RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Has he not just done that with a loan? But hopefully after the '120 day business review' he'll produce new ideas on how to increase revenue.He's going to have to come up with something is he not? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 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. Agree but what is his gameplan? Why couldn't he have bought shares whilst the price was low like Laxey & Prior did? I don't think there will be another shares issue in the near future 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Agree but what is his gameplan? Why couldn't he have bought shares whilst the price was low like Laxey & Prior did? I don't think there will be another shares issue in the near future Dunno. Maybe he's a man of principle and means what he says? Or maybe the best opportunities had passed by the time he settled the South African tax issues. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 But hopefully after the '120 day business review' he'll produce new ideas on how to increase revenue.He's going to have to come up with something is he not? If I am honest. I very much doubt it. He needed this loan to live up to his promises or indeed to weaken the share holding of others. There is no other reasonable explanation why he would take a "not needed loan." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Dunno. Maybe he's a man of principle and means what he says? Or maybe the best opportunities had passed by the time he settled the South African tax issues. He got his money back in March 2013. He did not buy a significant amount of shares because he did not want to fill Green & Co.'s pockets, as he said. Hence, others did that and we had an AGM that went according to plan ... for the current major players. Like it or not, King played his games and still plays them. And, as has been said, King has not revealed any of his plans either. I see that some really look for fan ownership, but does anyone actually think that this is something King is looking for? What has Wallace done by now then? How would we know? The detractors say that he hasn't send Irvine away so far. Would that help anyone aside from settling some scores? Apparently it doesn't matter now that he e.g. sent Stockbridge packing? I can actually hear the keyboards being worked with replies like: "that was a minimum", "only did his job", "he sure gave him a nice golden handshake" et al. Well, well. As for the statement ... in what way is that going to help the current situation between club and support? Again, there is fingerpointing and accusations, rather than taking the opportunity by the scruff of the neck. No-one covers themselves in any sort of glory. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 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. He got his money back in March 2013. He did not buy a significant amount of shares because he did not want to fill Green & Co.'s pockets, as he said. Hence, others did that and we had an AGM that went according to plan ... for the current major players. Like it or not, King played his games and still plays them. And, as has been said, King has not revealed any of his plans either. I see that some really look for fan ownership, but does anyone actually think that this is something King is looking for? What has Wallace done by now then? How would we know? The detractors say that he hasn't send Irvine away so far. Would that help anyone aside from settling some scores? Apparently it doesn't matter now that he e.g. sent Stockbridge packing? I can actually hear the keyboards being worked with replies like: "that was a minimum", "only did his job", "he sure gave him a nice golden handshake" et al. Well, well. As for the statement ... in what way is that going to help the current situation between club and support? Again, there is fingerpointing and accusations, rather than taking the opportunity by the scruff of the neck. No-one covers themselves in any sort of glory. If I'd lost £20m on Rangers, I'd be making very sure that any additional investment benefited the Club and not anyone else, so I don't blame King for playing the long game. Given it's only a matter of weeks since Wallace said we didn't need any additional working capital in the short to medium term, I think it's perfectly legitimate for fans groups to ask 1) why do we need the loan now 2) what will it be used for and 3) is this source of funding the best of the available options? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 If I am honest. I very much doubt it. " You doubt if you are honest, a man in your position? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 If I'd lost £20m on Rangers, I'd be making very sure that any additional investment benefited the Club and not anyone else, so I don't blame King for playing the long game. Given it's only a matter of weeks since Wallace said we didn't need any additional working capital in the short to medium term, I think it's perfectly legitimate for fans groups to ask 1) why do we need the loan now 2) what will it be used for and 3) is this source of funding the best of the available options? Did he really lose £20m ? That's a question he needs to answer 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTinMan99 0 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Did he really lose £20m ? That's a question he needs to answer It doesn't really matter if he lost the lot, or got a bit back. Anyone that questions King's motives is nothing short of a crazy person. King certainly never invested for profit, he want's what's best for the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 It doesn't really matter if he lost the lot, or got a bit back. Anyone that questions King's motives is nothing short of a crazy person. King certainly never invested for profit, he want's what's best for the club. I'm sure he does want the best for the club. I just think whatever his gameplan is it looks totally bizarre to me. Why didn't he Hoover up shares when the price was low like Laxey and Prior did? That would have got him a foot in the door if nothing else. The board would have had to have dealt with him then. Now though he looks like someone left standing on the platform and the train left long ago 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.