trublusince1982

would it not be the option of a second year at x amount is available if the club want it, as in first refusal ? not necessarily automatic?

Quite a few inventors must have been insane then ... how many attempts did Edison and Co. require to build the first usable incandescent light bulb again?

 

But thanks for the comparison.

If they did the same thing over and over again they would have never got to a usable version. They adapted each time to take in previous mistakes/problems. Its called learning!

http://mistrollingin.wordpress.com/2011/05/30/nottingham-forest-reflections-part-2-%E2%80%93-billy-davies/

 

http://seatpitch.co.uk/2011/06/13/why-billy-davies-had-to-go/

feel the same about Billy Davis to tell you the truth.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ally-mccoist-rangers-board-must-4847930

 

If you were in any doubt that McCoist isnt deluded then his latest outburst should set you straight. This is from a man who with a 20 million pound wage bill and a remit to take us up through the leagues wilst building a team to compete at the top level of scottish football.

 

I have to ask a couple of questions here :

 

Why are there 12 players out of contract in the first place? and which ones would you actually keep ally?

Darren Mcgregor should be signed up and all the rest notified that their contracts will not be renewed as ally says.

Last season on 1st of October, 13 players trained at Rangers (at least three years between 15 and 21 years old) were playing in top division clubs in Europe(does not include English Championship or any league outwith countries premier division). Last year that was the most of any Scottish side by far. Not seen this years numbers.

Supposedly Ally's £150k expenses have been leaked by the board. If it's true, which no doubt it is, that just sums up everything that is wrong with us. Not just the sum but the fact the board of our club are once again acting so unprofessionally.

leaked to who?

The theory that points to his interest in Rangers being because of SD expansion into Europe doesn't stand-up.

 

yeah i agree, but that needs to be put in a form that leaves the majority of Ger's fans certain with no room for spin, counter argument or speculation that the likes of Irvine and his cronies can use to muddy the waters. Those figures show that without leaving any room for sway. Its now unarguable fact he doesn't need Rangers to be successful to make a return that is larger than the one he gets from Newcastle.

I think you'll find that Ashely extracts much more value than that under the banner of 'missing' connercial revenue.

Yeah understand that just puts to bed the "we need to be a success" motto for him to make money. If as it says he already makes more through retail with us than with Newcastle. Also shows who will must likely sell the most merchandise abroad were his interests seem to be.

Sommers must be asked to explain his comments saying the merchandise deal makes quite a lot of money for Rangers. How does this statement stand against historical returns? When and how much did we receive that constitutes quite a lot? How does this return justify giving away of an £18m contract for zilch?(i know that wasn't him but he justifies the deal) How does that compute as a good partnership? Why lie to the public/fans? How can trust be garnered when he makes such nonsense statements? Then he should be taken to task on such a nonsense public statement misinforming shareholders and fans alike then asked to resign since he knows nothing of what he speaks or what is good for the club. For a chairman to be so far off the mark is unforgivable.

SD make more from Rangers than they do Newcastle?

 

Newcastle’s retail arm, which has been taken over by Sports Direct is worth £3.4m of business the company. That’s £3.4m off Newcastle’s turnover, including whatever profit it brings.

 

Rangers retail business, now in the hands of Sports Direct, is worth £3.8m in turnover.

 

edit add quote

The answer to that is evident from the club we now support. We are not ourselves, we are something else - something tawdry, cheap, undignified, incompetent, shady, corrupt and a laughing stock. Whatever we are, we are either not The Rangers or virtually not The Rangers. Everyone seems to be striving to eliminate the "virtually" from that sentence.

Don't know if you can call behaviour a part as such. The entity exists as it always has with all its facets in place. The only change is in its leadership which is always a interchanging part. They have changed the way we run and the way we behave. Remove them and we can revert back. Sell off the likes of Ibrox and rent Hampden and we cannot revert back and we have changed as an entity in my opinion.

We don't want to lose either, but if the worst happened, the club would still exist - if we wanted it to.

 

Rangers is not Ibrox and it is not Auchenhowie either. We have moved several times in the past and we may have to do so again in the future.

 

It's not desirable but strangers are running the show and we let them in.

 

Rangers can most definitely exist without Ibrox although I agree it would be very hard to take. Sometimes families have to move house even when they didn't plan on moving.

 

Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

If we are not the sum of all our parts what are we?

hes not interested in owning us he is interested in controlling us.

we will be nothing but a parody of Rangers football club. next on the block Rangers tv.

Good appointment. This will strengthen Ashley's influence and we know that we need to be successful for Ashley to make money.

successful like dunlop.

The way the ducks are being lined up you'd be forgiven for thinking they're gearing up for administration, this time round with all long term staff already paid off for the legal minimum there will be no one to TUPE over.

 

Pre-pack anyone?

only hope is that we are both very cynical people!

 

in all honesty only two options left in my opinion. neither very appetizing or appealing and both take immenses sacrifice from fans.

Why will the forces of good win because of administration? do you really think those in charge are that stupid they have not thought of every scenario? Out played at every maneuver so far no reason whatsoever to think that will change with the introduction of admin again. They have clearly shown they will get their preferred people into position at every turn. Nothing more than a 50/50 gamble with extremely high stakes.

Can't agree,........They could handle red cards but have an aversion to blue seats.

agree ,but doesnt fit with their actions. they seem to do everything possible to turn fans away.Why?

 

even a fool would do a couple of things that courted agreement

starting to think going to games in big numbers would piss them off more than not going

afraid i did!

 

it will be winging its way to you now

just got an email offering me the semi final t shirt!

 

their trying to piss us off

go on yerself hen!

Where did you get the 7 year thing from guys because it doesn't appear in any of the official statements or MSM commentary that I've seen?

was told by people in the club back at the time that 7 years was the believed duration but details were hard to come by even for staff in positions that should be in the know.

 

As FS said could have changed between then and now.

not sure but was told 7 years.