williamite1

You must be confusing Dave King with Charles Green.

All businessmen should be watched. They didn't become wealthy being straight and transparent.

Definitely not, just different sides of the same coin. King continues to damage us without . He has had more than enough chances to buy us and always fall short to the point of embarassment and his rhetoric does untold damage. Green on the other hand, very affable but raped us from within.

We as fans didn't help either during the whole process with the blackening of a couple of suitors to allow the BK's an advantage.

I am both sad and disappointed that no other wealthy Rangers man stepped up, eg. McColl, a seriously weatlthy suitor. Are we really such a bad investment? I don't get it and sick of the whole circus. It's mind numbing.

After the Alloa game, I vowed never to return until Ally had gone. I've got 3 season tickets and my teenage kids just take a mate along, so at least the bums on seats are there. However, after seeing the crowd on TV, it made my heart sink. We really shouldn't be doing this. No matter how shit Ally or the team are, I am of the opinion we need to support them. Watching Ally's post match interview, even though he got a win, I just couldn't help feeling sorry for him, as much that I have given him his character over the last year. We know he won't be around long term, as he just hasn't got what we need, so I say, in full knowledge of this, we should rally round our team and show the world who we really are. I am started to feel a bit ashamed and the thought of those scummy barstewards in the east end and the rest of Scottish football, laughing at us makes my blood boil.

As for the board room circus, so much of it is out of our control and if we all boycotted, admin 2 would seriously be on the way . We are better than that. We've went through thick in and thin the last 3 seasons and proved to the world that we will never walk away. Full houses in the lower divisions, so let us not fall at the last hurdle and give our enemies what they most want. We have that power and nobody can take it away from us, not even boards. Let's use it.

The lack of a plausible alternative does not mean you embrace impending doom.

 

Though of course there was a plausible alternative, one to the tune of £16m but there was never any chance of that being accepted.

Well, exactly. I assume it's because they are not buying up the shares from the current investors. It appears that unless you are MA, you have to buy them out at the price they want, so unless you have a shitload of cash to burn, it isn't going to happen. MA has a stranglehold as they have all thrown their hat in with him. I really don't know how this can be changed unless someone buys them out.

I must be missing something, the abject nonsense of the statement perhaps.

 

"He is accused of funding his Ibrox takeover by selling off season tickets and pretending to then owner Sir David Murray the cash was his own". Perhaps one of the main reasons it is unlikely a trial will take place, Murray.

As far as I am aware you cannot legally buy a business, using the funds of that self same business, which Whyte in effect done by mortgaging the season tickets. What I don't understand is how Ticketus are also not in the dock. The deal was also struck before Whyte even the legal owner of the club, so how could they lend to him in mortgaging season tickets that he in effect did not legally own at that point. Also, as a competent lender, they also must have known that the transaction was illegal.

What's your point? That because Ashley has effective control for a small amount of investment (and in reality seems to have done all along) that we should celebrate him as a saviour, shouldn't question the nature of his relationship with the club or press to find exactly what the fuck has been, and is being done to our club? I'll never give to trust anyone in control of Rangers and would hope no bear would. That needs to be earned. And what possible reason have we be given to trust him.

Exactly! He along with any other suitor needs to put up or GTF. Fed up with constant deflections and drivel that we are fed. Drip feeding us with loans is not the solution, but it wouldn't be for him either. If it is to be him, I want to hear the long term plans, the level of investment and see the colour of his money.

As for what has been going on, I doubt if we will ever get the full story. We know we have been corporately raped and the parties involved, but as for MA, CG effectively handed him the keys that he need not let go of, unless he has the mind, so how do we turn that into a positive is the trick. He is holding most of the cards. It will need goodwill from his side, but at the moment we know nothing of his intentions. He is well aware of our feelings, so we must bide our time until the AGM to find out what the strategy is for our club in moving forward. Let us hear the impassioned commitment, the plan, backed up with serious cash. If it is not forthcoming, then the time for action and do our utmost to run him out of town.

You ask how to stop it yet you consider Ashley to be the messiah?

 

I should stop replying to you because you're only getting the reaction you crave.

 

 

PS - One thing you might want to consider is a rule of thumb where whoever is in control of us will be causing us crippling misery.

I don't, but I don't see any alternatives. The current board and investors are only letting MA in and no one else, that is clear. Unless an alternative investor comes up with enough readies that they would be happy with and do one, the door is closed. We need cash now and as it stands only MA's cash is being accepted. There is not much we can realistically do about that, or is there, without puting the club in peril of admin 2?

You don't have the first clue what you're talking about do you.

Haven't seen anything posted that you do. Please impart from your crystal ball. I am sure it will be enlightening.

