Armageddon Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Ashley must have it in the terms of the loan agreement a clause where he can ask for repayment in full, this he's done & got this reply from king. . By refusing to pay, I'd imagine there in default of the agreement hence Ashley asking for an egm for a shareholder vote to force the issue 1st. We'll have to wait till the vote to see what Ashley's next move will be then. Good piece on it here. http://m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-board-to-ignore-mike-ashley-loan-demand-1-3792217 Why don't they just take ?5M from the ?40M being invested by the new regime? Sorry, forgot that part is just bullsh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blairdin Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Perhaps someone will enlighten me, I'm clearly an idiot? Why would Ashley renegotiate a contract that he put in place unless it was to better his position (which any renegotiation as a result of resolution 2 surely wouldn't?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 It would be highly amusing if Ashley went to court to ringfence this years ST money. I know he has security over physical assets but it would be a long drawn out process to get cash that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas-voss Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 That new away strip of theirs is honking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Perhaps someone will enlighten me, I'm clearly an idiot? Why would Ashley renegotiate a contract that he put in place unless it was to better his position (which any renegotiation as a result of resolution 2 surely wouldn't?). Only reason would be that it is the easier option than going through courts to get his loan back. However, the fact he is being asked to do it means Sevco's lawyers have clearly decided the contracts are not onerous and cannot be struck down. Effectively Sevco are trying to get the shareholders to refuse to pay back the loan so that the directors are not responsible... What they are doing is probably in Sevco's interest but it is not very ethical, and certainly won't improve the prospect of anyone external to the board wanting to "invest" or loan them money in future... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 It would be highly amusing if Ashley went to court to ringfence this years ST money. I know he has security over physical assets but it would be a long drawn out process to get cash that way. Not necessarily. Could he not just petition Court to send the Sheriff's officers round to lock the gates of Murray Park etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Perhaps someone will enlighten me, I'm clearly an idiot? Why would Ashley renegotiate a contract that he put in place unless it was to better his position (which any renegotiation as a result of resolution 2 surely wouldn't?). Because as businessmen the Good Rangers Men are not very smart. It is a bit like David Cameron putting all these 'non-achievable' promises into the Tory manifesto thinking they're not going to win an outright majority but when they do he has a problem putting his promises into the Queen's Speech. Ashley does not have to agree to anything, he has the contracts and they are worth the paper they are written on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Here's what the sevco shareholders got for the egm. Hah! Talk about loaded questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Hah! Talk about loaded questions I think Ashley's real reason for the Egm is to humiliate King and the Board about the NOMAD and AIM etc. asking for his money via resolution is merely the mechanism to get the meeting held... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I think Ashley's real reason for the Egm is to humiliate King and the Board about the NOMAD and AIM etc. asking for his money via resolution is merely the mechanism to get the meeting held... Not wrong there. There is little doubt that this has become a "personal" matter for Ashley, after some of the mud slinging that King has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=283884&do=findComment&comment=1062708617 Read this OP and thought" Finally, they get it!" Then read the responses and realised only one single Sevco fan isn't an absolute cretin! Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Perhaps someone will enlighten me, I'm clearly an idiot? Why would Ashley renegotiate a contract that he put in place unless it was to better his position (which any renegotiation as a result of resolution 2 surely wouldn't?). It's not a zero-sum game. There are possibilities that could be beneficial to both rangers and Ashley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Ashley must have it in the terms of the loan agreement a clause where he can ask for repayment in full, this he's done & got this reply from king. . By refusing to pay, I'd imagine there in default of the agreement hence Ashley asking for an egm for a shareholder vote to force the issue 1st. We'll have to wait till the vote to see what Ashley's next move will be then. Good piece on it here. http://m.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-board-to-ignore-mike-ashley-loan-demand-1-3792217 I'm not as convinced that it must be in the terms of the loan agreement but that may well end up being the case I think Ashley's real reason for the Egm is to humiliate King and the Board about the NOMAD and AIM etc. asking for his money via resolution is merely the mechanism to get the meeting held... Could be a possibility but it is pretty much guesswork at this stage. Even if Rangers do pay back the loan, SD/MASH still have the 7 year rolling contract in place with c.50% heading their way along with the assurances that they will get money even if shirts don't sell etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmfcfanyul Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) Ashley doesn't care - or shouldn't, as I have to assume here since I'm not a billionaire - whether the totality is zero sum or not. Is there more in it for him is what would motivate him. Unless all the guaranteed shirt sales stuff is hogwash, I can't see what he could gain. Unless sevco was to offer, say, 25% of profits for ten or twenty years instead of 50% for seven? Even that he wouldn't snatch out of your hand. Who'd bet on them being there in the same form in ten years?? Edited June 4, 2015 by hmfcfanyul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 To save me trawling through this thread can anyone tell me what the latest estimate of Rangers playing staff payroll costs were during the season just finished? Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maroon tinted glasses 2 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Im still a bit confused here, did the ?5 million loan not carry conditions that mean SD or MASH holds the rights to the badge and a lot of other The rangers stuff? So If they decide to vote on telling him to eff off regarding the payments does that not mean he can then say they have breached the agreement and since they are refusing to pay him back he can then stop them from using the badge and other identifiable "The rangers" stuff along with locking the gates to all the other facilities he has security over in part of the loan deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Im still a bit confused here, did the ?5 million loan not carry conditions that mean SD or MASH holds the rights to the badge and a lot of other The rangers stuff? So If they decide to vote on telling him to eff off regarding the payments does that not mean he can then say they have breached the agreement and since they are refusing to pay him back he can then stop them from using the badge and other identifiable "The rangers" stuff along with locking the gates to all the other facilities he has security over in part of the loan deal.that's how I understand it. If he decides to lock them out then it is pretty much war and that will be hilarious...Sevco board are trying to sound conciliatory but firm, but they have little to offer in return for the renegotiation that they want. As noted above I think Ashley's attack is on two fronts. To force King to explain his actions and to force him to pony up. One is about loss of share value and the other is about loan recovery. Either could make SFA look daft for approving FPP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 If i was Ashley, i'd start selling the assets. If possible of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 If i was Ashley, i'd start selling the assets. If possible of course. It's not possible, at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Ashley does not have to agree to anything, he has the contracts and they are worth the paper they are written on. Presumably the 'paper' is ?100 notes, and it's a very long contract, with one letter on each bit of paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 There is some truth in that. I'm sure Ashley expects to lose the vote at the egm given his standing with King & Co. But a vote not to pay Ashley his ?5m loan could force him down another avenue to recover it & that's a winding up petition.. Is king trying to set up Ashley as the fall guy here?. King & Co.'s wealth is undeniable & they've inherited a contract set up by the previous board. Why not simply buy him out, take back the merchandising in house & have complete control over any sales margins ?. King can easily rid sevco of Ashley & his onerous contracts, just pay the man enough to walk away. [emoji6] I think perhaps King is not as wealthy as has been claimed. I can't do the link, but there is a very good article on SFM (by barcabhoy) which explains, albeit with some speculation, that he is while very wealthy to you and I ,maybe not capable of the ?20m plus suggested. To summarise very briefly, all based on the fact that he was not mega wealthy prior to the sale of his company ... Sale of Company ?94m, of which he invested almost immediately ?20m in Murray . ?74m deduct sale of assets (wineries, Falcon jet and other "toys") by SARS plus costs (?32m) ?42m deduct cash to SARS (?16m) NET ?26m He also owns shares etc, and 3 huge houses and a golf estate, and while ?26m is indeed a fortune perhaps not enough to throw at a second tier Scottish football club. Some of the foregoing is admittedly speculation, but the article gives sound reasoning and is worth a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 If that estimate is accurate then he can't afford to buy out Ashley (on his own) & S. Ticket sales are of paramount importance in keeping the show on the road. [emoji106] Cheers I'll take a look. [emoji6] I suspect you are more qualified than me to comment on the article - there may be some wishful thinking, but it seems coherent enough to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 If that estimate is accurate then he can't afford to buy out Ashley (on his own) & S. Ticket sales are of paramount importance in keeping the show on the road. [emoji106] Cheers I'll take a look. [emoji6] Lets just say in 2006 he transferred over ?56 million to the family trust alone after a sale of shares and according the the state at the time....... 'The State says that King is the richest man in South Africa and has already spent R65m just on legal representation in South Africa.