SteveC 150 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Like a lion-tamer jabbing a chair at the gates of Ibrox Dave King shows no sign of leaving a riled Rangers board in peace. The former director says a second Ibrox share issue is now ‘100 per cent inevitable’ and he expects to be involved. The response from an increasingly exasperated Rangers support – no doubt the directors as well - was a roar of frustration. Put up or shut up was the cry. Show us your money. When it comes to spending other people’s money, of course, football supporters are the wizards of Wall Street. Yet the truth is this. Many show a remarkable inability to either listen to or absorb the line King has consistently adopted on this. He says he has the means to buy Rangers. Shelling out £43.7million to the South African authorities last year in full and final settlement of one of the lengthiest tax disputes the country had ever known, King described it as a ‘favourable’ result. Money: Were King to buy up all 60 million of the shares in circulation at that price he could, in theory, take control of Rangers for £16.2m There are people out there worrying where their next meal might come from. Dave King isn’t one of them. His personal wealth is known only to him. How he acquired it is also a question the SFA could be forced to ask one day. But in the aftermath of the settlement with the South African Revenue Service shares in Micromega, his South African firm, soared. On paper, at least, he appears to be a hugely wealthy man. All of which adds to the bewilderment of Rangers supporters that he won’t simply step in and end their misery by paying the opportunist investors currently running the club to go away. Since last year’s IPO the Rangers International share price has dropped from 70p to a mere 27.25p on Friday morning. Were King to buy up all 60 million of the shares in circulation at that price he could, in theory, take control of Rangers for £16.2m. That’s a sum comfortably within his budget. It’s feasible he could pay twice that price and still have change left over. But that doesn’t mean he will. Or that the people currently running the show will stand back and let him. Supporters speak as if all King has to do is transfer a few million quid to an Escrow account and pick up the keys to Ibrox. It’s not that simple. He could certainly make an offer for existing shares but he has said from the start he won’t put money into the pockets of wide boys. In June 2012 King met Charles Green at Ibrox and quickly established that the Yorkshireman and his faceless backers saw Rangers as the vehicle for making a fast buck. By the time he left Green took close to £1m out of the club. In contrast King is the proverbial ‘Rangers man’. A rarity willing to put millions into buying players for his boyhood idols in the full knowledge he will lose every penny. He put £20m of his own cash into the David Murray regime and lost it all. To hand yet more cash over to the corporate sharks who have landed Rangers in a hell of a mess through their avarice and opportunism, then, would stick in the throat. Neither is there any guarantee Sandy and James Easdale – the public faces on the throne – would sell. Meeting Sandy Easdale at his bus depot in November, King struck up a cordial relationship with the Greenock tycoon. But right now the Easdales show no inclination to hand the reins over to anyone. Their problem, however, is this. Rangers are running out of money. They could sell Lee Wallace, they could cut back the playing squad and they could trim costs across the board. But King articulated a common view among supporters this week. Becoming a team of also rans is simply unthinkable to Rangers. Almost as unpalatable as Celtic reaching ten-in-a-row. Yet unless the Easdales find a way to raise cash quickly it could easily happen. King’s solution is to underwrite a fresh issue of shares and return to the boardroom. For existing investors that’s a last resort option. They would have to dig deep once more or see their power base eroded. They don’t fancy that one bit. But if the alternative is another insolvency event then they may have little choice. Another Ibrox sugar daddy won’t appeal to everyone. The common sense solution would be for Rangers to spend what they earn. To stop throwing good money after bad and live within their means. But, as Walter Smith observed recently, common sense and Rangers finances rarely go hand in hand. Dave King remains hellbent on proving it. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2545705/Stephen-McGowan-Dave-King-showing-no-signs-leaving-riled-Rangers-board-peace.html#ixzz2rP65E6Ui Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,213 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Re his much-cited 20m investment. What do people think he was wanting for that "investment"? Was it a return one day in the future or was it, much like the sheikhs and Abramovitch do, money he blew on purpose for his "love affair" in the world of footall? To see them prosper at home and in Europe? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,252 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 If there is to be a second share issue won't current shareholders need to get first refusal? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 if theres no second share issue we will never get back on top. it's exactly what celtc did to hand oneil money then again to chesney. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 If there is to be a second share issue won't current shareholders need to get first refusal? Only if it's a rights issue; but that is what I would expect, otherwise existing shareholders will see their holdings diminish proportionally. This is pretty much a rehash of what has been said on other recent threads. Nothing new in this "story". Other papers had a little more detail. Clearly King is on some kind of media offensive. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,103 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 I would like to see a headline that reads "Journalists show no sign of leaving a beleaguered Rangers in peace". 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,213 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 if theres no second share issue we will never get back on top. it's exactly what celtc did to hand oneil money then again to chesney. Any guesses who underwrote most of these issues? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Any guesses who underwrote most of these issues? fergus twice then desmond. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Nothing new in this "story". Other papers had a little more detail. Clearly King is on some kind of media offensive. I think it at least might stop the usual "why doesn't King just buy up X amount of shares and put his money where his mouth is?" posts (for a little while anyway). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,252 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 fergus twice then desmond. As they formed two new companies in the process.......you wont hear much said about that will you that they're effectively three companies 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.