Rangers takeover: Deal agreed in principle

[Graeme Ro55 1,082]

54 minutes ago, CammyF said:

If they copy their model at Leeds, they'll increase their shareholding once the become the major shareholders. 

 

I'm sure when the started at Leeds they were minority shareholders with circa 25% of the shares. 

So the last non 49ers shareholders will sit back and watch their share value rocket without having to spend a penny. I just dont get the motivation for cavanagh & co to make others wealthier. 

[alexscottislegend 2,701]

1 hour ago, Uilleam said:

Pin it on your lapel? Now that takes talent. 

 

Methinks you have been reading Flann O'Brien. 

No I haven't - heard this many moons ago.

[alexscottislegend 2,701]

8 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

You’re thirty days too late with this, surely.

Is the Crimean War over yet?

[buster. 5,617]

16 minutes ago, Graeme Ro55 said:

So the last non 49ers shareholders will sit back and watch their share value rocket without having to spend a penny. I just dont get the motivation for cavanagh & co to make others wealthier. 

A lot depends on how they plan to extract a return.

 

We'll need to be patient and see how it develops. At the moment, we know very little.

[CammyF 9,442]

39 minutes ago, Graeme Ro55 said:

So the last non 49ers shareholders will sit back and watch their share value rocket without having to spend a penny. I just dont get the motivation for cavanagh & co to make others wealthier. 

I'm just staring what they did at Leeds and it appears they're jumping straight to 51% here but will probably look to hoover up more shares once they are on-board. 

 

They might not, they may stick at 51%, build the club up and sell their shares for a profit (which would be "win win"). 

Edited 22 hours ago by CammyF

[Sutton_blows_goats 6,183]

4 minutes ago, CammyF said:

I'm just staring what they did at Leeds and it appears they're jumping straight to 51% here but will probably look to hoover up more shares once they are on-board. 

 

They might not, they may stick at 51%, build the club up and sell their shares for a profit (which would be "win win"). 

 Couldn’t they continue doing what’s been done for some time? Loans to the club converted to shares and thus dilution of existing shareholders? A financial expert can correct me.

[Uilleam 6,422]

1 hour ago, alexscottislegend said:

No I haven't - heard this many moons ago.

Actually, I think it was coined by Brendan Behan - the award was a gold ring. 

Edited 22 hours ago by Uilleam

[ranger_syntax 4,816]

3 hours ago, Graeme Ro55 said:

So the last non 49ers shareholders will sit back and watch their share value rocket without having to spend a penny.

No.

3 hours ago, Graeme Ro55 said:

I just dont get the motivation for cavanagh & co to make others wealthier. 

Don't waste any time thinking about it.

 

They do not want to do that.

[RANGERRAB 4,090]

12 hours ago, Graeme Ro55 said:

So the last non 49ers shareholders will sit back and watch their share value rocket without having to spend a penny. I just dont get the motivation for cavanagh & co to make others wealthier. 

The consortium (which includes 49ers) gets publicity with Rangers playing European football every season. They don’t get that at Leeds 

[buster. 5,617]

14 hours ago, CammyF said:

I'm just staring what they did at Leeds and it appears they're jumping straight to 51% here but will probably look to hoover up more shares once they are on-board. 

 

They might not, they may stick at 51%, build the club up and sell their shares for a profit (which would be "win win"). 

I remember that many of our fans, at least on the message boards gave Charles Green the benefit of the doubt, using the logic that for them to make money, Rangers needed to do well.

 

Some did the same with Mike Ashley. Saying that he would invest so as to get us to the Champions League because he couldn't with Newcastle.

 

To be clear, I don't bracket the current interest with the Charles Green M.O. 

But it could be along broadly similar lines as Mike Ashley.