Charles Green – Businessman of the Year? Brief Prospectus Thoughts by Me at Scotzine

I greatly appreciate all the commenters who have been beavering away at the prospectus. I am gratified that people have taken the time and trouble to analyse the document and comment.

Some of my initial thoughts are over at Scotzine – click here to be taken there.

There will be more to come!

Posted by Paul McConville




Filed under Me at Scotzine, Rangers Share Offer

267 responses to “Charles Green – Businessman of the Year? Brief Prospectus Thoughts by Me at Scotzine

  1. Adam

    There is 100 socks in a drawer. 84 of them are green and 16 are blue. You are blindfolded and asked to randomly pick 11 socks out. Which of the following outcomes is more likely to happen ?

    1. You pick out 11 green.
    2. You pick out 10 blue and 1 green

  2. iain

    I haven’t read the document and may it may not get round to it.

    But I see near the top of this page the venerable eco and others are speculating that institutional investors are only investing so they can lose money and right off the tax.

    From that am I to assume that far from running a mile, there are plenty of institutional investors and the usual suspects are attempting to justify that fact, and that their scepticism was utterly misplaced (again)?

    • redetin

      “…speculating that institutional investors are only investing so they can lose money and right [write] off the tax.”

      I think you are misinterpreting the posts referenced. Institutional investors will have different reasons for investing, different strategies for their overall portfolios. There may be tax reliefs on share purchases via VCTs, there may be tax recovery on later capital losses. Indeed there may be capital gains, What institutional investors will not do is to make “emotional” investments.

      • iain

        No I think I have represented the posts perfectly.

        From institutional investors wont invest to they will but may be doing so to they can write off tax on their losses..
        That seems to be the made up justification to the news.

        • redetin

          But we’ve known about the institutional investors like Blue Pitch Holdings for months, so why you saying “won’t invest”, when they were listed up dunkys ago?
          And, as I said, they can have many reasons for investing, basically they are prepared to risk part of their pooled investor money to make more money.

          • mick

            who are blus pitch ??no 1 knows still

            • redetin

              Dunno, mick. I think a lot of these people either know each other or have business links. I think the posters who take the time to find out who they are and how they are connected are doing a great job.

          • ecojon

            @ redetin

            I don’t know why you bother as they are either too thick to understand or are trolls – basically a waste of time and space whatever they are. And when their insults fail they just make up lies as they go along.

            • redetin

              Och, it disnae bother me, ecojon, if I see a mistake I’ll try to correct it. I’m learning all the time masel.

        • There's Only One Willie Miller

          So it’s like Springtime for Hitler?

      • Budweiser

        Thanks redetin and all others who replied to my initial enquiry.[inquiry?]

  3. dan

    I’m really interested in stats: what is the above meant to demonstrate, pray tell?

  4. mick

    Celtic Football Club was formally constituted at a meeting in St. Mary’s church hall in East Rose Street (now Forbes Street), Calton, Glasgow, by Irish Marist Brother Walfrid[6] on 6 November 1887, with the purpose of alleviating poverty in the East End of Glasgow by raising money for the charity Walfrid had instituted, the Poor Children’s Dinner Table.[7] Walfrid’s move to establish the club as a means of fund-raising was largely inspired by the example of Hibernian who were formed out of the immigrant Irish population a few years earlier in Edinburgh. Walfrid’s own suggestion of the name ‘Celtic’ (pronounced Seltik), was intended to reflect the club’s Irish and Scottish roots, and was adopted at the same meeting.

    there adam read it no mention of faith its a charity for all for all faiths always has been always will be

    From the early 20th century onwards, Catholics were not knowingly signed by the club, nor employed in other prominent roles as an ‘unwritten rule’

    so there you have it adam we were never a 1 sided club and never will be

    • Adam

      What about the statement in January 1888 and are you trying to tell me Willie Maley told lies ?

      • mick

        it was founded by RCs for all you know am right your twisting every comment made for 2 weeks now adam will a just say your right and say sorry there there adam your club is not 140 days old the whole world is lying there there

        • Adam

          How can i twist a comment from Willie Maley in an official book on Celtic ??? How can i twist 3 sentences from an official Celtic document in January 1888 where it clearly states the club already had “several of the leading Catholic football players of the west of Scotland on our membership list”, that it wanted to select a team which will be “able to do credit to the Catholics of the west of Scotland” and create a “large recreation ground where our Catholic young men will be able to enjoy the various sports”

          • mick

            adam your twisting the point as you always do you said exclusivley for RCs a said thats a lie its only rfc oldco had those underwritten rules now after this comment a will not be commenting on your comments as you just mangle things and kill debate your ,celtic was for all faiths always has been and always will be due to the bile of you lot and not letting the celtic minded people in to clubs they started there own and opened the door to all so fxxk off txxl

            • Adam

              “fxxk off txxl” Nice. Very nice. The real mick shows his true colours yet again.

            • mick

              adam your a wxxker fxxk oxf txxl a will say what no 1 else will take alex and carson with you

            • Mike

              mick you are a bigoted div (by which I mean an anti-Rangers bigoted one-eyed div, for the sake of clarity)

            • ecojon

              @ mick

              Celtic were founded by a Marist monk, Brother Walfrid. The Head teacher of Sacred Heart parochial school in Glasgow’s east end in 1887, Walfrid left Co. Sligo as a child during the famine and was horrified by the poverty, hunger, and disease endured by the hundreds of thousands of Irish immigrants to the second city of the Empire. Celtic was founded to raise funds to feed and clothe these starving immigrants.

              Walfrid was further motivated by the ubiquitous presence of Protestant missionaries, eager to hand out food to the Irish on the condition that they publicly renounced their Catholic faith. Was it sectarian of him to try to do something about this? What was a Marist Brother to do?

              Celtic was intended to be inclusive from the start. The typical Irish-founded football club in Scotland was called “Hibernians,” “Harp,” “Emerald,” “Shamrock,” or some such Irish-derived name. The new club was called “Celtic,” (pronounced with a hard “C”) at Walfrid’s insistence, because it was a name both Irish and Scots could identify with, encompassing their common cultural heritage. Brother Walfrid sought the support of both Catholic and Protestant, Irish and Scot, for his new club.

              Unlike Rangers, who from 1920-89 knowingly employed only one Catholic player (who was told by the club to keep quiet about it after they found out), Celtic have always been open to all, and many of the greatest ever Celts have been Protestant. Celtic would be nothing today without the contribution of Jock Stein, the Protestant manager who led the club to their greatest victory.

              Until the end of the First World War, Rangers were clearly Scotland’s second-biggest club. Only with the influx of Protestant shipyard workers from Belfast, and the adoption of a Protestants-only signing policy in 1920, did Rangers acquire the financial muscle to challenge Celtic’s supremacy in Scottish football.

            • Budweiser

              you started off with ‘merry xmas etc’ baby jesus this.’tis the season to be merry’ that, then you end up with these diatribes. I don’t know whether you have had too many xmas spirits but please desist! To be clear , I am of the Richard Dawkins religious persuasion. I may have issues with adam re. the relevance of politics and religion and rangers , but I do not want to have jesus rammed down my throat-again please desist- go to church/chapel and sing your heart out. In this respect I agree with mike.

          • dan

            Adam, I wish I could say watch my lips, but watch my lips anyway. Are you saying that from 1888 until 1889, The Celtic Football & Athletic Company were a sectarian club? If you are correct in this assertion then you could force the current home game announcement at Celtic Park, that they were founded as being ‘open to all’ to cease, as it is a lie. If it is incorrect, or a lie, I think you are on to something monumental, and I, for one, as a Celtic fan, would have to eat humble pie as my club would be no better than the Oldco Rangers that I so reviled for their sectarianism. So, I ask you again, are you saying that for the first year of their existence, the Celtic Football and Athletic Company operated a sectarian policy?All it requires is a simple yes or no.

