forlanssister 3,050 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I thought the Easdales did buy them? He had a binding agreement to sell to Laxey but what does binding mean to these people in all of this Are you for real? You think "the Easdales did buy them" yet the declared shareholdings don't tally up. You state "he had a binding agreement to sell to Laxey" that is 100% pure unadulterated bullshit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTinMan99 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wake me up when King actually does something positive. Have you been asleep since he dropped £20m onto us without blinking? When it goes belly up again, people like your good self will be saying nobody warned us.....again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,257 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 how would that have got him a say? the fans have 11%. the requisitioners over 30% yet the same spivs who have always run the club still do. nothing would have changed and dave would just have less cash to invest in rangers when the time comes. Again, King has had his money back since March. The AGM was in close to x-mas. Millions of shares were being sold and bought in the meantime, pre and post AGM. To say that no-one would have sold him shares would be conjecture, thousands of shares are being sold on a weekly basis. He did not want to fill the SPIVS pockets? How come that a city-brain like Prior is willing to do so? Or long term investors like R&M? And that there are shares on the market. What transpires again in this thread is a rather distinguished bias against anything the board does or did, with essentially no info of what is being done by whom since the AGM. Likewise, King seems to be protected from nigh any sort of criticism. Both is IMHO unwarranted at this moment and time. Wallace wanted his 120 days and he shall get it. Likewise, the half-year results should be out soonish too. We'll see what will transpire and whether we need King's cash injection or not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,257 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Have you been asleep since he dropped £20m onto us without blinking? When it goes belly up again, people like your good self will be saying nobody warned us.....again. People should remind themselves what King was looking for here. Did he want to get his money back at some point? Was he just another businessmen? Or did he spend it on his beloved club to make it challenge for trophies at home and in Europe? When he did that, he sure got loads of the latter and he would sure say: money well spend. Was it spend on Auchenhowie or the Stadium then? If so, it is still there and sure be deemed money well spend. It is simply not the case that King spent 20m and saw those robbed by SDM/Lloyd's or Whyte. That money was invested at the time and spent well, by anyone's standards. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Dynamo 128 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Are you for real? You think "the Easdales did buy them" yet the declared shareholdings don't tally up. You state "he had a binding agreement to sell to Laxey" that is 100% pure unadulterated bullshit. http://news.stv.tv/west-central/237857-sandy-easdale-announces-rangers-share-deal-with-charles-green/ This says Easdale is buying all of Greens shares http://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/news/citywire-news/laxey-becomes-rangers-biggest-shareholder#sthash.ZKAFCyq6.dpuf This says Laxey is buying whats left of Greens shares Someone is telling lies 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 People should remind themselves what King was looking for here. Did he want to get his money back at some point? Was he just another businessmen? Or did he spend it on his beloved club to make it challenge for trophies at home and in Europe? When he did that, he sure got loads of the latter and he would sure say: money well spend. Was it spend on Auchenhowie or the Stadium then? If so, it is still there and sure be deemed money well spend. It is simply not the case that King spent 20m and saw those robbed by SDM/Lloyd's or Whyte. That money was invested at the time and spent well, by anyone's standards. King invested his £20m in 2000 the same year we "invested" in Tore Andre Flo. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Again, King has had his money back since March. The AGM was in close to x-mas. Millions of shares were being sold and bought in the meantime, pre and post AGM. To say that no-one would have sold him shares would be conjecture, thousands of shares are being sold on a weekly basis. He did not want to fill the SPIVS pockets? How come that a city-brain like Prior is willing to do so? Or long term investors like R&M? And that there are shares on the market. What transpires again in this thread is a rather distinguished bias against anything the board does or did, with essentially no info of what is being done by whom since the AGM. Likewise, King seems to be protected from nigh any sort of criticism. Both is IMHO unwarranted at this moment and time. Wallace wanted his 120 days and he shall get it. Likewise, the half-year results should be out soonish too. We'll see what will transpire and whether we need King's cash injection or not. What I am saying is their is no point buying shares because it gets you nowhere. You don't get any more info and you sure don't get on the board. The requisitioners had 30 percent of the shares and not one of them is on the board. Criticism of King for not buying shares is ill considered. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://news.stv.tv/west-central/237857-sandy-easdale-announces-rangers-share-deal-with-charles-green/ This says Easdale is buying all of Greens shares http://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/news/citywire-news/laxey-becomes-rangers-biggest-shareholder#sthash.ZKAFCyq6.dpuf This says Laxey is buying whats left of Greens shares Someone is telling lies Yes green and easdales as usual 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Someone is telling lies Charles Green is probably the biggest liar that Scottish football has witnessed in decades, so in relation to anything Green was involved with, it's pretty easy to think of a suspect when it seems someone has been telling porkies. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://news.stv.tv/west-central/237857-sandy-easdale-announces-rangers-share-deal-with-charles-green/ This says Easdale is buying all of Greens shares Sandy Easdale is registered as owning 2,942,957 shares where as Green owned over 5 million. http://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/news/citywire-news/laxey-becomes-rangers-biggest-shareholder#sthash.ZKAFCyq6.dpuf This says Laxey is buying whats left of Greens shares Someone is telling lies That report is inaccurate because Laxey didn't purchase the shares from Green as he had to give them to Laxey gratis as Laxey paid £1 per share in the pre-IPO fundraising and got Green to personally indemnify them for the difference between the £1 they paid and the £0.70 IPO price. Laxey having the foresight not to expose themselves to any potential illegal return of capital. 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.