Jump to content

 

 

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'liars'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Main Forums
    • Rangers Chat
    • General Football Chat
    • Bluenose Lounge
    • Forum Support and Feedback

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location


Interests


Occupation


Favourite Rangers Player


Twitter


Facebook


Skype

  1. ... from Ibrox Noise. I know quite a few will jump in here and there, but maybe it would do good to read the article twice before go haring after specific things. Posted by Ibrox Noise at 10:26 It will come of no surprise that I agree with a lot IN has to say, including that I don't view the current status quo as ideal.
  2. According to STV the review will be published to LSE today as planned. Please ensure all discussion takes place in this thread where appropriate. Full review for download here: http://t.co/HNRfyvKDAe
  3. RANGERS are behaving as though their 120-day business review will have to be crowbarred out of their directors' hands. The more cynical of this club's supporters would not be surprised if the update was delivered in encrypted text this Friday, such has been the apparent reluctance to let the findings out into the public domain. Friday will be day 128, incidentally, and all that has been promised is "update" rather than any extensive illumination of the Ibrox strategy. This is what football has come to: thousands of fans desperately waiting for breaking news on what they would once have dismissed as bone-dry financial strategies. Maybe Graham Wallace, the chief executive, didn't realise he was creating such a hostage to fortune when he announced this business review at the annual general meeting in December, but its significance has mushroomed Directors and fans are in a Mexican stand-off over season tickets. If Wallace placates the masses, damage will be done to the Union of Fans/Dave King attempt to persuade thousands to break the traditional supply chain and instead put their money into a trust fund. But on all available evidence so far it's hard to see what Wallace can deliver which will remotely placate them. Wallace is probably shrewd enough to know what's coming his way when the information is released. In the four months since he bought himself time by announcing this review, Rangers have divested themselves of two figures most of the support considered to be toxic: finance director Brian Stockbridge and public relations adviser Jack Irvine. The club also secured a shirt sponsorship deal with 32Red. Hip, hip hurrays all round? Well, yes, for a moment. Each of those moves was significant, yet they have had no lasting effect on the swirl of negativity around Rangers or the hostility and suspicion shown towards the board. Wallace's own popularity and standing has steadily eroded. At the time of the annual meeting supporters were able to distinguish between him and the rest of the unpopular board. Now, much less so. What can he say in this review that will make the critics pause and say, "actually, yeah, that's not bad, this could win us round"? Three days ago it became personal towards Wallace when his salary and bonus was openly questioned by supporters group The Union of Fans. Maybe £315,000-per-annum really is the going rate for high end football club chief executives these days, although Rangers continue to seem like pushovers when it comes to doing deals with just about anyone. But if Wallace is on another of those 100% Ibrox bonus deals, as his critics clearly believe, fans will see him as being a continuation of the chain of ****s and opportunists when they had hoped he would come in and cleanse the club of them all. What seems likely now is that Wallace's update will exasperate and irritate those fans further, hardening their opposition to the board and deepening their resolve to starve out the incumbent regime by withholding season ticket money. The collapse of King's cordial working relationship with the directors is significant, given that he surely had some sort of insight into Wallace's intended strategy. Positions are entrenched. No fair-minded supporter will reject Wallace's findings on a stubborn point-of-principle. Perhaps he will surprise them and come up with a plan which seems imaginative, ambitious and realistic. But it's only two months since this Rangers board had to go cap in hand for £1.5m in emergency loans just to see the club over the line until the next season-ticket money. At the end of last year the board suggested the players take a 15% wage cut: that was rejected and, since then, nothing more has been heard of it and no other cuts have been publicly proposed. Wallace is on record as saying costs are too high. Money continues to haemorrhage from Rangers. If Wallace's update acknowledges that the club needs either severe cuts or substantial external investment then the latter will be embraced by those who champion King and find it unfathomable, and deeply suspicious, that his apparent willingness to invest has not been encouraged by the Rangers board. What freedom does Wallace have here? This review has been sanctioned by Sandy and James Easdale and the rest of the Rangers board. Would it ever see the light of day if it delivered findings they didn't like? When Rangers said the update would be announced on Friday April 25 (which will be day 127, incidentally), fans immediately clocked that they would have only the weekend to consider it before deciding whether or not to cancel the auto-renewal of their season-tickets (which may not be enough time if it that has to be done in writing). That was either a calculating move by the club or an unthinking one, but either way it looked sleekit and did nothing to build bridges with the support. Wallace and chairman David Somers have both spoken of the need to be more open and transparent with )supporters but done next to nothing to back it up. Wallace will be heard before the week is out, though. His job may pay well, but it's an unenviable one: this week he must calm and win over supporters implacably opposed to the regime he represents. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/wallaces-strategy-update-may-be-too-late-to-win-over-rangers-fans.24005492?utm_source=headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Balert
