A Good Day to Bury Bad News (CRO article by Chris Graham)

[Posso Bear 14]

So, you will just ignore every question and point put to you that you don't like? Super.

I'm not ignoring every point but the fact of the matter is PM is not the money man behind all this but is constantly used as an excuse not to listen to these guys fears.

[the goal machine 7,811]

I'm no Paul Murray supporter but there is valid questions raised in that article.

[Count De Monet 9]

do you pay ni and paye

All my life. Not sure where this is heading.

[Zappa 358]

For a time we all backed Green

I never backed him right from square one and there's others who didn't either.

Pedantic Loyal

[Blue Atheist 178]

I read about half of it but as Chris say's himself, best to leave the accounts to someone more qualified than him.

Someone like Prior for example who said the accounts were okay. (And he's a pal of Malcolm Murray so his praise of Mather and assessment of the finances were genuine in my opinion.)

[Posso Bear 14]

Who are the big hitters that are waiting to come in.

King, Park and McColl for starters and whoever else they may have lined up but at the end of the day they ain't gonna tell the likes of me and you who these are until there is a chance that they may get a major shareholding.

You trying to tell me that they just simply haven't thought this through in regards to what we do going forward?

[Wafflesniffer 399]

I have no idea whether Murray has a viable plan or whether he'd succeed but it sure as hell looks like the current mob are making a cuddie's erse of it.

Does it? As far as I see and have read the accounts were acceptable if not brilliant; at the same time I'm sceptical any board would have delivered better results to be honest (again my opinion).

If the current board are doing so badly who should replace them? What is the alternative?

Its one thing saying 'the present incumbents are making an arse of it' but what's the solution? Paul Murray et al haven't offered much so far.

[minstral 5,375]

King, Park and McColl for starters and whoever else they may have lined up but at the end of the day they ain't gonna tell the likes of me and you who these are until there is a chance that they may get a major shareholding.

You trying to tell me that they just simply haven't thought this through in regards to what we do going forward?

Did McColl not say that he will not invest any money.

[woodvale1690 43]

I'm no Paul Murray supporter but there is valid questions raised in that article.

who has the money, mini is skint, so indy has it?

[woodvale1690 43]

King, Park and McColl for starters and whoever else they may have lined up but at the end of the day they ain't gonna tell the likes of me and you who these are until there is a chance that they may get a major shareholding.

You trying to tell me that they just simply haven't thought this through in regards to what we do going forward?

is park supplying the new buses, are they secure and are they free too our club , like bruce's deal

[HerKeegan 13]

Not only did they pick the day that Celtic played Barcelona to ensure that scrutiny of their various releases to the London Stock Exchange (LSE) would be minimised, but they also clearly knew the accounts would be the main topic of conversation.

The bit in bold is factually incorrect. The LSE would not care 1 jot about Celtics game; they are money people who crunch numbers for a living and if they were as bad as some hoped (still saying) then it would have showed up in the share price crashing. The share price has not crashed.

The bit in bold is actually correct.

It is NOT the job of the LSE to scutinise or judge Reports & Accounts. They merely publish them. It is the role of the financial press and to a greater extent - because we are a football club - the mainstream media. It was no coincidence that the results were published on the day that Barcelona are playing in Scotland.

In regards to your point on the share price: the price held firm because the stock market acts more like a barometer than a thermometer. The results were in line with predictions - poor.

The mismanagement of funds over the last year has seen the share price half from 98p to 49p (mid-market). Our market capitalisation has halved from £62 million to £31 million in 6 months and this hinders our ability to raise additional funding.

[Zappa 358]

No - but I expect Paul Murray to at the very least let us know what his plans are when he asks us to trust him.

That's why it's pointless and deliberately facetious for people to keep asking what Paul Murray's plans are when they know fine well that we don't know.

It's also a bridge too far to just assume that everyone who wants our Club's board of directors swept out and replaced by more qualified and trustworthy people are also supporters of Paul Murray. Some are, but plenty aren't and don't think he's necessarily the right man to be appointed to our board.

