Neon Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Can you provide a source please as opposed to copy and paste? The point was that the contract was freely entered into by both parties. If the new Sevco board don't like it then they will have to either pay compensation or hope for some legal loophole. http://thesportsherald.com/2015/05/26/rangers-news-dave-king-ready-to-ambush-mike-ashley-at-ibrox-general-meeting/ Thats' the only link I can see tot the above article but there it is linked tot the Telegraph as mentioned Geoff. Article was written by Roddy Forsyth Edited May 27, 2015 by Neon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Can you provide a source please as opposed to copy and paste? The point was that the contract was freely entered into by both parties. If the new Sevco board don't like it then they will have to either pay compensation or hope for some legal loophole. The bit where it says 'The Daily Telegraph can reveal'. is a clue Oh and also the Daily Mail and others. Edited May 27, 2015 by CJGJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Clearly there is a bitter history between the Telegraph and MA a quick search shows the feud on going since 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Slim Stylee Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 It really is sad watching people trying to support Ashley as if he is some sort of hero in this. Ashley may be a great businessman but he is bad for football and through his nominees entered into deals that were so one way there is a dispute over whether they will stand up in court. Time will tell on that score however the seemingly sheer desperate nature of some on here to have him shaft Rangers is truly sad to see. When Rangers act like idiots they deserve to be taken to task but when we are supposed to stand up for the poor billionaire in his fight for justice then things have gone truly overboard. How exactly is he "bad for football"? He's pumped an unsecured loan of 127 million in to Newcastle. He's pretty much saved that stupid Rangers club from a second admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 The bit where it says 'The Daily Telegraph can reveal'. is a clue Oh and also the Daily Mail and others. Thanks. Now, answer this question. If Mike Ashley owned 0% of Sevco, would this contract still be legally binding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I'm not saying it's a likely scenario, but it's worth baring in mind that should Rangers have another insolvency event, they might well be able to use it to wriggle out from the onerous contracts.... Just. Saying. Likes. But under SFA rules King and all the other directors would have to resign and not be allowed to take up formal positions with the club for c. 5 years. Oh wait...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 King seems to have no regard for basic corporate governance. I saw him quoted saying something like, "as a board, we don't need to pay attention to what shareholders say." Conveniently overlooking the fact that the board is appointed by and fully answerable to the shareholders. Nice touch of dictatorship, there; bodes well for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo 4 Ever Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 King seems to have no regard for basic corporate governance. I saw him quoted saying something like, "as a board, we don't need to pay attention to what shareholders say." Conveniently overlooking the fact that the board is appointed by and fully answerable to the shareholders. Nice touch of dictatorship, there; bodes well for the future. Out of interest, Where is that quote do you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I'm not sure anyone's saying Ashley's good for football. And I don't think anyone's saying Sevco are about to 'plunge' into admin. What most, including me, are saying is that King is a complete chancer and a suitable successor to the likes of David Murray, Craig Whyte and Charles Green. Everything that he's done and said (and more pointedly not done and not said) backs this up. Especially the handling of the upcoming GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I'm assuming that a change of Rangers articles of association (which King seems to think he needs to tear up some onerous contracts with Sports Direct) will require a 75% majority at the EGM..? While currently Mike Ashley and his allies hold about 35% of the shares.... Errrr.... If that's the case, I think I can see a slight flaw in King's plan..! Edited May 27, 2015 by The Gasman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I'm assuming that a change of Rangers articles of association (which King seems to think he needs to tear up some onerous contracts with Sports Direct) will require a 75% majority at the EGM..? While currently Mike Ashley and his allies hold about 35% of the shares.... Errrr.... If that's the case, I think I can see a slight flaw in King's plan..! I think you may need to get your eyes tested if thats what you see 'King's consortium received about 85% of the votes cast.'. There may be no flaw as you put it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I think you may need to get your eyes tested if thats what you see 'King's consortium received about 85% of the votes cast.'. There may be no flaw as you put it I'm not sure it matters how many people vote for it, the fact is King can't just decide he wants to rip up contracts that both parties signed and are legally binding, however much he wants to believe he can. I understand why he might think this, as rules haven't applied to Rangers for most things in the last 20+ years, but the courts are different from scottish football. Edited May 27, 2015 by Dalstonjambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altyjambo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 What is the deal with Rangers Retail. Does MA pay a dividend on the profit from the Retail Operation to the club? If so, that implies that all of the costs of the merchandise itself, the retail space, the shop and it's staff are met by MA. Suspect a large number of folk expect that if you spend ?50 on a shirt, the club gets ?50. It'd be interesting to know how much actual profit once all of the costs are accounted for another team makes - bet it's not as far away from ?3 per shirt as you think.