damien1

Dude will be along shortly asking for transparency.

Have you asked for trannsparency from any other groups? And if so what replies did you receive?

As has already been said, they only have to ask.

You are now being childish as regards the actual wording of the Donate button even after I've given you an explanation. Running costs in terms of running VB go towards causes we actively help. Nothing difficult to understand about that. Funds obviously goto causes after costs are met. This is of course unless a specific donater wants his donation to go toward a specific cause e.g. Erskine.

Nothing hard at all. Hope that answers your questions.

If non-members wish to donate then they can use the Notes section to ask how their money will be used and that information will be forwarded to them.

Ok, Dude fyi all monies received by VB are used towards VB causes be it those mentioned above and other projects that VB members know of. At any point any VB member can ask what the monies raised were, what monies were used for and evidence of such. Transparency is available to all VB members. As also has been pointed out no member of VB is ever asked for monies. Your bicker about 'running costs' is childish at best. As has been explained VB admin cover the cost of the site, any donations under the 'running costs' tag will go towards VB projects. Is that clear? Noone admin or otherwise profits from any donation. On the odd occassion when VB does sell flags or badges to its members these are sold at cost price, again no profit. Once again I'll say, in the name of transparency any VB member can question anything about monies raised and will receive said information. VB is answerable to noone but it's own members.

It came from The Blue Knights facebook page the other day. https://www.facebook.com/TheBlueKnightsRFC?fref=ts

I would to, it's folly for the board to leave questions unanswered.

Why silence someting like this? This is a non-story being spun against the current board when the loan was took out over a year ago when we had no other credit facilities. It's easy to spin manure into silk if your buyer wants to wear a shite shirt.

I don't doubt this loan is real. Bear in mind though, we had very little lines of credit and this was at a time when other forums/groups were calling to starve the club of cash and refuse to buy ST books, so it's easy to see why the club would have took this loan with uncertainty in mind. Do I agree with it, hell no, but if that money went towards keeping the club afloat at the time until ST monies came in then what else could the club possibly do?

Certain bloggers are renting their arses to McColl and Co to disrupt the current board. The board is within their rights to protect their status. Ban those bloggers who wish to do Rangers harm. Simples? Because lets face it, McColl and co have shown nothing to let them give us their backing other tan assumptions and rumours.

The time for amateur boardroom experts and accountants is now over, lets all get behind the club and the team. Giving creedence to boardroom warfare does nothing but play into the hands of our enemies.

Anyways I'm away to bed, have fun

I stated that the bonuses were ridiculous. As is Ally's wage. I have issue with both.

If money was spent that needed to be spent, justifiably, then how can than not be correct? We all wanted Albion and Edmiston House back? Is that justifiable yet incorrect? Our first year as a new company was always going to be expensive, anyone denying this is deluded. There are however many expense that can, could and should have been avoided.

The job of running Rangers seems to be doing ok. Top of the league, £10m in bank, income streams on top of that, matchdays run as per usual. Nope, I wasn't happy with Stockbridge, doesn't mean he isn't doing what he's paid for, Personally I think he shouldn't be speaking to the press about club finances. As far as I know he was a late addition to the fans meeting and came ill-prepared. It happens, but it shouldn't have. The bonuses are ridiculous, if they could be taken back then they should. As should Ally and the management teams wages be renegotiated. I think those demanding answers should wait for the accounts to be released before they do damage the club yes. Speculation isn't doing the club any good whatsoever.

I think we are all disappointed with the IPO spending figures, but until we have a factual breakdown that is legitimately confirmed by auditors then again we are dealing with assumptions. What if the IPO spending was justified? Where does that leave those calling for the current board to be culled? Where does it leave McColl/Murray?

But they have been doing their business via the tabloids. They've tried to belittle the current board.

It wasn't. The real question is do we trust someone based on assumptions of things. It appears that some sections of the fan-base are quite happy to do this. On what basis are they willing to do this?

You need to be in the know if he's wanting fans on board. McColl has no real vote on the board, he needs to find votes no matter who he finds to invest. He needs the fans vote and other investors votes. If he gets other investors votes to bring in other investors then surely their shares are going to be diluted. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Unless these investors are willing to sell to McColl's investors then the only ally he really has is the fans, to which he isn't doing a good job so far to curry favour with them.

Investors? FFS McColl is one of the richest men in the country. He doesn't want to shell out, wants to get Rangers on the sly, wants to use investors money and we are being asked to trust this guy? FFS on the face of it sounds like he's no better than Whyte or Green.

So you are privvy to the plans then?

You definitively said plans are in place. How can you make a statement like than then say firstly you aren't privvy to the plans, then secondly that you couldn't possibly say who told you. This is the type of cloak and dagger nonsense which is making the support not trust McColl. You could say uniting the support would be alot easier if they knew what they were buying into. Which on the face of it just now is basically, trust us we're Rangers men so we'll be true to our word. And as a poster above pointed out Craig Whyte said he was a Rangers man. On the face of it all I think Rangers fans should be forgetting all about the boardroom malarky and start getting behind the team with as much energy as they spend on the boardroom. Too many amateur accountants and boardroom directors talking nonsense and spreading falsehoods if you ask me.

How do you know plans 'are' in place then? Who told you? Why not get the majority involved when you know you could possibly get their backing and make the job easier? Personally I'm quite happy with the status quo, biggest failing I see however is our wage structure which needs addressed. But, if a better alternative comes along I am willing to listen to what they have to say. The unwillingness of putting out what they have to say concerns me. Would you vote for a political party without knowing its policies? Of course you wouldn't.