From barrybaldy

[Frankie 505]

1. Why do the Trust back this horse now after saying the same thing about King being the 'only show in town' only a few weeks ago?

2. What are Duffy et al offering to make the rest of us back them?

3. What are the Trust doing to lend weight to them being the fans' body to progress the above?

Still too many questions than answers at this stage. Perhaps all parties could garner more support if they answered a few instead of playing this out in the media like some sort of circus sideshow...

The RST never said that Dave King was 'the only show in town'. This canard seems to have arisen because of a comment which preceded an official statement posted on another m/board - the comment was not part of the statement.

To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence that Dave King was ever interested.

The Trust is working in conjunction with the Assembly and Association.

In an ideal world certain matters would be kept behind closed doors. However, Sir David Murray uses newspapers for his own benefit - as we have just seen at the weekend.

Those who are interested in buying Rangers have surely every right to go public - especially bearing in mind that the AGM is being held next week.

Instead of deflecting about alleged 'canards' based on valid concerns which are entirely relevant given I'm sure the owner of said message-board (a prominent board member of the RST and their delegate on the Assembly) approved (or more probably wrote) said preceding comment, why not answer the questions properly. If a mistake was made there, just say so and we'll all move on to the more important stuff.

Why is the Duffy bid considered 'the only show in town'? Why is he (and/or his colleagues on this consortium) the right person/people to buy Rangers and the right man/men for the Rangers support to invest their money in? Do Duffy's previous and ongoing questionable business activities not concern the Trust given the months of talks you've had with him? If not, why not? Why, despite those months of talks, are you no closer to buying the club or offering a tangible model to the wider support?

I've no problem with using the media to put across one's message. However, I do think the credibility of said message is in question given the Trust's premature comments on King previously juxtaposed with the dubious background of Duffy. Add in the fact there is still nothing concrete to buy into for any interested fan (we can all post our workable schemes on ownership with or without the backing of journalists); then I think my own mild criticism and disappointment is warranted.

Like I say, I'm very interested in what the Trust have to say on the matter but feel they'd be better served keeping their powder dry for when something real is on the table. Anything else just looks unprofessional and somewhat desperate IMHO. That is a shame as it is good to know all the fan groups are still working together. To that end, how do the fan groups intend reaching out to others to 'unite' further?

[Frankie 505]

I've done a bit of research. Doesn't look good.

Without knowing who the other big investors are then I believe we should hang fire.

Right now the only alternative is for the bank continuing to run our finances, even they don't want that.

I'd just like to hear what he has to say for himself, what the various fan groups have to say about it and whether the bank will entertain the idea.

If there are other investors involved then I'm surprised they've decided to use Duffy as their 'front' to test the waters. Much better for them to hold fire to avoid the criticisms/concerns we've read over the weekend until they are in a position to show their hand in a manner where we can actually form an opinion on them and any scheme they have to offer.

Anything else only leaves room for misinterpretation when we could all be concentrating ourselves on backing to help deliver something successful.

[Frankie 505]

That some would use Duffy's perceived interest as a way to have a dig at the RST is a bit disheartening. can we not at least wait until he has gave us his full proposals before setting up camps into various opposing factions.

Not sure who that is aimed at but there is a difference between gratuitous digs and valid questions which can open the debate up to let us all see what is proposed and why we should back it.

I'd contend not asking such questions would be more disheartening than anything else.

[Jimenez 1]

Not sure who that is aimed at but there is a difference between gratuitous digs and valid questions which can open the debate up to let us all see what is proposed and why we should back it.

I'd contend not asking such questions would be more disheartening than anything else.

It wasn't aimed at you, some fellow posters simply will not give anything a chance that has the RST's involvement.

tbf I don't know how many members they have so their influence even if there were any moves for a takeover would be minimal I'd imagine.

The fact that all supporter groups are in tow would suggest to me that it's serious enough to wait for Duffy's final proposals. sadly for me it also suggests that there are no other serious contenders willing to put up their own cash to get us out of this mess.

[opportunityknox 1]

That some would use Duffy's perceived interest as a way to have a dig at the RST is a bit disheartening. can we not at least wait until he has gave us his full proposals before setting up camps into various opposing factions.

Not sure who that is aimed at but there is a difference between gratuitous digs and valid questions which can open the debate up to let us all see what is proposed and why we should back it.

I'd contend not asking such questions would be more disheartening than anything else.

Why is it when people ask valid questions, the Trust and it's supporters deflect from the questions by attacking people as "anti trust"?

We should be told.

