bluebear54 0 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 wouldn't be my choice but would be a huge step in the right direction. we won't get anyone more experienced certainly. for personal reasons i would actually welcome it as well. Care to expand on why you would welcome him for personal reasons? We can keep it a secret between you, me, the Board and the Internet if you want. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 my cousin works for rangers and they get on really well. he helped set up her business. she likes him alot. she likes charles as well in fairness. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 The suggestion of Bain shows a lack of imagination, and we can do a lot better, but is actually a better suggestion than a vast majority of those in the forums over the past 24 hours. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 rumor has it craig mather has the job which would be a huge disappointment. gordon mckie is the best suggestion i have seen so far. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 rumor has it craig mather has the job which would be a huge disappointment. Why? gordon mckie is the best suggestion i have seen so far. Why? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 why1 because their would have to be a question of tared with greens brush. he also has no experience and his involvement in the accademy has always worried me given hes an agent. more power to foist his products on us would be wrong imho. but really because it's hard to see what he brings to the club in that role at all. we will be paying top dollar and we should be getting experience. wasn't lawwell on the board at the bank of england prior to celtc. mind you we shouldn't be paying the million a year he trousers all in. why2. good experience in sport. hes already been over the books and came up with a plan of how to recover us. kennedy is no mug and hired him for a good reason. he runs a tight ship and we are in a loss making situation and hes a rangers fan. but i am the last person to be deciding who we should have those are just as i see it. this is far more your field do you have any suggestions? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 why1 because their would have to be a question of tared with greens brush. he also has no experience and his involvement in the accademy has always worried me given hes an agent. more power to foist his products on us would be wrong imho. but really because it's hard to see what he brings to the club in that role at all. we will be paying top dollar and we should be getting experience. wasn't lawwell on the board at the bank of england prior to celtc. mind you we shouldn't be paying the million a year he trousers all in. why2. good experience in sport. hes already been over the books and came up with a plan of how to recover us. kennedy is no mug and hired him for a good reason. he runs a tight ship and we are in a loss making situation and hes a rangers fan. but i am the last person to be deciding who we should have those are just as i see it. this is far more your field do you have any suggestions? A reasonable analysis. Don't know. Disagree with most of the names suggested for one reason or another. It probably shouldn't be a major shareholder though. Probably being someone in who is unconnected with the club. Don't have any opinion on Gordon McKie. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 On a sidenote ... (and something rather easy for real journalists to dig up) ... (10) he has been a director of a club in membership of any National Association which has undergone an insolvency event within the five year period preceding the said insolvency event. ... might be a stumbling block too. Surely not if he was not a director? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 A reasonable analysis. Don't know. Disagree with most of the names suggested for one reason or another. It probably shouldn't be a major shareholder though. Probably being someone in who is unconnected with the club. Don't have any opinion on Gordon McKie. very much agree on it not being a major shareholder. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 Surely not if he was not a director? good point. one i missed actually. being on the board doesn't make you a director. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.