          • mick

            exclusively you liar it does not say that

    • selik were founded out of fear by a priest to stop the poor from attending reformed churches to be fed and clothed and then from maybe seeing the light and converting to the reformed faith ,and you say he was inspired by hibernian ? really? a club who refused to play protestants you may be brainwashed but some of us dont buy into propaganda and try to refrain from bad language please or is that a result of your poor education?

  5. On behalf of everyone at the Scottish Football League I would like to add my sincere congratulations to Rangers on Achieving this magnificant milestone in the club’s history.

    Rangers have brought great honour and distinction to Scottish football throughout these 140 years and the club has risen to every challenge it has faced.

    There is something rather poignant that after 140 years the club is once again a member of the organisation it helped found in 1890 and we are honoured and proud to have Rangers in the league.

    To everyone involved in the club and its remarkable and loyal fans Happy Anniversary.

    David Longmuir
    Chief Executive

    • Ernesider

      “This has to be said about Rangers…as a Scottish Football club they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This country would be abetter place if Rangers did not exist”. – Ian Archer (journalist 1970s)

    • Budweiser

      Coleridge was an opium addict what’s your excuse?

      • Budweiser

        re coleridge
        It might be more helpful if people are answering a post, then they address to the postee as the posts fly hard and fast. Adam you are particularilly at fault in this-perhaps we should ask paul to number our posts?

    • scunnered wi this saga

      and so Longmuir perpetuates the myth that ‘Rangers’ still exists, I didn’t think my estimation of him could get any lower but it just has. Where is the ‘honour and distinction’ in not paying tax and going into administration/liquidation and leaving creditors out of pocket. How long will it be before Longmuir resigns then pops up with a cushy job at Ibrox?

  6. mick

    the identity of those behind Blue Pitch Holdings, remains undeclared. whats your thoughts on this lads ???the deeds lol

    • Mike

      you know what mick, I’m so fed up of your ridiculous posts that I am going to make fun of you every time I can be bothered to make to post…so, mick you are a tiresome fool

  7. mick

    such a bunch of zombies green must be well loving how deluded they are its like taking candy from a baby he will be saying

  8. mick

    sevco new club no friends hated then hated now hated all over the world forever

  9. mick

    “Some Rangers fans believe the club’s history, which would end with liquidation, must be protected but there is a shameful part of that history which they should want to forget and any newco should make it clear a new beginning means exactly that…”

    James Traynor, Director of Sevco Communications
    sevco became the tribute to the rfc the worlds most bent club ever

  10. Alex

    I am a bit lost. Was your remark about De Valera occasioned by something I wrote. I am not sure you will get very far criticising Ireland’s position during the war. You may hate fascism and so do I, but at the time Ireland’s biggest problem was GB/UK. My enemy’s enemy is my friend. That they got into bed with a madman is not something we can really judge by today’s standards. And, the were officially neutral. Also, I do not think this site is a place for examining the history of Ireland.

    There is no doubt in my mind that Celtic is a team that has its roots in the catholic tradition, indeed it was always the view that the front row of the stand was reserved for priests, and like some views that may not have been true. But the big difference for me is that I have no evidence that they discriminated against any non-catholic, though I, and I am sure many others, know of cases where Rfc discriminated against catholics. Take for example a friend of mine from my youth. Who had a trial for RFC and was considered to be very good, but failed when he gave his name – Brendan. I think I have been fairly reasonable toward you and I have taken some flack for it. Please don’t make me change my opinion with all this sectarian discussion. And, I have been fairly silent about this, but why is it so important to celebrate 140 years. 100, 150, maybe even 125, but why 140. No one celebrates 140 unless they celebrated 130. It’s a bit like celebrating one’s 27 birthday with the gusto one celebrated one’s 18th or 21st. Could it have something to do with the IPO


    If I have a problem from your post it is not your fault. See above.

    It would be a weird investor who went into an investment merely so that they could lose money. Anyone investing from an institution expects to make money. I posted on this earlier seeking correction where I have gone wrong, but I have not seen any response. Some of you are too busy being from the West.

    • Mike

      Violet, whilst interesting, I have to agree that the history of the Irish Republic during WW2 has to be seen against the recent history of the country.

      Whilst reprehensible, their attitudes were probably understandable as anti-British, though I recently saw a program which suggested Eire actually did help the Allies covertly, against their neutral stance.

      As for Rangers celebrating 140 years, I can understand that – they very nearly didn’t have 140 years to celebrate at all.

      It is just unfortunate that a supremacist attitude is still seen by their support to be a fitting part of the club.

    • VC don’t bring fascism into the discussion if you do not want the politics fully aired, there is no such thing as a little bit fascist as there is no such thing as a little bit dead.

      • Alex

        They were right – I was wrong. About you. I would have thought that most people feel that fascism was and is wrong, but it is possible to infer from what you are saying that if we really want to get into the subject, you will open our eyes. Not to the rights and wrongs of fascism but the history of Ireland. Go ahead if you wish, but this site is not the place why don’t you try or I am sure they will accommodate you. BUT NOT HERE.

        • Mike


          the idea that the Irish Republic supported Nazi Germany is abhorrent and I can only from this time allow a little perspective that they were so anti-British that my enemy’s enemy is my friend sort of thing.

          From my own point of view, I find abhorrent anything man does to man in the name of an opinion – and I specifically include points of view which are religious or territorial here.

          Anytime someone here uses religion as a part of their argument – just discard them – there is no point in listening to someone who starts their argument which includes religion as a part of it.

          • If religion was key motive for the actions of the subject or subjects involved in the debate (argument) then it’s perfectly acceptable evidence or subject matter to be weighed up and considered alongside other points.

            Your statement is completely ludicrous.

        • Ernesider

          Good posts Violet

          I am hereby withdrawing my advances to Adam and you have best wishes in your efforts to press him to your bosom. Indeed contrary to what I originally believed you may be a good influence as he is becoming increasingly bogged down in petty point scoring exercises.

          I voted to get rid of the thumbs, but it doesn’t look as if its going to happen. Around 50% of the electorate have voted for the proposition that their votes are based on the merit or otherwise of the posts and not any preconceived bias. Over to Lord Acton I believe.

  11. COYBIG

    I asked this on the last post, but never got an answer:

    “The Rangers didn’t show a full year’s operation. So how can they claim to have profits of £13m from £40m revenue per year? Then there’s the £20m from ‘negative goodwill’. And as people on here have explained, ‘negative goodwill’ is not real money. So in reality, it’s a loss of £7m?

    And add that £7m to what Stevensanph said in the first post:

    “Wages of 3.5m over 3months, equals an approx 14.5m a year wage bill. 45 players, with 175 staff total… wow.

    Expenses of approx 2m = another 8m a year. Payments to directors, assuming promotion bonus’ is another 2-3m.

    That all equals 24.5m a year.

    Revenue was 1.7m, based on 3 home matches. Lets assume 22 home games this season. That would give around 12.5m in revenue.”

    That come the end of the financial year (excluding the money that will be raised from the share issue), The Rangers will have a deficit of £19m?”

    And if correct, then that would mean Bill Miller was right with his ‘£30m black hole per season’. As when he was going to take over, all the players that didn’t TUPE over to the newco, where still there. Subsidised by the extra money made from being in the SPL, it would work out at a loss of about £30m.

    • Adam

      Itis virtually impossible to look at a high level 3 months income and expenditure and marry it up to reality. We dont know how many 1 offs were in the expenses that wont occur again. There was only 1 home league game so not sure what level of accruals have been released and what they include, ie TV money. We dont know when sponsorship money is received and recognised. Im sure there are lots more as well.

    • ecojon

      @ COYBIG

      They have no interest in the Prospectus they just want to subvert the blog at an important time by talking sh*te. We really have got to ignore them – there are a few worth talking to and people know who they are.

      Some others hang about because they want to be a resident clown – fine but I personally won’t be talking to them.

      Look at their posts and look for any positive signs they want to dicuss and I think you will have a hard job.

        • COYBIG

          @Violet Carson

          What’s a “prig”?

