Fan board elections now closed as of Saturday 20 September

[Mountain Bear 0]

As I said, a long thread.............. that contained varied material that I consider relevant to the candidates suitability.

If you disagree, fine.

 

[unreasonable comment Edited by Frankie]

 

Bennett said at the time that he'd reached the same conclusion as Mr Harris independently and that his name had been released prematurely. Surely that is an example of a good judgement call?

 

Mr Harris was also influential in getting Jim McColl to agree to underwrite the fans' offer to acquire the Club from SDM for £30M in 2010.

Edited September 19, 2014 by Frankie

[Hildy 0]

Already, this sham membership scheme is causing arguments, friction and adding to the disunity that continues to grow within our ranks.

 

From the club's point of view so far then, it has been an outstanding and unqualified success.

[Frankie 8,473]

I don't have an issue with people discussing BH's past actions as long as the criticism is kept polite and fair.

 

FWIW, I disagreed with his actions at the time but some of the attention placed upon him - especially by those with 'inside knowledge' at FF - was disgraceful. Consequently I'd rather threads from this site were bumped in favour of ones from elsewhere.

[Frankie 8,473]

I don't look for favours, nor am I up for election.

Nor do I know after a fair while spent on FF, which are 'ghost accounts' on FF as you seem to.

 

You are right in that I do see the fansboard as a sham but it does seem to be happening and I would prefer that Alan Harris wasn't elected for personal reasons previously detailed in thie thread that go beyond what is contained in the FF thread.

 

This isn't about me though, so you can drop the stuff directed towards me.

You'll note that I didn't post in the FF thread, unless perhaps you know of "ghost accounts" I have, that I am unaware of.

 

There are certainly more than a few people that use multiple aliases on that forum. That I can assure you.

 

In saying that, I find my Ser Barristan Selmy account on here useful for strategic reasons...

[buster. 5,014]

I don't have an issue with people discussing BH's past actions as long as the criticism is kept polite and fair.

 

FWIW, I disagreed with his actions at the time but some of the attention placed upon him - especially by those with 'inside knowledge' at FF - was disgraceful. Consequently I'd rather threads from this site were bumped in favour of ones from elsewhere.

 

I'll stop regards debating the FF thread link I posted and leave people to read it if they wish.

 

[unreasonable comment Edited by Frankie]

 

I'm independent in these matters regards 'groups' and only seek what is best for the football club.

I don't seek division, just a rounded discussion before an election (which is a sham but seems to be happening)

I have also discovered in the last few years that I have a nose that has a knack of being able to detect and determine between truth, bullshit/spin. Too often my 'spidery senses' tell me that that AH as B.Hemdani is either not as intuitive as he is clever or is being 'political' regards his interpretations of ongoing events.

 

AH states the following in his campaign literature

"My main qualities have been described as financial skills, probity and eye for detail.”

 

I realise that I might be wrong but I back what I said up about AH with his 'unqualified blindness' when it came to Charles Green.

How can a man with the CV and relevant experience presented not have sniffed a rat with how CG went about his business, the wording and clauses of the IPO prospectus etc ?.................For me this just doesn't reconcile, whatever way you present the 'figures'.

 

So personally,I wouldn't like to see a man who is indirect and 'political' regards answering difficult questions, has a tendency to defend the board and whose judgement of the same has been shown to be very poor over a long and vital period.

 

If there is to be a fansboard, then it is my contention that at this moment in our history we would be better served by the Billy Patersons of this world and those who follow such a line (investigative but fair sceptics) even if not all were quite at the 'level' of BP.

 

 

 

I'll end there and get back to the more immediate and important issues facing the club. There seems to be another convicted fraudster confirmed graphically to be involved with the Dsyfunctional Lying Circus......but then we knew he was in conversations with Green&Co over 2 years ago.

 

I wonder what Deloittes make of it ?

Edited September 19, 2014 by Frankie

[Frankie 8,473]

I'll stop regards debating the FF thread link I posted and leave people to read it if they wish.

 

Unreasonable comment Edited by Frankie]

 

I'm independent in these matters regards 'groups' and only seek what is best for the football club.

I don't seek division, just a rounded discussion before an election (which is a sham but seems to be happening)

I have also discovered in the last few years that I have a nose that has a knack of being able to detect and determine between truth, bullshit/spin. Too often my 'spidery senses' tell me that that AH as B.Hemdani is either not as intuitive as he is clever or is being 'political' regards his interpretations of ongoing events.

 

AH states the following in his campaign literature

"My main qualities have been described as financial skills, probity and eye for detail.”

 

I realise that I might be wrong but I back what I said up about AH with his 'unqualified blindness' when it came to Charles Green.

How can a man with the CV and relevant experience presented not have sniffed a rat with how CG went about his business, the wording and clauses of the IPO prospectus etc ?.................For me this just doesn't reconcile, whatever way you present the 'figures'.

 

So personally,I wouldn't like to see a man who is indirect and 'political' regards answering difficult questions, has a tendency to defend the board and whose judgement of the same has been shown to be very poor over a long and vital period.

 

If there is to be a fansboard, then it is my contention that at this moment in our history we would be better served by the Billy Patersons of this world and those who follow such a line (investigative but fair sceptics) even if not all were quite at the 'level' of BP.

 

 

 

I'll end there and get back to the more immediate and important issues facing the club. There seems to be another convicted fraudster confirmed graphically to be involved with the Dsyfunctional Lying Circus......but then we knew he was in conversations with Green&Co over 2 years ago.

 

I wonder what Deloittes make of it ?

 

Like I said, I have no issue with any supporter application being discussed but I think it's important to note there are two sides to every story. And one side is missing from that on FF - not to mention the distasteful aspect of the criticism there.

 

Ergo, I think people may be better advised to view that and the thread below from here at the time.

 

http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?42094-John-Bennett-Withdraws-from-The-Blue-Knights-Consortium

Edited September 19, 2014 by Frankie

[craig 5,199]

Alan Harris knew that this would come up and is well aware that he will have to face it. I think what he did was bang out of order, but he paid for it, so, hey ho.

 

What he ACTUALLY did was protect his client's investment. He had clients invested in Mr Bennett's hedge fund and it was a valid concern of Mr Harris that if Mr Bennett invested in Rangers that he would have less time to dedicate to the management of the hedge fund.

 

Anyone that has dealt with, invested in, or even operated a hedge fund will know that the industry is very fickle when it comes to these things. My company have just pulled over a hundred million out of a hedge fund because one of the managers has left the fund.

 

When companies like Blackstone (huge hedge fund manager) look to invest in a hedge fund they will do incredible amounts of due diligence - they go to the extent of trawling the individuals (AND family) bank records, social media accounts, police records - they will even employ private investigators to find out everything from their route to work in the morning, any marital problems, financial issues etc.

 

Mr Harris was, quite rightly, protecting his clients financial interests.

 

He may or may not admit that he had a vested interest as this was Rangers that Mr Bennett was potentially investing in - and he will possibly even admit that he handled the information flow poorly.

 

But the notion that gets peddled that Mr Harris is the reason that Mr Bennett didn't invest at the time is preposterous. Mr Bennett is a big boy and would have made that decision on his own - in fact, if anything, the vitriol spouted forth when Mr Harris informed us about having spoken to Mr Bennett was more likely to see Bennett run for the hills than anything Alan Harris could have done.

 

And people think that this is unbiased information from some on FF.... we know that Alan Harris highlighted an irregular transaction in the financial statements and in some quarters that made him public enemy #1.

 

Now, it would be nice if people voted for, or not, Mr Harris based on what he brings to the table and what he says he will do for the benefit of the club - rather than supposition, innuendo, and false perceptions of the part he played in investment not being made into the club.

 

As for the suggestion that there is an inherent desire for Gersnet members to vote for Mr Harris because he is a member and regular poster here - I personally find that offensive. To suggest that we wouldn't make our own minds up based on the information available is to suggest, as Gribz would say, that we are sheeple. I believe our membership base is far more in tune, intelligent and bright enough to make decisions based on the information they have at hand.

 

I will say, though, that the information flow should still be allowed - Time4Change makes a valid point that when people put themselves up for positions they do so knowing that their history will be trawled over - this is indeed the case with Mr Harris and he is fully aware of it. But it would be nice if there was some balance - and I have my doubts on whether that would be the case on one of our sister forums, for their is clearly a history between one of their admin and Mr Harris - so paying attention to the information flow also needs to be tempered with whether it is being sanitized with a particular goal in mind.

 

[Related comments Edited by Frankie]

Edited September 19, 2014 by Frankie

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I'm not voting for Mr Harris , because if he's successful and does gain a place on the fans board. then we at Gesrnet might not have his full attention organising the Gersnet annual gathering. I wasn't at the last meal but hear it was a rounding success due in part to his meticulous eye to details and wine choice. So now i'm thinking attending the next meet, thus hopefully having Alan's full attention would secure another good evening out.

 

Sorry if that sounds selfish.

[Frankie 8,473]

I'm not voting for Mr Harris , because if he's successful and does gain a place on the fans board. then we at Gesrnet might not have his full attention organising the Gersnet annual gathering. I wasn't at the last meal but hear it was a rounding success due in part to his meticulous eye to details and wine choice. So now i'm thinking attending the next meet, thus hopefully having Alan's full attention would secure another good evening out.

 

Sorry if that sounds selfish.

 

Haha - very droll...

[Rangersitis 0]

My only gripe is how the situation was handled by Mr Harris, and do think that there may have been a touch of revenge in the manner in which he acted. In saying that, I have never believed that it prevented any investment into the club. The reaction to it on another site was OTT, but not at all unexpected given previous events.