Latest UoF statement

[Frankie 8,146]

"The Rangers support and the club itself has once again been betrayed by those tasked with overseeing the health and success of our great football club. The decision by the non-executive directors of the Plc board, Mr Somers, Mr James Easdale and Mr Norman Crighton, to effectively hand control of the club to Mike Ashley in return for a £2m, short term loan, is an absolute disgrace. They have acted in a cowardly way and have been bullied by Mike Ashley and Sandy Easdale into giving them precisely what they want with no regard for the club.

 

The club was at a crossroads. The board had to decide whether to take us down the route of a long term, £16m, sustainable investment and the start of a process where fans could once again trust those tasked with nursing Rangers back to health. Instead they have handed Mike Ashley control of the boardroom for a pittance which will now have to be repaid out of the pockets of the dwindling number of Rangers fans who still choose to support this regime financially. They have neglected their duty to shareholders, fans and the club itself. Their cowardly act now means we are likely to see Mr Ashley gain long term control of the club’s remaining commercial income without having to actually invest a penny.

 

The board has, through a policy of inaction and cooperation with Sandy Easdale's shareholder group, allowed a situation to develop where corporate vultures are grabbing what assets they can. There is no long term plan. There is no investment. We simply limp from one short term fix to another, each time giving away more of the family silver, despite a clear alternative being available.

 

Sandy Easdale's pronouncement that the Plc board "did their duty and their due diligence accordingly" and have done "what's in the best interests of the fans, the club and the shareholders" is the type of laughable nonsense we have come to expect from him. Mr Easdale certainly got what he wanted which was the retention of his seat in the director’s box and his club tie. The club and the fans have been sold down the river and this is another kick in the teeth for both them and the reputable shareholders still involved at Rangers. Mr Easdale, rather than disingenuous statements, should explain to fans why he actively blocked a £16m investment that could have taken the club forward.

 

It is now a matter of individual conscience for fans if they wish to continue to fund the corporate pillaging of our football club. They should be under no illusions however that every time they purchase a single item in either Sports Direct or our club shops, they are paying for the privilege of allowing Mike Ashley to strengthen his grip on our commercial operations in a move which could hamstring the club for a generation. Also for the remainder of this season, every match ticket they buy will be used to pay Mr Ashley back the money he has lent for control of our club. Effectively they will be paying him for the privilege of his power grab."

[stewarty 1,876]

Couldn't have put it any better.

[Hildy 0]

That's a good statement.

 

It says what has to be said.

[der Berliner 3,234]

" ... and have done "what's in the best interests of the fans, the club and the shareholders" is the type of laughable nonsense we have come to expect from him.

 

Such remarks are all fine and well. What I would expect is shareholders (especially those of note) to demand answers from the board why Ashley's deal was chosen over King's and/or Kennedy's and whether it was in the best interest of the shareholders. This, I would assume, can be legally enforced. Gnashing teeth on websites change or yield rather little.

[Tom Davison 0]

Included in the statement are the words "despite a clear alternative being available." Perhaps someone could assist me. I have read words attributed to Mr King but am struggling to understand the precise nature of the alternative, which makes it so clear

[colinstein 294]

The RST own almost as many shares as the Easdales. Will they get an answer ?

[SteveC 150]

Included in the statement are the words "despite a clear alternative being available." Perhaps someone could assist me. I have read words attributed to Mr King but am struggling to understand the precise nature of the alternative, which makes it so clear

 

There was a clear alternative from Brian Kennedy. Though, additionally - I'm not sure what part you found unclear in King's statement re the proposed £16 million investment from his group.

[Stimpy 0]

The RST own almost as many shares as the Easdales. Will they get an answer ?

 

They did mate. Easdales have since increased their holding.

[Rangersitis 0]

There was a clear alternative from Brian Kennedy. Though, additionally - I'm not sure what part you found unclear in King's statement re the proposed £16 million investment from his group.

 

The part of King's plan that was unclear was how he was going to achieve the conditions that he required for the deal to go through.

 

Have the full details been given on Kennedy's alternative? Has he even made a statement?

[the gunslinger 3,366]

any fan who hands their money to rangers now is doing more long term harm than good.