bossy

I think we will just have to wait and see what happens.

We don't know his personal financial situation or his appetite for investment. It is all speculation. He may choose to buy shares or he may not. In other companies, 'insiders' regularly buy and sell shares. It is often a good indication of how they view the future of the business. So, rather than making speculative statements of 'he will' or 'he will not', I suggest that we wait and see.

If Green thinks he can pick up shares at 70p and that they will be worth 150p in two years then that would represent a good investment no matter what he paid for his other shares.

The problem, of course, is that politics and sport do mix ... whether we like it or not. Celtic have understood this and have manipulated it to our detriment. The whole 'anti-sectarianism' drive of the last 10 years have been anti-Rangers. It had very little to do with sectarianism and even less to do with bigotry. It had everything to do with an attack on many of those values that Ranger's supporters have in common. So we do need to become a lot more politically savvy and, dare I say it, politically active when it comes to defending ourselves. But we also need to remember that the Rangers support is a broad church and not a uniquely protestant one. We are protestants and atheists and muslims and even catholics. We are labour, tory and nationalist. And we are unionists and nationalists, republicans and royalists. We are much more representative of the 'average' Scot than any other club. We need to learn to capitalise on this.

'World Class' is a term that gets bandied around far too easily. There are very few players that, in my opinion, can rise to that level and I don't think Hately was one of them. I'm not even sure that a Gascoigne or a Laudrup would rise to that standard. There is a difference between 'very good' and 'world class'.

I would be more impressed if he was buying Ranger's shares.

I would have thought that, by now, the realisation that Charles Green is one tough cookie and absolutely capable of following through on his promises/threats would have sunk in at the SFA and also at their hangers-on.

To me, Lafferty comes across as being a thick and very self-centred bassa rather than a panto villain

True. I often proxy my vote in the context of my other shareholdings (see proxyvote dot com). But, you are still limited to the AGM as a voting forum. Also, you are limited to voting on a few very specific issues. In general terms, your vote is a drop in the ocean compared to the institutional votes. It is also true that individual shareholders could give their proxy to the RST. But, if they do that then they have no mechanism to ensure that the RST will represent their interests. The only way to do that is to be part of the RST.

A bit of a sweeping statement there: "all anyone wants". Perhaps you know everyone? Also, I would be interested to know how your voting rights are being taken away. Additionally, if you are a direct shareholder in Rangers then how do you get to vote on club business other than at the AGM? As it happens, I think it would be a good idea for the RST to develop innovative way to engage its membership. But it isn't very fair to hold them to a standard that others are not held to and then criticise them for not meeting that standard.

Very strange piece. To summarise: 1. The RST are hugely influential. 2. The RST and the RFFF are the same thing and the RST are to blame for RFFF cheques bouncing. 3. The RST were giving the Scottish press a hard time but now they are in cahoots with them. 4. A £500 investment in the club will get you just one share 5. The RST will control just 700 votes (is that 700 times £500? And how do they know how much investment money has gone into the RST?) 6. All lawyers are bassas because one of them was involved with Craig Whyte

Fair point. Would be interested in comments from shoredbear or others who are close to this.

As I understand it, the primary aim of the Buy Rangers scheme is to allow small shareholders to pool their resources in order to control a significant block of shares through Buy Rangers. The reason you might want to do that is to build a large enough block of shares that you can have significant influence at Board level and even a seat on the board. It is worth remembering in the context of the above that, under David Murray, we were 10,000 small shareholders with zero influence. Clearly, if all you want is a certificate on the wall then Buy Rangers is not for you. There are two other reasons why Bears might invest via Buy Rangers. The first is if they cannot afford the £500 minimum to purchase shares directly. The threshold is much lower in the Buy Rangers scheme. The second is for US based Bears who cannot take part in the IPO. My understanding is that there is no such obstacle through Buy Rangers. In my opinion, we have been crying out for some form of small shareholders organisation so that, at least, our voice is heard. I appreciate that there are some who do not like the RST or certain individuals in the RST. But the fact remains that the RST is the only organisation to have come up with a way of representing small shareholders. It is easy to throw rocks but much harder to come up with a credible alternative solution.

Perhaps you can enlarge on this allegation.

Seeing as how 'newco' has been held responsible for the debts and punishments of 'oldco' then why should 'newco' not benefit from the assets and contracts of 'oldco'. Like you say it is complicated. But sauce for the goose and sauce for the gander and all that.

A good article but I disagree with the conclusion. It is not up to Rangers to make moves towards reconciliation. That responsibility resides with the SFA and the SPL. Certainly peace needs to break out in Sottish football. End the title stripping tribunal, lift the illegal transfer embargo and restitute the monies stolen from us and then we can have a conversation about reconciliation.

It is a good article as usual but I think that Chris is overly mild in his conditions for 'moving on'. Dropping the title stripping tribunal is certainly one demand. But, in addition to that, we want the illegal transfer embargo lifted and the monies that were stolen from us restituted. Personally, I'm not bothered about the apologies. They would be meaningless anyway.

