Wallace happy with off-field progress at Rangers

[der Berliner 3,196]

my guess is it includes cut so severe that no one will renew if they publish it.

 

You see, as I said somewhere else, what would expect people from Dave King here? Would he tolerate what goes on beyond board level? Wouldn't he be as "nasty" and make cuts equally severe ... to make us more profitable? The way the pendulum swings these days, I wouldn't be surprised if the board gets all the flak if it comes to the above, whereas King looks on a touch gleefully, as he's not in the headlights about this ... (which is why quite a few people would like to know what his plans are on this topic).

[D'Artagnan 173]

On the timing Frankie, I agree that this 25th-28th thing looks bad and I accept that we are an unusual times but I have to repeat that I don't think that the outcome of the review is the main deciding factor for most people in their decision whether or not to renew. Let's say the review tells us nothing new, what percentage of fans will not renew on that basis? Personally I think it will have quite a lot to offer if the new sponsorship trailer is anything to go by.

 

The cynics may well be right that the timing was engineered but equally there can be no doubt that a comprehensive review was required. Not much point in bringing in professionals like Wallace and Nash and then saying just carry on in the same disastrous way the Club has been run these past several years.

 

However, how could this clash of dates have been avoided. Shorten the review period, possible; but then Wallace would have argued he didn't have enough time. Delay the ST renewals till May as normal; but we are desperate for money.

 

Of course BH, perhaps some Devil's Advocate will come along and point out that the primary cause in the tight deadlines is possibly the threat of a ST Trust - one which is destined to fail with a non-co-operative board.

 

The best way to bring this all to an end is for King to publish the Somers's e-mail which gave rise to the latest round of exchanges - then there would be no need for all this nonsense - it would Game Over.

[Blue Moon 1,097]

what am i missing here? they aren't listed

 

He was talking about Paddy power's share of the market, not 32 Red.

[Blue Moon 1,097]

Of course BH' date=' perhaps some Devil's Advocate will come along and point out that the primary cause in the tight deadlines is possibly the threat of a ST Trust - one which is destined to fail with a non-co-operative board.

 

The best way to bring this all to an end is for King to publish the Somers's e-mail which gave rise to the latest round of exchanges - then there would be no need for all this nonsense - it would Game Over.[/quote']

 

I don't suppose you can tell us what was in Somer's e mail? If it was so bad, why isn't he telling us?

[TheTinMan99 0]

Of course BH' date=' perhaps some Devil's Advocate will come along and point out that the primary cause in the tight deadlines is possibly the threat of a ST Trust - one which is destined to fail with a non-co-operative board.

 

The best way to bring this all to an end is for King to publish the Somers's e-mail which gave rise to the latest round of exchanges - then there would be no need for all this nonsense - it would Game Over.[/quote']

 

Are you sure it was an e-mail though, D'Art? I don't remember King saying that specifically. It may have just been a phone call, although it would probably be prudent to record all dealings with the board. Whatever games are being played, it's book holders that will suffer by being forced onto a finance scheme on worse terms if they delay. All before April is even out.

 

The board have pulled a stroke here, no matter what King, or the trust have said, or have planned.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Are you sure it was an e-mail though, D'Art? I don't remember King saying that specifically. It may have just been a phone call, although it would probably be prudent to record all dealings with the board. Whatever games are being played, it's book holders that will suffer by being forced onto a finance scheme on worse terms if they delay. All before April is even out.

 

The board have pulled a stroke here, no matter what King, or the trust have said, or have planned.

 

Its what SOS quoted to me on my Twitter Time Line TM - and when I asked Chris Graham about it later he also alluded to a desire for DK to publish it - but doubted he would

[the gunslinger 3,366]

You see, as I said somewhere else, what would expect people from Dave King here? Would he tolerate what goes on beyond board level? Wouldn't he be as "nasty" and make cuts equally severe ... to make us more profitable? The way the pendulum swings these days, I wouldn't be surprised if the board gets all the flak if it comes to the above, whereas King looks on a touch gleefully, as he's not in the headlights about this ... (which is why quite a few people would like to know what his plans are on this topic).

 

i was talking a bout cuts to the playing squad. just when we need to be upping the first team budgets severely.

[TheTinMan99 0]

Its what SOS quoted to me on my Twitter Time Line TM - and when I asked Chris Graham about it later he also alluded to a desire for DK to publish it - but doubted he would

 

Fair enough if you have heard it elsewhere, but I'm not convinced that Somers would be so naive to put something like that in writing.

[der Berliner 3,196]

i was talking a bout cuts to the playing squad. just when we need to be upping the first team budgets severely.

 

The questions remain nonetheless. For the time being, we'll have to wait and see.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

He was talking about Paddy power's share of the market, not 32 Red.

 

ok mate got you. yeah they are big.