Jump to content

 

 

trueblue 64

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    306

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by trueblue 64

  1. trueblue 64
    King has money to spunk, Murray does not. Paul Murray has INVESTED NOTHING in Rangers. Show me where King has backed Murray's campaign.
  2. trueblue 64
    I am over the moon at the thought of King coming back unlike a lot on here who were sceptical last week until the papers started suggesting King was pro Murray.
  3. trueblue 64
    What I said was'nt spin, it is fact, Ask Fury.
  4. trueblue 64
    The point is he did not invest in Rangers, he invested in a make money from Rangers scheme. The fact that he made no profit says a lot about his lack of business acumen.
  5. trueblue 64
    Is it not true that Paul Murray put 250k into Rangers Youth Development along with Ian Hart, not into Rangers directly. In fact did he not stand to make a profit from selling us our own youngsters. Hart appears to have got his cash back in kind, maybe Murray feels he is due his.
  6. trueblue 64
    The Easdales can stay as they have put cash in, but Mather who has put a million in can't. What cash have the people put forward by McColl put in, heehaw. King will put in a substantial sum, he will demand a substantial say and he will demand strict financial governance. Welcome home Dave.
  7. trueblue 64
    This would be even more reason to rubbish it.
  8. trueblue 64
    So King is happy at being used as a pawn in a PR stunt.
  9. trueblue 64
    If this was a PR stunt by the board King would have rubbished it by now.
  10. trueblue 64
    Covered in post 46.
  11. trueblue 64
    If you are against something and are actively campaining against it you ARE a rebel. It is a more accurate term to describe the requesitioners as than the term SPIVS is to describe the current board .
  12. trueblue 64
    Hardly an earth shaking surprise. The question is, though, will he be a major player at part of the current set up, or a major player under a new board? That's the unknown. King has already stated he will not purchase existing shares so I see him coming in via a second share issue. The amount of power he would control would depend on the amount he put in, this in turn would determine the make up of the future board. I think the existing shareholders need to be asked would you allow your shares to be diluted by X if King and possibly others put Y in.
  13. trueblue 64
    Paul Murray has stated he would gladly walk away if King came in. King has not stated if he is for or against the current board, if he is against them then yes he would be a rebel.
  14. trueblue 64
    I would love King to come in and get rid of the lot of them and I include both sides. Some people just seem more concerned that King may back one side over the other. Away to work, will be on later.
  15. trueblue 64
    You are still focussing on our current destructive issues. Do you think Dave King could improve our club is the question.
  16. trueblue 64
    It seems a lot of people on here would rather we stayed on the current destructive path rather than even consider that this could be good for our club.
  17. trueblue 64
    I believe King will be our next owner/major shareholder, I stated this several weeks ago.
  18. trueblue 64
    I appreciate the link Zappa, but I did not appreciate the if you're actually interested jibe.
  19. trueblue 64
    Could you let us know if they take a vote of members who hold shares in their block, which way to vote at the AGM. Afterall we would not want them to lose their democratic right to vote.
  20. trueblue 64
    Surely not, that would be underhand, unbeffiting and snide. CF is also illegal facts/lies and often used by the rebels in an underhand, unbeffiting and snide manner.
  21. trueblue 64
    Complicated buisness,, can't help wondering if their paperwork will be in order.
  22. trueblue 64
    The other side aspire to represent Rangers and are acting no better.
  23. trueblue 64
    I was suspicious when he first arrived on the scene with a tiny shareholding in case he was only here to stir the shit(sounds familiar). Now he has increased his shareholding to over a million, he can only be good for us considering he is looking to invest more. Wise words from a wise man.
  24. trueblue 64
    Green removed Murray from the board when Green himself was'nt even on the board so that tells you who had the the power to appoint who to what board, regardless of what other investors said.
  25. trueblue 64
×
×
  • 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.