Chibmark 15 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I feel sick to my stomach every time i read one of his "pieces" he can't just report on the facts he always has to have a pop at Rangers or Rangers supporters his hatred for all things Rangers just oozes out of everything he writes....... Don't worry about him. Guys like him are eternally miserable. Imagine hating something so much that it consumes your every waking moment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 These rumours aren't just coming from IA or Celtic fans unfortunately. Can't say I'm convinced by any of the claims but I think it could be a big week. Graham Wallace's position is certainly an interesting one. If the board have tasked Wallace with serious cost reduction it would be remiss of him not to consider administration. As unpalatable as that is for you and me there's a business case to be made for it. There's also a business case to be made for redundancies, letting players go, reducing other overheads, selling players or selling land. If he has to report to the board on the options the club has then admin is an option, it's an extreme one but it can't be discounted without being examined. If Wallace has spoken to accountants based on finding out what would be involved, the costs and the likely outcome then he's just doing his job. It neither means it's going to happen this week or it's ever going to happen. I'm no supporter of this board but it's clear we're broke, again, and that Wallace has been tasked with fixing that. I'm not sure Wallace is the person to blame here. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Somewhat of a faux pas from King RE: Mad Phil and on its own it's not really a big issue for me. However, it does represent a small example of ignorance with respect to the overall picture of the political/media situation in Scotland. To be fair to King he lives several thousand miles away so has an excuse. Nevertheless, I'd like to think he won't make the same mistake again. Unlike, say Irvine/McMurdo/Easdales, who continue to utilise and recommend Phil and Scotzine whenever their argument suits them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If the board have tasked Wallace with serious cost reduction it would be remiss of him not to consider administration. As unpalatable as that is for you and me there's a business case to be made for it. There's also a business case to be made for redundancies, letting players go, reducing other overheads, selling players or selling land. If he has to report to the board on the options the club has then admin is an option, it's an extreme one but it can't be discounted without being examined. If Wallace has spoken to accountants based on finding out what would be involved, the costs and the likely outcome then he's just doing his job. It neither means it's going to happen this week or it's ever going to happen. I'm no supporter of this board but it's clear we're broke, again, and that Wallace has been tasked with fixing that. I'm not sure Wallace is the person to blame here. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising Wallace per se here. Like you say, pre-pack admin is just another tool available in a box that is rapidly running out of implements. However, if the club is considering such a nuclear strategy then they should be open about it. Furthermore, we have to recognise that should the club go into admin again, the likelihood of selling 36,000 season tickets may be very small as supporters will look towards King en masse. Suffice to say, once again we're suffering from an information vacuum. Firstly, and most importantly from the club, and secondly from King. It's not so much Ready to Listen but Always Hiding. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If the board have tasked Wallace with serious cost reduction it would be remiss of him not to consider administration. As unpalatable as that is for you and me there's a business case to be made for it. There's also a business case to be made for redundancies, letting players go, reducing other overheads, selling players or selling land. If he has to report to the board on the options the club has then admin is an option, it's an extreme one but it can't be discounted without being examined. If Wallace has spoken to accountants based on finding out what would be involved, the costs and the likely outcome then he's just doing his job. It neither means it's going to happen this week or it's ever going to happen. I'm no supporter of this board but it's clear we're broke, again, and that Wallace has been tasked with fixing that. I'm not sure Wallace is the person to blame here. Wouldn't work for me amms despite the favourable financial benefits you have highlighted - he has given numerous assurances to fans that admin would not occur during his watch - if it were to come to fruition he would have to fall on his sword. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 reads like the board are putting this out via phil to blackmail king into buying their shares. For goodness sake GS - that is just utter nonsense and not helpful to anyone. We do ourselves and our club no favours when we allow our allegiances to distort the truth, however uncomfortable it may be. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If there's admin, would that mean Laxey walking away with the Albion and Edmiston? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Ger_1872 2 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If there's admin, would that mean Laxey walking away with the Albion and Edmiston? If that's the case, i heard this morning that would render the Club Deck useless as apparently that cannot open unless the car parking space is made available? This security could be most significant in this charade. As King stated, they have already achieved the 'high risk' interest rate in addition to having the loan secured.....its a shambles that was allowed to happen! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If the board have tasked Wallace with serious cost reduction it would be remiss of him not to consider administration. As unpalatable as that is for you and me there's a business case to be made for it. There's also a business case to be made for redundancies, letting players go, reducing other overheads, selling players or selling land. If he has to report to the board on the options the club has then admin is an option, it's an extreme one but it can't be discounted without being examined. If Wallace has spoken to accountants based on finding out what would be involved, the costs and the likely outcome then he's just doing his job. It neither means it's going to happen this week or it's ever going to happen. I'm no supporter of this board but it's clear we're broke, again, and that Wallace has been tasked with fixing that. I'm not sure Wallace is the person to blame here. Using admin to get out of redundancy payments is morally abhorrent 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 For goodness sake GS - that is just utter nonsense and not helpful to anyone. We do ourselves and our club no favours when we allow our allegiances to distort the truth' date=' however uncomfortable it may be.[/quote'] It's exactly how it reads 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.