  4. DAVE KING tonight fired another attack on the Rangers board. The South African businessman has declared war on the current Ibrox regime and has issued a strongly-worded statement again urging Rangers fans not to renew season tickets. The statement reads: I must respond to the Rangers board’s criticism of my appeal to withhold season ticket advances. This board continues its habit of evading issues by attacking the integrity of any individual or group that speaks out against them. I am happy to engage the board on our comparative integrity. Unlike this board, I do not regard integrity as a character attribute that comes with an ON/OFF switch. When I met with the board the Chairman requested that, other than the two public statements that we made, the balance of our discussions would remain private. I agreed to that and, despite requests from fan groups to disclose the full details of my discussions, I steadfastly honoured my undertaking. This board did not do likewise. In an ill-judged attempt to discredit me, they have now disclosed my comment to them that I preferred not to put money into Rangers if it could be found from other sources. In this instance they demonstrated their lack of integrity for no advantage as I had already, as part of my frank discussions with the fan groups, advised them that I had no prime ambition to invest further in the club but will do so if no other investors come forward. I would be delighted if the club could thrive without any investment from me. This attempt at a “juicy” leak by the board merely proves that it is impossible to engage this board on a basis of confidentiality and integrity. The board has now stated that it was always its intention to only provide the business review after season ticket advances had largely been paid. It has denied that it agreed that the business review would be made available prior to fans committing to season ticket advances even though I referred to this agreement in my public statement immediately after our meeting. At the time the board allowed my public statement, in toto, to go unchallenged. Presumably it had no concern with what I stated. Again, we have an integrity issue but fortunately have common sense as a referee. We know that the board did not challenge my public statement of last month. It is also common cause that the vital issue for the fans is to be told what ambition the owners have for the club and how this is going to be funded. It must be obvious that the fans need this information prior to investing - not after. The board’s new version lacks integrity even if it was believable. Given that the board is quick to raise integrity and trust as key issues I would like to pose simple questions that are easy to reply to with a simple yes or no. a) Does the board agree it is unfair to ask fans to buy season tickets before they consider the business review? b) Does the board agree that, given the present financial position of the club, it is appropriate to provide Ibrox Park and Murray Park as security against season ticket advances? c) Does the board agree that in the latter half of December 2013 it was in discussions to obtain finance that would be needed prior to the end of the current season? d) Does the board agree that in the latter half of December 2013 it provided public assurances to the fans that the club had sufficient cash to last until the end of the current season? Without satisfactory answers to these questions fans should not be expected to invest in season tickets.
  5. APRIL 14, 2014 [h=1]UOF STATEMENT 14/04/2014[/h] by Garry Evans “Following discussions on the release of season ticket renewals, the Union of Fans would like to confirm that, in line with Dave King’s statements over the weekend, we will now be pushing forward with plans to collect season ticket money. We are delighted that Nine-in-a-Row captain, Richard Gough, and Dave King have both agreed to support this plan. We hope that other iconic Rangers figures will join them in publicly supporting this move in the near future. The money placed into the account will be released to the club, in full, as soon as they agree to give season ticket holders a security over Ibrox Stadium and Auchenhowie. There will be no drip feeding of funds and we do not consider that the board has any legitimate reason to reject this proposal. For the past two weeks we have, through a third party, put forward a plan to Graham Wallace which would have seen a security over Ibrox and Auchenhowie granted to trustees in favour of ALL season ticket holders. The security would have diminished as games were played and would have been discharged at the end of next season. We felt this would provide the board with an opportunity to build trust with fans over a reasonable period of time. We have received no response from the board to this proposal, or to the offer of a meeting to discuss things amicably. This board’s public pronouncements about engagement and trust are a sham. To be clear, had the board complied, it would have meant that we would not have needed to collect season ticket money in a separate account. It would have allowed the fans and the club to carry on with renewals as normal and would have removed any element of confrontation from the process. Despite repeated acceptance from Mr Wallace that the board do not have the trust of fans, and repeated claims that they are seeking to engage with them, this board have made no serious attempt to improve things. Their haste to release renewals before the completion of the 120 day business review, has now forced our hand. Legal advisers have been engaged and are working on the legal framework and bank account required to collect money. We would ask in the meantime that fans do not renew prior to evaluating this board’s ‘120 day’ review to take the club forward. We would also ask them to be vigilant and ensure they are