buster. 4,808 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I'm guessing McMurdo's been briefed by Toxic Jack on behalf of the various GreenCo shareholding block puppet masters regarding the latest line of propaganda drivel with which to attack. You can just sense that yesterday's brilliant news has ruined Hogmanay and New Years Day for quite a number of people! Judging by that article, Toxic is struggling to engineer even vaguely credble spin and has of late, had his puppet jumping from one place to another. One thing he is trying to do here, is to give 'doubting disciples' reason to stay aboard the Ashley/status Quo train by discrediting the Bears who have just bought the Laxey shares and their MO. There are many now seeing that Ashley isn't the only alternative (previous line peddled) and have to be re-convinced of why they should back him. The Bears need to continue in the way they have operated in the last few weeks and the under the counter Toxic slant (the Judas Blogger) will have to change. Note that there is no positive argument made on behalf of the Ashley/current status quo in that McMurdo piece, nor does it refer to many events and facts that have happened/came to light in recent weeks. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. Beelin'! With the same boring rhetoric being trotted out time after time, you are a fine replacement for Rab. Tick tock. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. As I said, struggling 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmu 0 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. dear lord Quattro. what is the difference?? The people that laxey have sold to are willing to put money in to try and regain control from Ashley. laxey hoped to get a return from their share in rangers but were clearly unwilling to put in any more and decided to cut and run. oh as well if it's true that the easdales are willing to assist the "three" in their attempts to take control then that would be another alliance of ashleys away.. Edited January 1, 2015 by pmu 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 It appears the mantra has shifted from, " they pyoor hiv ta buy shares man" to "they've pyoor bought the wrang shares man". 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) Kingsnorth seems to have a personal issue with Mike Ashley and hopes that the group he sold to will ramp up the opposition to Ashley in their new position as shareholders. Let me re-phrase this for you Bill.. Kingsnorth appears to have the same issues as Maher, Wallace, Nash etc etc etc before him - and that is that there are people at the club making decisions which are not for the benefit of Rangers FC. And you dont have to be a wet fish to work that out.... Edited January 1, 2015 by D'Artagnan 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 bb and bill dont half cheer me up. Whenever things look like we face an undefeatable adversary i read thier pap and realise they aint all that. tick tock. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siam69 0 Posted January 1, 2015 Author Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. Seems it's Bill and his/your employers that have been set on the back foot! This has been good news for Rangers fans, and those that want the best for the Club. It is of no surprise that you and Young Will would try to do anything but see it for the positive it is. Suck it up BB, and Young Will, who will no doubt be reading this as well, I wouldn't buy to much on HP in the sales, as you both might be losing some of your income in the foreseeable future. Beelin Edited January 1, 2015 by Siam69 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. It's the collaborators on the back foot. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Bill has really set a few people on the back foot, after all what has changed except the names on share certs, Laxey via Kingsnorth have all but admitted they were powerless against Ashley, even with 16% shareholding. What will the new share holders be able to enforce against Ashley that the Laxey camp failed to. There will be no share issue it will be a rights issue if any at all, the share issue was voted down by RF and RST amongst others. When Ashley decides good or bad we will know. Haven't seen good buddy RangersRab about, surely not another enforced holiday. Ashley's power base has been destabilised. He has/had power because the likes of Somers is a "wet fish" and the easdales are puppets. He won't be able to threaten and bully the likes of Park and Letham, which in turn threatens the SD deal. there are rumours of other bears in talks to buy out other institutional shareholders. Which bodes well when the share issue happens as Ashley will only be able to take up the additional shares to maintain is 8% or so, or up to a max of 10%. also, given that the share issue has been approved by a majority of shareholders at the AGM.... I'm not sure how you conclude it won't go ahead. Although I would concede that we should brace ourselves for a response from Ashley. He's a shark and wI'll retaliate in some way. That's about the only thing I can agree with McMurdo about. 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.