          • prig
            1. A person who demonstrates an exaggerated conformity or propriety, especially in an irritatingly arrogant or smug manner.
            2. Chiefly British A petty thief or pickpocket.
            3. Archaic A conceited dandy; a fop.

            I think all of those would be unfair accusations against Ecojon.

            • COYBIG


              Thanks. I don’t know why I didn’t think of looking it up in a dictionary.

              Why is someone conforming by the rules a bad thing?
              I thought everyone knew that since the the name of the blog is ‘Random Thoughts Re Scots Law by Paul McConville’ that you ran the site, not ecojon.
              As far as someone being smug or arrogant? Apart from someone constantly demeaning a person for no reason and forever proclaiming to be better than them, or indefinitely not accepting nor debating another persons views, I can’t see how you could conclude, via the internet, that someone is smug or arrogant.
              I don’t know ecojon personally, so can’t say wether he’s a pickpocket or not. But i’d presume the later.
              And finally, I have no idea how old ecojon is.

            • Paul

              Look again at 1 and then look at Eco’s post.

    • ecojon

      @ Coybig

      Accounts can be made to prove whatever you want them to prove.

      But a Flotation taking place in mid December but the account info is only to the end of August. What happened to September, October, November? Why weren’t they included in the financial info provided? Was it that bad?

      • COYBIG


        “Accounts can be made to prove whatever you want them to prove.”

        I think you’re spot on with that comment. £20m for negative goodwill that’s not even real money. How can anyone, not just The Rangers, get away with putting that in their accounts?

        “Hi, i’d like to by Wanyama off of you Peter.”

        “OK then Charles, that will be £20m.”

        “Do you take negative goodwill?”

    • ecojon


      And what is this all about? Were thing that tight financially they needed a £50,000 loan for a day. How can you run a football club with no banking facilities. Uually when someone is frightened to put money into a bank it’s because it’s so easy to seize it. Surely that can’t be the case here.

      28. Related Party Transactions
      On 6 August 2012, Brian Stockbridge, a director of RFCL provided a loan of £50,000 to RFCL. No interest accrued on this balance which was repaid on 7 August 2012. Brian Stockbridge also received a payment of £30,000 for the period from 14 June 2014 to 31 August 2012 with respect to his consultancy services as a director.

  12. Buddy Morrisey

    Adam 6.16
    “Celtic were founded as a rc club and were set up originally to be exclusively rc.

    Not the case Adam, to save your obfuscation I won’t term it a lie.

    Celtic was chosen as the name to represent the common cultural source of the Irish in Scotland. (As you know the Scotti were a tribe from Ireland who settled west central Scotland and gave the country its name eventually.)

    Celtic began with a rich cultural mix: Irish, catholic, land leaguers, politicos, trade unionists, lawyers, publicans, temperance movement et al.

    Brian wilson has it in his centenary history.”Reports of the annual meeting of 1889 indicate there were already ‘malcontents’ among the membership, none of whom was elected to the board… The malcontents were adamant (Yes ADAMant) that it (the club) should be Catholic, amateur and charitable. ” they also disproved of celtic board members being linked to the drinks trade.

    For wilson the debate was between those who saw the club for a narrow purpose or a broader approach. The broader approach tied to business always won out. In the years ahead Celtic meetings debated the point of view that the team should include a number of catholics. Each time it was defeated and the idea of a club open to all has always been accepted as part of Celtic. We had a Victorian version of a debate on being an inclusive club, a Scots club with Irish roots, or as Maley put a cosmopolitan club.

    It’s a pity that your club in its early days is not having a progressive debate on a positive identity for ‘The Rangers’.

    • Adam

      I refer you to January 1888 statement and Willie Maleys views on the matter. Read the statement but in the style of Matthew McConaughey in a Time to Kill, replace the word Catholic with Protestant and the word Celtic with Rangers. Try and be honest with yourself and think if you would have the same reaction to the statement.

    • ecojon

      @Buddy Morrisey

      I had hoped SFL3 would have provided them with the opportunity and breathing pace to debate and deal with their WATP Triumphalism – adly things are worse than they have been for quite a while.

      It will pass – they are dying out and becoming more and more iolated as Scotland changes and becomes a different kind of society.

      • GWG

        “it will pass – they are dying out and becoming more and more iolated as Scotland changes and becomes a different kind of society.”

        I would like to think so but the very fact that the MSM is indeed habited by the same kind of peooopul with the same triumphalist mentality makes this dream nothing more than a dream…..
        just look at those on here that cant see the woods for the trees..
        “They ARE the People” and dont you forget it

    • Adam

      Ive taken the liberty to re-write it:

      “Glasgow Rangers, patrons his grace the Mayor of Glasgow and the clergy of the Church of Scotland and the Principal Protestant laymen of Scotland.

      The above club was formed in November 1872 by a number of protestant people of the west end of the city. The main object is to supply the west end conferences of the Protestant church hospices with funds for the maintenance of the dinner tables of our needy children.

      Many cases of sheer poverty are left unaided through lack of means. It is therefore with this principle object that we have set afloat the Rangers and we invite you as one of our ever ready friends to assist in putting our new park in proper working order for the coming football season. We have already several of the leading protestant football players of the west of Scotland on our membership list.

      They have most thoughtfully offered to assist in the good work. We are fully aware that the elite of football players belong to this city and suburbs and we know that from there we can select a team which will be able to do credit to the Protestants of the west of Scotland.

      Again there is also the desire to have a large recreation ground where our Protestant young men will be able to enjoy the various sports which will build them up physically and we feel sure we will have many supporters with us in this laudable object.”

      Can you honestly say this wouldnt be thrown in the face of Rangers supporters ?

      • Ernesider


        Considering the abject poverty and underprivileged nature of the lives of most Catholics of the period, I find the above statement remarkably moderate.

        But no matter how much one may differ about the intentions of the founders of both clubs, two facts are incontestable. Rangers grew in a sectarian monster, Celtic didn’t.

        A friend of mine used to say, “If you want to know if parents are good, look at the children. Good children, good parents.”

        • Adam

          I have no problems admitting to Rangers sectarian attitude for a huge period of our existence. Im not proud of it either. The club moved on, though i accept there is still an issue with the fanbase to this very day.

          We are most certainly not alone though.

          • Gortnamona

            Fair enough Adam
            There may be hope for us all yet.

          • Adam,

            I am only catching up on all this crap.

            ThisBlog was about the new Share Issue etc. & it has deteriorated into a debate about bygone days of yore.

            I notice you have brought a wee tactic you used on the RTC blog over to here,.It’s called Whataboutery.. On the RTC Blog it was how RFC had cleared their debts & were trading in the black, with leaks to prove it & how unhealthy Celtic’s accounts were… Look how that ended up.

            Now it’s a historical ” you were as bad”., to be honest, I don’t know & don’t really care.

            RFC had a sectarian bad habit, The Church of Scotland joined in the anti Irish propaganda & practices.

            In more recent times the good folk of the Kirk have apoligised for that period in their history & have moved on, today they embrace the multi ethnicity & various religions in the Scottish community.

            Before anyone asks I am also of the Dawkin’s persuasion, but every man to his own as long as it harms no other.

            I have a problem with the way the RFC situation was & is being handled in the here & now, Rules have been bent broken & ignored to ensure Sevco survival & a place in Scottish Senior Football.This has empowered the bampots & they are being aided & abetted by Green to ensure the Share Issue succeeds.

            I scoffed at Regan & his warnings of civil strife if Rangers were allowed to fold according to the rules.

            Watching the TV as the trouble in Northern Ireland unfolds & seeing so many Rangers strips worn & Rangers Scarfs covering the faces of rioters I wonder if he was right.

            I don’t wan’t that crap in Scotland & the more you kowtow to the perceived superiority of a single group willing to act like this, the more likely it is to kick off when someone finally says no to them.

            That is the problem, everyone else is wrong, Rangers & their supporters are right & everyone else is getting “payback” when they can manage to get the boot in, that is in the papers on a daily basis.

