Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[AberdeenBud]

Horrific chat btw, I'll leave it at that.

Nicely detracts from Admin mk 2 and Teflon Sally as well.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Certainly far more sectarian than WATP or No Surrender or adding the odd H in Bhairnforever, yet we have been accused on this very thread of being bigots for using such things, the Ds and Ps certainly fly their double standards high, ok look I just said something else sectarian.

I am perfectly aware of the definition, as are you, clearly as you are intent on using it, how about we ignore your whataboutery and you try answering the original point.

So when Celtic fans sing (at hearts games) on mass "go home you ****" what are they meaning?

100% agree, if someone squealed like a wee piggy

You are as ever an expert on double standards.

[~~~]

Horrific chat btw, I'll leave it at that.

Nicely detracts from Admin mk 2 and Teflon Sally as well.

Good point.

Just as before they don't seem bothered about the latest coming out from the club

I find it funny how quickly they have turned on Charles Green

Remember how "future for Rangers"

http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php/topic/188485-charles-green-rangers-future/

He says RFC are exploring opportunities in Asia, especially China and India - IA is talking to the Chinese Minister for Sport and is hoping to get him over to Ibrox for a match.

RFC believes we can generate £100M per year in 'media rights'

CG alluded that 'The Sports Direct Stadium' might not be desirable, but 'The iBrox Stadium' (as in Apple iPad/iPhone etc.) would be

CG said he will personally make money from Rangers, but he will make it in the right way.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Enrico Annoni

[Apache Don]

Oh FFS.

We get one side insisting they should be allowed to say "h**" and the others saying "what's wrong with t**?"

Seriously, can we all stop being such juvenile wee cretins please?

If these terms are of debatable virtue, would it not be easier to simply use alternatives, as Bearwithme suggested earlier?

Quite. I've always preferred fud or blue puke.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

It's easy to hand it out like you do,anonymously via a football forum but spare me the Internet tough guy routine please as it's beyond tragic....

Hand what out? Are you 12 or something?

When you ever come to the table with something worth discussing, I'll discuss. Keep coming on with personal insults that add nothing but reinforcement of the stereotype decent people have of your clubs' supporters, and I'll treat you as you deserve. As a bitter, repetitive, wee tool.

[Henrik's tongue]

Oh FFS.

We get one side insisting they should be allowed to say "h**" and the others saying "what's wrong with t**?"

Seriously, can we all stop being such juvenile wee cretins please?

If these terms are of debatable virtue, would it not be easier to simply use alternatives, as Bearwithme suggested earlier?

^^^^ *** ***

[Magoo9uk]

Hand what out? Are you 12 or something?

When you ever come to the table with something worth discussing, I'll discuss. Keep coming on with personal insults that add nothing but reinforcement of the stereotype decent people have of your clubs'

supporters, and I'll treat you as you deserve. As a

bitter, repetitive, wee tool.

Decent people like you?

[johncolegrady]

But it's not just a term for Rangers supporters. Hearts fans in particular get referred to, especially by bigoted sections of the Celtic support, as "H*ns without the bus fare" and the like. Why? Because they perceive Hearts as the Protestant team in Edinburgh.

I believe using the abbreviation of Timothy for Celtic fans is banned on here as well. But I'm not going to whinge about it. Get a life and use some of the many other words available.

Sevconians.

[No8.]

Where is the Professor of lexicography No.8 to inform all of us on the origins of Tvm.

I'm an avowed atheist but would consider tvm to worse at is derives from a specific insult on a persons religion belief, hvn does not.

I am saying nothing about that word. I got a warning for making. a joke about my wife being a Tim.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Decent people like you?

Putting words in my mouth, are we?

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Sevconians.

Tax-dodgers, cheats, liars, bullies, deniers....

Your right, JCG, plenty of fitting epithets to choose from.

[flyingrodent]

Oh FFS.

We get one side insisting they should be allowed to say "h**" and the others saying "what's wrong with t**?"

Seriously, can we all stop being such juvenile wee cretins please?

If these terms are of debatable virtue, would it not be easier to simply use alternatives, as Bearwithme suggested earlier?

Can't say I'm much bothered, to be honest. Nonetheless, I am a terrible pedant, and that particular case is one where there's a provable truth, rather than just a lot of tit for tat about who's the most upset. No doubt it bores everyone else rigid.

[Apache Don]

Right then, to get us back on topic and reasoned, grown-up discussion. Will the fat fud's offer of taking a pay cut, be enough to save the blue puke?

