franker

I will be heading for The Wee Rangers Club. A few rolls, a few beers

when the bar opens and a meal after-expanding waistline loyal.

Ellis doesn't have to provide anything up front apparently.

 

Obviously Whyte is confident that whatever plans they have in the pipeline will make them both a lot of money given we're talking at least �£7million here.

Whyte can see a return in buying our club that no other Rangers supporting businessman can- the mans got to be a genius.............

Given their offence at Rangers fans the other night, perhaps they'd care to explain their position on the following terms they like to use?

 

1. http://www.facebook.com/arabtrust1909/posts/132549293423506

 

Rumoured opening day fixtures:- Us v Killie, Accies v Celtic, Jambo h*** v Aberdeen, ICT v Motherwell, h*** v Hibs and St. M v St.j

 

 

2. http://www.facebook.com/arabtrust1909/posts/119375364747723

 

Tina Turner 'The Best' has dropped from the entire top 40, oh well, the h*** didn't quite get the chance to validate their SPL Championship via the charts. With refs like the one yesterday, is it any wonder the h*** won it? Whilst I'm on the subject, really gotta love Reggie Yates and the 'Oh my God, init' way he talks:- ''Tixt in wiv wot you fink''.

 

 

3. http://twitter.com/#!/RobertJohnBrown/status/47739676852895744

 

We owe the 'DIET-h***' a hiding after their gloating last time round......2-1 to United (only because we're knackered!@ 70%)

 

 

 

Hmmmm!

 

PS: Thanks to jcdgow on Twitter for the info!

Frankie, Its not only their use of the H word but to my knowledge the Arab trust did not comment on Celtics game at Tannadice earlier in the season when Lennons behaviour provoked sectarian chants from the travelling support along with missile throwing. If they are setting themselves up as commentators on visiting fans behaviour then the least we can expect is a balanced view, something they have failed to do in this instance.

Due to the lack of detail we can only speculate on this last minute proposal - a share issue for 25 million at a price that would make Murray/MIH minority shareholders.?

Should it not be the case that it should be the players who benefited who are responsible for any tax bill? After all they are the ones who received the income...

I came across information regarding an ex player from around 6 years ago whose accountant specifically looked into our scheme. He sought advice from two independent tax experts and the conclusion was that from the players perspective there was no concern regarding any future liability.

Seems like that.

 

I nearly crashed my car this morning when I heard the Radio Scotland 7.25am update!

That would have made an interesting insurance claim!!

With Barley out we will need every remainingmember of our small squad contributing if we are to retain our title.

Last season as the Mowbray�s team took 2nd prize, with Celtic Park a sea of empty seats during match days, the Celtic sites reached bile-ing point regarding refs, conspiracy theories, and masonic plots. Lawell and Mowbray made their way to Hampden to put forward their clarification file to the SFA, a file that contained a substantial number of what they considered refereeing errors against Celtic.(the subtext being these honest? mistakes if repeated could determine the destination of the title)

This was no attempt to take part in an exercise to improve the standard of officiating the beautiful game, but an attempt to get their support back on side and their backsides back on those empty seats even if it meant siding with the fundamentalist wing of their support.

John Reid who was in the thick of it during previous governments spin era, knew how to get the message out to the masses. It was a classic New Labour tactic with a leak from the boardroom that told their support about the dossier meeting and, not concerned about the consequences, signalled contempt for the ruling body, an action that should have seen the SFA take Celtic to task.

As we now know Mowbrays intention to mimic Catalonia�s finest ended up a disaster-a 2nd rate fake so much so, some people suggest Celtic should be renamed Barras-elona . That was the football side of things, however the off field antics continued and there was an inevitability that they would escalate with the appointment of Neil Lennon.

Celtic playing 2nd fiddle to Rangers continued in the first half of this season and we could all see the dreadful touchline behaviour of Lennon, which reached a crescendo with Dougie MacDonald at Tannadice. His confrontation with the match officials provoked a sectarian outburst from the travelling support (noted by the Dundee constabulary)and Lennon could clearly be heard shouting f�king cheat at the match officials. We still await the outcome if any of all of what went on that day.