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I think perhaps King is not as wealthy as has been claimed. I can't do the link, but there is a very good article on SFM (by barcabhoy) which explains, albeit with some speculation, that he is while very wealthy to you and I ,maybe not capable of the ?20m plus suggested. To summarise very briefly, all based on the fact that he was not mega wealthy prior to the sale of his company ... Sale of Company ?94m, of which he invested almost immediately ?20m in Murray . ?74m deduct sale of assets (wineries, Falcon jet and other "toys") by SARS plus costs (?32m) ?42m deduct cash to SARS (?16m) NET ?26m He also owns shares etc, and 3 huge houses and a golf estate, and while ?26m is indeed a fortune perhaps not enough to throw at a second tier Scottish football club. Some of the foregoing is admittedly speculation, but the article gives sound reasoning and is worth a read. I agree CJGJ I reckon this is just a mixture of hot air and wishful thinking. If you are looking for a guess on Kings wealth I would look at the original SARS amount that they were after him for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7628mm Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Lets just say in 2006 he transferred over ?56 million to the family trust alone after a sale of shares and according the the state at the time....... 'The State says that King is the richest man in South Africa and has already spent R65m just on legal representation in South Africa.' Would that not leave him with just ?14 million after he paid the fines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor jambo Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Even if King is worth ?100 million in readily available cash That is still not enough to keep TRIFC on the road for very long. Being merely a millionaire is no longer sufficient The 3 Bears have already thrown ?3million on the fire, along with MASH ?5million , and also ?16-17 million owed to the parent company, and approx. ?1million to ex employees. And still losing money And in the Championship with no commercial revenues to speak of and no lending streams. Kings ?20 million wouldn't even get them back to point blank And it would have to be pointed out that from a football perspective they have progressed not an inch since they were formed NO manager, no backroom staff, no first team , poor youth team, no scouts What a mess I love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin_T Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 It doesn't upset me , it bores me. If you don't want to or can't add anything constructive , original or informative then just stay away. This thread has predictably gone off topic completely and you make it worse. Every time I see your name I know it's gonna be an argument. I stopped reading CJGJ's contributions to JKB a while back, I feel it has greatly enhanced my enjoyment of this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) There is some truth in that. I'm sure Ashley expects to lose the vote at the egm given his standing with King & Co. But a vote not to pay Ashley his ?5m loan could force him down another avenue to recover it & that's a winding up petition.. Is king trying to set up Ashley as the fall guy here?. King & Co.'s wealth is undeniable & they've inherited a contract set up by the previous board. Why not simply buy him out, take back the merchandising in house & have complete control over any sales margins ?. King can easily rid sevco of Ashley & his onerous contracts, just pay the man enough to walk away. [emoji6] Difficult for King to find a mechanism to repay Ashley. King doesn't own Sevco he is just a significant shareholder -same as Ashley - so given that he has publicly declared that he and his RRM buddies would never securitize Ibrox, Murray Park etc this leaves him having to give Sevco an unsecured loan to discharge Ashley's secured loan! Lol his kids will want him sectioned if he does that! Only other option is to "invest" more via holding a rights issue, which he'd have to underwrite himself! (for info, not necessarily for you) This means existing shareholders are invited to maintain their existing % by stumping up whatever share of the amount Sevco needs ie if ?20m, a shareholder with 10% stake is called to pump in ?2m to maintain his 10%, but if he and others choose not to, then King underwrites the shortfall up to perhaps the whole ?20m. From this King's ownership share increases %-wise. But there is a risk here, as he cannot know whether he will end up with a large minority shareholding, majority control, or achieves the trigger % whereby he has to offer to buy out every other shareholder!) Edited June 4, 2015 by Spellczech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Gordons Gloves Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I have completely missed this, but how did Dave King make his 'fortune'? Property? Investments? Drugs? Organized crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Here's the link to the Tsfm post. People can read it for themselves & make their own mind up about its veracity & kings supposed wealth themselves.. http://www.sfm.scot/sfm-the-next-steps/comment-page-25/#comment-56311 It's very interesting that GASL is alleged to have manipulated the worth of SOL and benefited from its sale. He by all accounts manipulated the share value of Rangers and bought when it was at a low ebb and now sits with a controlling interest. His down fall could well be his mouth he's actually talk himself into a corner where the faithful are looking for him to gift from his own personal fortune and to date he hasn't ponied up any thing of valve other than a loan. It's IMO looking more and more likely he will in fact live up to the judges description of a Glib and Shameless Liar, mendacious to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I have completely missed this, but how did Dave King make his 'fortune'? Property? Investments? Drugs? Organized crime?I'd like to know that too, and also how many years tax evasion he was done for. It was about 40 counts but it cannot be 40 years so is it 10 years of quarterly returns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Has anyone asked what would take to buy out the sports direct deal? This seems to be the issue, so what would it take for Ashley to walk away? How much profit will sports direct make over 7 years with rangers merchendice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I stopped reading CJGJ's contributions to JKB a while back, I feel it has greatly enhanced my enjoyment of this site. It seems anyone who dares to question the majority view or opinion has to be seen as wrong but we are all entitled to our view No they are not billionaires but they are wealthy enough to fund this and have the business brains to do so. We have a director of Morgan Stanley for example, a successful Scottish businessman with access to a decent amount of liquid wealth and of course Dave King who has from all accounts including that of the South African authorities quite a large sum tucked away which he can access. It's amazing that many on JKB seem to think they have more financial nous than those involved on the Rangers board. They will have by now had a good look at the books and contracts and need to move forward making a number of important decisions on and off the field but I just read some of what is posted and ask myself do these proven, successful businessmen realise the task they are undertaking or are those posting the majority view on JKB right in their predictions ? Repayment of the ?5 million loan is not the issue for they can do that. Rangers see it as linked to the deals commited to by the old board and want to discuss those so use the loan as leverage.. please note though they have not defaulted on the terms of the loan to date. Given Ashley's feelings he would not be long in going to court with no need for this GM had they done so. Ashley of course may well take a different view re any discussions about the contracts and thats his perogative but it is a business and he I am sure wants to benefit from those contracts to the maximum he can. PS i realise this post is wasted on you Martin. PSS the one thing I do agree with is that the current Rangers board needs to get a grip on the finances going forward and the danger is that they do not or waste money in an attempt to pander to the Ibrox masses. However unlike the past few years they do have some expertise in the field of finance. PSSS i hope that they fail and lurch from crisis to crisis but I just think that in time they have the funds and skills to at least stop the flow of cash leaving the business or matching in the medium to long term the income received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Independence Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 It seems anyone who dares to question the majority view or opinion has to be seen as wrong but we are all entitled to our view No they are not billionaires but they are wealthy enough to fund this and have the business brains to do so. We have a director of Morgan Stanley for example, a successful Scottish businessman with access to a decent amount of liquid wealth and of course Dave King who has from all accounts including that of the South African authorities quite a large sum tucked away which he can access. It's amazing that many on JKB seem to think they have more financial nous than those involved on the Rangers board. They will have by now had a good look at the books and contracts and need to move forward making a number of important decisions on and off the field but I just read some of what is posted and ask myself do these proven, successful businessmen realise the task they are undertaking or are those posting the majority view on JKB right in their predictions ? Repayment of the ?5 million loan is not the issue for they can do that. Rangers see it as linked to the deals commited to by the old board and want to discuss those so use the loan as leverage.. please note though they have not defaulted on the terms of the loan to date. Given Ashley's feelings he would not be long in going to court with no need for this GM had they done so. Ashley of course may well take a different view re any discussions about the contracts and thats his perogative but it is a business and he I am sure wants to benefit from those contracts to the maximum he can. PS i realise this post is wasted on you Martin. PSS the one thing I do agree with is that the current Rangers board needs to get a grip on the finances going forward and the danger is that they do not or waste money in an attempt to pander to the Ibrox masses. However unlike the past few years they do have some expertise in the field of finance. PSSS i hope that they fail and lurch from crisis to crisis but I just think that in time they have the funds and skills to at least stop the flow of cash leaving the business or matching in the medium to long term the income received. Talk about sticking your head in the sand!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=283884&do=findComment&comment=1062708617 Read this OP and thought" Finally, they get it!" Then read the responses and realised only one single Sevco fan isn't an absolute cretin! Lol This bit caught my eye: If ever a helpless bunch needed help, it is what is left of a once mighty force in world football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 It seems anyone who dares to question the majority view or opinion has to be seen as wrong but we are all entitled to our view No they are not billionaires but they are wealthy enough to fund this and have the business brains to do so. We have a director of Morgan Stanley for example, a successful Scottish businessman with access to a decent amount of liquid wealth and of course Dave King who has from all accounts including that of the South African authorities quite a large sum tucked away which he can access. It's amazing that many on JKB seem to think they have more financial nous than those involved on the Rangers board. They will have by now had a good look at the books and contracts and need to move forward making a number of important decisions on and off the field but I just read some of what is posted and ask myself do these proven, successful businessmen realise the task they are undertaking or are those posting the majority view on JKB right in their predictions ? Repayment of the ?5 million loan is not the issue for they can do that. Rangers see it