Darthter

Kayal's comments made me smile..... This is the same team that their own manager was getting ripped into only a few weeks ago. Now, all of a sudden, they are world beaters!!! Could be an interesting match tonight!!!

I think this line REALLY takes the biscuit!!!!

Windae panned in while he was @ Inverness and his pregnant girlfriend was in the house at the time. http://news.stv.tv/scotland/east-central/281023-celtic-footballer-anthony-stokes-has-window-smashed/

First & foremost, I think it's terrible what happened to Anthony Stokes' house.... However, after looking at the piccie of his hoose in the Record, it appears that the house is called "Windsor Lodge"....anyone else find it amusing that Mr Stokes in residing in a Lodge????

It's a step nearer the premiership....

heard that before.....that is until they put a deal worth double the wages and loads of extras in front of him....

He could just sign for Hearts & save a lot of hassle.....

Some great stats there....and something that McCoist & Rangers in general should be proud of!!! Just waiting on the "...but it's a Mickey Mouse league" etc comments....

We're getting them from Hearts.....total cost £50k + Lee McCulloch

so....possibly none of the above then!!! I find it amazing that a normal punter can put together a well written piece of journalism which isn't sensationalist, sticks 100% to the intended story and provides evidence to back up any points made.....yet the vast number of "professional" journalist are unable to do this.

According to the SPL boss....a penalty of 10 points, and only 10 point would be incurred. There is no precedent of any further punishment and the SFL has different procedures & rules surrounding Administration. Neil Doncaster repeated this several times during the week while taking part in the Real Radio Football Forum. That doesn't mean that Liewell won't TRY to pursue further points punishment.

"The Orange Arena"....has quite a nice ring to it!!! Probably get done for being Sectarian though..

I believe the current Tennents deal is worth about £1.5m per year. The big question would be....how much extra would Tennents or JJB be willing to pay for the extra exposure??? £3-5m???

I wouldn't be too sure. Rangers have a huge following world wide. They also get pretty decent exposure on the telly, and normally within Europe. Granted, I don't think we would get equal amounts with the EPL, but I believe they could command a decent amount - certainly not pennies!!!

Newcastle are hoping for £8-10m per year for a combined stadium & shirt deal. Man City signed a deal worth £400m over 10 years. So it could be fairly profitable.....

Don't think the fans would have a say. It would be who ever wants to sponsor the ground ie. We'll give you £100m per year and your Stadium will become the La Senza Sexy Underware Stadium (for example)

Changing Stadium names due to sponsorship is all over the news at the moment due to Newcastle renaming St James Park to the Sports Direct Stadium. What are folks thoughts on this happening with Ibrox??? Obviously this could prove to be VERY financially beneficial to the club if the correct sponsorship could be found.

According to Transfermarkt.co.uk (here) Season 2008/2009: Total Spent: £20m Total Sold: £11.7m Difference: £-9m Season 2009/2010: Total Spent: £0.44m Total Sold: £3.3m Difference: £2.87m Season 2010/2011: Total Spent: £6.4m Total Sold: £4.8m Difference: £-1.6m Season 2011/2012: Total Spent: £3m Total Sold: £1.7m Difference: £-1.3 Note: the total spend for 2011/12 doesn't include a figure for Matt McKay.

I think that is a valid point......however, the bank was in control of the situation ie. making sure that it got its money possibly to the detriment of the team at times. I think the banks demands etc certainly kept the club functioning in order for a buyer to be found. I think if they weren't so heavily involved the club would have been in a completely different situation.

IF it had been McGregor, I think the media attention would have increased 10-fold, and the pressure for "positive" action ie. Sack him, would be massive. Grant Adam is an unknown - mostly known to the masses as Charlie's brother, yet he still made front page news......imagine the full page spreads there would have been if it was Greegs???? Remember the coverage Boozegate got in the press!!!! Rangers need to make the "right" decision once a verdict is passed - this is not necessarily the best decision for the team, but in the eyes of the wider public.

I think it is VERY difficult to judge. The guy stepped up to the plate when no-one else did. He's also taken over at a VERY difficult time for the club financially. Its true he has made mistakes & errors of judgement so far - and he's admitted it. He's taken steps against the media for issues he deems unfair against the club. He's enabled investment in the playing squad either through contract renewals/extensions of new players. He's tackling the tax case head on. He appears to be prudent with his cash ie. not blindly paying a bill from the previous regime without asking questions about it. Same goes for players, he's not willing to pay over the odds. He's talking to the fans. IMHO, all positives. He's very secretive about his wealth - that's his business & no-one elses. Also the other companies he's involved in have not connection to Rangers, so why discuss/disclose info about them. His remit is to do the best for RANGERS. His 1st major challenge is the tax case - I'm sure if we come out of it unscathed, a lot of peoples opinions of Mr Whyte will change. I am also sure that once the tax issue is resolved (one way or another) we will see some very positive stuff coming out of Ibrox. Given what we know from the previous regime....would you trust them to handle the tax case efficiently???

from a logical business point of view, it makes little sense to put a company out of business. Say Rangers lose the case to the tune of £49m....how much of that £49m will HMRC ACTUALLY get??? However, if HMRC were to cut a deal @ say £10m over say 5 years, that money is guaranteed, as is the ongoing tax income generated from the club since it is still trading etc. It would be a win-win situation all round. I get the impression with the EBT amnesty that HMRC fear that if they lose the case against the Gers, they would be stuffed with all the other cases, therefore they are giving companies the opportunity to voluntarily pay up before the ruling. If a company doesn't pay now, and HMRC win the case, they will be targeting EVERY company that has used the EBT.

What about all the info released/discussed previously then???

Definitely.....however, On the good side of the river, we should continue to do the RIGHT thing as you've said, regardless of what everyone else is doing or their views. When/if the house of cards comes crashing down in the winds of change, at least we will be able to hold our heads high in the knowledge that we have done everything we can to ensure that the good fight is fought!!!!

The spotlight is continually on the club to be seen to be doing something about sectarianism, by not taking the hard-line, we will be criticised for it & accused of brushing it under the carpet - regardless of what has gone on in the past or else where. I feel it is more about building examples within the club so that when external bodies question the clubs commitment about dealing with sectarianism, clear & defined evidence can be produced. It is not fair that the club should have to do this, but that is the state of things at the moment.