not signed up for auto renewal, which they would need to cancel in writing to the ticket office before the 28th April. The vast majority of season ticket holders on the 4 month payment option from last year will fall into this category. We do not consider that there is any prospect of this action forcing the club into administration. It would be a gross dereliction of directors’ duties for this board to allow that to happen when substantial investment is on offer to them and when they can ensure they receive all season ticket money by securing Ibrox and Auchenhowie in favour of season ticket holders. We also have concerns that, even with all the season ticket money available to them, they will not be able to complete the season without further investment. Furthermore we reject suggestions this will push the board into securing Ibrox in return for further loans. Again, this would be in breach of their directorial duties when they would first have to reject a more favourable offer from the fans. We will be extremely interested to hear the board’s answers to the four questions posed by Dave King in his latest statement. Particularly the question relating to Graham Wallace’s undertaking to shareholders at the AGM that there was “sufficient cash in the business to fund the ongoing needs of the club in the near term”. We do not believe this statement to have been true. Our fans have an opportunity to safeguard Ibrox – we sincerely hope they do not succumb to emotional blackmail from people who know nothing about what our club means to us and that they use the only power they hold for the good of Rangers.” http://www.unionoffans.org/statements/2014/4/14/uof-statement-14042014
  6. Friday, 11 April 2014 18:55 Club Statement Written by Rangers Football Club "The Board of Rangers Football Club notes with astonishment the statement issued this afternoon by Dave King. In his statement Mr King makes a number of untrue allegations against the Chairman and the Board of Rangers Football Club alleging bad faith and false representation. The Chairman and the Board refute all such allegations in the strongest terms and have referred Mr King’s statement to the Club’s legal advisors. Mr King clearly has elected to ignore the Board’s previous public statement following the Board’s meeting with him. In this statement, which was reviewed with him prior to issue, the Board stated that it will issue the results of the business review prior to the season ticket renewal window ending. This position remains unchanged and Mr King is well aware of this having sought personal confirmation on this matter from the Chairman as recently as yesterday. The business review period has not yet even ended, as Mr King is well aware, however he has elected to make yet another public statement to serve his own purposes. When the Board met Mr King a few weeks ago, he made it clear that he did not want to put another penny into the Club and would prefer to see the Club using other investors' money. The Board was therefore surprised, but gave him the benefit of the doubt when, a few days later, Mr King made media comments about a willingness to invest his money into the Club. This is an easy statement to make to the media but is contrary to what he told the whole Board. It is extremely disappointing that Mr King should consider it appropriate to issue this latest statement, clearly designed to unsettle and mislead Rangers fans, on the eve of an important Scottish Cup semi-final match. For someone who claims to have the interests of Rangers at heart and as an ex-director, King's untrue comments are nothing short of disgraceful." http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/6741-club-statement
  7. http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2986&newsID=13171&newsCategoryID=1 In response to recent speculation and comments made by Dundee United officials, the Scottish FA is compelled to clarify the club’s ticketing allocation for the forthcoming William Hill Scottish Cup semi-final between Rangers and Dundee United at Ibrox. At the pre-operations meeting held on Tuesday, 11th March, Dundee United were made an initial offering of 11,063 tickets, allocated in the entirety of the Broomloan Road Stand, the Govan West corner and a section of the Govan Stand Front and Rear. The number was offered on the basis of Dundee United’s ticket sales for recent semi-finals. For last year’s semi-final against Celtic at Hampden Park, with a 12.45pm kick-off, Dundee United received an allocation of 10,686 tickets and sold 6783. For the 2010 semi-final against Raith Rovers at Hampden Park, with a 3pm kick-off, Dundee United were allocated 11,806 tickets and sold 9969. The Dundee United official present stated that in order to ensure a maximum attendance, in the first instance the club would not require the additional allocation in the Govan West corner, Front and Rear and, instead, would prefer the Broomloan Road stand, capacity 8012. He was invited to revert to the club for confirmation but declined. Notwithstanding the present allocation of 8012 – as requested by the club – Dundee United retain first option on the Govan West corner, and a section of the Front and Rear, an additional 3051 seats. Should the club a) request that additional allocation and b) sell it, then there remains the opportunity to extend the allocation subject to agreement between the clubs and the relevant police and stewarding advice.
  8. http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/6545-club-statement
  9. Anybody know who is behind this?. Lifted from FF
  10. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...1-5m-loan.html Rangers last night appeared to contradict the wording of that document, insisting the repayments would come from a wider pool of money. A club spokesman said: "The loans, if drawn, will be repaid from the operating cash flow of the business at the relevant time. Operating cash flow comprises many sources including commercial partnership income, retail dividends and match ticket income." Spivs out. Just noticed previous thread. Still lying spivs.