[samNewton 0]

1. Why do the Trust back this horse now after saying the same thing about King being the 'only show in town' only a few weeks ago?

2. What are Duffy et al offering to make the rest of us back them?

3. What are the Trust doing to lend weight to them being the fans' body to progress the above?

Still too many questions than answers at this stage. Perhaps all parties could garner more support if they answered a few instead of playing this out in the media like some sort of circus sideshow...

The RST never said that Dave King was 'the only show in town'. This canard seems to have arisen because of a comment which preceded an official statement posted on another m/board - the comment was not part of the statement.

To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence that Dave King was ever interested.

The Trust is working in conjunction with the Assembly and Association.

In an ideal world certain matters would be kept behind closed doors. However, Sir David Murray uses newspapers for his own benefit - as we have just seen at the weekend.

Those who are interested in buying Rangers have surely every right to go public - especially bearing in mind that the AGM is being held next week.

Instead of deflecting about alleged 'canards' based on valid concerns which are entirely relevant given I'm sure the owner of said message-board (a prominent board member of the RST and their delegate on the Assembly) approved (or more probably wrote) said preceding comment, why not answer the questions properly. If a mistake was made there, just say so and we'll all move on to the more important stuff.

Why is the Duffy bid considered 'the only show in town'? Why is he (and/or his colleagues on this consortium) the right person/people to buy Rangers and the right man/men for the Rangers support to invest their money in? Do Duffy's previous and ongoing questionable business activities not concern the Trust given the months of talks you've had with him? If not, why not? Why, despite those months of talks, are you no closer to buying the club or offering a tangible model to the wider support?

I've no problem with using the media to put across one's message. However, I do think the credibility of said message is in question given the Trust's premature comments on King previously juxtaposed with the dubious background of Duffy. Add in the fact there is still nothing concrete to buy into for any interested fan (we can all post our workable schemes on ownership with or without the backing of journalists); then I think my own mild criticism and disappointment is warranted.

Like I say, I'm very interested in what the Trust have to say on the matter but feel they'd be better served keeping their powder dry for when something real is on the table. Anything else just looks unprofessional and somewhat desperate IMHO. That is a shame as it is good to know all the fan groups are still working together. To that end, how do the fan groups intend reaching out to others to 'unite' further?

I corrected the myth about the 'Dave King-RST statement' a couple of weeks back. I said then that it was a mistake on the part of an FF admin. Yet you have clearly ignored this. Are you simply interested in using any means you can to trash the RST?

I believe that as far as the RST is aware, there has been no interest shown in buying the club from any other source. Therefore, the consortium - of which Mr. Duffy is but one part - is 'the only show in town' in that respect. Given that these people appear to be very sympathetic to ownership of Rangers FC by supporters, it can hardly be a surprise to anyone that the RST welcomes their interest.

The RST has been in contact with people in the consortium and their representatives. Despite the NOTW comment, I do not know if prolonged discussions with Mr. Duffy personally have taken place.

These people will not present a 'model' simply because someone on a m/board demands it. Likewise, I don't think they need to take your advice on when to bid and at what price. They are not stupid.

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

[Orangeclement 582]

1. Why do the Trust back this horse now after saying the same thing about King being the 'only show in town' only a few weeks ago?

2. What are Duffy et al offering to make the rest of us back them?

3. What are the Trust doing to lend weight to them being the fans' body to progress the above?

Still too many questions than answers at this stage. Perhaps all parties could garner more support if they answered a few instead of playing this out in the media like some sort of circus sideshow...

The RST never said that Dave King was 'the only show in town'. This canard seems to have arisen because of a comment which preceded an official statement posted on another m/board - the comment was not part of the statement.

To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence that Dave King was ever interested.

The Trust is working in conjunction with the Assembly and Association.

In an ideal world certain matters would be kept behind closed doors. However, Sir David Murray uses newspapers for his own benefit - as we have just seen at the weekend.

Those who are interested in buying Rangers have surely every right to go public - especially bearing in mind that the AGM is being held next week.

Instead of deflecting about alleged 'canards' based on valid concerns which are entirely relevant given I'm sure the owner of said message-board (a prominent board member of the RST and their delegate on the Assembly) approved (or more probably wrote) said preceding comment, why not answer the questions properly. If a mistake was made there, just say so and we'll all move on to the more important stuff.

