Jump to content

 

 

Donald McIntyre has resigned as Rangers' finance director.


Recommended Posts

McIntyre recovers 3mill so he should be hailed a hero. He's the finance director it's his job ffs.

 

That's a fair point.

 

Agree mate but you will get guys on here claiming they are great Rangers men. Rangers men my arse they are money grabbing chunts.

 

But you can't have it both ways. He's a guy doing his job and is therefore due his redundancy (or whatever) payoff in the same way as you and I would expect it. I failt to see why he is a "money grabbing chunt".

Link to post
Share on other sites

But you can't have it both ways. He's a guy doing his job and is therefore due his redundancy (or whatever) payoff in the same way as you and I would expect it. I failt to see why he is a "money grabbing chunt".

 

Not many of us would expect the type of redundancy that he does for such a short time in a job. Bad mouthing your new boss before he takes over is always going to reduce your chances keeping your job especially after the contentiousness of his employment - you'd think a normal person would have quit and found employment elsewhere - or at least used the five months of getting paid a fortune to do nothing to find one.

 

Sorry, he's not even slightly normal compared to most of us and in comparison is definitely a money grabbing chunt. Seems when you get to the really high earners, you seem to get a lot more of that. It's funny that when poor people get sacked they get nowt, when the rich get sacked they often get more than most earn in a lifetime...

 

Maybe he's in the right and it's just better justice for the well-off while the rest of us get shafted, but when it's the less well off who don't have that privilege that end up having to pay for it all, it's not easy to stomach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bain's new contract just months before the takeover, giving him a great pay rise and a fixed term contract (to give him a bigger pay-off post-takeover) was corrupt at best, and as finance director he must have authorised it, or at worst didnt do anything to say wait a minute, everyone should be on the same terms until the new owners come in.

 

The 2 of them were at it for their own good when they knew they were going to be surplus to requirements under the new regime, and deserve nothing but our contempt for their actions.

 

As CEO and FD under the old regime they hardly ran the club positively did they? Unless you call running it into the ground positive!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many of us would expect the type of redundancy that he does for such a short time in a job. Bad mouthing your new boss before he takes over is always going to reduce your chances keeping your job especially after the contentiousness of his employment - you'd think a normal person would have quit and found employment elsewhere - or at least used the five months of getting paid a fortune to do nothing to find one.

 

Sorry, he's not even slightly normal compared to most of us and in comparison is definitely a money grabbing chunt. Seems when you get to the really high earners, you seem to get a lot more of that. It's funny that when poor people get sacked they get nowt, when the rich get sacked they often get more than most earn in a lifetime...

 

Maybe he's in the right and it's just better justice for the well-off while the rest of us get shafted, but when it's the less well off who don't have that privilege that end up having to pay for it all, it's not easy to stomach.

 

I totally agree with Cal. Why the hell should these people get huge pay-offs for running our club to the gates of administration. Managers get well payed to manage just the same as I get payed to do my job. Why the hell should they get a huge pay-off when they leave it is total nuts. Another thing I hate is a football player saying they only have 10-12 years to earn his money. If I lose my job after 12 years I may have to change my trade and earn my money doing something else, why do they think they have to earn enough to retire at 30-40. Most go into another job within the sport anyway. Bring back the old days when a footballers wages are on a par with the work they are doing and not bankrupting football clubs. And I know they take what another is prepared to give them but it is time the clubs were boss of the players again and not the other way about..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when Bain was 'rewarded' by getting a wage increase to 600,000 quid PA by Murray saying that Bain had accepted a reduced wage for years to help the club. I wondered then when did we get out of our then troubles as Whyte hadn't bought the club and he bank were still on our backs at the time. I'm also puzzled by Bains ease of court action with the club he loves so much.

 

McIntyre is made from exactly the same cloth. Rich shit seem to be entitled to stay rich while the rest of us are all in it together.

Link to post
Share on other sites

McIntyre recovers 3mill so he should be hailed a hero. He's the finance director it's his job ffs.

 

Agreed. If there was 3 million of receivables on the books it is his, and his finance team's, job to recover it. Yet here we have someone lauding him as some kind of Rangers saviour.

 

Aye, ok.

 

Pay ME his wages and I will recover the 3 mill too, guaranteed. It isnt that difficult a thing to do.

 

The bigger question, surely, is if we had 3 mill of debt on the books due back to us, and we are celebrating McIntyre for recovering it, why wasnt it recovered sooner ? On top of that, should we REALLY be celebrating McIntyre for recovering 3 mill of debt given he was, at the same time, overseeing (as Financial Director it is his job to oversee all aspects of the financial running of the club) the club run up unsustainable debts..... not once but twice. The same Financial Director who was at the helm as we "needed" our bankers to come in and run the financial aspects of the club. Yep, that was a resounding thumbs up for Donald McIntyre right there.

 

Sorry, but I will be holding off on the "Donald McIntyre is a fine servant to the club" banners for now. I will prefer to wait and see what comes of his, and Bain's, situations before passing judgement.

 

McIntyre recovering 3 mill that is owed to the club is his job, nothing more nothing less. He got/gets paid well to do it. Quite simply, that is a red herring.

 

And Zappa, Bain's situation happens frequently. Both sides believe they are right, that happens a lot. I can understand you saying that Bain wouldnt take legal action if he didnt think he had a case. Likewise it can be said that Whyte wouldnt suspend him (and McIntyre) if HE didnt think he had rights to do so. Do you honestly think that Whyte would suspend them without thinking he had a strong case for doing so ? Of course he would. Why ? Because he knows that without any case then he will still have to pay them, and more than what he would by offering up a severance, as well as legal fees.

 

I am not saying that Whyte is right. I am not saying that Bain is right. None of us know and only time will tell. But these things DO happen frequently where both sides believe they are right (no different, really, to our ongoing saga with HMRC).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bain's new contract just months before the takeover, giving him a great pay rise and a fixed term contract (to give him a bigger pay-off post-takeover) was corrupt at best, and as finance director he must have authorised it, or at worst didnt do anything to say wait a minute, everyone should be on the same terms until the new owners come in.

 

The 2 of them were at it for their own good when they knew they were going to be surplus to requirements under the new regime, and deserve nothing but our contempt for their actions.

 

As CEO and FD under the old regime they hardly ran the club positively did they? Unless you call running it into the ground positive!

 

Dont disagree with too much of what you say but I suspect the piece in bold you are wrong. It is a public company, the FD probably doesnt have sole rights to authorise such a thing. It would be very irregular if he did. A compensation committee would decide upon that or, failing to have a compensation committee the Board of Directors would. McIntyre would be ONE vote if a Board vote (if there was a compensation committee he would be unlikely to be involved in the decision) and therefore a piece of the process, not sole owner of authorising it.

 

Some of what you say is supposition and subject to legal proceedings ("at it for their own good") but I certainly agree with your last sentence that it appears that they were anything but positive with regards to the long-term running of the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.