Rangersitis 0 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Guess we will need to look into the St James Park renaming charade and get clued up on how that developed. Ashley is the sort of guy who just wants to make money - i wonder if he has a price, and if so - how much? Here you go. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,247 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 And another thing - easdale is an utter joke! Implying its the fans fault there is a cash flow problems, referring to George Letham as 'that guy' etc. And who was he speaking as exactly? Sandy Easdale Shareholder...or Sandy Easdale Director?? I also notice the hints about board room split and he doesnt seem to be 'on board' with Wallace either. Shambles!! In the world of business stats and figures it is, no way about it. Like any other club ours is dependent on ST and pay-at-the-gate money. If supporters stay away, it will cause problems. No matter the whys and ifs and buts. At this moment and time you can just hope that the naming rights deal - now we know why no-one's talked about it - is a half decent one and that the share issue is taken up in full. And in the cold light of day we can check what Murray Park costs us per season and what it would cost if we train at a university sports complex (like Dundee United does) instead. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Quite possibly. I cant really understand why green would make the deal then turn around and spend so much cash on trying to overturn it? Unless he was pals with the lawyers and they needed easy work. Everyone gets to earn a couple of bob when Chuckles is around. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 There will be a few less supporters turning up for the next match after this. For a growing number, enough is enough. They held back reluctantly on season tickets but will feel now that their decision was the right one. And some who renewed may be wishing they hadn't. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 In the world of business stats and figures it is, no way about it. Like any other club ours is dependent on ST and pay-at-the-gate money. If supporters stay away, it will cause problems. No matter the whys and ifs and buts. At this moment and time you can just hope that the naming rights deal - now we know why no-one's talked about it - is a half decent one and that the share issue is taken up in full. And in the cold light of day we can check what Murray Park costs us per season and what it would cost if we train at a university sports complex (like Dundee United does) instead. Pish. Assuming that the story stands up, and Easdale wasn't refuting it, what part of a £1 deal is going to be half decent? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Ger_1872 2 Posted September 3, 2014 Author Share Posted September 3, 2014 In the world of business stats and figures it is, no way about it. Like any other club ours is dependent on ST and pay-at-the-gate money. If supporters stay away, it will cause problems. No matter the whys and ifs and buts. At this moment and time you can just hope that the naming rights deal - now we know why no-one's talked about it - is a half decent one and that the share issue is taken up in full. And in the cold light of day we can check what Murray Park costs us per season and what it would cost if we train at a university sports complex (like Dundee United does) instead. Well in terms of fans not turning up - we need this share issue to reach the end of the year. If the other 10,000-12,000 season tickets were taken up, that would have given us about £3-4M extra income. Which relates to the same amount of cash we are being asked for right now...to take us to the end of the year. So, with my very rough estimations at this late hour, the fans not buying into the ST renewals have brought this issue nearer - but are not responsible for it! The way i see it, this was always going to happen this season. We are loss making like its going out of fashion and there cant have been any real expectations that this season would provide a greater level of income other than the increase in ST prices across an amount of sales. But we needed 37,000 ST's last season - with a few loans to see us through! We might have had cash in the bank to try and minimise the losses but that pot of cash is close to, or has already, ran out. We have no alternatives to seeking additional funds via share issues - despite the efforts of the board (investment committee included) over the past 9 months or so - not a lot has been done to improve things. So i still find it rather odd that fans are being held accountable for this shortfall - for me, it was always on the cards. What an awful situation! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Pish. Assuming that the story stands up, and Easdale wasn't refuting it, what part of a £1 deal is going to be half decent? i don't think he's seen the car crash piece by easedale yet. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Ger_1872 2 Posted September 3, 2014 Author Share Posted September 3, 2014 Its developments like this might go someway as to explain the boards lack of action with Dave Kings offer of cash a while back? Where was the investment committee hiding all this time?? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Its developments like this might go someway as to explain the boards lack of action with Dave Kings offer of cash a while back? Where was the investment committee hiding all this time?? It might be a reason why they would not let King look at the financials. Another point that bothers me is Green's role as a director. Is there not some kind of market rule that the director of a board must act in the best interests of the club? Even if he argued that to get Ashley to underwrite the share issue he had to give this deal as an incentive, why would he try to pursue legal action to have the deal quashed? Maybe a shareholder could ask the police to investigate this. Don't go away, Chuckles. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sannybear 0 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 You just begin to wonder where the next body blow is coming from and where this will all end . Utterly disgraceful . 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.