buster.
-
Posts
13,521 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
95
Everything posted by buster.
-
Listening to KB on the radio over the last few weeks I think he's made his mind up that he's going elsewhere. He seems to view the season at Kilmarnock as a stage to get get gametime, score goals and prove that he has it in him to move up a level. Good business for all,.....I think KB is happy with what he has done and that Kilmarnock have been delighted but will accept that Boyd has other plans. So what will his plans be ? Rangers are the obvious candidate or will he listen to other offers ? Would the signing of Boyd excite the support because I think you'll find a player or two being signed up soon in a bid to push ST sales.
-
Football clubs and those given relevant contracts generally take advantage of the emotional attachment of 'customers' and the quality / pricing / margin tends to illustrate this. The only way to change this dynamic is for supporters in good number to voice their complaints and remove their custom (eg. football strips) until matters are addressed.
-
Chief Operating Officer & Chief Commercial Officer positions advertised
buster. replied to rbr's topic in Rangers Chat
Various accountants are needed because of the monotony of the job. When money comes into the club there is a box, where they keep the football club's money and a wheelbarrow where they put the money for the board, their friends etc. So it's a matter of a pile of legal tender in front of the accountant and they have to divvy it up and place the money into the box and wheelbarrow. One for you, Two for us, One for you, Two for us, One for you, Two for us,....................... -
Chief Operating Officer & Chief Commercial Officer positions advertised
buster. replied to rbr's topic in Rangers Chat
I think that COO was the role that Wallace had at Man City. If GW wants to take up this role which I think his experince and performance as CEO to date points him towards, I'd happily step-up for the CEO role. The first thing would be to put together a contract that was very clear on the renumeration package as I think Wallace made his first 'mistake' before he even signed the contract and has been struggling ever since. -
The bookies have a get out clause within T&C for this type of thing although I'd say this is difficult to defend from their POV in the glare of a now very public case. What they will say is that it has been a 'mistake' but to me given the market and time they've taken to notice the 'mistake', it looks very much like a 'misjudgement' when pricing the particular market. Billy may yet get the full whack and what I believe he is due.
-
Yesterday's Q&A was an OG. A half hearted effort at doing something that they could label "engagement". You can tell this is GW's first gig as a CEO, he isn't comfortable or very good when 'in front of the lights', even when it's behind a twitter account selecting the questions to answer. He trips himself up and makes it easy to pick him up when he goes outwith the general corporatespeak that tells us, not a lot. This only reflects what he is trying to shield or front.
-
Good post Hildy (no.51) I'll try to come at it from another angle. There are two main layers of power at Ibrox. At the top you have the executive board and underneath them is the football operation. What we've had in recent years is what you might describe as a 'mutual survival pact' between two seperate gravytrains. Neither have been or are good for the club. Although the important difference between them is that the board have an agenda that gives priority to themselves and their backers whereby the football dept. is simply not very good at what they do. When I say "mutual", that hasn't always been accurate because there have been public spats, negative subliminal messages etc.....However at important junctures there has been 'back scratching'. Ally McCoist isn't a good football manager and in a normal enviroment he would have been sacked by now but 'club politics' have made it difficult for the board to do this and Ally has helped the board sell ST's and backed every chancer to walk through the doors. At the moment AMcC seems more reluctant to contribute in this way and we'll have to see how it develops. So we have had and have various incarnations of executive control (board), none of whom we can trust giving priority to the political rather than the football. Aslong as the money keeps rolling in they won't rock the boat. Recently we had a business review that pointed to scouting as being important (120 days to realise that/ act on it) but went out and signed a spin-doctor. Talk about the football, Act on the political................ It's their MO. We had Green talk about CL music, no (external) debt etc. but he was long gone with pockets full as the truth became clear. The tell-tale sign was that in the IPO prospectus there was no provisional spend allocated towards scouting, youth & development. We have Wallace talking about SPFL1 Championships in 3 years (without real credible detail on how that is to be achieved), he'll be long gone before we can hold him to account. It's a multi-layered gravytrain (board&Co and football) where many benefit disproportionally as they contribute to an 'Omnishambles'. The real losers are the football club and the supporters. We have a football club that isn't Fit for Purpose at any level
-
Re-arranged possible title decider of the u20 under way
buster. replied to der Berliner's topic in Rangers Chat
Fair enough ! But it comes back to being a league that doesn't tell the full story. It's about managing and developing your young players, not winning titles. -
Re-arranged possible title decider of the u20 under way
buster. replied to der Berliner's topic in Rangers Chat
Unfortunatly I think you are right but winning an u20 league doesn't necessarily mean your youth system is the best. Surely teams that have a fair number of u20 players playing in the first team are ahead in that particular department. eg. If Dundee Utd had been able to play their best XI with u20's you'd have had the likes of Soutar, Gauld and Robertson playing. -
What ? The figure that 4 independent experts came up with for what GW merits for his bonus. This was done after spending 120 days painstaking days trying to interpretate his contract then numbercrunching. ps, joke
-
There will be an attempt to use any new membership scheme to try and marginalise those other groups who don't tow the partyline and have become 'awkward'....(It will also look to control and manage communication with the fans). I don't know about headcount and numbers involved but if not too high, they may have considered writing them off, so to speak. Thinking a fair percentage would drift back but as individuals.
