bmck

I don't know the ins and outs like you do, so I'll defer to your knowledge. However, as a shareholder, and an even bigger one now, good on you sir, if you feel a director is in breach of thei fiduciary duty - like selling at minimum price to their pals - there are remedies for that. You're essentially spot on. They're under a legal duty to essential maximise investment return. However, within that there's scope for judgement. There's scope for medium term losses for longer term gains, they have latitude. What I'm saynig is that not selling it for the price noted seems to me to align with what what you would expect of small investments. ADDED: As a shareholder you now have the right to legally challenge any corruption you see. Even the threat of it would be damaging media-wise. P.S Apologies for the multiple posts, hopefully someone got to it and tidied it up - supposed to have new internet today, decided not to turn on.

No wonder this country is socialist, basic economic illiteracy. It's like me wanting to by Tesla, and demanding, before I own Tesla, that they up the price. I have no fiduciary duty to something I don't yet own.

Yup, ultimately continental philosophy won, reason of experient, theory over experiment, and what we have is the carcass of a civilisation in the final stages of decomposing.

Or go super mental and teach Classics and History in schools. Properly. Not from a critical theory perspective.

People seem to think that companies have the choice to be benign and generous. They don't. As Bill says, it's their fiduciary duty as Directors acting in the interests of existing shareholders to maximise whatever gains can be made. There's also the issue of scale. To get the deal on the shares the directors paid they had to contribute across a certain threshold. It's basic economics and company management. If they sold shares at cost their shareholders could reasonably sue them.

Totally agree. It's what happens in a functionally one party state that grew up with the inherently same ideology as those in power. Most you can do is just not get a license. What are you missing?

This.

Easy to say, harder to do. Like shares they're only worth what people are willing to pay for them. If you don't feel it's sufficient, you stick long.

Thanks brother. It's really nice to see you too. A lot of bereavement then a lot of hardwork to make up for it. I know I was always going back and forth with your conspiracies back in the day. Then there was Epstein. You kinda won in the end

Tell me this is from the Onion, Ian good to see btw) - cheap shot, but the irony of snake salesmen being underpintted by snake oil salesmen is just too much (apologies to anyone who sells cars, if you tell them to go away, they do,)

Has to be somewhere in the middle. We're in a unique position right now iwth SG and 55. Without winning the league again next year, all of this goes away in blink of an eye. Kamara and Aribo are only just hitting their potential now. You're absolutely right re contracts - but we need to make sure ambition isn't lost in the process, and by ambition I don't mean going beyond our trading model - I mean realising how much these players would be worth coming from any other league than Scotland fo EFL sides. But as has been pointed out, it's largely upto the players these days. I believe in RW and most of all MB to make whomever replaces anyone worthy of that shirt. However, as has been said before, there aren't many places from which, irrespective of week to week wage, though I'm sure it hurts to be worth less than 10 mill than above it or whatever, Ibrox isn't a sidewards step. I think SG knows enough to explain that to them.

Not wrong at all. Comparing the correspondence sent re violence on either side would make - I was about to say interesting but - predictable reading.

Hey my man, You on a VPN or tor?

Has it started yet? Don't usually bother with international football. What's it on? Oh, reading right above, clearly.

I love the tenor of this article and how well written it is. Its writer knows exactly what is happening. And they are both tactically and strategically spot on. However, it has already conceeded defeat. Why was there so much backlash? Apart from the whole 'look at the bad Brittish on top again", it's because they were scared. After weilding so much power for so long, they found that when it came down to it, to quote JM, "They have the guns, but we have the numbers". It is right a government fears its people. It keeps them in check. Its what the 2nd ammendment in America was intended to ensure. One thing is fore sure, when the squnity bridge started bouncing such that the army couldn't have stopped it without lethal force, they reaised they were up against a force greater than them. There was nothing they could realistically do about it. And as for those the caused trouble? It's quite hard to care over much. The idea (legally) that Rangers could be vicariously liable is so funny, or that Rangers could be liable in any situation which prevails across the entirety of the UK. It's not our job to regulate our own, let people who want to be loved do that - unless it can be done person to person with a quiet reasonable word - we are individuals. We're all accountable for everyone else in a purely mystical sense. You can't placate that which can't be placated - I don't know if you know how deeply routed critical theory is in universities, nothing will satisfy them. I'm happy - but not not sad - there wasn't more trouble, to remind them the majority still has a voice and can mobilise.

Tough sell though. Double predestsination. Vehicles fit for destruction. No free-willl, not even choice to be Reformed. Irony, is that it's most horrible doctrines is what produces the best effects in people. They realise there's nothing they did - no personal act, not even a step forward - for which they can be credited. Always thought it was a bit of a paradox. Ideas like vicarious sacrifice - like God needs blood to look at us from his infinite holiness - are just ugly. They produce wonderful humans, though.

That’s probably the only definition to which I’d agree if I believed in it but I think the larger point is the idea of an individualised relationship with God - sola fide, sola scriptura etc - created individuals when it evolved/devolved (according to your tastes) into secularism it took the idea of individuals and individual rights and obligations with it (versus other collectivised derivatons of religion like state from Church). It’s why Celtic supporters who aren’t all Catholics are more prone to group think and the need to be loved as a group. I have no concern whatever another Rangers fan does, it doesn’t reflect on me. That’s how I take it.

Good to be back brother, thanks for reactivating my account - and not holding it against me that I disappeared of a day. Gentleman as ever.

Hahah, thank mate - it's probably getting nearer that than it is the other, alas How's yourself? Don't want to hijack the thread actually. But hope you're keeping well!

CammyF! Hope all is well with you, my good man. Truly lovely to see you. Yeah, it's been such a while. Good to know I wasn't the only one for whom life killed Gersnet, and his good self Whosthedado was saying. It's amazing to see what this has turned into. Frankie doing - hardly atypically - a good job, as ever.

Thanks very much indeed good sir, long time no 'see'. Hope you are keeping well in these strange but glorious times of ours!

It feels like a variation on the same discussions we were having the last time I was around. Enough to make you despondent.

Will away fans be allowed do you think? The presumption is that it's going to be functionally open.

However, one advantage it does have is that it makes it very difficult for malware or backdooring of your PC to actually make it back to the command and control of the virus writer. You should never stop running malware or anti-virus, but using a VPN (always, locked) means that the virus/malware/backdoor will find it very hard to get back to its command and control centre. Which means it's more secure, as well as the above being entirely true.

CyberGhost's owners worry me. It depends whether you're really interested in anonymity / privacy (two different things), or just seeing games. NordVPN is a good mixture of the two. If you want something that's more pro those other things, I'd give you other suggestions.