SDM here for at least two more years!

[Zulu 981]

OK Its the silly season and I have decided to TRY TO join the ranks of those who can read between the lines.

My workings:

1. No deals in the offing!

2. Walter gets a new deal!

3. WS is tight with SDM - SDM sanctioned the deal and gave assurances about budget and asked WS who should replace him (remember they both trust each other).

4. WS says give Ally and Kenny a chance. "OK, I will sanction that", says SDM.

5. SDM has used a 'proxy' chairman before to sort out tough financial issues and then step back in.

6. History repeats itself

Conclusion: No deals in the offing, cost cutting done and bank in line - que SDM saying I may as well stay (He also has no choice) - I'll give WS the job as I trust him and give Ally and Kenny a chance next year. SDM here for at least 2 more years.

Can I join the Psychic Loyal: Reading between the lines branch?

That isnt bad altho my source anold jake found notes discarded in a bin, whilst looking for dinner states that there is a deal in place and all should be done in 48 hours

Fucking great another 48 hrs thats made my day.

[Bluedell 14]

LOL SDM owns 90+% of the club - I would say he has a great relationship withthe board as they could NOT get close to it without his approval.

That'll be the same board that refused to allow some of his preferred appointments onto it?

It really did NOT take much working out that the ellis deal was a no go - people like WS and AJ would NOT have comeout publically and badmouthed them if they had been close to a deal. Also if you track MIM you would have seen lots of positive news coming out from them. Whether some believe it or not SDM cares a lot about the instatution of Rangers and if its in his power he will do nothing that he does NOT think is in their best interests - yes he made mistakes, who hasn't but no decision was made to deliberately harm, they wrere all for positive reasons and so it is again.

Not sure what any of that has to do with the point in question.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

LOL SDM owns 90+% of the club - I would say he has a great relationship withthe board as they could NOT get close to it without his approval.

That'll be the same board that refused to allow some of his preferred appointments onto it?

It really did NOT take much working out that the ellis deal was a no go - people like WS and AJ would NOT have comeout publically and badmouthed them if they had been close to a deal. Also if you track MIM you would have seen lots of positive news coming out from them. Whether some believe it or not SDM cares a lot about the instatution of Rangers and if its in his power he will do nothing that he does NOT think is in their best interests - yes he made mistakes, who hasn't but no decision was made to deliberately harm, they wrere all for positive reasons and so it is again.

Not sure what any of that has to do with the point in question.

Point 1: I always had assumed you knew a fair bit about business and knew as well as I did that the board can not block shareholders appointment of directors. Your statement is bollocks. The board may advise and there may be some constitutional rules about board members numbers appointment etc. BUT I have never heard of a board being able to refuse MAJORITY shareholder appointments - do you really believe that there is anyone on that board (including Muir) whom Murrray does not approve of and do you really believe if he wanted someone on the board he does not have the legal power to do so?

Point 2: I did not realise all posts had to have relevance - why the dig ? It was just a general comment.

[BILLYSNOVO 5]

LOL SDM owns 90+% of the club - I would say he has a great relationship withthe board as they could NOT get close to it without his approval.

That'll be the same board that refused to allow some of his preferred appointments onto it?

It really did NOT take much working out that the ellis deal was a no go - people like WS and AJ would NOT have comeout publically and badmouthed them if they had been close to a deal. Also if you track MIM you would have seen lots of positive news coming out from them. Whether some believe it or not SDM cares a lot about the instatution of Rangers and if its in his power he will do nothing that he does NOT think is in their best interests - yes he made mistakes, who hasn't but no decision was made to deliberately harm, they wrere all for positive reasons and so it is again.

Not sure what any of that has to do with the point in question.

Point 1: I always had assumed you knew a fair bit about business and knew as well as I did that the board can not block shareholders appointment of directors. Your statement is bollocks. The board may advise and there may be some constitutional rules about board members numbers appointment etc. BUT I have never heard of a board being able to refuse MAJORITY shareholder appointments - do you really believe that there is anyone on that board (including Muir) whom Murrray does not approve of and do you really believe if he wanted someone on the board he does not have the legal power to do so?

Point 2: I did not realise all posts had to have relevance - why the dig ? It was just a general comment.

i agree with you there.

I reckon SDM had other pressing things (MIH) to concentrate on when he stepped down as chairman of our club.

HE appointed AJ HE appointed muir,ad no matter what conclusion the board come to on future buyers or any future 'important' decisions to be made regarding the club,that CONCLUSION will merely be an OPINION to which SDM may or may not consider.

Bottom line is SDM will have the final say no matter what.

