Dr Koop Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Hmm, go blabbing about commercial deals to the newspapers. Nice one, Dave. If you're lucky other folk might only think twice about doing business with your club if you piss over confidentiality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Dave king may have good lawyers but big mike has better. Proof please..... His Lawyers failed to stop him being convicted of multiple counts of fraud in his last case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipster Dufus Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 They can't be trusted with cash. ...or a credit line from a bank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 7 years Lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Sit down and have a wee think about how the content of that "insult" is so ridiculously contradictory. Then remove yourself from the internet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Glib and Shameless telling the shareholders to vote against repaying the MASH loan. What a bunch of absolute beggars. Hope you stuff Motherwell though, really not wanting to share a league with this vile organisation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_p Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 To be fair, the rangers board are now looking holistically at the entire retail deal with the loan, the obviously believe that it was made by Ashleys representatives on the board in favour of MASH and not in favor of the company they were actually employed by. Remember that Ashley is guilty of breaching dual ownership rules designed deliberately to stop these clash of interests. The board are for this very reason recommending that Ashley be blocked from voting on issues that effect the club to avoid falling foul of the SFA rules on dual ownership again...sensible I am sure you will agree. Of course the flip side is that Sevco had no other means of raising working capital other than Ashley. It was in the best interests of Sevco to take the loan with its strings or not have enough working capital to stay in business. As far as I can recall Board members were door stepping every finance house in the City begging for working cpital. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 To be fair, the rangers board are now looking holistically at the entire retail deal with the loan, the obviously believe that it was made by Ashleys representatives on the board in favour of MASH and not in favor of the company they were actually employed by. Remember that Ashley is guilty of breaching dual ownership rules designed deliberately to stop these clash of interests. The board are for this very reason recommending that Ashley be blocked from voting on issues that effect the club to avoid falling foul of the SFA rules on dual ownership again...sensible I am sure you will agree. The loan(s) and the retail agreements are two entirely different corporate agreements? Surely they're not going to attempt some form of "you're no getting yer money back until you give us what we want", argument? Is that the real reason that the board want Ashley blocked( I presume this would affect all minority shareholders, no?) or is it just to noise him up a bit so he eventually gets fed up. You'd think he's got to be reaching that stage. Alternatively if they're so concerned they could just pony up mike's money and tell him to toddle off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_p Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Have I missed something here. Ashley was guilty of having an interest in 2 clubs. Newcastle and Sevco. The Loan and retail agreements are from Sports Direct / MASH. What has he been found guilty of in relation to MASH and Sevco? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM5 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Yes, the point is that Hearts no longer have a dodgy owner and the fans rallied together to help sort things out. Sevco are reeling from one dodgy owner to the next and the fans are doing nothing whatsoever to help. Please stop. You're blind hatred for Rangers is, like a lot of people on here, making you post some really stupid things. The Rangers fans haven't done anything to help? What, other than: a) pouring millions of our own pounds into the club for it to be wasted/disappear? b) having some of the biggest crowds in British football while in the doldrums of Scottish football? c) protesting outside and inside Ibrox about the stewardship of the club? d) having the biggest fan share ownership group in Britain? No, nobody did anything. We've all been happy with the way things have been/currently are. If you weren't such a disgustingly ignorant cretin you would realise why Rangers have had different problems from Hearts regarding the ownership of their club. Have you actually ever spoken to a Rangers fan? Or do you just believe the hype and hide behind your couch. Edited May 27, 2015 by DM5 -6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM5 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Have I missed something here. Yeah, a question mark from that sentence and the formation of a brain when developing as a fetus. -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 a) pouring millions of our own pounds into the club for it to be wasted/disappear? If only you had been warned, eh? PS: Company, not club. Get with the plan. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 To be fair, the rangers board are now looking holistically at the entire retail deal with the loan, the obviously believe that it was made by Ashleys representatives on the board in favour of MASH and not in favor of the company they were actually employed by. Remember that Ashley is guilty of breaching dual ownership rules designed deliberately to stop these clash of interests. The board are for this very reason recommending that Ashley be blocked from voting on issues that effect the club to avoid falling foul of the SFA rules on dual ownership again...sensible I am sure you will agree. Dual ownership... Thought the issue was dual ownership of Sevco / Newcastle Utd Not Sevco / Sports Direct by MA So really the dual ownership issue has zero to do with the retail contacts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Please stop. You're blind hatred for Rangers is, like a lot of people on here, making you post some really stupid things. The Rangers fans haven't done anything to help? What, other than: a) pouring millions of our own