Mountain Bear

This game will be won or lost in the minds of the players, as much as by tactics or formations.

Happy with the starting line-up. Temps and Shiels need to turn up after several below par performances and its a big day for Faure in particular in defence. I think 2:1 to the Gers.

Thanks Plgsarmy. The EBITDA & operating profit numbers for 2013 are the important ones and don't look too bad to me (they give the underlying trading performance -and show a managable couple of million shortfall in 2013). Most of the rest of the forecast losses are exceptional, non-recurring items. As long as the cash position is healthy, and I'm sure it will be, CG won't mind posting a big accounting loss in year one. He can always offset future year profits against it for Corporation tax purposes. Btw, if the source is genuine, then don't expect a £10m signing war chest, as there's zero net expenditure on transfer fees forecast in '14 and '15. Also, overall operating costs only go up by a couple of million over the same period, suggesting that player wages aren't going to increase that much even if we're after out of contract players only.

I'm more relieved than disappointed by that prognosis. No need to rush back Lewis - we'll be looking forward to seeing you again in the team when you're good and ready.

If the ruling is delivered quickly, then the WORST we'll receive will be the equivalent of a slap on the wrist. Anything else would be an affront to justice and would / should be faught until our collective last breath. My worry is that they defer judgement until after any future HMRC appeal of the Big Tax Case verdict, which would be purgatory. For me, the end of this Commission will mean that we can finally move on and focus properly on the future. Here's to swift justice...

Agree with you there GA.

We'll have to disagree on that one STB, the troops were running all over the pitch at half time. I've no problem with that on other days and in no way does it warrant the language used in the letter posted elsewhere in this thread, but it lacked the respectful dignity I expect from a Remembrance event. The card display and the artillery piece marking the minute's scilence were special, but not the rest of it.

Not this time. We should have a bit more class than was on display at half time that day.

Well said 26th of Foot. Rememberence Day should be a solemn occasion, not a disorganised mini version of the Edinburgh Tattoo. All done for the right reasons no doubt, but the half time on pitch "parade" didnt feel appropriate to me at the time, not did the pre kick off abseil. I don't really care who complained, but I'm not sure there was any need to make the response public. Should have simply changed it for next time.

Read the prospectus Zappa, £5.5m of the IPO cash was for stadium refurb, £4.5m on land purchases to increase revenues and a potential additional £3.5m for refurbs in future years. They may not be expanding capacity, but they have promised to spend the money on long-term revenue generating assets.

Gorgeous George; a pompous, philandering, sun bed worshiping, dictator fawning, opinionated, vacuous, self publicist. Respect? Don't make me laugh...

Take a bow Amms, Calscot, GA etc, for one of the best recent threads on Gersnet. I believe we have to find a balance between defending our own interests and the long-term health of the game in Scotland. We SHOULD care about why so many people were queuing up to kick us last summer. The "No one likes us, we don't care" attitude simply created conditions which allowed those with an anti Rangers agenda to get away with all sorts of injustices.

Nothing wrong with a bit of sabre rattling now and then. Hopefully we're cultivating the right long term relationships and influencing agendas in other, more subtle, ways too.

A fair challenge SB (and I wouldn't disagree with you in terms of the attractiveness of the scheme as an investment vehicle). At a market cap of £50m and an RST holding of only £250k, then it's only 0.5%. I wish it was more and that a greater percentage of the £5.5m from private individuals had gone to the club via the RST, but it's a start that I hope they can build on over time. The other way of looking at it of course, would be to ask how much influence would I have as an individual private investor with a holding of £500 (0.001%)?

Really DougieTBO? I read the prospectus and the RST terms and conditions very carefully. I understand the pitfalls and risks of both. I decided to donate (note not invest) some of my money because I like the principle of fan ownership and I want the support to have a voice which will be heard. Does that make me more of a fool than someone who makes sweeping statements denigrating fellow supporters?

£5m from non institutional investors suggests you're not exactly alone. Healthy skepticism and robust challenge is fine given what we've been through, but some contributions offer nothing constructive. I happen to think £50m is a pretty toppy valuation for the club at this time, so it's not a great investment opportunity, but I've seen enough to give Green the benefit of the doubt and a modest amount of my own money. Mind you, most of my cash was in bank shares in 2007!

A quiet word is probably all that's required, just to remind them of the SFL's official stance on the matter. The bottom line is that we're going to get this sort of petty dig from now on and if we make a huge fuss about it, we'll seem as paranoid as the lunatics who were writing to Trading Standards last week. We've got the SFA, SFL, the court appointed Administrators and now the European Club Association all backing our view, so until some organisation with credibility comes out with a statement to the contrary, all we're dealing with is small-minded wind-ups, self delusion and wishful thinking. Agree we should challenge the high profile misrepresentation though.

The holding company will be the ultimate parent company of the Group and will own 100% of RFCL. It's a total non issue (and I'm not involved in RST, other than having just invested via their scheme). As we should all know by now, there's a difference between the Club and the legal entity which conducts it's business and issues the shares. Whether the shares are issued by a holding co. or not makes no difference to me.

I was #923 on the RST site when I bought yesterday evening. I was surprised that I was such a low number, so it sounds like neither the Capita route, nor the RST are setting the heather on fire...

Likewise. An individual private invester has no voice as far as most Executive Boards are concerned. I'm not close enough to the internecine warfare that seems to characterise relations between the various Rangers supporters groups, but I liked what I read on the RST & Buyrangers sites and I'll be keeping an eye on who they elect and what they say on my behalf. They should at least have a voice that is heard by the Club. A couple of things do worry me a little though; around this time yesterday when I paid up, I was only #923. That's either a lot of people taking their time to work through the prospectus, or they are buying direct, or they're not buying at all. The other thing which worries me a bit (and this isn't a normal investment for me, as I'm not looking for return on capital), is that the Club is valued at c£50m post offer. I'm not sure that there's much upside on that valuation for a Scottish football club and it implies to me that the company will need to pay out at least £3m pa in dividends to keep the high yield fund investors happy. That's a lot of cash to find every year, so I hope Green & Co spend the IPO monies wisely, as it will need to generate incremental turnover. Should be an interesting journey!

The Orwell Prize for political writing: http://theorwellprize.co.uk/news/orwell-prize-2012-winners-announced/ Quite amusingly it's sponsored by The Media Standards Trust, who are a independent charity who promote "quality, transparency and accountability in news". Yes, I know, I laughed out loud too when I read that!

6719. As I was reading the petition, I couldn't help but reflect on the enormous amount of time many of our Celtic minded friends spent obsessing over the RTC blog. They must be feeling a little disappointed in their hero now I imagine. Maybe they'll demand he's stripped of his award....

In summary - Charles Green is pulling wool. ...or sending a message to those who would strip us of titles. Green knows that there will have to be a solution whereby Rangers play Celtic eventually, but he also knows that other people need us to find that solution too. I hope he plays that fact for all its worth and secures as many concessions for us as possible.

It's the 2nd weekend of the October school break where I live. Lots of families will be away for a short holiday I imagine.

Doesn't have to be that way. For example, if the sum raised was big enough, we could settle the outstanding debts of the Oldco's small creditors as a gesture of goodwill to the local firms who we let down in the past. The key for me is that a) any sum would have to be really significant and b) we should not spend a one-off source of income on day-to-day expenses. I'd only support renaming Ibrox if the proceeds were invested rather than consumed. So, things like the redevelopment of the surrounding area to generate a better environment and future on-going income for the club, stadium upgrades, or some form of long-term investment in the brand overseas. If you think less of me because of this, then so be it. I happen to share your views about monetising everything, just not in this case, under these circumstances.