Jump to content

 

 

Bluedell

  • Posts

    17,839
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    99

Everything posted by Bluedell

  1. Well done to Northampton_Loyalist for pulling this together. There is a major frustration felt by the support about the information that is coming out of Ibrox from unofficial sources about who is and who is not making the major decisions. Hopefully the Rangers directors will see fit to let the support what is actually happening and not issue wooly statements that don't actually clarify anything. The support CAN handle the truth.
  2. Here you go.
  3. If you want to discuss canadianbacon's comment and my reply then do it on the RM thread. If you wish to point out what part of my previous post on this thread is incorrect then feel free.
  4. MIH have been unable to meet their loan repayments as detailed in the last set of their audited, published acccounts.
  5. They can say that and still have have had Muir appointed, IMO.
  6. Have the bank every denied that they asked Murray to place Muir on the Rangers board? No. Is it possible that they could have done so, with Muir having certain objectives, and still deny that they are not involved in the day-to-day running of the club? Of course it it. What has been said by all parties so far proves absolutely nothing, one way or the other.
  7. No, the principles behind the protest and the effectiveness were not the reasons why they didn't join in.
  8. No, they haven't. I believe Murray did that himself.
  9. What position was Greg Wylde playing?
  10. Don't know, other than through the media, but just highlighting the problems involved. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be done, and I'd be happy enough to do it again in the future, but people should just be aware than you might not be reaching 80% of the support.
  11. As someone who has stood outside Ibrox handing out leaflets, I found that most people aren't interested in taking them.
  12. Welcome to the site, mate. Certainly a thought provoking post, and hopefully your comments can be taken onboard by most.
  13. But does the protest actually involve the consortium and the bank's unwillingness to sell to them, or is it about the way that they are influencing the running of the club, or is it both? That's what's unclear, and what needs to be clarified.
  14. It certainly makes it more difficult to appeal to the wider, non-message board element of our support.
  15. What MF is asking is who are the organisers behind the protest? Who was involved in making the decisions about the logo and the objectives etc and who will be responsible for the cash that is being collected.
  16. He is a Celtic fan. Always has been. There was a big thing made about it on helicopter Sunday.
  17. So what specifically are we wanting the bank to do, or not to do? That needs to be made clearer. The phrase above is not that meaningful, and should be padded out. People need to know what the protest is trying to achieve. This is a little wooly on the objectives, I'm afraid.
  18. I didn't hear it all, but I don't think he mentioned any protests. He didn't mention any of the claims of what Muir has been up either, but just called for Muir to make a statement.
  19. I'll be renewing mine, partly because there is not enough reasons (yet) not to.
  20. Gersnet are always willing to take part in such initiatives. I've read the thread on FF and I see at least one provocative post that's obviously not in the spirit of the OP. I guess some websites are more willing than others.
  21. Alexander is usually a lot better with dealing with these things. Not the best of nights for him.
  22. Mate, we've argued before about banks, and I'm not going there again.
  23. The difference is that you seem to think it's OK for them to behave like that and I don't. Not that confusing.
  24. Tell me about it. I've probably had more run-ins with banks than most. They can still act totally unreasonably and cost themselves money at no risk to themselves.
  25. Of course they can, but why would they when it's not in their best interests. Is it acceptable for a bank to allow you to take out a 25 year mortgage and then insist on it to be fully repaid a year into it? No, but I'm sure that is legal for them to do it. I'm in way suggesting that they are not doing anything illegal, but that still doesn't make it acceptable. I don't have an issue with the bank coming along and insisting on spending restrictions. Our squad was too big and we had an unsustainable model. However they are apparently taking things too far.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.