Why is the Duffy bid considered 'the only show in town'? Why is he (and/or his colleagues on this consortium) the right person/people to buy Rangers and the right man/men for the Rangers support to invest their money in? Do Duffy's previous and ongoing questionable business activities not concern the Trust given the months of talks you've had with him? If not, why not? Why, despite those months of talks, are you no closer to buying the club or offering a tangible model to the wider support?

I've no problem with using the media to put across one's message. However, I do think the credibility of said message is in question given the Trust's premature comments on King previously juxtaposed with the dubious background of Duffy. Add in the fact there is still nothing concrete to buy into for any interested fan (we can all post our workable schemes on ownership with or without the backing of journalists); then I think my own mild criticism and disappointment is warranted.

Like I say, I'm very interested in what the Trust have to say on the matter but feel they'd be better served keeping their powder dry for when something real is on the table. Anything else just looks unprofessional and somewhat desperate IMHO. That is a shame as it is good to know all the fan groups are still working together. To that end, how do the fan groups intend reaching out to others to 'unite' further?

I corrected the myth about the 'Dave King-RST statement' a couple of weeks back. I said then that it was a mistake on the part of an FF admin. Yet you have clearly ignored this. Are you simply interested in using any means you can to trash the RST?

I believe that as far as the RST is aware, there has been no interest shown in buying the club from any other source. Therefore, the consortium - of which Mr. Duffy is but one part - is 'the only show in town' in that respect. Given that these people appear to be very sympathetic to ownership of Rangers FC by supporters, it can hardly be a surprise to anyone that the RST welcomes their interest.

The RST has been in contact with people in the consortium and their representatives. Despite the NOTW comment, I do not know if prolonged discussions with Mr. Duffy personally have taken place.

These people will not present a 'model' simply because someone on a m/board demands it. Likewise, I don't think they need to take your advice on when to bid and at what price. They are not stupid.

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

But he isnt just someone on a message board he is a PAYING FAN like many of us who demand answers we are the ones putting our hard earned into the club to see the owners piss it up against a wall . se get over yourself and answer some questions properly and stop taking them as a personal attack .

[RFE 35]

1. Why do the Trust back this horse now after saying the same thing about King being the 'only show in town' only a few weeks ago?

2. What are Duffy et al offering to make the rest of us back them?

3. What are the Trust doing to lend weight to them being the fans' body to progress the above?

Still too many questions than answers at this stage. Perhaps all parties could garner more support if they answered a few instead of playing this out in the media like some sort of circus sideshow...

The RST never said that Dave King was 'the only show in town'. This canard seems to have arisen because of a comment which preceded an official statement posted on another m/board - the comment was not part of the statement.

To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence that Dave King was ever interested.

The Trust is working in conjunction with the Assembly and Association.

In an ideal world certain matters would be kept behind closed doors. However, Sir David Murray uses newspapers for his own benefit - as we have just seen at the weekend.

Those who are interested in buying Rangers have surely every right to go public - especially bearing in mind that the AGM is being held next week.

Instead of deflecting about alleged 'canards' based on valid concerns which are entirely relevant given I'm sure the owner of said message-board (a prominent board member of the RST and their delegate on the Assembly) approved (or more probably wrote) said preceding comment, why not answer the questions properly. If a mistake was made there, just say so and we'll all move on to the more important stuff.

Why is the Duffy bid considered 'the only show in town'? Why is he (and/or his colleagues on this consortium) the right person/people to buy Rangers and the right man/men for the Rangers support to invest their money in? Do Duffy's previous and ongoing questionable business activities not concern the Trust given the months of talks you've had with him? If not, why not? Why, despite those months of talks, are you no closer to buying the club or offering a tangible model to the wider support?

I've no problem with using the media to put across one's message. However, I do think the credibility of said message is in question given the Trust's premature comments on King previously juxtaposed with the dubious background of Duffy. Add in the fact there is still nothing concrete to buy into for any interested fan (we can all post our workable schemes on ownership with or without the backing of journalists); then I think my own mild criticism and disappointment is warranted.

Like I say, I'm very interested in what the Trust have to say on the matter but feel they'd be better served keeping their powder dry for when something real is on the table. Anything else just looks unprofessional and somewhat desperate IMHO. That is a shame as it is good to know all the fan groups are still working together. To that end, how do the fan groups intend reaching out to others to 'unite' further?

I corrected the myth about the 'Dave King-RST statement' a couple of weeks back. I said then that it was a mistake on the part of an FF admin. Yet you have clearly ignored this. Are you simply interested in using any means you can to trash the RST?