L

Those that are actual Bears, because such is the obsession with us many would not be, but with those that are actual Bears backing Ashley blindly on those pages, it's the 'want to believe', the 'dreams for a successfull Rangers' if you like.

 

Sad but true, and I can understand it, but prefer to live in the real world in regards to what going on.

What's going on in the real world then?

King and his dog and pony show are riding in with millions to save us? RF will become the largest shareholder? McCoist is going to buy us with his small change?

I await in wonderment at some facts.

Been plenty value in it so far has there not?

For MA, peanuts thus far. His big pay days are when we are in the top flight and Europe. As for the rest, they have well raped us and fled. On second thoughts, , there are several amongst the playing staff still raping us and still with us.

Every Director is up for election.

 

Such is the construction of the joint venture deal that Ashley/SD will make money irrespective of how successful we are on the park.

 

One thing we've learnt is that RIFC plc doesn't not have to be a successful business in order for in control to suck money out.

I get that, but how the f@ck do we stop it , because I really don't know? We've even got supporters ripping us off!

We've all been watching MA (as far as we've been able to - the visibility isn't great).

 

What has he done so far to win our trust? Based on his actions up to this point, what grounds are there to believe he has Rangers' best interests at heart? For example, do you think the Sports Direct deal has been good for the club?

Exactly nowt and I don't. For me the pointer is his man up for election, so it isn't a short term thing. I cannot see the for him to have the brand, even for nothing, if we as a team are not successful on the park. It doesn't make good business sense in the context of football. Clubs need to be successful on the park if they are to be successful off the park in business terms. Otherwise there is no point him bothering. Our brand is everything to that success. He'd make a fortune if we were winning as in the nine in a row years. My point is that he is the only substantial and credible financial backer to get us there. It's a leap of faith yes, but to do otherwise in MA's world wouldn't make sense.

Where is all this Champion's league guff coming from? MA is only protecting his onerous contract, which seems to be well sewn up. There is no chance of him being outright owner.

Well there's hardly much value in trying to promote a brand from losers is there?

another troll on the go.

What part would be untrue?

I do understand that the at times can be difficult to accept. I even believed CG and what a lying c@nt and disaster he turned out to be. MA has has too much to lose to screw this up if he takes us over and I don't mean in monetary terms. His reputation as a businessman would be at stake. I don't mean I trust him, far from it, as everyone of those business type need watched like hawkers and I'm sure everyone of us will be doing just that. For him, his prestige as a top businessman is what counts and for him to be successful as the owner of our club, we need to be successful on the park and I am confident he will readily provide the cash to be just that.

As direct and to the point as one would expect from Chris. I for one though haven't come across anyone who says Ashely is an "Ibrox saviour". All know what he does at Newcastle and how he deals with the Magpies. Likewise, having him here does mean some background stability, if at the cost of loans and thus ending up at his pleasure. The board has no other answer ... or chose to ignore the support's most favoured option. We'll have to wait and see how powers shift and change and decide up to and at the AGM.

What percentage of the support would be the supports' more favoured option? Now let me see, SOS, RST, UOF, RSA..........now I'm struggling to get to double figures.

Taken from Follow Follow

 

The Rangers story rumbles on, the gaudy prospect of financial meltdown distracting observers from even a backward glance in the rear-view mirror. The news that £8m is needed to keep the lights on keeps minds focused on the present.

 

The question of how it all came to this may have to have its answer in court. Recent history, though, can be assessed with some accuracy.

 

The failure of Dave King's attempt to take over Rangers is crucial not only to the future direction of the club but also has a further, significant impact. It is this: King gathered expert advisors and galvanised a section of the support. The legacy of King's failure to gain any power at Ibrox is that some are now not only disillusioned but highly reluctant to attach themselves to any renewed moves by the South African businessman.

 

However, the idea that King may have no further role in the Rangers story may not stand up to scrutiny.

 

A chronicle of his interest in Rangers proves an instructive history of what has gone on at the club over the past nine months leading up to Thursday's announcement of the £8.3m loss to June this year. Auditors have included an emphasis of matter paragraph, highlighting that there is "material uncertainty on the group's ability to continue as a going concern".

 

This has always been King's contention and it has informed the choices he has made when addressing the task of changing the power base at Ibrox.

 

At an early stage in his attempt to force regime change, King told an advisor: "I will just sit here until they run out of money and they will have no place to go. They will have to come to me." He was consistently told this would not happen. It did not happen. But can it now?

 

The King involvement must be examined as it charts the course to where Rangers stand now and what options are available to the club in what can now be soberly described as a battle for survival.

 

King, of course, was always on the periphery of the Rangers story but he took centre stage in March when he came to Glasgow to meet the Ibrox board and canvassed for both financial and popular support.

