calscot

You have as much ability to understand your fellow posters as a monkey (despite multiple explanations - something that would you would do well to monkey see, monkey do). I infer that you believed the RTC site and all the other Celtic cabal propaganda seeing as you are obvious an advocate, of hearing, seeing and and speaking evil everywhere. The lack of respect by some posters is depressing, and I do realise the irony that I've been dragged down to that level.

Thanks for the quick reply, Zappy. I'm actually talking about stealth mode in Chrome which I've now remembered is called "Incognito mode". It means, that cookies are not remembered and so you the site can't automatically log you in. I do usually copy before posting but sometimes forget. I think the solution to the big problem of losing the post is just to use another editor - although I often have line break problems when copying and pasting. The minor problem of repeated logging in doesn't seem to have a solution it seems...

I'm using stealth mode to view the site but the problem is that when I post it forgets I'm logged in and asks me to log in again, then tells me I'm already registered. The problem is that when I post and this happens, no matter what I do, I lose my post which has sometimes taken a bit of time and effort to write. The thing is I like to dip in and out during the day when taking a five/ten minute time out at work. The site seems to time me out pretty quickly in stealth mode. I wrongly thought the message that my post is saved which periodically appears would mean I could trust the site to conserve my post. Hope I don't sound too moany, but by god it's frustrating.

Can I ask a few of questions that I'm finding a bit ambiguous in the arguments? So were the fans right or wrong to invest in the IPO and buy season tickets? How CAN they stop the money being taken out of the club? What have the less naive supporters done to help the situation?

What if you lead the horse near to water which isn't in sight and then deliberately put blinkers on him and refuse to take them off even though it's obvious he's uncomfortable and not able to find the water easily? Not only that, suppose there is other water around with locoweed in it?

Wrong, the average punter while generally optimistic and reluctant to see his club in a bad like, generally doesn't know what to believe when a load of innuendo is thrown around. There is so much anti-Rangers propaganda just what ARE you to believe? That is incredibly unfair. The main evidence for that was in a Rangers hatchet job of a TV program that also had it that we were guilty of tax evasion. It's all very well talking about so called evidence but the media would have it that it was inconceivable we'd win the tax case and our titles should be stripped. Yeah, three wise monkeys, eh? Secondly, with what came out about Whyte, what could the fans actually do? The only real evidence that came out was that he was banned from being a director, doesn't mean he'd commit another crime. It could have meant that he was the kind of wise guy who knew how to play the game and get us out of a tight spot. HMRC were desperate to put us out of business, maybe having a dangerous rottweiller was better than a well behaved, tail wagging collie. There is NO WAY you could know what he would do - whether it would be good or bad for us, and no way to stop him. Just ask the old board. Again, what could we do? And again there is the point that Whyte needed to be put to the sword and it not only took someone devious enough to do it, but also someone who didn't mind taking the fall for it, for a nice pile of cash of course. How would the Blue Knights have handled that? But then, they didn't even have the wherewithal to resurrect the club anyway - and wanted to use the clubs own cash to buy it, and future payments from pie in the sky conditions? We had Green forced upon us and he delivered on certain things and now we need to pay the devil his dues. Maybe not, but how do you work out which stuff is true and which isn't. It's all very well to say you can research it, but that's not exactly easy. A lot of research and illegally leaked documents went into the RTC site and THAT ended up being a load of bollocks. But again the biggest problem with people like yourself is that you only give teasers, you don't actually take time to explain or back up your posts. How are we supposed to treat that as facts and serious warnings? Instead of doing this and then fighting with everyone in a condescending way, it would seem more prudent to be a bit more like the sage who welcomes the thirst for knowledge and delivers his wisdom benevolently and patiently and in an easily understandable way...

It's a type of fallacy - an argument that is not really valid used to try to win a debate. This one describes an argument where instead of answering the previous point, you change it to something similar sounding but easy to dismiss - the most common being an exaggeration. The name comes from an imaginary situation where instead of attacking a real man, you make a replica of him in straw and easily defeat that. One example in your case is that while your "opponent" was arguing that McCoist played an important part in the resurgence of the club, you turned that into him saying he was a messiah and bigger than the club, which is easy to refute but not actually the argument given.

Totally agree with you. There were enough requests to at least clarify what was said and they were ignored. Then someone complains and is hit with financial babble and implied he's an idiot for not knowing it. This is a time when people of a profession usually considered the most boring thing in the world, actually have some kudos and the attention of everyone. Instead of using this status to educate genuinely interested people, some are just figuratively baiting them and then flexing their muscles and pushing them around. Which is EXACTLY what they did with Whyte... And then complain nobody listened.

I don't get you, you seem to be arguing against yourself and not saying much relevant to the other argument. On the one hand you say you know the difference between the club and the individual but on the other don't seem to see the difference between the club and the owners. It seems you'll happily give your money to the owners no matter what they intend to do with it, as long as they own Rangers. You'd be happy to give your money to a charlatan like Whyte to put in his pocket under the guise of investing in Rangers. What Ally provided was what we see as a more trustworthy inside view of the credibility of those buying the club. It's a bit like coming across an unknown website for something expensive you want to buy and worrying about whether to give your payment details. You are then put at rest with someone you trust who has checked out the company and vouches for it. Here the unknown website is the new board of directors. I don't think that is even slightly mistaking an individual for the club any more than the above is mistaking the trusted person for the thing you want to buy.

