Easdale – Call a Halt and Get Round a Table

As The Daily Record reports that Rangers Director Sandy Easdale is set to sue Craig Houston of the Sons of Struth, it serves as a very high profile reminder that the relationship between the club, and certain anti board activists is at an all-time low.

While the anti-board activists have behaved in a despicable manner through various incarnations, I believe firmly that Easdale should not be acting. Yet.
The fact he is, for me, rings major alarm bells.

While his alleged legal action is in his own name, I believe that Graham Wallace, on behalf of the club, should have persuaded him to desist. At least for now.

Wallace, after all, is nearing completion of his 120 day review of the club’s operations, and should therefore be in a position to finally offer the kind of clarity on the recent past and on plans for the future that the Anti-board activists have been asking for all along.

If the plan is strong enough to stand behind, then the whole board should be primed to do just that, and if it is a review and plan of substance and credibility then the Anti-board activists will have to accept that it is time they stood down and backed the board.

Despite bluster to the contrary, following King’s meeting with the board, the self-styled “union of fans” agreed to allow the board to complete the 120 day review.
This means that they can back down if Dave King tells them to do so.

This is all supposition of course, but if the current board’s “plan” was rock solid, and several Rangers supporting individuals persisted in attempts to destabilise the board, by whichever means at their disposal, then frankly, I would expect the club to take action.

As it stands though, the club has made no effort to communicate to fans and the 120 day review isn’t complete.

A cynic might say that the club could in theory be taking action against Houston to silence critics ahead of the publication of the review and what may be in it.

That’s why, despite me believing that Houston and several individuals pulling his strings are in some way deserving of their current predicament due to their conduct, the club, and Easdale, are not winning over friends by silencing him the wrong way. The right way, clearly, is to give all Rangers fans confidence that the club is being managed properly, and has a robust plan to build for the future.

Houston, for his part, would have a greater chance of support from the wider fan base had he not disrespected any Rangers supporter asking questions, slated other Rangers supporters in the national press, or misled supporters about the involvement of Malcolm Murray in discussions about the Sons of Struth.

The quote from him in today’s Record that “I’ve made his lawyers aware of similar posts on three other forums”, should ring alarm bells for any supporters of SoS who may have been caught up in the hype. One would hope that it is not Rangers fans on Rangers forums that Houston is grassing up to save his own skin.

Neither side are acting in a matter befitting Rangers, and I for one would be angered if some suggestions for RFFF money to be used to fund Houston’s legal defence, were approved.
This money, which was raised in good faith by the support during the summer of 2012, should not be used to support an individual fighting Rangers directors. The suggestion is absurd.

While Houston looks to have been pushed under the bus by other anti-board activists, one would expect that they personally should fund his defence, and not leave him on the streets for fighting their cause. If, for instance, the RST can raise funds of £1.5M to “loan” to the club, then they can afford to foot Houston’s legal bills.

This whole episode is unedifying but the most worrying aspect for me is the club’s apparent lack of confidence that the 120 day review and subsequent plan isn’t strong enough to silence even the strongest critics.

In some ways the legalities of some dodgy allegations on a Facebook page are an unwelcome side show and I hope they don’t’ overshadow the most important business review in the recent history of the club. That review is where all eyes should be focused.

Bill.

Don’t Be Conned

As younger voters become turned off by the Independence Referendum, this should ring the largest alarm bells with Better Together.
As BBC Scotland and STV and the Scottish media pummel the public in Scotland, the saturation of the airwaves of the “arguments” between the Nationalists and Unionists is irritating enough for me as someone with a keen interest in both maintaining the union, and challenging many of the lies u-turns and misleading statements from the SS (SalmondSturgeon) Party.

My view is that the Yes campaign are not only trying to con the public in to voting for them, but also trying to con Better Together to change their campaigning strategy.

Quite rightly, the Better Together Campaign has challenged many of the Yes Campaign’s lies and u-turns, and shown that there is no sensible basis for separation at all.

