mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 I don't see why that's a bad thing re me thinking that because I don't want them near the clubI'm delighted they can't fill the paperwork out correctly if it means it invalidates their claimI dont think it has been confirmed that the documents were filed incorrectly.Murray says they were, board says they were not.If the board are refusing to allow people to stand, even if their paperwork was correct, then its terrible. IF Murray has filed incorrect paperwork, its shocking.The judge will rule on who is right here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky True Legend 2,682 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 BigAl II. As I said on another thread, it was incorrect/sloppy paperwork which contributed to our present position. Why should the board take any further risks. We must be seen to be above suspicion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 Lets just assume the judge decides against the requistioners. Where do you expect the board to draw the line? I understand your point of view but you cant just let Murray and Co have a reckless approach. If the board wins Murray is going to look like a mug.On the other hand, if Murray wins, the board will look like they are running scared and using dodgy tactics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I actually forgot about this, shows how disillusioned I am Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I dont think it has been confirmed that the documents were filed incorrectly.Murray says they were, board says they were not.If the board are refusing to allow people to stand, even if their paperwork was correct, then its terrible. IF Murray has filed incorrect paperwork, its shocking.The judge will rule on who is right here.Yeah I'm talking on the assumption the paperwork has been filed incorrectly If the judge rules the paperworks fine and correct then it's game on Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 358 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 On the other hand, if Murray wins, the board will look like they are running scared and using dodgy tactics.The board don't look good here no matter what the outcome is because either way they've clearly been trying to block the requisitioners having their names put forward for a democratic vote by shareholders. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 The board don't look good here no matter what the outcome is because either way they've clearly been trying to block the requisitioners having their names put forward for a democratic vote by shareholders.BollocksWhy should they accept direct opposition to them if the paperwork isn't done and it renders their opposition invalid Do you think the rebels would do different if the roles were reversed? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Bob 1,360 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 On the other hand, if Murray wins, the board will look like they are running scared and using dodgy tactics. Yes this is also true. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 The board don't look good here no matter what the outcome is because either way they've clearly been trying to block the requisitioners having their names put forward for a democratic vote by shareholders.Dont agree. Im open on this one until the judge rules.If the paperwork is not filed correctly, then the board were right not to include them. You should not have folk standing who are not correctly nominated.If Murray fails today, then I lose any sympathy I might have had. If he wins, then he still has a chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al 55 9,275 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I don't see why that's a bad thing re me thinking that because I don't want them near the clubI'm delighted they can't fill the paperwork out correctly if it means it invalidates their claimInvalidates whose claim? And what claim?All that is being asked is that the shareholders get to vote. You know a democratic choice. Personally I hope they win and then no one votes for them. IMO if King is indeed the new chairman then his endorsement of the incumbents is good enough for me for now.It is the right of the shareholders backing minico I agree with here, not minico. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Bob 1,360 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I have also been wondering if this whole thing was based on getting King on board before an AGM. We have been looking for a chairman for awhile.Did the board block the requisition to give them more time to announce the possible imminent arrival of King? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 I have also been wondering if this whole thing was based on getting King on board before an AGM. We have been looking for a chairman for awhile.Did the board block the requisition to give them more time to announce the possible imminent arrival of King?No. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 358 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Dont agree. Im open on this one until the judge rules.If the paperwork is not filed correctly, then the board were right not to include them. You should not have folk standing who are not correctly nominated.If Murray fails today, then I lose any sympathy I might have had. If he wins, then he still has a chance.The board have been stalling as well as trying to block the requisitioners for about two and a half months. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Invalidates whose claim? And what claim?All that is being asked is that the shareholders get to vote. You know a democratic choice. Personally I hope they win and then no one votes for them. IMO if King is indeed the new chairman then his endorsement of the incumbents is good enough for me for now.It is the right of the shareholders backing minico I agree with here, not minico.Eh? Invalidates minicos claim - you know, what this is all about Democracy can only take place if the people involved do things right If they have made an arse of the paperwork why should the ones In power just let them on anyway regardless? