Jump to content

 

 

buster.

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    14,226

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    111

 Content Type 

Everything posted by buster.

  1. buster.
    I would say that diverts us from the important issues surrounding yesterdays regulatory notice.
  2. buster.
    So you concede that the current board alongside Stockbridge, may have been deliberately misleading the support and the markets. You ask why Stockbridge would want to do the club (RIFC) any favours. 1. Because the club were complicit to a degree in how things were played and he benefited. 2. Because the contacts that helped finance the purchase of assets and have previously employed BS elsewhere (pre Rangers) are still involved (eg. Blue Pitch/Margarita) .... ie. a network of sp.ivs that he will want to keep in with and may still be benefitting from. It is useful to look into the background of 'players' involved, their tie-ins as it helps illustrate the CONTINUATION from June 2012 to the present boardroom (including major influences).
  3. buster.
    I doubt it was "incompetence". Not because I took as gospel the gushing praise he received from present board members but because he has a history of 'innocent mistakes' that suggest less than forthright honest behaviour. eg. The wording of resloution 9 / fans group meeting.
  4. buster.
    The "yellow press" !! Tabloids are tabloids and they will always headline accordingly, sometimes with good reason and others to sensationalise.............but do you think the last few years have been generally exaggerated or have the media in general failed to grasp the fullextent of the ongoing nightmare in a timely manner ? It's all very well you and Mr.Hemdani criticising the media but perhaps in part this is the easy route to forgetting your own serious fundamental misjudgements along the way. I'd say what the support might be better off doing is trying to learn from their own mistakes rather than flagging up the supposed 'baddies' of eg. The Daily Record,...who many told us (including the club) were 'not to be listened to'. note 30: could some kind soul who isn't ignored by DB quote this post so as he has the option to read it, thank's ! For the benifit of Mr.Hemdani........... This note (30) is part of the post.
  5. buster.
    Here is a reply about "any of that". When accounts are published are they signed off on the page where the numbers/balance sheet ends or at the end after the relevant information (notes) that are added after the actual financial statements ? Your post seems to stretch into 'damage limitation'. Funny how this statement to the LSE was made and the latest Stockbridge 'affair' came to light once ST renewals were collected.
  6. buster.
    Can't remember who it was exactly but it was obviously going to be a Green/Blue Pitch friendly appointment.
  7. buster.
    This was done around the sametime as the head maintainance man at Ibrox was sacked or paid off. What links them is that both had input into financial outgoings over and above their own salary. One was simply cut, the other needed someone who was 'onside' or/and 'complicit'.
  8. buster.
    Graham Wallace: Day 229 229 days = 7.63 months Scouts: No Spin: Yes Bonus: Yes -------------------------------------------------------------- ps. In a strange kind of way DB mirrors how the board operate. He puts forward his interpretation and then 'ignores' those he may find 'awkward'.
  9. buster.
    Who knows where we'll be in 12 months. Circles may be squared.
  10. buster.
    I think the spate of 1 year contracts may have something to do with what the club have in mind regards football strategy, or at least on the face of it.
  11. buster.
    Graham Wallace was keen to emphasis his football experience at Manchester City and the contacts he had in the UK and Europe. 228 days after his appointment, we still have no Chief Scout or network whilst GW has already passed the post (last week) for his first bonus. As for Ally, he says.................. “You can get a boy at 18, 19 and say: ‘Right, it looks like we are not going to play you for 18 months but we are going to develop you’......................he doesn't have a clue. Welcome to the Rangers Omnishambles where highly paid Bullshit and highly paid Incompetence flourish. Please roll-up and fund it..........
  12. buster.
    It's ironic that something called 'Vanguard' touches on tabloid journalism and it's effects on Rangers in the summer of 2014,.............. whilst perversly pushing 'Vigilance' and by implication, suggesting the board are deserving of trust. 'Vanguard Vigilance' might have been better employed somewhat earlier (years ago) and in opposite directions to that of which they were preaching at the time. 'Rearguard Inverse Vigilance' may be a more apt term.
  13. buster.
    Rangers First buying 70,000 shares at around 30p each, as Stockbridge gets over 714,000 shares at 1p each is a good illustration of a 'loaded game'.
  14. buster.
    IF my auntie had baws.................. Represents the case that can be made in favour of AMcC as a football manager. Forget what's gone before and hope for the best but with no particular solid reason to do so.
  15. buster.
    Loads of money is the answer. Thereafter: - buy-out sp.ivs - sort-out onerous contracts - address issues both infrastructural and football However we need to change old habits and get better value for money out of every pound spent. Easy, now someone (supporter) go out and win the Euro millions.
