Bluedell

Ian Hart been offered Chairmanship?

This is been going on for years though. It's nothing to do with us being on our way back. The VBs were organising protests back in 2008, for example.

So it's dignified to be wearing something for a sum of cash when you could be wearing something almost identical for a lot more cash? I wouldn't say it's anything to do with dignity, just bad business.

So you think Adidas is the best deal without knowing any of the details of any deal? What would your decision be if Macron was offering us £3m and Adidas £1m with the potential of say turning it into £1.5m? Would you still go for Adidas?

Don't think you should take Leggat's ramblings so seriously.

I fail to see why having 3 colours on your tracksuit collar is an expression of political opinion and I doubt UEFA will go for that. Yes, they also fly the tricolour and although it can be looked upon as distasteful, again I'm not sure that it falls under political expression and it would be easy enough for them to defend. Was the saltire on our strips political and support independence? of course not. It's a reasonable effort by Leggat but it's fairly easy to defend.

Were points like that put to him during the interview?

Will Amo be speaking at it?

If it was an existing contract and he was tupe'ed across then perhaps there's not much we could do about it?

If it was an existing contract and he was tupe'ed across then perhaps there's not much we could do about it?

Yeah, shit. All these Rangers hating journalists look the same to me.,..

They are biased and because he is, and his articles come across that way, it prevents him from being a good journalist. His programme about Whyte was crap for that very reason. However much of the stuff he said about Whtye turnned out to be true, and this could well be as well.

The texts haven't been denied as such. They must have been from Whyte. It seems strange that he would be giving Thomson this information. The timing is also interesting. Early Jan, Traynor is looking for a job, which he obviously doesn't get. Late Jan he breaks the Ticketus story which was what led to our administration. Hmmm.

To play Whyte?

It was always an option but it's difficult to go into administration if you have a good few million from the CL sitting in the bank. Why go into administration if you qualify for the CL group stages and win the BTC? He may well have ended up with funding issues further down the line but a successful team could have resulted in us trading out of it. If administration was something he was definitely going to do then he could have done it a lot earlier than he did.

I didn't have any problems with it last night....

There was an assumption that we would qualify for the CL and therefore we would have been easily able to honour the contract, so to say that the club had no intention of honouring it is incorrect. Whyte could still be here if we had qualified for the group stages last season.

The market for our shares is probably fairly illiquid and therefore it's perhaps not a surprise that a seller has to take a price below the mid-market price.

Although I'd argue that Murray paid a fair amount for Edmiston House so not asset stripping per se, but it would still have been better if we'd kept it.

I get feck all for mine.

Sure, but given it's a publicly quoted company there will also be some requirement to charge the correct amount, even if it's to a sub. They could get away with it if they really wanted but everything we know about Green suggests he probably won't take that approach.

Not on something like this unfortunately. Perhaps someone like ShoreRd Bear may be able to get quick answers or shed some light on it?

I wouldn't say that I qualify as a Green basher. I've hardly mentioned him on the thread other than to suggest there's a possibility he misspoke. It's not an issue really to do with Green as such. You may be totally relaxed with it but it doesn't mean that it's not a concern to others. Not everything boils down to pro- or anti- Green.

May well do that, although I think I've promised to go and see my daughter in a show that night so may not be able to.

Same tax group so doesn't have any tax impact. Celtic's situation is slightly different. They have their "old" company from the 1890s owning the stadium. They just have another (newco) company playing the games. Their reasons for stripping out the club related to debt, I believe, and as we are not going to have any debt then what does it matter? It could be something to do with financial fair play, I guess, but I'm still unhappy that we don't own the stadium. However, I should again say that I have my doubts as to what has been reported is correct. It could be that Green under the pressure of an audience got it wrong.