After months of disproving and dismantling every “yes” argument, the Nat whiners have decided to change tact and deflect from this by complaining that the “No” campaign is too negative.

While some unionists appear to have accepted that assertion and are set to focus only on selling the good things about the Union, I believe firmly that they cannot stop also challenging the relentless Yes campaign’s questionable claims and assertions.

Take this example of one of the latest opinion polls, from the Panelbase website inaccurately reporting that the Yes campaign are now polling circa 40%.

This is a report in the Scotsman

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-panelbase-poll-boosts-yes-1-3347389

“A total of 40% of Scots say they will vote Yes, according to the poll conducted by Panelbase for Newsnet Scotland. That figure is just 5% behind those who say they will vote No. There are still 15% of Scots who are undecided, according to the poll.

The five-point gap is down from 12 points on a previous Panelbase poll last month which had Yes on 37%, with No on 49%.

The latest poll suggests that excluding ‘don’t knows’, support for Yes has reached 47% with No on 53%. The results suggest a swing of just three points is needed to put Yes ahead in September.”


Actually the Panelbase poll did not say that in the slightest

The actual poll percentage for “Yes” was 38%, but the results show a Raw figure, and also a weighted figure. Guess which figure was issued in the Press Release to Reuters from the nationalist website newsnet Scotland? Yes, that would be the weighted one.

http://www.panelbase.com/media/polls/NewsnetScotlandPollv3.pdf

It should also be noted that excluding “don’t knows” skews the figures

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-dont-knows


Notice that the Panelbase poll also suggest that of those interviewed 35% voted SNP at the last election. Remember that the SNP actually returned 22% of the vote at the last election.
Note also that Panelbase have conducted polls for nationalist leaning websites, including extremists “Wings Over Scotland”.

The polls are not random, and are asked of the same skewed audience each time

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/panelbase-bans-new-members-from-independence-polls-1-3080830

I’d suggest that the relatively static 35-38% Yes figure returned in most polls is far more accurate, but the electorate in Scotland should be made aware of facts and facts only, negative or not

Bill

It’s all about The Rangers

Sometimes I think that its Rangers who are keeping the fires burning of the Scottish media.

Of course, they are also joined by Channel 4 stooge Alex Thomson, who seems to be intent on sacrificing his own diminishing credibility to keep some bloggers tarred with a sectarian brush happy, and Graham Spiers, who has done a complete u turn against the Offensive Behaviour at football Act, despite being one of the main driving forces for it happening, and indeed advocating that thought crime should be punished.

In theory, I’d like us Rangers fans to be in a position to ignore these two cretins, and focus on the very pressing matters with the Rangers board, Dave King, and various supporters groups keen to gain a shareholding backed voice within the club but I have to say it gave me great pleasure to see Thomson ridiculed on Twitter on his latest claims that Rangers were set to announce Administration yesterday.

Spiers has largely escaped the wrath of the support and can count himself lucky that Thomson won clown of the day and deflected attention away from the disgusting move by Celtic to rescind the Act, now that the Act has shone a light on the dark republican underbelly of the Celtic support.

After decades of campaigning against “bigotry” and “sectarianism” it seems that the campaigners didn’t sit on some moral high ground at all, but were instead only seeking a licence for Celtic fans to do as they wish, while Rangers fans get jailed for challenging Irish Republicanism and support for racist terrorist groups.

Elsewhere the club’s financial woes keep the Daily Record in business as Dave King prepares to fly to the UK amidst some smoke and mirrors from the Rangers boardroom in a propaganda battle for the hearts and minds of the Rangers support.

While I noticed a poll on Vanguard Bears that only 3% of their members polled supported the current board, the relatively high percentage willing to give Graham Wallace a chance was something I agreed with, probably until this morning, when it became apparent that Sandy Easdale had misled supporters on Sky Sports News by claiming that Dave King had not offered to invest in the club.