I've found it difficult for the last year. I think a lack of televised games for me since Setanta went bust, makes a big difference - as are the playing the youths and making less famous signings than before. Usually we sign only a few players a season and so only have to get used to them during the season while we know the rest. I think we all recognise McCulloch and Wallace who are the first teamers left from two seasons ago... We've had about 30 or more new players in the team to recognise in just over a year. I definitely found it easier when I was young but I think the swapping of footballer stickers helped there... It meant I could recognise most of the Premier Division players as well as the English first division.

This is a bit like someone boasting about getting a nine year fixed rate mortgage deal when interest rates are really high and likely to go down in a couple of years... what an idiot.

That would just be wrong, and a REAL example of breaking sporting integrity.

Thought Livvie's stadium was also 10k...

Of course it is, they only get half the money and so need twice the ticket sales to make up for missing two home league matches as their ground holds 2.5k... The numbers are all very neat and tidy!

he's pretty famous in China...

Supporters groups aren't professionals and there is likely chances you'd either get them being too sycophantic or the "hard man" doing the opposite and verging on abuse.

One of the things that came out of this is that he was asking the questions and putting up the criticism that fans have been giving - and getting the answers, if not the best worded. If nothing else the acknowledgement is there.

Alex Ferguson looks like a heavy drinker. Don't think Man U fans were bothered.

If they could stream quick highlights and interviews after the game the perhaps a number of people would be encouraged to hang about for say 10 minutes before leaving, staggering some of the density of people dispersing.

The massive flaws about saying, just don't read them or watch them, is that others do. The damage they are doing is not to Rangers reputation to Rangers fans but to everyone else. We know who will believe all the negative stuff without question but what about the fair minded non-Rangers fan? How are they to know that it is lies and deception they are reading? If they know the newspaper is banned from Ibrox for libelling the club, then they at least have a caveat to what they are reading. And as DB says, how do you starve the BBC of money?

I think overseas guys get all the games (or most) for about £25 a month. They are able do that as it doesn't impact attendances or the shared, home market deal for TV rights. Would love to be able to do that here, especially as I live 450 miles from Ibrox - it's definitely NOT going to interfere with attendances. They could have perhaps done this for England but the further complication is that different pricing for EC regions is now illegal. So even the overseas deal will probably be restricted to outside the EC only in future.

Is there any real reason to think that the boards medium to long term plan is NOT to balance the books? I realise a lot of the IPO is probably spent but paying off directors and top earning players is not going to happen every year, and some of the investments will not need repeating for a while, if ever (real estate, stadium investment etc). However, many of our investors are in it for a financial return - at least in share capital, and we have successful businessmen at the heart of the club, who although are eminently capable of making mistakes, surely they at least have the financial competence and common sense of your average fan? Actually I'd guess most fans don't really understand a balance sheet and the concept of pre-payments and accruals, and even though they'll understand the reality of it in their own life without the jargon, they get spooked when they see capital investment in the club and bank balance being depleted. But I'm sure our board at least realise that to avoid a loss: expenditure <= income, and that 1:3 is a reasonable ratio for wages to income. We used to run about 60 to 70% and cut that down to about 50% in the later years. It seem to me that it's our other expenditures we have to keep an eye on, while increasing our income as much as we can - without alienating our "customers". I do agree that a modest rise in ticket prices (8%?) would have generally have been acceptable and brought in another 1m but also agree the fans also deserve to be treated with respect and their loyalty returned. Our biggest shortfall at the moment will be TV income which, if we could negotiate our own deals could probably bring in 10m or more - but we should really be earning at least £5m from that sector while sharing the other half with the rest of the leagues. The SPL have killed any chance of that kind of numbers with their destruction of the brand, even though it is peanuts compare to the 70m your BOTTOM EPL teams receive - and I'd guess about 10% of that is funded by Scots. Trouble is that Scots will pay Sky whether Scottish football is on it or not so there is no significant increase in subscription sales for the Scottish leagues to exploit. Scottish love of the EPL (or golf, boxing etc) is killing us. For me, I can't see the justification for paying £12 for a land line, plus about £45 a month for Sky with sports and then another £7 or something for ESPN - for 10 games. That's about £80 a game! (unless my numbers are wrong). Give me 20 + games on setanta plus Rangers TV and a few Scotland games for £120 again. The coverage may be shit but at a fiver a game, a sixteenth of Sky, I can handle that. I suppose I could go to BT but would that not be about £35 a month including land-line? That's still over £40 a game. Season tickets are looking very cheap in comparison.

Can't imagine threading the needle myself - maybe when I was younger; but my sense of self preservation is taking over in my old age, with memories of too many lucky escapes with some causing injured limbs that will never be the same again. Hats off to those that do stuff like that. (Don't mind climbing the odd mountain though - just like to avoid scrambling along narrow ledges with shear drops.)

Don't see that being on the agenda. I think it will be an ultra positive exercise which will be choreographed to rouse us about a great future with an excellent squad playing fantastic football and winning trophies with the medium term plan of getting back in the top league, challenging for the title and qualifying for Europe and making a good fist of it there. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, it's a beautiful world and the future is golden.

Won't go down well with whom? I think everyone wants fiscal prudence, the problem is that some seem to want extreme parsimony.