wabashcannonball

Allegedly the abuse of the rules by Kraft, expedited the confirmation of the new code, which had been under consideration for some time. You may remember Bluedell, that they promised to keep an English factory open during the Cadbury takeover process, and then promptly announced its closure after the successful bid.

So why lie, and say that they can't say anything, which I must admit seems only to apply when it suits.

AJ may be culpable by involvement, but only one man created the farce. However I digress, after a nice chat with a very nice young chap at the takeover panel, he has pointed me to new legislation, which I present for your perusal and opinion. http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/pcp2.pdf&sa=X&ei=s_T0S7XRM4qIsgOfy6mIBQ&ved=0CBcQzgQoADAA&usg=AFQjCNGesuAAb4z73XK7Ld6bxSbz9T0PDg He clarified the situation with regard to public comments about the interest, as it is only an interest and not an offer, (rule 2.4b.... a firm offer is covered by different legislation..rule 2.5..these new rules came into effect 19/04/2010..they will apply to any "bid" tendered for Rangers FC.) in short anyone can say anything they like, as long as it is not said to affect the market or the company or parties involved in any way regarding posturing for position or financial manouvering.

I think it boils down to a healthy objection to being treated with utter contempt by the powers that be.

I took a shorter period than I thought for AJ to become another target. http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=151627

Information from Rangers Assembly meeting with the Chairman, Chief Executive and Donald Muir on Sunday 9th May 2010 CLUB OWNERSHIP Andrew Ellis has held talks with Donald Muir and with Sir David Murray and has provided proof of funds. So who is right, Ellis who claims not to have spoken to Minty or the RSA statement, can we trust anyone to tell us the truth.

Will it be invoked, but as no bid has yet been tendered... Introduction On 25 February, the Code Committee of the Takeover Panel (“the Code Committee”) published a Public Consultation Paper (“PCP2004/1”) entitled “‘Put Up or Shut Up’ and No Intention to Bid Statements”. The purpose of this paper is to provide details of the Code Committee’s response to the external consultation process on PCP 2004/1.

The person to whom Ellis claims to be talking to at Ibrox shouldn't be Muir, not at least in his role as a Rangers director....so who could it possibly be.... The Independent Directors exclude Mike McGill and Donald Muir who are connected to MIH, and so have a potential conflict of interest, and Dave King and Paul Murray about whose intentions there has been past speculation that could lead to a perception of a possible conflict of interest.

Furfuxsake, they're passin it roon, this was in last nights Express... http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/editor-s-picks-ignore/rangers-chairman-stands-firm-in-row-with-andrew-ellis-1.1028928

Wee darrell chuntering away, but very carefully this time.... http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/editor-s-picks-ignore/time-for-talking-is-over-rangers-need-to-be-handed-control-of-own-destiny-1.1028924 ""Today, he also states he has never spoken to Sir David Murray, and it’s now well known that he has had no dialogue with Smith or Johnston."" Jings crivens help ma boab !!!!

OK then, everything NL has posted is the dogs and Ellis will be taking over before lunch, Messi, Ronaldo and Beckham will be arriving after the world cup and Alfio Basile will be the new manager. How exactly does the debate get moved on, two of the main protaginists are now at apparent loggerheads, conducting a slanging match through the press, rather than simply providing clear guidance to the fans within allowed parameters, as to what is going on. This debate and farce will move on in whichever direction, when Murray decides it will.

More of a damp squib, but hey who is surprised... http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/hopes-of-ellis-bid-dwindle-after-johnston-s-sceptical-accusations-1.1028727 Johnston had gone as far as to claim Ellis had made no direct contact with anyone at Rangers. Had his discussions been with Murray rather than Johnston? “Not with David Murray but with other people at the club,” Ellis went on. http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/175985 '' I am not permitted as chairman to call directly to Ellis other than through Murray International Holdings representatives '' he revealed . '' I asked them to arrange one meeting as far back as March and was told it had been arranged for Edinburgh before it was cancelled as his financial advisors were not available.. '' On behalf of the independent committee set up to assess any takeover I then asked in a memo dated May 5 for another meeting but got no response.

Thank fuk for the world cup, and me winning a fortune on Brasil and Kaka...:spl:

Stand by for some more exiting revelations from the Herald in this ongoing soap, JR and Desperate Dan are said to be down at the Cattlemans bar, both cattled, plotting a flanker at least I think that is what it is called, get your Herald read all about it... :spl:

I don't believe I called you a liar, I simply do not believe a word of what you are repeating, now if someone is feeding you bollox and you choose to air that in public that is your affair, but it doesn't change your info into the oracle, nor does my take that it is bollox make you out a liar, your "source" may be economical with the truth, and just to reiterate, I do not believe a word of it, see I done that without calling you a liar at anytime....:devil:

What I think is that you are talkin bollox, the same as I think the statement realeased by the RSA about Ellis proving funding is and was bollox. I will take the word of AJ over any poster or Ellis, Ellis has serious previous for talkin the talk but failing to walk the walk, it is a big big shout for Ellis to cast shall we say doubt on AJ's recollections, they certainly won't be working together any time soon or ever...and what sort of a guy apologises for upsetting a guy who he claims never had anything arranged with him, it's ok you don't need to answer that....

Your avin a laff, seems Ellis the one man consortium is singin from a different hymn sheet to that of the "consortium" spokesman...and Esplin I wouldn't send him for a pan loaf and a pint o milk, I reckon he is britney's twin dobber. :spl: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/8690286.stm

Ask him below, and don't take life so seriously, no matter what you, me or magintys goat thinks, it is what Minty decides that floats the boat, and I hope you reversed the charges.....:fish: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0y8WgybyLw]YouTube- Only Fools & Horses Del Boy's Executive Mobile Phone[/ame]

Someone has to read it to cut and paste it.

Fuk me I do not believe I am reading this, but I did. The chairmen of Rangers cannot get a ragman;s fart out of Ellis, yet a poster on an internet board just picks up the phone and has a heart to heart, some of us didn't come up the Clyde on a water biscuit, but apparently others did.

Knowledge is the food of life, it depends how you use and sort that knowledge, censorship is for a society that doesn't trust people to think for themselves, people paid the ultimate price to oppose the censors and book burners, I for one have no wish to see that sacrifice cast aside. You propose the thin end of a very big wedge Zappa, trust in truth for all else is untruth.

As it was when this thing started so it will be however it ends, Murray will have called the shots, and all the journos and print in the world will not change that. When did one man become a consortium. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/8690286.stm

You are right there, an election has come and gone, parties have settled their differences in"the national interest", whatever the fuk that means, and still we Rangers are no further forward......amateurish doesn't even begin to describe it, never mind black ans white...

I don't believe it is questioning anymore than two apparently opposing points of view, both of them cannot be right, Either AJ believes Ellis to be a man of substance or a man of straw... which is it.

The problem Bluedell is that this article in its own way, does question the truth of that funding.