            Then the complaints that no one likes them & somehow the lenient application of the rules against them is “Bigotry” ala Green & the Traynoresque diatribes that it is ” Bigotry & hatred” coupled with jealousy which has caused everyone to gang up on Rangers & lay them low.. They are creating a monster for their own ends.

            The truth is RFC cheated & were not treated according to the rules in existence,, they were let off leniently, if the rules had been applied then there would be No Rangers this year, that is a simple fact.

            So instead of lashing out at all & sundry & blaming everyone else, a cold hard look should be applied by Rangers folk towards Rangers & it’s leadership past & present for two reasons.

            Firstly to see the truth & get the chip off their shoulder & secondly to ensure it does not happen again.

            As far as I can see the overhead is too high & the club is being treated as a cash cow by Green & his Associates. If this is true we will be back again facing a “Rangers in Debt” crisis with all the usual bends & twists because “Scottish Football needs them” . .

  13. Bhrianmac

    My apologies if you have already seen this touching report but, for those who haven’t maybe it will make you smile.
    From McMurdo’s ‘A Proud Celebration’ a few quotes.
    1.) On that paragon of virtue, Andy Gray;
    “I have to say Andy Gray sounded like a man about to pee his pants with excitement as he MC’d the celebrations….”
    2.) Richard (BRAVEA*S*) Gough:
    “Richard Gough also won back a fair few of those who were annoyed with his comments over the Tannadice Boycott by booming out an emphatic “WE ARE THE PEOPLE!” to the packed stadium.
    3.) Finally on ould Snake Oil himself.
    “…even Charles Green, who saw in Rangers a chance to make quick money by his own admission has fallen hopelessly in love with the Gers.”

    What about all that for making your heart weep, eh?
    Oops I’ll have to go. Theres a wee puddle on my seat. Must have been when I was splittling my sides.

    • COYBIG

      “I have to say Andy Gray sounded like a man about to pee his pants with excitement as he MC’d the celebrations….”

      Why? Was there a female Sky Sports presenter tucking in his mic box?

      “Richard Gough also won back a fair few of those who were annoyed with his comments over the Tannadice Boycott by booming out an emphatic “WE ARE THE PEOPLE!” to the packed stadium.”

      Shh!! Don’t let Charlie know that after he’s took his money and ran away, all he’d have to do is shout, “We are the People!” and all would be forgiven. He’d just come back and do it all over again. Infact, Charlie! Come here a minute, i’ve something to tell you.

      “…even Charles Green, who saw in Rangers a chance to make quick money by his own admission has fallen hopelessly in love with the Gers.”

      Give practically anyone Charlie’s wage packet:

      – £360k salary.
      – Benefits and expenses plus accomodation costs.
      – £360k bonus ‘for promotion from the SFL’.
      – Equity stake of 10% of the enlarged ordinary share capital of RFCL post-secondary fund-raising and/or IPO.
      – Share options – in the event of RFCL Group’s share options listed on ‘any recognised exchange’ – worth twice annual salary i.e. £720k.
      – BUPA healthcare.
      – Accomodation in Glasgow worth £1600 per month, plus all council tax and utilities paid for.

      And they would gladly give “I love The Rangers!” soundbites. Not forgetting the fact that he’s after The Rangers fans money, so he’s hardly going to say, “I hate The Rangers!” is he?

  14. Alex

    I now think I have got it. I posted a remark about Barcelona, where I mentioned fascism. You, in some strange way chose to connect that with De Valera. As though I had been dropping some kind of subliminal hint that the Ireland of WW2 was fascist. No, hang on, you were against me traducing Ireland (which I wasn’t). I will get back to this. What I was posting was a fairly light hearted comment to Martin suggesting that we might all look to Barcelona for an example and they fought fascists i.e. Franco. It is indeed a peculiar mindset that could link my comment to Ireland and De Valera.

    Why are you manufacturing arguments where none exist. You are not some kind of ‘defender of the faith’ that is Ibrox or are you. This is a debate forum where a certain basic grounding in the subjects being discussed is taken for granted. I know the history of Ireland and I have read about the history of Spain and Barcelona FC. AND I KNOW THE HISTORY OF RANGERS and it is not attractive. Celtic, there is little doubt, are a team embracing the catholic tradition of this country and of Ireland. My team, Hearts have a masonic tradition they would care not to remember, but at that time they volunteered for WW1 with disastrous consequences – see the memorial. But all of this was in the early part of last century where values were different and do not lend themselves to modern day understandings of what is right and wrong. Only RFC kept this up until the late part of the century and from your posts still do. In the 70’s Celtic were forced to put numbers on their shirts, but RFC were essentially forced to employ catholics because someone, possibly Messrs. Souness and Murray realised that their sectarian policy would not wash with UEFA or any modern standard. The establishment at Rangers employed a sectarian policy and its supporters enthusiastically went along with it. Your attempts at bringing De Valera, who has a none too proud back story, into the debate to somehow blacken both my name and Celtic (a team I do not support) is vile. You seem to live on an edge, where any perceived criticism of RFC must be seized upon and must evoke a reference to a tangential use of some factlet which blackens the name of Celtic. What has De Valera got to do with any of this. And, I am repeating myself here, has De Valera got to do with my post of a light heated comment on Barcelona.

    I’ll say it again they were right and I was wrong about you.

    • Budweiser

      Two points violet. Well no three actually. 1st point- glad to see the light finally dawning with regards to alex.
      2nd. With regards to, I think, jimbhoy and ecojon when they were talking about playing on’ red blaize’ pitches etc. You were , at the time. involved in some dispute with eco and rubbished his reminiscences as some sort of ‘waltons ‘nostalgia. [Sorry this has been festering]
      It reminds me of the difference between players and supporters. Players know what it is to go out on an icy day in january and get the shit kicked out of you ,and love it, and pray that in the next game they will do better. Supporters wish that they could be on the field, and imagine that they could do better. This is true of both amateur and pros, only the amateurs obviously, don’t get paid. Were you a player violet?
      3rd. Re saints ‘lying down’ to celtic. O
      ver the years there have been many accusations of ‘lying down’-the most recent being dunfermline/rangers whilst celtic were playing kilmarnock in title deciders.
      i can’t speak for the pros, but in 40 years of actually playing, sometimes twice a day, saturday morning and saturday afternoon we always played to win. Most times we were beaten by a better team, but hey, there was always next week.I loved the game. I supported scotland and all the players in the team; the biggest honour I could think of was to actually play for scotland-my wildest dream. Play for nothing! Pay to play! Where are we now? overpaid prima donnas who couldn’t lace the boots of their predecessors. So point is ‘players’ don’t like to get beaten , but mostimes the better team will win. Or is just a ‘girly,’ thing and you just don’t know what your’e talking about/

  15. portpower

    The first official Celtic game, played at the old Celtic Park.

    Strictly, Celtic’s first ever game. The opponents were really a Rangers XI composed from their reserve side (who called themselves “The Swifts”), likely as they didn’t want to lose to a new outfit (just in case). The game was advertised as being against “a side of Rangers”.

    Celtic wore white shirts with a green collar and a red and green Celtic cross on the breast (see right). These were given to the club by Penman Brothers from Bridgeton Cross.

    Neil McCallum had the honour of scoring the first Celtic goal, a feat of which he and all others attending on that day likely will never fully have known the importance of it for the whole of Scottish footballing history and to the many fans to come. One goal was chopped off for being offside which became the standard for Celtic in years to come in games against Rangers!

    Due to that the team was formed within Irish circles in Scotland, the players were all picked from respective clubs with Irish social links, and so naturally the team was thus composed of players who were Catholic. This was due to circumstances alone and there is no record of any policies to say otherwise. Non-Catholics played for the side very soon enough, and no policy was ever put in place to stop any being allowed to play for the club at any point in our history, a standard by which has been a hallmark of Celtic FC where “a man is judged by his football alone!”

