Laudrup1

My Dad always said Baxter was our best ever. He'd been going to Ibrox since just after the war and I grew up on stories of Jim just being the best. Then Laudrup turned up and he changed his mind, just.

I would imagine, given the kids are at school and can't attend during the day, it will indeed improve them

It's almost like having spent all that, I had to save up for the last few bits. Just for you then...

The answer to your second question was in the notice they gave about the proposed account and yes, you can get your money back if you change your mind. An answer to the first question is likely a very difficult thing to give without dialogue from the club. I'd like to be able to retain my two seats through the scheme of possible but I'd be willing to forfeit that for the greater good. Nothing is bigger than the future of the club and if I have to move a few feet, it's no skin off my nose despite having sat there for 20 odds years too.

the fans will never have a voice if we all own £500 each and vote individually. The Donald Muir instance proved that. I can see we're miles apart on the Trust (I'm not even a total 100% backer of them) and it would appear to be the same on how I see the use of our shares if we move forward in a certain manner too. Suppose there's no real point in arguing the matter when we're so far apart.

I heard the story on the news too. I guess it was far more about people just asking about their wage slip by my comment to the wife, when they said people had been waiting up to two weeks for contact was "they can count themselves lucky they weren't Rangers then" Two weeks would have been a great turnaround on the FTTT.

Moses. Are you looking for a profitable return on your investment? It's in no way about me making money that I'm looking to buy shares here. I'm doing it for the good of Rangers, not myself. I'm not putting a value on this. I'm looking at the vision of perhaps owning, as a set of Rangers fans, a share in the club where we could actually have a voice far in excess of anything we've had before. The Donald Muir vote at the last AGM finally convinced me I had literally no say in Rangers as things stood.

Yeah, that's all fair enough. The words I used were a bit strong perhaps. I'd come on here to try and form an opinion on what "the other side" might be thinking and read posts from the user I quoted on this thread and a number from a poster "Richard Gough" on another thread that seemed to be rather OTT with their condemnation of what the buyrangers option was trying to achieve. My take on the "own voice" thing was that I had shares before and had literally no voice despite a reasonable value on my stake. The Donald Muir incident at the last AGM proved that beyond any doubt for me.

The plan is surely to gain a fans interest in the control of the club. The only way to do that is to buy the shares that are available over time. The money will have gone in to the club as part of the initial flotation. I can't really see it as a stick to beat the RST with that they're eventually buying shares from groups or individuals and the money is going to those people? What's the alternative? Just to not try and build up the ownership of the club by fans? If a bluenose wants to buy shares in the club in 2014 and buys them from Zeus Capital / whoever, are you going to critcise them for wanting to own a bit of the club because their money has gone to A.N Other and not in to the coffers for McCoist's next signing? I think folk need to get over the idea that the shares are "not in your name" - it's part of a vehicle to give the supporters a bigger voice. If you want the share certificate for your wall and the chance to go to the AGM, buy a single share at 70p (and brokers fees) when it launches. Although, at that point, your money won't be going to the club!

Is Boss on here the guy that made waves to promote Donald Muir as some sort of good guy? Just out of curiosity... TexasRanger...you're post explains it better than I've seen anywhere so far. Rather than the TicketUs money being used to pay off Lloyds, it's been used to pay back the cash they generated themselves in the first place as part of the takeover. It amounts to the same thing in the grand scheme of it all but it's a much better explanation of how things went down.

Your article on the newsfeeds is a good one weejock but you've got the Kuznetzov stuff wrong from what I remember. He arrived with us in October and his first game was against St Mirren. He hadn't played in any preseason games though or the league games we'd played by then either. He'd been a midseason purchase (though the deal was struck earlier he remained with Kiev until their league finished) Then, as you said, he got injured in the next match against St Johnstone.

I don't think people are suggesting dropping any of them but having him in the squad ahead of Dailly or Adam for a CM slot (when he's on less wages too) would be a very good option.

God, there's some site being talked on this thread. Only docspiderman seems to have much of an idea at all. Do we think Smith doesn't know who Efrem is, really? He looked very good at u19s last year but did struggle in the reserves at times. He's a good player but nowhere near ready to be our saviour in the first team. That's not to say he's not an option if injuries and suspensions mount up rather than loaning someone in but he's nowhere near ready for a regular first team slot and I've seen him alot.

We never paid anything like £1m for Bendiksen. It was 1m Norwegian Kroner (? or whatever their currency is) I think the report that was quoted earlier in this thread came from Sky Sports and it was wrong in the first place. He's looking a good prospect all the same. In the Hemdani mould if I had to compare him to anyone in our squad although he does like to get forward a bit more.

Nope .. it's "Murray Park", it was named to honour the man who funded its construction. Auchenhowie is where it is. And here was me thinking that it was us the fans that funded it.