Latest News - David Edgar RST

[kevinthomson8 0]

From David Edgar

 

 

Hello folks,

Here's the latest info as I have it;

 

Ian Tudhope is effectively the Bain of MIH - he has quit. Despite the denials, it's strongly rumoured by people close to the situation that this is because of Muir. Essentially, Muir is running MIH now and, you can safely assume, is having the same impact that he is having at Rangers.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/busine...mpire-1.988277

 

This is absolutely criticial and flies in the face of what Murray and the bank have been saying about his role as an 'advisor'.

 

There will be more from Graham Duffy in the papers over the next few days which should answer questions on his credentials. However, he may or may not be involved as one of the main players in the most likely consortium. This consortium is made up of names you would know, and is very close to making its move.

 

The exact model of fans representation has not been agreed as there will need to be feasability studies done etc. For example, would Duffy's plan be unworkable? Is there more desire for a membership scheme etc. Supporters representation is however a key component to all members of the prospective consortium.

 

The plan is, as it always has been, to get the bank and the failed owner out of Ibrox officially and then instigate the major changes required, including fan ownership.

 

I know it is frustrating, waiting around for things to happen, but things ARE moving and it WILL happen.

 

If you can, get to the AGM, speak out against Lloyds and the previous regime and vote against Muir becoming a Director.

 

The next few days are crucial to the future of our club. If it all goes to plan, we'll start this new decade in style.

Edited December 3, 2009 by Frankie

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

Being kept informed is all we can expect right now.

Edited December 3, 2009 by OnlyOneAmoruso

[Frankie 8,150]

Glad for the update. Being kept informed is all we can expect right now.

 

Fixed.

 

Pity David can't rise above the petty stuff of recent days but I'm sure we'll take the information in good faith nonetheless.

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

It's a pity the petty stuff has to happen at all Frankie.

[Frankie 8,150]

It's a pity the petty stuff has to happen at all Frankie.

 

Absolutely but as far as I can see that was finished with yesterday.

 

Strange how in attempting to lead and unite again the official spokesperson of the Trust has to be so childish but hopefully his playground jibes will be ignored in favour of more constructive debate.

[craig 5,195]

Where were the playground jibes Frankie ? I dont see anything in that article which suggests such.

[Frankie 8,150]

Where were the playground jibes Frankie ? I dont see anything in that article which suggests such.

 

These were in his subsequent posts.

 

Their official spokesperson made some strange claims about 'gangs of 7' (I assume the 7 people who resigned 18 months ago - including myself) which kind of go against the unity/professionalism message they profess.

 

This is particularly disappointing given a few of this 'gang' have been in contact with the Trust since they resigned to help the organisation when required.

 

Add in the contact from the STS project to the Trust (and FF) which was ignored, then one may obtain a more accurate picture of who wants bygones to be bygones and who'd prefer to abuse, insult and tacitly threat.

[maineflyer 0]

As I posted elsewhere this morning with respect to blanket RST calls for an apparently-newly-discovered commodity called unity..............

 

I know one thing to be true. You don't pull people together by announcing that people need to pull together. All that achieves is the writer being able to display his credentials to an audience. Actually pulling people together means removing existing obstacles. Getting beyond mere expressions of aspiration, how do the unifiers amonst us propose that happens, in hard practical terms, without those obstacles first being removed?

 

Could it be that some of those they infer are contributing to division are actually those who are trying hardest to remove those obstacles?

[craig 5,195]

 

Could it be that some of those they infer are contributing to division are actually those who are trying hardest to remove those obstacles?

 

Simple answer..... yes.

 

What I have seen is the following :

 

1. The Trust want unity

2. The very fine (IMO) STS report was produced and distributed to interested websites and organisations.

3. FF and the Trust were the only ones to exclude themselves from acknowledging and promoting it.

4. FF and the Trust also didnt explain why this was the case especially when the report contained many pertinent issues to our club. In fact, some of these issues are particularly relevent today.

5. The "olive branch" has been extended toward the Trust on more than one occasion.

6. The Trust, whilst giving a public perception of accepting this olive branch havent shown it by action.

7. Shit hits fan at club financially, Trust see opportunity to get fan ownership and see themselves as the best vehicle for doing so (I wont necessarily disagree here).

8. Trust calls for unity.

9. People ask valid questions on the various investors.

10. Rather than answer said questions, or confirm they don't know, they decide to assassinate people's character.

 

I could go on with all of this but it bores me. The simple reality is that, whether they like it or not, the Trust seem to be talking out both sides of their mouth. They say they want unity but their office bearers are then more than willing to come forward and chastise, berate and be derogatory to people even if those same people are simply asking pertinent questions that will need to be answered at some point if fans are expected to part with the recession-impacted hard-earned.

 

Actions speak louder than words. The Trust need to learn that. If they TRULY want unity then they need to act in an appropriate manner. I am still yet to see it.

 

And in this regard, with some of the comments made by Trust members recently and, even more worryingly the official spokesperson, is this an organisation that you would be comfortable being the voice of Rangers ? I used to answer that affirmatively - some of the public statements from the RST had me nodding my head and smiling because they were succinct, professional and made their point without resorting to petty slagging and gutteral press. However, almost every statement made in 2009 have been nothing short of cringe-worthy (one in particular I recall casting personal aspersions against a journalist - which isn't acceptable no matter how we feel about the press).

[maineflyer 0]

Wonderful post Craig. Right to the heart of it.