...all talk no action comes to mind, I also don't like the 'we will challenge for the title' comments either, especially when we are no where near deciding where we are right now on the park (St Johnstone dispatched with us with ease). One thing I liked was their choice of manager, that has been the one massive thing I've been happy about regards our board. A magic hat like no other. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,257 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 I think to date' date=' with the exception of the Chris Graham situation & resignation, the board to date have done an excellent job.[/b'] But I would like to see consistency of statment and vision - something you touched on in your last post in reference to King/Murray timescales - I would also like to see them deliver on statments or assurances they make, and this latter request is covered by consistency also. How can we hold one board to account for faiure to deliver on committments but not another ? Time for bed and I'll answer more fully tomorrow but how can you begin to compare boards in the question you pose, when their (underlying) motives were/are so obviously different ? That isn't even thinking about the 46,000K average home attendence, 100% league record and entertaining football. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Comparing the current board to the past lot is like comparing a good sirloin steak to pot noodle. Nothing wrong with questioning the steak? 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.