Ex-Rangers director says boardâ??s takeover fears are playing out

[Bluedell 5,679]

Then he should have resigned. If he disagreed with all the poor decision-making then he DID have an option. He never took it and that makes him culpable, in my opinion.

 

 

So if a director disagrees with the decisions of the majority of the board he should resign? is that what you would do?

 

Unrealistic and an easy option. Much better to try and fight your corner and try and persuade them to make the right decision next time.

[rbr 1,266]

So if a director disagrees with the decisions of the majority of the board he should resign? is that what you would do?

 

Unrealistic and an easy option. Much better to try and fight your corner and try and persuade them to make the right decision next time.

 

We kept hearing from nearly all the old regime that they didnt agree with this or they didnt want to do that , can not one single person find the balls to come out ans say it like it was , we are facing a situation of possible nightmare proportions yet we are no nearer any answers , in fact the actions that Whyte seems to be takingo ie only paying bills when forced by legal action is really really concerning , the situation regarding our euro license is starting to get very very murky with a possible appeal muted against the penalty for the smaller tax case .

 

I am starting to get very worried by the lack of a plan or the appearance of any plan

[aweebluesoandso 290]

If P Murray came out and critisized SDM and told us where it all went wrong in a 'warts and all story', i might find some respect for him.

[forlanssister 3,114]

I find it hard to give credibility to someone who was part of the custodianship when this club spiralled out of control.

 

The club had spiralled out of control long before Paul Murray joined the board in September 2007, look at the running of the club from September 2007 till the sale to Whyte if you're going to judge Paul Murray.

 

I'd perhaps agree with you had he been so proactive whilst he was collecting his salary. Like the previous regime, he is being obstructive towards the club, like the previous regime he was quiet when shit was hitting the fan.

 

if I was part of an organisation with constant, loyal customers and the bank stepped in because they had no confidence in the board, I would keep my mouth shut.

 

All very timmy-like.

 

Paul Murray was a non-executive director of the club he received no financial remuneration from Rangers for that role. The only non-executive to receive payment for being a non-executive was John Greig who received the princely sum of £1250 in 2009.

 

Ex-Directors like Paul Murray are easy for stories. Any Journalist worth their salt, would be questioning D.Murray and D.Muir.

 

Any journalist worth their salt would be questioning why given LBG's prior relationship with Craig Whyte why they, their placements on the board nor David Murray never informed the other members of RFC's board about the fact of Craig Whyte's banning as a company director and also why the shareholders and PLUS Market were not informed.

 

Any journalist worth their salt should be investigating the source of funding for Liberty Capital in the BVI and whether it comes from one of the half dozen or so LBG subsidiaries in the BVI.

 

Any journalist worth their salt would be investigating whether Whyte is a willing Patsy brought on board to do what neither LBG nor David Murray could be seen to countenance and picking up a few bob for his troubles or just a naive chancer way,way,way out of his depth.

 

I can't see how anyone can really give CW the pelters for his investment in the club until we see his actions after the tax case has been resolved. It seems obvious to me that his hands are tied until he knows our true financial situation. You don't start spending tons on your house when you have a potential massive bill to dispute. You hold fire. Slagging him off now just sounds like Murray is clueless about our current situation - and the guy was recently on the board! What a total dilbus.

 

Who in their right mind buys a house for £1 in the knowledge that it could well take 50 million times as much to fix it?

 

His allusion to his late "bid" for the club is also laughable - he had about three years to put together something feasible and instead spend 5 minutes planning a so-call "bid" on the back of a 10p mixture poke. Amateurish at best.

 

Whyte may be as bad as people claim but he's the ONLY one who put up a quarter of a million quid to perform due diligence and set out a plausible business plan.

 

The "bid" you refer to was not a "bid" it was an offer to recapitalise the club with £25m (fully underwritten) new money which would have resulted in David Murray not receiving so much as one penny and having his shareholding diluted to such an extent that he would have became almost irrelevant but he would still have had to face the music if the big tax case hit the fan now he can turn round and say, "wisnae me gov" likewise LBG got off the hook, do you really think that either Murray or LBG could have publicly countenanced placing us into administration or even worse liquidation?

