King To Sue D Murray

[Ergatrude 0]

Ok, Dave King is a vulture. He wants liquidation to buy us back for fuck all, and make money for himself.

 

The Blue Knights don't want liquidation and believe we can get out of admin before the season end (as i read it)

 

Right now i see Dave King as a kind of Craig Whyte with out the mask on

 

That's my view in a very simplistic way

 

Except Dave King invested 20m.

[johnnyk 158]

Mike Farrell ‏ @mikefstv Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sir David Murray expected to make statement in response to Dave King's claims today bit.

 

Should be interesting

[Bears 0]

Except Dave King invested 20m.

 

 

I know mate, but may be he see's this as a way to get it back and some?

 

I think there's going to be a power struggle break out in the coming days up to D-day. Things could get shitty. I have to admit to rather enjoying this in a weird way

[Ergatrude 0]

Mike Farrell ‏ @mikefstv Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sir David Murray expected to make statement in response to Dave King's claims today bit.

 

Should be interesting

 

I wonder what happened to dignified silence? :fish:

[Ergatrude 0]

Valid points Bears. Only time will tell.

[Frankie 8,665]

Can King, Paul Murray, AJ and Bain all really say they weren't aware of corporate vandalism and financial risk-taking at the club during their times on the board?

 

I don't believe that.

[Stefanovitch 0]

Mike Farrell ‏ @mikefstv Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sir David Murray expected to make statement in response to Dave King's claims today bit.

 

Should be interesting

 

I bet it's not. It will be a case of deflect and deny and criticise Craig Whyte.

[johnnyk 158]

I bet it's not. It will be a case of deflect and deny and criticise Craig Whyte.

 

To most I think it will be, they want to hear what he has to say as he hasn't said a thing.

[BlueMazza 0]

SDM will say he was completely unaware of the ticketus money used to buy the club, all he saw was the £24 mil acc letter to confirm funds were there. That Whyte being an apparent life long Rangers fan appeared a good bet. That he can't comment on EBT's under investigation but knew of no wrong doing. That he doesn't understand why King will sue etc etc. Plus he'll bring it back round to the fact that Rangers are only in admin now because of Whyte's non payment of PAYE/Ni. When he left Rangers were reasonably healthy and he had assurances/clauses in place.

 

Spin and smokescreen stuff most likely.

[calscot 0]

Administration proves he was right to have it ring fenced.

 

He knew that Whyte was out to screw everyone...

 

Ring fencing made administration more likely so hardly an argument. It also leads directly to us losing players. Bain had a beef against Whyte not Rangers but he chose to kick Rangers in the nads.

 

Not only that but he had a major responsibility for getting us into the mess we were in while paying himself massive wages and bonuses. He can take no credit for the reduction of the debt he help create as surely that was the responsibility of Muir and the Bank. Plus I give no credit to the reduction of debt as it contravened an original arrangement that was already in place to pay it off in more reasonable terms (£1M per year) which would have allowed us a better budget in order to compete on the pitch. This could even almost be considered a bait and switch manoeuvre, and be akin to thanking your bank for halving your mortgage in a few years by forcing you to quadruple your payments.

 

If Bain is as good at his job as he claims, why would he come back when he should already be ensconced in a similar job elsewhere. In fact there is the nub: if he was good at his job, was worth the money, demonstrated a high integrity, AND not an enemy of Rangers, he would have taken up one of what should have been multiple offers elsewhere and resigned forthwith from Rangers. There would have been no financial penalty for him and his reputation would have remained intact, where he could have been free to slate Whyte with impunity, warn the fans (and have them listen) and get some sort of revenge.

 

He did none of this and as such, with the whole picture is one that shows little morality and not that many levels above the depths of Whyte in my eyes.

 

Even at the basic level, if he was that good, he wouldn't have been totally ineffective while we headed to the abyss. Do we really want such an incompetent CEO back?

 

I don't know why people are throwing around complements like confetti to those who have actually harmed our club - especially Bain, Johnston, Muir and Lloyds. It's unbelievable that we even have King complimenting HMRC...

 

The only ones to come out of the whole mess untainted are John Greig and Walter Smith. Maybe John McCelland to a lesser extent.

 

Please let's stop treating people like Bain like they are justified in the harm they have caused. It's like someone punching you in the face and you rationalising that they deserved to do it or were entitled to do it or it was in some way understandable and condonable.