TheTinMan99

They have released a statement in response to ST holders concerns.

 

Contrary to popular opinion I am not here to support or answer for the Board and I agree that the timing is unacceptable. I also agree that the statement made by Mr Wallace at the AGM requires clarification.

 

However , not only is Mr King not a shareholder but he has stated publicly that he does not wish to invest in the Club if others can be found. So you tell me, why should the Board answer his questions?

King is clearly calling them out on the notion that they have future investors lined up. Most reasonable people know that they have nothing. The current investors have enough of a stake to call the shots, so they literally have no reason to dilute their holdings.

What's good for them, is obviously not good for the club. Your assertion that the current investors will be lining to reinvest in any future share issue, in the hope that the price will rise above 47p or so, is pure fantasy. If you don't think that an individual that has pledged to invest £30m+ deserves answers to some pretty basic questions, then nothing I can say will convince you otherwise.

For the record, you don't actually know that Mr King isn't a shareholder, but members of the UOF certainly are, and are basically asking the same questions.

They said the 120 review would be available before peoples renewal dates were up. Less than one working day is a little worse than stretching the truth a little. It's bordering on financial blackmail, not to mention deceitful. You could be forgiven for thinking that they want everyone on the Zebra finance scheme, hence costing the fans more, and getting them the money sooner.

I just don't understand your blatant mistrust of King's motives, and yet are on here most days defending the board. There may well be some valid points about how the season ticket trust will go about their business, but I imagine that's why they said they will seek legal advice on the matter.

No need for them to answer, Mr King is not a shareholder.

Ah, so only shareholders are entitled to ask reasonable questions, and expect answers? I note that since I made that post that the board have indeed released a short statement, informing us that an update about the 120 review will be issued on the final working day before the right to cancellation is due. I look forward to your justifying of this, considering your recent stance about supporters being given the 120 review in plenty of time before their renewal date.

It also seems they have decided to use the 'fingers in ears, la la la' method, in regards to the four questions. But hey, he's not a shareholder so it's fine.

Still no counter statement from the board, or an answer to the four questions? Is it Jack's day off?

There would be a lot more GS if King published Somers's e-mail.

 

The word "stampede" springs to mind.

Agreed. If King could back up his claim about Somers, even the most ardent of board supporters would have to realise something is rotten in Denmark. Say what you like about Whyte, but he sure knew how to record private meetings, and expose liars within the club.

Almost voted "undecided", but went for " Ally to stay". Would love to give a reason, but I have to get back to my real teams forum, and discuss us winning next years CL. I wouldn't lose any sleep if McDowall got pumped.

RFFF to fund a defence against any legal action against King?

I wonder who typed that statement for him? Guff's reputation would suggest that payment is likely to be involved.

If you can't debunk the message, discredit the messenger. Pretty low, against one of our greatest ever captains.

He's got a drink in him. I thought that was the case with most of his utterings tbh.

So fans give their ST money to DK - how do they then get to watch the match(s)??? Does the Account trustee's forward an amount of money to the club to "purchase" x-number of tickets for names attendees??? I can't see ANY fan wanting to hand over £500 without some rock-solid guarantee that they are going to get the required tickets.

 

As for club property as security - NEVER gonna happen.

 

Other than that, strong words from DK & will be interesting how the board respond (which is the key)!!!

It's quite a simple concept. You hand over your cash to the trust. They then take it en masse to the club and offer in exchange for your season book, and security on Ibrox/Murray park. If the club accept, you get your book, and our main assets are safe from being used for anything dodgy for a year. If they refuse, you get your money back, and can purchase your own season book as normal through the club.

The only risk is that you may, or may not lose your seat. If the club has any respect for it's support, your seat will be reserved until this whole mess is sorted out. Don't hold your breath for that though. It's the last ace they hold.

The font isn't small? windows key and + will help you though...

Was tiny on my laptop. Good tip about the windows key, cheers. Read it now. Disgusted, if not surprised.

Close

Can someone enlarge this, for those of us without binoculars handy:eek2:

I quite like the timing because this can be a big talking point amongst fans at Ibrox tomorrow. I don't think he'd planned to release a statement ahead of the game, but the board have tried to outmaneuver him and he's responding in kind.

Perhaps, but I think the people who haven't bought books already were waiting for whatever King had to say anyway. The board loyal will have already signed up, or won't listen no matter what he says. I don't think there's that many people left sitting on the fence.

I back Mr King 100%, but the timing is awful. It's hardly breaking news that our board of directors are full of shite. Could have waited until Monday.

As for your second point, you are most definitely wrong Zappa. My company here in Bermuda has equity of over $5 billion and cash over well into the hundreds of millions of $.... we still have a credit facility though..... there are very often valid reasons for having credit facilities which are not related to the actual NEED for them....

