Uilleam

Was there a touch of the sclaff about Diomande's goal?

A belter, a sclaff, and an in-off, today, by anybody, would be more than satisfactory.

Aye, right.

Staggering lack of self awareness (despite their claims about 'knowing their history'), which, I suppose, makes them easily manipulable.

...but their support's customary offensive rubbish will not be displayed..... which must surely hand us an advantage...... Frankly, that lot could give Trump lessons in narcissism, and self-importance. (To be fair, he's not a vicious antisemite.) "A football club held in the highest esteem". Indeed - presumably in pederast circles, as an example of how to abuse generations of children and get away with it. It doesn't seem to have penetrated the minds of this soi-disant intellectual wing of the fhilth support that Sunday's match will, as usual, attract attention from all over the globe, and that the Board will not wish to be embarrassed by the content of any display; nor will it wish to have to explain, or attempt to excuse, such content. Of course, in, mirabile dictu, an exercise in naked cynicism, refusing permission for a display means that it will not have to be seen to condemn it, afterwards, no matter how mealy mouthed, and insincere, that rebuke would be. Until the last rebel, indeed. God speed that day.

Ibrox......baby

And what is more, we beat them on away goals!!

I should rather we had put them to the sword, but is that not what we did in the shootout?

So little in doubt that I didn't bother to watch the pens. Onward, and, hopefully, upward!!!

They are better than us: faster, fitter, stronger, and have a bit more Fitba' about them. Only God knows how we qualify.

The one out there is an improvement on the last one, no? So a third time will be lucky.

Which would be a fluke of mythic proportions. I'd maybe settle for one of heroic scale, mark you.

We need a fluke of mythic proportions

I don't know who that is. (I should pay more attention.... Perhaps not.) The shareholders and board members are in a process of disengagement, it seems, so there is less point in worrying about the past, than there is in worrying about the future. Although, as we have little or no influence on what is to come, why worry?

You should be on the Board!!

Well, I am glad that you clarified all that.

Good.

Buying money, mate!! I take it Chelters has taken on the hue of a bookie's benefit.

Does it matter, unless you want to 'hammer' the Board for paying commercial interest rates?

Trump has stopped war chests for Europe. Do keep up, man.

Nah! Not 'avin' that. You just wanted/want a stick to beat the Board, the outgoing Board at that. We see you.

So what is your point? It's short term, something we can't influence, presumably is the best deal that the market could offer, and ultimately, will be of purely historic interest.

It reads to me that 6% is the price at which the Club would do business. We'll find out, presumably. When/if we do, it will be purely of historic interest, and of little practical import.

John Bennett quoted verbatim in the Super Soaraway According to documents lodged to Companies House, two parties, 'FCT' and 'PC', owe Rangers money. It is likely FCT and PC refer to FC Twente and Parma Calcio, two clubs that Rangers have done business with in recent years. Gers sold Antonio Colak to Serie A side Parma for around £2.5m in 2023 and Eredivisie outfit Twente purchased Sam Lammers for a similar amount last summer. Transfer fees are usually paid in instalments than in full however, and it's understood Rangers are still waiting for these instalments to be paid. Neither Twente or Parma are believed to late or overdue with their instalments. But Rangers have taken this action to receive funds now, with interest to be paid on the loan going forward. The future fees that were due from Twente and Parma will now be paid to Macquarie rather than Rangers as part of the agreement. In turn, Macquarie will give the Ibrox club an immediate injection of cash. In normal circumstances, current shareholders could have stepped in and fronted up money of their own whilst the club waited for the instalments to be paid. But with a potential takeover of the Ibrox club by the San Francisco 49ers agreed in principle - and with several of the Rangers board ready to sell up before the end of the current Premiership season - it is reasonable to expect that they would be unwilling to part with more of their own cash. What the move does signal is a change in stance from what ex-chairman John Bennett said in 2021 on the topic of interest rates offered by banks such as Macquarie. He said: "We have had numerous approaches, including in November. It is so interesting, they come to you and it could be equity, it could be family offices, it could be banks such as MacQuarie Bank and they are active in the football space. They can't touch our terms," he said. "What I have been saying and a number of us have been saying is 'Ok, those are interesting approaches'. I can tell you that one of them was at 13 per cent per annum. "We're not paying that. We are no longer paying nine, we are no longer paying eight, six is the new benchmark. "If those providers can come in and beat that at two levels - a lower coupon, because six is the new benchmark, and we have driven the cost of funding down to six. "I think that is one of the lowest numbers in the whole of football in Britain for loans. But also on security. I can assure you they want a whole lot more security and a higher coupon." https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/14472837/rangers-loan-future-transfer-fees-what-it-means-finances/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=ScottishSunSportTwitter&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1741733679