Comment on Accountability via Transparency. by Cluster One.

    HirsutePursuit 5th June 2019 at 00:46
    3 0 Rate This


    I’m not sure what point you are making in relation to the TV deal.
    No point. Just putting some information out that was round about the time in 2012.
    Sorry if i have been misleading or confusing.
    My point is that the parties to the 5WA have agreed, as a matter of contract, that they would present a single front on the matter of Rangers purported continuation. That lie has been used by two of the parties (now merged into one) to sell a product (the TV deal) at a higher value than is likely to have been achievable if the truth had been told.

    Did Duff and Phelps achieve a better sale price because of the lie?

    Did Charles Green sell an IPO on the back of the lie? Is Sevco still benefitting from that lie today in season ticket and merchandise sales?
    All the above yes and you could go on
    Did CG sell more season tickets because of the lie?…Oh yes.
    Did players joint because of the lie?.. well every time one joined it was because of the history and tradition and a big club.
    All Lies of course.
    But it makes money and everyone of them embrace the big lie to make money.

    Cluster One Also Commented

    Accountability via Transparency.
    Jingso.Jimsie 22nd June 2019 at 11:08
    9 0 Rate This

    Rather long piece by Martin Williams in the Herald about RIFC challenging Mr. Justice Persey’s findings:
    High Court judge Lionel Persey said he had “no hesitation” in rejecting Rangers’ approach over changing certain rights in their agreement.

    His judgment came as it emerged that the Rangers Megastore at Ibrox, which is run by Sports Direct as part of their agreement was shut down over a week ago.
    Mr Persey said Rangers wished to rewrite or amend some of the payment terms in the agreement but said: “There is no basis for it to do so unless SDIR agrees.”
    That is a challenge right enough.
    The club and SDIR had agreed that the Mike Ashley company does have the right to distribute, market, advertise, promote, offer for sale or sell the official Rangers kit under the further agreement. The ruling stated that Rangers objected to three of Sports Direct’s amendments based on that understanding. But Mr Persey said that he considered there was no substance to the objections.
    The duration of the contract was two years, commencing August 1, 2018.
    Just how king can spin the latest to the gullibles to get them to run up the steps i can’t wait.

    Accountability via Transparency.
    Corrupt official 21st June 2019 at 19:52
    If, and when….Celtic win 9 IAR I imagine the following season when Celtic are attempting 10, that would be the optimum time to put it to the fans to dig deep. ,
    Dig Deep to stop 10 in a row slogan would be even too embarrassing for them to come out with. To do that would underline they are not equal to celtic but in their shadow,and it is not about the ibrox club going for their first title but all about the ibrox club stopping celtic going for ten.

    Accountability via Transparency.
    Thanks again to the court guys.laugh

    Recent Comments by Cluster One

    In Whose Interests
    Bogs Dollox 14th October 2019 at 21:52
    Does anyone know how far reaching the could shoulder sanctions are?
    (And the media have been very quite to let the ibrox fans and the fans of scottish football know just how much the cold shoulder will or could effect king and the ibrox brand. No in-depth analysis from any journalists)
    I wonder why.

    In Whose Interests
    Bogs Dollox 14th October 2019 at 14:28
    I wonder if it’s as wide ranging a sanction as that.

    Is it not restricted to Stock Exchange/AIM related transactions?

    I could be wrong as my track record testifies.
    Even if the sanctions are only restricted to Stock Exchange/AIM related transactions? (And the media have been very quite to let the ibrox fans and the fans of scottish football know just how much the cold shoulder will or could effect king and the ibrox brand. No in-depth analysis from any journalists)
    If you had a Business would you deal with Mr king? A man who had 41 convictions, a man branded in SA as a glib and shameless liar? A man the Takeover Panel refer to as someone not to be trusted.A man who has lost a court battle with Ashley and told to pay all legal costs A man who joins only a handful of people given the cold shoulder in the UK.
    Would you deal with this man?
    If the answer is No? Why would you expect any reputable business to.

    In Whose Interests
    StevieBC 14th October 2019 at 13:08
    Thanks for that good post.
    One or two questions if i may?
    1) Impact on King.

    Whilst being an SA resident, King jets into the UK frequently, so I’m assuming that King will ‘probably’ retain some personal and/or business bank accounts in the UK.
    How does he jet out, would a travel agency deal with king and his bank account, a bank account that may wish to cut ties with king, or is cash his only option?

    In Whose Interests
    The Scottish FA does not administer a fit and proper person test but does follow illustrative guidelines against which potential office bearers are measured.10 October 2013

    In Whose Interests
    valentinesclown 13th October 2019 at 11:45
    The fans of this new club are beyond gullible thanks to SFA, smsm and pundits. Imaging Mr Lawwell got the cold shoulder, coverage from press may have been different.
    Looking at today’s Sunday papers i half expected David Provan to have something to say on Mr kings cold shoulder, he has championed enough for king in the past. Sadly not a word. Maybe he had too much to say about scotland and all his thoughts on king will be in next weeks issue.