I'm sure there is, but I don't think that's the case with us. Trying to dock the players wages by 15% would suggest that we do need, and have used these credit facilities. A cursory glance at the accounts would also suggest that the credit facility will be used in full by the time any significant book money is in. I known you're just making a point, but it's kinda moot in this case I think.

If it's a choice between paying HMRC, and your regular suppliers, then it's a no-brainer. A business can still function, and possibly get itself out the mire without settling on time with HMRC. It's difficult to keep trading if you get your electric cut off, or can't pay police costs, wages, etc. You have to delay the costs of things that don't actually affect the running of the business.

It only buys you so much time, but it can often be enough to sort out short-term cash flow problems.

I am genuinely struggling with the importance that some contributors are attaching to the 120 day review. There are quite a lot of people who are uncertain over whether to renew or not. So what would be the key issues that are included in this 120 day piece that would persuade anyone who is doubtful, to take the decision to renew their season ticket?

I would think a pledge for an imminent share issue involving Mr King are what a lot of people are expecting/hoping to see in the 120 day review. Not sure why anyone would renew until they know where the investment is coming from to plug the inevitable shortfall we're heading for.

 

 

 

Why is 19 days to cancel ridiculous when you can send an email?

Auto renewal works for the club because it cuts down on administration and hence costs and it works for me if not for you because it saves me filling in new paperwork each year. Fair enough stance, assuming you ticked a box agreeing to it.

 

As far as I am concerned it is a win/win situation. Perhaps 21 days might have been better but 28 days would be too long in my opinion; long deadlines can easily be forgotten. 19 days is too short for a number of practical reasons. Long holidays, far away pay-days etc.

 

There is more than ample time to cancel if I or anyone else doesn't like the new terms. You shouldn't have to cancel, unless you have previously agreed to renew. Anything else is just shady in any normal business.

 

I am confident that if you missed the deadline for good reason your case would get a sympathetic hearing. If I die and Rangers get an extra payment, I don't have a problem with that; perhaps they'll put my name on a brick. I would hope the club would return your money in the event of a death, and let your beneficiaries decide on having your name upon a brick.

 

I think you are just looking for excuses not to renew. Never had a season book, never will. I dislike the concept of paying for something I haven't used yet, especially when zero discount is involved. You even get a discount on your vehicle excise duty for paying it all up front, as opposed to six months.

 

If you are so enamoured of your internet provider perhaps you should stay home playing games. I despise most internet providers, much in the same way as I despise any company that charges for a service that they don't consistently deliver. This is the way our club is heading. I won't feel guilty for opposing them every step of the way.

.

You should have said:

 

A) The upstanding transport tycoons need to stay because they're fabulous guys and you also like their hair.

 

B) The Club does not need to have a share issue to get Dave King investing £30m and becoming the largest shareholder.

 

C) You think the board and people running the Club are doing a fantastic job and you'd like to shake their hands.

 

D) You like the general concept of gravy trains.

 

E) You don't have a snout, but you'd happily stick your head in the trough if given the chance.

 

F) If you can't get your head in the trough, could you please have some sand.

How did you get the answers to simplythebest's answers to the first survey?

There seems to be more than a few people that don't remember ticking an auto-renew box. There must be one person on here that can remember?? Even the normally fastidious Brahim isn't 100% sure. If such a box didn't exist, 19 days to cancel is ridiculous.

I don't know why anyone would tick an auto-renew box. Anything can happen in a year, or around the time of renewal. You may die, or be in hospital, or away on holiday and forgot you ticked a box a year ago. A window of 19 days isn't enough for an auto-renewal. Couple that with 'worse' terms' if you don't go through with the auto-renewal and it doesn't sit right with me.

The contract I have with my internet provider lasts 18 months, if I don't contact them and renew, it defaults to a month by month payment contract, until either of us communicate and negotiate a new deal. This seems fair, and that's from scumbags like internet providers.

Well, he got a few goals when we were struggling to win a good few games. And he was the only bugger who could defend balls into the box as well. Probably we would have won the league without him but he certainly helped.

 

Sorry for the late reply but I've been listening with a sardonic smile to Spence on the radio desperately trying to explain away celtc employing a racist.

Don't get me wrong, I like and respect Jig when he plays up top for us, but when he's at the back, I get filled with rage and disgust. All I remember from Sunday is that stupid flick he done that cost us the goal, when he only had to put his boot through it to clear. Couple that with his lack of pace, he makes Mohsni look like Baresi.

 

Yes but even you didn't know you were on autorenew. Many others are the same.

 

Ppi claims all over again.

 

Depends if it was a 'tick box for auto-renew', or 'un-tick box to not auto-renew'. The former is acceptable, the latter isn't.

Not sure if serious, Andrew.

Maybe youse would have preferred him to walk away as well?

 

No argument that he's past his best and replacing him would be a good move, but a bit of respect for someone who stuck by us.

It's difficult to respect anyone that steals a wage off us that high. It was more a case of the club sticking by him, than vice versa. His new contract was the worse piece of business we've ever done, and that's saying something.