I believe that as far as the RST is aware, there has been no interest shown in buying the club from any other source. Therefore, the consortium - of which Mr. Duffy is but one part - is 'the only show in town' in that respect. Given that these people appear to be very sympathetic to ownership of Rangers FC by supporters, it can hardly be a surprise to anyone that the RST welcomes their interest.

The RST has been in contact with people in the consortium and their representatives. Despite the NOTW comment, I do not know if prolonged discussions with Mr. Duffy personally have taken place.

These people will not present a 'model' simply because someone on a m/board demands it. Likewise, I don't think they need to take your advice on when to bid and at what price. They are not stupid.

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

Why are people from the Trust intent in turning this into an anti-Trust debate? If you read the many threads on regarding Mr Duffy then you will see people are concerned if he is the right person to be involved with the consortium or even leading it?

Given the RST have publicly backed this guy whilst the rest of us have serious reservations, it's only right to ask questions regarding the trust knowledge of Mr Duffy's background. If the RST indeed know what we know, what reassured them that this was the correct bid?

Do I want fans ownership, yes it would great in an ideal world.

Would I sell my soul to achieve this? No chance.

Do I want to entrust my cash with Mr Duffy? At this present time, no chance.

Do I want Mr Duffy involved at Rangers? At this present time, again no chance.

What makes you say yes to my last 2 questions?

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

What are people jealous of....

[caseyjones 3,009]

Could Barry Baldy be Darryl the journalist who breaks all these stories in the Rhebel? Just a thought for everyone to ponder....Never been much good at anagrams myself.

Whether it is him or not, I don't know, but he is the source of the information posted by Barrybaldy.

[Bluedell 14]

These people will not present a 'model' simply because someone on a m/board demands it. Likewise, I don't think they need to take your advice on when to bid and at what price. They are not stupid.

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

So these people don't care about the fans' views and aren't interested in our thoughts?

Hardly the sort of people I'd want at Rangers then.

I presume that they are treating the RST's views with similar disdain, or are you suggesting that only the RST are clever enough to deal with them as the rest of us are too "stupid"?

I'm not sure that the RST should be treating its members who use RM with such disrespect.

[pcbear 10,924]

Who is barrybaldy? to have access to classified info?

[bombaybadboy08 15,660]

Who is barrybaldy? to have access to classified info?

Close links to a *journalist/is a journalist

*delete as applicable

[bombaybadboy08 15,660]

Who is barrybaldy? to have access to classified info?

Close links to a *journalist/is a journalist

*delete as applicable

Certain Rangers website owners are very friendly with journalists, who in turn feed each other info and news. All very comfortable for those involved. So for instance...hypothetical scenario, but you'll get what I'm on about.

RST meet shady so called businessman and discuss taking over Rangers, with a seat on the board for the ordinary supporter. RST tip off, one of their friends in the media, who then reports the story in his Rangers hating rag.

Couple of favours here and a backhander there and the job's done.

Of course I'm only playing at make belief and the above would never take place. But journalists and website owners do keep in touch you know

Hmmm i smell what your cooking Willhelm,makes perfect sense

[Carsons Army 4,146]

Why do all the posts from people involved with the trust seem so defensive, patronising and condescending, These people are supposed to represent the Rangers fans, not treat them with total disdain and fudge them off with disrespectful replies

[caseyjones 3,009]

Why do all the posts from people involved with the trust seem so defensive, patronising and condescending, These people are supposed to represent the Rangers fans, not treat them with total disdain and fudge them off with disrespectful replies

No. The RST represent members of the RST.

[DinViesel 399]

Why do all the posts from people involved with the trust seem so defensive, patronising and condescending, These people are supposed to represent the Rangers fans, not treat them with total disdain and fudge them off with disrespectful replies

No. The RST represent members of the RST.

1: What does a Supporters Trust do?

The basic definition of a Trust is a democratic, not-for-profit organisation of supporters, committed to strengthening the voice for supporters in the decision making process at a club, and strengthening the links between the club and the community it serves.

That is from the RST's own website. "Strengthening the voice for supporters." So are we only supporters in your eyes if we buy in?

[Carsons Army 4,146]

Why do all the posts from people involved with the trust seem so defensive, patronising and condescending, These people are supposed to represent the Rangers fans, not treat them with total disdain and fudge them off with disrespectful replies

No. The RST represent members of the RST.

All the members or just the one

[caseyjones 3,009]

I'm not a member. That is just what I have been told every time I have been critical of the way they have done business. I stand by what I said in my original post, no matter what it states on their website.

[nvager 498]

Lets not get into a pro or against RST thread. lets just stick to takeovers and other nonevents.

