trublusince1982 243 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) Yes, I genuinely think he is deliberately misleading. Show me one other example of a PLC chairman who includes the purchase of third party shares in a "project" when talking with his chairman hat on. I've never come across it before. Yes, £12.9m is still within the promises made, and I don't know why he has the need to exaggerate. SDM used to do it too. From memory he said that he had invested £60m, which included the purchase of his shares from the Laurence family and the amount that King himself invested. He didn't have to do that. he had invested £35m into the company and all credit for him for doing so, and likewise, credit to King and Co for putting in the £12.9m. Why add in the additional money? He's not speaking personally. If he was he can use whatever figures he likes. he's speaking as chairman and there's a big difference. It wasn't released as a club statement it was released as a personal statement from dave king the official club statement was released two days previous. Think he tries to explain that fact in the first paragraph but fails tbh. Check the club website its clearly stated as a dave king statement he also doesnt sign off as chairman. Edited February 13, 2017 by trublusince1982 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) I think the real problem is that none of the figures you are debating are going to get us where we need to be in any case. We need to add a "0" to the number left to be spent to catch up with our rivals - and even then what would be left for players after other necessary outlay would have to be spent wisely. Our club has been robbed of well over 100 million in the last 5 years. Meanwhile our rivals have been boosted by Champs League money even in seasons when they lost on the field in the qualifiers. As is their way in Scotland, they then "won" money and progress off the field instead. They also get players sold for vast profit on the back of one good showing in otherwise humiliating CL group stages. Dembele will go for a fortune in the summer. Also, meanwhile, transfer fees and wages have sky rocketed. Edited February 13, 2017 by SteveC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 it wasn't a personal investment it was the first step of a defined project. Each member didn't look at the club and decide to buy shares for monetary concerns and personal gains, they bought a combined controlling interest so the project could begin. It wasnt an ad hoc purchase of random amounts of shares that just happened to give them the percentage they wanted. The shares are a fundamental part of the plan implemented by king and the three bears and clearly come under the definition of a project. Ask yourself this could the project as it stands happen without first the purchase of those shares? Did he say that he had made "an investment in the Club" ? If the answer is yes then no matter how many ways you try to dress it up then it is wrong. An investment in the Club means accruing benefit to the Club. The Club never received any such benefit. At no point in time has DK referred to this as a "project". He continually talks about his "investment in the Club". You cannot include the original share purchase when those monies went to external 3rd parties which saw none of those funds go to the benefit of the Club. He made a private purchase of shares between individuals or corporations that held the shares in RFC. He didn't invest any of that original purchase in RFC and therefore it isn't an "investment in the Club". Again you can dress it up all you like but it is a factually incorrect statement. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) Did he say that he had made "an investment in the Club" ? If the answer is yes then no matter how many ways you try to dress it up then it is wrong. An investment in the Club means accruing benefit to the Club. The Club never received any such benefit. At no point in time has DK referred to this as a "project". He continually talks about his "investment in the Club". You cannot include the original share purchase when those monies went to external 3rd parties which saw none of those funds go to the benefit of the Club. He made a private purchase of shares between individuals or corporations that held the shares in RFC. He didn't invest any of that original purchase in RFC and therefore it isn't an "investment in the Club". Again you can dress it up all you like but it is a factually incorrect statement. think this is the bit that has annoyed people £18 million of the originally estimated £30 million investment has already been made. Ultimately, the overall investment in any football team is driven by the net player spend and, given that we are behind target with our squad, there may be a further need to accelerate investment at the end of this season. It is my present personal view that we will, in all likelihood, invest more than £30 million before we are where we want to be but this will be revisited once we have a new permanent management team in place. at no time is personal investment mentioned i dont think, only as a group as to not defined a s a project that's not true. It has been talked of as a five year plan constantly and the term project has also been used on several occasions Edited February 13, 2017 by trublusince1982 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 think this is the bit that has annoyed people £18 million of the originally estimated £30 million investment has already been made. Ultimately, the overall investment in any football team is driven by the net player spend and, given that