An Open Letter to Dave King

[Anchorman 0]

Maybe I've missed something, but I don't recall Dave King saying he wanted to be owner. From memory he has stated he wants to add financial support to the right people and has no interest in being the 'owner'. I stand to be corrected.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Anchorman

[Anchorman 0]

Maybe I'm over simplifying things here, but if Dave were to release a statement saying he would pump x amount of millions into the club IF the requisitioners get onto the board, would that not pretty much be game over for the spivs? I can't remember what he already said, apologies if this is a dumb post I'm sick of trying to keep up with this..

 

No a dumb post, as a lot of people have made an assumption that he supports one side (although he probably trusts the McColl camp a bit more) He is very much his own man and has no real interest in being in one camp or other from what he says. He wants to put money into the Club he loves - full stop (as he has done before when £20m was worth far more than £20m these days). He will only do so when he is 100% sure that he is not lining anyone else's pocket i.e. he is sure there are no charlatans on the board.

To take a side at this point would make him force himself into a corner i.e. I believe he will invest either way but only if\when there is stability, regardless of who that stability is with (as long as he trusts them).

[craig 5,199]

I am confused....

 

"I don’t necessarily believe the model of ownership you would bring to our club – a sole owner – has been particularly successful for Rangers"

 

BUT.....

 

"Further more I am not convinced that either side emerging victorious from the AGM on the 19th December, will result in a cessation of hostilities, merely a lull in the fighting, which will be renewed, perhaps with greater vigour and further damage to our already fragmented support in the future."

 

So in the opening gambit we arent convinced that sole proprietorship is the way forward. But then fully recognise that the publicly traded route with multiple shareholders has us ripping ourselves asunder and a continuation of hostilities ?

 

Which is it to be ?

 

The only thing which seems to be suggested is fan representation on the Board. But guess what ? Board representation for the fans changes very little when it comes to making decisions because so long as the person with the majority of the shares has 50%+1 (pr 75% if super majority vote is needed) then he can do what he likes, regardless of fan approval on the Board. And what does that do ? Brings us back to where we already are.... having to threaten boycotts of ST's, merchandise etc.

 

I am not averse to having a sole proprietor. The one thing we know with Dave King is that he has already shown that he is prepared to put his own money into the club, not for personal gain, but because he wanted to. He would still be my choice, and I would still be comfortable with him as sole proprietor.

[craig 5,199]

Maybe I've missed something, but I don't recall Dave King saying he wanted to be owner. From memory he has stated he wants to add financial support to the right people and has no interest in being the 'owner'. I stand to be corrected.

 

I dont think so. I thought he said he would be willing to invest in a new share issue, but wouldnt buy shares currently on the market as the proceeds go to the shares owners rather than the club.

[Anchorman 0]

I dont think so. I thought he said he would be willing to invest in a new share issue, but wouldnt buy shares currently on the market as the proceeds go to the shares owners rather than the club.

 

Agreed - badly worded on my part. I should have said "add financial support to the Club" rather than "add financial support to the right people".

[D'Artagnan 173]

I am confused....

 

"I don’t necessarily believe the model of ownership you would bring to our club – a sole owner – has been particularly successful for Rangers"

 

BUT.....

 

"Further more I am not convinced that either side emerging victorious from the AGM on the 19th December, will result in a cessation of hostilities, merely a lull in the fighting, which will be renewed, perhaps with greater vigour and further damage to our already fragmented support in the future."

 

So in the opening gambit we arent convinced that sole proprietorship is the way forward. But then fully recognise that the publicly traded route with multiple shareholders has us ripping ourselves asunder and a continuation of hostilities ?

 

Which is it to be ?

 

 

The only thing which seems to be suggested is fan representation on the Board. But guess what ? Board representation for the fans changes very little when it comes to making decisions because so long as the person with the majority of the shares has 50%+1 (pr 75% if super majority vote is needed) then he can do what he likes, regardless of fan approval on the Board. And what does that do ? Brings us back to where we already are.... having to threaten boycotts of ST's, merchandise etc.

 

I am not averse to having a sole proprietor. The one thing we know with Dave King is that he has already shown that he is prepared to put his own money into the club, not for personal gain, but because he wanted to. He would still be my choice, and I would still be comfortable with him as sole proprietor.

 

 

I have long stated I dont believe sole ownership to be in our best interests based on our experiences of SDM & Whyte - but the point of that is that despite my reservations of such a model I would prefer it for the unity Dave King can bring to the club amongst the support which I think is of far greater importance.

[Zappa 0]

He doesn't have a magic wand though D'Art and it would take something like that which only exists in fiction, fantasy and dreams to fix the support's factions infighting and bickering. Unfortunately I doubt if Dave King has enough money to send all the trouble makers to another planet to fight amongst themselves.

[D'Artagnan 173]

He doesn't have a magic wand though D'Art and it would take something like that which only exists in fiction, fantasy and dreams to fix the support's factions infighting and bickering. Unfortunately I doubt if Dave King has enough money to send all the trouble makers to another planet to fight amongst themselves.

 

But thats the thing Zap its not a bit of bickering or infighting its much worse than that. Its not the money King brings which is his major asset - but his ability to unite our support

[Frankie 8,168]

I'm not so convinced he would unite anyone.

 

If he worked with the existing board some would moan, if he worked with PM et al others would moan.

 

In any event, King doesn't really convince me either way so certainly wouldn't have my backing until, like anyone, he actually showed us what he planned to do rather than just talk about it.

[Stimpy 0]

I'm not so convinced he would unite anyone.

 

If he worked with the existing board some would moan, if he worked with PM et al others would moan.

 

In any event, King doesn't really convince me either way so certainly wouldn't have my backing until, like anyone, he actually showed us what he planned to do rather than just talk about it.

Only on the internet though, Frankie. Offline supporters expectations and considerations are much more simplistic - they don't care about pettiness and just want a settled club. That said, my old man isn't online but saw through Whyte way before I did and saw through Green right from the start. Perhaps our ire towards the media, y'know where we denounce their articles as lies, is not always correct.

 

My mates are not online bears and haven't a clue what is said on Twitter etc.