[Highlandmagyar]

Right then, to get us back on topic and reasoned, grown-up discussion. Will the fat fud's offer of taking a pay cut, be enough to save the blue puke?

The rate they are burning money I doubt it. It would make The Bank of England blanche.

[Jacksgranda]

Oh FFS.

We get one side insisting they should be allowed to say "h**" and the others saying "what's wrong with t**?"

Seriously, can we all stop being such juvenile wee cretins please?

If these terms are of debatable virtue, would it not be easier to simply use alternatives, as Bearwithme suggested earlier?

Why not use "hims" and "tuns"? Preferably both in the same sentence, so the participants in this juvenile name calling farce can rearrange the letters to suit their own proclivities.

[No8.]

That's exactly the point, MT.

He may, in his little brain, not have realised he was causing offence. I then stated quite politely (repeated, actually) that I found his language to be grossly offensive. and discriminatory at that - I then requested that he desist.

He then repeated it. In law, it doesn't matter what he thinks - it has been clearly stated that using this language, in this manner, to this individual, is causing harm. By repeating it, he is compounding that harm.

Still, in all honesty, it's what we've expect from many fans of rangers and their successors. Treating it as their problem and not ours is probably the best way to deal with it.

Amazing that you are so easily offended considering the way you continually try and belittle other posters and throw insults about.

[CityDave]

And then there's......

Club braces itself for crunch meeting of shareholders to decide the future

Sunday 11 August 2013

The Rangers directors have nine days to reach an agreement with the shareholders who want to see changes made to the board, or they will have to hold a general meeting.

A requisition notice was made to the club allowing 18 days for chief executive Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge, the finance director, and Bryan Smart, the non-executive director, to be removed from the board and replaced by Paul Murray, the former Rangers director, and Frank Blin, the former executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

If the changes are not made, or a settlement not reached, the club will have 21 days from the end of the deadline to hold the general meeting, at which shareholders will vote on the proposals. The latest it could be held is September 11, seven days before the audited accounts are due to be published.

The requisition notice was supported by a little less than 29% of shareholders, including three of the major financial institutions and Jim McColl, the leading Scottish businessman. The group is not seeking to launch a takeover, but the shareholders are concerned about the club's finances and a board that has often been fractured.

Charles Green, who fronted the consortium that bought the ­business and assets from Rangers Football Club plc in liquidation last summer, claims to control 51% of the shareholders. Green himself holds the single-largest shareholding, of around 7%. The Sunday Herald understands that the group behind the requisition is now backed by more than 29%. Fans hold around 11%, but much of that is split among individuals, while Mike Ashley, the owner of Sports Direct, is the fifth-largest shareholder with 4.69%, and could be a critical figure in any vote.

Walter Smith urged the board to find a way to avoid the general meeting when he stood down as chairman last week. He feels unable to work with Green, who returned last week as a paid consultant, and because he backs the shareholders behind the requisition notice. Any compromise would only be likely if somebody on the board pushed for it.

Mather, though, could be significant in this respect. He has earned the trust of manager Ally McCoist and Smith, while during a meeting with fans last week he pledged to contact McColl. Mather's reputation was enhanced following the fans' meeting, while Stockbridge attracted criticism for saying that he did not know how much of the £22 million raised in last December's Initial Public Offering (IPO) of shares remains.

Mather could push for a compromise that involves him staying on as chief executive while the other changes are imposed. McColl and the other shareholders are determined to change the board. Brinkmanship will continue, with both sides believing they would win a shareholder vote.

[AberdeenBud]

And then there's......

Club braces itself for crunch meeting of shareholders to decide the future

Sunday 11 August 2013

The Rangers directors have nine days to reach an agreement with the shareholders who want to see changes made to the board, or they will have to hold a general meeting.

A requisition notice was made to the club allowing 18 days for chief executive Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge, the finance director, and Bryan Smart, the non-executive director, to be removed from the board and replaced by Paul Murray, the former Rangers director, and Frank Blin, the former executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

If the changes are not made, or a settlement not reached, the club will have 21 days from the end of the deadline to hold the general meeting, at which shareholders will vote on the proposals. The latest it could be held is September 11, seven days before the audited accounts are due to be published.

The requisition notice was supported by a little less than 29% of shareholders, including three of the major financial institutions and Jim McColl, the leading Scottish businessman. The group is not seeking to launch a takeover, but the shareholders are concerned about the club's finances and a board that has often been fractured.

