The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Lets just say in 2006 he transferred over ?56 million to the family trust alone after a sale of shares and according the the state at the time.......

 

'The State says that King is the richest man in South Africa and has already spent R65m just on legal representation in South Africa.'

 

The state is wrong then. SA's richest man is a guy called Johan Rupert who is worth around $6.6bn.

[Phil D. Corners]

Not sure I get what's going on here, could king not jus pay Ashley back his ?5million then that's the end of the saga no?

I assume it's because King wants away to get the money back and the club can't offer that just now seeing as they are losing money. (Hence the need for the loan(s) in the first place. )

[I P Knightley]

 

 

PSS the one thing I do agree with is that the current Rangers board needs to get a grip on the finances going forward and the danger is that they do not or waste money in an attempt to pander to the Ibrox masses. However unlike the past few years they do have some expertise in the field of finance.

 

Pandering to the masses will be their undoing.

 

No successful businessman comes into (Scottish) football with the intention of getting an honest return on investment that might have been delivered in other fields of business. Not unless they're as ruthless as Ashley appears to be in his dealings at Newcastle.

 

King's already tried to play Mr Nice Guy to the hordes. He became a saviour and, imo, is revelling in the White Knight status attached to him by the great unwashed. Rallying them all into not buying their STs; in doing so, creating more financial hardship for the company; then stepping in to buy shares, the price of which his actions had suppressed? Yep, he may be a sound (or properly crooked and dodgy) businessman when he's doing whatever he does in RSA but, when he's in Ibrox, he's as much a crook as they've all been.

[King of the North]

I'm genuinely baffled why a particular poster is so determined to paint Dave King and the current Rangers board as shrewd financial wizards, and the current situation as part and parcel of this cunning wheeling and dealing, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

Statements like 'He is the richest man in South Africa', when a simple google search can easily prove otherwise are hard to comprehend. Is it just picking a fight for the sake of it, or some desperate need for attention, or even blind loyalty to some faded and misguided notion of loyalist links between our club and the old Rangers club.

 

Not trying to take the piss, just genuinely find it odd and hard to understand. Surely there is nothing but joy for us all in the Huns' current predicament?

Edited June 4, 2015 by King of the North

[Zico]

if you check your facts you will find that George Taylor is not the managing director OF Morgan Stanley.

Indeed. Morgan Stanley have over 150 managing directors.

 

Also, since we're talking about facts with regards to the successes (or not) of the Rangers board, I've mentioned before that I worked with Paul Murray. He worked in private equity and it is a fact that he was completely unsuccessful at raising investment for the PE funds at the place I worked and at other firms he worked for and as a result, the funds closed and he left those firms. He wasn't daft but he's no financial whiz kid (to use a term beloved of the Daily Record).

 

I don't know about the other Rangers directors, but those two will not have millions that they can afford to throw around.

[CJGJ]

if you check your facts you will find that George Taylor is not the managing director OF Morgan Stanley.

Check the post as it clearly states A managing director....A not THE

 

Hope thats okay with you.

[scottg71]

Check the post as it clearly states A managing director....A not THE

 

Hope thats okay with you.[/quote

 

Without doubt the biggest bellend on Kickback

Now that's some achievement

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Unknown user]

Indeed. Morgan Stanley have over 150 managing directors.

 

Also, since we're talking about facts with regards to the successes (or not) of the Rangers board, I've mentioned before that I worked with Paul Murray. He worked in private equity and it is a fact that he was completely unsuccessful at raising investment for the PE funds at the place I worked and at other firms he worked for and as a result, the funds closed and he left those firms. He wasn't daft but he's no financial whiz kid (to use a term beloved of the Daily Record).

 

I don't know about the other Rangers directors, but those two will not have millions that they can afford to throw around.

So what's the script with these managing directors?

 

To my limited understanding of companies on this scale there would be one managing director in a company, maybe a handful at most.

 

But then I Googled Taylor and found that he was one of 200+ managing directors appointed that particular December, and that their average pay is around 360,000 dollars a year.

 

Lot of money to you or I but not in the ballpark some seem to be thinking.

