Charlie challenges hostiles to debate.

[bawsburst 1,381]

Charlie has really put the haters noses out of joint they are shitting themselves, why don'r they ask Wattie how the bonuses were calculatrd/sanctioned he was after all a member of the three man committee responsible for them.

[AlBear. 8,499]

The "hostiles"...

Who coined that phrase? Fuckin cringe.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

He's done his bit already. Helped raise significant investment during the IPO. By the same token what have the current incumbents done to warrant stepping aside? We can't blame them for the finances when most of our contracts commercially and internally were put in place under CG.

I just feel if the squabbling and posturing from both sides continues we will struggle to progress. Someone needs to do what's best for the club and allow us to continue the rebuild under stable circumstances.

I don't completely disagree with anything you've said, but it is a confusing state of affairs that people are all too ready to make their minds up about.

[MayboleLoyal_atb 3,772]

Does he want this on TV?

[scottyboyblue 61]

Love him or hate him, and i'm in the neither camp, he's got more front than Blackpool, i just fail to see what benefits our proud club will gain from more ridicule

[AlCapone 7,678]

It's more talk, I admire the courage of ALL your convictions.

I sincerely hope you are all right and I'm wrong.

It's not about being a green hater, its about being worried for the health of my club.

And do you not have any worries about the health of our club as to what would replace him?

[AlCapone 7,678]

I wasn't a hater until i heard he was coming back after resigning. Then finding out of the amount of money that gets spent on him to fly where ever he likes etc.....Then when i found out that we only have 10million left plus Walter smith resigning because of Charles Green board making a cunt of Rangers in public on a daily basis.

You do come across as someone easily manipulated by the spoonfeeders

[Kopter 310]

Cool - let's have it the day after the accounts are available.

It's embarrassing all this but we need it sorted out pronto.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I say let them have the "debate"

What do the hostiles have to fear?

A debate is just grandstanding - we need stability and information and all a debate will do is add to the fears not alleviate them ( plus be a field day for the press) - if Charles has a plan and the shareholder power he claims - tell us the plan and get on with it. Ditto for the Mureay/ McColl axis - or even King - tell us the plan and if you have the power get on with it - Craig Mathers and Stockbrodge did not say they could see us running out if cash - this hysteria is all brought on by external patties - so the external parties ( Green, Murray or King camps) should either put up or shut up at the EGM.

[Bertent 2,081]

Good idea one way to hear what the malcontents propose and be challenged on while balancing the debate against the diatribe being driven by agenda laden bloggers and fanzine blazer seekers.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

If it's the same set up as usual I'll be there

I'll hide ma phone in front of wee wanker Hannah

He is someone who thinks himself above others, did so from his days in the Edmiston Club and Fat Cats bus.

[Reformation Bear 6,453]

From the notes I've seen of the meeting at Ibrox last week Mather and Stockbridge and the Board are looking to do a deal with Murray and McColl to avoid a General Meeting being called where the stated reason for the meeting is to sack Mather and Stockbridge and a non-exec director and (I think) to put Murray and McColl on the Board. Mather / Stockbridge are looking to do a deal to save their jobs on the one hand and to get back on a path to stability by avoiding a GM on the other hand. They also said the Board would be looking again at the appointment of Charles Green as a consultant. Given the Board's complete about turn (initially shock at a GM being called followed by a 'call back Charlie to help' defend this) to a (hmmmm maybe a deal with Murray and McColl would not be so bad so lets go for appeasment instead) - there is no need now for Charles Green to be a consultant and I'd expect his appointment to be ended.

That does not prevent him from offering to have a debate at Ibrox. I guess he sees his record at Rangers as being conveniently marginalised with the risk that those who now run the Club go back to old ways of spending too much, taking bad decisions, not working hard enough to generate ST sales (still well short of last season and its not a question of timing - people knew when the league season starts and that we had a licence and that there is a team refresh going on - but still the numbers are lower than last season and Mather and the Board have not got out of their plush offices to get selling). He did not create the current de-stabalising episode. The responsibility for that lies squarely with Murray in launching an out of the darkness a request for a GM to sack senior execs on the Board. There is no escape from that. If he had not done so we would not be going through the spin cycle yet again. It has renewed accusations that the Club is running out of money and it has brought into play strong sentiments in certain quarters of conveniently putting aside or forgetting the work he and his consortium did last year to put Rangers on the path to recovery.