we are behind target with our squad, there may be a further need to accelerate investment at the end of this season. It is my present personal view that we will, in all likelihood, invest more than £30 million before we are where we want to be but this will be revisited once we have a new permanent management team in place. at no time is personal investment mentioned i dont think, only as a group He made personal investment statements , don't you remember the "I will spend my children's inheritance if necessary " statement . The problem with DK is that before he managed to get into a position of power he and the other 3 bears were more than happy to organise protests/boycotts to help them get power , he made numerous statements about investments , go back and Google them it's quite easy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 It wasn't released as a club statement it was released as a personal statement from dave king the official club statement was released two days previous. Think he tries to explain that fact in the first paragraph but fails tbh. Check the club website its clearly stated as a dave king statement he also doesnt sign off as chairman. Seriously? Anything he does on the official site is in his position, unless specifically highlighted as such. It doesn't say a personal statement from Dave King. He continually talks about the board in his statement. For example "The vagaries of running a football club are not new to your Board". he continually refers to "We" and "the board". He is clearly speaking with his directors' hat on, and to argue anything else is not realistic. He does make it clear when he is speaking personally (the end of point 4) but otherwise he is clearly not speaking personally. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted February 13, 2017 Author Share Posted February 13, 2017 So basically all the times I've bought shares in companies I've never actually made an actual investment in the company the only times I've actually made an actual investment is when I took part in any rights issues they had, is that correct? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,429 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 So basically all the times I've bought shares in companies I've never actually made an actual investment in the company the only times I've actually made an actual investment is when I took part in any rights issues they had, is that correct? So we are told. I am on to my bank, and to my brokers, already. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 He made personal investment statements , don't you remember the "I will spend my children's inheritance if necessary " statement . The problem with DK is that before he managed to get into a position of power he and the other 3 bears were more than happy to organise protests/boycotts to help them get power , he made numerous statements about investments , go back and Google them it's quite easy Yeah i remember the comment about inheritance in reply to the question how does you family feel about this. Dont see the issue he has put up the money he said he would, not sure if it comes out of anyones inheritance mind you. not sure why it matters tbh. the term investment literally means all assets bought with a mind to a future return, the argument is whether that return comes under personal investment or not, for me the return in this case is not a rise on purchase price which would make it a personal investment but the control of the club was the intended return making it part of the project. Its all getting a bit chicken and egg. In my opinion it wasn't a personal investment in the typical sense as the consequences of that purchase was the desired outcome not the shares or monetary return on those shares. In fact DK tried to buy the shares through the club but those in charge at the time refused the offer, if they had accepted ,this same purchase of shares, would happily be defined by all as part of the investment which goes to show how fine a line we are talking about. And as said the statement released was not an official club statement from the chairmen but a personal message to help minimise the media stories. All i can say is there would be no point in lying because basically he didn't need to, so i think in this case we can give him the benefit of the doubt and from now on take all talk of investment as including the purchase price. Its not much to ask for is it? Think we all need to start pulling in the same direction and go with the flow until something completely unforgivable looks inevitable. If we want transparency we need to listen and try and understand not take the default position of questioning every word. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Seriously? Anything he does on the official site is in his position, unless specifically highlighted as such. It doesn't say a personal statement from Dave King. He continually talks about the board in his statement. For example "The vagaries of running a football club are not new to your Board". he continually refers to "We" and "the board". He is clearly speaking with his directors' hat on, and to argue anything else is not realistic. He does make it clear when he is speaking personally (the end of point 4) but otherwise he is clearly not speaking personally. It does right across the top in big blue letters it clearly says statement from dave king. Its also discussed (badly tbf) in the first paragraph and also he signs of as just dave king. They also placed it right next to the official club statement which is titled as such. 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.