Name your price, Lloyds

[wabashcannonball 0]

You may or may not be interested to know that these "worthless" shares are trading at "17/12/2009 09:16:11 46.00 3,166 shares �£1,456.36" "the last noted trade is "13/01/2010 14:37:55 47.00 50shares �£23.50

 

Someone appears to disagree with you about how worthless they are. While not a great fan of Murray I can still see who is driving the train and it is by no means a runaway train.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Then why did Lloyds reject a bid for the club?

 

Why is a Lloyds fixer on the Rangers board and the board of Murray's Commercial Property business?

 

Very simply because there is no evidence to support any of your allegations.

[Super_Ally 0]

Yes I am. A life member in fact. Paid for annual members for a further 10 Gersnetters. Never attended a meeting as it is physically very difficult. Does that mean that I am a bad member and simply griping ?

 

The thing is, if the RST is such a progressive organisation then they should be taking the criticism on board and at least TRY to improve where possible. I havent seen much progression in that regard recently.

 

Some call it sniping, others will call it constructive criticism. At the end of the day those involved with the Trust need to be thick-skinned enough to know that they cant please everyone and there will be criticism but where people are having similar issues surely the Trust would be well served in trying to see if they could utilise some of the suggestions.

 

Now, how about someone from the Trust explain just why it was that the very same organisation ignored the fine STS Project ? Now, I defy anyone to tell me that particular project was not worth standing behind as it at least put forward suggestions for bettering the club. Why was it that only the Trust and FF did not acknowledge it ?

 

I thought the Trust was about bettering the club, no ? From their refusal to back STS it would appear to some that the Trust, rather than being about bettering the club is about progressing other agendas, especially when they have something tangible at hand to support (STS).

 

But is this all "griping" ? Call it what you will but IMO it is constructive criticism and so long as the Trust do not take it on board then their efforts will continue to be futile.

 

I don't feel the need to respond to EB's post and digress the debate as you've said much of what I would have in response (and probably in a more legible way).

 

One thing I would say to EB. Seeing as he is unwilling to take any criticism of the trust; I don't understand your view that anyone who doesn't support he trust 100% regardless of the dubious agenda of some of the head honchos is to create another fan group.

 

The fan base as a whole, particularly those active online and within organisations already agree we have too many groups who are dividing the support, making it difficult to rally around behind one flag and having no direction or large support. So why are you suggesting forming another group? All that will do is weaken the fan base as a whole and further divide the support.

 

I would also add I was formally a member of the trust though not really active due to a number of reasons. When my membership lapsed I didn't renew it because I was not very comfortable with the way control was seized by individuals whose main concerns seemed to be personal advancement rather than the more honourable aims the Trust was formed upon. If that is not a fair reflection of events that is a fault of the clandestine nature of the RST and it's members and not those viewing from the outside as there is still a lot of secrecy over precisely what happened.

[pete 2,499]

I will say in the favour of the RST members at least they have come on here and tried to communicate. Although i have never been a member this site was once a RST stronghold for a while. It really is a pity that there is now such animosity amongst members and former members. I don't know the way forward but unless all rangers supporters, be it Assembly,RST or just joe soap can pull together then we have no right to get anywhere near the board room of Ibrox.

[Frankie 8,674]

Very simply because there is no evidence to support any of your allegations.

 

His evidence is the same that you post in support of your claims - the media.

 

Personally I feel the truth is more in the middle somewhere. I don't doubt the bank are involved and making (or strongly influencing) key decisions but I agree with you in that if people think SDM is sitting somewhere neutered by the bank then it must suit him to give that impression for the moment.

 

I don't think SDM has many fans left online (and I'm definitely not one of them) but we'd all do well to remember just how clever/ruthless this gentleman is when it comes to SDM.

[maineflyer 0]

I will say in the favour of the RST members at least they have come on here and tried to communicate. Although i have never been a member this site was once a RST stronghold for a while. It really is a pity that there is now such animosity amongst members and former members. I don't know the way forward but unless all rangers supporters, be it Assembly,RST or just joe soap can pull together then we have no right to get anywhere near the board room of Ibrox.

 

While certain RST board members are clearly unfit to represent themselves, let alone anyone else, I'm not sure there is any widespread animosity towards individuals in that organisation. What is certainly evident is a profound and settled dissatisfaction at the lack of achievement from the RST, either to build credibility and strength through membership or to otherwise influence the club or other aspects of society in respect of Rangers.

