Emerging from the shadows-richard wilson

[forlanssister 3,062]

I would like CG to stick firm to the notion of no one shareholder owning more than 15%. There would be NOTHING stopping Kennedy, McCall, Park etc stumping up a couple of £m each for a 15% stake.

 

We already have a shareholder with well in excess of 15% and Green refuses to tell the fans who they are.

[Zappa 0]

I don't see how Wilson or anyone else for that matter, are necessarily "anti-Green" just because they point out a few failings and problems that Green is having.

 

It's been a swelling issue since Green arrived on the scene, to the ludicrous point of practically being hissed and sneered at if you dare to raise genuine concerns about Green or even just ask questions due to finding it difficult to trust him after everything that's happened to the club.

 

It reads to me like Richard Wilson is concerned about Charles Green & Co, rather than anti-Charles Green & Co.

[Bluedell 5,367]

I don't see how Wilson or anyone else for that matter, are necessarily "anti-Green" just because they point out a few failings and problems that Green is having.

 

It's been a swelling issue since Green arrived on the scene, to the ludicrous point of practically being hissed and sneered at if you dare to raise genuine concerns about Green or even just ask questions due to finding it difficult to trust him after everything that's happened to the club.

 

It reads to me like Richard Wilson is concerned about Charles Green & Co, rather than anti-Charles Green & Co.

 

 

We'll need to disagree on that. Questions can be asked in a neutral manner or can be asked in a negative manner and that article is the latter, in my opinion.

 

Why ask where the £30m has gone? It has been explained that the initial use of that was in relation to a successful CVA. There are other examples where issues have been explained but he is ignoring the answers and continuing to ask the questions as if they have not been answered.

 

Why ask if Ally knows the role of Stretford? is there any suggestion that he wouldn't know his role? Of course Ally has yet to be told his wages budget. Sanctions have yet to be finalised so how can you give him a budget?

 

The assertion that Green lacks credibility with a majority of the fans whereas Kennedy is popular is hardly factual and hardly neutral. That is not put by someone someone who is concerned. That is someone who is anti.

[Zappa 0]

We'll need to disagree on that. Questions can be asked in a neutral manner or can be asked in a negative manner and that article is the latter, in my opinion.

 

Yep, agree to disagree then because it reads more neutral than negative to me. It's all in the interpretation.

 

Why ask where the £30m has gone?

 

He doesn't ask where the £30m has gone at all though. He points out that Green hasn't delivered the investment he previously spoke of, but goes on to explain why that is by saying Green's plan was based on us playing in the SPL & selling "the normal amount" of season tickets. That's a fairly objective and balanced point to make. Whether it's 100% accurate or not is another matter. Here's that part again:

 

He also claimed that he had £30m in funding ready to be invested in the club by the end of July, so far he has delivered only Mather's £1m. New investors are clearly not buying into his plans, and even current backers will be wondering where their return is coming from.

 

Green's plan was based on Rangers newco being in the Scottish Premier League and selling the normal amount of season tickets. The club is now in the third division and only 450 season tickets have been sold, although sales are on hold until SFA membership is granted.

 

It has been explained that the initial use of that was in relation to a successful CVA.

 

That CVA had very little chance of being accepted by HMRC, so why did Duff and Phelps & Green say they thought it would? Why would Green have £30m in investments lined up for a CVA that was destined to be rejected?

 

There are other examples where issues have been explained but he is ignoring the answers and continuing to ask the questions as if they have not been answered.

 

I don't know which examples you're talking about here, but maybe Wilson doesn't accept some of the explanations and thinks that there's still valid questions there to be asked.

 

Why ask if Ally knows the role of Stretford? is there any suggestion that he wouldn't know his role?

 

I don't see why it's not a valid question. If Stretford is involved with player sales and arrivals then surely Ally should know what his role is and be working with him? Wilson is merely saying that Stretford's role hasn't been clarified and further to that, he might even be sneakily letting us all know that he has info to say that Ally doesn't know what Stretford's role is!!

 

Of course Ally has yet to be told his wages budget. Sanctions have yet to be finalised so how can you give him a budget?

