CityDave Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 The condition of the two directors were part of the loan agreement .... I doubt DK will repay the money. Ashley will still have his onerous contracts but his influence over board room decisions will be greatly reduced if the loans are repaid ... Isn't the SFA disciplinary hearing for Mike Ashley today? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Isn't the SFA disciplinary hearing for Mike Ashley today? Tedi will help you out with that one, he's right clued up on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 67 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) From earlier on http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/andy-goram-tells-sfa-dave-5260226 The bottom part of the article has this - "But it doesn't seem like there is much point of the EGM going ahead if there is only going to be two directors left. They should resign now and let King get on with it. "Even if they do that I'm not sure that will be the last we see of Ashley's presence at the club though. I've heard that Ashley is still allowed to nominate two directors to the board so if Llambias and Leach go, two more will come in. "I'm not sure how tight that deal is but I don't think is right." There will have to be some kind of compromise between the two to work together if this is the case. If not we could see more shambles. I mentioned these two votes for mike a couple of weeks ago. I asked if the two guys are voted off the board....and mike still has the right to pick another two board members under the terms of the loan.....could he not pick those same two guys and Reinstate them asap....think tedi answered this question and said it couldn't be done... Can't remember the reason tbh, you could go back through the pages and look for the reason he gave me or just ask him and he will let you know. Edited March 2, 2015 by the 67 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 67 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Isn't the SFA disciplinary hearing for Mike Ashley today? Yes it was today...meeting did not start to well after 2 pm according to the radio mate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny the jambo Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 No. Rangers owe Ashley £5 million. He has a huge percentage of the merchandise side of things but we dont know the details of this contract. Even when king gets control, Ashley still owns almost 9% so he still has a fairly big say He also has most of rangers retail, naming rights for the stadium, the training ground, and pretty much every other revenue stream sown up from what we are led to believe so I don't think he really cares who pays the bills just now. I think he will sit it out. He will let king and the others run it their way for a while, and when it all goes tits up he will strip more assets until he has the lot. By the sound of it he hates to give control to anyone else so it won't take him long to get whatever he wants out of it. Personally I think Ashley would be The Rangers best bet at the moment, but because he doesn't talk to the media the fans don't know what his plans are, and are understandably sceptical about him after all the other cretins who have been fleecing them for years. But to accept King just because " he's a rainjurs man" is the wrong way to go. If he wins his majority on Friday, and he can afford to buy off MA loans and get the playing side sorted out then fair play, but I can't see it myself 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Is DK a fit and proper person?!? Really? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) I don't think it will be that easy to shake of Mike Ashley and even if King wins control and Ashleys lackeys are shoved out the door as AG said Ashley is still entitled to bring in replacements so the club could still be pulled in two different directions. If King repays the loan it will make little difference to Ashley's continuing influence over the club. I thought the 'members on the board' deal was a condition of MASH lending them the £5M-£10M. If, as you posit, King repays those loans, the securities against Murray Park, the car park etc. disappear.. as would Ashley's right to appoint board members. Or have I missed a deal somewhere? ETA: DB beat me to it. It's worse than a full-time job keeping up with this thread. The things we do for love, eh? Edited March 2, 2015 by The DA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podlie Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 From earlier on http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/andy-goram-tells-sfa-dave-5260226 The bottom part of the article has this - "But it doesn't seem like there is much point of the EGM going ahead if there is only going to be two directors left. They should resign now and let King get on with it. "Even if they do that I'm not sure that will be the last we see of Ashley's presence at the club though. I've heard that Ashley is still allowed to nominate two directors to the board so if Llambias and Leach go, two more will come in. "I'm not sure how tight that deal is but I don't think is right." There will have to be some kind of compromise between the two to work together if this is the case. If not we could see more shambles. It's part of the loan deal: http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/453 The Facility is to be secured by (1) a floating charge over the Club's assets and (2) fixed charges over Murray Park, Edmiston House, Albion Car Park, and the Club's registered trademarks. None of the security that is being given to SD covers Ibrox Stadium, which is specifically excluded and remains in the full ownership of the Club, free from any security. SD will also have the right to nominate two directors to the board of Rangers for the duration of the Facility, any such nomination will be subject to regulatory consent pursuant to the AIM Rules and other regulatory bodies. If the entire sum drawn down is repaid, the Facility will be deemed to be terminated, all security will be released, the 26% of RRL will revert to the Company and all rights of SD to nominate Directors to the Board of the Company will cease. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Yes it was today...meeting did not start to well after 2 pm according to the radio mate. Succulent lamb for lunch, no doubt... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I thought the 'members on the board' deal was a condition of MASH lending them the £5M-£10M. If, as you posit, King repays those loans, the securities against Murray Park, the car park etc. disappear.. as would Ashley's right to appoint board members. Or have I missed a deal somewhere? ETA: DB beat me to it. It's worse than a full-time job keeping up with this thread. The things we do for love, eh? You're probably right. I would not be surprised though if Mike Ashley already has two potentials lined up regardless of how the EGM turns out. He's not going to wait and see what happens. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Due diligence?!? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Why do newspaper a articles about The Rangers only ever reference them going into administration? None of them ever mention the subsequent liquidation? Why is that? It's slightly Orwellian. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 More than slightly. They're a sensitive bunch tbf. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DepecheBhoy Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Why do newspaper a articles about The Rangers only ever reference them going into administration? None of them ever mention the subsequent liquidation? Why is that? It's slightly Orwellian. Boycott fear. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I suppose, the barbarian horde are a scary bunch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Nederlander Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Why do newspaper a articles about The Rangers only ever reference them going into administration? None of them ever mention the subsequent liquidation? Why is that? It's slightly Orwellian. Especially when you consider that the press is all anti-'Rangers' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 It's a sad demonstration of the effectiveness of mob rule that the press are too afraid to report what's actually going on and instead actively assist in the creation and maintenance of Visigothic fantasies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 It's a sad demonstration of the effectiveness of mob rule that the press are too afraid to report what's actually going on and instead actively assist in the creation and maintenance of Visigothic fantasies. The press isn't afraid of anything. It has its tongue firmly wedged up the nether winker of one individual. Union Jack is a good example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Chris Graham 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Stuart McCall 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.