    An attendance of 2000 watched the game. It´s thought that the 2,000 attendance could have been greater but for the International Exhibition taking place the same day though in the West End.
    Celtic could not play the rangers first team because they were being
    investigated for EBT`s.

    • ecojon


      I had forgotten about that strip and the fact it was the second Rangers 11 – The Swifts. I gave all my Celtic books including a lot of early ones to one of my sons – the usual, meant to be a loan but I’ll never get them back 🙂 He’s a bit like me interested in history so I don’t really mind just gives me something to moan at.

      But it’s annoying the likes of tonight as I don’t like to rely on memory when people are trying to score religious points and then rewriting history to prove a point although Adam has quite a lot of previous on that score.

      However was a good week for the Celts and let’s hope we can build the Scottish co-efficient a bit more 🙂

    • dan

      Eco, you’ll notice Adam didn’t answer my question as to whether Celtic were ever sectarian, by which I mean they operated a policy that excluded people of other faiths. They quite simply did not. I think this is just mischief making—which is fine as I’m up for that myself—but it does encourage people like the revolting Carson to come on, exude his suppurating pus and lower the tone of the blog.

      ps Eco. have you ever came across the ‘unofficial’ history of Celtic? I think it was penned by a fellow called Woods, who is/was a fan. If my memory is correct the club took exception to him suggesting they were formed in 1887. Maybe that gap year is what Adam is referring to—-and dissembling about.?

      • ecojon

        @ dan

        Don’t know if you’ll ee this but there’s aklways been that argument about the actual founding date but I wouldn’t pontificate on it without going back and re-reading the sources as it’s been at least 40 years since the argument last surfaced as far as I am concerned.

        It matters not because as someone else said we grew into a different club from Ranger and we still are as far as I am concerned.

  16. Approaching with an open mind, I can’t honestly say that the statement excludes other religions, although it does avoid mentioning them.
    Considering the audience the statement was framed for, that is understandable, though not laudable.

    Adam, this is not sufficient evidence to underwrite your assertion about Celtic’s foundation, regardless of whether you are right or wrong.

    • Adam

      At last. A sensible post on the issue. Incidentally and for the record, im actually not bothered either way. I still maintain there is 2 decent sources to confirm it was the case but the notion was soon dealt with and rightly so in my book.

      Having said that, i notice people have stayed clear of my sock challenge. Perhaps they dont want to be on record as saying that it is more likely you will pick 11 green socks than 10 blue and 1 green sock. The demographic of the sock drawer leans towards the greens and it would be absolutely astounding if somehow you managed to pick 90% blue from a 16% demographic. Whereas 100% from 84% seems more balanced. 🙂

      • Ernesider

        Ghavgrim & Adam

        You quite simply can’t go on judging events of the past by modern day standards. It is one of the most basic errors in historical analysis and without a thorough understanding of historical context the following is meaningless.

        ” Considering the audience the statement was framed for, that is understandable, though not laudable.

  17. Lots of comments on here that are a detriment to the reputation of the blog.
    In particular, I protest against Mick’s use
    of barely concealed obscenities. It is too far.
    Paul, this standard is an increasing trend. Have you considered how you will tackle the increasing number of antagonistic posts?
    I appreciate you may not have the manpower for self moderation. Some of these posters would appear not to have the capacity…

  18. COYBIG

    I know everyone who writes on here is passionate about their views on everything. But could everyone stop with the Catholics this, Protestants that, debate, as it’s getting tiresome to say the least. I come on here to have a bit of banter with people, say a few things in jest, and generally debate with them in a reasonable enough manner. I don’t agree with this, “I hate you!” “Well I hate you!” talk. Which is sadly what some people seem to think is what this site is for. It’s not. If I wanted to talk or read about who’s the bigger bigots, i’d go to a site made for that debate. So if anyone wants to do so, then go elsewhere please.

    • Adam

      Well said. I apologise for getting dragged into it when i should know better. So for me, on anything religion from here on in, im out.

      And again, apologies for the huge part ive played in it tonight.

      • Budweiser

        Better not talk about the rangers then eh? Richard Dawkins. If rangers are happy not to involve religion then I am more than happy-it would be a new beginning. Should I hold my breath? btw , that goes for celtic as well!

    • Budweiser

      It would be really ‘nice’ if everbody stopped talking about ‘catholics this,ptotestants that’. Unfortunately we live in a world, here in scotland,especially, where football in particular, and society in general, seem to be fixated on these matters.which is why I drew attention to the events in NI. We do not live in a vacuum where there is no connectivity to outside events.I really wish it were otherwise,and that is why adam,[ against his will?] attempts to justify rangers position at this time. I posted the link to NI. and the link to CG’S meeting with RTIDNI to try to show that not only was CG an ‘opportunistic financier’ but that he had no regard for the legacy his actions might create. He doesn’t care about prods and papes- he feeds it for one agenda only MAMMON. It just makes me so sad that the likes of adam can only see the numbers and not the reality behind the scenes.Who and what are rangers? The prospectus might interest adam but I would like a prospectus on the new rangers and how they could be a positive,vibrant.all inclusive force which would benefit ALL scottish football. As I say , I won’t hold my breath.

  19. Buddy Morrisey


    You started it! 😉

    “Celtic were founded as a rc club and were set up originally to be exclusively rc.’

    Celtic were never exclusively anything. The mix among their founders was across a breadth of Irish /Catholic Scots; mix of motivations too. Your exclusive tag won’t wash. some Irish Scots wanted celtic to be a bridge from ireland into Scottish life – they decided on soccer rather than gaelic sports – they wanted to be part of Scotland! others tried to form links among a range of scottish communities – mining, fishing and Highland Land leagues. At the heart was the irish catholic community making their mark and working for charitable causes. It’s quite a story and one that Scotland can be rightly proud of.

    Some patrons at the time wanted Celtic to be more Catholic, more temperance, more amateur but professionalism, business oriented progressivism won out. At annual meetings Celtic voted down greater catholic quotas among players – the inclusivists won!

  20. I have watched developments yesterday and today with some confusion, as an American from Chicago who supports the soccer team Juventus, because of an Italian soccer coach at home you could think I am entitled to be confused.
    The guys on our rigs are all pretty mixed I have heard good natured banter but never open sectarianism, being fourth generation Chicagoan of distant Irish descent I am pretty clued up on the American Irish attitudes, which are fading into nothingness as time passes.

    A Native American on one of our rigs explained it to a few of us in simple terms, he said everywhere in the world is the same those with the biggest guns take what they want, he equated much of Europe and in particular the Irish question to the plight of the Native American, that being that the Europeans and the Irish left their own lands and helped the descendants of the Pilgrim Fathers steal his peoples lands and commit genocide on an untold scale. I will only say that I had and have no answer to his accusations, there is only a sense of guilt that is now being felt by many non Native Americans, my dad sums it up as there but for the grace of God.

    I guess the point I am trying to make is that after all these years history keeps repeating itself, I wonder if we will ever learn to live in harmony I doubt I could bear the pain that my proud Native American carries for his lost people and the theft of their lands and heritage.

  21. Ernesider

    I think I will take a break. Like a Kathleen Mavourneen loan:
    It may be a while and it may be for ever.

  22. Andy

    So here we have the prospectus and low and behold there are institutional investors, quite a lot actually, willing to throw money away to save tax apparently (as if anyone here knows why such investors invest!!), and the fans just need to chip in with 10m, and then everyones happy….

    Well maybe….whilst it’s hardly suprising that many on here were going to spend their hours picking holes and cricising the full show, I will give it my honest opinion:

    So we have £10m on upgrades to the stadium, which really means 5.5m of fixing the stadium and 4.5m buying some of it and putting in a new bar, superstore and ticket office….Okay, repairs need made so fair enough, however with the rest of it, I think we could be long time waiting for a return….as we already have a superstore and ticket office, the increased revenue will need to be significant from the bar, but even a 1m a year profit will take time….But long term Im okay with this plan, its not exactly blowing my mind but its fine.