 

Any Morgan Stanley experts out there?

[Unknown user]

http://news.efinancialcareers.com/nl-en/167611/banks-weird-hierarchies-analysts-associates-vps-mds-really/

 

Found this. Basically, an MD at Morgan Stanley is a posh salesman

[269miles]

This is prob one of the best articles about king & sums him up nicely ..

http://www.biznews.com/undictated/2013/09/04/king-seeks-a-fresh-start-after-his-damascene-conversion-he-might-just-get-it/

Would the judge have said this if King was a Jew ? -

 

Mr Chipps built a case that resonated with Mr Justice Hartzenberg who opened his September 2002 Judgment with: ?Scotsmen are known to be thrifty. (King) is a Scot. He cannot be accused of squandering his money on the unnecessary payment of income tax.?

[ghkjambo]

Would the judge have said this if King was a Jew ? -

 

Mr Chipps built a case that resonated with Mr Justice Hartzenberg who opened his September 2002 Judgment with: ?Scotsmen are known to be thrifty. (King) is a Scot. He cannot be accused of squandering his money on the unnecessary payment of income tax.?

True, it's a cert it wouldn't have been said about a Jew. However, I think we Scots can laugh such a jibe off. Recent history has not been so kind to Jews, hence I think there is a difference between the statements. I don't think there was anything sinister about the reference to the frugality of a Scotsman, it's going to be a while before the same thing can be assumed in the context of Jews. It's a sad reminder of how brutal people can be. Heavy stuff, sorry.

[CJGJ]

Check the post as it clearly states A managing director....A not THE

 

Hope thats okay with you.[/quote

 

Without doubt the biggest bellend on Kickback

Now that's some achievement

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ouch a fatally wounding comment       (but a view which you are free to post...can't agree with it though. My manners will prevent me from posting my feelings re your good self)

 

As I said dare to differ and look what happens and yet your view is no more valid than mine. When the dust has settled we'll see just who was nearer the truth at which point humble pie may have to be eaten.......but by whom ?

Edited June 5, 2015 by CJGJ

[Jambo 4 Ever]

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/582318/Huddersfield-400k-Bid-Rangers-Nicky-Law

 

Looks like Law may be off

[vegas-voss]

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/582318/Huddersfield-400k-Bid-Rangers-Nicky-Law

 

Looks like Law may be off

?400k for him if that's the going rate then our squad must be worth quite a lot of cash as he is rubbish.

[CJGJ]

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-board-to-ignore-mike-ashley-loan-demand-1-3792217

 

?It seems to the Directors that Sports Direct no longer wishes to make the Facility available to the Club and that MASH has put ordinary resolution 1 to the GM to assist Sports Direct in this regard,? added the board statement. ?It is not clear to the Directors why this would be in the Company or its shareholders? interests.

<a href="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/jump/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=5;pos=mpu4;pos=artmpu4;sz=300x253,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" target="_blank"> <img src="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/ad/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=5;pos=mpu4;pos=artmpu4;sz=300x253,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" alt="Dynamic Dart Advertisement" /> </a>

<a href="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/jump/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=6;pos=mpu2;pos=artmpu2;sz=300x252,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" target="_blank"> <img src="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/ad/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=6;pos=mpu2;pos=artmpu2;sz=300x252,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" alt="Dynamic Dart Advertisement" /> </a>

?The Directors do not consider that, at this time, the repayment of ?5million to Sports Direct is the best use of the Company?s resources.

?The Directors are restricted in what they can say about Rangers Retail Limited (RRL) and have been cautioned about breaching confidentiality provisions. The Directors do not believe the transfer back to the club of a 26 per cent interest in RRL will serve to resolve the issues which the Directors consider have to be addressed.

?There are a number of steps required to rebuild the company and the club and all of these require resource. The Directors will keep these issues under continuous review and if, exercising their skill, care and judgement, the Directors determine that it is desirable for the club to repay the Facility and this will assist with the overall arrangements between the club, MASH and Sports Direct the Directors will take appropriate action.

