PRW 0 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 He'll be gone very soon (with a large severance package) and replaced with another of his ilk but pleasing to see some form of pressure amassing over the current board and Ashley in his bid to sew us up lock stock and barrel. Though with resolution 9 being voted against by this shower of vermin and Ashley hamstrung with SFA regulations it's clear loans from fatty is our only route for capital. Cheerio Ibrox and Auchenhowie. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Share Posted December 25, 2014 (edited) Is there some form between Ashley and the Telegraph/Roddy Forsyth ? They seem to be taking the lead on this. Edited December 25, 2014 by chilledbear 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Is there some form between Ashley and the Telegraph/Roddy Forsyth ? They seem to be taking the lead on this. Maybe the telegraph but not Forsyth I don't think. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Share Posted December 25, 2014 Maybe the telegraph but not Forsyth I don't think. You are probably correct mate. Perhaps with Newcastle, didn't he ban some journalists. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gisabeer 409 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 unfortunately by the time the law catches up with them the damage has already been done and as we have found out in the past its irreversible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 The bit I'm struggling to fathom is why members of the Board voted against their own resolution (#9) at the AGM. Even by our own recent standards, that's just bizarre. Obviously, there's been a late change of mind after the resolutions were made public, so perhaps it's a result of the shifting balance of power within Ibrox. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 The bit I'm struggling to fathom is why members of the Board voted against their own resolution (#9) at the AGM. Even by our own recent standards, that's just bizarre. Obviously, there's been a late change of mind after the resolutions were made public, so perhaps it's a result of the shifting balance of power within Ibrox. Wasn't it just put there to show that they had given the opportunity for other investors to be allowed in bu the shareholders rejected it (as they knew they would)? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Wasn't it just put there to show that they had given the opportunity for other investors to be allowed in bu the shareholders rejected it (as they knew they would)? But it just makes it even more obvious when a director with shares and proxies amounting to 29% then votes against it. Surely better not to have the resolution at all and therefore draw less attention to your opposition to the principle? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gisabeer 409 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 But it just makes it even more obvious when a director with shares and proxies amounting to 29% then votes against it. Surely better not to have the resolution at all and therefore draw less attention to your opposition to the principle? sounds like someone changed their minds at the last minute. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 But it just makes it even more obvious when a director with shares and proxies amounting to 29% then votes against it. Surely better not to have the resolution at all and therefore draw less attention to your opposition to the principle? Not if your hiding your intentions. It was a bluff for the sfa. 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.