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-board-ready-war-after-5768552? Good luck trying to find any holes in an Mike Ashley contract lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) It really is sad watching people trying to support Ashley as if he is some sort of hero in this. Ashley may be a great businessman but he is bad for football and through his nominees entered into deals that were so one way there is a dispute over whether they will stand up in court. Time will tell on that score however the seemingly sheer desperate nature of some on here to have him shaft Rangers is truly sad to see. When Rangers act like idiots they deserve to be taken to task but when we are supposed to stand up for the poor billionaire in his fight for justice then things have gone truly overboard. He is a hero for what he has/is doing to Rangers, I only wish he would take an interest in Celtic next... Its a shame Ashley didn't get Ibrox too. Edited May 27, 2015 by steve444 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I think you may need to get your eyes tested if thats what you see 'King's consortium received about 85% of the votes cast.'. There may be no flaw as you put it There were abstentions .May not be this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 So again, hypothetically, King sidelines Ashley with this motion. How can the Sevco board get out of the Sports Direct contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phage Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I think you may need to get your eyes tested if thats what you see 'King's consortium received about 85% of the votes cast.'. There may be no flaw as you put it Did a few big MASH shareholders not abstain when it became apparent King was going to win anyway. Certainly an Easdale never voted.... so yeah 85% of votes cast went to King but if Easdale had voted it would have been under 75% (I reckon). edit: happy to be corrected on that Edited May 27, 2015 by Phage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) There were abstentions .May not be this time. True,, the Easdales friends and family group of approx 20% though may be lower than before. By now though they have seen which way this is going and may well abstain again unless of course they want to be seen as the people stopping a 'renogatiation' of the deals made whilst they were involved and given they have to live here and have an interest in Rangers the club doing well to increase their shares value it may well be they sit back once more. This is about doing a deal and both sides are flexing their muscle in advance of such. It's a corporate game that has been played out many times before but because it's football it will be more of a public issue. Indeed as part of the game the loan has not been repaid and thats because someone sees it as a bargaining chip in the process. Edited May 27, 2015 by CJGJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phage Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 True,, the Easdales friends and family group of approx 20% though may be lower than before. By now though they have seen which way this is going and may well abstain again unless of course they want to be seen as the people stopping a 'renogatiation' of the deals made whilst they were involved and given they have to live here and have an interest in Rangers the club doing well to increase their shares value it may well be they sit back once more. This is about doing a deal and both sides are flexing their muscle in advance of such. It's a corporate game that has been played out many times before but because it's football it will be more of a public isssue. Indeed as part of the game the loan has not been repaid and thats because someone sees it as a bargaining chip in the process. Good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i wish jj was my dad Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Mike Ashley is weakening Rangers and in turn their partners in crime, Celtic, then he certainly isn't bad for football in this country. We've had 20 to 30 years of this pair carving everything up to suit themselves and destroying the national game in the process. So the enemy of my enemy is my friend as far as I'm concerned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I think you may need to get your eyes tested if thats what you see 'King's consortium received about 85% of the votes cast.'. There may be no flaw as you put it Dodgy eyesight or not (and my eyesight is certainly dodgy right now! ) I can still see the difference between 85% of votes cast, and 75% of total votes - and it's the later which King would most likely require to change the Club's articles of association. Edited May 27, 2015 by The Gasman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Mike Ashley is not a nice man. Dave King is not a nice man. He is also a convicted criminal and has been caught telling lies quite often. Mike Ashley/Sports Direct entered contracts that are very good for them, with a previous board of RIFC/TRFC. A different RIFC/TRFC board investigated those contracts (and a whole raft of others) and were unable to have them set aside. Because RIFC/TRFC were in such a bad way, Ashley/SD were able to take over the board. All this was known to King and his 3bears. As with any other company it was up to them to do due diligence before making their move to take over the board and to sink their money into the club, or, as is the case, lend it money. The world and it's dog knew all about the onerous contracts and the SD/Rangers Retail set up, and nobody forced King and the 3 bears to get involved. Things