[Frankie 505]

I corrected the myth about the 'Dave King-RST statement' a couple of weeks back. I said then that it was a mistake on the part of an FF admin. Yet you have clearly ignored this. Are you simply interested in using any means you can to trash the RST?

I believe that as far as the RST is aware, there has been no interest shown in buying the club from any other source. Therefore, the consortium - of which Mr. Duffy is but one part - is 'the only show in town' in that respect. Given that these people appear to be very sympathetic to ownership of Rangers FC by supporters, it can hardly be a surprise to anyone that the RST welcomes their interest.

The RST has been in contact with people in the consortium and their representatives. Despite the NOTW comment, I do not know if prolonged discussions with Mr. Duffy personally have taken place.

These people will not present a 'model' simply because someone on a m/board demands it. Likewise, I don't think they need to take your advice on when to bid and at what price. They are not stupid.

There is a serious case of the green-eyed monster on this forum.

:D

So a few reasonable questions and valid concerns about the future of our club for you to answer and you resort to petty insults such as stupid and jealous? As well as downright bizarre suggestions I'm trying to 'trash the Trust'?

1. Glad to see you admit to a mistake by FF regarding the Trust's alleged clear support for the non-event that was the King bid. I'm sure the same schoolboy error where upon an 'FF admin' is permitted to add their own spin/words to accompany official Trust/Assembly/Association statements won't happen again. It's no myth - the page and the preamble is still active.

2. I'm not interested in 'trashing the Trust' as you bizarrely put it. As a former board member still interested in the organisation, and still of the belief the model works best for supporters; I only want to catalyse debate to ensure transparency, honesty and quality for Rangers fans also interested in supporters Trusts. If I wanted to 'trash' the organisation; I certainly still wouldn't be spending time on here, and three other forums defending it and their media reps from the less constructive posts. If I wanted to 'trash' the organisation I wouldn't have spent 6 months putting together an interesting project to complement previous Trust work, then contact the organisation looking for their help (to be ignored). I'm afraid the only people 'trashing' the Trust are those who refuse to answer simple questions then resort to petty and unfounded insults about supporters they supposedly want to reach regarding future projects. I respectfully suggest you rethink your strategy there as I can't see you winning many people with your attitude.

3. I'm delighted the Trust are interested in working with those who want to buy the club and want to involve the wider support in that. It would be remiss of them not to get involved. I'm only urging caution and I don't think that is unreasonable given Duffy's background. As someone interested in investing, am I not entitled to ask questions?

4. Ah, so the NotW are now misquoting the Trust as well now? David Edgar made it quite clear that they've been talking for a few months. I'm sure he and his colleagues on the Trust board would have used that time to establish Duffy's credentials, what his plans for the club were and how best to present that to the support. I appreciate that can take a few months so am merely suggesting that without anything concrete, going public was perhaps the wrong move at the moment. I may be wrong but again, I think I'm entitled to an opinion without petty insults back.

5. I don't see anyone 'demanding' anything. There have been a few valid questions and associated concerns from what I'd describe as a moderate fan interested in the Trust and interested in any fan ownership model. It is perfectly natural for that interest to manifest itself in curiosity, excitement and questions. I admit I'm curious. I admit I'm excited. I admit I have some questions which I think could be best answered by the in-depth examination of what potential owners have to offer by way of on and off line debate. I'm certainly no expert but I do have interested contacts who'd may be able to provide expert feedback to the Trust and Mr Duffy if they so choose to canvass for it. That wouldn't make them stupid - just sensible while showing the kind of transparency, leadership and unity we all want to see. After all the Trust did say they wanted to unite fans so surely inviting them to the table is doing that?

6. And to your final playground insult - I am jealous. People who ask relevant questions of your organisation are jealous. Wow! Is this the unity and leadership the Trust promised at GersPride? If so, then that is very sad and disappointing indeed.

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,030]

I can honestly say that my objection to this is not the rst, if anyone proposed this I would still say it was a terrible idea....

Have you a crystal ball that sees the full report into his proposals ?

The model for supporters ownership is there for all to see and it’s not one I think would work in this country and especially at this time. The devil may be in the detail but I would wager I would see nothing to change my mind.

exactly, fan ownership is great when its a club that has access to shed loads of cash in tv revenue, sponsorship etc etc

scotland has no cash in it whatsoever, it would be up to the fans every year to give the club the money to spend on players etc and thats too much too ask

hence why we need someone who has finances PLUS knows a few other people that have spare cash going around