He'd be glad to be rid of anyone who has had or would hope to have some power at ibrox though no? I'm assuming he's ego driven and power hungry in the traditional rangers manner.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Printable View
He'd be glad to be rid of anyone who has had or would hope to have some power at ibrox though no? I'm assuming he's ego driven and power hungry in the traditional rangers manner.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
He doesn't have to get rid of anyone he does need to put money in-no sign of that yet.
Yeah, of course. It's about ego rather than money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr White
Alternatively, he might prefer Ashley et al to sell their shares off to other, smaller, investors who are less of a threat.
Find all the time when looking at commercial borrowing that once you look "under the bonnet" it bears no relation to what was described.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamig
The thing is that any Nomad worth his salt should have known there were likely to be problems when it was widely known of the problems in the press and marketplace. I simply don't believe King had a Nomad lined up. He had likely looked into getting one and discussed it with one or two but not got one lined up. A case of being seen to go through the motions and given the opportunity to blame everyone else I doubt he is bothered in the slightest about changing indexes.
He could be described as disingenuous at best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Or as another scoundrel James Hunt of a Hun at worst, or rather in truth.
Indeed! :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Has anyone twigged that at the December AGM in the gazebo there was a resolution to reappoint Deloitte as Auditors (http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headli...-result-of-agm) but they had already told the old Board in November that they were quitting. Why was this resolution allowed to be part of the AGM when it was clearly never going to happen in reality.
They really are taking the shareholders for mugs over there.
Good spot, I hadn't realised that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveSo
Being pedantic, they were entitled to put forward a resolution to re-appoint Deloittes (emphasis on "re"). Equally so, Deloittes would have been entitled to decline the appointment.
However, in the interests of transparency......... :rolleyes:
From the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...ck-market.html
Quote:
In the meantime, it is understood that Rangers will require another loan – following the £1.5 million lent by King’s allies, the Three Bears consortium – in order to meet running costs until the end of next month. Telegraph Sport understands, however, that the Ibrox board is relaxed about this and had anticipated the need for bridging funds before they gained control.
Bridging to what, though? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Bridging to the next loan. They can only meet their obligations by borrowing money. This is how all big clumpanies operate.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Depends when the Season Tickets go on sale.
Don't be surprised if it turns out that is the Big Investment they've been talking about.
You don't mean? Wait? Surely not?Quote:
Originally Posted by keekaboo
They're going to rely on ST income for their budget?
It'll never catch on. ....
Season ticket money coming in, most of the duds on crazy money due to leave and replaceable with players on affordable contracts, new management team again at reasonable rates to be appointed.
So what is under the bonnet that is so toxic ? Has anyone asked ? or is the Glib a shameless one pulling a fast one.
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15...46f6e2049b.jpg
Says here that Sports direct can buy all of rangers retail
At a ridiculously low valuation!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Great, eh. [emoji2]Quote:
Originally Posted by ano hibby
Fantastic:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
So if the village idiots boycott buying the strips etc Ashley gets to own the whole shooting match and do what he likes with it for even less money? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Seems to be. [emoji1]Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
The person who tweeted that also seems to think they should not be including Rangers retail in their turnover figures.
That Phil MacGhiollabhain has tweeted 'Ashley will move next week - things gonna get legal I suspect'Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://mobile.twitter.com/Pmacgiollabhain/status/583981550351548416
No idea what his track-record's like but even if it's not, I didn't think someone like MA would stay quiet for too long. As others have said, it's all about ego's now.
Well, ego's and the knowledge there's still lots of money to be made out of, surely, World Football's most 'IQ-challenged' support !!
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11788/9794252/dave-king-given-green-light-to-become-rangers-director-by-court-of-session
Dave King (Billy) allowed to become a director of Hunco
No great surprise there given he was talking with the powers that be months ago so he must of been confident enough He will soon be the new Moral Compass leading Scottish Football out the mess it's got itself into without The Rangers being in the big league all these years. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Looks to me as though the hot potato just got passed to the SFA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
i can hear a huge sense of relief at SFA HQ
They have the rubber stamp ready - all that's left is for King to pass the FTP test.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
i'm positive he will pass any FTP test...like all the other sectarian bigots in the Govan stands :wink: or is this another type of test :greengrin
[emoji106]Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
It's the all important fat and protestant person test, supported by football authorities, the police and the media alike so it's another formality for a multi convicted tax fraudster.
The dilemma remains for the SFA that if they allow a convicted tax fraudster to pass their 'fit and proper person' test how can they ever apply it to any other person.
Would make the test pointless.(maybe it already is).
And, if they refuse him, they will probably find themselves in a Court case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela