Bluedell 5,329 Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Llambias is brusque that is for sure but he is or appears to be well versed in the corporate world and had achieved some cost cutting which his predecessor had not. Whether he cut costs will be never known. Yes, he got rid of people but that's not the same thing. How much were Ashley's companies going to charge for performing the services for us? He maintained his independence from Sports Direct but clearly that is open to considerable doubt and it is up to KingCo to prove otherwise. I don't recall anything that was done that suggested any sort of independence from Ashley. Llambias's actions, from the £5m loan deal to the instructions that we had to play Newcastle players showed that he was in Ashley's pockets. I'm not sure why it is up to King to prove otherwise when Llambias's own actions prove it. It is up to anyone else to prove otherwise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Given how fast we are clearly burning through cash its hard to believe costs are lower. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) On the face of it, L&L may have been good for the club so I can see why some bears were prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. However their actions since should have totally eroded that so if anyone still thinks their appointment (or indeed retention) was for the good of the club then they are deluded. How could they have been good? That would go against all available evidence at the time. Edited March 10, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I can agree with that but I know there are many who agree with me, a minority for sure and perhaps not many if any on here, but not an insignificant minority. Yes, there will always be a lunatic fringe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfly Trumpeter 50 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 A couple of percent Yet this cretin claims it as a personal triumph I don't think any Rangers supporters voted to keep the Lamb. And at the egm, apart from Ashley, only 1.33% of the issued shares wanted to keep him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The trouble with this is you bring zero honesty to the debate. Your driving an agenda because your far to bright to believe what your saying. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Given how fast we are clearly burning through cash its hard to believe costs are lower. Alas, we'll hopefully know soon enough, where that money was actually burned and whether some of it can be brought back legally, even though I doubt that the latter will take place anytime soon, if at all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 On the face of it, L&L may have been good for the club so I can see why some bears were prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. However their actions since should have totally eroded that so if anyone still thinks their appointment (or indeed retention) was for the good of the club then they are deluded. The strange thing is that they are defended more than Somers and Easdale - but at least those two both resigned without pay-offs and would have allowed us to save money on the EGM. You've got to be horrendous to appear a lot more damaging to Rangers in your last actions than those two incompetents. We've now got the good guys, perhaps Somers and Easdale were merely the ugly, L&L are shown to be the bad guys. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 How much cost cutting has he achieved? Question is, how many jobs could we have paid for with the money for the EGM and L&L pay-off demands? What's that £340k? Say 20 part-time jobs for a year? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The trouble with this is you bring zero honesty to the debate. Your driving an agenda because your far to bright to believe what your saying. Could you find another way to put that without falsly accusing me of being dishonest. 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.