  11. Lifted from FF: By Grandmaster Suck Updated Friday, 7th March 2014 Official documents reveal Easdale and Laxey have joint security over both the Edmiston House and Albion car par properties. They will be paid back in the first instance from money generated by season ticket sales. The season tickets are effectively mortgaged to the debt. Laxey are charging a higher interest rate than Ticketus did. The details from the Registers of Scotland (land registry) - Security over Edmiston House granted to Sandy Easdale http://freepdfhosting.com/3474a90828.pdf Security over the Albion car park granted to Laxey Partners http://freepdfhosting.com/cef985a572.pdf Ranking agreement between Sandy Easdale and Laxey Partners http://freepdfhosting.com/1bfcbe0abb.pdf The Ranking Agreement basically establishes that both have claims over both the car park and Edmiston House. Have a look at the page hand-numbered 19 (its 3 pages down) in the Ranking Agreement - this mentions that the money to Sandy Easdale and Laxey will be repaid in the first instance from season ticket money. Peculiarly, the announcement to the Stock Exchange said the loan would be repaid by 1st September 2014 - http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11872699 - but the Ranking Agreement says 1st September 2015. http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/season_ticket_sales_will_pay_for_easdale_and_laxey_loans_826877/index.shtml
  12. http://www.scribd.com/doc/201292857/One-year-ago Published by RangersTransparency One year ago Mr McCoist had the chance to lead by example. Subject: Ally Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:52:06 +0000 From: Brian Stockbridge To: Ian Hart, Walter Smith, Malcolm Murray, Phil Cartmell, Bryan Smart CC: Charles A Green, Imran Ahmad Gentlemen The Board is being asked by Ally and his agent to approve an increase in his salary to the original level of £750k per annum. Whilst some of you may be aware of the background discussions that have taken place with Ally over his remuneration, some of you may not be so I set out the detail below: Originally Ally had an employment contract paying £750k per annum. In consideration for working with the Club during the difficult early stages and as a condition of supporting Charles, it was necessary for Charles to agree with Ally that Ally would have the same option package as Charles Charles, after discussion with Malcolm, agreed to reduce his own salary by half to £360k per annum. Ally agreed to reduce his salary from £750k to £600k per annum. At the time of the IPO, it became apparent that public disclosure of Ally's salary may be necessary in the Prospectus. Ally was concerned at how the fans would react to his salary level and I understand that he wanted to reduce it further to around £200k but with some sort of guaranteed bonus to make it back up. The Executive did not accept this as it was considered misleading and the disclosure made in the prospectus was for the actual amounts paid to Ally from June to August. The Executive agreed to explore every avenue to avoid having to disclose Ally's current contract and, after lengthy discussion with the Executive and its advisers, the UKLA accepted that no disclosure needed to be made about the level of Ally's ongoing salary. The Executive has recently been contacted by Ally's agent requesting an increase in Ally's salary from £600k back to the original £750k from now but with arrears of £62.5k to be paid in the January payroll (this represents the 5 months backdated pay). The Board is asked to consider and, if appropriate, approve the reinstatement of Ally's salary at £750k per annum and the payment of £62.5k of arrears. If this is approved then Ally's original contract will become in force. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. If this is real then I can see Ally quitting or being sacked.
  13. I had the pleasure to read a tremendous article recently on the Do The Bouncy forums, by Locutus :- http://dothebouncy.com/main/threads/sharks-trolls-headstones-and-apathy.59319/ I love articles you can tell come from the heart, oozing in sheer passion for our club. One particular phrase though set me thinking “Politics should have no place in football , but thats a debate for another day.” Perhaps with events elsewhere – that day has come. Of course in a nirvana state – Politics should have no place in football, neither for that matter should Racism, Sectarianism nor Illegal betting. Unfortunately we do not live in such a sporting utopia and from time to time we have to cope with things invading our game which are neither welcome, nor enhancing for the reputation of our so called “Beautiful game”. In fact, if we are totally honest, at times it is downright ugly rather than beautiful. But if Politics has no place in football – what about Political influence ? For the Rangers support these last 3 years or so have been a real wake up call. As our club lurched from crisis to crisis and was subjected to a catalogue of unjust treatment, the silence from politicians in Scotland was deafening. Compare and contrast such silence with the political response to an illegal procession organised by The Green Brigade. http://news.stv.tv/west-central/218177-celtics-green-brigade-protest-results-in-msps-policing-question/ That’s not to say of course that Scottish Labour MP’s were silent over the crisis at Rangers, some in fact were only too happy to have something to say. http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/913 Some of you will remember Jim McGovern, Labour MP for Dundee West from some of my previous articles. He has been particularly vocal of late. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/westminster-mps-table-motion-condemning-2867719 http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/dundee/dundee-mp-calls-for-probe-into-champions-league-trouble-in-amsterdam-1.158942 The Courier article in particular saw some particularly critical online comments directed towards Mr McGovern – particulary as he was not so much vocal but noticeably silent after Celtic supporters misbehaved in his constituency of Dundee. Scenes described by Dundee Operations Manager Jim Thomson as “a throwback to the 1970′s” and “I have never seen anything like the behaviour of the Celtic fans in the 20 years I have been running games at Dens Park” warranted not a murmur from Mr McGovern. Not surprising then with conduct such as this that Mr McGovern requires annual staffing fees of £ 115, 581.17 ( as opposed to his Party leader, and Leader of the Opposition – Ed Miliband’s £ 93, 747.42 ) perhaps his staff are particularly busy answering constituent’s questions about his apparent double standards. With Baron Reid of Cardowan a recent chairman, as well as Brian Wilson currently serving on the board of Celtic FC, it would be foolhardy to suggest our footballing rivals are suffering from a lack of political influence, particularly within the Scottish Labour Party. Though such influence appears not to be confined to the bigger stage but also on a more localised level and has been highlighted previously http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/same-city-council-same-old-story.html With the Co-op Bank, with their historical links to the Labour Party, now subject to both scrutiny and investigation, it begs the question if the favourable loan rates afforded to Celtic FC were as a consequence of Celtic’s rather cosy relationship with the Scottish Labour Party ? And as preliminary enquiries into land deals run their course in Brussels and Tory researchers work long into the night scouring over Co-op loan arrangements, I have a question for the Rangers support. Is it time we sacrificed “politics has no place in football” – for the love of our club ?