as linked to the deals commited to by the old board and want to discuss those so use the loan as leverage.. please note though they have not defaulted on the terms of the loan to date. Given Ashley's feelings he would not be long in going to court with no need for this GM had they done so. Ashley of course may well take a different view re any discussions about the contracts and thats his perogative but it is a business and he I am sure wants to benefit from those contracts to the maximum he can. PS i realise this post is wasted on you Martin. PSS the one thing I do agree with is that the current Rangers board needs to get a grip on the finances going forward and the danger is that they do not or waste money in an attempt to pander to the Ibrox masses. However unlike the past few years they do have some expertise in the field of finance. PSSS i hope that they fail and lurch from crisis to crisis but I just think that in time they have the funds and skills to at least stop the flow of cash leaving the business or matching in the medium to long term the income received. I cannot fault anything you say, but your faith in these businessman's financial expertise would not appear to be borne out by their previous directorships in old Rangers. Only ones who has have clear records are the guy from Tennents and I don't know much about him and what state they were in under him, or indeed the circumstances of them being bought by Cantrall & Cochrane (Magners). The other is Park, but there has been rumour that he and King have had a fall out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewboy Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Repayment of the ?5 million loan is not the issue for they can do that. Rangers see it as linked to the deals commited to by the old board and want to discuss those so use the loan as leverage.. please note though they have not defaulted on the terms of the loan to date. . Once again (think this is the third time without an answer!) What are the terms of the loan? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 More good news lol Haris Vuckic has been told he won?t play for his national team as long as he is playing second tier football with Glasgow Rangers. However, one of the most promising players from his generation in Slovenia has been warned he won?t play international football if he remains at Rangers next season. Slovenia boss Srecko Katanec said: ?Haris played for Rangers in the second division in Scotland. ?I was disappointed, not just with him, but with the quality of the league he was playing in. ?I would have thought Rangers would have had a better team.? Vuckic?s loan deal is over at Rangers and it remains to be seen whether he signs on a permanent basis. http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/haris-vuckic-told-wont-play-9384207 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Talk about sticking your head in the sand!!!! As I said the financial expertise of some on here clearly outweighs that of sucessful businessmen (and that is not including King) I'm sure Douglas Park, George Taylor (a managing director of Morgan Stanley) and others will take on board the views of JKB posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) It seems anyone who dares to question the majority view or opinion has to be seen as wrong but we are all entitled to our view No they are not billionaires but they are wealthy enough to fund this and have the business brains to do so. We have a director of Morgan Stanley for example, a successful Scottish businessman with access to a decent amount of liquid wealth and of course Dave King who has from all accounts including that of the South African authorities quite a large sum tucked away which he can access. It's amazing that many on JKB seem to think they have more financial nous than those involved on the Rangers board. They will have by now had a good look at the books and contracts and need to move forward making a number of important decisions on and off the field but I just read some of what is posted and ask myself do these proven, successful businessmen realise the task they are undertaking or are those posting the majority view on JKB right in their predictions ? Repayment of the ?5 million loan is not the issue for they can do that. Rangers see it as linked to the deals commited to by the old board and want to discuss those so use the loan as leverage.. please note though they have not defaulted on the terms of the loan to date. Given Ashley's feelings he would not be long in going to court with no need for this GM had they done so. Ashley of course may well take a different view re any discussions about the contracts and thats his perogative but it is a business and he I am sure wants to benefit from those contracts to the maximum he can. PS i realise this post is wasted on you Martin. PSS the one thing I do agree with is that the current Rangers board needs to get a grip on the finances going forward and the danger is that they do not or waste money in an attempt to pander to the Ibrox masses. However unlike the past few years they do have some expertise in the field of finance. PSSS i hope that they fail and lurch from crisis to crisis but I just think that in time they have the funds and skills to at least stop the flow of cash leaving the business or matching in the medium to long term the income received. Some very interesting stuff there that I've not read anywhere else. Some super sleuthing, if I may say so. You seem to have a source of knowledge none of the rest of us have and I've highlighted a few of your nuggets and would be grateful if you could provide the source, or at least let us know how you know this. Not even Level 5 have been able to uncover most of it, or, at least, if they have, they haven't published it! Edited June 4, 2015 by AllyjamboDerbyshire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinks Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I cannot fault