- Popular Post
BearInTheToon
-
Posts
1,355 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by BearInTheToon
-
-
14 minutes ago, backup said:
No you certainly are not.....goodbye.
Wow, great comeback. Your argument was based on absolutely no clear evidence other than what you've read other people speculate on online/on forums. I'd stay away from debates mate, you're out of your depth.
-
Just now, backup said:
the accounts are the friend of yourself and others, who wish something to be true that has no basis in fact.
"I know you got your arse ripped apart on here yesterday" some chaps have vivid imaginations, I like to leave them to it...and now you in your quest to get one over on MA, I don't wonder why.
Where to even start... I can now see why you got a tanking yesterday. You're not very bright, are you?
-
Just now, backup said:
You don't have an argument, RR was not involved in the Puma deal, the accounts are clear.
Mate, what are you talking about? I know you got your arse ripped apart on here yesterday and it appears you're talking yet more pish today.
No offence, but have you even read the accounts or understand how to read year end company accounts? They're all there on Companies House, in black and white. There's no mention whatsoever of the Puma deal in The Rangers Football Club Ltd accounts. Nor do the numbers stack up of any real spike to the sponsorship income at the time which could be attributed to a new kit deal.
So if you're convinced the accounts are so clear that the money went to TRFC Ltd and that RR wasn't involved, when actually the numbers and evidence suggest the complete opposite, I and others would love to see it.
-
2 minutes ago, backup said:
The accounts are factual.
So where does it say it in the accounts? Let's see it. Given the Puma deal was struck at the height of Ashley's involvement (2013), I can't imagine for a second that the money from the deal wasn't put into the limited company which housed the retail arm and which was directly controlled by Sports Direct (though which, SD stood to make the most profit). And given there is an increase of around £3.6m in turnover in the RR Ltd accounts during that exact period (which is quite an increase on the previous year), your argument doesn't tally.
-
29 minutes ago, backup said:
In all of the relevant accounts, which as said, stress Puma/The Rangers Football Club is a direct agreement.
https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/pop-up-shop-at-the-louden.82083/
I mean which factual piece of info, whether a confirmed article/or clearly stated in accounts, are you seeing that?
-
24 minutes ago, backup said:
There is no indication anywhere that any puma money went to RR, indeed the accounts are at great pains to stress it is a deal between Puma and The Rangers.
Where you seeing that mate? At that period in time, I can’t think of any other income to the retail operation that would’ve contributed to such an increase in turnover.
-
14 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:
My mistake.
I misread the Puma deal as £3m when they were talking about the Hummel deal being around £3m a year.
The question I asked still stands though. In terms of the RR deal was it the case RR got the sponsorship fee from Puma, rather than it going straight to the club.
Looking at the accounts, I’d say it almost certainly went to RR. There was a hefty spike in turnover from £1.2m to £4.8m during the period that the puma deal was signed.
-
Just had a look at the RR company accounts but the year end 2018 ones haven’t been filed yet. It’s astounding how little the turnover is though, especially given we were in the top 3 for retail/merch in the mid to late nineties and into the early 2000s.
Couldn’t find any figures on how much the puma deal was worth, as it was undisclosed at the time of the announcement - anyone know?
-
I reckon he's more talking about 23/24 outfield players plus 3 keepers. But yeah, if Kent and another come in, could definitely see the likes of Hastie, Murphy and/or Docherty going out on loan.
-
RE kit sales/how profits are divvied up, I remember reading an article about how it was thought that shirt sales would cover the cost of Ronaldo's move to Juventus last summer. It's a quick read but pretty interesting stuff and just shows how much our deal pales into utter insignificance compared to clubs in the big leagues.
Our deal with Hummel is worth around £3.3m per year over 3 years and if you take similar percentages (10-15%) as mentioned in the article, it gives an idea of how much we'd make from each adult top alone, for example (£6-£9 per jersey based on a £60 adult top). Can't imagine, due to the absolute monumental fuck up of our current retail agreement and the manufacturing farce behind it, that we've even flogged 100,000 tops (which is mental when you think how many we used to shift).
It's worth a read...
-
His body language, barring being blamed for some play on the run up to a Marseille corner, was great. Much more confident and when he was subbed, left the park with what you could tell was a far greater sense of pride/self assurance, as opposed to looking pretty sheepish/head down.
He knew he’d contributed, played well and loved taking the deserved applause from the crowd. With even more confidence, think he could seriously flourish from here.
-
I’m really not convinced and don’t think that’s quite the case mate. He will have definitely lost a bit of pace, the ability to turn/change direction as quickly and unlike many examples of people who have returned in the past, we have to factor in playing on plastic pitches easily a good 10 times per year (likely against the teams he’d have been used against e.g. Hamilton, Livingston, Killie).
Hope I’m wrong, as I like the guy, but the fact he won’t play on plastic pitches and when SG looks at all his wide/midfield options, I think Murphy might be the one he feels most uncomfortable about throwing in. And, he’ll be on a decent wage.
-
25 minutes ago, TMB said:
Murphy, Grezda, and Middleton also play those wide positions. Just shows how bloated the squad is in those areas.
You’re right, but I was assuming those 3 would be away permanently or on loan. Really crazy when you consider how many players we have on the books.
-
2 hours ago, Prso's headband said:
I’d be delighted if we got rid of Foderingham, Alnwick, Dodoo, Holt, Herrera, Dorrans, Grezda Hardie, Lafferty, not loans, totally away.