might be worse than they thought, but as with Lloyds when they bought over Bank of Scotland, that's just tough! They had no recourse through the courts just because they'd got a bad deal. In the real world, away from football, no one would have taken over such a company as RIFC/TRFC, unless they saw a way to milk it for themselves. It makes no difference that it is a football club/company, nor that people were investing through their hearts rather than their heads. The law is on the side of those with the properly drawn up contracts. If all the contracts are properly drawn up and legally executed on behalf of RIFC/TRFC, then the law will be on the side of Ashley whether he's bad for Scottish football or not. So far there's not been even a hint that there might be something illegal about them, just wishful thinking and bluster from King! On the evidence in the public domain, I doubt Mike Ashley would be good for Scottish football. On the evidence in the public domain, I have absolutely no doubt that Dave King will be very bad for Scottish football, and I couldn't care less if he was an absolute disaster for TRFC! I have absolutely no doubt either, that should he be successful at Ibrox, he will be very bad for Hearts, just as his very similarly minded predecessor, David Murray, was! It isn't a case of Ashley or King winning control, though, it's about whether or not King can get away with all his lies and bluster and stiff TRFC's creditors and contractors in his efforts to make his club strong. Just like David Murray did! There is no guarantee, either, that should King get his a*se kicked, that Ashley will hang around to do any more than get his money back and hold onto all his contracts. This isn't a power battle, King won that at the last EGM, it's about whether or not King gets to stiff Ashley and so set himself, and TRFC, on the road to some level of dominance over the rest of Scottish football. How any non-TRFC supporter would find that desirable, or even acceptable, is beyond me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Out of interest, Where is that quote do you know? "It is a lot of nonsense. The shareholders cannot tell the board how to behave. The board would be under no obligation to take their advice." http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32832070 I'm not sure anyone's saying Ashley's good for football. I am. NUFC supporters have demonised him because he's not plunging his massive wealth down the pan to pay ridiculous wages and ridiculous transfer prices to get them "back where they belong". This assumes that the approach adopted by Abramovich and the Saudis is actually good for football. I don't believe it is and think it's refreshing to see someone tell a club that, with all the millions coming from TV rights and sponsorship, they ought to be able to live within their means. Football, especially in England, has more than enough money; the good of football is not going to be served by putting even more into it. I said three years ago that Rangers would be a great money-making opportunity for anyone with a few million to invest in the assets of the liquidated company. It could easily live within very meagre means for 3 years; emerge into the premier league in a very healthy and strong position and find itself occupying the place vacated by the old Rangers. Bears/Orcs have been berated through this thread for being "deluded" that they deserved more. This berating is exactly what Ashley's about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEHEART1874 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 As a consequence of the heightening tensions between the board and Ashley, it now seems certain there will be no chance of an agreement being struck between Rangers and Newcastle for the permanent transfer of Haris Vuckic. Shame if true only half decent player they have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I'm not sure it matters how many people vote for it, the fact is King can't just decide he wants to rip up contracts that both parties signed and are legally binding, however much he wants to believe he can. I understand why he might think this, as rules haven't applied to Rangers for most things in the last 20+ years, but the courts are different from scottish football. Indeed, 100% of people polled in my house would like to see our mortgage contract ripped up so we can move away freely, for some reason though the bank chose not to respect our domestic democracy, shocking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 An excellent post sir [emoji122] King's trying desperately to find reasons not to pay Ashley his ?5m back back & the threat of taking away his voting rights is laughable tbh. If king wants these contracts set aside he can ask for a judicial review, he knows he'll lose & prob won't imo. One of the things about a loan is that, no matter what the terms are, it has to be repaid. Unless Ashley's lawyers are really stupid, then there will be some point, or event, that will enable Ashley to demand immediate repayment. Unless King can prove that the loan wasn't actually received by TRFC, there is no court in the land would block it's repayment! I'd guess that the longest TRFC have to repay it is one year from the date of the loan, at which point, it would probably become re-negotiable, in line with a normal bank overdraft arrangement. Ashley knows that there is very little chance that the EGM vote will lead to the loan being repaid, but he's called for the motion for a reason; that could easily be to trigger a clause in the contract that allows for him to demand repayment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 As a consequence of the heightening tensions between the board and Ashley, it now seems certain there will be no chance of an agreement being struck between Rangers and Newcastle for the permanent transfer of Haris Vuckic. Shame if true only half decent player they have Be better if he were recalled prior to the play off v