  14. ​ JAMES and Sandy Easdale are poised to plough around £20million into cash-strapped Rangers. By: Graham Clark Published: Fri, January 17, 2014 0 Comments James and Sandy Easdale are set to give Rangers a well-needed cash boost [WILLIE VASS] The Greenock businessmen, already significantly involved in the Ibrox club as shareholders and directors, are edging closer to selling their bus firm and are considering investing massively in the stricken League One leaders. The brothers are already understood to have knocked back approaches for McGill’s Buses amid rumours that one £80m offer wasn’t enough and that they’re holding out for £100m. If they succeed in getting a buyer at that price, the speculation is they will aim to increase their stake at Ibrox by investing about £20m. James, on the club’s plc board, and Sandy, who is chairman of the football board, have been building up their shareholding in recent months as they look to tighten their grip on the club. They are now generally recognised to be the powers behind the throne at Ibrox. The Easdales took over McGill’s in 2001 and, after moving back into the black by posting profits of £659,404 compared with a loss of more than £550,000 the year before, their turnover has almost doubled from £15m to £28m following the takeover of rival Arriva Scotland West nearly two years ago. These figures have made McGill’s an attractive proposition and it is a business the Easdales are prepared to offload as they have other interests, including taxi firms and private rental and commercial property. The jury remains out on the Gers’ board simply because little or no information is passed the supporters’ way and stories like yesterday’s in Express Sport that players had rejected chief executive Graham Wallace’s suggestion they take a 15 per cent cut in wages has done little to quell their concerns over the club’s financial position. Wallace, in fact, has declared there is no chance of a second administration but conceded the club can’t continue to run the way it is amid suggestions it is losing around £1m a month. And, even if the Easdales were to splash their cash, there would still be a need to rein in the general costs. But, if the Greenock pair put up around £20m, it would go a long way to easing the near-critical state at the club and, of course, help appease and win over worried fans.
  15. McCOIST said there is "no appetite for boycotts" despite some fans threatening to starve the club of cash in order to bring about change at boardroom level. ALLY McCOIST last night insisted Rangers fans need to continue buying season tickets, and forget boycotts, if the club is to “survive, improve and progress.” And the manager sounded a warning for Ibrox chief executive Graham Wallace that any cuts to his playing budget would mean he couldn’t compete with Celtic. Wallace told shareholders at last week’s agm cuts would be necessary at a club where the wage bill is almost 100 per cent of turnover. But McCoist said: “If I have a budget of £3million and Celtic have a budget of £20m then it would be extremely difficult to compete with them, an enormous task. Rangers and Celtic have always had the highest budgets.” Some fans have threatened to starve the club of cash in order to bring about change at boardroom level. But McCoist added: “The fans are the most important part of our club. We wouldn’t be here today if it hadn’t been for them buying 72,000 season tickets over the last couple of years that have followed administration. “The fans must continue to buy season tickets if the club is to survive, improve and progress. “I’m sure, the way things look at the moment, there’s no appetite for talk of boycotts. “But I won’t tell the fans what to do. All I can do is state they will have a major bearing on how we move on from here.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-manager-ally-mccoist-need-2957386
  16. Three members of the Rangers board have lodged complaints to the police after violent threats were made against them. Rangers chairman Sandy Easdale, his brother James and Brian Stockbridge all received threats on a fans website. One image on the website, which cannot be named, contained a picture of Stockbridge with the caption stating "where is Lee Harvey Oswald when we need him". Another posting advocates "torching" McGill's Buses, which are owned by the Easdale brothers. Stockbridge, the Rangers financial director, was one of the five board members re-elected at Thursday's annual general meeting. Solicitors have asked police to investigate violent threats made against him and the Easdales. http://t.co/mPyqWbn2OR
  17. http://t.co/akFr5PEKH3 Rangers chairman David Somers believes the "majority" of the Light Blues' support trust the board despite the stormy scenes at the club's annual general meeting at Ibrox on Thursday and recent fans' protests. The Rangers board were booed on to the stage at the AGM but emerged triumphant after all five directors were re-elected and their four opponents failed in their bid to be appointed. Under-fire finance director Brian Stockbridge, who received a particularly rough ride from those who attended the AGM, received 65.3 per cent backing from shareholders while his four colleagues, Norman Crighton, James Easdale and chief executive Graham Wallace, who subsequently won over most of the body of the meeting, all secured more than three-quarters of the support. The four so-called requisitioners - former Rangers oldco director Paul