I am not saying boycotting games is wrong buts it's something I couldn't do personally. . . . . . .
The Board have rejected Sarver's latest offer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30774504?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Are "the majority shareholders" not the current board and their mates? So basically what they are saying is "we're nae selling".
Maybe they are afraid what a new majority shareholder will find out? Or at least one who might not be crooked.
I have already said to you before that the club and company are not separate in law , go back and read what I said weeks ago , going by your argument there has never been a Rangers football Club but only the Company so it cant be a new club because there was never an old club .
You would have to define what a Football club is which Lord Nimmo Smith did which I posted above.
'It is a different club. They may play at Ibrox and they may play sometimes in royal blue jerseys. But you cannot pass on that which is undefinable. And that is spirit and tradition and all the rest of it. To me this is a new Rangers which has to establish its own history and tradition. But it's not the Rangers I know. To me, genuinely, it is a new entity.'
Forgot about this.
For another legal opinion, that of Donald Findlay QC, sash-singing bigot and former vice-Chairman of Rangers -
Ha! If there's one group just as backward, bigoted and despicable as the Blue Bigots, it's the Green Bhigots
I don't disagree with you , just think your thought process is no different to the very bigots you say you despise , your posting from a hatred no different to that from the blue bigots who think all Celtic fans are the same and the green ones who think all the Rangers fans are the same , much like some motorists who think all cyclists are RLJing freeloaders .