Craig Mather (and Bryan Smart) Resign

[Zappa 0]

So no anti P Murray, but its ok to be anti Board?

 

Say what you like about Paul Murray or anyone else within reason, but the anti-PM stuff is getting beyond a joke when it turns into bickering about his discussions & proposed dealings with Ticketus. That stuff is well and truly in the past, so please try to at least stay on topic here and not rant about what Paul Murray may or may not have done in the past. It's tedious and really not particularly relevant to current discussions at all unless you happen to dislike Paul Murray or have some kind of agenda against him.

[crucible 0]

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 ?

[bossy 0]

Switching sides may well be the only way for the Easdales to survive an AGM and retain their seats on the board. Even if they do switch sides and survive an AGM I wouldn't put money on them still having a single seat on either board by this time next year.

 

I think that the Easdales may be out of their depth. Certainly they have had success with their bus company but getting involved in Rangers is like moving up a couple of leagues. Now they are dealing with real corporate heavy hitters, people who have some serious money and people who have much more experience of wheeling dealing and planting metaphorical knives in the backs of others. It is a new world for them.

[Zappa 0]

Also OK to insult the board but not Murray...

 

You post here frequently enough to know fine well that there isn't any sort of 'pro' or 'anti' PM agenda or party line here. The fact that there's been a big shift of opinion against the board recently is purely down to what's been going on at the club and the accumulation of events since Green & co took over.

[amms 0]

Spot on, football games are for football.

 

That's ironic considering your stance on some 'songs' recently. Support takes many forms - "To keep from weakening or failing" is its dictionary definition, it seems quite fitting don't you think.

[Stimpy 0]

:whistle:Well do e RST on chasing away incompetent individuals

[bossy 0]

I don't really have a view on either Paul Murray or Malcolm Murray or on the other two who are proposed to be on the board. But with these resignations, the board clearly needs to be rebuilt and we also need a new CEO. So, other than myself, my good friend Zappa, Boss (for the CFO position obviously) or Frankie, who do we think should be getting the jobs?

[simplythebest 0]

That's ironic considering your stance on some 'songs' recently. Support takes many forms - "To keep from weakening or failing" is its dictionary definition, it seems quite fitting don't you think.

 

The songs are to do with creating an atmosphere, very different

[Bluedell 5,348]

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 ?

 

That's a fair point and throws up some question marks over him.

 

It's disappointing that there is a lack of imagination in respect of the alternatives to the current board we are being offered.

[Little General 80]

How quickly will we see new appointments to the board?