 

They should already have a budget planned for us playing in the 3rd Division with a worst case scenario projection for ST income based on slightly reduced ST sales at the new lower price points. They've got two financial boffins from Zeus on the board, so I fail to see how that can't have already made some projections and be planning ahead with a starting budget which can be increased as the situation develops.

 

The assertion that Green lacks credibility with a majority of the fans whereas Kennedy is popular is hardly factual and hardly neutral. That is not put by someone someone who is concerned. That is someone who is anti.

 

If we're being factual and neutral ourselves on this point, we might actually come to the conclusion that Wilson could simply be making a mistake or have been fed with inaccurate information. After all, those conclusions are just as likely as Wilson actually being "anti-Green".

[UCF2008 0]

The assertion that Green lacks credibility with a majority of the fans whereas Kennedy is popular is hardly factual and hardly neutral. That is not put by someone someone who is concerned. That is someone who is anti.

 

I do get the impression that a fair number fans are anti-Green and if you combine those with the large portion of the support who continue to sit on the fence, remaining unconvinced that Green and his consortium are the right men for the job, then you possibly do still have a majority.

 

Had he been successful in buying the club, especially in partnership with TBK's, Kennedy wouldn't have had this problem.

 

If Kennedy were to be welcomed on board at this point in time, I think it probably would go a long way to getting the support on side. The two main obstacles to that are the majority shareholding Kennedy's after and the issue of whether Kennedy and Green would be able to work with one another.

[Zappa 0]

The two main obstacles to that are the majority shareholding Kennedy's after and the issue of whether Kennedy and Green would be able to work with one another.

 

No chance they could work together. Kennedy would get shot of Green pretty much immediately. Two minutes of listening to him waffle would be enough.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

two days before hmrc rejected the cva green was promising 30 million in 6 weeks if it passed.

 

that same day Dave king was saying have you seen the cva its never going to pass.

 

maybe green was stupid enough to think it was going to pass. maybe he knew it wound fail.

 

either way I'm not impressed.

[UCF2008 0]

two days before hmrc rejected the cva green was promising 30 million in 6 weeks if it passed.

 

that same day Dave king was saying have you seen the cva its never going to pass.

 

maybe green was stupid enough to think it was going to pass. maybe he knew it wound fail.

 

either way I'm not impressed.

 

On that front though, Kennedy & TBK's were proposing a CVA that offered even less and despite the fact they had a newco solution in their proposal they claimed the CVA was all they were interested in.

 

During their press conference, Kennedy was making noises about getting the best football CVA specialists in the country on board who supposedly felt we had a really good chance.

 

However, if you take into account the fact that Kennedy himself had admitted to approaching Bill Miller with a proposal of adding some finance to make the CVA achievable, then the numbers really don't add up.

 

Personally, I think every single one of them knew that a CVA would be a long shot unless there was a LOT more return being offered to the creditors.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

On that front though, Kennedy & TBK's were proposing a CVA that offered even less and despite the fact they had a newco solution in their proposal they claimed the CVA was all they were interested in.

 

During their press conference, Kennedy was making noises about getting the best football CVA specialists in the country on board who supposedly felt we had a really good chance.

 

However, if you take into account the fact that Kennedy himself had admitted to approaching Bill Miller with a proposal of adding some finance to make the CVA achievable, then the numbers really don't add up.

 

Personally, I think every single one of them knew that a CVA would be a long shot unless there was a LOT more return being offered to the creditors.

 

it didn't have a newco. it had a transfer of ownership to a newco. same as whyte did not green.

 

your right about a cva. always going to be difficult. perhaps bk experts could have swung it. probably not.

[UCF2008 0]

it didn't have a newco. it had a transfer of ownership to a newco. same as whyte did not green.

 

your right about a cva. always going to be difficult. perhaps bk experts could have swung it. probably not.

 

I'd need to read back over it to confirm that and don't have their proposal at hand right now mate.

 

Since we both seem to be agreeing about the CVA though, if it wasn't newco, what was their plan B?