Fans Groups Statement

[Hildy 0]

Fully agree. I got concerned when the players got asked to consider a wage cut.

My point is though that virtually all businesses do borrow. I don't think we should be getting over concerned at this stage.

Let's see where we are after the '120 day business review'. I'll wait til then before I make a full judgement on our CEO

 

It's not a crime to borrow, but is very misleading to make the statement already highlighted in my previous post, and then start borrowing two months later.

 

We also need to be told exactly what it is costing as well as the consequences of a repayment in shares - if this is the intent.

[RANGERRAB 3,258]

It's not a crime to borrow, but is very misleading to make the statement already highlighted in my previous post, and then start borrowing two months later.

 

We also need to be told exactly what it is costing as well as the consequences of a repayment in shares - if this is the intent.

 

I still think we need to allow our CEO to complete his '120 day business review' before we make any judgements.

I'll be most interested to see what transpires.

[bluebear54 0]

It's not a crime to borrow, but is very misleading to make the statement already highlighted in my previous post, and then start borrowing two months later.

 

We also need to be told exactly what it is costing as well as the consequences of a repayment in shares - if this is the intent.

 

Agreed, but do you think we will hear the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

[Mountain Bear 0]

An excellent statement.

 

Resolutions 9 & 10 were almost as unpopular as Stockbridge at the AGM.

 

While I think they're limited to issuing c6m new shares for the £1.5m (i.e. they're not giving them away for peanuts, as technically they could have done), they've made pretty quick use of their new ability to wave pre-emption rights for existing shareholders (resolution 10). I suspect they've been planning this for some time.

 

Green's favoured ones tightening their grip on control.

[Hildy 0]

Agreed, but do you think we will hear the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

 

I don't know, but an answer is required.

 

For all the stick that fan groups get, they provide a service for the entire support when they take the club to task on issues like this.

 

They can put pressure on the club in a way that individuals mostly cannot. Instead of this issue being ignored or forgotten about, the club is now under pressure to come up with a convincing answer - and that's good.

[RANGERRAB 3,258]

An excellent statement.

 

Resolutions 9 & 10 were almost as unpopular as Stockbridge at the AGM.

 

While I think they're limited to issuing c6m new shares for the £1.5m (i.e. they're not giving them away for peanuts, as technically they could have done), they've made pretty quick use of their new ability to wave pre-emption rights for existing shareholders (resolution 10). I suspect they've been planning this for some time.

 

Green's favoured ones tightening their grip on control.

 

So why is it with the share price low DK doesn't buy up a shareholding ? Wouldn't cost a man of his means too much would it to build up say a 10 to 15 percent shareholding would it? Presume you do support him judging by your final statement

[TheTinMan99 0]

I still think we need to allow our CEO to complete his '120 day business review' before we make any judgements.

I'll be most interested to see what transpires.

 

What exactly are you expecting at the end of this mysterious 120 days? A full statement of accounts, or an explanation of what they are up to? The 120 days is and was nothing more than buying time after the AGM. Just enough time for them to tie us up like a kipper again.

 

So far under Mr Wallace, we have the continued employment of Irvine, the botched reduction of the players salaries, and now this dodgy loan. He has no real influence on anything important, as far as I can see. If he does, then he's just as bad as them.

[RANGERRAB 3,258]

What exactly are you expecting at the end of this mysterious 120 days? A full statement of accounts, or an explanation of what they are up to? The 120 days is and was nothing more than buying time after the AGM. Just enough time for them to tie us up like a kipper again.

 

So far under Mr Wallace, we have the continued employment of Irvine, the botched reduction of the players salaries, and now this dodgy loan. He has no real influence on anything important, as far as I can see. If he does, then he's just as bad as them.

 

Agree with what your saying but I do believe we have to give him the 120 days he has asked for. After that we should judge him.My own view is that his top priority should be how to increase revenue. I shall be interested to see what he comes up with in that respect

[pete 2,499]

Agree with what your saying but I do believe we have to give him the 120 days he has asked for. After that we should judge him.My own view is that his top priority should be how to increase revenue. I shall be interested to see what he comes up with in that respect

Has he not just done that with a loan?

[Mountain Bear 0]

So why is it with the share price low DK doesn't buy up a shareholding ? Wouldn't cost a man of his means too much would it to build up say a 10 to 15 percent shareholding would it? Presume you do support him judging by your final statement

 

I'm fairly ambivalent about King. I'd prefer him to the current lot, but I want the fans to have a bigger stake more.

 

I do believe that he genuinely wants any money he puts into Rangers to go to the club rather than lining other people's pockets. The main problem King has is that the Board don't seem to want to share control via a share issue. Even if he did want to buy a sizable stake from existing holders, he wouldn't be able to do so at the current price - he would just drive the price up.