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Rd 2,860 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Invalidates whose claim? And what claim?All that is being asked is that the shareholders get to vote. You know a democratic choice. Personally I hope they win and then no one votes for them. IMO if King is indeed the new chairman then his endorsement of the incumbents is good enough for me for now.It is the right of the shareholders backing minico I agree with here, not minico.Ive got to agree with this What are the Board afraid of?They, Bawsburst, McMurdo have all stated they have the Votes in the bag, so, why not let it go to a Democratic Shareholders Vote as to who sits on the Board at a AGM. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 The board have been stalling as well as trying to block the requisitioners for about two and a half months.Well if it turns out that the reqs had 2 and a half months and could nto fill in a form correctly then I have little sympathy.If I knew a group was making life as difficult as possible, you could be damn sure I would make sure my paperwork was in order.If the judge rules in favour of the reqs, then the board come out of this badly. If however the judge rules the board are correct, then I dont see how a defence can be made for Murray. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hubbard 280 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Invalidates whose claim? And what claim?All that is being asked is that the shareholders get to vote. You know a democratic choice. Personally I hope they win and then no one votes for them. IMO if King is indeed the new chairman then his endorsement of the incumbents is good enough for me for now.It is the right of the shareholders backing minico I agree with here, not minico.I agree with youshareholders should get a vote on this. It's not a lot to ask for Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Ive got to agree with this What are the Board afraid of?They, Bawsburst, McMurdo have all stated they have the Votes in the bag, so, why not let it go to a Democratic Shareholders Vote as to who sits on the Board at a AGM.Both of them know nothing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,509 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 I agree with youshareholders should get a vote on this. It's not a lot to ask forProcesses have to be followed and followed correctly though.I doubt I could just stoat up to the houses of parliment the week before a general election and demand that the 'mitre_mouldmaster party' must be included on the vote and that it is only fair that the people be allowed to vote for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasa_Papac_No1_Fan 605 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Andy Newport @Andythemod91mLord Tyre has retired to consider his decision on Rangers AGM interdict at Court of Session. Not expected to return before 3.30pm Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Bob 1,360 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Well if it turns out that the reqs had 2 and a half months and could nto fill in a form correctly then I have little sympathy.If I knew a group was making life as difficult as possible, you could be damn sure I would make sure my paperwork was in order.If the judge rules in favour of the reqs, then the board come out of this badly. If however the judge rules the board are correct, then I dont see how a defence can be made for Murray. Could it have been a case of not having 'suitable' candidates to stand all that time? Seems a bit of a last minute thing. Reminds me of Paul Murrays attempt to take control of the club over the last couple of years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Ive got to agree with this What are the Board afraid of?They, Bawsburst, McMurdo have all stated they have the Votes in the bag, so, why not let it go to a Democratic Shareholders Vote as to who sits on the Board at a AGM.It is called protocol and procedure, seems you favour anarchy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al 55 9,275 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Eh? Invalidates minicos claim - you know, what this is all aboutDemocracy can only take place if the people involved do things rightIf they have made an arse of the paperwork why should the ones In power just let them on anyway regardless?But its not minico's claim.Its the claim of the shareholders backing them. There has to be the distinction. Those shareholders have the same rights as the current directors...also shareholders.If you are saying fuck the shareholders they didn't get the documentation right then fair enough.The are in court arguing the point; are the signatures of those institutional investors who were authorised to sign the form enough?Obviously we won't agree Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter ritchie 12 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Invalidates whose claim? And what claim?All that is being asked is that the shareholders get to vote. You know a democratic choice. Personally I hope they win and then no one votes for them. IMO if King is indeed the new chairman then his endorsement of the incumbents is good enough for me for now.It is the right of the shareholders backing minico I agree with here, not minico.So pm won't have a vote? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 It's not a question of the board being afraid of anything If your in power and your oppositions paperwork was filled in incorrectly why would you just accept it anyway and move on taking the chance they could win?Why should you be democratic when you are under no obligation to, especially with destructive proven liars? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.