Murray, former chairman Malcolm Murray, Alex Wilson and Scott Murdoch - all polled close to 30 per cent of votes to scupper their hopes. However, despite a clear mandate from shareholders, the fall-out from the meeting had Gers supporters and fans' representatives talking about boycotts and refusing to renew season tickets amid general disgruntlement. Asked if he accepted there was a lack of trust in the board from the fans, Somers told Press Association Sport: "Just at the beginning (of the AGM) there were boos but the rest of the meeting was very orderly. "I was pleased that I got a nice round of applause after my speech which I thought was very generous of them. "I thought the questions were fair and overall, I thought the mood of the meeting was very positive. "Hopefully it cleared the air and we can build on that and take the club forward in terms of stability. "I think there is trust from the majority of the fans but having looked at the dark corporate history of the club, I understand why, for some of the fans' groups, there is some distrust. It is our job to build up the trust but it will take time. "And actually, if we look at the result of the AGM, you can see quite clearly that were massive support for the board. "It is also interesting to see that the requisitioners didn't have the level of support from the fans that they were saying they had got - we can see that from the numbers." Somers, whose position was made permanent last month after he was given the chairmanship on an interim period, dismissed the fans' red card display at the last home game against Ayr United. In the 18th and 72nd minutes of the match, the majority of the 45,227 crowd held up cards which had written on them 'get out of our club' and 'vote out the current board'. "I wasn't at that particular one but I have had several emails from people who said they were led to believe that the red card display was about apartheid so there seems to be some confusion among the fans as to what they were displaying," said Somers. "But we have taken on board that we have got to engage with the fans, the supporters groups and we have plans to do just that." Indeed, one of the biggest gripes of Paul Murray and the fans' representatives in the acrimonious lead-up to the AGM was the failure of the board to enter into dialogue with supporters. Somers, who revealed he had been appointed to the chairman's post by Stockbridge and Easdale after being recommended by club advisors Daniel Stewart, explained his reticence. "A lot of it has been time-related," he said. "I have only been on the board four weeks, Graham has only been on the board three weeks. "I spent the first two weeks interviewing nine or 10 CEOs and also interviewing a bunch of non-executive directors and that took up quite a bit of time. "We knew the AGM was important so it meant we went round all the institutional shareholder groups and said, 'Here we are and this is what we plan to do' and we were using up time that should have been used in normal circumstances for the fan groups. "I think we reassured the fans (at the AGM) that we have to engage much more with them than we have been doing. "Some (meetings) have already taken place. Graham has already had two or three meetings." Somers, however, admits there are no plans to invite a fans' representative on to the board. "I think a fan on the board would be a very singular situation," he said. "We are looking to set up a mechanism by which we can engage more democratically with the fans and get more fan representation. "That is something that we will be talking with the fans groups about. "There are various options. One option is to have a fan advisory board where we have a number of supporter groups on it. " Somers also confirmed that there were no plans to invite any of the requisitioners on to the board. He said: "Not at the moment, no. The shareholders have made their decision so we have to respect what the shareholders have said." A "final statement" released to Press Association Sport on behalf of the requisitioners read: "Now that the dust has settled after yesterday's result we thought it was important to make a few final comments. "First and foremost, we would like to thank everyone who voted for us, particularly the fans whose overwhelming support has galvanised us throughout this process. "Secondly, we think it is important that yesterday's result is put in context. The reality is that Brian Stockbridge's vote and our vote was determined by a very small number of shareholders. "Four shareholders, Easdale proxy, Laxey, Mike Ashley and Zeus Capital control almost 50 per cent of the shares. Obviously none of them voted for us and all of them voted for Brian Stockbridge. "We therefore achieved 60 per cent support from the remainder of the shareholders whilst Brian Stockbridge achieved 30 per cent. "That said it was a democratic vote and we stand by the result. "We are proud of our campaign. We have brought all of the issues to the fore and we have exposed the mismanagement of the club. "This has brought positive board change particularly in the shape of Graham Wallace. "We now hope that he is given the authority to make his mark without outside influences. "Finally we wish Ally and the team continued success in the future." Copyright PA Sport 2013, All Rights Reserved
  18. @SonsofStruth: PROTEST ON TUESDAY Meet Copland Rd stairs seven o'clock. Protesting Stockbridge and Irvine to be removed from club. SHARE IF YOU CARE.