?Such a decision will, however, be based solely on what is in the best interests of the company and the club and will not be unduly influenced by the interests of a single shareholder.

<a href="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/jump/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=7;pos=mpu3;pos=artmpu3;sz=300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" target="_blank"> <img src="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/ad/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=7;pos=mpu3;pos=artmpu3;sz=300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" alt="Dynamic Dart Advertisement" /> </a>

<a href="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/jump/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=8;pos=mpu3;pos=artmpu3;sz=300x253,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" target="_blank"> <img src="http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/ad/scotsman.jp/spfl-lower-divisions;nav=sport;nav=football;nav=spfl-lower-divisions;pgid=13792217;tile=8;pos=mpu3;pos=artmpu3;sz=300x253,300x250;;gs_cat=GS_TOPIC;weathertoday=cloudy;weathertomorrow=lightshowers;ord=[timestamp]?" alt="Dynamic Dart Advertisement" /> </a>

?The MASH facility is just one element of a series of contracts which have been put in place between MASH, Sports Direct and related entities and the club. The Directors believe that all of these arrangements require to be addressed collectively. It would be disadvantageous for the club and the company to be dealing with such arrangements piecemeal and on terms dictated by MASH.

?The Directors accordingly recommend voting Against Resolution 1.?

Rangers, meanwhile, have added a second resolution to the agenda which calls for their contracts with Sports Direct to be renegotiated.

The board statement said: ?The Directors are concerned with the continued and dramatic reduction in income generated by retail operations. The Directors are aware that many supporters of the club will not purchase club merchandise from Sports Direct because they do not believe the current contractual arrangements between the club and Sports Direct adequately reward the club.

?The Directors very much want to improve relations with Sports Direct and have made that clear to Sports Direct?s senior executives, however, this has to proceed on the basis of mutual understanding, respect and reward. In the Directors? view, if matters continue as they stand, this will not be to the commercial advantage of either the club or Sports Direct.?

[Martin_T]

I used to work for Morgan Stanley, I was 2 promotions away from being a Vice President and 3 away from Executive Director. Job titles in American banks overstate the importance of the role.

[Mr Nobody]

Does anyone actually know the repayment terms on the loan. It is clear that the repayment of the loan will mean that Rangers will get their 26% back.

 

Is MA under the loan agreement entitled to be repaid whenever he wants or was it an open ended loan.

 

The answer to that question will likely determine how it proceeds. If MA has the ability to call the loan in then dies it really matter what anyone votes at the EGM. MA will just pursue it through the appropriate legal channels.

 

If he doesn't have the ability then there's probably not a lot be can do other than to continue with the lucrative deal he has in place.

 

So does anyone actually know the answer to that question. I would have thought it would be reasonable to disclose that prior to asking people to vote on it

[CJGJ]

I used to work for Morgan Stanley, I was 2 promotions away from being a Vice President and 3 away from Executive Director. Job titles in American banks overstate the importance of the role.

Serious question here.

 

Does the salary mean that you would have had a spare ?1million to loan asp as the gentleman in question did ?

[DETTY29]

Heard a rumour one of the 3 bears wives was exceptionally unhappy on how the latest tranche was funded.

 

When she eventually found out.

[Sydney]

Based on data from 2014, Managing Directors at Morgan Stanley earned $744,817 (about 480,000 pounds)

 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/morgan-stanley-salaries-2014-11

[FarmerTweedy]

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12306115.html

 

Steve444: Bringing you yesterday's news tomorrow!!!!

[FarmerTweedy]

Now obviously this is old news, but it means for ?52,561 he owned 6.45% of Newco.

 

So it means the whole club is only worth ?1 million lol

 

Old news that means nothing remotely like you say it does!

 

I realise there's a certain amount of irony in me commenting on you posting old news given that your post is itself a few days old now! I've fallen a bit behind on the thread and am now having a catchup!

[soonbe110]

Check the post as it clearly states A managing director....A not THE

 

Hope thats okay with you.

Post 81995 You stated Of Morgan Stanley. It's in black and white. Hard to argue with my point but I'm sure you will try.

