rankbadyin
-
Posts
248 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by rankbadyin
-
-
Yes, but the existing board are looking for a guarantee from the Requisitioners that they will vote for their reappointment at the AGM. With the support of the Requisitioners, they would definitely be re-elected. Why should the Requisitioners agree to this?
The existing board would have nothing to do with an independent EGM called by the requisitioners except pay for said meeting and be bound by any majority decision, enough excuses do the business or get off the pot.
-
I don't know.
It sounds like they've already agreed to compromise on their initial demands in the Requisition on the basis that appointments are made now, then every board position is put to the vote at the AGM. The current board either need to agree and risk losing their jobs at an AGM vote, not agree and have an EGM called (new deadline for agreement is Friday) or just do the honorable thing by accepting the Requisition resolutions, resigning and walking away. They have another choice too: keep stalling like they've been doing for over a month.
At the AGM the present board have no choice all positions are up for endorsement or not, the requisitioners appear amateurish in the extreme as I said they could force their own EGM as anyone in a position of power would do and impose a majority vote on the sitting board, their failure to do so speaks volumes as to the weakness of their position both financial and support wise.
-
Absolutely correct. Some so called fans reps care more about profits, ego's and smearing fellow Bears than they do about Rangers.
Apparently it is not the done thing to draw attention to the shortcomings of the fan bodies or those that are at their heads, as can be seen by the attacks on The Host.
-
Spot on. The board aren't confident enough to simply agree to a GM without some guarantees that they'll keep their jobs.
Statements like this and more delays just embarrass our board even further. If they had an ounce of dignity left, they would call the EGM and get this over and done with.
There is nothing to stop the requisitioners convening their own GM and billing the club, so why don't they.
-
I doubt anyone is playing hardball, probably and more simply the requisitioners are short of the support they are alleged to have to force any issue.
-
As title. Think the second 13/09/2013 should be 30/09/2013
Company Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
TIDM RFC Headline Further to requisition of general meeting Released 07:00 10-Sep-2013 Number 5771N07 RNS Number : 5771N
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
10 September 2013
10 September 2013
Rangers International Football Club plc
("Rangers", the "Company" or "Club")
Further to requisition of general meeting
Further to the announcement on 4 September 2013, the Company confirms that whilst the Board's discussions have continued with representatives of the group who requisitioned (together the "Requisitioners") a general meeting to consider the proposed resolutions ("Requisition") detailed in the announcement on 2 August 2013 ("General Meeting"), the Board is disappointed to announce that no agreement has been reached.
Unless an agreement can be reached prior to 13 September 2013, as set out in the announcement on 2 September 2013, the Company will be required to send a notice to shareholders to convene the General Meeting by no later than 13 September 2013.
Further announcements will be made as appropriate.
For further information please contact:
Rangers International Football Club plc
Tel: 0141 580 8647
Craig Mather, CEO
Brian Stockbridge, FD
Strand Hanson Limited (Nominated Adviser)
Tel: 020 7409 3494
Stuart Faulkner / Rory Murphy / Richard Tulloch
Daniel Stewart & Company plc (Broker)
Tel: 020 7776 6550
Paul Shackleton
Newgate Threadneedle (Financial PR)
Tel: 020 7148 6143
Graham Herring / John Coles / Fiona Conroy
Media House International Ltd
Tel: 020 7710 0020
Jack Irvine
-
Once again I advise you to go and read what I posted about Keevins before derailing a thread with this Pish! You have been a member on here less than a month and this is already the third time I have seen you do shit like this....pathetic.
Your words on the keevins thread and you have the brass neck to opine about pish.
"not really worthy of getting upset about on this one lads".
-
You really are an odd fellow aren't you? Thats a few times now i have seen you post on a thread to try and undermine another poster instead of contributing to the thread. Did you read my views on Keevins or are you a bit slow? Maybe best to go read my views on that particular individual once again before needlessly trying to derail a thread with petty personal Pish!
Regardless the big difference here is that the BBC is a publicly funded broadcaster who are supposed to under their own guidelines to remain impartial and factual something spence et al seem incapable of doing thereby going against the guidelines and rulings of the BBC trust which governs BBC Scotland.
So anyway, this waste of space aside, keep up the good work folks....get the complaints in at trust level, it's the only way to get any kind of change/action and don't settle for their "apology".
Your hypocrisy as to keevins comments being best ignored and spence's prosecuted is ludicrous, in case you missed it the gherald printed the bbc reply/explanation to the spence comments complaints, it was many things an apology was not one of them.
Could be worse britney could describe as some sort of secret police, he would probably get away with it just like keevins.
-
Having an opinion is one thing....badgering others to join your opinion is quite another.
If you don't want him or any other ex Rangers director on the board then fine, so be it. I am not arguing with you because of this. This is your opinion to have.
I am on the fence with some. I am not fore, I am not against. I am a person who wants to see who has Rangers best interests at heart with full facts in front of me. I can see for myself who does or does not without being told whose side I should be on. I am sure you will understand this of course
I can see you like to change your mind, if you don't want to voice your opinion fine, if you do I won't take it as badgering.
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=258468&st=80#entry1061369189
-
-
http://www.theranger...e-rangers-jibes
Keep the complaints going on this one folks....much respect to those that are. The only way things will improve is if direction is given from the very top.
You'll be complaining about keevins next and his misrepresentation of the facts, maybe not.
-
It seems like you are spoiling for an argument with someone. Relax and have some breakfast.
People who post on message boards that they would rather keep their opinion to themselves are a strange breed.
-
good for you
And Rangers.
-
I would prefer not to say. Too many posts derailed.
All you need to know is my uncertainty of having past directors etc back at the club. To be perfectly honest, we rarely, if at all, get a say in what happens in the boardroom anyway - even as a minor shareholder.
I have no such uncertainty AJ should have no involvement at Ibrox.
-
Baxter by a country mile, not many if any before or since destroyed the cream of world football on their own must be why it is known as Baxter's Wembley he owned it and them.
-
Maybe not as chairman, but on some sort of advisory capacity where it isn't necessary for him to be in Scotland on a daily basis....although, I don't know if looking back is the answer.
He would be a preferred choice over someone else though.
Who else anyone else at all ?
-
If you don't care either way why would it bother you in the least to even shrug.
-
Thanks, saved me typing similar. Its a ridiculous argument to be fair.
King didn't invest in the club.
-
No I dont mean that link
Its ok to be proven wrong, happens to the best of us
Your not wrong there, AJ's judgement was proven to be wrong in spades..
-
-
Yes the club didnt see any of Whytes plans until the around early March. An then im sure it was around the 18th/19th AJ came out saying there was no proof of Whytes funds.
Firstly to call a successful businessman incompetent is daft. But that isnt why I am defending him on this certain point. I am defending him because whether you like it or not you are wrong on what actually happened
That you are being deliberately obtuse there is no doubt, AJ very publicly praised Whyte 34 days before completion a wrong call if ever there was one.
-
the interview was on the 2nd april. Whyte bought the club on 6 may
Hardly early on in discussions 34 days before completition, however you continue to beat the drum for an incompetent.
-
I roughly read through the article seems very much in the early stages it was taken.
As I said he did tell murray not to do it but nothing he could do. As he said in the same interview he ccouldnt stop a whyte take over even if he wanted to it wasnt down to him
Seems your time scale is seriously out.
-
I see the FF view on the matter is being transported here almost to the letter and not even surreptitiously.
Jim Spence Rangers Jibes - Chris Graham
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
When I need your advice I will whistle all you frustrated want-to-be-mods are the same everywhere, full of your own self importance..