  19. Ringing fugitive on Interpol wanted list not unusual in new world of Rangers KEITH tells how trying to make contact with a man on Interpol's most wanted list is hardly unusual in the weird world which Rangers now inhabit. IT’S not every week you speak to someone on Interpol’s most wanted list. In fact, after 20-odd years writing about football for a living, this was something of a first. Not that it was actually much of a conversation. “Hello, Mr Rizvi,” “Hello, who is this?” “Keith Jackson from the Daily Record newspaper in Glasgow, I want to speak to you about your involvement in Blue Pitch Holdings.” “I think you have the wrong number my friend, I would ahem (click)...” “Mr Rizvi? Rafat? Hello?” “BEEEEEEEEEEEP!” That was about the size of it. Hardly earth-shattering stuff. In fact, the only truly remarkable thing about this conversation is that it needed to take place at all. But this is the way of it at Rangers in 2013 – this club has long since disappeared through the looking glass. Vanished into a world which is as much about the fugitives as it is about the football. I phoned straight back but Rafat Rizvi, or whatever this plummy-voiced gentleman calls himself these days, didn’t answer. So I followed up with a text message, offering to speak on or off the record and pointing out that the identities of those anonymous investors behind Blue Pitch and Margarita Holdings were likely to be made public soon. Again, no response. Perhaps he was just busy. Then again, perhaps men who are on the run from the authorities over a £600million bank fraud, facing a potential death penalty in Indonesia, don’t do protracted conversations. Not with press men at any rate. Which would be fair enough were it not for the fact the future of Rangers hangs in the balance all over again and that there are many thousands of supporters out there who are beside themselves with worry and who are asking for one simple thing from their club, the truth. Remember that? It’s not easy where Rangers are concerned. This is a club which currently employs more spin doctors than it does directors, a business which is engulfed in a cloud of its own toxicity. A company which attempts to confuse its own customers with an unrelenting barrage of spin and counter-spin. The truth? So many lies and so much misinformation has been spread in the name of Rangers that the truth has become a complete stranger. It has been twisted and distorted to such an extent that it has become almost unrecognisable. And it has to stop, for the sake of the fans and for the greater good of the Scottish game in general. It is time for Rangers to reconnect with the truth. Which is why it would have been nice had Rizvi stayed on the phone for a longer chat. He might have been able to clear up many of the issues which continue to distress these supporters and cause them sleepless nights. Just who are Blue Pitch for example? These mysterious offshore backers of Charles Green, who financed the Yorkshireman’s takeover, buying up Ibrox and Murray Park for a £5.5m snip thanks to the stupendous generosity of administrators Duff and Phelps. It would also have been of interest to ask Mr Rizvi, a long-standing associate of Green and shamed former commercial director Imran Ahmad, if he could shed any light on some of the names of those behind the equally mysterious Margarita. Between them, Blue Pitch and Margarita hold a 15 per cent stake in the club and their voting power – which has been handed over by proxy to the Easdale Brothers – could swing the balance whenever this club finally allows its shareholders to vote on the make-up of the boardroom at its long awaited agm. Could it be that Brian Stockbridge, for example, is to be found standing behind Margarita’s door? Just asking because if the financial director was to be among these penny-a-share investors then it’s no wonder they are attempting to block the changes that would ultimately lead to Stockbridge’s removal from power. Right? Here’s another thing. Did you know Stockbridge and James Easdale last week signed off on a robustly worded warning to the club’s entire workforce, making it clear that information leaks from inside Ibrox will not be tolerated? That’s right. Stockbridge, who infamously filmed former chairman Malcolm Murray worse for wear at the end of a long night out, and Easdale, who endorsed the return of a certain spin doctor to the club. The hypocrisy is mind boggling. In fact, it smacks of yet another hamfisted and ever so slightly sinister attempt to suppress the truth. The fact that their internal memo has already been leaked out on to the internet is a delicious irony. Much has gone on behind the scenes of this club in recent times which defies belief. Senior, trusted and hugely respected figures have been horribly intimidated. These people too have a story to tell. Just like Rizvi. It would do Rangers a world of good if one day the whole truth emerges from this distasteful debacle, no matter how unpleasant or even inconvenient that truth might be. The truth is all that can pull Rangers back from this world through the looking glass and allow it to look at itself in the mirror once again.
