simplythechamps08

A quick look at the McGills accounts will tell you this isn't true. They have huge liabilities for such a small business and despite making a small profit last year the accounts suggest the business is in trouble. It's really difficult to estimate a value for that business just now because with current debts it's probably impossible to sell but if forced I would say its true worth is 800kish. I'm not saying the Easdales don't have money I know they have other businesses but that particular one is struggling and suggestions of a 100 million sale is laughable spin.

I'm sorry my choice of wording when mentioning the Easdales offends you. In my defence my statement wasn't entirely uneducated as I have had cause in the past to deal with both brothers in a professional capacity, based on that experience I feel certain their influence will lead to a decline in standards at Rangers. Interestingly you made the assumption that I am a "dullard" despite having never met me and based on one forum post, such an assumption could easily be classed as "uneducated pish". Not to worry though, I just checked with my wife and she assures me that at least in terms of your "dullard" description you are 100% correct.

Genuinely disgusted at this, sadly it's just one of many examples of the falling standards at our club. I can't see anything improving while people like the Easdales have their snouts in the trough either. The most ridiculous part of them upsetting this elderly gentleman is that they hardly need the space in the stadium, it'll be half empty next season at this rate anyway.

If there isn't significant change following the agm I'll be boycotting. It's a decision for each individual I wouldn't criticise anyone if they continue to go but I would rather starve these leeches out quickly than face a slow lingering death.

I re-read some of the IPO literature last night and noticed that projection for the 1st year was £6.5 million loss, a long way from the 14 million loss we actually made. Even more concerningly the IPO literature was written after most non-recurring expenses had been paid so there is no obvious excuse for such inaccuracy. Surely regardless of your opinion on the board Stockbridge must step down if responsible for those projections as they suggest at best incompetence on his part. He also blatantly lied to shareholders when he said the results were "in line with our 5 year plan".

People should be apologetic towards a board who have: - Delivered a set of financial accounts which even when you take non-recurring costs out see us spending £10 million more than we bring in each year. - Are taking obscene bonuses and salaries from the club causing us to have a £10 million non playing staff wage bill.(as high as it was when we were in the champions league). - Allowed 25% of our IPO money to go on fees instead of the normal 5%. I would suggest given how close this figure is to the purchase price we will soon find out those fees went to Richard Hughes, Imran Ahmed and Charles Green. - Have burned through £40 million in IPO and season ticket money leaving it unclear whether we have enough cash to see us through to the end of the season. No thanks I won't apologise, I will reserve my right to ask questions of and be critical of a board which Walter Smith described as "dysfunctional".

Okay that may save £2 million pounds a year but we would still have a deficit of £8 million a year according to these accounts so far from job done.

Non-recurring costs are listed as 4.2 million. Without these we have a £10 million black hole to fill which means we need to achieve a combination of substantially increased revenue streams which will be difficult in this division and drastic cost cutting. The problem is these will take time and with no credit line in place I really hope the board have a plan in place to obtain additional capital to keep us solvent in the interim. If they don't produce a plan for this prior to the AGM then they must be voted off.

These accounts are at first look absolutely disastrous. Two points which are clear and terrifying: 1) Even without the 4.2 million of non-recurring costs we have a deficit of around £10 million a year which means costs have to be slashed or income needs to be increased massively to fill that gap. So far the board have produced no tangible plan to do this and worryingly don't even appear that interested in tackling the issue. 2) It is clear that with current operating expenses and no credit line we will run out of funds very soon, I would guess although it is difficult to be specific due to unknown variables that this will happen at some point in February. There has been no plan produced by the board about how they plan to raise the necessary capital to avoid us running out of money and essentially becoming insolvent. We need wholesale changes to the board as with the current lack of transparency and long term planning we have no chance of obtaining sufficient investment to stave off administration.

These accounts are at first look absolutely disastrous, I'm amazed at the OP dismissing people who are highlighting this as "doom-mongers". Two points which are clear and terrifying: 1) Even without the 4.2 million of non-recurring costs we have a deficit of around £10 million a year which means costs have to be slashed or income needs to be increased massively to fill that gap. So far the board have produced no tangible plan to do this and worryingly don't even appear that interested in tackling the issue. 2) It is clear that with current operating expenses and no credit line we will run out of funds very soon, I would guess although it is difficult to be specific due to unknown variables that this will happen at some point in February. There has been no plan produced by the board about how they plan to raise the necessary capital to avoid us running out of money and essentially becoming insolvent. We need wholesale changes to the board as with the current lack of transparency and long term planning we have no chance of obtaining sufficient investment to stave off administration.

Worryingly the Easdales seem to reiterate what their fellow Zeus puppet Ahmed said earlier in the week that they feel confident they can fend off the EGM vote. We could be stuck with these leeches for a while yet.

Interesting stuff it seems like hes quite reclusive nobody seems to know much about him other than the fact hes minted!

JJB restructured their debt recently and sold off their chain of gyms but this could just be a short term fix as they have been struggling for years. My understanding is if they default on any of the payments we can break out of the contract. Would be good to get some control back I think the deal was the safe bet giving us guaranteed income but meant we missed out on huge sums of money when we went to Manchester.

I might be reading too much into this - apologies if I am - but since when do we care about home addresses and listing them on the internet? Is it meant to be a veiled threat? Are we tims now? Depends what you are "reading into this". If you mean something illegal then yes you are and for that reason I would not put his actual address on a public forum. However I do believe in personalising campaigns as I have long experience in dealing with large organisations and generally the people who are making unpopular decisions prefer not to have to account for them directly to those affected. One of the things I usually do if a company does something I don't like is to send a personal letter direct to the MD's home. This bypasses the company's customer relation department which is there to protect directors from the public. Surprising how often it produces a response. I would have thought a few thousand letters to Mr Muir's home address might concentrate his mind on what he is doing. Sorry, but that's out of order, in my opinion. People should be allowed privacy in their own homes. It's something that I'd expect from celtic fans, as I'm sure some Scottish refs would be only too keen to testify. And you're entitled to your opinion. But it appears that because mine is different from yours it means that I'm either a celtic fan or acting like one. How does that work? Just for the record - I'd be very surprised if any celtic fans have ever written to a Scottish ref about anything. This country is now saddled with billions of pounds of debt and much of the problem has been lack of corporate responsibility. Many directors of large organizations are insulated from the effects their decisions make on the public by what are laughably called "customer relation departments". Perhaps if they were exposed more directly to their customers we would have had better corporate governance. I practice what I preach btw. My home address has been on my business letterhead for over 10 years. So the fact that you have your home address on your business cards gives you the right to contact people who don't? I didn't say you were a celtic fan. However Celtic fans HAVE contacted refs at their homes. It's been well publicised. Your attempted justification quoting lack of corporate responsibility to contact anyone at their home, whether they have shown such a thing or not is as laughable as these anonymous customer relation departments that you refer to. I presume that it's people like you that have caused the law to be changed, and the fact that you look into people's personal details and try and contact them where their wives and children are is creepy at best. What a lot of nonsense - I'd be perfectly happy to be able to contact a director of a major company at their place of work if that were actually possible, but it isn't and you know that perfectly well. The reason for using their home address is because there is a reasonable chance that they will actually read the letter rather than it be dealt with by someone whose job is simply to deflect criticism. Im sorry I appreciate this is an emotive subject but no matter how much you disagree with the work a man carries out in a professional capacity he still has a right to a private and family life. To contact a stranger at their home address regarding an issue you have with his employer would be completely innapropriate.

Cheers guys