Since our 2-0 defeat at the turn of the year, and with results going his way, he seemed to calm down for a period but returned to his old ways with Rangers signing of Diouf. Lennon in my opinion targeted this player for special treatment with Brown and Kayal in particular taking it upon themselves to dish it out with Lennon himself joining in on the abuse of Diouf in the tunnel at the recent 2-2 cup game at Ibrox.

Last night was a repeat of what went on before but let�s be blunt here. We all knew what he was like but more importantly the Celtic board that appointed him knew what he was like but similar to their attitude to the SFA, they seem unconcerned about the consequences,indeed with their attendances improving as well as results, they will feel they have played their cards right.

Reading the title of this thread I would not want anyone to think I have thrown my hand in. There is hope we can still win the league, and remember in poker, a Royal Flush beats 4 aces.

I have it on very good authority from a friend of a friend who is close enough to have dinner with Ellis and Whyte that they are currently i.e. as I type this, in talks to finalise the takeover.

 

I should know more tomorrow.

 

Personaly I remain sceptical that any deal could be closed this side of the tax issue being resolved and that the outcome of that small matter might so

 

radically alter the Club's finances as to render it impossible, but you never know.

I must admit to being concerned with regards to Whyte and Ellis. I agreed with Alastair Johnson when in his first speech as chairman,he spoke about a new buyer having access to unencumbered wealth.(of a significant amount) I have yet to see any evidence of the duo mentioned meeting that

qualification.

In all seriousness, it cant be easy to concentrate on running your business when you are being threatened by members of the white underclass wing of the tim support.(they felt he was too far up Lawells backside and his blog was a vehicle for boardroom propoganda). Add to that his choice of friends, Sean South or should i say McNally of the Mirror and Phil Ma Bankaccount over in Donegal. Imagine having to turn to they 2 when you are in need of advice???

Paul Brennan of CQN has posted this article as some sort of serious financial scoop on the dealings of MIH. Brennan has offered numerous financial critiques of MIH in recent years yet can't return a profit on his own entrepreneurial venture, IT company Local Planet Solutions.:smile:

perhaps you could in the spirit of fraternal brotherhood point me in the direction of these accounts

 

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/ce450e2de947a55bbddd06747a0f20de/wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo

 

There you go, just type in Murray Sports, pay your monies and all will be revealed.

 

PS I would advise waiting until 30/4/10 when Murray International Holdings are due to submit their long awaited accounts.

While this gives a very interesting attendance comparison, it would also be interesting to know the comparison in income terms - do you happen to know figures that could be used to compare the admission charges. In other words, how dependent is each country (Scotland, Germany and England) on achieving attendances to pay meet their costs, and to what extent are these income-attendances being achieved.

The only data i have seen that may relate to admission charges is in the annual report by Deloitte entitled The Football Money League. It details the financial performance of the worlds top twenty clubs by turnover. The last time Rangers reached the top twenty in their 2007 report, we were 18th out of 20. The report gives a breakdown of each clubs turnover,( Matchday/Commercial/Broadcasting) Rangers matchday income was 46% of turnover(the highest of any other club in the top 20)

It does not go into the actual average admission price that you may be after but you can trawl through and see that the other clubs, the Germans in particular, with their substantial commercial and broadcasting revenues can afford to keep matchday admission prices low by comparison to us.

1. Financial figures for year end June 30th 2009: ~�£30million debt expected

 

2. UEFA punishment: �£40K fine rumoured.

 

3. EPL2 meeting: Two-tier proposals featuring Old Firm to be discussed.

 

Should be an interesting day. I know Bluedell is sharpening his article pencil as we speak...

 

1. With a trading loss expected of between 8 and 12 million depending on who you speak to, our shareholders fund at 2008 of 79 million will take a kicking(lets hope they omit a property valuation or it would would be an even bigger kicking!)

2. Frankie, i would take a fine right now but fear something greater. Lets hope i am wrong.

3. With the gloom of points 1 & 2 maybe just maybe EPL2 gives us something to cheer us up.

What I want to know is why Rangers always have any trouble highlighted and repeated ad finitum.