 

A series of meetings was held and he headed back to South Africa. However, he left behind a time bomb for the Ibrox board. His move to set up a trust fund for season ticket money could be seen as highly unsuccessful as it was never formed, instead a website gathered support from disaffected fans.

 

But it had an effect that it was part of a climate that reduced season ticket sales. Shortly after King flew out, David Somers, the Rangers chairman, criticised the move on season tickets as the club released interim financial results for the last six months of 2013, showing a £3.5m pre-tax loss.

 

King ramped up his offensive in a series of interviews, pledging that he could underwrite a share issue personally to the sum of £30m, perhaps even £50m.

 

Rangers, meanwhile, were looking at an unsustainable future, despite the protestations of directors. Briefly, season ticket revenue was down and costs were outstripping income. As the figures released on Thursday show, this basic business problem has not been addressed with any success.

 

It was then that instead of a King putsch there was a Mike Ashley manoeuvre. The sportswear billionaire had, of course, bought shares at the initial public offering. He had a merchandising contract in place. He has the crest.

 

At the beginning of August, there were leaks that Rangers needed money and that Ashley was prepared to provide it in loans. The Newcastle United owner, routinely and accurately described as a billionaire, was ready to flex his muscles.

 

In early August, there was a meeting to step up the King move to bring change to Rangers. George Letham, who had given Rangers a £1m crisis loan, Paul Murray, a former board member who was now allied to King, were present, as were others.

 

The Herald understands it was agreed to try to raise money to make a public, formal offer for the 26% Beaufort stake in Rangers, controlled by the Easdale brothers. The next step was to approach the Park family who own the coach company and car dealerships.

 

A source close to this development said this meeting took "the best part of a month" to set up. It is not known what occurred at that meeting but the buying of the Beaufort shares was never pursued in any meaningful sense.

 

The next move was for King to have talks with Graham Wallace, chief executive of Rangers, Philip Nash, director, and Norman Crighton, non-executive director. Paul Murray and Letham were present at these discussions.

 

The plan was to persuade the board to recommend a share issue whereby King would put in £8m and what could be called the Murray-Letham consortium put in a further £8m.

 

Rangers, meanwhile, were desperately seeking a saviour but King consistently refused to see Ashley as a threat to his ambitions.

 

Instead, the English businessman was presented with an open goal. As Somers subsequently explained, the Ashley loan could be taken because the rival Brian Kennedy bid carried a higher level of interest and demanded more security. There are mutterings about both these claims but Somers has issued a statement reinforcing them.

 

The King-Murray-Letham consortium was dismissed over what was described as a failure to provide proof of funds.

 

There has been much shouting since in terms of statements and counter statements.

 

Three interesting elements have emerged. First, that Paul Murray was prepared to sit on the board as part of the Kennedy deal. Second, that King has revealed he did not want to oust Sandy Easdale, the football board chairman, from Ibrox.

 

The third is that King and his allies believe they never had a chance. On October 23, they believed they had an agreement in principle with Easdale to have some power in exchange for investment. They needed Easdale on board because the brothers have control over 26% of shares and 75% is needed to approve a shares issue. The half-back line of Easdales, Ashley and Laxey hold 51%.

 

But as King headed to watch Liverpool play Real Madrid, he believed he had a deal in his grasp. Within 24 hours he was disabused of this, with telephone calls informing him that Rangers would take a loan from Ashley.

 

This series of events has led to Ashley gaining an extraordinary influence at Ibrox, particularly for someone owning about 9% of shares. They are also history.

 

So why does it matter now?

 

It is clear King failed in this approach. He also contributed to a significant level of disillusionment among fans who can be best described as activists in attempting to change the structure at the club. This could impact on any renewed attempt by him to gain power at Ibrox.

 

But the developments also give an insight into the motives of Ashley. He has not, nor will not, make his intentions clear but he has to safeguard the merchandising deal that he has with club. The drip of loans means the clubs survives, strips can sold.

 

But it is not a long-term strategy. Ashley has to find a coherent plan that does not just involve cutting costs but includes ushering in a period of stability. Does he have the will to dedicate a significant chunk of time to something that is relatively modest in terms of income to a man worth £4bn?

 

So what will he do next?" Whatever he wants," was the brisk reply from a City source last night who has rued his investment in Rangers.

 

The City source suggested that Ashley may decide that he is willing to share some of the burden of restructuring a club, forming a scouting network, refurbishing the stadium and building a team to compete at the top level of Scottish sport. This was the view, too, of a major financial player close to the Rangers story.