pounds into the club for it to be wasted/disappear? b) having some of the biggest crowds in British football while in the doldrums of Scottish football? c) protesting outside and inside Ibrox about the stewardship of the club? d) having the biggest fan group in Britain? No, nobody did anything. We've all been happy with the way things have been/currently are. If you weren't such a disgustingly ignorant cretin you would realise why Rangers have had different problems from Hearts regarding the ownership of their club. Have you actually ever spoken to a Rangers fan? Or do you just believe the hype and hide behind your couch. Promising start. I like you. I hope you stick around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 a) pouring millions of our own pounds into the club for it to be wasted/disappear? Your club was and still is run by spivs, crooks and gangsters. You were given fair warning of this but they've duped you every time. b) having some of the biggest crowds in British football while in the doldrums of Scottish football? About 30% of whom actually care about the football. c) protesting outside and inside Ibrox about the stewardship of the club? d) having the biggest fan group in Britain? Are you measuring that in combined body mass? If so, fair enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 The SFA are not interested in getting into the detail of what the conflicts are. MA has been told to stop influencing Rangers football club, Rangers are putting proposals in place to stop him voting as part of a block. Nonsense; The first formal challenge to the dual involvement of Mike Ashley at Newcastle United and Rangers has arrived from the Scottish Football Association, which has issued a notice of complaint against the businessman and the Scottish Championship club. From The Guardian SFA fines Mike Ashley over breach of dual ownership roles with Rangers and Newcastle UnitedFrom the Telegraph Rangers fined £5,500 for breaching SFA 'ownership' rules Rangers have been fined £5,500 by a Scottish Football Association judicial panel for breaching "dual ownership" rules relating to Newcastle owner Mike Ashley. Ashley, who has a 9% stake in Rangers, was himself fined £7,500 last month for the same offence. A disciplinary tribunal deemed Ashley had influence in the Ibrox boardroom. The bulk of Rangers' fine was imposed for failing to act towards the SFA with the utmost good faith. Rangers were also fined £500 as Ashley was deemed to have influenced the management or administration through the appointment of business associates Derek Llambias and Barry Leach to the club's board. Ashley has made cash loans to the cash-strapped Scottish Championship club, holds commercial contracts and had Llambias and Leach operating as chief executive and finance director, respectively, on the Ibrox board until they were removed at an extraordinary general meeting called by Dave King. In December, the SFA refused to allow Sports Direct owner Ashley to increase his stake in Rangers International Football Club to 29.9%. He had previously signed an agreement that limited his shareholding to 10%. Scottish FA's disciplinary rule 19 "Except with the prior written consent of the Board: (a) no club or nominee of a club; and (b) no person, whether absolutely or as a trustee, either alone or in conjunction with one or more associates or solely through an associate or associates (even where such person has no formal interest), who: (i) is a member of a club; or (ii) is involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of a club, or (iii) has any power whatsoever to influence the management or administration or a club, may at the same time either directly or indirectly:- (a) be a member of another club; or (b) be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of another club; or © have any power whatsoever to influence the management or administration of another club." Scottish FA's disciplinary rule 1 All members shall: (b) be subject to and comply with (i) the Articles (ii) this protocol. (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith. From the BBC and quite explicit the rule relates to ownership of football clubs and has zero to do with the ownership of a private business 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM5 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Your club was and still is run by spivs, crooks and gangsters. You were given fair warning of this but they've duped you every time. You're an idiot! What do you expect ordinary fans to do when people with millions of pounds come in to take over their club? About 30% of whom actually care about the football. Evidence? What else are they interested in? Probably your most intelligent reply. Are you measuring that in combined body mass? If so, fair enough. No, unlike you I base my posts on fact. Rangers First is the largest fan's supporters trusts in the UK. Edited May 27, 2015 by DM5 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4roon Pl4toon Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 That just confirms what I said, the SFA are simply not interest in what decisions he is influencing, they are basically saying he cannot influence anything while he owns Newcastle...if he wants to influence anything at Rangers then he would need to sell his interest in Newcastle. Does that mean all the games that Vukic played in (and let's be honest) kept you in the play offs should be null and void? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 That just confirms what I said, the SFA are simply not interest in what decisions he is influencing, they are basically saying he cannot influence anything while he owns Newcastle...if he wants to influence anything at Rangers then he would need to sell his interest in Newcastle. Through his deals and loans he was influencing the club, the board are quite right in trying to make sure that the club follows SFA rules. Not sure why posters are disagreeing with you here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Ah !, the classic whit aboot thame technique. Well played young man, you're getting the hang of this shit The Rangers fans use on the forum to avoid, deflect and derail anything on the Big Thread. Whataboutery refers back to when Celtic fans wanted to slate the songs sung by Rangers fans but didn't want anyone discussing their own song book. So they came up with whataboutery. Comparisons my learned friend are a valid form of debating. 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.