I don't know why people keep adding 2+2 and getting 5.

Don't trust board + want board removed does not necessarily = likes or wants Paul Murray. Ok, it does for some people, but not everyone.

[Zappa 358]

I read about half of it but as Chris say's himself, best to leave the accounts to someone more qualified than him.

Someone like Prior for example who said the accounts were okay. (And he's a pal of Malcolm Murray so his praise of Mather and assessment of the finances were genuine in my opinion.)

TBH, huge IQ or not, I think Prior might actually be a sandwich short of picnic or maybe even not acting/speaking in our Club's best interests. God knows, but there something about him that doesn't sit right with me at all.

[woodvale1690 43]

That's why it's pointless and deliberately facetious for people to keep asking what Paul Murray's plans are when they know fine well that we don't know.

It's also a bridge too far to just assume that everyone who wants our Club's board of directors swept out and replaced by more qualified and trustworthy people are also supporters of Paul Murray. Some are, but plenty aren't and don't think he's necessarily the right man to be appointed to our board.

I don't know why people keep adding 2+2 and getting 5.

Don't trust board + want board removed does not necessarily = likes or wants Paul Murray. Ok, it does for some people, but not everyone.

so why post this thread ya cock, oh and tell black man redemtion lick ma fuckin beads o'sweat maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

[AlBear. 8,499]

That's why it's pointless and deliberately facetious for people to keep asking what Paul Murray's plans are when they know fine well that we don't know.

It's also a bridge too far to just assume that everyone who wants our Club's board of directors swept out and replaced by more qualified and trustworthy people are also supporters of Paul Murray. Some are, but plenty aren't and don't think he's necessarily the right man to be appointed to our board.

I don't know why people keep adding 2+2 and getting 5.

Don't trust board + want board removed does not necessarily = likes or wants Paul Murray. Ok, it does for some people, but not everyone.

Perhaps peoples issue is the attitude 'Anyone but the current incumbents will do...'

That's not really a viable plan of action for us right now.

Unless those in charge are making glaringly obvious errors, that despite some peoples attempts at spin in their favour, then the last thing we need is more wholesale changes.

It's a game of musical chairs on an industrial scale.

[Wafflesniffer 399]

That's why it's pointless and deliberately facetious for people to keep asking what Paul Murray's plans are when they know fine well that we don't know.

It's also a bridge too far to just assume that everyone who wants our Club's board of directors swept out and replaced by more qualified and trustworthy people are also supporters of Paul Murray. Some are, but plenty aren't and don't think he's necessarily the right man to be appointed to our board.

I don't know why people keep adding 2+2 and getting 5.

Don't trust board + want board removed does not necessarily = likes or wants Paul Murray. Ok, it does for some people, but not everyone.

That's fair enough - but when the majority of people advocating Paul Murray's 'moves' fail to justify or explain his actions & simply cannot explain why he's so supported its understandable why people get fed up of the constant clamour.

For what its worth I'd still preferably have Stockbridge removed so I'm not for a minute suggesting that the fact I (and others) are anti - Murray suggests I'm pro - current board but it does highlight that nobody has offered a viable alternative.

Until there is such alternative all that is left is to be vigilant. Which does not automatically mean divisive, which many are being.

[Johnnyren 601]

Its amazing how not having a massive chip on my shoulder over anything ff, can make you see things clearer,

[Getstiffed 8,863]

I'm with Chris on this and I'm not alone.Lots of unanswered questions yet not that long ago that was the theme on here towards Chris.Hopefully this forum does not represent the true feelings among our support and from talking to many fellow bears I don't believe it does.

Maybe if Chris and his ilk refrained from using the same carpet bagging tactics that were used by the media against us he'd get an easier ride.

"Im no expert" "the accounts look woeful"

"Im no tax expert" "Rangers have fiddled the taxman".

No difference at all.

