Blue Forever

I cannot believe that we couldn't find a better qualified candidate for the CEO position.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22400088 Reads like a wish-list drawn from RM.

I know it was a typo hence the emoticon . I just don't think he could mobilise the amount of backing he has purely on the fact he doesn't like Green. For me, these institutions only take this action if they are worried about their investment, and if they are worried about their investment then something must be wrong.

Bill McMurdo mentioned it on Twitter. However he's not the most reliable as we know.

You seem to have misunderstood. Going into more detail referred to expanding on what I meant when I said that I thought the club could have been run better.

Am I not allowed to say how I think the club should have been run? Am I not allowed to put forward my ideas of how things could have been done better?

Well if you've no reason to believe it why are you posting it? These investment firms wouldn't dance to Malcolm Murray's tune because of a personal vendetta or whatever else, they would only take action if they had genuine concerns.

I have never claimed to have inside knowledge, my info comes from the same places as everyone else. However, I think the process I outlined (my opinion) would have been a more appropriate way to handle the club's journey back to the top league.

Opinion: 1. A view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. The figures are taken from Richard Wilson's articles, who has been bang on consistently throughout the mess this year and last.

Pure speculation, but that's fine because it is a discussion board.

Yes. However the board should have the conviction to do what's best for the business and the shareholders.

Yet many high-profile professional investment institutions are concerned enough about the state of the club to demand change. There must be some driving force behind this.

Where's the guesswork? Part of it is my opinion on how the club should have been run and the rest is the consequences of how the club has actually been run. The only part that could be even remotely considered guessing is the part about what the IPO money has been spent. It has been widely reported that the club is running at a loss, and that only £7-8m remains of the £22m raised. What has that been spent on if not on absorbing losses? I think you would struggle to attribute £15m of expenditure to anything else.

That may be so, but McCoist isn't responsible for maintaining the financial health of the club. If a prudent approach had been taken, McCoist would have been told that he couldn't get however many players he wanted and the reason for it. After all, if he started getting irritated about Green or whoever else imposing financial restrictions, his own salary would have made him look a bit of a hypocrite. At the end of the day, it's the CEO who approves the contracts and the CEO could have said no and that would have been it, there would have been nothing McCoist could have done.

I don't know, but if the point you are making is that the coaches are overpaid then I wouldn't disagree with that, especially in relation to the performances on the park.

Of course they were an unavoidable burden, but adding to it surely did not help the financial situation.

What do you mean inflicted on us?

Think I just told you, unless you mean something different?

£7k a week for Black for example. A scaled contract for Sandaza which would have seen him earning five figures in the SPL (by which time he would have been in his thirties). Those sort of contracts. Sanctioning the signings of Kyle, Cribari etc (the sort of players he recently claimed he wouldn't have allowed Ally to sign).

The manager who can't manage didn't sanction the massive contracts handed out last summer. Mather I assume, but it's rich of Green to come back and say he wouldn't have allowed this signing and that signing when (a) he gave out the silly contracts last summer and (b) was banging on about £10m of the IPO money being set aside for players - we don't even have £10m fucking left!

What Green and his people should have done was to minimise outlay on the playing staff and build up a reserve of money, a fund ready to be used to build a squad capable of challenging for the title immediately upon our return to the SPL. Instead we signed guys like Black and Kyle on massive wages and long contracts. Now we have eaten away the majority of the IPO money, and with little visible benefit. The only conclusion I can draw from that is we have been using it to absorb our losses. Now we are faced with needing to raise more money before the end of the season or start taking on debt to fund the club's operations. Not exactly what I'd hoped for from Green and his people.

I perhaps was unclear: the club was very much at risk, but it wasn't a very high risk investment given our position and growth potential. Anyway, I'm done for tonight, but will definitely go into more detail tomorrow.

Any claim would have been against the oldco. The club wasn't actually that much of a risk, No debt and no legacy liabilities (except ones we were forced to agree to). It could be argued that Green and his people have done a poor job of maximising the potential of the club. If you want a detailed explanation of why I think that then I will write up a post in the morning.

17x profit is indeed quite a mark up. I believe that the deal would far more of a fair reflection of the value of the business than the 70x profit Green is asking for though.

Agreed. Please don't misconstrue my arguments as a defence of the manager.