  20. Did I hear this correctly today? If so, could Rhegan tell us what the SFA did to prevent Craig Whyte getting ownership of Rangers two and a half years ago? Despite warnings about Whyte's background from the likes of AJ and Jeff Randall the SFA sat back and allowed Whyte to get his hands on Rangers and we all know how that ended up. Did Whyte make any such prior application to the SFA ? If so can we see it? Or did Liewell & his PGB call the shots & allow Whyte ownership knowing what was likely to happen as that would benefit Liewell's club ? So what's changed regards Dave King ? is it because his arrival at Rangers & subsequent investment might be of considerable benefit to Rangers that an 'application' now has to be made ? Do some people at the SFA not like the thought of Rangers returning to the top of Scottish football? Also has the fat,sweaty, bespectacled lawyer been working behind the scenes to change the rules? King's arrival yesterday certainly seemed to concern the usual suspects in the mhedia. English for one.
  21. From Sons of Struth Facebook page. OPEN LETTER TO THE ONLINE KEYBOARD WARRIORS AND KNOW IT ALLS This page started 7-8 weeks ago by 2 friends who knew things were not right within the confines of the Ibrox boardroom and like many we were riddled with guilt when OUR club went in to administration and eventual liquidation as we felt the Rangers support as a whole and us as individuals had sat back and let it happen before our eyes. We made a promise that we would not sit back and let anyone ruin our club again In a short space of time we have attracted numerous fellow bears and other fans groups who had similar feelings to ourselves. We have stood in the streets handing out leaflets at a number of games, organised production of banners, arranged and held open meetings, been continuously on the phone and internet answering questions and stating our point, tried to unite the support and supporters groups and we have done all this for one reason, to protect our club from a clear and present danger in the board room. We have always stated that not every Rangers fan would agree with us and we expect and respect that but expected the same respect back. We have received help and support from numerous sources and their help, advise and financial help in forms of suppliers giving their time and products has been priceless and very much appreciated. We could not have taken this from two pals and a facebook page to the front pages of the national press with out this massive support from many others and your assistance will never be forgotten. The board room has been shaken and the institutional investors have heard our voice. What have we received in return? On a personal level I have lost a considerable income as i am a sole trader, missed out on the limited time I have with my children and put stresses on my relationship due to this page growing arms and legs in a short period and the amount of time it has taken out of my life. I have to accept that this has happened through my own doing. What I cant accept is the verbal abuse handed out not only online but also while handing out leaflets on the street by the minority. I have been accused of being in the pocket of others and the mouthpiece for organisations i am not even a member of. I have been told I am scum, a ****, a jacobite and even most recently by a professional blogger and probably the most bizarre, a socialist. I am continually told I have a hidden agenda and not the best interests of the club at heart. I get berated online by individuals who appear to follow the party line of their forum of choice and then send me personal message saying in private that they actually don’t mind what we are saying. I get accused of not answering questions when i have answered the same questions a hundred times before but the poster cant be bothered to scan our page for the answer they demand. I have been told never to return to Ibrox. I have been accused of using youths to distribute my message on my behalf. I appear to also have been reported to the police by the board of directors in Ibrox. Why does all this happen? Because i have a different opinion to the minority who wish to destabilise our movement and leave the current proven liars in power at our club? Allow me my voice as i allow you yours. The rangers online community must be the most fragmented place in the world and thankfully doesn’t represent the fans as a whole. It is a place where the easily lead and lazy form opinions based on the forum of their choice or even based purely as the opposite of the forums and personalities they dislike. It is full of closed shop forums and secret facebook pages where they all decide who they can hate or love, agree or disagree with as a collective. Its a place where statistics are made up then passed off as fact. It is a place for hatred and bile between Rangers fans. It is a place where people can assume strange nicknames and abuse others in secret. It is a place i do not like. This community really must sort its act out and stop fighting each other because of old differences and lies about each other. There are no winners only losers in this and if you could stop this nonsense then the outside enemies and distracters could be blown away by the power of a defragmented unified support. Do you all realise the effect you could have if you ALL united against outside forces instead of the continued in fight you all seem to thrive on? GIVE YOUR HEADS A SHAKE Agree or disagree with me on the aims of our group but allow me my opinion without threat and insult please. I will no longer get involved with debate on line as the minority waste it for the majority. I will still post when I need to and will leave this page open to allow others their opinion but I will continue to delete offensive posts and will start to ban users who continue to abuse others. Thank you again to the vast majority who conduct themselves in the correct manner but no thanks to the keyboard warriors and know it alls. CRAIG SONS OF STRUTH
  22. http://immortalrangers.wordpress.com/ Due to the size of this article I have deviated from the usual reproduction and only posted the link.
  23. http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5195-rangers-announce-annual-results
×
×
  • 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.