[damien1 29]

Sir David Murray has set out his most ambitious plan yet - investing nearly £1bn to develop land to the west of Edinburgh, on what is now greenbelt land.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10397389.stm

Yet he lets us stew for a measly £24million.

[minstral 5,375]

Sir David Murray has set out his most ambitious plan yet - investing nearly £1bn to develop land to the west of Edinburgh, on what is now greenbelt land.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10397389.stm

Yet he lets us stew for a measly £24million.

This tells you all you want to know about him, never a Rangers man in his life.

[damien1 29]

Sir David Murray has set out his most ambitious plan yet - investing nearly £1bn to develop land to the west of Edinburgh, on what is now greenbelt land.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10397389.stm

Yet he lets us stew for a measly £24million.

This tells you all you want to know about him, never a Rangers man in his life.

Our club comes within days or weeks of administration and this chunt as per thinks about himself, vineyards and anything but us.

There will undoubtedly be some who will come on here and say administration was never gonna happen, well if that was such a case why did the charlatan allow newspapers to run with it so long. Why doesn't the charlatan settle our debts and give the club a good footing for the future?

We mean nothing to him and in return he means nothing to him other than he's the person who has made a once great club into just another Scottish club.

[MartinGers93 388]

Face the facts Andrew Ellis was a dodgy bastard and David Murray knew it.

[Bluedell 14]

LOL SDM owns 90+% of the club - I would say he has a great relationship withthe board as they could NOT get close to it without his approval.

That'll be the same board that refused to allow some of his preferred appointments onto it?

It really did NOT take much working out that the ellis deal was a no go - people like WS and AJ would NOT have comeout publically and badmouthed them if they had been close to a deal. Also if you track MIM you would have seen lots of positive news coming out from them. Whether some believe it or not SDM cares a lot about the instatution of Rangers and if its in his power he will do nothing that he does NOT think is in their best interests - yes he made mistakes, who hasn't but no decision was made to deliberately harm, they wrere all for positive reasons and so it is again.

Not sure what any of that has to do with the point in question.

Point 1: I always had assumed you knew a fair bit about business and knew as well as I did that the board can not block shareholders appointment of directors. Your statement is bollocks. The board may advise and there may be some constitutional rules about board members numbers appointment etc. BUT I have never heard of a board being able to refuse MAJORITY shareholder appointments - do you really believe that there is anyone on that board (including Muir) whom Murrray does not approve of and do you really believe if he wanted someone on the board he does not have the legal power to do so?

Point 2: I did not realise all posts had to have relevance - why the dig ? It was just a general comment.

Point 1 - I was taking the comments by our Chairman at face value. It was him that stated that SDM had wanted 4 directors but the current board refused it and only allowed 2. There are steps that SDM could take to get his directors appointed, which would be embarrassing for him and obviously he didn't do so, but it points towards him not having a great relationship with the directors.

So if my point is bollocks you are accusing AJ of being a liar.

Point 2 - I had thought it was meant as a relevant point, but if it's not then fair enough. No dig intended.

[Guest therabbitt]

Sir David Murray has set out his most ambitious plan yet - investing nearly £1bn to develop land to the west of Edinburgh, on what is now greenbelt land.

http://news.bbc.co.u...nd/10397389.stm

Yet he lets us stew for a measly £24million.

This tells you all you want to know about him, never a Rangers man in his life.

Our club comes within days or weeks of administration and this chunt as per thinks about himself, vineyards and anything but us.

There will undoubtedly be some who will come on here and say administration was never gonna happen, well if that was such a case why did the charlatan allow newspapers to run with it so long. Why doesn't the charlatan settle our debts and give the club a good footing for the future?

We mean nothing to him and in return he means nothing to him other than he's the person who has made a once great club into just another Scottish club.

We were never days or even weeks from administration.

[minstral 5,375]

Sir David Murray has set out his most ambitious plan yet - investing nearly £1bn to develop land to the west of Edinburgh, on what is now greenbelt land.

http://news.bbc.co.u...nd/10397389.stm

Yet he lets us stew for a measly £24million.

This tells you all you want to know about him, never a Rangers man in his life.

Our club comes within days or weeks of administration and this chunt as per thinks about himself, vineyards and anything but us.

There will undoubtedly be some who will come on here and say administration was never gonna happen, well if that was such a case why did the charlatan allow newspapers to run with it so long. Why doesn't the charlatan settle our debts and give the club a good footing for the future?

We mean nothing to him and in return he means nothing to him other than he's the person who has made a once great club into just another Scottish club.

We were never days or even weeks from administration.

Hi Rab i never thought that we were, but still detest the man, he started off well but also pulled the heart out of the club. My gripe is he divided our support and would not stand up for our club or fans unless it was a personal attack on himself.