 

I say again, Whyte may be a load crap but we're light years away from knowing that for sure. The tax case is the sword of Damocles hanging over his head - and he wasn't even the one responsible for it being there. If we win the case, Whyte will have to start putting his money where his mouth was...

 

If Whyte had done as he said he would and put his money where his mouth is then we wouldn't be in the state we are just now facing court actions on a weekly basis.

[Stimpy 0]

If P Murray came out and critisized SDM and told us where it all went wrong in a 'warts and all story', i might find some respect for him.

 

That's exactly it for me; taking the relativist approach is not good enough.

 

Paul Murray was a non-executive director of the club he received no financial remuneration from Rangers for that role. The only non-executive to receive payment for being a non-executive was John Greig who received the princely sum of £1250 in 2009.

 

Legally? No. I very much doubt he went without.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Legally? No. I very much doubt he went without.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that RFC made illegal payments to Paul Murray whilst he was a non-executive director of RFC ?

[Stimpy 0]

Are you seriously suggesting that RFC made illegal payments to Paul Murray whilst he was a non-executive director of RFC ?

 

Nope, but very few do anything for nothing in today's worlds. The position of any kind of directorial role within Rangers is worth its weight in gold.

 

Seems to me you're hiding behind semantics or criteria bestowed upon P Murray. He was there for what, 4/5 years? And it took him to the last minute to bid an offer? He had an opportunity to to galvanise the support and didn't until he realised his position was under threat. Why?

 

In his interview, where's the hard facts? His interview is not any better than the rubbish spouted by the blog, Rangers tax Case.

 

Think about it: Murray and his cohorts were responsible for an organisation with tens of thousands of loyal customers. Those loyal customers are never going to walk away like the supermarket consumer. So why do nothing?

 

The actions of the old board marry up their current actions. When on the board they keep quiet and let the fans take an absolute tanking in the media along with the club. when off the board they sue, mouth off and make life even more difficult for Rangers: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Nope, but very few do anything for nothing in today's worlds. The position of any kind of directorial role within Rangers is worth its weight in gold.

 

Not quite gold but perhaps a £1million investment in Rangers Youth Development Limited, a £1million that when you invest you know you'll never see again.

 

Seems to me you're hiding behind semantics or criteria bestowed upon P Murray. He was there for what, 4/5 years? And it took him to the last minute to bid an offer? He had an opportunity to to galvanise the support and didn't until he realised his position was under threat. Why?

 

I make it 3 years 8 months or thereabouts. Last minute to make an offer or last minute to make an offer public?, I'd hazard a guess at the latter. I concur that he left it way too late to attempt to galvanise the support and badly misjudged the strength of anti Murray (David) feeling and those who were in the fans eyes guilty by association. As to "Why?", it's pretty clear both from the interview at the beginning of this thread and the one given to the BBC that he simply didn't think anyone was stupid enough to take on the potential liability without an indemnity.

 

There is no doubt that the Paul Murray "bid to inject £25m of new capital was the best one for Rangers there is also no doubt that Whyte's £1 was far, far better for LBG, MIH and David Murray hence where we are today.

 

The actions of the old board marry up their current actions. When on the board they keep quiet and let the fans take an absolute tanking in the media along with the club. when off the board they sue, mouth off and make life even more difficult for Rangers: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

 

The old board were at the mercy of a dictator who controlled 80 odd % and was content to let the club and its' fans take a tanking as long as the press left him alone, now we don't even have a board (worthy of the name), don't hold board meetings( and possibly even an AGM),and produce unaudited accounts.

 

We are not on speaking terms with the BBC not because of anything they have said about the club but because they embarrassed Craig Whyte. ( I'm quite happy of the BBC ban per se but I'm not naive as to the reason behind it).

 

The two executive directors are suing simply because of the reckless and naive actions of Craig Whyte, nobody expected them to survive the change of ownership and nobody disputes Whyte's right to remove them but the manner of his doing so was at best amateurish and at worst negligent and has garnered both unnecessary publicity and unnecessary expenditure

[chilledbear 16]

One things for sure, if Whyte was the owner of Septic, we would be laughing our socks off.