Stimpy 0 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Richard Wilson said on the wireless tonight that Ashley had signed an undertaking with the SFA not to increase his shares above 10% and not to have any influence on the board. Now he has already called for an EGM to remove 2 board members so it looks like he's breached that undertaking already As of yet, he's not increased his holding above 10%, has he? The option's there but I doubt we'll see any issue now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 As of yet, he's not increased his holding above 10%, has he? The option's there but I doubt we'll see any issue now. There is nowt to stop him from entering into negotiations with the authorities where he got an increase on that 10%. If he gets his own men on the board, there would be no reason to increase his shareholding. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,218 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I see nothing wrong with what he says. You pick curious times, samples and occasions to reveal this kind of neutral and impartional streak. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,372 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Richard Wilson said on the wireless tonight that Ashley had signed an undertaking with the SFA not to increase his shares above 10% and not to have any influence on the board. Now he has already called for an EGM to remove 2 board members so it looks like he's breached that undertaking already http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04mcqtc 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Ashley doesn't need to own us, when he's already running the club. he's done it on the cheap and sly/ However we need to deal with that reality imo. Give peace a chance. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 You pick curious times, samples and occasions to reveal this kind of neutral and impartional streak. I don't pick times to do anything. I responded to a post and gave my thoughts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I see nothing wrong with what he says. I don't see anything wrong in what he said either, I do however in the context of Ashley's loan being accepted when financial sense would have dictated better offers were accepted. The comment, due its timing and forum used, was all about English delighting in King being beaten by Ashley. Of course the statement, per se, is sensible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I don't see anything wrong in what he said either, I do however in the context of Ashley's loan being accepted when financial sense would have dictated better offers were accepted. The comment, due its timing and forum used, was all about English delighting in King being beaten by Ashley. Of course the statement, per se, is sensible. I had no idea that English has a preference as to who is in control at Rangers. Does he have history with King? If he has made the comment based solely on what you said, then the message has a different slant to it. King's plan(s) didn't make financial sense to those that he ultimately had to persuade. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I see nothing wrong with what he says. That's because there is nothing wrong with what he said there. The club gets much stronger criticism from us. Edit - I see Steve has clarified his point. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I had no idea that English has a preference as to who is in control at Rangers. Does he have history with King? If he has made the comment based solely on what you said, then the message has a different slant to it. King's plan(s) didn't make financial sense to those that he ultimately had to persuade. He has attacked King quite ferociously in the past, his quote was made in response to the news that Ashley's bid had been accepted and some Rangers fans had just expressed their dismay. I meant more that he just likes winding us up. Whatever the Rangers fans response had been you kind of felt he was going to chip in with the opposite 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.