So if he wants a debate with detractors I don't see why that should be refused. Better out in the open than all the sniping from all quarters with selective references to facts or to over-blown analysis and so on. A straightforward debate might do the worlld of good in clarifiying matters. The problem for the Board at Ibrox is that it has no Chairman who could chair such a meeting. And even if WS was still in the chair he most probably would not want to chair that type of session. The next problem for the Board is that there is no-one who could match the calibre of Charles Green in a debate. Mather and Stockbridge (that's all there is now really - no Chairman any more) could never stand up to him. They can only operate in their own comfort zones (safe territory in a conference in San Francisco and inside the walls at Ibrox with fans representatives and even then no official record of the meeting is published).

They won't agree to a meeting of course. They don't have to. Charles Green is not a Director and I'm guessing his consultancy contract will be ended so I guess there would be no need for them to feel they need to agree to a meeting. But having now worked so hard to deliberately place Charles Green as someone they now do not want to deal with Mather and Stockbridge (and the Board) have presumably thought through the likelihood of a major shareholder, and former CEO deciding simply to return to the position before the request for the GM of being out of the public eye. The alternative being that if he sensed that the work done might be being undone, and that returns to the Whyte / SDM days of operating the business in a way that falls well below the standards needed to run a sustainable and successful Club, and if there is insufficient effort to generate revenue, and insufficient work done to improve share value .........................then will he continue to remain silent? If, as it seems to me, the Board has firmly turned against him and prefers to get into bed with Murray and McColl then one would think that the outcome from such a marriage of convenience would be watched with considerable commercial interest from a major shareholder in the Club. Will be exciting to see him ask questions as a shareholder at the AGM. Now that will worth selling tickets so see and hear. Board rehearshals for that meeting would alos be wortth seeing to see if the 'wee laddie' as Charles put it is earning his c£300k pa salary.

[Kopter 310]

He is someone who thinks himself above others, did so from his days in the Edmiston Club and Fat Cats bus.

He's back

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

The Club could sell tickets for the Mainstand and Club Deck and have the opposing sides on the pitch in front of the dugouts, that would bring in some money..........and no comps btw or if one can tweet everyone can tweet

I wonder who would call Ibrox to get into the Directors box or better still have a draw made for certain number shareholders, season ticket holders and non season ticket holders who are members of a Supporters Club.

More importantly no-one at Ibrox able to hand out tickets to friends and mean friends in a loose term.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

He's back

I know, and still hitting the nail on the head

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

From the notes I've seen of the meeting at Ibrox last week Mather and Stockbridge and the Board are looking to do a deal with Murray and McColl to avoid a General Meeting being called where the stated reason for the meeting is to sack Mather and Stockbridge and a non-exec director and (I think) to put Murray and McColl on the Board. Mather / Stockbridge are looking to do a deal to save their jobs on the one hand and to get back on a path to stability by avoiding a GM on the other hand. They also said the Board would be looking again at the appointment of Charles Green as a consultant. Given the Board's complete about turn (initially shock at a GM being called followed by a 'call back Charlie to help' defend this) to a (hmmmm maybe a deal with Murray and McColl would not be so bad so lets go for appeasment instead) - there is no need now for Charles Green to be a consultant and I'd expect his appointment to be ended.

That does not prevent him from offering to have a debate at Ibrox. I guess he sees his record at Rangers as being conveniently marginalised with the risk that those who now run the Club go back to old ways of spending too much, taking bad decisions, not working hard enough to generate ST sales (still well short of last season and its not a question of timing - people knew when the league season starts and that we had a licence and that there is a team refresh going on - but still the numbers are lower than last season and Mather and the Board have not got out of their plush offices to get selling). He did not create the current de-stabalising episode. The responsibility for that lies squarely with Murray in launching an out of the darkness a request for a GM to sack senior execs on the Board. There is no escape from that. If he had not done so we would not be going through the spin cycle yet again. It has renewed accusations that the Club is running out of money and it has brought into play strong sentiments in certain quarters of conveniently putting aside or forgetting the work he and his consortium did last year to put Rangers on the path to recovery.

So if he wants a debate with detractors I don't see why that should be refused. Better out in the open than all the sniping from all quarters with selective references to facts or to over-blown analysis and so on. A straightforward debate might do the worlld of good in clarifiying matters. The problem for the Board at Ibrox is that it has no Chairman who could chair such a meeting. And even if WS was still in the chair he most probably would not want to chair that type of session. The next problem for the Board is that there is no-one who could match the calibre of Charles Green in a debate. Mather and Stockbridge (that's all there is now really - no Chairman any more) could never stand up to him. They can only operate in their own comfort zones (safe territory in a conference in San Francisco and inside the walls at Ibrox with fans representatives and even then no official record of the meeting is published).