I’d be looking to loan some of the promising youngsters as well.
Helander and Kent in, Morelos and Tav kept and we’re laughing.
I largely agree with that but do think we need to keep either Fod or Alnwick.
Would be seriously nervous about having Firth as the only back up to our 38 yr old keeper.
Also, if we did add Kent, that’d be Morelos, Defoe, Stewart, Kent, Jones, Hastie, Ojo and Candeias (and arguably Arfield) all vying for 3 places. So do wonder if we’d still be a bit bulky. Don’t envy Gerrard, that’s for sure...
-
34 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:
Is this a real question? If so, the answer is yes.
Merely setting a question to create a debate/get people’s opinions mate. Based on Gerrard’s own comments, it takes us beyond the 2 players per position objective he’s set.
-
Apologies if there’s already a thread, though couldn’t see one.
Was doing the numbers on just how massive our first team squad is. If, as expected, Helander signs, we’ll have 36 players on our books (including those already out on loan i.e. the McCrorie brothers, Rossiter and Herrera).
This doesn’t include Lewis Mayo, Stephen Kelly, Josh McPake or obviously the potential re-signing of Kent/other new players.
Understandably, we’ve all been asking ‘what do we need?’ in terms of adding to the squad.
But as the squad has evolved and taken shape, who do people now think we really need rid of, both financially and for squad harmony?
There are obvious ones such as Dodoo, Dorrans, Grezda, Hardie, Herrera (permanently), Holt, Lafferty. That’s 7 stick-ons, but who else should join the list?
Personally, as much as I like the guy, I do think Murphy needs let go of, especially with so many plastic pitches in the league and how an ACL injury will have impacted his style/mentality.
Would be sad to see Candeias go but can see why it’s necessary, especially with his inconsistency of end-product. And then either Fod or Alnwick for me.
But who else? Do we really need Tav, Polster, Flanagan, Barasic and Halliday for fullback positions?
- Bigdave30 and HalifaxBear
-
2
-
It's virtually a pre-season game at the start of July. The mind boggles that criticism could be made of any one of the players having just strolled that game...
-
48 minutes ago, denya said:
Do you think there is chance of maybe play 3 in defence and have 4 in midfield. It is St Josephs and not more difficult team. 1 away goal and this is all finished I think. Go very attack style lineup.
Three at the back would be even more defensive/unnecessary. With our back 4, by the time the full backs have pushed on, it’s more like a 2/fluid 3 at times depending on the timing of their runs.
-
15 minutes ago, bluenoz said:
Defoe's goal was all Ojo. A ten year old could have made that pass to Defoe. Vision & pass -it was six feet!
Steady, mate. Think you need to rewatch it - that ain’t what happened.
-
Can’t see Davis not starting. Such an influential player and his vision and pass through to Tav for the Defoe’s goal was top notch.
-
McGregor
Tav. Goldson . Katic. Barasic
Davis
Jack. Kamara
Ojo. Jones
Defoe
-
2 hours ago, Rfc52 said:
Don't know why these threads crop up in June when the window closes September so much can change
I think given we’ve signed 7 players already though, there is some justification.
Many fans thought the squad was already too big and expected us to get rid of 6 or 7 of the deadwood. Then to see us properly kick on, many expected us (as MA and SG both strongly intimated/said in May) to sign 3-4 players that could walk straight into the 11.
Now, the ridding of deadwood will still likely, and must, happen. But in terms of those who have actually come in, it hasn’t made too much sense or tallied with what was said in May.
-
10 hours ago, TMB said:
We’ve scored more goals than any other team in the league for the last two years. Last season our defense showed great improvement but we still conceded 7 more than celtic. If we could just tighten up our defense a bit more that could translate in to the extra 10 points we need to win the league. If a very good CB comes in then we could have a title winning team.
Not disputing that about the goal tally but even though it's a great badge of honour, it means nothing if they're mainly being scored in a few hammerings and then we come unstuck and drop points against stuffier teams. That was our achilles heel big time last year - breaking down well organised opponents and not having enough goals from midfield. The points dropped against Aberdeen, Hibs, Killie etc weren't the cause of leaking lots of goals - it was down to not creating/taking enough chances. We should be putting 2-3 past these teams on most occasions, and expecting to concede 1 or 2 sometimes along the way.
Agree with you on the tightening up of CB but, for me, it's about having 3-4 players who can unlock defences and put the ball in the net - we needed a couple of proper upgrades on Candeias, Murphy, Grezda.
I really do hope I'm wrong and I'm not writing them off, but I just don't see Jones, Stewart and Hastie as being any better or having the necessary quality/cutting edge to make the difference when the going gets tough.
-
Have to say, if we had to go into the season tomorrow, I’d have the fear a bit. Really hope I’m wrong but I can well see us sitting here in a few months with loads on RM going mental saying our recruitment wasn’t strong enough.
We were already needing much better than we had to truly kick on but I just don’t see Jones, Hastie or Stewart as being of the necessary standard required.
And I don’t believe for a second Gerrard genuinely believes that these guys are the level of player he was hoping to add to the squad. Hope we’re not done by a long shot and that the board give him a bit of cash.
Greg Stewart
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
Really harsh. He’s got a good touch, great awareness and when up to speed/fitness, will create and chip in with a good few goals.
It’s Hastie for me that looks like he’s well short of the level we need.