 

I do believe there is still considerable goodwill towards the idea of a Supporters Trust and that the widespread rejection of the RST is entirely down to the behaviour and performance of those running it. Most other executives that had been shunned to this extent by its constituency would have resigned long ago and the sheer intransigence of the current RST board is progressively alienating more and more members and potential members alike.

 

There comes a time when everyone has to accept the judgement of their own track record and no amount of the peculiar defence seen elsewhere in this thread can obscure the paucity of those running the RST. That these people continue in office is little short of a disgrace. That they should come on forums such as this to deflect and deny by attacking their critics in such a petulant manner is only typical of the entire RST malaise. This unwillingness to address the shortcomings that everyone else can see but which they can only respond to with acrimony and blame. To any serious observer, the whole RST affair is little short of pathetic.

[wabashcannonball 0]

His evidence is the same that you post in support of your claims - the media.

 

Personally I feel the truth is more in the middle somewhere. I don't doubt the bank are involved and making (or strongly influencing) key decisions but I agree with you in that if people think SDM is sitting somewhere neutered by the bank then it must suit him to give that impression for the moment.

 

I don't think SDM has many fans left online (and I'm definitely not one of them) but we'd all do well to remember just how clever/ruthless this gentleman is when it comes to SDM.

 

No my evidence if that is what you call it, is simple protocol. No bids or offers have been notified to the SLE, ergo no bids have been made, potential bidders or time-wasters may shoot the breeze all do long, talkin the talk and walkin the walk are very different aspects.

If the bank saying you must work within the remit of our facility granted you is the bank running the club, the banks will be running the majority of businesses world wide.

Now I understand people disagree, but as far as I can see Murray is holding all the aces and pulling the strings, my prediction is that after MIH publish their amazing turn around figures, Murray will withdraw Rangers from the open market, time will tell.

[Frankie 8,674]

What amazing turn-around figures are these? How are you privvy to information which is hitherto private?

 

Moreover, even if MIH show signs of slight recovery, why would Murray then suggest the club is no longer for sale when he's been actively trying to flog it for the best part of 4 years?

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

No my evidence if that is what you call it, is simple protocol. No bids or offers have been notified to the SLE, ergo no bids have been made, potential bidders or time-wasters may shoot the breeze all do long, talkin the talk and walkin the walk are very different aspects.

If the bank saying you must work within the remit of our facility granted you is the bank running the club, the banks will be running the majority of businesses world wide.

Now I understand people disagree, but as far as I can see Murray is holding all the aces and pulling the strings, my prediction is that after MIH publish their amazing turn around figures, Murray will withdraw Rangers from the open market, time will tell.

 

Except that MIH don't have any amazing turn around figures.

 

They're currently scrabbling around, racing against the clock to refinance hundreds of millions worth of debt in the next couple of weeks.

 

Can you define what aces Murray is holding? As Frankie says, if he was trying to sell Rangers BEFORE the credit crunch and his empire crumbled around him, what makes you think he would want to hang on to it now?

Edited January 20, 2010 by OnlyOneAmoruso

[calscot 0]

While certain RST board members are clearly unfit to represent themselves, let alone anyone else, I'm not sure there is any widespread animosity towards individuals in that organisation. What is certainly evident is a profound and settled dissatisfaction at the lack of achievement from the RST, either to build credibility and strength through membership or to otherwise influence the club or other aspects of society in respect of Rangers.

 

I do believe there is still considerable goodwill towards the idea of a Supporters Trust and that the widespread rejection of the RST is entirely down to the behaviour and performance of those running it. Most other executives that had been shunned to this extent by its constituency would have resigned long ago and the sheer intransigence of the current RST board is progressively alienating more and more members and potential members alike.

 

There comes a time when everyone has to accept the judgement of their own track record and no amount of the peculiar defence seen elsewhere in this thread can obscure the paucity of those running the RST. That these people continue in office is little short of a disgrace. That they should come on forums such as this to deflect and deny by attacking their critics in such a petulant manner is only typical of the entire RST malaise. This unwillingness to address the shortcomings that everyone else can see but which they can only respond to with acrimony and blame. To any serious observer, the whole RST affair is little short of pathetic.

 

I agree with much of this. I think the same kind of thing can apply to something like newspapers. They are fundamentally a good idea and I don't think I could do a good job of running one; however, the likes of The Sun or the Daily Mail are horrendous newspapers in my opinion, with very poor and weirdly biased reporting.

 

I cringe at much of the stuff they write and don't have much respect for their contributors. Thankfully, they are not the only source of news around...