 

For example with regards to the riot in Manchester, there were about 200,000 fans their to see the most important game for years even if just on a giant screen. Now with that kind of number from any part of society is it not reasonable to expect it to contain a certain amount of undesirables? Add the combustible mixture of drinking from the morning of the match, poor organisation meaning too many people in a small place, aggressive policing and then the ignition of a failing screen at kickoff and we get a few hundred fans out of 200,000 rioting. The fact is the football had nothing to do with as they hadn't even seen the game and it could be argued that most of them would have preferred to watch the game seeing as they had travelled to the city for that purpose.

 

That's a maximum of one in five hundred fans causing trouble. Now with those provocative circumstances in a situation where people don't even need a ticket, how can Rangers actually be responsible for behaviour of the worst 0.2% of our population?

 

Now contrast this with the Chelsea fans who rioted in Fulham after the Champions League final. There were "several hundred" of them in the pubs. They had been drinking for a few hours, had no failure of screen, they all got to watch the game, and yet about 200 of them rioted for the sole reason being that their team lost.

 

This was at least 20% of their fans in that area. 0.2% compared to 20% suggests that with no provocation they are 100 times worse than our fans with provocation.

 

Now even though the order of the number of fans rioting was similar, and considering the contrasting circumstances, which incident gets high exposure 18 months after the game and which gets absolutely nothing?

 

There is trouble at English games every week that is far, far worse than any at what should be a combustible atmosphere of an Old Firm game. English fans cause trouble every time they go abroad, yet we are the ones singled out every time for about 90% of all the media exposure.

 

I condemn the behaviour of our misbehaving fans but the lies and propaganda in portraying it as only a Rangers problem is a crime against society in itself.

You are correct to highlight the Chelsea fans that night and you could have added the Barcelona fans in May with over 100 arrests and riot police having to fire rubber bullets to quell the disturbances. Throw in the Man Utd fans who have run into trouble off the pitch in Rome. 3 examples of trouble outside the stadium with three different clubs. The difference in treatment to these clubs and Rangers is this. There is no constant campaign by English or Catalan journalists calling for a European ban for these clubs unlike in Scotland where today Tom English stated the following "UEFA washed its hands of the Manchester business. Shame on it for that. A city centre under siege and Michel Platini and chums turned and looked the other way. By rights, Rangers should have been banned from Europe for what happened down there."

Whatever the rights and wrongs of our support and we do have problems like many clubs, i would like to know why Scottish based journos would want us in effect treated more harshly by footballs authorities than other clubs, because that is the reality of the situation.

In the aftermath of Bucharest, Spiers, Gibbons and Smith in particular used their columns to vent their disgust of the Rangers support. Since Speirs friendship with Matt McGlone flourished a number of years ago, you could find it easy to conclude it has affected Britneyââ?¬â?¢s utterings, and he is reduced at times to write his articles as if he was a contributor to a Celtic fanzine. You canââ?¬â?¢t help wonder during their flat share if Matt was injecting him with somethingââ?¬Â¦Ã¢â?¬Â¦ for instance Spiers in todayââ?¬â?¢s article trots out his fairly new slur on us calling our fans ââ?¬Å?a white underclass ââ?¬Å?

Gibbons meanwhile penned an article entitled ââ?¬Å?An open letter to Martin Bain, excuser of Rangers serial troublemakersââ?¬Â in which he mentions incidents going back to Newcastle in 1969! and comments ââ?¬Å?are succeeding generations of your travelling supporters afflicted with a congenital disorder that compels them, at semi-regular intervals, to inflict mayhem on stadiums and towns they visit throughout Europe?ââ?¬Â

As for Smith, despite no reports of sectarian behaviour at Wednesdays match she brings the sectarian slur into her column in today�s News of the World,

ââ?¬Å?Could it be that the sectarian element fosters a mentality that will always be hell-bent on trouble? We know that where you have sectarianism, you will find thuggery.ââ?¬Â

Having spoken to 4 individuals (including a member of Rangers security) who were at the game, the scenes whilst disturbing could not be described as the battle of Bucharest or a riot in any shape or form. Still hyperbole of the negative sort from these 3 journos when discussing the behaviour of Rangers fans is not unusual.