Just to add to my post on page 1. The latest viewing figures show that 291,000 viewed Rangers v Elgin more than the combined totals of a Hibs v Hearts, Edinburgh cup derby (124,000) and the Hearts v Celtic SPL game (129,000) that was shown in that week. In fact, the SPL average is 69,952 over the first 21 games compared to 180,524 a year ago. By way of comparison, the Rangers average for those games that were televised is 153,000. If the SPL/SFA are in any doubt about the economic importance of Rangers to Scottish football, the above figures will make sobering reading. Time, I think, that the SPL/SFA swallow their pride and make some serious concessions.

First let me say that I agree with your article. Now, let me try to take the discussion a step further. At some point, peace needs to break out in Scottish football. Whether the SFA, SPL, various media figures or others like it or not, Rangers remain one of the key economic motors of Scottish football. Not only have our home gates and season ticket sales held up but we are providing a very real revenue boost to clubs in the third division. Our economic importance is highlighted by the way the SPL and SFA felt the need to blackmail us over TV rights in order to secure an acceptable deal for the SPL. The recent stushie over the Dundee United match, the almost unanimous call from Rangers supporter's organisations for a boycott and the decision of the club to back the support has sent a message to Scottish football that there is a unity of purpose between the Ranger's support and the club. The club's refusal to concede our share of the gate receipts to Dundee United was also a very clear message. Does Scottish football really believe that Charles Green will not follow through on his refusal to sign a future TV deal? Time is not on the side of the SPL. The recent PwC report made their financial weakness clear to all. And that was before Rangers were consigned to the third division. It isn't going to get any better. Hearts are lurching from one financial crisis to another, Aberdeen just had to do a debt for equity swap and, if Celtic's gates are anything to go by, season ticket sales may be down significantly next year. Meanwhile, Rangers are financially healthy, we have a young and affordable squad, season ticket sales have held up and we are about to recapitalise through an IPO. From a financial perspective, Rangers do not need league reconstruction and we have the luxury of time to get things right both on and off the field. The rest of Scottish football and especially the SPL do not have the same luxury. Scottish football have every interest in declaring an end to hostilities. That realisation is beginning to seep through to the Scottish media hence the recent article by Davie Provan and, of course, Jim Traynor has highlighted it multiple times. The recent silence of the SFA plus their refusal to support Dundee United on the gate receipts issue suggests that they may also be moving away from confrontation. But peace needs to be accompanied by concessions and these are usually made by the weaker party. Thee is no doubt that the SPL is now in the weaker position. Rangers simply don't need them and that puts us in what is commonly known as the 'eff you' situation. Economically, the SPL is suffering and trying to paper over the cracks through league reconstruction is going to fail unless Rangers are part of it. They need us more than we need them. Other than a loss of face, there is very little cost to the SPL/SFA in making a few concessions. Lifting a transfer embargo which the Court of Session has already deemed to be illegal would be an easy step. So would putting an end to the SPL tribunal especially after the FTT result. The only really contentious area would be restitution of monies due to Rangers and retained by the SFA/SPL. But I am sure that could be handled through negotiation. The only real question is how long the culture of hate and vindictiveness is going to permeate the SPL and SFA and how much collateral damage will be done to Scottish football before ugly financial reality forces their hand.

"Rangers will need to get over the fact Craig Whyte ruined the club, not Dundee United." This is clearly the new 'party line' in the Scottish mhedia. English was also pushing it. But, of course, it completely misses the point. We all know that between them, David Murray and Craig Whyte were responsible for Rangers going into administration and, subsequently, liquidation. What we blame the SFA, SPL and a number of SPL clubs for is their deliberate attempt to further damage us by an illegal transfer embargo, by the continuing attempt to steal our titles and by the theft of money that was due to the club. Instead of trying to help a member club that was in trouble, they tried to damage us even further and to ensure that we could not be competitive for many years. For that, we will not forget and we will not forgive. If, indeed, Keevins wants us to "get back to the football instead of thinking up new ways to sabotage it" then he needs to be telling the SFA/SPL to: 1. End the SPL attempt to steal our titles 2. Lift the illegal transfer embargo 3. Restitute the monies stolen from us. If they do that, we will still not forget or forgive but we might be willing to be a bit nicer.

Quite apart from the fact that both the SPL and SFL reconstruction plans will not work ...... I have this vision of a light suddenly being switched on in Provan's head with the realisation that Scottish football - and especially the SPL - needs Rangers, is fecked without us and that we will exact our vengeance on the bassas.

It doesn't matter how English and his ilk tries to argue, to rationalise, to explain. We will never forget or forgive the hatred, the bile and the vindictiveness that came our way from the rest of the SPL, the SFA and plenty of others. We now have a sense of unity, a sense that the club is on our side and a willingness to carry the fight to our enemies. But we are also reasonable people ........ End the SPL attempt to take our titles. Lift the illegal transfer embargo. Restitute the money stolen from us by the SPL/SFA. We won't forget or forgive. But we might be willing to be a bit nicer.

I have never been a big fan of Traynor. But there is no doubt that he is very capable. Lets hope he is with the program and can be part of the fightback.

I intend to invest. I will read the prospectus over the weekend and then decide how much.

These guys are professional footballers. So I understand that they need to put their careers before club loyalties. But I still don't like the way they walked out on us when we needed them the most. So I'm not going around slagging them but they don't deserve the red-carpet treatment either.