Graham Wallace is a very credible board figure, who has a very impressive CV of the kind of level a Rangers CEO should have, but he must feel that he is surrounded by sharks and piranhas in murky boardroom waters, and he will need to assert his authority in that boardroom before his very impressive CV becomes tarnished.

I suspect that Wallace will need to bring forward his 120 Day review if he has any chance of maintaining the levels of confidence that many have in him,

Let me be clear, I have no agenda for any of the competing fan groups, or even for King, but for the club to be stabilised by someone capable of doing so, and structured in such a fashion that trust is earned and maintained in those running the club, and that we have a believable plan to return to the top of the Premier league within 3 years.

Will that happen under Wallace? Will it happen under King?

Frankly, until either of them tell us in detail how they will get there I can’t judge.

All I do know is that there needs to be a relatively quick resolution to this battle in order for the fans to believe the club are on the right track – whether it be through one side gaining control, or through some happy medium where both “sides” join forces for the good of the club.

Time will tell.

Bill

The Time is Now

As the battle for hearts and minds of Rangers fans steps up this morning between Dave King and the current board, it is still mired in smoke and mirrors, which makes any decision from the Rangers support over what to do very difficult.

I suspect that Rangers fans will need to keep a record of the public proclamations and statements from both the current board, and from Mr King.

The problem for independent supporters is that there are so many Stakeholder groups claiming to represent the best interests of the club, from the current board, to King, to the Rangers FiRST movement, to the newly formed Union of Fans, that claims to represent the Rangers Supporters Trust, Assembly, Association, Blue Order, Union Bears and Sons of Struth.

The fact that the substantial groups in that “Union of Fans” here have not yet consulted their members before asking them to support a campaign not to re-new Season Tickets is largely overlooked by those pushing their agenda to force the current board out and force Dave King/Paul Murray IN.

The latest move by King is in response to the loans provided by Sandy Easdale and claims from Rangers CEO that the club had been in dialogue with King

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/graham-wallace-qa-rangers-chief-3181015

To be absolutely precise, these are the quotes from Wallace in the interview with Keith Jackson

“KJ: Haven’t you created a potential problem with other shareholders or would-be
investors who might ask why they weren’t invited to make a similar loan? And I’m talking here specifically about Dave King.

GW: The board has had a dialogue in recent weeks with Dave King. He has not been rebuffed by the board. He is not currently a shareholder. He has indicated he’d be an interested participant in a future equity raising at the appropriate point in time. Our shareholder base has also expressed willingness to invest in fresh equity.

Dave King has not come to the club with an offer, other than an interest in participating in a future equity.

KJ: Just to be clear, are you saying Dave King has not offered the club short-term funding?

GW: He has not done that, no. Dave is not a shareholder and he has not made the club any offer of financial assistance. That’s not a criticism of Dave King. I have not met him but as a board we have had some dialogue to try to understand his intentions because there has been a lot of talk about his interest in investing. There has been no other proposal made by him at all.”

Note that Wallace only mentioned King when challenged specifically about him by Jackson

While King released an official statement, and was quoted in The Scottish Sun as saying “Mr Wallace has never spoken to me or even attempted to communicate with me in any form whatsoever”

The Sun reported that King would release a statement that would detail him offering a £1M interest free loan to Rangers that was rebuffed by the current board
Note that in his official statement, King never claimed to have offered any such loan

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/dave-king-official-statement-rangers-3185424

Rangers then released a statement on their website stating that the claims within the Scottish Sun were inaccurate. All the evidence would suggest that The Scottish Sun’s report of events bears little resemblance to either King’s position, or the position of Somers’ statement, which simply re-stated what Wallace said in the interview with Jackson.

The General perception across the support is that King offered an interest free loan that was rebuffed by Rangers in favour of the Laxey loan, due to the Sun’s reportage, and some hints on Twitter from prominent supporters close to Paul Murray.

While the usual suspects that head up various fan groups cover the well work ground of demanding board change, the response from the club to the support has been weak, and not of the substance that the wider fan base needs to make an informed judgement to continue to support the team by renewing Season Tickets, and to ignore calls for change.

