RANGERRAB 3,263 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 It's neither here nor there what people say on here about him. I personally would have happily started going back to Ibrox if he got in a manager and we started playing watchable football again. The people that count (shareholders and board) didn't entertain his offer and that's all it boils down to. The lamentable product on the park needs addressed ASAP.Without sufficient funding like Sarver had to offer that will be difficult 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) He has still left the door open when he said "they just need to call me". In the event that T3B and King can somehow get power and/or sway other investors into voting on their lines and/or get another share issue approved then Sarver could very well come back in. The problem is that in order to dilute the shareholding of Ashley/Easdale you need a 75% vote to allow an open issue to take place which allows for dilution. Ashley & Easdale comfortably have more than 25% including their proxies. This road has much to travel yet. Edited January 13, 2015 by craig 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie P 4 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 He has still left the door open when he said "they just need to call me". In the event that T3B and King can somehow get power and/or sway other investors into voting on their lines and/or get another share issue approved then Sarver could very well come back in. The problem is that in order to dilute the shareholding of Ashley/Easdale you need a 75% vote to allow an open issue to take place which allows for dilution. Ashley & Easdale comfortably have more than 75%. This road has much to travel yet. You mean more than 25% presumably? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 You mean more than 25% presumably? Oops - now corrected 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sannybear 0 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 He has still left the door open when he said "they just need to call me". In the event that T3B and King can somehow get power and/or sway other investors into voting on their lines and/or get another share issue approved then Sarver could very well come back in. The problem is that in order to dilute the shareholding of Ashley/Easdale you need a 75% vote to allow an open issue to take place which allows for dilution. Ashley & Easdale comfortably have more than 75%. This road has much to travel yet. This is all very true . It's no coincidence that the easdale "block" amounts to more than 25% , hence my post from a few days ago saying that the allies might be compelled to keep the easdales on side with their personal holding of around 6% . Just me thinking aloud , we still don't know who owns around 15% I think . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 There is a big difference between having no alarm bells over Sarver and having no alarm bells over Ashley/Easdale. Is there? I heard the same thing trotted out with Green's appearance on the scene simply because 'he isn't Whyte'. Just to clarify, I have not compared Sarver to Ashley, Easdale or Whyte. Club 9 and Bill Miller would be closer to how I view it all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Bill miller was whyte 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,263 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Bill miller was whyte LOL. You're not serious are you? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 So Sarver is in the same category as Ashley or Whyte then? If we use a fitting analogy of a Bear I see Whyte as someone who hunts down a bear to kill it and sell on it's fur etc; Green as someone who buys a dying, pregnant bear, let's the mother bear die after the birth, then takes the baby bear and teaches it tricks before selling it to a circus which only cares about expoiting the bear for money; finally Ashley as someone who puts a tap into the bear's stomach to collect bile and sell it to the Chinese. Sarver seems more to be about taking the bear, bringing back to good health and then putting it in his safari park for people to pay to see and so make it pay its way. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Dynamo 128 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Bill Miller might've done a better job of turning us around 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.