forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 EXCLUSIVE: "And let's not forget what Mike Ashley has done for Newcastle United. Yes there has been some criticism from the Newcastle fans but when he took over the club was spiralling out of control. http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/527497/Newcastle-Mike-Ashley-wants-to-save-crisis-torn-Rangers At least one relegation and perhaps another along with a circa £30m deficit in commercial income. Anyway he'll be shot of Newcastle as soon as it's known for certain which league they'll be playing in next season. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 As far as I can see £0.00 Looks like zilch if the trigger is invoked! The question is - what invokes the trigger? Nothing..... Absolutely heartbreaking. What an utter utter disgrace. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Green has destroyed us to get rich. Heartbreaking indeed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,246 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The facts on Mike Ashley's ability to own both Newcastle and Rangers By Grant Russell 26 October 2014 18:59 GMT With Rangers due to inform the stock exchange they have accepted an emergency loan from Mike Ashley, further questions have been raised about his increasing influence at Ibrox. Some are suggesting the Newcastle United owner's £2m injection, the conditions of which are not yet known, could even be a precursor to the businessman bidding for outright control of the club's shares. As a general rule, an individual requires the consent of the Scottish FA to have any significant shareholding or involvement in the running of the club if they already have such interests in any other football club in the world. Ashley already holds just under nine per cent of the shares of Rangers. Such a shareholding has already required the prior consent of the Scottish FA's board, as it breaches a three per cent threshold. Similarly, any attempts to increase that stake would again require approval. Boardroom power In the immediate term, there are questions over the influence Ashley could wield as a result of his cash loan. With Phillip Nash having quit the club's board, and chief executive Graham Wallace likely to follow, it is said two of Ashley's men - Derek Llambias and Stephen Mucklow - will be installed. In plain sight, that would represent two of the five members of the board, assuming Wallace's removal, being associates of Ashley. Scottish FA regulations state "no person...through an associate... may have any power whatsoever to influence the management or administration of another club". It's unclear whether that rule extends to having two votes at the boardroom table, or whether it applies only if a majority of votes were held. Assuming the latter, it wouldn't appear a Scottish FA regulation was being potentially breached, nor would their consent be required. Nevertheless, it has been reported the governing body will write to Ashley asking him to clarify his position and intent going forward. Taking share control If Ashley, as is being reported, sought outright control of Rangers, for example a 51 per cent shareholding, the picture would be clearer. The businessman currently has an agreement with the Scottish FA not to exceed a 10 per cent shareholding in the Ibrox side. In order to increase that stake, permission from the governing body would be required. While there is arguably a case to be heard for a non-majority shareholding to be purchased, taking a majority would mean Ashley would be their owner, and have full power over all of their decisions. The Scottish FA has the discretion if it sees fit to allow that to happen. The rules are not inflexible. They state such a controlling interest is not allowed "except with the prior written consent of the board". Clearly if they so wish, the governing body could block Ashley from taking any more shares in Rangers, and they could block him taking outright control. Similarly, they can also allow it to happen and allow him to own both Newcastle United and Rangers. As a third option, the Scottish FA could allow more shares to be bought but only if Ashley can prove he has disposed of his interests in Newcastle United. That has already been raised as a possibility in the future, but the man himself has said that is unlikely to happen until "at least" 2016. From the perspective of the Scottish FA's rules, the key line is the "power whatsoever to influence the management or administration of another club". It is down to them to determine at which point that is occurring. Foreign interests As far as the English Premier League are concerned, their rules do not forbid Ashley from having any form of influence on a club outside of England. The Football League, which operates the second-tier Championship competition down to the fourth-tier League Two, have far more stringent rules. Their regulations state consent is required if an owner of an English club has the power to influence affairs at a Scottish team, or has any shares in them. There is one other pertinent point which will interest Rangers supporters. An "interest" as per Football League rules extends to having "lent to... or guaranteed the debts or obligations of that Club (or any other arrangement of substantially similar effect) otherwise than in the ordinary course of banking." All that said, it is important to note that these regulations, as is the case with the Scottish FA's, do not expressly forbid the interest taking place. Instead, it is at the behest of the bodies' respective boards to determine whether they should be permitted. UEFA are the governing body for European football but their regulations would only come into play at Rangers if, in the future, both they and Newcastle United both qualified for either the Champions League or Europa League. They are not required to both be playing in the same competition at the same time. The rules here are clear and not flexible through the consent of any UEFA board. If Ashley was thought to be in control of the majority of shareholders' voting rights, held the ability to appoint a majority of board members, or was "able to exercise by any means a decisive influence in the decision-making of the club", UEFA would block both teams being able to take part. They don't, however, kick both teams out of competition. Instead, one gets to keep their place. How they do determine which one? There is a pecking order. First, if the clubs were in separate UEFA competitions, the team taking part in the Champions League would be the one to keep their spot. If both were in the same competition, Rangers would lose their spot as England is ranked much higher than Scotland on UEFA's "access list" for competitions. Scotland wouldn't lose a European participant. Instead, Rangers would be replaced accordingly. Can Mike Ashley influence or own both clubs? Only the Scottish FA can ultimately decide whether they deem it appropriate for Mike Ashley to have a hand in both Newcastle United and Rangers, if indeed that is his goal. In English terms, the picture is only complicated if Newcastle United are relegated out of the Premier League. In UEFA terms, it's only an issue if both qualify for European competition at the same time. And even then, the rules do not forbid one of the two clubs being able to take up a place. The onus then will fall on in the positions of power at Hampden. If a proposal from Mike Ashley arrives on their desks under which he proposes strengthening his grip on affairs at Ibrox, it is their call to make. Given the currently unofficial claims about the precarious nature of the club's finances without an Ashley intervention, albeit in the context of various other suitors being on the scene, the Scottish FA may soon hold the future of Rangers in their hands. STV So it would be Regan, Lawwell and Co. to decide on our future, should Ashley put his cards on the table and asks for goodies? They did a fine job in 2011 (and no-one has taken them to the cleaners for that as far as I can remember). I reckon the anti-Ashley faction can sleep more easily if the above is all true and comes to pass. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 STV So it would be Regan, Lawwell and Co. to decide on our future, should Ashley put his cards on the table and asks for goodies? They did a fine job in 2011 (and no-one has taken them to the cleaners for that as far as I can remember). I reckon the anti-Ashley faction can sleep more easily if the above is all true and comes to pass. celtc will be desperate for ashley to own us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,137 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I think that once Ashley gets his own men in place there will be casualties and the first one could be our ally and his coaching staff 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I think that once Ashley gets his own men in place there will be casualties and the first one could be our ally and his coaching staff But that would be doing what is best for the club. Surely not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 depends who he brings in. plus ashley loves a poor manager to take the heat off him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN63 0 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 celtc will be desperate for ashley to own us. I think the view to people outside of our support might be differently perceived to how our fans view Ashley. I'm sure that will be the case in some quarters. I'm no fan of Ashley, but given his potential financial muscle some septic fans may see him as a threat to their current domination. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,137 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 maybe every time a celtic fan buys a replica shirt from sports direct they might be putting money into rangers 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.