ian1964 10,720 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 THEY were dismissed, by some at least, as troublemakers with personal grievances against Rangers. They were accused of being opportunists who were simply after a place on the Ibrox board without spending a penny of their own money. But now the grave fears they expressed about their beloved club have been shown to be far more than just scaremongering. Scott Murdoch, Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray and Alex Wilson all failed in their bids to be elected directors at the Rangers agm in December. The backing of many institutional investors and major shareholders ensured the existing incumbents were all returned by sizeable margins. Yet, the Requisitioners, as they became known, have since been vindicated in their view that all was far from well behind the scenes at the club. And their prediction that limited funds would run dry without fresh investment - which they had managed to line-up - has also been proved to be accurate. The revelations contained in the 120-day business review carried out by Rangers chief executive Graham Wallace, then, came as no surprise to the group. "I read the review on Friday and noted what Mr Wallace had to say about the previous regimes and how they conducted their business with alarm and interest," said Wilson today. "To be honest, it is what we as a Gang of Four were saying in the build-up to the agm. "We also had a degree of disbelief that the club had enough money to see it through to the end of the season. "We had no inside information. It was just a general feeling. If you looked at the existing funds and the cash burn and then tracked forward you could see it running out. "Everything that we said was going wrong was indeed going wrong. Everything that we said we felt was going to happen has transpired. It is really, really, really frustrating." A complaint has been made to Police Scotland about Wallace allegedly misleading shareholders at the agm by stating the club had enough money to see out the season. Wilson said: "Whether Mr Wallace knew or not is for the police to investigate. "He had a financial director, Brian Stockbridge, who we had no confidence in and we said he was a disgrace at the time." But the Scot, who has worked in HR for multinational companies including BT, Ford, Guinness and ICI during a successful 40-year business career, feels another matter should be scrutinised. He was taken aback by an interview that shareholder Sandy Easdale gave to BBC Scotland last Thursday - the day before the review was released to the London Stock Exchange. Easdale revealed the Rangers finances were "fragile" and then expressed the belief that the Ibrox club would be unable to survive a second administration. Wallace distanced himself from the comments made by the bus tycoon in a series of media interviews on Friday. However, Wilson agrees wholeheartedly with the Union of Fans who have publicly called for club chairman David Somers to look into the matter. He said: "I have worked on boards before. Stuff like that is price sensitive. Speaking publicly about it breaks all sorts of stock exchange rules. "Mr Easdale is not on the main board. So how did he have access to that information? "If a board member has price sensitive information and has released it to another individual it should be looked at. "The director responsible should, at the very least, be censured." Somers broke cover to issue a firm denial of the "odious and unfounded" allegations of "inappropriate behaviour" against Wallace on Monday night. But there was no mention of the remarks made by Mr Easdale who has been accused of an "utter lack of corporate governance" by the Union of Fans. Wilson said: "The chairman has been notable by his absence and by his lack of comment on some of the issues which have arisen at the club. "If serious accusations are made, as has been the case, then you would expect the chairman to step forward and make a statement saying what will be done or saying that no action is necessary and why. "Graham Wallace's rebuttal of Sandy Easdale's remarks on Friday, when he said he doesn't speak for the board, was interesting. "Was he trying to save the situation with regards to price sensitive information being used?" Wilson was also scathing of the possibility that senior executives, including the chief executive, at Rangers could receive substantial bonuses at a time when staff are being made redundant. He said: "To make a ham-fisted approach to the players last year and ask them to take a 15% pay cut without at the same time taking an identical cut was a disgrace. "Again, I don't know what the situation with bonuses at the club is, but I would hope there is no executive on that board taking away a bonus when the finances are in such a parlous state. "We (the Requisitioners) said we would serve on the board for nothing. "Our purpose was not personal gain or self-aggrandisement. We were all prepared to work together for the good of the club." Lifelong Rangers fan Wilson, who has two season tickets at Ibrox and commutes to games from London, was also unhappy about supporters being blamed for the loss of credit and debit card facilities. It has been alleged that First Data withdrew their services in January - the month before fans were first urged to pool their season ticket money in a trust fund. Wilson added: "By all accounts, withholding season ticket money was not a serious proposition when they (First Data) first asked for security back in January. "I am sure that the action being taken by the Union of Fans has hardened their resolve. "But it has a lot more to do with just fans saying they were going to withhold season ticket money. "Once again, this smacks of the board looking to blame somebody else for the club's problems." http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/rangers-requisitioners-warned-cash-storm-clouds-were-gathering-161584n.24094362 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,743 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 It is always interesting to note how people see the same statements and facts from very certain angles and make an opinion of that. On a sidenote, Sandy Easdale is not on the board, so Wallace is quite right to say that he does not speak for the board, but as a shareholder. Easdale's assumption that a greater loss of ST income this summer may result in fragile finances is not that hard to understand ... and would probably hold true for most clubs living of ST income. Whether it comes to pass remains to be seen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 what about his assertion that the finances were fragile and renewals low. information he had no right to have. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 On a sidenote, Sandy Easdale is not on the board, so Wallace is quite right to say that he does not speak for the board, but as a shareholder. Far from being a sidenote, it is central to the issue that S. Easedale was sitting at the top table with the rest of the board at the AGM - which other normal shareholder did that? It appears that S Easedale takes part in board meetings. Which other normal shareholder does that? S Easedale feels secure enough in the price sensitive knowledge he has to speak to the press about it; which other normal shareholder does that? Which other normal shareholder gives press interviews about board matters? Are you being willfully blinkered about his involvement? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I am not surprised the the Requisitioners knew all about the level of spend etc....Malcom Murray was one of the directors doing the spending!!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,653 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I am not surprised the the Requisitioners knew all about the level of spend etc....Malcom Murray was one of the directors doing the spending!!!! FWIW I thought Alex Wilson & Scott Murdoch would have been ideal board members along with Frank Blin. Associating themselves with the Murrays double act was never going to get them elected 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 trying to remove the ****s and run us properly was there real undoing. shame they would have been superb 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I am not surprised the the Requisitioners knew all about the level of spend etc....Malcom Murray was one of the directors doing the spending!!!! It's a fair point - they should have known better than to ask MM along. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,743 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Far from being a sidenote, it is central to the issue that S. Easedale was sitting at the top table with the rest of the board at the AGM - which other normal shareholder did that? It appears that S Easedale takes part in board meetings. Which other normal shareholder does that? S Easedale feels secure enough in the price sensitive knowledge he has to speak to the press about it; which other normal shareholder does that? Which other normal shareholder gives press interviews about board matters?Are you being willfully blinkered about his involvement? All shareholders can give interviews on board matters or comment on board actions, if they want to. Sandy Easdale is contact-wise (due to his brother) obviously far closer to the board than other shareholders, but also in terms of geography. These are just general remarks, BTW. Likewise: I am not sure whether other "major" shareholders were invited to join the board at the AGM and declined or were unable to appear. Do you? As I've said a few times, it is not just black & white out there and it would suit the debate if people would on occasion try to leave their trenches. Some stuff that is being writting is sure lacking a certain degree of objectivity and you would at least expect it from some, non-involved journos. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 The two Murray's involvement was a big part of their downfall 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.