Motherwell, but that's probably not allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) There are Rangers fan(nie)s on my facebook posting and sharing this........... https://www.change.org/p/mike-ashley-sports-direct-cancel-your-merchandise-contract-with-rangers-fc?recruiter=305567001&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive :facepalm: Edited May 27, 2015 by Walter Bishop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 There are Rangers fan(nie)s on my facebook posting and sharing this........... https://www.change.org/p/mike-ashley-sports-direct-cancel-your-merchandise-contract-with-rangers-fc?recruiter=305567001&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive :facepalm: Quality. Do the numpties not realise that if they don't buy the merchandise, Ashley still makes money with RR compensating him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusk_Till_Dawn Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 There are Rangers fan(nie)s on my facebook posting and sharing this........... https://www.change.org/p/mike-ashley-sports-direct-cancel-your-merchandise-contract-with-rangers-fc?recruiter=305567001&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive :facepalm: John McKie GLASGOW, SCT about 2 hours ago Liked 1 I want honesty & decency back at our club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 There are Rangers fan(nie)s on my facebook posting and sharing this........... https://www.change.org/p/mike-ashley-sports-direct-cancel-your-merchandise-contract-with-rangers-fc?recruiter=305567001&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive :facepalm: Go now, or I'll not spend money in your shop - oh aye, and even if you do go, now I'll not spend money in your shop anyway..! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I have all the securities/charges docs relating to the ?5m loan, nearly 130 pages long. Ashley's lawyers done a great job. The devil is in the detail, king will now know this too. King certainly should've known this as part of any half decent due diligence process, but it appears he may not have.... Also, I suspect his knowing it, and his accepting it, may prove to be two different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Nobody Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 The Rangers fans just going down the same path over and over of backing the person who tells them what they want to hear. DK has been caught lying so many times since he has been on the scene it's not funny. MA and his representatives have not. The questions asked by them, Wheres your money? Wheres your Nomad? have not been answered by King but they will be at the EGM. If King exposes the contracts in full then so what. It will only go to prove how good a deal MA got. Not sure what he expects to gain from that? Neither are good for Scottish football but until the Rangers fans actually start asking serious questions and thinking about it these people will continue to pop up at their club with no other interest except lining their own pockets. What is the average income in the SPL outside of Celtic 4-5M? Rangers have blown 72M and have had to borrow at least another 6.5M in 3 years just to get to the Championship and continue to lose circa 18M a year. That is absolutely astonishing and how the Rangers fans and the weak as piss media do not ask more questions is beyond belief. Will they go bust? Who knows. But just imagine if that had been us with 72M available starting in the bottom tier with the set up we have now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 An excellent post sir [emoji122] King's trying desperately to find reasons not to pay Ashley his ?5m back back & the threat of taking away his voting rights is laughable tbh. If king wants these contracts set aside he can ask for a judicial review, he knows he'll lose & prob won't imo. Thev desperation to get at King and Rangers by some is just sad and some on here should get a grip. All the Ashley chat as if he is perfect is just beggars belief.....he was outflanked in his attempts to take over Rangers....... beaten, he lost etc etc and is hurting. If you are not aware of the bigger picture then find out ........this is simply a corporate game and it will be in his interests to do a deal as it is in Kings interests to broker a deal......they are businessmen and King is nobodys fool either despite some posters failure to realise this. The loan is part of the bigger picture as is this meeting but lets not try to fool ourselves King and co have the money but are choosing not to repay at present as they want a long term deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Dreary me, just how deluded are you ?. [emoji23] 1. Ashley's doesn't need a deal, he has perfectly good legally binding contracts. Why does Ashley need " a deal with king" exactly ?. 2. I can assure you I'm far more aware of the "bigger picture" than you'll even be. [emoji6] Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. Answer Farin's questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. OK, you tell us why King doesn't just pay back the loan. It clearly bothers you that so many on here are so ignorant of the way business is run, so please enlighten us on that one, at least. I'm a simple fellow and always thought that loans were required to be repaid. If King has reasonable grounds for witholding repayment, why doesn't he just come out and say what they are? If the loan isn't yet due for repayment, why doesn't he just come out and say that too? As for desperate, you are very clearly just as desperate to prove King, and TRFC, to be something worthy of our acceptance as anyone else is to disparage King and his club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XB52 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. the only one coming over as sad is yourself. You seem to be getting very upset on here lately for some strange reason. Why not just sit back and laugh at the fiasco that is sevco like