    We then have 3m on other things that could generate revenue….great, so ehhhh, what is that??…RTV, a train station?…who knows…

    Ditto on the further 5.5m to be spent on the same sort of thing…

    Next up the numbers, so for the period up til now there has been 13m profit, which is good. 4m cash in the bank is somewhat lower than I had anitcipated though, which would explain the ‘working capital’ element.

    So, numbers look okay, diversity of investors (whatever their reasons), and all in all a reasonably secure looking set-up…So where is the problem….

    Well, I guess the question is, why give fans the chance to invest then make it a week before christmas (begs the question does he really want fans to invest?)…Secondly, from what I can see, we need 5.5m for ibrox repairs… the rest a necessity or is it just a gamble of long odds that these projects will start to turn a profit? I also think the risks are understated, as whilst crowds have been good this year, the 2nd year was always going to be the toughest sale…The working capital requirement is still a worry, however having said that, he seems to have enough insitutional investors to get the guts of what he needs, and I am sure there will be many thousands of Rangers fans willing to invest there hard earned cash (circa 3m), though I will not be one of them, I do hope it all goes to plan, whilst not a resounding success, I dont beleive it will be a complete failure either.

    And from this, we should now receive far greater transaparency….

    • Tyke Bhoy

      Not being keeping up I see Andy. The “profit” is entirely due to a one off “negative goodwill” which is a paper transaction based on revaluing non current assets bought for less than £5m (note the total purchase price included some current assets) at over £63m.

      £4m in the bank? Remember that’s at 31st August. An awful lot of salaries to be paid since then and probably a lot of Consultancy fees to the CEO and Finance Director too.

      Working capital? Wasn’t the prospectus of the view that there was enough working capital for the season? Or was it just the year of which there are 21 days left.

      All in all the Tribute acts looks very close to what the original certainly appears to have been doing in several months to the admin and throughout its admin “trading while insolvent”. Duff an Phelps own figures show that the admin was run at a loss only slighly smaller than they achieved for the creditors pot by selling the assets.

      • Andy


        Admittedly, even though I had indicated real interest in this prospectus I havent actually spent too much time analysing it and just had a quick look into some of the numbers, however from what I can see from the numbers, is that financially, the club looks sustainable under the current model, with moderate potential to increase revenue else wwhere.

        There is talk of storing up a mega fund for when we are back in the SPL, but I cant see that happeninng, I think it will be thorugh youth development and shrewd cheap market buys (much like Celtic, albeit they have invested significantly in their scouting network), before Rangers can dream of challenging for the top prize in scottish football again.

        As at 31st August, 4m in the bank, but you forget that the majority of season tickets were paid over 4 month instalment plans, therefore there was still a awful lot of money to be collected, i.e. the 6m debtors I beleive…coupled with the matchday revenue, I dont think there has been too much trouble paying the bills thus far….though I do appreciate that it is somewhat tighter than I had envisaged initially.

        I dont think there is too much to be negative about on the face of it. It does appear that the club should go on and be able to live within it’s budget as is, so for now IMHO its all okay (financially), the hard part comes when we have to challenge Celtic and have limited resources to do so against a club who to all intents and purposes under proper governance (and I see no reason for there not to be) will be cash rich, that what happens when gap takes far longer to bridge than first thought….

        I would liked to have seen a prospectus that promised further investment in youth development and a proper scouting network, as then we may have had half a chance when the time comes….that would have been a proper long term investment with potential huge profits from young talent being nourtured in to top players, though I wont lose sleep over it. But I rest a little easier in the knowledge that we slowly moving in the right direction….I think the time for people who want to find fault and conspire should now be at an end…….those that are wise, will move on and look forward to the time when Rangers and Celtic are sparring with one another again…..and for majority on here, they should be looking forward to it massively as they will undoubtely have a far stronger team….For everyone else that wished Rangers gone, well they can continue to dream on……

        • tykebhoy

          There maybe season book money to collect but as is normally the case isn’t this to be drip fed into operating income as and when the games are played even if it is collected and sitting in a deposit account. Also did TRFC manage to set up an installment plan? I may be wrong but I thought they hadn’t managed to find a banking facility through which they could apply a direct debit scheme.

          I think you are also being a little optimistic on the sustainable model. Some of the blackhole may have been plugged but with wages and bonuses as high as they still are it still remains to seem if operating revenues will outstrip expenses. They certainly didn’t in the first 3 months and I doubt if Adam’s one offs in expenditure account for as much as the one off £17m in negative goodwill or anything even approaching the “paper profit” it created.

  23. tykebhoy

    There has been a lot of comment from Sevconians about why so many commenters on Paul’s Blog are so interested in the affairs of the company of the tribute act playing out of Ibrox.

    Well I suspect like me, most are worried what will happen if/when it all goes pearshaped for the tribute act in the same way as it did for it’s predecessor. Worried, well yes given the lengths most of the mainstream media, the footballing authorities and some others holding public office went to in an attempt to initially preserve RFC and when that failed to manipulate the best position possible for TRFC.

    Firstly we have the “hopelessly conflicted” Campbell Ogilvie who as SFA President was aware that according to an FTTT RFC were engaging in, and I’ll use a popular contemporary term here, “Aggressive Tax Evasion” to gain a benefit on the football field. CO can’t deny this knowledge he admitted to benefitting from it to the tune of a good night out. (Did that not turn out to be £90k although obviously he would have received at least half of that were tax paid.)

    Next we have the SFA who permitted RFC a UEFA licence for the 11/12 season despite outstanding social taxes and having taken it as read that Craig Whyte was a fit an proper person to run a football club.

    Then we have concerted efforts from the press and several in public posts to ensure that RFC see out the 11/12 season having entered administration on Valentine’s day 2012. The administrators managed to run the club at a loss for that period only just short of the amount they then managed to sell the assets for having failed to obtain a CVA.

    A new club was set up by SEVCO, “The Rangers Football Club”. The press and the footballing authorities SPL/SFA then went into overdrive in an attempt to get this club, that didn’t even have SFA membership or even the requisites to achieve it, into the SPL. This includes threats of Armageddon for the SPL unless a club playing at Ibrox was include in it. This certainly begs the question which rules and regulations would be ignored, bent, twisted and broken had the club from Ibrox finished the season in the relegation spot and achieved a CVA. I’ll return to Armageddon later.

    When that failed to gain TRFC a place at the top table the MSM/SPL/SFA/SFL went into overdrive suggesting disaster for Scottish Football if TRFC didn’t play this season in League one, despite not even having membership of the SFL, or meeting the requirements to even be an associate member (the SFA requirements still missing too).

    This too failed but TRFC were allowed to enter SFL3, with the SFL ignoring other clubs who could have petitioned for membership. At this time the SFA created, as their rules permit, a new type of membership which they inferred on only once club, TRFC, in order for that club to participate in the SFL

    Armageddon? The Sevconians ignore the fact that the Scottish Champions have qualified for the last 16 of the Champions league and in so doing gained valuable UEFA money for Scottish football and probably enhancing the Scottish football coefficient too. They also ignore that this could turn out to be one of the closest SPL’s ever and not just a 2 horse race with 4 point covering the top 4, 7 the top 6 and only 14 points covering the top 11. Nope sevconains point out that armageddon must be happening because overall SPL average crowds are down. Well that was almost certain to happen wasn’t it and I’ll explain with some simple maths.

    The SPL has lost a team with a 50k+ stadium and an average crowd last season supposedly well over 40k. To simplify matters lets call it 42k

    They have been replaced by a club with a stadium capacity of just over 12k. For the sake of the argument lets say Dundee sell out every home game ( we know they don’t).

    That means 1 in every 12 SPL matches this season must have at least 30k less attendees than last season.

    This also means to match total SPL attendancs last season each of the other 11 out of 12 games/clubs must average just under 3000 more in attendance than last season.

