Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Indeed. BTW, so far the Easdales have provided interest free loans on a couple of occasions, while AFAIK are not on any sort of payroll since assuming their respective roles? Just saying. Perhaps if they weren't inadequate clowns we wouldn't require emergency loans constantly just to make it through the end of the week. You wonder if anyone at Ibrox ever had any plans beyond emergency loans and dishing out onerous contracts to their mates. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 the easdales have cost us millions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 A loan for working capital secured against a transfer payment that was to be used for working capital. Just another normal day at the office. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 A loan for working capital secured against a transfer payment that was to be used for working capital. Just another normal day at the office. And yet it's being widely praised . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 The only way Ashley would need to fund a loan is if everyone involved - present board(s), shareholders, potential investors, a new vehicle, even RFFF and so on - refused to offer one. Knowing that someone, somewhere will stump up the relatively small amount needed to keep things going until changes can be attempted, he can sit back, contracts signed, and let other people pay to cover the mess his actions have helped create. He's probably more interested in striking accords with the people coming in. You don't need to see through walls to see how things are going at Ibrox, so he can hang out his useful idiots and get on with coorying in with the new lot. Even if all this pans out best case scenario, we'll still be stuck with Ashley for years in some way, shape or form. I fear you may be right regarding Ashley but for the club to be successful those contracts will have to go. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 And yet it's being widely praised . Finally, Sandy is getting the gratitiude that he craves! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSolace 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Didn't a 100k go missing at his depot last year ....really should keep a tighter grip on his finances ... The irony being bailed out by Sandy Easdale, criminally convicted of VAT fraud .... Decent Rangers men (and ladies) only please. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,231 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 So far the Easdales have stopped King investing in the club on a couple of occasions. Just saying. As did Laxey ... BTW, it was just a remark. Letham got interest for his loan, while Ashley's motives are somewhat more sinister. It would be "interesting" to know what the Easdales get or got for their involvement. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumshie RFC 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 As did Laxey ... BTW, it was just a remark. Letham got interest for his loan, while Ashley's motives are somewhat more sinister. It would be "interesting" to know what the Easdales get or got for their involvement. He gets the fact that he wasn't part of the board which took Rangers into administration for the second time in three years. The sooner he gets out the club the better. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoodyBlue 0 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) Latest from King on this mornings activity: King retorted angrily and told Telegraph Sport: "Given that Sandy Easdale rejected new funds and was a chief architect in getting the club into this mess, lending a small amount of money is the minimum he should have done. As part restitution he should make the £500,000 a donation rather than a loan." Edited January 5, 2015 by MoodyBlue 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.