Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

If he weakens the first team squad next month by selling players and not replacing them then any trust will surely disappear.

 

It would be a grossly incompetent CEO who didn't follow that specific course of action (allied to other cost cutting measures i.e boardroom remuneration) no matter how we would like to think otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You trust him? Woah! He might not be a stooge but I'd hold back on trusting anyone for a long time! ;)

 

I'm the same as you. 'Trust in Allah - but tie up your camel just in case' and all that. But at some point in life you have to trust some people more than others. And before anyone asks:

 

D Holmes - Absolutely ( I wish we had him now)

D Murray - yes I did

C Whyte - no - not once

C Green - once or twice fell for some flannel

G Wallace - gives me the same feeling that D Holmes did.

 

His record with Man City is something he will not want tarnished. He is trustworthy in my book, but I'm not sure if he even knows whether he was used as a pawn to lure investors past the point of the AGM or whether he has a future with us. I hope he has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that our inept board attracted Wallace to be honest. It leads me to believe that there are some pretty significant people involved in us. Why they would give fraudsters like the Easdales free reign is anyones guess though.

 

I remember a year or so ago STV found that our largest shareholder was some sort of middle east billionaire. Is he still involved? Did they not establish that he's the main guy behind one of our big nameless investors?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) does anyone else think Wallace, Somers and Crichton will all be gone before the end of the season ?

2) at what point will Dave King be approached to invest in and takeover Rangers?

 

When I hear our new CEO talking about cutting costs I genuinely worry if that involves the first team squad. This team needs strengthened not weakened which these costs would ultimately achieve.If he goes ahead with this I genuinely believe we could return to what we were in the early 1980's with a sub-standard team which people won't pay to watch.

I'd previously said this new board needs to be given time.Now though I'm not so sure. Some of the insinuations being made give me cause for concern.

 

i am with you all the way mate. unfortunately i believe the spivs will refuse to let king near for fear they will make less from the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth noting that although Wallace apparently has an excellent CV the circumstances of his leaving Manchester City are shrouded in mystery and he was unemployed at the time Rangers approached him or he applied for the job. That said if he tackles the overspending he will be seen in good light by the institutional investors.

 

The share price appears to have bottomed and Crichton just bought 60,000 at 34p.

 

Expect a new share issue at around 30p/share at the end of the 120 day planning period.

 

King will not be approached by the current Board. He would want a seat on the Board and (a) they don't want him and (b) he cannot satisfy the SFA "fit and proper" rules so can't be a director in any event.

Edited by BrahimHemdani
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth noting that although Wallace apparently has an excellent CV the circumstances of his leaving Manchester City are shrouded in mystery and he was unemployed at the time Rangers approached him or he applied for the job. That said if he tackles the overspending he will be seen in good light by the institutional investors.

 

The share price appears to hyave bottomed and Crichton just bought 60,000 at 34p.

 

Expect a new share issue at around 30p/share at the end of the 120 day planning period.

 

King will not be approached by the current Board. He would want a seat on the Board and (a) they don't want him and (b) he cannot satisfy the SFA "fit and proper" rules so can't be a director in any event.

Oh don't worry, I don't trust Wallace as far as I can throw him and expect him to be dodgy but his previous employment at Man City puts him streets ahead of the dodgers we normally attract

Link to post
Share on other sites

he cannot satisfy the SFA "fit and proper" rules so can't be a director in any event.

 

I think you will find that is not the case. And even if Liewell finds a way (very doubtful) to bend rules, he can't stop King investing, director or not. Anyone who thinks King's investment is dependent on a 'blazer' either has a short memory or is too young to remember. King will invest as soon as he knows nobody will benefit from his investment apart from the team. And he is as hard nosed an individual as they come - the more resistance he gets the more determined he will become - just ask SARS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.