pete 2,494 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Battle of Little Bighorn. In 1872 four men stepped out of a rowing boat and started playing a game of football. Just four years later in 1876 General Custer was making his last stand against the Indians at the battle of Little Bighorn. Little would these guys think that in 2015 the football team they were starting would look more like a battle ground in Montana than a friendly kick of a ball at Glasgow green. The Rangers Board are copying General Custer, in that Custer ordered his men to shoot their horses so as they could use them as shields’ The Rangers board are also killing their biggest asset, the Rangers retail business so as they can make a last stand. Funny enough the General sent to support Custer was General Crook well there is another similarity we all know he also exists in our battle. In fact some may think the board room are all related to General Crook because they keep calling them by that name. Of course Custer was a proud flamboyant stubborn man and refused any offers of help he was offered as he wanted to keep himself in the limelight. Our Board have also refused any help they have been offered just so they can keep their blazers and also stay in the limelight. The Indians in this story are of course Dave King and the three bears. They also have a lot in common with the Indians in the story. Custer was trying to stop a group of Indians reaching their goal in getting back to the reservation. All of a sudden the Indians pulled off an unexpected move, Just like King and the 3 bears did, and Custer realized he was totally surrounded. Custer and his men perished in the pursuing battle. The history books portray Custer as some kind of Hero, just like our Mr. Somers seems to think he is, but modern research is now proving that Custer’s men died in a situation of panic and fleeing. Our Board may not yet be fleeing but it is obvious that panic has certainly set in. Let’s hope that they differ from General Custer and accept an offer of help even if it is from the Indians. Otherwise they will be put to an EGM sword. I had just written this as well. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Anything that still has the Easdales with influence is unacceptable, and will just be more of the same. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 One is not enough, but debt for equity will likely dilute everyone else which means more power. More board places after the rights issue? If this shower know their arses are toast following an AGM, why are they insisting on minimum representation ? what are they going to sign over to Ashley while they hang on ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) What is the rationale behind these stupid dances? OK, I suppose you could make the argument that 'they' are trying to get the money they need without giving away power, but it's pretty clear that no-one at all, anywhere is willing to give that lot money to do with as they please. Surely they've got it by now, no-one trusts them with a bag of sweeties never mind serious money? So why bother pissing into the increasingly strong wind, dragging things out, making things worse? These people hate Rangers, you'll never convince me otherwise. They went way beyond sheer incompetence and self interest years ago, it's now sheer spite. Edited January 10, 2015 by andy steel 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Radio Scotland - McLaughlin. Also conjecture that Ashlay will sell to ParkCo. McLaughlin is being fed by Irvine so I will take this with a pinch of salt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siam69 0 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 One is not enough, but debt for equity will likely dilute everyone else which means more power. More board places after the rights issue? I agree, but if it allows a foothold, money in, stabilised for limited time, King calls EGM and gets the Rats cleansed to fuck outta out club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 other than spite it can only mean they have a trick up thier sleeves that relies on the good guys only having one guy on the board. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I don't care how they go about it, but Dave King, George Taylor, Dougie Park & George Letham really must get rid of Somers and James Easdale and get at least 2 men on the PLC board to replace them. Getting rid of Sandy Easdale from the Club board can come later after they've got control of the PLC board. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 5,825 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Take the olive branch and make the Weasdales and Somers eat it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Just get the blazer chasers out. 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.