the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 What are these mate? Any details? We will see in the accounts but up to Jan we were yet to get a penny from retail. Then we have easdales admission of Ibrox naming rights being sold for a pound. That's just the ones we know about. Safe to assume their are more when your CEO is calling them onerous. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 What are these mate? Any details? Anything to do with Ashley for a start... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The enemy of my enemy is my friend? Personally, it's far too late for rats like Wallace to be allowed to jump ship when his position is becoming precarious. He was always going tof be the next Mather. Sink the lot of them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 We will see in the accounts but up to Jan we were yet to get a penny from retail. Then we have easdales admission of Ibrox naming rights being sold for a pound. That's just the ones we know about. Safe to assume their are more when your CEO is calling them onerous. Why has that CEO never expanded on what contracts he believes are onerous? Why has that CEO not made one single comment on that £1 deal, or on the claims that £400k was spent on legal fees attempting to undo it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Why has that CEO never expanded on what contracts he believes are onerous? Why has that CEO not made one single comment on that £1 deal, or on the claims that £400k was spent on legal fees attempting to undo it? Fear I expect for his job 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,148 Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 What percentage of the votes would be needed to force their removal? That may depend on the issue/resolution. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 i think 50% 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,148 Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 i think 50% Well, 51% but what I meant was, it's not clear who'd vote what way in each resolution. For example, just because Laxey may vote for a new share issue doesn't mean they'd vote against removing a director. It's all up in the air. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg_Mcnoleg 50 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 This'll be Ashley preempting the move by King and co. covered in the Jackson story. Given he's said he doesn't want to invest, we can look forward to afat Cockney gobshyte with bottomless pockets leeching money away from the club indefinitely or a bunch of supporters with some, though not limitless, money trying to look after it. I can already see what way this is going to go. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Fear I expect for his job They are perfectly valid reasons for him to lose his job, and despite me not agreeing with the intentions of those trying to force him out, he should be seen off the premises forthwith. I realise that you have put on your Dave King hat once again, but please leave the politics aside, and view as one, all those who have sought to damage Rangers in return for personal gain. 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.