the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 It really is sad watching people trying to support Ashley as if he is some sort of hero in this. Ashley may be a great businessman but he is bad for football and through his nominees entered into deals that were so one way there is a dispute over whether they will stand up in court. Time will tell on that score however the seemingly sheer desperate nature of some on here to have him shaft Rangers is truly sad to see. When Rangers act like idiots they deserve to be taken to task but when we are supposed to stand up for the poor billionaire in his fight for justice then things have gone truly overboard. Sevco have the whole of the MSM batting for them. I'm not sure they are quite the victims they make themselves out to be. This saga is billionaires and millionaires scrapping over assets and egos. Why should we as Hearts fans have any sympathy for anyone at Sevco, including the "peepul", whose sense of entitlement alienates every fan of opposing teams...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 King certainly should've known this as part of any half decent due diligence process, but it appears he may not have.... Also, I suspect his knowing it, and his accepting it, may prove to be two different things. he won't have been able to do any due diligence. This was not a takeover situation. All he did was get his stockbroker to buy a few million quid worth of shares. King went in blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) he won't have been able to do any due diligence. This was not a takeover situation. All he did was get his stockbroker to buy a few million quid worth of shares. King went in blind.He said himself that he only inspectedthe detail once he ousted the old board Edited May 27, 2015 by Spellczech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1874robbo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. Are you going to answer the question or not It seemed a fairly straightforward one to me for a man of your alleged knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 he won't have been able to do any due diligence. This was not a takeover situation. All he did was get his stockbroker to buy a few million quid worth of shares. King went in blind. If King went in 'blind' it was because he kept his eyes shut. At the very least he would have known that things were bad, and common sense would have told him the reality was likely to be much worse than he feared. King chose the time and method of his power grab, he was under no pressure from Ashley, just from his ego, to do so. If King isn't happy with what he's found, he only has himself to blame. King wasn't deceived by Ashley into taking over the boardroom at Ibrox, which is not something that could be said of the King tactics at the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Of course you are.........another one claiming to be in the know re this matter when he knows nothing ........god help us. As I said the desperation for some is showing and it is sad to see. . Jeez, you are really really hurting cause the Rangers didn't get automatic promotion. Everyone has agreed that only Ashley knows what he will do and only King knows what his plan is. The rest of us are sitting back, laughing at both of them and hoping that the carnage continues. They more King conducts his campaign in the media, the more his desperation shines through as legally he doesn't have any leg to stand on. Ashley can sit back and watch the money roll in unless he suddenly develops a conscience and feels sorry for the knuckle dragging hoards. The more they concentrate on fighting amongst themselves, the better for us and everyone else, well perhaps apart from Celtic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 What many in the MSM seem to be missing is that Ashley's call for an EGM is not a power grab, he is using it to highlight, to other shareholders, King's dishonesty at the previous EGM and, I suspect, to show he doesn't have the money, or is not prepared to commit it, to repay the loan. Ashley will be fully aware that, should he (Ashley) win at the EGM, King would still be in power, but with less credibility. What happens after that will depend on the ability to repay the loan and how much is left in the kitty should it be paid. Whatever happens, the SD/RRL contracts will remain in place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zico Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 CJGJ clearly bought some Slazenger sports socks that all developed holes in less than a week. I think there are Geordies who like Ashley more than him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1874robbo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 How many mini meltdowns has this poster had on this thread recently? [emoji23] He's certainly showing his true (red white and blue) colours that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 This soap opera just keeps giving [emoji3] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 What many in the MSM seem to be missing is that Ashley's call for an EGM is not a power grab, he is using it to highlight, to other shareholders, King's dishonesty at the previous EGM and, I suspect, to show he doesn't have the money, or is not prepared to commit it, to repay the loan. Ashley will be fully aware that, should he (Ashley) win at the EGM, King would still be in power, but with less credibility. What happens after that will depend on the ability to repay the loan and how much is left in the kitty should it be paid. Whatever happens, the SD/RRL contracts will remain in place! Indeed. Problem King has is that he says he won't take security for any 'investment' and so he faces the prospect of having to make an unsecured loan to Sevco so it can discharge a secured loan to Ashley. Now that is a scary way to "invest" 5 million in a football club that you are only a minority shareholder in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts