Mountain Bear

Irrespective of the precise numbers of regular contributors, the RST were pretty successful at increasing their shareholding in the past 18months.

They've generated funds and share transfers in a variety of ways, so they may feel that simply quoting a number for regular contributors would understate their overall potential.

They may have 6,250 members which is probably 5/6 times what they had in 2010/11 but I don't think they have anyhting like that number paying monthly into Buy Rangers.

You're probably correct BH, but I quoted that figure in response to Boabie's assertion that there had been a fall in the RST's membership, when in fact it has grown significantly.

Totally agree with that and it would look like the police never found anything linking them yet.

He invested £1m, which GreenCo managed to find creative ways of extracting from the Club and in return secured an unprecedentedly generous retail contract with a rolling 7-year notice period.

Whether it was criminal, or just a breach of a Directors' fiduciary duty, time will tell.

Obviously I am not going to take an opposite position to yourself PLG's. You are in the perfect position to know about membership numbers. One thing I will say though, of the dozen or so close friends who joined along me with me I am the only one still standing.

Their website says 6250 members. That's roughly 3 times the pre Administration level.

Obviously, if you're collecting subs from members of the public, your systems and processes have to be able to cope with routine requests like SBS', so his experience is very disappointing. However, we should never lose sight of the outstanding work the RST did to galvanise the wider support and help force regime change.

IMHO, if any Rangers related organisation deserves a bit of patience and understanding, it's the Trust.

I've just read some frothing at the mouth political stuff on the Herald by someone called Michael Settle, and now this 'report' with random debts and 'tainted titles'.

 

What happened to our city's newspaper? I doubt anyone expects more than a horoscope and Cliff Hanley (showing my age now) from the Evening Times, and I don't remember the Eveneing Citizen, but the Herald used to be better than this.

Sad but true.

Between the Metro & the BBC news website stealing its readership, fragmented media channels diluting its advertising revenues and the ever reducing numbers (and quality) of journalists, it looks like that once fine newspaper is in terminal decline.

BH,

I've PM'd you tonight.

Apologies for being hard to reach over the past few days. Cheers.

I intend to come along.

Agree with what you're saying but if/when CG is found guilty I think there will undoubtedly be an appeal so getting the SD contract(s) declared void may take some considerable time.

Meanwhile we're stuck with a situation which is of little use to either party. What I can't understand is why PUMA don't try to intervene.I'd have thought it would be in their interests to get all parties round the table & re-negotiate these contracts to the satisfaction of everyone. If they're really interested in selling Rangers merchandise that is.....

Probably not worth the potential grief for Puma, especially if they annoy Ashley in the process.

yes but the Sports Direct boycott would have meant it was 26% of not very much

Question is whether fans start to buy merchandise in numbers once again. Given that the underlying deal seems to be weighted so heavily in Ashley's favour, I doubt it.

Our best hope of a quick and satisfactory resolution is probably that Green is found guilty in his criminal trial and the Club is subsequently able to use the evidence from that case to show that he breached his fiduciary duties as a Director by not acting in the best interests of the Club.

Frankie may not want us to speculate on the nature of any such potential breach, given the ongoing criminal case, but if you follow the money relating to Ashley's investment in the Club, it's pretty obvious what he got in return and who benefited.

If that connection can be proven, then we can ask a court to declare the contract void.

That wonder goal concerns me somewhat in all honesty. A showboat trick like that has the potential to go very wrong. It should be a simple, easy finish. No need to go for the spectacular in that fashion.

I don't see that as showboating, the pass was slightly behind where it should ideally have been received, so he hit it with his trailing foot.

Just using good balance and technique in my opinion.

Thanks for the dinner speaker recruitment update BH.

Shame about the CEO not being able to make it, as he's an impressive speaker and comes across as a very decent guy. I'm sure with your contacts, you'll come up with another top name!

Personally, I'd love the opportunity to hear from one of the high profile new appointments the club have made recently, to learn about what they found when they arrived and their plans for their area of expertise.

I can make either

Likewise, either date is OK by me.

Probably too late, but it's a yes for me.

Isn't it great that we're picking up the best young talent in Scotland again. Back to the future...

If we are to pay for his legal fee's then we should pick his legal representatives preferably someone totally shite.

I'll do it pro bono.

Prophetic post Germinal, we were bullied last night, St Johnstone's physicality and experience were too much for us.

Bullied was exactly the description I used last night. I'm sure that didn't escape Warburton's attention either, which is probably why he wants Eustace.

Best wishes for a speedy recovery BH.

Hope you get the only result that's important and your Mum recovers Zappa.

It isn't the Scottish football authorities taking a stand on it..... it is the UK Anti-Doping Agency that meted out a 2 year ban to the lad.

 

You clearly didn't read the article that I posted whereby the lad is adamant that his drinks were spiked. In what civilized society would you be considered to be breaking the law when you unwittingly, due to the stupidity of someone else, took drugs. McMillan is adamant he had no idea his drinks were being spiked and the guy who did it has been charged.

I read the article after replying to your previous post.

The appeal judgment is on the UKAD website. They basically didn't believe his mate.

I just read his version of events online http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3233831/Sacked-Partick-Thistle-defender-Jordan-McMillan-banned-football-two-years-testing-positive-cocaine.html and, if accurate, I think he is pretty harshly done by here.

 

I understand Strict Liability but given his version of events what could he possibly have done ? He even goes on to say that the guy who spiked his drink admitted to it and is subject to charges by the Police.

 

If, and only if, his version of events is accurate then I feel sorry for the lad.

I agree with you on that. If...

Losing his job isn't repercussion enough ? So lets force him to lose his livelihood for two years too ? He may have lost his livelihood anyway (clubs would see him as tarnished goods).

 

I was certain I read the other week about someone in the English game who had tested positive for cocaine and the FA were taking no further action - wish I could find the article again because it looks like double standards if so.

 

He is clearly a very silly young man. But is he an addict ? Was it having an adverse effect on his performance ? I have absolutely NO IDEA about cocaine and its impact as drugs just isn't my thing (other than a few beers...)

There are plenty of professions where breaking the law would not only lose you your job, but bar you from practicing / performing it elsewhere.

Each case should be judged on its merits, but I'm happy that the Scottish football authorities seem to be taking a stand on this.

If the FA take a different view in exactly the same circumstances, it's not double standards, just a lack of standards on their part.

I'm not sure but that's a terrible slur on a knight of the realm...

 

I'm not suggesting he shouldn't be punished, just that 2 years seems excessive. He already lost his job (Thistle sacked him) I'd have thought a 6 month ban with a further year suspended to be applied should he fall foul again is more appropriate. This is assuming he's not some sort of addict, in which case some sort of assistance might have been more beneficial.

I wouldn't argue with that John.

He may have been made an example of which would be tough on him personally. I believe it's a big problem in football these days though.

What's the relevance of that ?

No serious athlete can perform at the peak of their ability whilst using cocaine.

They're selling supporters short, setting a poor example to those who idolise them and failing to show respect to the Clubs that employ them.

By all means try and help them, but it's quite right IMO that they should face serious repercussions.

Am I the only one who thinks a two year ban is a little harsh? It's not performance enhancing after all, at least not his football performance.

I wonder if his off-field behaviour was the reason behind his release, at the time I was baffled why we didn't retain him, he left us to join a club two leagues higher.

How many lines of coke do you think Sir Chris Hoy took when he was preparing for the Olympics?

I don't want go all SNP on you brahim . But it might be worth letting us vote again unless you're adding our revised pledges

The Gersnet dinner is something I'm happy to participate in more than once in a generation...

Would be good to see some of our many newer contributors make it along too.