crucible

If we are to believe Whyte is around and active which I don't, you can lock the gates before the SFA do it for us, scaremongering and dangerous rumourmongering on an epic scale, not what we need at this moment sometimes I wonder if we really need enemies.

You can"t correct me then, thanks.

In comparison to what? the present paragons of virtue?

I believe the recent resignations where at some time under MM's corporate governance, perhaps you can correct me.

Lots of people are alcoholics it doesn't make them bad people or unable to function.

Shouldn't we be considering MM's previous tenure and apparent lack of corporate governance.

I prefer not to get too personal about this. It isn't about P. Murray or about C. Mather or the Easdales.

 

It is about who will give us the best corporate governance, who is going to be the most effective CEO and - crucially - who is going to be able to raise more cash from investors so that we don't go into Admin 2 when we run out towards the end of 2014.

 

Under Green/Mather/Stockbridge, I am not sure that we have had particularly good corporate governance. There are real questions to be asked about how much money they have taken out of the club. Mather may have been a decent CEO although it is too early to see the fruits of his labours. But many of his actions and statements towards both the requisitioners and fans have been unacceptable. When it comes to the next share issue, I don't think the current board have the ability to take that forward. Why else would they have tried to get King on-board to do it for them?

 

So I do think we need changes at board level and I have no problem if P. Murray is part of that change.

14th June 2012 Malcolm Murray appointed chairman, isn't he the alleged guru of the buzz saying "corporate governance" what happened to the corporate governance under his watch, when all sorts are said to have been going on ?

Nobody is alleging anyone is our "saviour", so that's yet more nonsense. Yes, the Easdales, Green & co, Whyte, SDM, King and ALL the various players in the whole saga are relevant to varying degrees, but please spare us the obsessive anti-Paul Murray rants and the administration history lesson.

Are we to leave unchallenged blatant misrepresentation of fact by posters that suits one argument ?

What have bids from PM & TBK 18 months ago got to do with Craig Mather & Bryan Smart resigning as directors of the board today? Nothing.

 

What have dealings with Ticketus 18+ months ago got to do with Mather & Smart resigning as directors of the board today?? Nothing...

 

Try to keep the discussion somewhere remotely resembling the topic.

You mean you don't know or don't want to know, the answer is plenty since our latest alleged saviour was involved, PM King and others were introduced as early as the first page, bit late putting your finger in the hole in the dyke

Truth is often stranger than fiction, especially when not one brass farthing is owed and PM couldn't find £500,000 from anywhere so he could gain excusitivity to pay ticketus money we don't owe, and borrow from these people we don't owe money too.

The Blue Knights, with Ticketus as a partner, had appeared to be front-runner to take the club over.

It had hoped to be named preferred bidder on Friday and was asked to provide a £500,000 non-refundable deposit for exclusivity.

Murray told BBC Scotland that Ticketus was not prepared to provide this cash for the administrators on Friday and over the weekend he said it became clear that Ticketus had agreed a "substantially" better deal with Ng's group of investors.

"We stand ready to complete our offer of 4 April which included a deal in principle with Ticketus. We still believe that a partnership with Ticketus represents the best opportunity of the club exiting administration via a CVA," said Murray.

Well at least we have confirmed that ticketus had and have no claim via the Administrators documents, although PM wanted to give them millions we didn't and dont owe them, then re-borrow millions a sort of reverse ponzy.

Thats wrong, we owed ticketus every single penny Whyte got from them.

Ticketus

13.9 The Joint Administrators have continued to investigate the claims made by Ticketus in the administration. The evidence available to the Joint Administrators suggests that the claims made by Ticketus against the Company are unenforceable. The Joint Administrators have taken advice from both solicitors and counsel in both England and Scotland on the validity or otherwise of the claims. The advice received is to the effect that there are a number of grounds on which the claims can be disputed in full. Following the legal advice received, the Joint Administrators consider that the claims made by Ticketus should be rejected in full for voting purposes. Ticketus have been given notice of this decision.

That wasnt the deal. Frankly the deal pm struck was ridiculously good for rangers. You also must remember that ticketus were claiming to have control of whytes shares and were dropped when it transpired they didn't

We didn't and don't owe ticketus anything not one penny, however PM and his group believed they knew better than the administrators, seems they didn't and far from it no more needs said on that.

