Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

I wonder if those patriotic bears will struggle to sing the line "and sent him homewards to think again" when they belt out the national anthem at Ibrox.

Will I respond? Shall I hush my mouth? Is such consummate ignorance even worthy of a reply?

Such decisions.....OK here I go:

"and sent him homewards to think again" isn't part of the National Anthem ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave King Statement re Rangers FC

It is appropriate that I give feedback to the Rangers fans before departing for South Africa.

Over the last few weeks Paul Murray, George Letham and myself have constructively engaged the Rangers board and (at the request of the board) Sandy Easdale regarding our proposal to invest 16 million into the club as soon as is practically possible. When investing in any public company there are numerous regulatory and compliance requirements that have to be dealt with. There are also SFA compliance issues that arise when investing in a football club in Scotland.

An obvious further complication in Rangers case is the seeming lack of authority of the Rangers board to make decisions without reference to key shareholders who appear to be “the power behind the throne”.

Prior to commencing the implementation issues referred to above it is necessary to reach an in-principle agreement with the board that can then be put to shareholders. In this regard it is important to recogniser hat the so-called Easdale Block represents more than 25% of the shares in issue and could therefore block the implementation of our proposal even if recommended by the board. Likewise, a combination of other shareholders could veto our proposal. I attempted to meet with Mr Ashley on my visit but neither he, nor his colleague, Mr Bishop, acknowledged my request for a meeting. This is their right but is unfortunate given the present concerns from supporters that Mr Ashley is using his shareholder status to put pressure on the board to alienate the rights and trade mark of the club in favour of his personal interest. I will make a separate announcement and appeal to fans on this topic at the appropriate time.

Our initial proposal to the board was to invest the full 16m by way of equity at 20p per share. The board requested that we consider a debt/equity mix that would reduce dilution for existing shareholders and allow the debt component to be advanced prior to the extended time frame required for the approval of additional equity. We are amenable to this and to working with the board on the mechanics necessary to ensure that this is achieved provided that the full investment is recognised by way of board representation. We wish to appoint an equal number of members to the board and have the key say regarding the appointment of the Chairperson. We will not invest funds and let the existing board determine how these funds are spent. That has not worked well in the past.

In any transaction of this nature there are a number of interests to be consulted and considered. The board has apparently engaged constructively on our proposal while advancing its own points as to what it believes is in the best interest of the club and its shareholders. Sandy Easdale has similarly apparently engaged constructively including highlighting some concerns. I have today responded to these concerns in writing. He will now consult with his co-shareholders and hopefully revert soonest so that we can proceed to agreement and the earliest possible implementation thereof.

Unfortunately, I have to again deal with a point that I have covered previously. Despite our agreement with the board on confidentiality (that we have strictly complied with) we were faced with the inevitable combination of truth, half-truth and fallacies peddled by Mr Irvine on behalf of his employers. He states in particular that he is voicing Sandy Easdale’s directly communicated thoughts. Sandy has assured me that this is not the case regarding his recent nonsensical utterings.

On that point, I have recently had the amusement of reviewing over 100 email communications between MrIrvine and Craig Whyte during the period that Mr Irvine was attempting to advance Mr Whyte’s business interests. My review of these emails indicates to me that he carefully identifies journalists that he believes lack journalistic integrity and ability and can therefore be fed by him for the benefit of whoever pays him. I urge fans to continue to ignore the nonsense that comes from these sources.

We have a lot of work to do over the next few months to regain the club. I would not be here without the support of the fans and neither would my co-investors. We are going to need to draw on your support again over the coming months.

post-35393-0-50132300-1414102704.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the Copland Road be onto something?

The badge mystery

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/10/the-rangers-badge-mystery.html?m=1

Well...... clearly they wern't fucking "Ready" so they deserve to have that badge removed. Makes perfect sense. Well done Copeland Road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the Copland Road be onto something?

The badge mystery

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/10/the-rangers-badge-mystery.html?m=1

Could the Copland Road be onto something?

The badge mystery

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/10/the-rangers-badge-mystery.html?m=1

Dinna ken.

They still use the ready one on the website, while the RFC one has always been more for the strips.

Either the rights have been lost or it's simply a rebranding to tie in with the 5 stars image.

Has anyone asked Densboy what he thinks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the Copland Road be onto something?

The badge mystery http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/10/the-rangers-badge-mystery.html?m=1

Pile of pish. They weren't winning 5-0 at any point in the game against us. It finished 4-1. On 76 minutes, it was 4-0, on 81 it was 4-1.

That picture is a fake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the Copland Road be onto something?

The badge mystery

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/10/the-rangers-badge-mystery.html?m=1

I'm still giggling at the second comment.. Doesn't help that I read it to a tune from the film frozen (thanks to nieces for that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still giggling at the second comment.. Doesn't help that I read it to a tune from the film frozen (thanks to nieces for that)

The 4th comment made me giggle :thumsup2:lol::thumsup2

Edited by shull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is hardly surprising that these rumours are circulating when we have a director and major shareholder feeding discredited bloggers like Merlin and Mad Phil highly confidential information and misinformation through a weasel like Jack Irvine.

So you take everything King says as gospel? Put two and two together and get PHIL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only official source which tracks ownership of these things clearly shows where ownership lies, if they had been sold then the new owner would make sure that they are the official owner, this would save any ambiguity should another insolvency event occur, you are correct it is just paranoia, although it is hardly surprising that these rumours are circulating when we have a director and major shareholder feeding discredited bloggers like Merlin and Mad Phil highly confidential information and misinformation through a weasel like Jack Irvine.

Heh....can't remember you calling Jack Irvine a 'weasel' when he was the Goebbels to David Murray's Hitler. You c***s loved it when Irvine / Media House were spinning like tops on behalf of the Murray regime and briefing The Succulents to fight the Deidco cause.

What's that old chestnut about being careful what you wish for...???

8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to laugh at all the Sevco fans putting their faith in the "glib and shameless liar " Dave King.

One crook after another with you lot. How many convicted fraudsters do you need involved with the club/company?

Edited by kildog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a c0ck he is.

The board are not obliged to pass every tyre-kickers wet dream to the shareholders.

What King needs to do, is buy shares from the shareholders, not tell them to give away even more value from their investment, through a dilutive share-issue.

He had a telephone call with Easdales. Sandy has been entrusted with voting rights, If he thinks King is full of pyss and wind, then he is quite entitled to make those decisions.

Yours

aDONis

Edited by aDONisSheep
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They also need to keep the ship afloat and get those accounts signed off which have that pesky going concern condition attached to them, will be interesting to see the Easdales proposed plan to achieve this.

Maybe so, but that is still his decision to make, not King's.

Yours

aDONis

Edited by aDONisSheep
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...