-
It's ironic that Mr.Hunt is talking about spin when we are simply reading what was said in the business review and comparing it to what was said today. If Mr.Wallace hadn't made the revisionist change in such an important part of the answer to one of the few probing questions then you wouldn't have needed to come on and tell us to stop nit-picking.
-
Why not just say what you alude to ? The business review refers to fans, unless they are now regarded by the club as 'non-fans'. In court on Tuesday, the QC who took instruction from Rangers said something that was perhaps revealing or perhaps not. Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont 6 de may. Mr Summers QC says Rangers wish Union of Fans would "go away to allow the club to move on". Today GW today said that fans were not blamed in the business review and revised the text to suit this line.
-
If you were working in some kind of advisory capacity in the material you'd have been given your P45 and not asked back for a similar gig. As it is, we are only messageboard posters but when one shouts so loud and often it is better to do so with a decent track record.
-
Aye right, forget the words............next it'll be the pounds
-
Well documented on FF. This is why I mentioned it in the first place. Nearly all those standing 'unconditionally' with the current board are the same who were shouting beside the likes of Green. Their credibility on such judgement calls is effected. Many did make the mistake and got carried along with the wave but you are someone who I would have thought savvy enough to see through the bluster, apparently not. It is relevant in that you might want to err on the side of caution or not be so generous with the benefit of the doubt.
-
No, he deliberately tried to mislead/revise. If that isn't the case, we have an idiot on 315K plus 100% bonus.
-
"in some quarters".............. is the phrase you want to examine. Put the shovel away BH
-
You didn't with Mr.Green either.
-
You can only polish a t**d for so long.
-
We've seen similar movies before, they end badly. No meaningful transparency Deliberate misleading Large Bonus percentages with no clear and justifiable triggers (even on contract) Lies Talk about scouting and appoint spin-doctors. Unrealistic targets with insufficient detail on how they will be attained (despite having 150 days to think of them) etc etc No, they're taking the p**h.
-
Firstly ask Graham why the word "media" wasn't specified in the actual business review but chose to use the term today and in so doing was inaccurate and revisionist. It was and is very clear who and whom are referred to with the phrase "in some quarters". If you choose not to see that, it says more about your position (built on sand) than anything else.
-
You could buy an 'Action Man', load it with corporate non-answers and ask the man on RTV to ask questions then pull the neck chord. You can tell it's his first gig as a CEO. Out of his depth but happy swimming in a pool of ten pound notes.
-
He cares about it 100% !!
-
Wallace just said "media" The business review didn't mention "media" Business Review The Board believes that one of the major factors influencing the merchant acquirer to change its terms was the extensive negative coverage of calls in some quarters for supporters to refrain or delay purchasing season tickets. GW in Q&A Just to be clear, fans were not blamed for the withdrawl of the credit card facility. The review said that negative comment in the media was a factor in the Club's credit card provider seeking security over Ibrox. He is playing on words and isn't even very good at it, nor does it have plausible deniability.