[soonbe110]

I'm genuinely baffled why a particular poster is so determined to paint Dave King and the current Rangers board as shrewd financial wizards, and the current situation as part and parcel of this cunning wheeling and dealing, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Statements like 'He is the richest man in South Africa', when a simple google search can easily prove otherwise are hard to comprehend. Is it just picking a fight for the sake of it, or some desperate need for attention, or even blind loyalty to some faded and misguided notion of loyalist links between our club and the old Rangers club.

Not trying to take the piss, just genuinely find it odd and hard to understand. Surely there is nothing but joy for us all in the Huns' current predicament?

Agree, it's a bizarre one. Maybe time for the mods to give him a break and some time to think.

[soonbe110]

So what's the script with these managing directors?

To my limited understanding of companies on this scale there would be one managing director in a company, maybe a handful at most.

But then I Googled Taylor and found that he was one of 200+ managing directors appointed that particular December, and that their average pay is around 360,000 dollars a year.

Lot of money to you or I but not in the ballpark some seem to be thinking.

Any Morgan Stanley experts out there?

its a business card title designed to open customers doors and speak to their senior management. Similar to the title Vice-President. Some U.S. Companies have hundreds of Vice-Presidents. I'm CEO, Managing Director, Chairman and President of the company I work for. It's my company and I'm the only employee but I'm the most senior employee in it.

[soonbe110]

Based on data from 2014, Managing Directors at Morgan Stanley earned $744,817 (about 480,000 pounds)

 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/morgan-stanley-salaries-2014-11

Almost half of which should have gone to the taxman unless they are all at it. ?300k pa net doesn't give you the wherewithal to invest millions into anything without putting your possessions up as collateral.

[Angus Young]

The Lying King ( AKA Walter Mitty ) seems to not like spending/investing money in sevco

[DETTY29]

Someone persauded Morgan Stanley to invest in RIFC though.

[The People's Chimp]

Agree, it's a bizarre one. Maybe time for the mods to give him a break and some time to think.

 

So, because he has a different opinion/doesn't agree with you or this thread's groupthink, the mods should suspend him? Jesus wept. 

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

Serious question here.

 

Does the salary mean that you would have had a spare ?1million to loan asp as the gentleman in question did ?

And do you know:

 

a) if the gentleman in question did lend TRFC ?1m, or are you just assuming he did because that's the way it's been painted in the MSM?

if he did 'invest', was it his own money?

c) is he sleeping well at night?

 

If you know the answers to these questions, please let us know how you know this?

 

PS I am not expecting you to answer these direct questions, you seldom, if ever, do, I'm just making the point that, in the same way no one else has any information not in the public domain, you don't either. At best, I'd suggest you just lap up every piece of TRFC PR pumped out through the SMSM. Still, it would be nice, if you would, just once, make an effort to convince us you do have knowledge that eludes the rest of us, rather than just stating, as fact, things of a quality and insight that could have been lifted straight from a 'Rangers' fan site!

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

Someone persauded Morgan Stanley to invest in RIFC though.

I doubt very much that anyone had to convince anyone at Morgan Stanley, let alone the bank itself, to invest money in RIFC. Unless George Taylor is of an even lower level than has been indicated here, he would have the authority to either make the investment himself, or instruct a dealer to do so. He may well, of course, have had to justify his actions that have resulted in a high percentage loss (though not a great deal in monetary terms), either for the company (unlikely), or for the funds they manage on behalf of other people. I would imagine, though, that a loss of such a relatively small amount would barely raise an eyebrow at any of the larger merchant banks such as Morgan Stanley.

[Zico]

So what's the script with these managing directors?

 

To my limited understanding of companies on this scale there would be one managing director in a company, maybe a handful at most.

 

But then I Googled Taylor and found that he was one of 200+ managing directors appointed that particular December, and that their average pay is around 360,000 dollars a year.

 

Lot of money to you or I but not in the ballpark some seem to be thinking.

 

Any Morgan Stanley experts out there?

It's a divisional title common in large US financial companies. My boss is a managing director and while she's got plenty money, she's not throwing $10 million at the New York Red Bulls.

