New Dave King statement

[andy steel 0]

Those in the camp that do not wish to see King wear the crown should be very,very careful of what they wish for because they may just get their wish.

 

That's a bit cryptic! I would have said that our troika of King-doubters want the best for Rangers, even though I think they are off the mark in this case - what is it you think they wish for?

[Frankie 8,151]

As it stands the only clear point for the next year is that the club desperately needs investment. Now, King may or may not have been totally up-front about his intentions in that regard but I think it's safe to say he's one of very few options we have in terms of new money. Possibly (probably?) the only option.

 

Meanwhile what's the chances of season book sales moderately rising vis a vis the going concern notes? They won't - in fact, they will most likely reduce whether it's down to a UoF trust, the style of football, rising costs or more TV matches.

 

This means the first 5000 portion of automatic renewals will pay off this year's £1.5m loan. Then we'll have another 15-20 thousand sales for working capital - including stadium maintenance and squad improvements. Finally, we may have around 5000 people who join the UoF trust giving us around 30,000 in total.

 

How long then before we need more loans to see out next season? Or will we have received the 32RED monies up front to keep us viable? Just how many cuts will be made to 'compliment' this lack of income?

 

These are the questions we need answered. No-one at the club seems willing though while Dave King is equally unclear in how he'd turn everything around - even if his money appears more and more of a necessity to stabilise and future-proof the club. It's certainly appropriate that we have a casino company on the shirt as those in charge are most definitely gambling with our future.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

As it stands the only clear point for the next year is that the club desperately needs investment. Now, King may or may not have been totally up-front about his intentions in that regard but I think it's safe to say he's one of very few options we have in terms of new money. Possibly (probably?) the only option.

 

Meanwhile what's the chances of season book sales moderately rising vis a vis the going concern notes? They won't - in fact, they will most likely reduce whether it's down to a UoF trust, the style of football, rising costs or more TV matches.

 

This means the first 5000 portion of automatic renewals will pay off this year's £1.5m loan. Then we'll have another 15-20 thousand sales for working capital - including stadium maintenance and squad improvements. Finally, we may have around 5000 people who join the UoF trust giving us around 30,000 in total.

 

How long then before we need more loans to see out next season? Or will we have received the 32RED monies up front to keep us viable? Just how many cuts will be made to 'compliment' this lack of income?

 

These are the questions we need answered. No-one at the club seems willing though while Dave King is equally unclear in how he'd turn everything around - even if his money appears more and more of a necessity to stabilise and future-proof the club. It's certainly appropriate that we have a casino company on the shirt as those in charge are most definitely gambling with our future.

 

Nice analogy though some might think that a whiskey brand may have been more appropriate in that regard.

 

Do you seriously think that 5,000 people will pay into a ST trust fund; I doubt it will be 500.

 

Proper marketing of our last push back to the SPL can see a rise in ST sales; but a new management team would be the biggest boost to sales and if this forum is anything to go by of far greater importance than any review regardless of the timing.

 

I do note that on RM for example the ST trust is almost universally condemned as indeed is Mr King (and I can see the next comment coming, but I'm happy on here thanks, can't cope with the language over there). What I'm saying is that it is not clear to me how representative views expressed on here are of Rangers fans as a whole, given a different bias perhaps on different forums and the tiny minority of fans who post at all.

[Frankie 8,151]

Nice analogy though some might think that a whiskey brand may have been more appropriate in that regard.

 

Do you seriously think that 5,000 people will pay into a ST trust fund; I doubt it will be 500.

 

Proper marketing of our last push back to the SPL can see a rise in ST sales; but a new management team would be the biggest boost to sales and if this forum is anything to go by of far greater importance than any review regardless of the timing.

 

I do note that on RM for example the ST trust is almost universally condemned as indeed is Mr King (and I can see the next comment coming, but I'm happy on here thanks, can't cope with the language over there). What I'm saying is that it is not clear to me how representative views expressed on here are of Rangers fans as a whole, given a different bias perhaps on different forums and the tiny minority of fans who post at all.

 

It could be 5, 500 or 5000 but every bear I speak to is certainly holding off for the time being as they, quite rightly, want to survey the review and King's plans. I don't see all that much backing for the season ticket trust but they do have around 7000 pledges so it may well be they can turn a fair portion of those into actual escrow funds.

 

However, no matter the reason, it seems more than possible that renewal numbers will be moderately lower next year than higher as suggested in the accounts. Ergo, the question of investment remains and it's a question I see no-one answering on any forum or, most importantly, by anyone at the club.

[Blue Moon 1,113]

The deadline will be extended because there will be a shortfall in season ticket sales, regardless of whether it is due to the manager or not. What will they do then with the review?

[Frankie 8,151]

The deadline will be extended because there will be a shortfall in season ticket sales, regardless of whether it is due to the manager or not. What will they do then with the review?

 

Your guess is as good as mine.

 

It comes across to me as that sometimes the board just enjoys playing silly buggers. To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me to see the review published today as much as August.

[Darthter 542]

I still shake my head when people criticise someone for not spending £30 Million of his own money. That's THIRTY MILLION POUNDS! No matter how much money someone has to expect them to hand over that amount of money for something that isn't worth half that and for which he is very unlikely to ever get back is quite something.

 

I demand to know why Darthter hasn't put £50,000 into Rangers. C'mon, sell your house man, get a second job, you claim to love the club but all you do is bump your gums on here, show you really care by selling your car or a kidney or something.

 

£30m or £30....King clearly stated in an interview that was was looking to invest out of his own pocket. Now he's saying he's wanting other folk to invest the cash - how much is he actually going to pit in???

 

If I had £50k of £30m sitting "spare" in an account I would invest it in the club, but unfortunately I don't.

 

Everyone is wanting the board to be transparent and clear about their plans etc....yet DK keeps changing his story, and folk seem quite happy with that.....

[calscot 0]

I don't see how he's changing his story, it seems pretty clear. He thinks Rangers need £30m of investment and if that can be raised by others then job done, if not he's prepared to put the money up himself - seems fair and logical. What don't people understand? Of course if he's investing that much, he will want control of how it is invested in the club, or pretty much control of the club - which again seems fair and logical.

[Darthter 542]

I don't see how he's changing his story, it seems pretty clear. He thinks Rangers need £30m of investment and if that can be raised by others then job done, if not he's prepared to put the money up himself - seems fair and logical. What don't people understand? Of course if he's investing that much, he will want control of how it is invested in the club, or pretty much control of the club - which again seems fair and logical.

 

King previously stated in an interview (link provided previously) that he was putting the £30m in himself - no mention of his cash being a fallback option....it was coming out his pocket!!!

 

Now he saying he hopes the £30m comes from others. His story HAS changed. If this was the board they would be getting branded as liars, but since it's King it's fine. Why is that difficult for folk to see.

 

King is not saying that he won't invest, but his position HAS changed from what he first stated.

[Guest magnus]

King previously stated in an interview (link provided previously) that he was putting the £30m in himself - no mention of his cash being a fallback option....it was coming out his pocket!!!

 

Now he saying he hopes the £30m comes from others. His story HAS changed. If this was the board they would be getting branded as liars, but since it's King it's fine. Why is that difficult for folk to see.

 

King is not saying that he won't invest, but his position HAS changed from what he first stated.

 

You are splitting hairs. He stated the club requires £30 million. He stated he will provide it if necessary although he would be happy for others to do so.