[Zappa 358]

so why post this thread ya cock, oh and tell black man redemtion lick ma fuckin beads o'sweat maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

You either need a taxi, a nurse or a ticket to the Ajax game at the tattiedome.

[Blue Atheist 178]

TBH, huge IQ or not, I think Prior might actually be a sandwich short of picnic or maybe even not acting/speaking in our Club's best interests. God knows, but there something about him that doesn't sit right with me at all.

Seems genuine enough. The only thing thats been highlighted by others is his links to Catholicism but I don't really think that matters. (what does matter is that someone can be religious and still have an IQ of 234 but I digress)....

I'm judging the board on their second season. If they make similar loses it will be unacceptable.

[Zappa 358]

Perhaps peoples issue is the attitude 'Anyone but the current incumbents will do...'

That's not really a viable plan of action for us right now.

Unless those in charge are making glaringly obvious errors, that despite some peoples attempts at spin in their favour, then the last thing we need is more wholesale changes.

It's a game of musical chairs on an industrial scale.

There's probably quite a lot of people on RM here that would agree with you on those points, but for me, I'll be delighted with almost anyone other than the current incumbents so long as they're linked in no way with the present regime (or Green & co), they're better qualified for the positions and I feel that they're also more trustworthy. Not necessarily in that order mind you!

[Zappa 358]

Seems genuine enough. The only thing thats been highlighted by others is his links to Catholicism but I don't really think that matters. (what does matter is that someone can be religious and still have an IQ of 234 but I digress)....

I'm judging the board on their second season. If they make similar loses it will be unacceptable.

I'm not overly concerned about his religious beliefs, although I can't say it doesn't bother me at all. Whyte + Green + administration + liquidation + dodgy del boys/spivs has made me decidedly skeptical going on paranoid.

The main thing that seems out of place about him though, is that for some bizarre reason he seems to think buying millions of shares in an unstable company with a share value which could tank at any time is some sort of attractive investment opportunity. Maybe he just likes a risky punt?

[Zappa 358]

For what its worth I'd still preferably have Stockbridge removed so I'm not for a minute suggesting that the fact I (and others) are anti - Murray suggests I'm pro - current board but it does highlight that nobody has offered a viable alternative.

Until there is such alternative all that is left is to be vigilant. Which does not automatically mean divisive, which many are being.

I'm confident that we'll see and hear about viable alternatives before the AGM, but whether anyone is successful at the AGM and gets the current board replaced by a more suitable one is another matter. The current regime do indeed seem intent on blocking any moves to have them removed.

[nvager 498]

PM has stated that he would walk away if people were not interested in him being part of the board.

Fans are trying to force a vote which is being blocked for no apparent reason other own personal interests.

So if shareholders are sketchy about PM being on the board they have that right (if they get a vote) not to to vote him on it and find other individuals I.e Dave King,Frank Blin, Douglas Park and the likes who I believe have our best interests at heart and more importantly do not need the money but just for the love of our club.

Dave King- A SA judge said in court he was a liar. He has had to repay millions to the SA Tax Authorities and apologize for his actions. He did invest 20m in Rangers before but SDM lost/wasted that money. He was a director when we ran up huge debts and under Whyte. Recently said we would be bankrupt by the end of the year. Would the SFA accept him as a director after the SA mess?

Frank Blin wants no involvement with Rangers.

Douglas Park has failed to put up sufficient cash to have any bid accepted. Deep pockets but short arms it seems.

So why would we want these men on the Board?

[Wafflesniffer 399]

I'm confident that we'll see and hear about viable alternatives before the AGM, but whether anyone is successful at the AGM and gets the current board replaced by a more suitable one is another matter. The current regime do indeed seem intent on blocking any moves to have them removed.

I'd think if any viable alternative were forthcoming it would already be apparent by now. Who knows what will transpire in the coming weeks. Never a dull moment!

Unfortunately I'm sceptical if the AGM will put an end to it all; depressing thought for all Bears regardless of associations, factions and agendas.