stonedsailor Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Or he saw the price creeping back up, realised it wasn't going to drop any lower and got in before it got any higher. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The share price went up. It only fell due to the piss poor managing demonstrated all too frequently by the spivs in charge which was Dave`s point, 'dont give your money to these guys, they will piss it all away' The price fell to a lower point than what he bought in October, yet he did not buy in then, the reason he bought now was the same as T3B did, to counter the power grab by Cashley. That's the important bit. Whether or not his intention was altruistic and for the best interests of his fellow fans , he still played a large part in a concerted effort to starve the business of cash and then bought at a lower price later on. The immediate impact might not have been negative, but the medium to long term impact clearly was. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The share price went up. It only fell due to the piss poor managing demonstrated all too frequently by the spivs in charge which was Dave`s point, 'dont give your money to these guys, they will piss it all away' The price fell to a lower point than what he bought in October, yet he did not buy in then, the reason he bought now was the same as T3B did, to counter the power grab by Cashley. But Ashley is still in control,and King has played his Ace by the looks of it without actually getting the club any more secure than it already was. The fact that with the Three Bears they have enough % of shares to offer a buyout of all other shareholders shares, and the fact they didn't looks like they have no more cash. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Good Guys !!!!!!!!........ Should they not be The Shysters that know how to wear blazer, tie & brogues. Ain't no good guys amongst any of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 But Ashley is still in control,and King has played his Ace by the looks of it without actually getting the club any more secure than it already was. The fact that with the Three Bears they have enough % of shares to offer a buyout of all other shareholders shares, and the fact they didn't looks like they have no more cash. And the market has marked up the SP, so they will need even more cash to stage a buyout. Bit of a Catch 22. Is the American chap still in play? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Well it's good to see that the Ps&Ds are now instant experts on the rules and processes of the FCA and, without doubt, their input wll be as valuable to them as it was to HMRC, The ASA and The SFA's LNS inquiry. So what are the fans doing during this currant crisis? f**k all, like the last 2/3/umpteen times? Certainly worked well for them in 2012. If the ability to stand around and look like c***s while the thing they claimed to love spasmed around on the floor like a fallen race horse, just waiting for the veterinary bullet were an olympic sport...... Haw mods, is this flagrant bypassing of the swear filter or merely rank ignorance? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Barely and that 50% is perilously close, gone are any hope of sale and leaseback. Who else is selling? They would rather pump the money in as much needed investment. Well maybe they do have cash holding back for future investment, but if so it is not gaining control of the club for them now. If they have someone waiting on the sidelines to invest once the Bears and King have control then why are they not just using one of them to actually buy out the other board members. As the longer this goes on for them it looks more likely Ashley will get full control or they pull the plug and liquidate.King and Bears then lose their money. So I stick with that Bears and King don't actually have the cash to back this up,or they haven't a clue how to actually end the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 and he was not alone. those running the club did all the damage themselves by continually squandering the hard earned money given in good faith by their customers, thus pissing their customers off to the point they no longer wanted to hand their money across. If they had run the club properly and spent the money on the club instead of giving it all away to Cashley and their mates who were also wifi installers then the fans would have still be onside, spent money on ST`s which would have kept the share price up for the right reasons. The fans never "gave" the club anything! They exchanged their "hard earned" (or claimed) cash for services or a product. The fans paid to watch a Premiership standard (ahem) team playing on the pitch at Ibrox nothing more, nothing less. What the company then spent the money, which was now property of the company, on was the decision of the company. Do you not think these business men deserved just recompense? After all they gave you a team to watch when you could have been shopping with the missus instead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Well it's good to see that the Ps&Ds are now instant experts on the rules and processes of the FCA and, without doubt, their input wll be as valuable to them as it was to HMRC, The ASA and The SFA's LNS inquiry. Haw mods, is this flagrant bypassing of the swear filter or merely rank ignorance? Actual tears over a typo, I'm glad I never thought more of you. So what are you doing kinky? Threatening any clowns? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Haw mods, is this flagrant bypassing of the swear filter or merely rank ignorance? Typo? ... but glad to see it riles you ... Actual tears over a typo, I'm glad I never thought more of you. So what are you doing kinky? Threatening any clowns? Calm doon the pair of you; it was a joke FFS. Maybe I should have added a Shull of smilies for those with an irony bypass. Still, you must both be delighted that "market manipulation" has joined "financial doping" and "sporting integrity" in the argot of Scottish football and I look forward to its frequent use as the barrack-room lawyers of P&B regale us with the enviable forensic insight that has stood them in good stead in the past. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Why would they pull the plug when they have 3 investment offers on the table? Sorry but this was just a desperately seeking liquidation type post. Come on Tedi, think about it. Ashley does not want to liquidate the club just yet,he is drip feeding it to keep alive his retail and promotion of his company through the club, if he wanted it dead he would have been out a long time ago. On the other hand though if he keeps getting pressed on from here there and everywhere he can afford to let the club be liquidated,as he has assets tied up with monies owed and will get back more than he has put in...which to be honest doesn't look like he has actually put much if anything in at all, it has all been loans with assets as default payment. Ashley has more money than the rest put together,it is his game and he wont accept any offer that is not going to make him money, I never saw in any of the offers the contracts he has for retail and badge etc etc....so there is no way he is going to accept them. Offer him that amount and allow him to keep those contracts,well that is a different ball game, although I don't see the offer coming anytime soon. So excuse me for having you think I was just on a mission to find a way of having your club liquidated Tedi,as I believe they will survive..albeit a very poor form of what you wish them to be, but as long as Ashley gets his £'s from advertising and retail he won't mind. He has no love for your club,and doubt he ever will..you have more chance of him actually coming to the stadium than him ever loving the club. So liquidation is a possibility,but only if and when Ashley decides he has had enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 T_K in best Black Knight mode 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Why would they pull the plug when they have 3 investment offers on the table? Sorry but this was just a desperately seeking liquidation type post. Depends what his loans are secured against, and if that security is protected in an admin / liquidation, if by losing £6 million he gains Ibrox, Murray park, Edminston House and the Albion or a combination of them then he may go that route 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Ashley has more money than the rest put together,it is his game and he wont accept any offer that is not going to make him money, I never saw in any of the offers the contracts he has for retail and badge etc etc....so there is no way he is going to accept them. Offer him that amount and allow him to keep those contracts,well that is a different ball game, although I don't see the offer coming anytime soon. Ashley has under 10% and can't increase that. He has £3m of loans with securities He has retail deals in place, which may or may not have to remain. I'm not an expert like you are but going on the available evidence it looks like Ashley (thanks to the SFA) may not be as strong as some people think he is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Rumours indicate Ibrox has a claim over it (MP too?) and there are legal issues in using them as security. Whytes much vaunted court case? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 He owns 10%, you are acting like he has 100. A 10% shareholder will not be able liquidate anything just because he has had enough. Ashley has not invested any money in Rangers, you are contradicting yourself in this post, all he has done is given a few loans that have to be repaid alongside stealing a shed load of retail money that the club badly needs. Well who else is pulling the strings then if not Asley, 10% or not. He has LLambias and Leach in with another board member slot to be allocated...LLambias doesn't count as one of his 2 as he was a recommendation that the board appointed. Investing and loaning are not the same Tedi, why would you think they are. If he was investing he would do so without asking for assets against the money or his money returned within a short time period, they are loans Tedi,and saying anything otherwise is kidding yourself on. Wonga give loans,but do not invest in everyone they give them to. So no contradiction,he has invested little if anything into the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 shares ? how many times can you cut a cake ffs. Not too often. At Sevco, the hungry guys always go for the big part first. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Ashley has under 10% and can't increase that. He has £3m of loans with securities He has retail deals in place, which may or may not have to remain. I'm not an expert like you are but going on the available evidence it looks like Ashley (thanks to the SFA) may not be as strong as some people think he is. I do hope you are right Bennett, but seeing as he seems to be the main reason the club saw beyond Christmas I do hope he doesn't get made to be a weak power in this battle. That may be when he uses his appointed buddies to help him pull the plug,get his money back through the assets and ride off into the sunset. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 He has control of the boardroom but they cannot do anything that damaging without shareholder approval. I never said they were, I merely pointed out that you contradicted yourself when you claimed Ashley had put more money in that anyone else and then you followed this up by admitting that he had not actually put anything in, I am fully aware that Ashley has invested nothing. He has friends on the board, and with his money backing him up he can easily remain to do so. If the SFa suddenly make him look a weak and spent force he could easily influence the friends he has onboard already to go for administration,and liquidate the club with him having the assets. Buy up the rest for pennies like Charlie Chuckles and co did first time around and give a nice little seat on the new board to all his Allies that helped him do so. He then sheds debt, players and managers who are bleeding the club dry, but would still be able to have his advertising and retail monies coming in. The new incarnation may never be a force again,but would he care...I doubt it,because if he did then why hasn't he pushed for League title challenges and Champions league football every season with Newcastle...he has major wealth like the big 4 clubs in Englands owners have and they use it to push for these...Reason is Ashley wants to make money,but with very little outlay to do so. And anyone can see he could easily do this on a 10% shareholding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Diamond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I struggle to understand why the bears refuse to see what is under their noses .. he is in control at present (with his buddies). That is what counts ... He can turn off the cashley tap and put them into admin ... He is still in a strong position as a secured creditor and has the reins at the moment. If King's response was a knee jerk reaction and he's not prepared to deal (or has not enough funds in place to deal) , then heaven help them. Totally agree, their faith in King could be their downfall...while their lack of faith in Ashley could also be their downfall. It's a lose, lose scenario. Ashley will keep them alive as long as he is making money,if they push to remove him and King has nothing to back up his shares bid then it is game over. 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.