fitbaliketheolddays
-
Posts
79 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by fitbaliketheolddays
-
BIG cheers the link
-
Pay for Sky or are we still boycotting them? You'll get CL
-
Are you being serious sir op? A Scottish game on the openining night of Champions League?
-
As disclosed fae before, I'm fae Fife and didn't touch pies in Kirkcalds - they're made from cow brain matter still left from 2004!!!!!! Good day it was Brahim
-
As I understand it - there is no real deal to the bars at Ibrox. We changed to someone we pay on delivery (i.e. upfront). That is how low Greenco have put us for new beer contract
-
Fook off - I want 30% of yer bovril or no deal - RAB has my back
-
About to bid 95% on pie n chips - coke 29%
-
Hey blue - the RST need to give an announcement about making themselves **** fools - wasting the fans' money @ 20p when their share scheme clearly states it's objective to be owning a significant voice. Rangers First used their members' money @ 20p to support the regime when it was clear to anyone it would fall below that and their members could have owned more today. That is even before we wish to talk not supporting the regime at all. I wonder if Rangers First will give an announcement of their decision.
-
LOL - read above RAB - I bet you a n Ibrox pie not!!! You are hilarious
-
db - I cope with my REAL woman from Duisburg's ignorance of "soccer" but sometimes lurking here, I see you as troll and winding. Last time at Ibrox you sat where?
-
I get you - I suspect I was asking was probably jibeing if we should be giving 20p at anytime to current regime - a view - but I respect your response too.
-
No - just as in other thread, I could not see any logic in RST's vehicle propping-up Greenco at a higher price than they needed to pay. EDIT: Own 9% when you want and Greenco can still play around !!!!! That is what I took from your points!
-
Explain again for the terminally sensible!
-
cdynamo1 - sorry if my answer sounded rude BTW - I'm just frustrated - I could see last week there was no point in a limited aspirations fans sub-group of the RST buying @ 20p if they vow to own a 'mentionable percentage'. AND - protecting what investment????? Greenco will go bust or not - one of the two, but not something they can ever change by propping them at the wrong price. Also, how did they protect members' subs last week? By buying at 20p when you can buy cheaper this week? Who on earth are their fund managers!!!!!!
-
Easily summarised sir - well done!
-
Waiting for the fully expected price drops/else the new issue - let us be clear - If BUY RANGERS had waited 4 days and bought today @ 19p they'd own more of Rangers than they will on Thursday (owning a %age is the avoud aim). You didn't need to be a New York Merchant to know it would happen this week. Why did they willfully of foolishly prop the regime @ 20p instead?
-
As a newbie - I assume that is your argument against the Buy Rangers set-up (foul-up) and hence why you believe RangersFirst is the more laudible aspiration?!
-
1. if there is so much unhappiness with the regime? 2. If the vow is to get as big a %age as possible to have a meaningful voice for Buy Rangers, then buying at 20p was never gonna be a good idea.........the market price was always gonna fall as a bigger pool of shares owned exactly the same business - they could have hoovered-up more at any subsequent release with the members' hard-invested. (can the protestors/boycotters/nae-sayers say why they ever thought the RST decision to do this was a good one?). I've asked before, but never had an answer I could believe - why invest in Greenco now instead of waiting with the funds?????
-
Haven't we employed many dB and wasn't Wally's first movement after the 129 day review to employ another? Not to fix things, employ more accountants and PR
-
I agree with this RAB - I know many bears who wouldn't touch an online forum with a shitty stick but would say 2nd admin is the end for them, seek o it. It is their way, still fans but wouldn't have the heart anymore.
-
Rangers Agree Settlement With Ahmad
fitbaliketheolddays replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
I don't buy into that I'm afraid - Chuckie, Stockbridge and Sandaza had less clear cut reasons to be sacked, but were - Black who is still there should have been sacked. -
Rangers Agree Settlement With Ahmad
fitbaliketheolddays replied to chilledbear's topic in Rangers Chat
Good question - we divvied up to Green n Stockbridge without a sweat - we divvied up to players without a sweat. Cheerio Sandaza, here's another year's worth in yer hipper. Fighting Ahmad 3 times then giving him a pay-off at the end makes no sense unless you are a QC needing that holiday villa in Mauritius! -
Leaks would be sorely frowned upon by the Exchange - do you want us in more trouble????? Watch some old movies about the stock exchange to see what happens to insider trading - start with "Wall Street" starring Michael Douglas Thanks for wanting us delisted by your impatience
-
I think you are naiive - not before the market closes @16.00 FGS
-
Correct itis - even minus 25 we could make the playoffs - be loud and proud - I'll wave to you from the town of Raith on TV (joke - Kirkcaldy)