glasgowrangersno1

It's completely different, and you know it. Imagine using a legend of our club to try and deflect from a self proclaimed money grabbing Yorkshireman - shame on you and others just like you.

Why defend the indefensible? I don't get it.

Charles Green Salary £333,077 Severance £217,850 Bonus £360,000 For a shambles of a buisness? Good going.

Did Green not take 900k in a 'pay off'?

Absolutely spot on. We are in this mess because we put trust in literally anyone. We need to question this sort of thing otherwise we could end up in shit street again.

Not good news at all. Fair play on the interest free part but why have we accepted Laxey's deal? Would no one have offered better?

Temps was looking for that IMO.

Couldn't agree more.

I was talking about the CURRENT board, as in since the AGM. If you are talking since Green's consortium took over, for sure there are some positives from their time. There are more negatives than positives though.

Are we happy enough that the current crop (minus some deadwood) can guarantee us The Championship title next season? For me, yes. Given our current predicament, unless a great deal is presented to us, we should focus on scouting for the following summer (and possible pre contracts in Jan 2015).

I sincerely hope so. The problem being, nothing has been that simple in the past 2 years.

Go ahead and tell me what you praise the current board for.

This is the kind of thing we need to club to confirm though.

Where is credit due at the moment? The survey is a good idea, provided they follow through on the results. They have attempted to engage with the fans, that's important. Until I see more action it's hard to praise much more.

A lot of this is correct IMO. I agree with giving Wallace a chance but when we take a loan that is going to be converted into shares, we need to know what's going on. Why are these the only shareholders being offered this deal? It could be completely the correct decision but too many shenanigans have gone before this to just accept it.

I've not been banned and there's plenty I've disagreed with. Part of the reason I started the thread.

Where do you get that from? Anti previous board - yes Pro 'rebels' - not as such but better than option than Stockbridge and co IMO Current board - willing to give a chance Move on mate, I don't care about petty rebel jibes.

You've just proved my point. The difference between the groups doesn't matter. The statement and what they are asking of the board is perfectly valid, which is the point I was making. Read the statement, not who's made it. Any right minded Rangers fan who read that statement without seeing who it was from would be delighted.

They have to let their members know don't they? You can have a go at the RST about certain things but keeping the fans informed of this isn't one of them.

Another example of looking at who's saying it rather than what's being said. If this was VB's statement it would be praise to the high heavens on here. Glad someone is asking about this - we deserve to know the background to this.

It's not really about agreeing with my opinion. It's about people making a judgement based on how a certain group is perceived. A lot of people on here were backing up Stockbridge but I bet they couldn't give shit now. People are so loyal to Rangers that they can't accept there could be chancers at our club. And people are so against the consortium who took over nearly 2 years ago that anyone who they bring in(even if the whole board has changed since then) they treat them as though they are the same people.

You've no idea who this investor is. I'm not saying I believe it but I wouldn't come on and slate one of our own fans for saying it. What I do believe is other shareholders would be pissed off with this.

I never mentioned being picked on. I judge each situation as I see it but a thread on FF about the current board and a thread on here about SoS made me start this one. People just jump on the bandwagon depending on what board you post on, and for me, that's pathetic. Maybe they haven't at the moment, doesn't mean if the times comes they shouldn't be critized, that's all I'm saying.

It amazes me that when something is posted up, it doesn't really matter what's being said, it's automatically good/bad and truth/lies based on who said it. Can people not based their opinion on the situation? It gets ridiculous that as fans we cannot have our own opinions, it's like school, saying things to because you think it's cool infront of your pals :roll: Time is required to complete this 120 day review but it doesn't mean we can't critize the board during it, if it's merited.

Anyone got anything constructive to say or is it just put down as lies because of who said it? I would certainly expect investors to be annoyed with this deal - anyone who thinks they won't be needs their head examined.