Seems PM supporters fail to realise that failure brings it own rewards or brickbats and he has failed on too many fronts, I would hazard that is why many are very wary of being bitten by that failure.

Looks like the major shareholders are going to appoint and the minor shareholders are going to have to lump it or like it.

"through a consensus amongst major shareholders, which can then be considered by all shareholders"

Perhaps if we had psuedo fan bodies been given the media platform their membership deserves we might get somewhere rather than it being inferred that these small groups speak for all, which is nothing like the truth and distorts how things are perceived by the guy in the street.

They all of them should be disbanded and we should go back to the days of one Rangers Supporters association, we may then see more balance in how things are reported and viewed.

As for say what you like about DK or PM i have said it and will say it again, they failed us before nothing more nothing less.

There is no escape! Don't make me destroy you. Luke, you do not yet realize your importance. You've only begun to discover your power! Join me, and I will complete your training! With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict, and bring order to the galaxy.

I see you resort to posting gibberish when your nonsense is disassembled.

Perhaps that explains Mather's actions today then.

What today's actions don't do is explain the reluctance of PM or DK to stand up to SDM and his recklessness, in PM'S case the very essence of a NED's duties, no amount of deflection or spin will cover that failure.

I think criticisms of PM (and King's) time on the oldco board are valid enough but have to be tempered with the realism that SDM controlled everything.

 

Does that make them suitable now? Maybe not but the one motivation you can rule out of their desire to be re-involved with Rangers is cash. That separates them quite clearly compared from some recent directors.

Honourable men resign when they realise they are but rubber stamp puppets.

why are you using celtc style net debt figures?

 

 

 

what was the debt in September 2007?

 

boss has an article on rm giving debt at 49 million circa 2008. an article he stands by when questioned. rm seems to be down but i might post it later if i can be bothered.

As for the style of figures you would have to ask Boss, though why you would invoke celtic to deflect from your nonsensical assertions is for you to know, you obviously are unable to raise any validity for your propaganda I will leave you to be bothered.

The hollowness of your support is complete.

debt fell from 49 million from the day aj took over to 14 million when whyte bought us.

 

murray was there a bit before the.

 

we won 3 in a row and made the uefa final during that time.

 

 

 

debts may have risen 1 year in 4 or something like any statistic it can be made to show anything. but regardless of what debt did. no one got a 100% bonus for winning the 4th division or winning anything for that matter. nor did millions get paid out to shareholders.

So you have nothing no bona fides to back up your assertion which was the very simple request I made, while the required bona fides that discredit your claim were published by a knowledgeable source in another place. Your claim that PM is therefore OK is shown up for the nonsense and propaganda that it is.

The below is the figures from that knowledgeable post by Boss for your perusal and elucidation.

Net debt at 30 June 2007 £16,542,000

Paul Murray appointed director 20 September 2007

Net debt at 30 June 2008 £21,559,000

Net debt at 30 June 2009 £31,118,000

Net debt at 30 June 2010 £27,074,000 (last audited accounts)

Sometimes facts are annoying.

murray ran us into debt them paid the debt off.

 

but leaving that aside p murray is ok as he joined when the debt was there and it was cleared when he left.

Can you provide bona fide audited figures to back your claim up, I saw figures from audited accounts posted by Admin on RM an accountant I believe, that showed the debt increased under Paul Murray and others.

Are you able to refute that claim and audited figures without contradiction.

Anyone associated with the SDM regime should be nowhere near the boardroom not least of all for the way they allowed SDM to run the club into debt without a murmur or resignation.

"My involvement is not linked in any way to any other individual, albeit I have my private thoughts as to certain individuals that might add value to the club going forward. Ultimately it is for the shareholders to make such decisions. "

 

I'd suggest King, like others, simply want the best board possible - along with the chance to vote for such people at a correctly constituted AGM.

And I will suggest that the headline story is utter tosh as is normal for that particular rag, strange how DK says private thoughts yet the rag claims to know them which we now know to be untrue.

Guess this one has been put to bed.

I can't find anything to justify the headline, is it in some other article can someone point in the right direction.