SteveC 150 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 If the McCoist story is true, then it is a disgrace and he has turned himself into an enemy of the club in a way that far outstrips any earlier damage to the club he caused out of personal greed. One would suppose if this betrayal is true, then it is greed or pique that is behind it again. He is genuinely deluded and thinks he did a great job so won't understand why he wasn't offered the job by King. So it could be petty revenge or could be not to dilute his shares or perhaps he just couldn't be arsed. Whatever the reason, if it pans out to be the truth, it makes him one of the worst of all the characters in our sorry saga. Whyte, Green, Ashley were pillaging and ruining a club that means fuck all to them (at best) - this would be viciously wounding a club you once called your own and to which you pledged your heart. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) can someone explain for us dullards how exactly mccoist ends up "kingmaker" and then sides with thieving bastards? what in detail does mccoist get out of doing this? Edited November 28, 2016 by jhunter 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,749 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) Still quite a bit of ifs and buts here. Wonder how those saying it was him who blocked Res 11 going through came to that knowledge. Is there a list of who voted pro or con? EDIT: Just read the DR article that says he did not vote at all (like last time around?) and his 1.25% might have tipped it. Hardly surprising that some see it as negatively as they do. Edited November 28, 2016 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 Still quite a bit of ifs and buts here. Wonder how those saying it was him who blocked Res 11 going through came to that knowledge. Is there a list of who voted pro or con? No ifs or buts at all, McCoist promised the Board he'd back the resolution then reneged. Of course there's a list of who voted for, against and abstained, how do you think they arrive at a total? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 No ifs or buts at all, McCoist promised the Board he'd back the resolution then reneged. Of course there's a list of who voted for, against and abstained, how do you think they arrive at a total? That makes it even worse, I wonder who got to him. ££££££££'s 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,948 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) No ifs or buts at all, McCoist promised the Board he'd back the resolution then reneged. If this is an accurate representation of events -and I have no reason to doubt it- McCoist's behaviour is completely despicable. I cannot think of any circumstance that would in any way justify such duplicity. Edited November 28, 2016 by Uilleam 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 IMHO, this is all a bit unfair on McCoist.....he is getting the blame for the resolution failing, thanks to hindsight. If he was the only shareholder not to vote, and it failed then fair enough. However there were many voters who didn't vote. McCoist is getting singled out because he is a high profile shareholder who happens to have enough % to have swung the vote. If Res11 failed by 1.3%, would anyone have cared if McCoist had voted or not??? Yes, it is strange that he didn't vote, but is anyone questioning why the others didn't vote??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,256 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 All shareholders especially those with large shareholdings are obliged to vote especially is previously canvassed by the board 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 IMHO, this is all a bit unfair on McCoist.....he is getting the blame for the resolution failing, thanks to hindsight. If he was the only shareholder not to vote, and it failed then fair enough. However there were many voters who didn't vote.McCoist is getting singled out because he is a high profile shareholder who happens to have enough % to have swung the vote. If Res11 failed by 1.3%, would anyone have cared if McCoist had voted or not??? Yes, it is strange that he didn't vote, but is anyone questioning why the others didn't vote??? Did they promise to the board that they would? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,749 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) No ifs or buts at all, McCoist promised the Board he'd back the resolution then reneged. Of course there's a list of who voted for, against and abstained, how do you think they arrive at a total? ... I "wondered" how those who said it was McCoist from the off knew of how he (or anyone else) cast his vote before it is public knowledge. No more, no less. Once there IS a list, we can see who apart from McCoist did abstain or decided not to vote. NB: I'm not saying that I like his decision, btw. Edited November 28, 2016 by der Berliner 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.