Bluedell

which was damn good stuff.

while continuing to give your guests some cheap rose wine. :fish:

Why didn't you follow through with your promise of supporter representation? What is your current relationship with the Chairman, given that the current Board refused to accept some of your proposals onto the Rangers board? Why did you not remain as a non-executive director of the club when you stepped down as Chairman?

It's being alleged that the name was leaked by SDM. How did he know the name when you guys didn't?

I will give my opinion as I know nothing about the goings-on behind the scenes on RM. The post in question certainly contained inaccuracies (and in my opinion was ill-advised), but then again I continue to read posts on FF by RST board members in respect of that period that also contain inaccuracies. No point in rehashing old ground, particularly at this time.

That's an issue that the RST need to address. They have to face that there is a degree of mistrust/dislike and them being solely driving it will put a lot of people off and lose the scheme a lot of investment. I also saw it suggested that joining investing in the scheme would mean that you would automatically become a member of the RST. This would also put people off. Whatever scheme that the RST develops needs to be operated outside of the RST.

Thanks. So was the first time the RST knew the identity of the backer when it was revealed last w/e, or was there a period between when you did know the identity and when it was made public?

What's the problem with asking them? Nobody is losing out if they don't take up the offer.

What "faces"?

Did I read that the RST were only dealing with McColl's representatives and did not know his identity? Is this bit true?

There are better options out there. He is too inconsistent, hides too much and is injury prone. Don't think he deserves a new contract.

I'm just left feeling unclean.

MF, I thought better of you than to start quoting that ****.

It would just be good to be definitively told how much truth there is to the articles, without having to go onto messageboards, either here or elsewhere. Following the Duffy affair, where the quotes attributed to the RST spokeman were later denied, surely it can be seen that we therefore can't rely on what is being reported in the press and have no way of knowing what the real situation is?

The more relevant question is why don't the RST put them up on their website and send them out by email to their members? They are trying to put together something that will appeal to 20,000 fans. They need to move away from the mentality that the Rangers world revolves around FF if they want to widen their appeal.

It's wrong that the members are not being told anything formally, and having to rely on newspaper quotes (which have proved to be less than accurate in the past ) or soundbites on radio stations, all of which many members may not have listened to. It seems that the members on FF are being kept up to date with various comments from board members as to who the RST have or have not been dealing with, whereas members who don't go onto that website are not being afforded the same courtesy. So much for the promises of better communication. Non-FF members of the RST are being treated as second class members.

In my experience, that is standard. As I said earlier in the thread, I've been involved in a few DD projects, albeit some time ago, and they were generally shrouded in secrecy with no confirmation given about anything and codewords used. This approach may not always be the case, but given that it is being done through an off-shore shell company then it's possible that DD is being carried out with strict instructions given that there is to be no publicity. Many businesses operate under the rule of giving out as little information as they can get away with.

In theory, yes, but as has already been said, I'd need to believe in it, and completely understand what the benefits were and where the cash was going.

Plgsarmy said yesterday that they were preparing a press release. Nothing on it yet, though.

The quotes in that are months old. Half this story was peddled out last year. However it'll be interesting to see if the RST have had any dealings with him.

Slagging the RST for the press getting it wrong?

Can't say I'm surprised that McColl's not interested.

I guess it depends on the strength of the seller, how badly the buyer wanted it and the number of parties interested. Is Ellis in a strong enough position to demand it? I'm not so sure.

I don't see why exclusivity has to be in place for DD to take place. I have been involved in DD in the past where it has not been, in companies bigger and smaller than Rangers.

1. The interest of Ellis has been officially recorded. 2. There is no need for anything else to be disclosed at this stage, including whether he is doing due diligence. He and his company are still registered as being an "offeror" 3. The company's registrars have absolutely nothing to do with this. You may or may not be correct with your views about Ellis, but nothing that you have posted offers any evidence either way.