Charles Green, who fronted the consortium that bought the ­business and assets from Rangers Football Club plc in liquidation last summer, claims to control 51% of the shareholders. Green himself holds the single-largest shareholding, of around 7%. The Sunday Herald understands that the group behind the requisition is now backed by more than 29%. Fans hold around 11%, but much of that is split among individuals, while Mike Ashley, the owner of Sports Direct, is the fifth-largest shareholder with 4.69%, and could be a critical figure in any vote.

Walter Smith urged the board to find a way to avoid the general meeting when he stood down as chairman last week. He feels unable to work with Green, who returned last week as a paid consultant, and because he backs the shareholders behind the requisition notice. Any compromise would only be likely if somebody on the board pushed for it.

Mather, though, could be significant in this respect. He has earned the trust of manager Ally McCoist and Smith, while during a meeting with fans last week he pledged to contact McColl. Mather's reputation was enhanced following the fans' meeting, while Stockbridge attracted criticism for saying that he did not know how much of the £22 million raised in last December's Initial Public Offering (IPO) of shares remains.

Mather could push for a compromise that involves him staying on as chief executive while the other changes are imposed. McColl and the other shareholders are determined to change the board. Brinkmanship will continue, with both sides believing they would win a shareholder vote.

[thelegendthatis]

Who will benefit from this Fund

100% of the funds generated through the purchasing of the Red and Black scarves will go towards buying tickets for future home games. The tickets will then be given to children’s charities, schools, football clubs, BBs, etc, throughout Glasgow.

• 100% of the profits will go towards buying Rangers Tickets
• Tickets will be given to school headmasters
• ny surplus cash will be used to purchase Rising Star tickets at the last match of the season.
• We will spend all funds raised on Purchasing tickets

Hope they kept receipts of all their handouts so they can let those who bought scarves know they helped make a difference.

I assume they paid the scarf manufacturers.

I originally chose my animated gif as a tribute to the Scarf Brigade hoping it would all blow up in their faces sometime. Just like the new club/company.

[Bearwithme]

And then there's......

Club braces itself for crunch meeting of shareholders to decide the future

Sunday 11 August 2013

The Rangers directors have nine days to reach an agreement with the shareholders who want to see changes made to the board, or they will have to hold a general meeting.

A requisition notice was made to the club allowing 18 days for chief executive Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge, the finance director, and Bryan Smart, the non-executive director, to be removed from the board and replaced by Paul Murray, the former Rangers director, and Frank Blin, the former executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

If the changes are not made, or a settlement not reached, the club will have 21 days from the end of the deadline to hold the general meeting, at which shareholders will vote on the proposals. The latest it could be held is September 11, seven days before the audited accounts are due to be published.

The requisition notice was supported by a little less than 29% of shareholders, including three of the major financial institutions and Jim McColl, the leading Scottish businessman. The group is not seeking to launch a takeover, but the shareholders are concerned about the club's finances and a board that has often been fractured.

Charles Green, who fronted the consortium that bought the ­business and assets from Rangers Football Club plc in liquidation last summer, claims to control 51% of the shareholders. Green himself holds the single-largest shareholding, of around 7%. The Sunday Herald understands that the group behind the requisition is now backed by more than 29%. Fans hold around 11%, but much of that is split among individuals, while Mike Ashley, the owner of Sports Direct, is the fifth-largest shareholder with 4.69%, and could be a critical figure in any vote.

Walter Smith urged the board to find a way to avoid the general meeting when he stood down as chairman last week. He feels unable to work with Green, who returned last week as a paid consultant, and because he backs the shareholders behind the requisition notice. Any compromise would only be likely if somebody on the board pushed for it.

Mather, though, could be significant in this respect. He has earned the trust of manager Ally McCoist and Smith, while during a meeting with fans last week he pledged to contact McColl. Mather's reputation was enhanced following the fans' meeting, while Stockbridge attracted criticism for saying that he did not know how much of the £22 million raised in last December's Initial Public Offering (IPO) of shares remains.

Mather could push for a compromise that involves him staying on as chief executive while the other changes are imposed. McColl and the other shareholders are determined to change the board. Brinkmanship will continue, with both sides believing they would win a shareholder vote.

I'd say Rangers fans in general hope the boardroom changes go through. However I doubt if anyone (certainly not anyone outwith the main protagonists) knows what percentage of shares either side will be able to call on.