    In the case of Ross County that’s not quite like for like and I doubt there home crowds are 3000 up on Dunfermlines last season(I haven’t checked) but I am sure Ross are reasonably happy with their gates.

    Of the other 10. Celtic crowds are down probably due to a number or reasons including economic climate, poor home form and the added distraction of Home champions league group and qualifying matches and reminiscent trips to Spain and Lisbon. Again I haven’t checked but I would imagine a slight increase in attendences at Piittodrie and Easter Road due to improvement over last season and the rest will pretty much be the same.

    Armageddon hasn’t happened in the SPL or in the SFL but it pretty much will do if Scottish Football has a repeat of the shenanigans that went on in 2012 to keep a club playing at Ibrox. Scottish Football is hardly a goose laying golden eggs but a repeat of those machinations would probably kill and cook that goose. Now do you understand why fans of Scottish football are interested in the potential failure? We are worried that a repeat show of total lack of integrity by senior officials at the SPL/SFA/SFL will see disenchantment and walking away on an Armageddon like scale.

    • Andy


      To be honest that has to be the single most bitter statement I have read to date. I dont even no where to start.

      Lets start with the previous post, yes Rangers did set-up a direct debit facility, it was an option on the renewal form and I know people that paid via this method…satisified.

      Why dont you take a sanity check, stop wishing clubs dead, move on enjoy your champions league football whilst it lasts (for the record I hope it does for the good of scottish football), and we’ll meet you in a few years!!

      Lennon has already admitted he misses the thrill of the old firm games, as any true FOOTBALL supporter will agree (those with other vested interests will disagree), and the game is always better with true competition for the main prize!! Dont try and joke about the league being competitive, its not, Celtic will now go on a run in the league as they can put the champions league to the back of their minds, no one comes close to the quality and depth of squad they have.

      Anyone interested in improving the game and competitive environment we play in will hope that Rangers make there way back as expected year on year to the top table and none more so that PL… can make up excuses for the low gates at parkhead, simple fact is if Celtic were competing against Rangers for the title then Celtic would comfortably be looking at 50k+ each home game. People say Rangers need to change and I agree with that, we need to stamp out the bigots and rid of ourselves of our seige mentality (boycotts etc i completely disagree with), but by god some people throwing these remarks around need to look in the mirror….it will take both sides to lower their arms before everyone can move on…

      I have the pleasant position of being able to have friends of both Rangers and Celtic persuasion that adopt a similar stance to myself….perhaps others should too…

  24. lordmac

    i would be looking for a mole within the octopus investment group, i would find this very strange that most of theses directors are linked to them , also there is a named director having a interests in two football clubs, that cant be healthy for football, with so many tentacles in the pie inside trading could be looked or frowned upon, don’t forget these same directors
    have been in as many companies that have dissolved and shut down,
    i must admit CHARLES GREEN has landed on his feet with a weekly basic wage of £7,000 for life as there is never going to be any one able to buy rangers out now should this share issue win or fail. the chance of the rangers support ever owing the company has long gone, i believe the blue knights have seen to that with there penny pinching. they must look like numpties now , after letting this gift horse slip through there fingers.

  25. Geddy Lee

    Andy, do you feel your club need to raise huge amounts of money while languishing in the 4th tier of Scottish football? Surely the fanbase should have insisted they hold it off until Green has proved he’s genuine.

    One would have thought the hard lessons you recieved under Murray and Whyte would have made the fanbase a bit more cautious of Green, especially as he has so far failed miserably on a huge raft of promises.

    EG, do you honestly think he is on the verge of signing a deal with Adidass that will bring the club 30-40 Million?

    The fact there is a 10 million difference in the high and low figures should have immediatley rung alarm bells, instead the fan base simply rejoiced. That was on the 21 Sept, and was to be signed “In a matter of days”.

    Naturally, absolutely nothing has happened on that front, yet there is not a peep out of any of the plethora of fan

    Why on earth will none of you hold him to task?
    Why this dreadful timidity where Green is concerned? You will only have yourselfs to blame if this all goes wrong.

    There is nothing in Green’s business track record to suggest he knows what he is doing, indeed, he has already admitted he knows absolutely nothing about football.

    Any thoughts ?

    • Andy

      @geddy lee

      I have actually e-mailed Rangers on a number of occasions asking questions around ownership of ibrox etc etc. and wrote a guest post on my doubts of Green.

      I still have them, hence why I am not personally investing, save from season ticket and match tickets. I have seen the prospectus adn I am comfortable with the numbers, in that I do not think the club is curently under a high risk of going under. That is just my opinion, based on the numbers I have seen, some of the shareholders (e.g. Mike Ashley, Walter Smith) give me a degree of confidence and the confirmed investment from institutional investors.

      So many Celtic fans write a lot about Green, without realising he doesn’t hold all that much power. Do you disagree that such a diverse shareholding is a good thing? We are moving away from sugardaddy model and yet you are only interested in critising?

      Its a good question, do Rangers NEED to invest in ibrox right now….or should we hope that its all okay and that it lasts a few extra years (and if your going to do it, you may as well improve it)…..perhaps its a lower risk to do this now, a. some work clearly needs done, and b. to get institutional investors the issue had to be when the price was at its lowest…..I dont for a minute think fans will invest 10m, do you?

      I didnt see a quote of 30/40m from adidas/nike/puma…but thats not an unrealistic figure on say a 10/15 year deal is it?

      Mike Ashley certainly knows how to run a football club, there are many more very smart businessmen on board, what is this obsession with Green??…he is just a mouthpeice…not the brains behind it all!!!

      • tykebhoy

        The CEO and chairman doesn’t hold much power. I’ve heard it all now.

      • COYBIG


        But Mike Ashley is not allowed to be involved in running The Rangers in any way shape or form. Or are you saying to fuck with the SFA rules, again?

        • Andy


          Ehhhh, think you are a little confused, the SFA approved Mike Ashley to own a small stake in Rangers…they have no jurisdiction over what steps someone takes to protect their investment. If someone owns part of something, you had better beleive they have a say. bloody hell, where’s Mick, think he has been dishing out some of that deluded juice to some of you on here.

          • COYBIG


            Ehhh…you’re wrong. He’s not allowed to be involved in running the Club. Look it up before you embarrass yourself even more.

            • Andy

              ehhh, no I’m not, read again….it was approved on the basis he did not take a material control, i.e. single percentage stake….there is nothing on what he can and can’t do….in fact, Charles Green did say…Mike Ashley is ‘very very influential’…..

            • COYBIG


              He is not allowed to be involved in the running of the Club. It was repeated over and over when his Sports Direct deal was announced.

            • COYBIG


              “The Scottish FA is set ratify the move on the condition Ashley owns no more than 10% of Rangers and has no personal role in running the club.”

              Via –

            • tykebhoy

              @Coybig there must be a subtle difference between “material control” and “very, very influential”. Oh wait a minute I have just seen the light. The latter description comes from someone with not much power (despite being chairman and CEO). Maybe he has strings attached, which are being pulled, like a puppet. Mibbee just mibbee 😉

  26. Geddy Lee

    I’m not criticising Andy, I’m simply puzzled as to why your fanbase( You excepted) have so much faith in a man who frankly, has been an embarrasment to your club from the moment he crossed the border.

    His claims were made during his trip to Toronto, and were posted live by one of your fans direct onto twitter.

    The Bear’s Den still has the thread in their archives where he rants about the huge shirt deal, the tie ups with MLS that have already been denied (Never heard of him) the Soccer schools you are opening across North America etc etc etc.

    Just as bad were his claims when he visited “Norn Iron”. I assume like most of your fanbase, you will claim to have not read them either.

    There’s little point in ignoring these aspects of Green, just as you should be asking why on earth your club has employed Traynor as you head of communications. I have to assume that you at least saw his plethora of quotes about your club’s
    history having been wiped out by Liquidation. Indeed Green made the same admission, but I guess you “Missed” that too.


    As for Ashley, he has bought a few shares but will be tieing up the merchandise deal to sell you cheap tat through his stores . He will offload the shares as soon as they begin to fall (usually immediatley with almost all football shares), like any investor, he is in to make money. Like Green, he has no ties to “The Rangers”
    at all and will lose no sleep over yo

    Ashley has made some real howlers at St Jame’s not least the changing of the stadium name. It looks like he wants to do the same at Ibrox yet the fans again don’t seem prepared to try and prevent that, unlike the Newcastle fans who forced him to change it back.

    • Andy


      I do agree with a lot of what you say (though I think your tone is a bit patronising which I dont feel there is any need for as I am trying to engage in a two sided debate)…..

      I read the adidias article, I just missed the 30/40m of income bit, which as I said before isnt that wild over a long term deal anyway.

      A lot of what he has said has been pie in the sky and often distasteful (the nonsense bigoted comments, and the boycotting to start with), but at the end of the day a lot of the comments on here are because you guys just dont like him, and I personally dont trust him, but I am less worried as he is only going to own 9% (its not like whyte owning 85%), so he is limited in what he can actually do, and as I said before, he is just a frontman, and certainly not the brains behind the operation.

      As for the traynor appointment, yup agreed the mind boggles, this chap has made a career out of stirring things up (which is fine and probably why Green wants him), but its not exactly the credentials Id be looking for in a PR man.

      Also, you make the mistake of assuming the majority of Rangers fans are all on the bandwagon…were not!!…though as things stand its certainly a tolerable situation as opposed to whyte.

      As for Ashley…..without wanting to sound patronising, how on bloody earth would you know what he is going to do??

      He can rename Ibrox all he likes, I’ll still be calling it Ibrox, and for an extra 1.5m a year, why not, its just the way football is going these days…..dont be fooled into thinking that Celtic wont be watching the success or failure of such a venture with a very very keen eye!

      • COYBIG


        “I read the adidias article, I just missed the 30/40m of income bit, which as I said before isnt that wild over a long term deal anyway.”

        £30/£40m isn’t that wild for a Club in the 4th tier of Scottish Football? I think the word i’m looking for is. Anyway…

        “but at the end of the day a lot of the comments on here are because you guys just dont like him”

        Don’t like him? How can anyone not love Charlie Green? I can’t wait to buy his DVD when it comes out – Delusions of Grandeur from Yorkshire. With extended directors cut (We can only hope it’s better than whoever tailors his suit).

        “As for the traynor appointment”

        I agree with you there. Why put a man who has openly said he despises new media, incharge of, you guessed it, new media? And why the need to pay him to do so? He was doing enough PR for The Rangers for free as it was.

        “He can rename Ibrox all he likes, I’ll still be calling it Ibrox, and for an extra 1.5m a year”

        Only £1.5m a year to rename Ibrox? Dermot! I’ve got a idea for a wee laugh, it won’t cost you much…

  27. Geddy Lee

    Andy, I’m sorry if I sound patronising, but it’s just exaspiration at yet another The Rangers supporter claiming NOT to have seen Green’s financial quotes about your as of yet mythical shirt deal.

    As for Ashley, I base my assumptions on what any buissnesman worth his salt does when a part of his portfolio begins to lose value, he GETS RID. Of course, The Rangers flotation may buck the trend , and the shares may rise in value, although I am prepared to wager you 500 pounds they will fall immediatley.

    Oh by the way that goes for your “manager” too. He will be flogging his share within 24 hrs. Mark my words.

    Ashley is already flogging you his cheap tat through your “on line superstore”. You know, the one that’s STILL using a picture of Steven Davis to flog you guys clobber. I think you need to fire off another E-Mail to your club about this because it really has become a point of ridicule on the net. LOL.

    Finally where would I find any dissenting “The Rangers” fans apart from yourself. Certainly not on the net, that’s
    for sure.

    • Andy


      Some businessmen prefer to get in cheap and work at their investment until it gains the value they are after, and some just do it because they like a certain area (ie ashley obv has an interest in football)….I didnt see him cut and run when Newcastle were relegated….I think you are being awfully presumptious as to what Ashley is upto….he’s better being on the inside for the rest of his business benefit, and there he shall remain..

      Again, you now know that McCoist is going to flog his shares straight away……if everyone is flogging their shares, who is buying them I wonder??

      Probably if you got off the net and into the real world, you would find plenty of dissneting Rangers voices…

      There are many things I dont like about Green, many things we as a club have to improve on, but I beleive that whilst times remain tight we have expierenced business savvy people on the board and a model that will allow us to continue to ply our trade through the divisions….and maybe during that time we will learn a thing or two and correct some of our wrongs (we may not, but I am an optimist by nature so I’ll play that card)……maybe, just maybe its time for others to do the same for the good of the game..

      • COYBIG


        “I didnt see him cut and run when Newcastle were relegated”

        Once again, and i’m not picking on you, but you’re wrong. Mike Ashley had Newcastle on the market for ages. Nearly as long as Murray had Rangers on the market. But like the later, nobody was intrested in buying Newcastle.

        “Probably if you got off the net and into the real world, you would find plenty of dissneting Rangers voices…”

        Yes, there are The Rangers fans who can see what’s happening for what it is. But it’s the fans who think Green is the new Ayatollah and everything he says is Gospel that are the ones being seen and heard.

        “but I beleive that whilst times remain tight we have expierenced business savvy people on the board and a model that will allow us to continue to ply our trade through the divisions”

        Expierenced business savvy people on the board? Please tell me you’ve not seen Charlie’s record. Because if you have and you still think he’s clued up on how to run a sussesfull Football Club, well I…I really don’t know what to say to that. Oh, and the business model? It currently shows that you made approx. £1m in 3 months, and spent approx. £5m. But if you’re OK with that, then fare enough.

        “maybe, just maybe its time for others to do the same for the good of the game..”

        Subliminal messages are all well and good. But would you care to elaborate on that please.

    • COYBIG

      @Geddy Lee

      “the one that’s STILL using a picture of Steven Davis to flog you guys clobber.”

      Really? I don’t mean to be mean, but that’s amateurish to say the least. But it’s not the first time it’s happend. They had pictures of Chris Burke advertising something in Ibrox, and he’d been gone at least a year.

      • Andy

        So you have run out of anything meaningful after you were wrong about the tax case, and now wrong about the impending doom of rangers….so your now having a go at some old posters……LOL LOL LOL

        • COYBIG


          Wrong about the tax case? As far as i’m aware, the tax case is still ongoing after HMRC’s appeal.

          Wrong about the impending doom of The Rangers? When have I said such a thing. I’ll give you the benifit of the doubt of being flustered and will give you a chance to retract that accusation.

          A go at some old posters? Hmm…OK then. Maybe you’re not knowledgable with how advertising works. So let me repeat again, it’s amateurish, especially for a Club such as the World Famous Glasgow Rangers, to be seen to be advertising using ‘out of date’ imagery. But then again, if you’re OK with that, then I guess there’s no problem. Hey ho. Or is it LOL LOL LOL?

  28. charliedon

    Re your earlier post, I don’t think Walter Smith is a shareholder. He is (or is going to be) a non-executive director and as such, I think he cannot be a shareholder.

    • Andy


      Agreed, sorry I should have been clearer, it’s more the fact he agreed to come on board that gave me some degree of confidence as opposed to him owning any shares.

  29. COYBIG

    RE the 67 former Rangers players taking The Rangers to court.

    Has Ally McCoist demanded to know who these players are yet?

  30. Sandro

    There are 2 things which make me “baffled” about this share issue:

    Business investors want to make money. That’s their goal. How these new business investors want to make a profit with this investment ? Most shares of other footbal clubs went down….. and these shares are not cheap (since the original investors of Charles Green’s consortium will make their profit with this flotation, and since this club will stick for some time in SFL with no further income/revenue from European football, and and and..).

    2) Why is there such a hurry with this IPO ? There is no immediate need for investment (signing ban.. etc etc). …. it gives the feeling that someone wants to make a quick buck…..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s