 

There may be some conjecture of what precisely is Ashley's vision for the club. There can be no doubt that he does not like what he sees, though. History tells us that Ashley is always prepared to make a deal. Does that include returning to suitors to see what they have to offer?

 

King has been dismissed as a "tyre kicker" whose reluctance to buy shares was fatal to any successful strategy. There may be truth in some of this but it would be foolish to rule out a return to the table by the former Rangers director.

 

The jostling for power has not stopped.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/the-king-bid-is-dead-but-for-how-long-we-cannot-say.25998604?

Any effective jostling has stopped and all that remains is mud slinging by bad losers. MA's man is up foe election to the board at the AGM. That Amy's all about who is in control. The brothers back MA, so it's sewn up as tight as ducks erse. As for King, for sure, the biggest tyre kicker I have ever seen He has repeatedly proven that doesn't love Rangers as many would believe. He has done untold damage with his mud slinging tactics. He is a convicted serial fraudster. You would need to be a total idiot to go into business with such an untrustworthy character. MA is no fool and he doesn't ever let others play with his money and certainly not a chancer like King.

We need to hold just 25% of the share capital to wield real influence and protect the assets of the Club.

 

At the moment that's approx £4.2m. In reality, we might need as much as double that with a share issue coming.

 

I defy anyone to tell me that the collective Rangers support can't achieve that with the help of some wealthy fans to underwrite us, or indeed that it would be a bad idea.

 

If we don't care enough or back our ability to use that influence for the long term benefit of the club, then we'll get the owners we deserve and they'll have unfettered control. Just be very clear that they care not one iota for Rangers' long term interests. Do you really want that?

 

It's a no-brainer.

It's a no brainier that we will never achieve that figure and if by some miracle and the time that we do, there will be little shares to trade when the new owner buys up what is currently available from all the institutional shareholders, to ensure that such a scenario never happens. What major investor, particularly one like MA would leave such a door open for others to influence what he does. No chance.

Do we really need someone who doesn't do prisoners? Someone who refuses to give us our share of the retail money, someone who threatens us to ensure that his company benefits at our expense?

If he were to become outright owner, which I am confident that he will, Rangers would be his company and his money to do with what he pleases as with any owner.

We need a level of sustainable investment that will continually see us at the top of the SPFL and in the Champions League group stages. That is where MA's head is at, in promoting his other business interests. To achieve this, we would need to at least equal scum fc's investment and in the grand scheme of things, is minuscule in the MA world and in how much he needs to sustain NUFC. We are a much bigger brand than them, so makes for good business sense. To generate serious cash, every football club needs to be successfull on the park. Win win all round and who knows he might even get to like us with a passion. How much more money are you looking for?

As direct and to the point as one would expect from Chris. I for one though haven't come across anyone who says Ashely is an "Ibrox saviour". All know what he does at Newcastle and how he deals with the Magpies. Likewise, having him here does mean some background stability, if at the cost of loans and thus ending up at his pleasure. The board has no other answer ... or chose to ignore the support's most favoured option. We'll have to wait and see how powers shift and change and decide up to and at the AGM.

More mud raking and negative spin by the kingleon for the sake of it.

MA is and will be our only saviour with no other credible financial investment by so called "Rangersmen" or any other. The kingleons do need to come to terms with the fact that the King is dead, otherwise the men in the White coats will be taking them away.

RF collect the money from subscribers and then choose the right time to purchase the shares for maximum value.

 

Presumably the large share issue that the Board have acknowledged needs to happen soon is their key focus. That offers the potential to achieve real influence quickly if everyone gets behind them or BuyRangers.

 

Of course there are risks, but I don't know anyone who expects to get their money back or make a return on their investment. The stark choice is that we do this, in big numbers, or:

 

We can wait for another sugar daddy to try and do it for us...

 

...or sit wringing our hands, accepting the status quo...

 

...or walk away...

 

You choose.

I don't think there are many accepting the status quo. We are where we are and there wasn't much any ordinary supporter could have done about.

I agee on having a supporters rep on the board, but the concept of overall supporter ownership is alien to me. As a business model for a club of our size, I just cannot see the sustainability for the funding that would be needed. These are hard times economically and from the little support there is thus far, the majority of fans appear not to want it, no matter how much it is pushed.

For me, yes we need a sugar daddy, but one who is fiscally prudent and MA fits right into that category. He is a strong leader, repels all boarders, doesn't do prisoners. Not only do we need that, Scottish football needs it and I am quite sure our haters at the SFA and scum fc are not relishing the thought of having to face him! Top businessmen are ruthless and there is good reason for that and they don't run successfull companies by committee.

I think the biggest issue is that we don't get value for the amount we spent. High wages for shit players under a manger who has proven himself inept in the job.