[reaths17]

So, because he has a different opinion/doesn't agree with you or this thread's groupthink, the mods should suspend him? Jesus wept. 

Spouting a bunch of none truths, in reply to others points "whether they be speculative" or otherwise, would be defined as trawling I would think and this is against board rules.

 

all the hun sympathisers holding red hands together on a thread that is clearly labelled "detrimental talk about newco" on a hearts board.

 

theres one form of jesus weeping on his white horse, that's for sure.

Edited June 5, 2015 by reaths17

[XB52]

So, because he has a different opinion/doesn't agree with you or this thread's groupthink, the mods should suspend him? Jesus wept. 

have to agree, let him carry on his crusade, carrying the torch for King and rangers. Totally bizarre for a Hearts fan to get so worked up about people slagging of King/rangers but it is his right to post what he likes and our right to laugh at him

[OmiyaHearts]

Spouting a bunch of none truths, in reply to others points "whether they be speculative" or otherwise, would be defined as trawling I would think and this is against board rules.

 

all the hun sympathisers holding red hands together on a thread that is clearly labelled "detrimental talk about newco" on a hearts board.

 

theres one form of jesus weeping on his white horse, that's for sure.

Let's be fair - spouting none truths is 90% of the 1,600 pages on this thread. It's people saying what they think is going to happen and being wrong.

Edited June 5, 2015 by donaldmclachlan

[Feeno]

Spouting a bunch of none truths, in reply to others points "whether they be speculative" or otherwise, would be defined as trawling I would think and this is against board rules.

 

all the hun sympathisers holding red hands together on a thread that is clearly labelled "detrimental talk about newco" on a hearts board.

 

theres one form of jesus weeping on his white horse, that's for sure.

 

I know you've got that wrong but to be fair to you, he is fishing on an industrial scale. So it is still very apt

[The People's Chimp]

Spouting a bunch of none truths, in reply to others points "whether they be speculative" or otherwise, would be defined as trawling I would think and this is against board rules.

 

all the hun sympathisers holding red hands together on a thread that is clearly labelled "detrimental talk about newco" on a hearts board.

 

theres one form of jesus weeping on his white horse, that's for sure.

 

Word salad for elevenses sir? 

[Spellczech]

Let's be fair - spouting none truths is 90% of the 1,600 pages on this thread. It's people saying what they think is going to happen and being wrong.

That is the nature of speculation...Don't think we are in a position to say right or wrong yet. I'd suggest we are all still waiting to see what King does. So far, in the last almost 3 months, he has done absolutely nothing...only the SFA has done anything since the EGM which marked the passing of control to the "RRM".

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

Getting away from all the personal stuff...

 

This is like a game of chess. Both Ashley and King will have looked at the board and several moves ahead.

 

I doubt if it is purely about money for Ashley: he does not need the ?5m.

It is probably all about money for King. He does not have ?5m to spend - or maybe he just does not want to spend it on Ashley.

 

The merchandising contracts are the where the real battlefield is. From what has been posted here, it looks like Ashley has Rangers by the dangly bits.

 

But the big challenge for King is to get his books in order. There is too much money going out to make Rangers attractive as an investment.

 

Unless King has an ace up his sleeve, then it certainly looks as if Ashley is playing this game with two queens.

[reaths17]

Let's be fair - spouting none truths is 90% of the 1,600 pages on this thread. It's people saying what they think is going to happen and being wrong.

 

everybodies speculating mainly for what they would like to happen, he states his as the gospel and implies that everyone else is lying.

I know you've got that wrong but to be fair to you, he is fishing on an industrial scale. So it is still very apt

 1 page is fishing, we've had about 4,5 of this, ruining the thread, now that's trawling. its painful and time consuming going through it all.

[Unknown user]

Getting away from all the personal stuff...

 

This is like a game of chess. Both Ashley and King will have looked at the board and several moves ahead.

 

I doubt if it is purely about money for Ashley: he does not need the ?5m.

It is probably all about money for King. He does not have ?5m to spend - or maybe he just does not want to spend it on Ashley.