anything you say, but your faith in these businessman's financial expertise would not appear to be borne out by their previous directorships in old Rangers. Only ones who has have clear records are the guy from Tennents and I don't know much about him and what state they were in under him, or indeed the circumstances of them being bought by Cantrall & Cochrane (Magners). The other is Park, but there has been rumour that he and King have had a fall out... Gilligan was only at Tennents for approx three years after they were bought by C&C.Not exactly a roaring success.Quickly replaced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12XU Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Wow To have have financial expertise in a sentence regarding Rangers is mind blowing - even though you were trying to chuck it back to posters on here If it was financial buffoonery ( Rangers board past and present ) then I am in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 As I said the financial expertise of some on here clearly outweighs that of sucessful businessmen (and that is not including King) I'm sure Douglas Park, George Taylor (a managing director of Morgan Stanley) and others will take on board the views of JKB posters. everybody above the tea lady is a Director or Vice President at American banks. Did he work in their Glasgow credit card call centre? Truth is that many successful people in business get there through inherited wealth, nepotism or other patronage or dodgy-dealing...David Murray took a solid family company into more glamorous arenas of football and commercial real estate and ultimately wrecked it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I have completely missed this, but how did Dave King make his 'fortune'? Property? Investments? Drugs? Organized crime? Worth a read.. http://www.moneyweb.co.za/archive/dave-king-and-i/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 As I said the financial expertise of some on here clearly outweighs that of sucessful businessmen (and that is not including King) I'm sure Douglas Park, George Taylor (a managing director of Morgan Stanley) and others will take on board the views of JKB posters. you are making a rather large assumption the there are no successful businessmen on here. But then most of what you say is based on another large assumption ie just because they appear to have lots of money makes them successful businessmen. All I'll say is David Murray, Craig Whyte, Sepp Blatter, Vladimir Romanov. Lots of money, were they successful or just crooks? They don't fit my picture of a successful businessman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 As I said the financial expertise of some on here clearly outweighs that of sucessful businessmen (and that is not including King) I'm sure Douglas Park, George Taylor (a managing director of Morgan Stanley) and others will take on board the views of JKB posters. What sensible business man takes on a toxic brand losing ?900k a month, after a clear case of share price manipulation by a guy who was charged, and cleared, after a no show from witnesses, of racketeering .... Not me. Maybe people on here have more sense than you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 As I said the financial expertise of some on here clearly outweighs that of sucessful businessmen (and that is not including King) I'm sure Douglas Park, George Taylor (a managing director of Morgan Stanley) and others will take on board the views of JKB posters. if you check your facts you will find that George Taylor is not the managing director OF Morgan Stanley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve444 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 This is NOT a joke ad either. http://www.indeed.co.uk/cmp/Rangers-Football-Club/jobs/Groundsperson-d80fde3cdef407c7 Groundsperson (Skilled)Rangers Football Club - Glasgow A vacancy has become available for the position of Groundsperson reporting to the Head Groundsperson. The purpose of this role is to assist the Deputy Head Groundsperson to provide and maintain high standards of groundsmanship within our training ground based at Murray Park and within our stadium based at Ibrox as deemed by the company and in line with requirements of top level professional football. The successful candidate will have completed a successful apprenticeship within Grounds / Greenkeeping and have gained the relevant skills and experience required for the role. Applicants must be able to demonstrate proven success and experience working within a similar role. Commitment, excellent communications skills, flexibility and enthusiasm are also a must. You should be able to work well as part of a team or as an individual and having a flexible approach to working hours is a must. Working hours are 37.5 per week, working 5 days out of 7 on a rota. A full job description is available on request. If you can add value to our team please email your CV and covering letter. Alternatively, your CV and covering letter can be sent to David Roxburgh, Argyle House, Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow, G51 2XD. The closing date for applications is Monday, 27th April 2015. http://www.indeed.co.uk/cmp/Rangers-Football-Club/jobs/Groundsperson-d80fde3cdef407c7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Worth a read.. http://www.moneyweb.co.za/archive/dave-king-and-i/ Touch of the succulent lamb about that piece. Me and my mate Dave...No mention of the jail sentences, the dropped fraud and money laundering charges, not even of the agreement to bring all his offshore investments home to SA. Did bring out, though, how spending your money very publicly can bring SARS knocking on your door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanks Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Not sure I get what's going on here, could king not jus pay Ashley back his ?5million then that's the end of the saga no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts