Footballfirst Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 How anyone can take anything he says at face value? Glib and shameless That's why it is good to retain a record of such claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
269miles Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 How anyone can take anything he says at face value? Glib and shameless And now we're about to find out just how much it's gonna cost. A lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I was wondering if Vuckic's sudden anonymity in the playoff finals as soon as the owner of his home club asked for his money back might be that surprise? Would be very unprofessional but he did go from hero to zero... He was shite, that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I bet Dave King has been really messed up by them not achieving the Premier League. The impression was they were a shoe-in. Just watch his money not appearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenbank2 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years. Just like the money to buy his shares was impossible to get out of the country or the latest ?1.5 million loan/investment.........is that what you mean ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Just like the money to buy his shares was impossible to get out of the country or the latest ?1.5 million loan/investment.........is that what you mean ? Any need for that? The guy was just asking a pretty reasonable question. It could be that he can only take so much out, and they needed ?1.5 million desperately? But then you know he was asking a reasonable question and are just trying to be obstinate aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Was there not a quote from King or one of his crowd saying they'd be fine but promotion was absolutely essential? Otherwise it could get hairy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years.he won't keep his money in RSA. More likely Switzerland or an offshore jurisdiction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Any need for that? The guy was just asking a pretty reasonable question. It could be that he can only take so much out, and they needed ?1.5 million desperately? But then you know he was asking a reasonable question and are just trying to be obstinate aren't you? Some people can't handle the truth......seems if you dare to point out facts not fiction some get a bit defensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years. I do not know the rules these days but when I worked in RSA you were limited on what money you could take out of the country. I was paid into a Swiss bank and only living expenses paid in rands. I knew someone who used up his rands to have a gold chess set made so he could 'smuggle' it out of the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Some people can't handle the truth......seems if you dare to point out facts not fiction some get a bit defensive. Not really - the guy asked a perfectly reasonable question, and used a reference point, companies he had dealt with. You didn't - you just made a sarcastic response, and ironically were far less objective than he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Just like the money to buy his shares was impossible to get out of the country or the latest ?1.5 million loan/investment.........is that what you mean ? I'm pretty sure that the family trust that he used to purchase the shares was based in the Channel Islands, i. e. he already has money stashed offshore. However any substantial transactions he undertakes may attract the attention of SARS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of The Cat Cafe Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years. It may be too simple an answer, but South Acrica does have exchange controls. The quick check I did suggests that 1m Rand a year can be transferred. That is about ?53,000. http://www.money-transfers.co.za/south-africa-exchange-control.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Not sure if this is relevant but the below seems to suggest an individual can't just take money out. 10 million rand is just over 530k - so not sure how that would work with an investment?https://www.resbank.co.za/RegulationAndSupervision/FinancialSurveillanceAndExchangeControl/FAQs/Pages/Individuals.aspx(i) A tax-payer in good standing and over the age of 18 years, can invest up to R10 million in his/her name outside the Common Monetary Area (CMA-Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia), per calendar year. A Tax Clearance Certificate (in respect of foreign investments) must be obtained. These funds may not be reinvested into the CMA countries thereby creating a loop structure or be re-introduced as a loan to a CMA resident. (ii) In addition, up to R1 million, within the single discretionary allowance facility, can be transferred abroad, without the requirement to obtain a Tax Clearance Certificate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 It may be too simple an answer, but South Acrica does have exchange controls. The quick check I did suggests that 1m Rand a year can be transferred. That is about ?53,000. http://www.money-transfers.co.za/south-africa-exchange-control.php Ha ha - looks like if we keep going at this rate it will be ?53 million by lunchtime. Problem solved! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Zero hour contracts now to be adopted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Still waiting on an answer to my question on why M. Ashley has to do a deal with King re his retail contracts ??. As you have already been given the answer perhaps you need to do more work on the subject.........Ashley is a businessman and if it is advantageous for him to do a deal then it will be struck. You have no more an idea than I have on this subject but I am willing to give my point of view. It needs someone to puncture the balloon of hot air some posters have on this topic. Dream scenarios are created which bare no relation to the facts and when someone dares to question all the fantasists come out of the woodwork in case they are called out to defend their position. We'll see in a few months just what happens and no one can with certainty know what will happen at present but we can give a viewpoint and I've given mine. So get off your fence and give us your viewpoint or are you still dreaming of another administration ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the North Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Just like the money to buy his shares was impossible to get out of the country or the latest ?1.5 million loan/investment.........is that what you mean ? It was very definitely a loan. Nothing has been invested so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 It was very definitely a loan. Nothing has been invested so far.Can we start to say "spent" or "wasted" rather than invested? Even if swapped for shares investing in football is for love or control, but not for financial return... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 So even though Ashley has perfectly good legally binding contracts that he's pleased with, he's going to want to renegotiate them with king ( who's already said they are not in sevcos best interest) & prob get a worse deal than he's already got now ? [emoji23] Deary me , you no businessman are you ?. You are really saying Ashley would renegotiate a worse deal than he has now with king & Co ?. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I've said this before but would welcome any intel from someone who knows South African law. No doubt that the Glib and Shameless Liar has money. However, if this is held in RSA, it is likely that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get it out of the country. I have dealt with companies in RSA who have had cash, but because of punitive financial regulation, could not pay international debts because their banks and goverments will not let them take their money out of the country. Could it be the case with the Glib and Shameless Liar? You may say that this is strange, but remember that RSA still has all sorts of weird laws in order to redress the aparteit years. You are correct that RSA has some pretty tight laws to prevent money leaving the country, Britain used to have them, too, many years ago, 'Exchange Control'. While not impossible to get money out without permission (you can get permission for legitimate trade purposes), it is only crooks who get it out without permission. King is known to have illegally transferred money out and part of his 'deal' in exchange for jail-time was that he'd 'repatriate' all his offshore money and investments. I doubt very much that he has lived up to that part of the deal completely, but I expect it will be difficult for him to invest his own money in a very public business without a few raised SA eyebrows. I'd expect that the ?1.5m King has supposedly (and can we believe anything coming from Ibrox) loaned the club will not have his name on it, though it might actually be his money (though some people of an honest nature might dispute that it is 'his' money). Whatever, moving money around the world will be difficult for him, unless he can convince the SA Foreign Exchange and tax authorities that the investment is of benefit to SA, ie something that would result in money coming back to SA in the way of healthy dividends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I was wondering if Vuckic's sudden anonymity in the playoff finals as soon as the owner of his home club asked for his money back might be that surprise? Would be very unprofessional but he did go from hero to zero... Vuckic has been one of their best players and they would not of been in the final if we're not for him. I'm pretty sure Motherwell made sure he was kept quite. There has been no real praise for Ashely for bring in Vuckic. I wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenbank2 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Just like the money to buy his shares was impossible to get out of the country or the latest ?1.5 million loan/investment.........is that what you mean ? Here's the hypothesis. He buys into the club using cash he has access to (already outside RSA) but without understanding the true extent of their financial position (BTW that's a FACT). He finds out that he needs to provde more liquidity to keep the lights on, which on paper he can do. But he then finds out he cannot get his cash out of the country (Again a FACT and thanks to those who have clarified this). Now you may think that someone of his experience would have known this. My experience was in dealing with a business with operations throughout Africa and had to apply to government/banks to get circa $5M out. They were highy confident, but their application was denied - and the denial took months. The kind of numbers being banded around are that Sevco needs circa ?30M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 what am i doing at Tynecastle when there is stunners like top left and at both sides of the guy with glasses at the bottom kicking about at Ibrox , oh and Moshni's bro in the middle. wooty wooo What is it with Jambos from Airdrie and young (looking) female football followers? It was very definitely a loan. Nothing has been invested so far. People keep saying this and I don't understand the point they're trying to make. A loan is an investment. It's a chunk of money given to a business which will use that money to carry out its operations. The lender (or "investor") does this with a view to getting some kind of return on his investment. I bloody hope so as my investment adviser has taken a chunk of my money and stuck it in bonds So, King's taken a million and a half of his own money and he's letting Rangers piss it up against a wall. He won't be getting much of a return on it but, if it all goes tits up, he stands to get (some of) his money back before Ally McCoist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) So even though Ashley has perfectly good legally binding contracts that he's pleased with, he's going to want to renegotiate them with king ( who's already said they are not in sevcos best interest) & prob get a worse deal than he's already got now ? [emoji23] Deary me , you no businessman are you ?. You are really saying Ashley would renegotiate a worse deal than he has now with king & Co ?. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] You really are no business person yourself.....along with a couple of others on here. Let me try to help you and others as it seems you need some guidance Ashley looks for what is best for him. The contracts he has are worth something but would be worth a whole lot more if supporters could be persuaded to buy the merchandise. That is not happening at present so if a deal can be struck over his shares, his loan and his merchandise agreements that will lead to Rangers and him benefitting it will be done.......it's not rocket science though for you and others it seems so. The realities of the business world pass some people by and it seems some post on JKB. PS imagine if he already has ?40 million in the offshore trust and has the money to back it up ?......personally I think we will see another share issue and he will invest along with others but of course not for ?30/?40 million as supporters etc will be coming up with much of the 'investment' through the purchase of shares. Edited June 1, 2015 by CJGJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I'd imagine that ?1.5m loan will be paid out of the same offshore trust fund that he bought his shares with. Registered in his wife's name. The loan will prob be paid back in shares in a debt for equity swap once king floats them again to get investment funds. I'm sure it was, or in some similar manner. I doubt, though, that the SA authorities are stupid enough to ignore King spending any of his family's money without putting it under some sort of microscope, there would be little point in having Exchange Control if known abusers of the system were allowed to flaunt the loopholes so publicly. One of the charges dropped as a result of his ?41m settlement was that of money laundering, it hardly seems feasible that the SA money laundering investigative services won't be keeping an eye on him as well as SARS. The FIFA investigations, too, might well lead to a closer eye being passed over international money transfers in and out of football clubs, especially where people suspected, and charged, of the crime are involved. Regardless of all our speculation, only time will tell if King's promises hold any water, but, in the meantime, analysing the known problems he might face in moving money, together with the man's record, criminal and of telling the truth, holds a lot more water than just saying 'the man's loaded so TRFC are saved'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 You really are no business person yourself.....along with a couple of others on here. Let me try to help you and others as it seems you need some guidance Ashley looks for what is best for him. The contracts he has are worth something but would be worth a whole lot more if supporters could be persuaded to buy the merchandise. That is not happening at present so if a deal can be struck over his shares, his loan and his merchandise agreements that will lead to Rangers and him benefitting it will be done.......it's not rocket science though for you and others it seems so. The realities of the business world pass some people by and it seems some post on JKB. PS imagine if he already has ?40 million in the offshore trust and has the money to back it up ?......personally I think we will see another share issue and he will invest along with others but of course not for ?30/?40 million as supporters etc will be coming up with much of the 'investment' through the purchase of shares. You seem to forget, rather readily, that part of the contract that SD holds stipulates that TRFC must make up the cost of any unsold merchandise. Ashley doesn't have to worry about angry bears not buying his strips! Still, with a contract like that, Ashley will melt under the weight of King's argument for a renegotiated contract! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) You really are no business person yourself.....along with a couple of others on here. Let me try to help you and others as it seems you need some guidance Ashley looks for what is best for him. The contracts he has are worth something but would be worth a whole lot more if supporters could be persuaded to buy the merchandise. That is not happening at present so if a deal can be struck over his shares, his loan and his merchandise agreements that will lead to Rangers and him benefitting it will be done.......it's not rocket science though for you and others it seems so. The realities of the business world pass some people by and it seems some post on JKB. PS imagine if he already has ?40 million in the offshore trust and has the money to back it up ?......personally I think we will see another share issue and he will invest along with others but of course not for ?30/?40 million as supporters etc will be coming up with much of the 'investment' through the purchase of shares. What evidence do you have that the supporters are not buying or are boycotting Sports Direct? Edit: forgot about Ashley's water tight contract Edited June 1, 2015 by Dannie Boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 he won't keep his money in RSA. More likely Switzerland or an offshore jurisdiction... His shares were bought through a Jersey trust ( or Isle of Man, one of the two). As was his ?20m investment back in the Murray era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 What evidence do you have that the supporters are not buying or are boycotting Sports Direct? Edit: forgot about Ashley's water tight contract There is much more but I'll give you this as a sample http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/sons-struth-plea-rangers-fans-5570264 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1874robbo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Just posting to get to the last page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 There is much more but I'll give you this as a sample http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/sons-struth-plea-rangers-fans-5570264 Thanks, certainly a request there from SoS (who are not representative of the all the Sevconians) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Something that I think rather important, but is generally overlooked, in this apparent battle between King and Ashley is; both men are very successful within their own business areas. Unfortunately for King, this 'battle' is being fought in Ashley's area of great expertise, and Ashley has come out on top against other genuine experts in this field a great many times. From what has been published, King seems to be an expert in persuading mostly ordinary people to part with their money in his money-making schemes (that he then makes a killing on before leaving his investors in the smelly stuff), not in negotiating merchandising contracts with hard nosed experts like Ashley. With that in mind, he may be able to raise investment for TRFC more successfully than Ashley might, though Ashley, I'm sure, would just hire someone even better than King! For that is how he works. Unless Ashley has made a mistake, or one of his lawyers has, King doesn't have a prayer in any negotiation - assuming Ashley ever agrees to it getting that far! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I'm pretty sure that the family trust that he used to purchase the shares was based in the Channel Islands, i. e. he already has money stashed offshore. However any substantial transactions he undertakes may attract the attention of SARS. I would had thought that SARS would have needed to know exactly how much King had anywhere in the World so as they could determine if tax were due on it or not. If King has stated that he has X amount in accounts outwith SA and he or his family trusts etc start to spend Y amounts then SARS may question where this money has come from and if tax is due on it. Investing/buying ?2.5m in shares and a ?1.5m loan is chicken feed compared to the ?20m-?40m that King says sevco really need, investing that amount may attract unwanted questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I would had thought that SARS would have needed to know exactly how much King had anywhere in the World so as they could determine if tax were due on it or not. If King has stated that he has X amount in accounts outwith SA and he or his family trusts etc start to spend Y amounts then SARS may question where this money has come from and if tax is due on it. Investing/buying ?2.5m in shares and a ?1.5m loan is chicken feed compared to the ?20m-?40m that King says sevco really need, investing that amount may attract unwanted questions. I would have thought that speculating on South African tax laws is probably futile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I would have thought that speculating on South African tax laws is probably futile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maroon tinted glasses 2 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I would think that although some supporters would try and boycott buying the kits from sports direct most would still need to use the shop for gym/sports gear, tracksuits or trainers so would still be pumping money into the brand regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Yes & that ?20m investment went into MIM ( Murray international Metals ) not the liquidated Rfc also. I'm sure King's on the creditors list for ?20m so he could see circa ?4m of it back someday. I really want to understand more about that ?20 million. If king is a creditor it must mean that it was not just a gift payment. I wonder what he was getting out the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Two undisputable facts 1. There are strict exchange controls regulating money leaving SA ( to protect their currency) 2. King's movement of money outside SA was cited in his legal dispute along with a demand that he repatriate cash (and other assets) Anyone thinking King can freely move money anywhere he wishes is dreaming. Let's see what's said in the coming days. I fully expect a new managerial appointment and a 'call to arms' for season ticket renewal. Aside from that nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of The Cat Cafe Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Maybe I have missed it somewhere,but I know that King has talked about ?30m or ?40m to get Rangers where he wants them, but has he ever said "I will contribute ?x"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 It was discussed back on this thread, but I'm sure it was a loan to Sdm, I don't remember him getting Rfc shares for it. He actually tried to take Sdm to court over his lost ?20m. F.F might have the info at hand on it. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Maybe I have missed it somewhere,but I know that King has talked about ?30m or ?40m to get Rangers where he wants them, but has he ever said "I will contribute ?x"? He claimed he was going to put up 50% of that and has backtracked on it. Not that it really matters. Provided they can persuade their fans to buy into a non-moonbeams funded team they will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Meldrew Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Looks like the penny's starting to drop about King for some of them: http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=283808 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 There is much more but I'll give you this as a sample http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/sons-struth-plea-rangers-fans-5570264 Care to answer the point on why Ashley cares about Rangers fans not buying merchandise and would therefore be desperate to renegotiate his contracts when he has them tied into paying for any merchandise not sold ?? You seem to skip passed this conveniently when its brought back to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of The Cat Cafe Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 He claimed he was going to put up 50% of that and has backtracked on it. Not that it really matters. Provided they can persuade their fans to buy into a non-moonbeams funded team they will be fine. So, like, is he trying to buy the club with other people's money? That would never work, would it?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XB52 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 You really are no business person yourself.....along with a couple of others on here. Let me try to help you and others as it seems you need some guidance Ashley looks for what is best for him. The contracts he has are worth something but would be worth a whole lot more if supporters could be persuaded to buy the merchandise. That is not happening at present so if a deal can be struck over his shares, his loan and his merchandise agreements that will lead to Rangers and him benefitting it will be done.......it's not rocket science though for you and others it seems so. The realities of the business world pass some people by and it seems some post on JKB. PS imagine if he already has ?40 million in the offshore trust and has the money to back it up ?......personally I think we will see another share issue and he will invest along with others but of course not for ?30/?40 million as supporters etc will be coming up with much of the 'investment' through the purchase of shares. oh dear, you seem so upset because some people hold a different view than you on Ashley/King/Sevco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 They can invest ?20M, ?30M, ?40M or whatever, but until they can balance their income and expenditure it is just turning a large fortune into a small one.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) It was discussed back on this thread, but I'm sure it was a loan to Sdm, I don't remember him getting Rfc shares for it. He actually tried to take Sdm to court over his lost ?20m. F.F might have the info at hand on it. King invested ?20M via one of his companies, Ben Nevis, in Murray Sports Limited in 2000. MSL was Rangers parent company at the time and the investment was part of a rights issue that raised ?38M (to fund Advocaat's transfer dealings). In return Ben Nevis received shares in MSL (not Rangers), but King also received a non-exec directorship of the club. Ben Nevis was one of the main targets for SARS during their investigation of King. Somewhere between 2002 and 2003, King switched ownership of the Ben Nevis shares held in MSL to Metlika Trading. Both Ben Nevis and Metlika are registered in the British Virgin Islands. I assume that the change in ownership was probably related to the SARS interest. The situation continued until February 2011, when it looks as if SDM was reorganising his portfolio of companies. Murray Holdings Ltd took ownership of the bulk of RFC shares, but Metlika for the first time took a direct holding in RFC (approx 5%) which was proportionate to its previous holding in MSL. Three months later SDM sold the MHL shares to Craig Whyte. I have no idea where the "creditor" element came from. I haven't seen anything that suggests that their was any debt attached to King's holding in RFC (via Ben Nevis or Metlika), so I would have thought that he would end up at the back of the RFC queue along with the other shareholders. King did threaten to sue SDM, but I don't think he took his claim any further, or if it was suggested to him to try a claim via BDO. King wasn't listed as a creditor while the club was in administration, but appeared as a "director's" claim in the BDO reports. If his claim is upheld he will receive a minimum of ?3M and maybe up to ?5M if HMRC fail to overturn the UTTT decision on appeal. In their last report, BDO indicated that an interim dividend would be declared during the spring (just past), so he may already have received funds from that source. King has previously advised that any money he got back from the Oldco would be reinvested in the newco, so we can look out for that one. BDO's latest six monthly report is due for publication about now, so we might get some clarification shortly. Edited June 1, 2015 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 There is much more but I'll give you this as a sample http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/sons-struth-plea-rangers-fans-5570264 Mike Ashley will have a water tight contract on the merchandise, there is no getting away from that. The chances of finding any loopholes are slim to none. 7 year rolling contract keeps on rolling lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts