THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight


UPTHEHOOPS MAY 3, 2017 at 07:20         Just watching a clip from Sky …

Comment on THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight by Jingso.Jimsie.


MAY 3, 2017 at 07:20        

Just watching a clip from Sky Sports where Davie Provan was asked what would it take for Rangers to close the gap on Celtic. “Hard cash”, was his answer, but no insight as to where it will come from. Just like Walter Smith, Ally McCoist, Willie Henderson etc.

I wonder why people are scared to point out Rangers were never really rich, that they just had a very friendly bank, then adopted very dodgy tax avoidance practices…

I suspect the only time that any form of Rangers had ‘hard cash’ in the last thirty years was in the immediate aftermath of Chuck’s IPO.

I wonder what happened to it?

Jingso.Jimsie Also Commented

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
I noticed a link to this article elsewhere & I think it’s worth sharing:

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight

MAY 1, 2017 at 10:50        
One can often gauge what the current popular view is by reading the scribblings in the daily record. In particular those of Keith Jackson…

You have to remember that the Monday morning ‘Keich By Keith’ is an ‘opinion’ piece, rather than reportage.

His opinion, going by today’s column, is rather confused.

THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
I read Ewen Murray’s report last evening. It’s a decent piece, particularly when compared to BBC Scotland’s on-line match report. However, like many, he’s in denial or ignorance about the songbook. The BTL comments are worth reading as well.

Recent Comments by Jingso.Jimsie

Small Price to Pay?

MARCH 10, 2017 at 09:49        

I see reference is again being made to T’Rangers having no money.
This is incorrect.
They have paying customers in large volumes and have had decent cup runs to provide additional income.


MARCH 10, 2017 at 10:51        

wottpiMarch 10, 2017 at 09:49

I get what you mean, but I think you are wrong in saying they have money, any money. The income from home gates and cup matches will be spent before, or as soon as , they get it, and the rest of the money you speak of is not theirs, though it is, potentially, available.

I suppose it depends on how many ‘walk-ups’ TRFC get for league matches.

A generous estimate would be 10k @ £50 a head = £500k.

Take off the VAT, match-day operating costs & there might be £200k/250k or so left for day-to-day expenses until the next home match, which could be up to three weeks away. 

I think that qualifies as ‘no money’ for a business that operates two large premises & has around one hundred employees, but has little or no cash reserves & no line of credit.

Small Price to Pay?

‘Shur’ Wattie d’Cardigan…

Small Price to Pay?

I’m sure that the Press Officers at the SFA & SPFL are currently drafting their rebuttals (not!).

Small Price to Pay?

MARCH 5, 2017 at 20:26       

I totally agree, but I do wonder who is releasing all these squirrels, none of which enhance King’s Messiah status. Somebody is briefing against the Castlemilk born billionaire. The three bears? The Easdales? Maybe King briefing against himself as part of an exit strategy? Something is going on, that’s for sure.

Not squirrels, but ferrets (of the ‘reverse’ variety):

It may just be down to circulation wars/numbers: the ongoing DCK narrative has stopped working/selling/getting sufficient clicks, so try another angle & see if sales/hits increase in the short term…

Small Price to Pay?

MARCH 3, 2017 at 19:29        

MARCH 3, 2017 at 19:14 

Why are Club 1872 doing Stewart Robertson’s Annual Assessment?================================================

Wonder if Robertson was uncomfortable and/or internally seething during that meeting ?
Sounds like he has been sold a pup: MD of TRFC, but doesn’t seem to have the authority to effect the necssary changes.As the apparent decision-maker, King should have met with Club 1872…erm, but conveniently he is not ‘fit & proper’ to do so.
Now Robertson is publicly covering up for King’s blatant BS…doesn’t bode well for the MD, IMO.

Robertson’s problem is that he has several different groupings to keep onside: the King/Murray/Gilligan faction, the Park/Letham/Taylor faction & the supporters’ clubs, for example. There may be other, internal divisions that he has to manage in addition to the known & obvious ones.

Oh, & why wasn’t there an experienced PR professional at the meeting? It looks like a situation where one would have been useful. Robertson’s told them what he thinks they want to hear, but that may not have been what he should have told them.

About the author