  16. buster.
    The divisions go back years and became apparent during the SDM years. Irvine developed and nutured them. He pushed 'mind-sets', confusion and division preparing the ground so as to make his job and his clients remit so much easier. He was also cleaning up Craig Whytes 'google history' as best he could in August 2009, the same month as SDM stood down from the board at Ibrox.........With Muir (bank) and McGill (MIM) to come in shortly after. Despite working for CW as far back as 2006, Irvine allowed his old mucker and client, SDM............ to be duped by Whyte
  17. buster.
    Regards the 'match-by-match' opposed to a ST recommendation, it's only a recommendation. The individual will make his own economic decisions. Personally I won't be spending any money on the club/company. Whilst I respect the individual's right to decide, my personal opinion is that to give the executive board money up front would be a mix of wilful stupidity, blind loyalty and misplaced hope.
  18. buster.
    People are free to disagree, I'd welcome their input. As you alude to, solutions are difficult to envisage at this stage. What the sp.ivs want is for the support to become 'battle-fatigued', expect to write off X amount of ST's and continue a diluted show on the road alongside plentiful downward expectation management, moonbeams and gradual decline as further value is extracted. Alternatively someone may buy them out but precedent suggests that the various parties have very different numbers in mind when it comes to negotiations. Bottomline is that sp.ivs are in control and sp.ivs get involved so that sp.ivs can make money. Sp.ivs are good at what they do and have us stiched up like a kipper, laying 'mines' that make defending their position easier. On the other hand, the efforts against the sp.ivs have generally been found wanting (with some honourable exceptions). I think it fair to say that they saw us a particularly juicy and relatively easy catch. The reasons behind the relative ease is a story in itself.
  19. buster.
    The situation is: - that money going into the club is still in part being sucked straight out via onerous contracts, bonus culture, etc. - that those in executive control both on the board and somewhere behind the board are part of an ongoing process that comes in stages and has an MO of extracting money, value and positioning the assets. - this particular stage looks to keep the show on the road so as onerous contracts are paid, other benefits can be extracted and assets positioned. - 227 days after Graham Wallace signed a contract with a 100% non-specific bonus clause (due last week) and as the club sign veterens with significant injury history, we don't have a scouting network/ head scout. - The levels of corporate goverence, the lack of transpareny, the misleading spin, the contradictory messages, the patronising and plastic efforts of 'engagement', the vanishing money etc.........all point to a slow boat, not to China but to Portsmouth or perhaps a train to Leeds or Coventry. When you spend a Blue Pound, it will be divided between sp.iv and club. When you consider back in the day, that a season in the CL group stages had us break-even or show a small profit, then you'll appreciate the level the club will have to operate at when there is No CL money and what money there is has to be essentially divvied up between sp.iv and club. This means our forseeable Top Tier glass ceiling is going to be second place and that we'll on average probably get to the final qualifying round of the Europa League (in August) before being papped out. Of course along the way, we'll lose ownership of the main assets, including Ibrox.
  20. buster.
    All players should have them tatooed down their right arm and play in short sleeves throughout the winter.
  21. buster.
    Yes, it is over-exposed (flash) which doen't do any favours for the collar.
  22. buster.
    First impression is........ The white collar and those white stripes aren't really the best.
  23. buster.
    Herein lys a problem. If you continually throw money at short-term problems so as to 'win' and you don't have enough coming in to cover it you build up financial bubbles. In an ideal world, we would hope for the following, which is not unreasonable...... Remember the amount of money that has come into the club since the siummer of 2012. - A board that were interested in the club and the long-term. - A football management team that were competent+. - A well-run club. We have none of the above, the money has not only gone but we have large internal debts built-up. We lurch from season to season with the same spinning bullshit, more money leaking through onerous contracts and a pre-historic team built for a season.
  24. buster.
    Maybe but I'm not sure. We are the support who have been most conditioned to accept the bullshit spun towards us. Or put another way, it has been 'designed' so as any 'message' coming from the support appears to be confused, mixed, unclear and 'managable'.
  25. buster.
    Ally McCoist and the Hans Christan Andersen tale, 'The Emperor's Birthday Suit' have a lot in common. Ally has been wearing one for years. The support desperately want to believe that they can see tangible cloth but as time goes by, more and more silently realise but don't really want to fully broach the issue.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.