Frankly, the longer they leave it the less credible they look, and the more credible King looks, whatever fans’ movement he chooses to further his aims.

Even if fans’ groups conduct themselves in a manner that doesn’t befit the Rangers way, and resort to lying, smearing and propaganda about the current board, frankly, if the Board cannot convince the whole support that the small band of activists are barking up the wrong tree, then we should all be joining the Anti board movement and demanding change.

It really is that simple

The concept of listening to fans via the “Ready to Listen” banner promoted by the club recently should be the reverse. The club should be ready to talk.

If the club is being managed properly, has proper governance in place, and has a plan to both be lean and be able to grow income streams, then the time to tell us in detail is right now

If the current board have run out of ideas and are struggling to create a workable business plan that will return Rangers to the top of Scottish football, then they should resign and make enough noise that Blue Pitch, Margarita and company have no option but to sell up to King

This constant battle and negativity is damaging the club and impacting our ability to recover as quickly as we need to.

Those custodians of the club have it within their gift to tell us.

What’s stopping them?

Bill

Saved

As Celtic prepare themselves to celebrate 3 in a row, with Rangers absent from the top league for two of them, imaginations are running wild amongst their supporters that they are now on the road to ten in a row.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/every-empire-can-crumble-but-make-no-mistake-10-in-a-row-is-on-for-celtic.23525085

Of course, Rangers don’t have our troubles to seek, but we are on course to return to the Premiership in August 2015, shortly after it is expected that Celtic will have secured their 4th title on the bounce.
No Rangers fan I know expects that we will win the title in 2016 on our return to the Premiership, as Celtic have been able to call on Champions League riches, and some astute dealings by Neil Lennon, to paper over the financial cracks at Celtic Park.

We do however, believe it is slightly presumptuous by Celtic fans that the biggest club in Scotland (that’s Rangers) will not be able to recover our rightful place at the top of Scottish football until 2023.

It strikes me more that those indulging in such conjecture are more likely to be trying to kick the Rangers support while we are down than actually believing it.

It may be that Rangers have more important fish to fry in the coming months than bother about retorts to this kind of nonsense, but Michael Grant can be assured that this article has been saved for a rainy day

Bill.

What Next?

Some Rangers fans may feel comfortable that the club has entered in to loan arrangements with Laxey partners, and Sandy Easdale, however, I will categorically state now that I am not one of them.
Following news last week that this was likely, it’s only this morning that some detail has been announced

While last week’s coverage suggested that the loans were investments in to the club in return for shares, the announcement this morning makes it clear that the facilities are indeed loans, with no option of shares for Easdale, meaning the club (we) are due to pay him back £500k before the season has even started.

Laxey have an option on Shares, but, given the sheer volume involved (Approx 304,750 shares at current prices) this would require an EGM to approve such a substantial issue of shares, and increase in voting power to Laxey, with an EGM facing a dilemma of accepting this, or saddling the club with a £1.12M Debt to Laxey at the start of the season.

On the face of it, while Easdale has been cute in presenting his loan as interest free, it is still a loan, and by no means an investment.

While Jack Irvine might try and bullshit the support on to believing that Easdale/BPH/AN Other have oodles of cash to “invest”, this deal proves once and for all that no such thing will happen.

Other investors have a right to be aggrieved, if reports are accurate that they were not consulted about these loans, nor given an opportunity to make their own proposals

It looks to these untrained eyes that Laxey are running the club, and have us over a barrel.

Like many supporters, I do not wish for many more months of the current movers and shakers at the club being at loggerheads with forces associated to Paul Murray as that conflict itself is damaging, but I feel that this current situation is unacceptable.

The problem is, while Dave King has been lurking in the background, it appears unlikely that he will launch a hostile takeover, as that would require significant purchases of shares from those very same groups who are in control of the club at present.

Unless King has a change of position and decides that lining the pockets of Easdale, Laxey and company is a necessary evil, then there looks to be few painless options for other shareholders and supporters.

Some will use this as an opportunity to drive Fan Ownership, however, the RST’s scheme is still being administrated by the same individuals who have repeatedly failed to communicate to their members about upheaval to their own board, so they cannot be trusted, while the alternative scheme being championed by some former RST board members is still in it’s infancy, and far from capturing the imagination of the levels of support it would need to make inroads in to the club’s shareholding.

So, where does that leave the normal supporter and minor shareholder?

In a pickle.

Firstly, we need some detail from Graham Wallace as to the “120 Day Review”, and what the current burn rate of spend at the club is per month, and the basis for these loans.
The level of communication is just not good enough.

Secondly, unless we get a credible and confidence building explanation from Wallace, we need to pick what option from those available to us, is the one we should lend our support to, whether it be the Rangers (Fi)RST movement, which some may think is just the RST without Mark Dingwall and Gordon Dinnie, The Remaining Supporters Trust, or pressuring King to invest.

Doing nothing does not look to be a feasible option.

If anyone has any brighter ideas, then I’m all ears

Bill

These People are NOT liberal

I’ve seen a lot of anger over Graham Spiers’ latest attention seeking column defending the Official Celtic fan groups campaign to chart the IRA anthem “Roll of Honour”

This vile song has been described in great detail on The Rangers Standard, and to a lesser extent on Vanguard Bears, so I certainly won’t be repeating the lyrics here, but I will stress that it is a song that praises Republican terrorists

http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/309-roll-of-dishonour-celtic-s-shame

Spiers surprises no one with his defence of such a disgusting homage to the Anti British Racists, bigots and killers of the “Brits Out” era of the Provos and INLA.

Of course, he dresses up his defence of The Green Brigade, and “Fans Against Criminalisation” as some kind of uber liberal approach to free speech, with some disingenuous waffle about “The Irish Question” thrown in to try and justify not being able to take up a stance against murdering bigots and gangsters.

Taking up a liberal stance inconsistently though exposes him as having an agenda following years of distinctly non liberal posturing and campaigning against Rangers songbook

He’s as transparent as cling film

He’s also presumably free to write whatever provo-cative filth riles decent thinking people in Scotland, therefor The Herald is equally culpable for allowing publication, just a few days after reporting Celtic fans “success” at having Roll of Honour charted.

I monitored a number of Rangers fans challenging Herald editor Magnus Llewellin last week on that disgraceful front page and he failed to reply.

This further insult to the Rangers support from Graham Spiers in the same newspaper, should serve as a reminder to Rangers fans, and to decent people across Scotland that this newspaper should be shunned, and it’s editor told why it is being shunned. If you are going to stop buying the newspaper (better late than never), then you have a duty to tell the editor why. For good measure you should tell the regional MD of Newsquest Tim Blott why you are no longer buying his product.

This is not a job for someone else. This is a job for me, and you. All of you.

During Llewellin’s time as Deputy Editor and then Editor he has overseen a drastic reduction in circulation and income. The Herald’s circulation is in the region of 40k, down by 7k in the year, and only further reductions will reverse their disregard for decent people in Scotland.

Magnus.llewellin@heraldandtimes.co.uk

Tim.blott@newsquest.co.uk

As Spiers was writing his piece, Glasgow University students were celebrating the election of Edward Snowdon as Rector. It seems that joining the military, then putting your colleagues and your country at risk of terrorist attack is something to celebrate in Glasgow

There is something fundamentally wrong that the University can accept such a candidate, but I for one was not surprised. If they can employ and defend Jeanette Findlay, for her outspoken support of Irish Republicanism, then they too are worthy of scrutiny.

I don’t doubt there are increasing numbers who feel that the wrongs in this country need to be addressed, and are of the view that none of Scotland’s political elite or media establishment represent the majority

It is for this reason that I have started writing some non football content for http://thescottishunionist.wordpress.com/, and I’d suggest my readers pop over to a site that I feel could be the beginnings of something very special

Bill.