CaleyD

I'm not too surprised to be honest, but I would like to hope that if we aren't bringing anyone else in then some of the cash that might have been available is being used to shore up contracts with the guys we want to hold on to in the longer term.

First Class, Second Class or Special Delivery?

I would have answered earlier...but as my mother always told me...nobody likes a smart@rse :015:

Assuming it's a Black Tie affair?

I never had you down as a glory hunter Johnboy...you learn something new every day!!!

I was under the impression he sold his house AFTER being told by Brewster he could leave in January :024: Of course there are 2 sides to every story but I can't help feel that Brew must take some of the blame for the current situation. From memory, articles and quotes from around that time suggested that Rankin (along with a couple of other players) had been told that they would need to earn their place in the squad and the rumours were pretty rife that he wanted a move to the central belt even before that. I am in two minds....I can't decide if this is Rankin trying to play the club to get what he wants and break his contract. Breaking through into the squad and playing some of his best football since he arrived here just as we are coming round to the window seems a little coincidental. The other side of the coin is that this has been badly managed by the club in their player talks. In all likelihood it's a bit of both and the club have to make the call as to whether they keep a player who doesn't want to be here and hope he continues to perform so as to keep up interest and look for a move in future....or whether they cash in and take what they can get now.

I think it's just a case of putting things into perspective RiG. I don't think anyone is denying that he's dona a job for us and most seem to think he would be a good acquisition, but when weighing up his "worth" then all things need to be considered and you cannot deny that, even for a centre back, his disciplinary record is a bot poor.

I've just run some of the maintenance routines on the site and also note that our host have been doing some Network maintenance work in the last day or so which might be causing intermittent slowness/time outs on the site. Myself and Scotty will continue to monitor the situation.

It's been a bit slower, partly due to the fact it's been busy, but I haven't had delays of anything like 30 secs or a minute.

No quotes from anyone, or evidence to back it other than heresay at the moment. Rumour Mill material IMO.

I can't be certain, but I've heard mention that the reason we appeared to pay over the odds for Rankin was because we would not accept a sell-on clause in the contract.

The next set of accounts could make interesting reading!!!

[img width=500 height=332]http://www.caleythistleonline.com/gallery/albums/upload/match_pics/2007_08/20080105_gretna_pp/normal_20080105_gretna_pp_001.jpg

I'd be more worried if we went through the Transfer Window without anyone showing any interest. Given the fact that he is on a rumoured ?250,000 per year, then I don't consider that to be a luxury we can afford long term with our current level of income and turnover. Just to qualify that remark...if his goals and contributions see us to a top 6, or a decent cup run, then that could net us enough additional income to break even on the investment (should we let him just walk for free)...not to mention the "buzz factor" for the fans in such achievements. Also, if we do achieve that and get thrust in to the limelight a bit more towards the end of the season and it is, in part, down to the contribution of Niculae...then quite simply...we would be receiving offers we simply could not refuse. The "plan" in bringing in Niculae seems to be working, thus far, and as I said right at the start when news broke of his signing, it was/is a highly risky piece of business for which the club would be praised if it paid of and lambasted for if it failed - come 5pm on the 5th April we'll know which it is to be.

The information is in the public domain. Send ?5 to Companies House and they'll send you back a report.

I just about choked on my coffee there.

I'd be surprised if he didn't (it's pretty much the norm these days), and I'd also be surprised if it was something that would undermine the clubs investment.

I actually gave Duncan points in the PotY for yesterdays match as I thought he had a fairly solid game and made a valuable contribution towards the end result.

A few people were dubious when it was announced that Brewster had brought him back from Untied, but he's done nothing but prove his worth every chance he's been given. He moved in the the Centre today and looked just as comfortable playing there as he does at RB. He seems to be constantly switched on to what's happening around him and did some good covering today when others had pushed forward :021:

It very nearly was Duncan

Great result, but Gretna never really tested us and that showed in the second half when we looked like we were trying to walk the ball home or create that "perfect" goal to mark the 1000 mark. It's feckin cold out and I need a cuppa to thaw....I'll be back :shooting02:

Boys against Men here today. Am i right in saying current scores put Hearts 11th?

I will honour the request, but when it comes to rationality I would say that the constant need to force people to pay respect to someone who they barely knew isn't exactly rational. If the SPL intended to hold a minutes applause tomorrow then they shouldn't have requested it last week...are we to expect another minutes applause next week when Motherwell and Celtic are back playing just so everyone can join in as a whole then too? Where do you draw the line?

The debt is serviced from the rent that they receive from the club and underwritten by Tulloch (possibly even DS himself) and a few others who make up the board of trustees. What I don't know is whether the rent is equal to interest payments only or if it is sufficient to have made any dent in it over the years. As I said above, it would also depend very much on the nature of the Trust agreement and their "ownership" of the lease/stadium. There's a 100's of permutations on the types of trusts and the conditions that are contained therein. It is possible that the club would have to pay full market value for the buy-back regardless of the level of the debt - clauses could exist saying that they receive discount based on length of tenancy...or it could be some form of revertible trust which automatically sees it all pass back into the hands of the club at some future date!!! Although I agree that the trust was not set up purely out of altruism it has served us well, as have those who were involved, so until that changes I see no need to change the way things stand. In this day of mechanno stadiums when you've been to one you've been to them all, so I don't think I would say that I had any strong emotional or spiritual attachment to TCS. That "Special" Stadium for me will always be Telford Street.

It's all getting a bit out of hand IMO, the club paid it's respects at the Aberdeen game and it's time to move on.