They won't agree to a meeting of course. They don't have to. Charles Green is not a Director and I'm guessing his consultancy contract will be ended so I guess there would be no need for them to feel they need to agree to a meeting. But having now worked so hard to deliberately place Charles Green as someone they now do not want to deal with Mather and Stockbridge (and the Board) have presumably thought through the likelihood of a major shareholder, and former CEO deciding simply to return to the position before the request for the GM of being out of the public eye. The alternative being that if he sensed that the work done might be being undone, and that returns to the Whyte / SDM days of operating the business in a way that falls well below the standards needed to run a sustainable and successful Club, and if there is insufficient effort to generate revenue, and insufficient work done to improve share value .........................then will he continue to remain silent? If, as it seems to me, the Board has firmly turned against him and prefers to get into bed with Murray and McColl then one would think that the outcome from such a marriage of convenience would be watched with considerable commercial interest from a major shareholder in the Club. Will be exciting to see him ask questions as a shareholder at the AGM. Now that will worth selling tickets so see and hear. Board rehearshals for that meeting would alos be wortth seeing to see if the 'wee laddie' as Charles put it is earning his c£300k pa salary.

This Board is indeed week, first Easdale calls for EGM and that's enough to see him on the Board.........murray must have noticed this and has tried the same tact and if the above comes true then again highlights how weak the people in charge are.

I agree it would be an experience to see CG (no not that one ) in action re debate. I would like to see the EGM go ahead as we may find out who have given blin/murray this clout to call for one and have the Board in your scenario running scared.

[Young Citizen 7]

Lets hear how much you have taken out the club Charles,, lets see how the finances of the club were under your control Charles , please explain your £1000 consultancy fee Charles. Finally, can you give us an update on the deal with the Dallas cowboys... Oops and the deal with Man united?

[bawsburst 1,381]

Lets hear how much you have taken out the club Charles,, lets see how the finances of the club were under your control Charles , please explain your £1000 consultancy fee Charles. Finally, can you give us an update on the deal with the Dallas cowboys... Oops and the deal with Man united?

I can safely assume that you have not the slightest idea of the finer points of business or of selling the "product". I am not assuming however that Charlie could quiet easily as he has done previously update you on the reasons as why we still have a club to support and who is responsible for giving the fans an opportunity to invest by giving us a club to support.

[trublusince1982 768]

I can safely assume that you have not the slightest idea of the finer points of business or of selling the "product". I am not assuming however that Charlie could quiet easily as he has done previously update you on the reasons as why we still have a club to support and who is responsible for giving the fans an opportunity to invest by giving us a club to support.

min £350,000 basic with an equal bonus each year we win the league, expense account, trips abroad, housing allowance(which is huge) £1m-£3m in shares for fuck all, or if you take CG's estimated value his 11% is worth around £5.6m for zero outlay,or his £12000 consultants fee and also but not probably lastly his undisclosed severance package.

That's just the money that either he has told us about or has been confirmed by the club.

Do you think someone can be held as a saviour when their actions are for their own personal gain?

Do you think there is anymore earnings for green we still don't know about?

Do you think this is a normal amount for a ceo of a football club to earn?

And the biggest question of all who made more Charles Green or Imran Ahmed?

[Right_To_Censor 1,951]

green all the way, charles that is

[StublueKPL 524]

min £350,000 basic with an equal bonus each year we win the league, expense account, trips abroad, housing allowance(which is huge) £1m-£3m in shares for fuck all, or if you take CG's estimated value his 11% is worth around £5.6m for zero outlay,or his £12000 consultants fee and also but not probably lastly his undisclosed severance package.

That's just the money that either he has told us about or has been confirmed by the club.

Do you think someone can be held as a saviour when their actions are for their own personal gain?

Do you think there is anymore earnings for green we still don't know about?

Do you think this is a normal amount for a ceo of a football club to earn?

And the biggest question of all who made more Charles Green or Imran Ahmed?

housing allowance is around 2k a month. Not exactly extravagant I'm today's terms but still enough for a great pad

[Zappa 358]

Apparently he could raise 10 million for us tommrow but won't because we don't need it

It's like rent-a-quote from this crackpot. This one goes in the 'not exactly truthful' pile along with hundreds of others.

[trublusince1982 768]

housing allowance is around 2k a month. Not exactly extravagant I'm today's terms but still enough for a great pad

if that is the true amount i agree that's not to high, but the figure i have heard is a lot higher than that. Whatever the amount personally i don't see why someone making so much needs to have his house paid for him also. pretty sure he could afford to pay for his own lodgings.

[Calgacus 88]

I can safely assume that you have not the slightest idea of the finer points of business or of selling the "product". I am not assuming however that Charlie could quiet easily as he has done previously update you on the reasons as why we still have a club to support and who is responsible for giving the fans an opportunity to invest by giving us a club to support.

Because Duff and Phelps picked him?

[bawsburst 1,381]

Because Duff and Phelps picked him?

Because he and his people put up when the others shut up, simples.