Mountain Bear
-
Posts
1,321 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Mountain Bear
-
Unlike Ulrika, he asked for that... -
Never could have predicted that, doh! He's not the sharpest tool in the box is he?
-
Stan Collymore on Twitter mocking McCoist for "walking away". Blocked me for asking if he was still jealous, given Ulrika was with Ally when he beat her to a pulp. Touchy guy. [emoji56]
-
He has many faults, but he's not stupid.
-
The RST took up their rights in the recent capital raising exercise and are likely to do so again in future, so there's a strong argument that the Club DID get hard cash from the sale of the Red and Black tops.
-
Apologies if I've missed it elsewhere in the thread, but would you mind telling us why?
-
They told me they'd show me a real five-way agreement...
-
Just want to echo the previous comments about the quality of the food, company and organisation. I want to formally table a motion that BH retains the accrued interest in the bank account, to partly offset the expense of the clipboard he purchased for the occasion. [emoji6] I also propose that any future guest speakers are provided with insurance cover at our expense, in light of Hastie's "near miss" with Dave Smith. Finally, I propose we do this again, as it even made sitting through the game seem worthwhile. Thanks again to BH / Dave Smith / my fellow Gersnetters and guests for a great evening. Cheers.
-
I'd love to see Buy Rangers selling more tops to our fans than Mike Ashley.
-
Aw Jack, is that really the best you've got?
-
I'm might wear my Rangers First red and black top then, just to see if anyone will refuse a lift! [emoji9]
-
I'll make my own way there. I'll probably have my car, so I can also help with lifts if necessary. PM me BH if I'm required.
-
Union Bears stop their boycott and Champion Rangers First.
Mountain Bear replied to Siam69's topic in Rangers Chat
I understand RangersFirst have already explored the option of high net worth fan(s) fronting up the money and being repaid from future RF income. MA only owns 10%. It's not at all clear that he will be allowed to purchase more. The other institutional investors, especially the hedge funds, are unlikely to see us as a long term hold and some of them have already cut their losses. Others may not wish to take up their rights in the next share issue. Not nearly as far fetched an objective as you seem to think. -
Union Bears stop their boycott and Champion Rangers First.
Mountain Bear replied to Siam69's topic in Rangers Chat
We need to hold just 25% of the share capital to wield real influence and protect the assets of the Club. At the moment that's approx £4.2m. In reality, we might need as much as double that with a share issue coming. I defy anyone to tell me that the collective Rangers support can't achieve that with the help of some wealthy fans to underwrite us, or indeed that it would be a bad idea. If we don't care enough or back our ability to use that influence for the long term benefit of the club, then we'll get the owners we deserve and they'll have unfettered control. Just be very clear that they care not one iota for Rangers' long term interests. Do you really want that? It's a no-brainer. -
Time for Somers to earn some of his money for a change. Might need a little back up from Ashley to persuade a reputable NOMAD to touch us, but the quality of the firm we get should tell us more about our future prospects than any amount of Board waffle and spin.
-
Sounds good to me.
-
Union Bears stop their boycott and Champion Rangers First.
Mountain Bear replied to Siam69's topic in Rangers Chat
RF collect the money from subscribers and then choose the right time to purchase the shares for maximum value. Presumably the large share issue that the Board have acknowledged needs to happen soon is their key focus. That offers the potential to achieve real influence quickly if everyone gets behind them or BuyRangers. Of course there are risks, but I don't know anyone who expects to get their money back or make a return on their investment. The stark choice is that we do this, in big numbers, or: We can wait for another sugar daddy to try and do it for us... ...or sit wringing our hands, accepting the status quo... ...or walk away... You choose. -
If there's a "exactly the same as last time" option BH that would do me just fine! But since you asked my request would be for: Mejillones a la Marinera and /or the home made Spanish black pudding. Increasingly looking like this will be the highlight of the season!!! Cheers.
-
I don't disagree re many of the points you make above, just that it's not a case of him being completely black / white, good / bad. As for the redevelopment of CP, that was a pure volume play: pack the seats in and do it as cheaply as possible. Celtic have got a lot right recently, but not everything they do is high quality by any means.
-
I think that's an overly harsh assessment. He's certainly culpable in many respects, but deserves at least some credit for underwriting the failed share issue and the legacy of facilities the Club has. He also had ambition for our Club. Few would say that about our recent owners...
-
I criticise him heavily for the scale of risk he accepted re EBTs, but slightly less so for the levels of debt. He got unlucky with the economic crash and we suffered the consequences. Having a wealth entrepreneur as your majority shareholder has pros and cons. One of the big cons is that they tend to be more comfortable living with risk and so when things go wrong, they go wrong in a big way.
-
They would if they were a subsidiary of a Group which owed hundreds of £m and operated heavily in commercial property and steel fabrication during the worst recession in living memory...
-
Very possibly.
-
They may well have noticed Zappa, but what would you expect them to do then? HMRC knew anyway; they couldn't tell the press or the SFA and they clearly already wanted RFC to re-bank.
-
Much closer scrutiny of management accounts where there's a borrowing facility.