With their opinions there for all to see in this weeks papers, what will the three amigos report regarding today�s pre-meditated disruption of the minutes silence at Falkirk?

Will Spiers berate Celtics grey green and white underclass/ their trailer trash republicans? Will Gibbons write an open letter to Peter Lawell reminding him of decades of anti-British hatred from their support?(going back longer than 1969 Mr Gibbons if you know your history) and will Anna Smith explore the racist and sectarian elements of her beloved hoops fans?

Lets wait and see but be prepared for a long wait�������.

Got a couple of tickets ordered for this. Looking forward to what looks like a diverse and interesting list of speakers.

The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the year end has been changed to give MIH the maximum time to improve the numbers. Murray has to have had the support of Lloyds banking group to make this decision -something he will be quick to remind any detractors in the financial press. All i can see from to days news is the speculation regarding the future of MIH as it is structured today will substantially increase.

Our main concern on this board and others is course Rangers. Lets hope that a group of investors can be persuaded to part with cash sooner rather than later even if it means MIH retaining a stake(i would be happy with them keeping 49%). I am sure Muir and McGill would make capable MIH non execs in that scenario.

Having attended the last four AGMs, the numbers attending have always been on the low side,probably around 40 at best, with last years around the low 30s. The RST board said that in discussion with the supporters direct organisation,and their experience of trusts at other clubs, there is a surge of interest at inception gradually tailing off around the 5 years mark.

Another example given was where one single issue can be a recruiting agent but when it recedes there can be a massive drop in membership. Manchester Uniteds trust saw an astonishing growth in numbers to circa 25,000 at the height of the Glaziers takeover. Now that subject is proving less headline grabbing, particularily with the success of the team, their numbers have dropped by around 17.500.

Whatever the reasons for supporter apathy, anyone who commits time to contribute to the RST or collaborates in the production of STS deserves all our appreciation for what must seem at times a thankless task.

But the Assembly is nothing to do with Celtic.

 

I have no problem in them focussing on just Rangers and Rangers issues, even though we know there is biased reporting from our media.

Craig

This issue is a Rangers issue (Uefa investigation) and has to be one of the most important in the clubs history. If you are going to raise it for all and sundry to see then treat it with the seriousness it deserves. The new website has a link from the official site, a site that receives hits from fans of all clubs around the world. If you are going to put a link to the Uefa verdict, to do so without any context of the old firm rivalry, based on our social, political and religious history(and the chants that emanated from that rivalry) is to invite those fans that link in to draw a one sided conclusion.

http://www.thebluenose.co.uk/assembly/uefa-directive/

With specific reference to the above directive it is disappointing that the new site does not give some background to chants at both old firm clubs at the time of the UEFA investigation.

I saw someone at the game yesterday who goes to Ibrox every week. I noticed that he refused to clap (or do anything) at any of the goals. He never even reacted when Whittaker scored his second.

 

Is there any excuse for this?

Serves you right for sitting next to Spiers:)

A new era to begin? or Johnston to stabilise us until the club is sold? For me the best option is that Johnston can use his extensive contacts to entice an investor/investors and a new C.E.O. (On the presumption that Murray has given him his proxy) Interesting times.

Big Spliff

"I love the history of Rangers, but I have to be honest and say I�m more interested in the future. I worry about Rangers. I really do. And now I see what Rangers could be; much more than a football club and a business; more of a social enterprise, serving its community and a hub for all things blue, and the things we stand for. Rangers permeates all corners of life in the west of Scotland and beyond. Everybody knows our name. We are a huge and remarkable club. We are truly unique."

I like you worry about the clubs , in fact in 43 years of following Rangers and i have never been more concerned regarding the finances and future direction of our club. One can only hope that with the inevitable pressure on the present custodian in this business climate, he may get back to the table with prospective buyers.

Hamilton Accies insolvent, declares judge

Todays article in the Herald that reveals the state of the finances at new boys Hamilton.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2494024.0.Hamilton_Accies_insolvent_declares_judge.php

PS Apologies for the spelling error in the header!