thenolly Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 So King has called an EGM which needs responding in 44 days Ashleys offer needs taking up in 35 days (33 now) Payroll is in 5 days I can see the EGM happening after the assets have been moved across to MASH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Can Ashley give the loan and get the assets before the egm. ? Then can he put them in admin as soon as he owns the assets. ? If so does that make a egm useless? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podlie Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Can Ashley give the loan and get the assets before the egm. ? Then can he put them in admin as soon as he owns the assets. ? If so does that make a egm useless? Will be a drawdown loan like an overdraft facility for them to dip into valid for 6 months expect. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Can Ashley give the loan and get the assets before the egm. ? Then can he put them in admin as soon as he owns the assets. ? If so does that make a egm useless? He could only put them in admin once the loan is due as opposed to as soon as it's given. *Post may be oversimplified 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 So King has called an EGM which needs responding in 44 days Ashleys offer needs taking up in 35 days (33 now) Payroll is in 5 days I can see the EGM happening after the assets have been moved across to MASH At least the tents will be better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Nederlander Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) It seems to me that the 'Rangers' fans could have avoided all this heartache by simply not letting the original Rangers die in the first place. Indeed they might even have avoided all this by simply questioning the spunking of loads of cash on players like Kevin Kyle to play in the arse end of Scottish football rather than giving it the big licks and posturing cause they were taking everyone else's best players !! All this stamping of feet about Ibrox is pretty much all the last lot did when Rangers went tits-up - temper tantrums aplenty,bleating that it would never happen, embarrassing posturing from a support who repeatedly fail to pull together like nearly every other support would. And the really really strange thing is is that if Ibrox was used against security, and if they did lose it, they'd suddenly just claim that it wasn't gone, all the protests would be forgotten, they, and the Scottish Press of course, would simply pretend that where-ever they played next was still Ibrox ... and the SFA would probably tag along and put 'Ibrox' down as their home on it's website. And all the while they'd continue to tell us that the rest of Scottish Football was fucked Edited January 17, 2015 by Ned Nederlander 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 It seems to me that the 'Rangers' fans could have avoided all this heartache by simply not letting the original Rangers die in the first place. Indeed they might even have avoided all this by simply questioning the spunking of loads of cash on players like Kevin Kyle to play in the arse end of Scottish football rather than giving it the big licks and posturing cause they were taking everyone else's best players !! All this stamping of feet about Ibrox is pretty much all the last lot did when Rangers went tits-up - temper tantrums aplenty,bleating that it would never happen, embarrassing posturing from a support who repeatedly fail to pull together like nearly every other support would. And the really really strange thing is is that if Ibrox was used against security, and if they did lose it, they'd suddenly just claim that it wasn't gone, all the protests would be forgotten, they, and the Scottish Press of course, would simply pretend that where-ever they played next was still Ibrox ... and the SFA would probably tag along and put 'Ibrox' down as their home on it's website. And all the while they'd continue to tell us that the rest of Scottish Football was fucked When Rangers were liquidated they owed £125 million. How should the fans have raised that amount? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) If you assume that the rumour of the 8 -9 million off the book debt is true and they have no money to meet the payroll ... Then Ashley loans 10 million + 3 million + 8.? million + payroll = ?? Certainly they could still call an admin event based on the numbers ... Even while the debt to Ashley isn't due one of the other creditors could technically put them into administration if debts to them aren't honoured but if Ashley is the only secured creditor there wouldn't be any incentive for unsecured creditors to trigger an administration.Also you seem to be confused in your sums. The £10,000,000 is coming in as opposed to going out. They would be consolidating a lot of smaller short term debts into one big long term secured loan. The whole point of borrowing Ashley's money is to deal with existing creditors. After the deal went through most existing creditors will be settled up, or at least up to date and the club will owe the money to Ashley instead Its equivalent to running up huge debts on credit cards, store cards and Malaysian bookies and then taking out a mortgage to clear it. It's a stupid position to get into but it's a sensible response should you be in that position. Of course if you don't deal with the behaviour that got you into that position in the first place you end up homeless but that's another issue. The whole fuss about Ibrox being security against debt is a bit of a red herring anyway as without it all unsecured creditors would be entitled to a slice of the assets if worst comes to worst. If Ashley's insistence on jumping to the front of the queue is "Legalised theft" then the victims aren't Rangers but those longer term , unsecured creditors whose prospects of seeing their money again would be reduced if they're pushed further down the queue Edited January 17, 2015 by topcat(The most tip top) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 When Rangers were liquidated they owed £125 million. How should the fans have raised that amount? 25p each - not a big ask, really, if they actually gave fúck and didn't wait for the next pyoor ranjurs man to throw cash in the pit... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 25p each - not a big ask, really, if they actually gave fúck and didn't wait for the next pyoor ranjurs man to throw cash in the pit... The grown ups are talking here, I'm sure your friends will be along shortly though. You can argue with them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 When Rangers were liquidated they owed £125 million. How should the fans have raised that amount? Prostitution. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 If the Rangers are consolidatng all debts into one big debt to Ashley, isn't that like A: Carol Vorderman's Ocean Finance, and B: Hearts and Romanov? That ended up well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 When Rangers were liquidated they owed £125 million. How should the fans have raised that amount? You're right it is much, much better that you didn't even try. Proud, staunch, courageous and loyal inactivity. I mean look at the mess Hearts are in now after all the trying their fans did. Mugs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 The grown ups are talking here, I'm sure your friends will be along shortly though. You can argue with them. Facetious I was, but the point is a serious one. The fans' involvement, or lack of, depends on exactly the same factors as those at Thistle, Dunfermline, Hearts, and others. Only the scale is different. The question is "how much do you love your club?" The answer given, time and again, by your lot, is "obviously not enough." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Facetious I was, but the point is a serious one. The fans' involvement, or lack of, depends on exactly the same factors as those at Thistle, Dunfermline, Hearts, and others. Only the scale is different. The question is "how much do you love your club?" The answer given, time and again, by your lot, is "obviously not enough." the question is wrong it should be ,how much do you love your company? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 stolen from #therealromanov 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 King's call for an EGM appears to a face saving exercise and may have undermined any talks the Three Gummy Bears were holding with the board. He's not even sure he can get the 50% required at a vote ,.. just a desperate last throw of the dice ... If he hasn't got that 50% of backing this could be very embarrassing for him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Ashley has played a blinder in doing all the pre work for opening the first 2 UK branches of his US sports complex business. One of the sites is already fully kitted out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) 25p each - not a big ask, really, if they actually gave fúck and didn't wait for the next pyoor ranjurs man to throw cash in the pit... Based on the figure of125M, my calculations made it 4 quid each. (based on the worldwide 'fan' base of 500M) But, IIRC, the assets were bought for 6M (ish), so using 60,000 as a more realistic 'fan' base, the 'fans' could have bought them for a hundred quid each. Still do-able. But they done nuffink. ETA Oops! I blame my calculator. 25p ,is the correct amount. Edited January 17, 2015 by cyderspaceman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Facetious I was, but the point is a serious one. The fans' involvement, or lack of, depends on exactly the same factors as those at Thistle, Dunfermline, Hearts, and others. Only the scale is different. The question is "how much do you love your club?" The answer given, time and again, by your lot, is "obviously not enough." There's a lot of fan involvement as you all know, given the mocking that goes on on here. It's just my opinion that it would have been very unlikely anyway due to the nature of the debt. 0 Quote Link to comment 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.