Super Cooper 0 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 Whether you rate Jackson or not, there will be a sizeable number of our support, who will see this article as being credible. Oh i know mate, that is what i meant. I am one of them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 Ah well that's the official RM line, at least it saves me going on to see for myself! They have serious issues with anyone critical of this board for some reason. One would think their masses do not have our clubs best interests at heart. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Agree with nigh all of it. The thing is that in times like these, when we have no banking facility (for whatever reason, BTW), a rich person simply being there as a fall-back option would make life for the club much easier and settle the nerves of many a Bear. We now know that McColl is unable to invest that much, but the hesitancy that surrounds King (for months now) or the likes of Ashley do make you wonder. Maybe I am wrong, but when the share-price was down at 42p, chaps like King could have got most of the shares out there for rather little cash, only his - IMHO - ego stopped him from giving it to those who will make millions of this. That said, I reckon that (should he buy them) King's shares will be on the rise too, once the club is safely back on track in the business department. We are all worrying for nothing, Bill Mc Murdo is hinting today that there are developments behinds the scenes re a bye-out by "heavy hitters" I think there's a clue in the words 'heavy hitters; i'm thinking Mike Tyson or Chris Brown, though i wouldn't like to see Rihanna taking one for the Bears . Edited October 7, 2013 by aweebluesoandso 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 They have serious issues with anyone critical of this board for some reason. One would think their masses do not have our clubs best interests at heart. So all supporters must toe an anti-board party line? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 So all supporters must toe an anti-board party line? No but i believe all should really open their eyes and definitely want what is best for the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 No but i believe all should really open their eyes and definitely want what is best for the club. As always there are differing views as to what is best for the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,653 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 if you look at resolution 10 on the forthcoming AGM voting paper it says:- 'to enable the directors to allot shares for cash without first offering them to existing shareholders' if there were another share issue then you'd expect existing shareholders to be offered first refusal on new shares to maintain their % shareholding but this (to me) is an open invitation to a Dave King or Mike Ashley to take control by buying up new shares and pumping funds into the club. Anyone agree? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,653 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 Murray had to sell. LBG forced him to. and who do you think got LBG's Scottish business division to do this ? handy when you had a couple of bhoys running it I suppose. and who do you think got HMRC to chase a fictitious tax bill to make the club virtually unsellable ? wee clue - he used to be chairman over at the east end 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 if you look at resolution 10 on the forthcoming AGM voting paper it says:- 'to enable the directors to allot shares for cash without first offering them to existing shareholders' if there were another share issue then you'd expect existing shareholders to be offered first refusal on new shares to maintain their % shareholding but this (to me) is an open invitation to a Dave King or Mike Ashley to take control by buying up new shares and pumping funds into the club. Anyone agree? Or issue a whole load of shares at 1p to the Easdales to give them outright control of the club? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 and who do you think got LBG's Scottish business division to do this ? handy when you had a couple of bhoys running it I suppose.and who do you think got HMRC to chase a fictitious tax bill to make the club virtually unsellable ? wee clue - he used to be chairman over at the east end There's absolutely no evidence that Celtic fans were involved in any decisions at LBG, other than Leggat's ramblings. 0 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.