financial figures on PM history, taken from RM.

[amms 0]

Reply to post #34 as it didn't quote properly

 

That isn't the best defense case I have ever seen.

 

Paul Murray is no genius and I don't think he could of done any better than the current board if he had got his hands on rangers, and that is why I won't vote for him. I have to put my faith into the new appointees and their calibre to see Stockbridge isn't upto the job and replace him with a better candidate. Then again I don't know 100% what his job is and how much say he had in certain things! there is also people saying that MM residing over the board when the contracts were dished out, so why would I want him back, playing staff and management also happily kept on taking the wages given to them, so should they also be hounded out as well.

 

So many questions and people that need attacked and hounded.

 

For fuxake, you don't think he could have done any better? Really? You could have done better than the current board!

 

You clearly didn't read Somer's statement yesterday, we owe Stockbridge a debt of gratitude apparently. Aye, what judgement and acumen he's demonstrating.

 

It wasn't a defence of Paul murray, it was an explanation as too why at this time I view him as more suitable than the incumbents despite the financial reports for dummies that started the thread.

[amms 0]

Sometimes, no matter how terrible a situation seems, the 'only other option' isn't necessarily any better.

 

You would have thought we couldn't get anyone worse than David Murray but in came Whyte (then Green, who was basically a weird amalgamation of the pair).

 

Both MM and PM have already had stints on the board and they were both terrible. I don't know why everyone has to be so dichotomous here, the whole lot of them are all useless shites.

 

We're dichotomous because a choice has to be made, a vote is being taken and support needs given. Ach well, let's just wait and see isn't a choice here.

[amms 0]

I am no fan of Stockbridges and there were parts of the statement yesterday that were crass however Somers has the background. He has the big company mentality and he isn't a Charles green or Craig Whyte.

 

For me it's simple, no matter who we vote for its a gamble so faced with the choice of the history of failure with the Murray's or 3 new guys with credible backgrounds then I'm going to put my chip on the latter.

 

Another thing that grates me about Paul Murray and his fans is this constant greeting about Bluepitch and Margarita. He wants Somers to disclose who they are. Why doesn't Malcolm disclose who they are? After all, he was in the job almost 8 times longer than Somers after all.

 

Well if he isn't Green or Whyte why is he using their mouthpiece?

 

Is having a 'big company mentality' a good thing then? We're a football club not a public utility or merchant bank. Publicly backing Stockbridge, indeed telling us we should be thanking him, suggests Somers has a long way to go. History of failure? Go get me the context of those 'figures' and then we'll talk about failure or success.

 

Your 'Blue Pitch' paragraph is a strawman.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

For fuxake, you don't think he could have done any better? Really? You could have done better than the current board!

 

You clearly didn't read Somer's statement yesterday, we owe Stockbridge a debt of gratitude apparently. Aye, what judgement and acumen he's demonstrating.

 

It wasn't a defence of Paul murray, it was an explanation as too why at this time I view him as more suitable than the incumbents despite the financial reports for dummies that started the thread.

In fairness, the current board haven't ran up a huge debt requiring the bank to take control, yet.

[TheWeissMan 0]

Well if he isn't Green or Whyte why is he using their mouthpiece?

 

Is having a 'big company mentality' a good thing then? We're a football club not a public utility or merchant bank. Publicly backing Stockbridge, indeed telling us we should be thanking him, suggests Somers has a long way to go. History of failure? Go get me the context of those 'figures' and then we'll talk about failure or success.

 

Your 'Blue Pitch' paragraph is a strawman.

 

The guy has only been here for 22 working days. He wont know this history of Jack Irvine right now and he probably wont know the history of Stockbridge either. Im guessing he wont even know about the video either. He has clearly been poring over the Board Meetings and probably thinking WTF ? Stockbridge will be playing him just now, as you would and on the face of it, claims that we could have been suspended on AIM if BS left are true.

 

Once he gets his feet under the table firmly though, im sure he will be able to sort the wheat from the chaff because unlike Murray, his business history and present tells us he can.

 

As for it being a strawman, can you explain to me any reasonable argument as to why our Ex Chairman of 10 months should not know an answer to a question they are asking of our current chairman of 1 month. ?

[j1mgg 0]

For fuxake, you don't think he could have done any better? Really? You could have done better than the current board!

 

You clearly didn't read Somer's statement yesterday, we owe Stockbridge a debt of gratitude apparently. Aye, what judgement and acumen he's demonstrating.

 

It wasn't a defence of Paul murray, it was an explanation as too why at this time I view him as more suitable than the incumbents despite the financial reports for dummies that started the thread.

 

I actually don't, and the reason I am not voting for him.

[amms 0]

In fairness, the current board haven't ran up a huge debt requiring the bank to take control, yet.

Well, some want to give them time to do just that.

[amms 0]

The guy has only been here for 22 working days. He wont know this history of Jack Irvine right now and he probably wont know the history of Stockbridge either. Im guessing he wont even know about the video either. He has clearly been poring over the Board Meetings and probably thinking WTF ? Stockbridge will be playing him just now, as you would and on the face of it, claims that we could have been suspended on AIM if BS left are true.

 

Once he gets his feet under the table firmly though, im sure he will be able to sort the wheat from the chaff because unlike Murray, his business history and present tells us he can.

 

As for it being a strawman, can you explain to me any reasonable argument as to why our Ex Chairman of 10 months should not know an answer to a question they are asking of our current chairman of 1 month. ?

 

Well assuming he has access to Google it shouldn't take 22 days to understand how Irvine is regarded by the Rangers support and why using him is anathema to all normal thinking people. Perhaps these 'big company men' need little people to help them with such trivial matters. Likewise it shouldn't take a month to understand that Stockbridge so out of his depth he shouldn't be backed publicly. Even a cursory glance at our finances should tell him all he needs to know about our FD. A month is plenty of time to understand the politics and realities of the place. Here's a thought though, if he doesn't understand the place yet, if he's been locked in the boardroom pouring over the minutes as you seem to believe and if he hasn't made up his mind yet on Irvine, Stockbridge and our support then say nothing about them, don't make statements that further inflame an already volatile situation. Still, he's a business genius, let's fellate him instead of criticising him when he does something stupid.

 

As for your strawman (which is irrelevant to this thread that's you introducing it was a strawman) I've no idea, perhaps because whenever he asked who they were they wouldn't tell him, just a thought.

[amms 0]

I actually don't, and the reason I am not voting for him.

 

Well done, the incumbents must sleep easy knowing there's a section of our support who don't care what they do, just as long as they aren't someone they don't like.

[j1mgg 0]

Well done, the incumbents must sleep easy knowing there's a section of our support who don't care what they do, just as long as they aren't someone they don't like.

 

 

And vice versa.

 

Seem to be a set of fans that will back PM and MM no matter how badly they have done in the past.