Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[craig 5,195]

45 minutes ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

You are responding saying don’t go ‘greeting’ and the likes, hardly friendly 

 

It wasn’t an explanation, it was another example of you forcing your opinion at me 

(When people do this stuff it shows - YOU) 

 

As for being a snowflake? Really?! Lol - More like I have no desire to waste my time arguing about a subject that many points we actually agree on & I’ve never challenged you about but you still don’t see it 

 

However, this thread is getting clogged up with crap like this, so DM & we’ll discuss or we’ll move on - isn’t worth wasting the thread on 

 

Big game tonight an all ??

DM sent  

[craig 5,195]

27 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

to me it seems they want the burden and the shares that go with it. 

 

i see no sign of public offering. Or indeed wider offering to existing shareholders. 

Which is all well and good.  But how do they then plan to finance the future financial burden that may come ?  There can't be a reliance on Park & Bennett et al to continually provide the funding - and, even if they do and that funding is converted to shares then it dilutes C1872's shareholding.... and when that happens they drop below the %age needed to veto any super-majority votes.

 

So how are they going to fund not just the 13 million, but also to maintain %age shareholding in the event further funding is needed ?

 

This is the problem - they have brought a suggestion that only covers one piece of the jigsaw.  I don't think they should be doing that without having a plan for the short, medium AND longer term.

[Bluedell 5,329]

1 hour ago, the gunslinger said:

those funds are already committed.

I should also say that there's a big difference between guaranteeing the funds for the purpose of the going concern note in the accounts and actually paying it over.

 

It's possible that Park and Bennett have no intention of putting in the £14m for next season and it will be funded completely through the sale of players. and it would only be in the worst case scenario that we were unable to sell players where they would need to use the proposed funding.

[Bluedell 5,329]

31 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

i see no sign of public offering. Or indeed wider offering to existing shareholders. 

That costs a hell of a lot of money and may end up swallowing most of the third party take up in costs.

 

They're doing it the cost effective way.

 

It doesn't mean that they wouldn't be amenable to a large investment from C1872.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Perhaps i am wrong about the desire for cash from other sources. I just don't see it and no one is saying anything to convince me it exists. 

 

I agree it would be the way to go. 

[craig 5,195]

One thing that I feel should be pointed out, and it doesn't have any direct relevance to this but Dave King has already sunk 20 million into the club under Murray's stewardship too.  Money he never recouped.  His Rangers-friendly credentials are there for all to see.

 

It feels a little churlish to bemoan him given everything he has done for the club, both financially and non-financially, over the years.

[forlanssister 3,050]

I don't think anyone doubts the debt of gratitude we owe Dave King, I dread to think where we'd be today without him and the Three Bears and I say that unequivocally. 

 

However that doesn't mean we can't doubt the timing and method of what's currently being proposed or rather imposed if you wish.

Edited December 3, 2020 by forlanssister

[Soulsonic5791 408]

Having read, listened, postulated, deliberated et al on the subject, I still can’t get past a few things which are inescapable for me.

 

They are:

 

Why does Club1872 continue to look like such an opaque vehicle so long after its inception, (especially to the lay person/ordinary punter)? Will this change in the future, and if so, whose purposes does that change serve?

 

The Club requires new investment to facilitate ongoing costs. At the quoted figures, how likely is this to be met by the current Club1872 membership and the prospect of increasing their existing subscription rates?

 

How feasible is the perceived reliance on Club1872 to provide further funds on an ad hoc basis to prevent dilution of its shareholding, never mind facilitating additional cash flow shortfalls?

 

How realistic is the prospect of future short to medium term sustainability being met without the need for a public offering? 

 

Have our current custodians reached the limit of their exposure to risk? If not, how close are they to reaching their limit?

 

There are so many other aspects of the potential impacts that this apparent crossroads in the way that the Club is governed which could be raised. They are possibly too numerous to list or even bring to mind here, but one thing is certain, nothing in this scenario is straightforward.

 

As always, it will boil down to who we do and don’t trust. The battle for hearts and minds continues ad infinitum.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Soulsonic5791

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, the gunslinger said:

i see no sign of public offering. Or indeed wider offering to existing shareholders. 

To be fair, the middle of a global pandemic and economic collapse is hardly the best time to launch a share issue.

[craig 5,195]

1 hour ago, forlanssister said:

I don't think anyone doubts the debt of gratitude we owe Dave King, I dread to think where we'd be today without him and the Three Bears and I say that unequivocally. 

 

However that doesn't mean we can't doubt the timing and method of what's currently being proposed or rather imposed if you wish.

Completely agree.  Just felt the need for us all to be reminded that this isn't the first time he has been involved with Rangers financially.

 

We still have an obligation to ourselves and the club to ask questions of anyone charged with the management, direction and custodianship of the club !