 

The merchandising contracts are the where the real battlefield is. From what has been posted here, it looks like Ashley has Rangers by the dangly bits.

 

But the big challenge for King is to get his books in order. There is too much money going out to make Rangers attractive as an investment.

 

Unless King has an ace up his sleeve, then it certainly looks as if Ashley is playing this game with two queens.

I agree that it doesn't appear to be just about the money for Ashley, it looks a bit more personal than that to me too.

 

It's generally wise to try and avoid noising up incredibly rich, ruthless men who have the ability to make life awkward. King should know that

[Feeno]

everybodies speculating mainly for what they would like to happen, he states his as the gospel and implies that everyone else is lying.

 1 page is fishing, we've had about 4,5 of this, ruining the thread, now that's trawling. its painful and time consuming going through it all.

 

Mate, its "trolling"

[2NaFish]

Spouting a bunch of none truths, in reply to others points "whether they be speculative" or otherwise, would be defined as trawling I would think and this is against board rules.

 

all the hun sympathisers holding red hands together on a thread that is clearly labelled "detrimental talk about newco" on a hearts board.

 

theres one form of jesus weeping on his white horse, that's for sure.

 

Anyone who disagrees with the consensus is a bigot.

[Jambof3tornado]

It really is like a primary school playground on here at times.....we dont need mods....we need an angry janitor with a brown dustcoat on to sort out the squabbles which move from thread to thread!!

 

Half the good posts get swallowed up by the nonsense.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Heard a rumour one of the 3 bears wives was exceptionally unhappy on how the latest tranche was funded.

 

When she eventually found out.

 

And there went her pink Bentley Continental.

[Spellczech]

This board has always had a few posters to like to disagree with the majority on virtually every thread discussion. They regard themselves as free thinkers which is fair enough. I've noticed that the majority tend to be mature/eternal students for some reason. I guess if one arrives late at university or never wants to leave, you are already regretting going down the first path you took, or avoiding the real world, so they look to shy away from the accepted view. Thus being in a free thinking minority, and in tertiary education they tend to regard their own opinions as superior and adopt condescending tones. If you ignore the arrogance, there can sometimes be a bit of sense in the underlying argument. Just don't pick holes in the parts which are nonsense or just made up, and certainly don't try to question why such contrarians seem to feel the need to ALWAYS deny concensus, as this doesn't go down too well...

[eddiepolio]

This board has always had a few posters to like to disagree with the majority on virtually every thread discussion. They regard themselves as free thinkers which is fair enough. I've noticed that the majority tend to be mature/eternal students for some reason. I guess if one arrives late at university or never wants to leave, you are already regretting going down the first path you took, or avoiding the real world, so they look to shy away from the accepted view. Thus being in a free thinking minority, and in tertiary education they tend to regard their own opinions as superior and adopt condescending tones. If you ignore the arrogance, there can sometimes be a bit of sense in the underlying argument. Just don't pick holes in the parts which are nonsense or just made up, and certainly don't try to question why such contrarians seem to feel the need to ALWAYS deny concensus, as this doesn't go down too well...

Wow! What is it you're currently studying at 'Uni' ;-)

[reaths17]

Anyone who disagrees with the consensus is a bigot.

he was found to be using NONE TRUTHS, he/she even, was not in disagreement with the conversation, more they didn't like the topic so tried to ruin it with bullshit. everyone knows the common reason for this on this thread.

 

you don't like the topic, naebody forcing you to even click on the thread let alone join in. I click on it because I enjoy their misery. I wouldn't join in on one about their happiness.

[The Great Khali]

That what this place has become? Someone has a different opinion so we go running to the mods and see if we can get them suspended.

 

****ing pathetic, much like the majority of this thread.

Edited June 5, 2015 by The Great Khali

[Fort Vallance]

It really is like a primary school playground on here at times.....we dont need mods....we need an angry janitor with a brown dustcoat on to sort out the squabbles which move from thread to thread!!

 

Half the good posts get swallowed up by the nonsense.

And a bucket of sand / sawdust.