Bluedell 5,624 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I would imagine the London decision. You mean shareholders reaction to the location? They are unhappy but they've been unhappy before but I haven't seen any threats of violence etc. I'm still not sure what "events" they are referring to. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 If the police are unaware of any threat to their safety then there is no threat to their safety. Simple as that. This is a dreadful PR tactic merely to create division. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 You mean shareholders reaction to the location? They are unhappy but they've been unhappy before but I haven't seen any threats of violence etc. I'm still not sure what "events" they are referring to. It must be the fantasy events which go together to build up a picture of the board's opponents as crazy, swivel eyed Jockos who can't be trusted with the Rangers vehicle in the sophisticated world of high finance. King's a crook, Gilligan can't raise finance, Murray will be black balled, and the fans are hooligans. It's possible they actually believe it, I suppose. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 It must be the fantasy events which go together to build up a picture of the board's opponents as crazy, swivel eyed Jockos who can't be trusted with the Rangers vehicle in the sophisticated world of high finance. King's a crook, Gilligan can't raise finance, Murray will be black balled, and the fans are hooligans. It's possible they actually believe it, I suppose. I think that they're so entrenched in their views that they probably do believe it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 The fans should calm it until the 4th, they will look for any excuse to cancel or ( if possible ) declare the result void. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,183 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) If the police are unaware of any threat to their safety then there is no threat to their safety. Simple as that. This is a dreadful PR tactic merely to create division. I'd agree that this reeks of a PR tactic but I think it may go further than simple division. It may run alongside and possibly within the 'incumbent board's "Plan of Reaction' to the calling of the General Meeting. The apparent advice from the club's security men was broadcast several days ago and everyone knew of it and that the directors were going to heed it and not attend.............. WHY make an official statement on what was already known ? Who was the statement directed towards ? Being on the club website makes you think it was in the main for a support who already knew. A support who were not happy with the board, unhappy at being beaten by Raith Rovers and were not going to react well to such a communication. I briefly go back to last week and the Llambias communication to the RFB about the date of the GM which as we all know was wrong but our CEO was so sure that he gave Gary Gillian the OK to tell the world before an announcement was made to the markets. It would seem as though the incumbent board and those around them are looking to poke the support with a sharp stick every opportunity they can get......Why ? Coming back to yesterdays statement about the non-attendence of some directors (some don't usually attend anyway). Would they be putting together a case of flimsy evidence together so as to help justify a course of action they may want to take in the coming weeks ? -------------------------------------------------------- The hand of Jack Irvine was partly present in the LONG announcement to the stock exchange about the date of the GM and the boards thoughts on the various votes. I very much believe it is present in this latest tactic. If we look back to Irvine's 'crisis management' in the 5 months from the second Requisition (McColl/PM) of 2013, leading up to the AGM in December.......you'll remember he was on a handsome renumeration package from the club. Irvine's involvement also shows intent to go beyond the 'purly corporate' regards strategy. His on/off working relationship with the Easdale family is curious and it is my belief that he is effectively representing the interests of the 26% (Easdale's have always been a front). Who pays him and where does the money actually come from ? I would bet that it comes indirectly from the club. Edited February 9, 2015 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 if the board believe that their doing of necessity is putting them in direct danger from customers then the simplist solutions is to put the reigns into the hands of figures the customers back to do whats needed. starting to remind me of someone else. Who is that group that always end up arguing for reasons that at the same time prove them wrong? 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.