Graham Wallace Statement

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Wallace knew exactly what he was getting to he alone is responsible for for his current position but hey £6k per week with an inevitable £300k pay off seems worth more to him than his reputation.[/QUOT

 

Was he working for anyone when he came to us?

 

He had been out of work for nearly a year.

[andy steel 0]

As to the actual statement, I was most disappointed by the vague references to things being improved behind the scenes. Anyone with an ear to the support must have noticed that we are crying out for a tangible demonstration of this - something, anything, which says the wasting of money is over, we're trying our best, look, we're doing this, that or the next thing. Instead of which, we are asked to take on trust some behind the scenes changes which we are expected to fund but are not allowed to know the specifics of - in the same week that a previous assurance about not running out of money turned out to be balls, and was dealt with by the raising of a loan at a very costly return...to us, again.

 

If we are to take peoples' word for things we need to see concrete evidence of progress - if that has to come before 120 days so be it.

 

I'm trying to avoid slagging Wallace or anyone because it can easily be brushed aside as personal vitriol, but probably only a football club could treat its customers which such contempt while expected them to pay for the treatment into the bargain. Terribly disappointing reaction.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Wallace knew exactly what he was getting to

 

I wonder if he really did.

[RANGERRAB 3,255]

The '120 business review' or whatever it is called is in danger of building up unrealistic expectations. So far all we've had is a rejected offer of a wage cut to players and the manager's exorbitant salary cut which was on the cards long before GW arrived.Now of course we've had this loan or loans from Sandy Easdale & Laxey

At the end of this '120 day business review' supporters will expect all sorts of new developments to secure the clubs future which I can't see happening.I suspect DK thinks the same although I simply cannot see how he'll manage to invest as things currently stand without a new share issue which doesn't seem forthcoming.

[forlanssister 3,050]

 

He had been out of work for nearly a year.

 

His Linkedin states he left Man City in March 2013 and joined Rangers in November 2013.

 

I wonder if he really did.

 

Absolutely he did, he was well warned what to expect and initially told his friends he'd knocked it back.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

His Linkedin states he left Man City in March 2013 and joined Rangers in November 2013.

 

Seems he left City in December 2012 http://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=273357 but may have been on gardening leave, or snow clearing leave till March 2013; either way it was nearly a year.

[Calgacus 8]

His Linkedin states he left Man City in March 2013 and joined Rangers in November 2013.

 

 

 

Absolutely he did, he was well warned what to expect and initially told his friends he'd knocked it back.

 

if I was cynical, I might think he's just here for the pay off!

[Mountain Bear 0]

What I can't understand about this whole episode is that our highly paid PR expert didn't anticipate that this loan arrangement would cause a shitstorm and advise the board to find other alternatives.

 

That, combined with the "it was all part of the business plan" statement from Wallace, makes me wonder whether this loan was part of a pre AGM agreement to secure Laxey's support for the board. Damn, caught being cynical again...

[BrahimHemdani 1]

 

Absolutely he did, he was well warned what to expect and initially told his friends he'd knocked it back.

 

Happy to accept that from you.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

That, combined with the "it was all part of the business plan" statement from Wallace, makes me wonder whether this loan was part of a pre AGM agreement to secure Laxey's support for the board. Damn, caught being cynical again...

 

That part is just baffling.

 

If it was "part of the business plan" why were the terms only agreed last week?

 

If it was only in the forecast that we would need another £1.5m, why did he say we didn't need any more finance in the "short to medium term".

 

He can't have it both ways; and his attempts to explain it away like that do his credibility no good at all.