Mee Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 its could be a relatively low investment to eventually expose his brand to CL football. I don't get that argument. It's a lot of hassle to get your name on a shirt for a team that might qualify in 3 4 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Decent post from a Rangers fan on what might happen in the next few weeks. "We wont just slide into administration. Ashley will continue with these loans, securing assests as he does. My thoughts are that he saw how we all stupidly danced to Charles Green's, and to an extent Craig Whyte's tunes and thought that the same would happen again. What he didn't expect was that the fans would have had enough and the numbers of those attending would dwindle, along with the amount of merchandise being purchased. He is trying to secure as much as RFC as possible, the best way for him to do this is by increasing his shareholding. That has failed so it will now be loans (mortgages really) against the assests of the club, like what he did before. I believe his end game originally was to make as much money out of merchandise whilst starving the club of the money. He thought, and it is quite a reasonable thought, that all Rangers fans would be too stupid or blindly loyal to see what he was doing and saw an easy buck. None of this "expand Sports Direct" - he wanted to make money from Rangers fans. His plan hasn't worked so now he is on a mission to make whatever money he can. I believe he plans to do this by securing as much of Rangers as he can, and when Rangers can not afford to repay his loans, administration will be inevitable, unless someone is willing to pay off the loans - don't see that happening as it wont help the situation. Again, we're slightly wiser than before and I don't see the powers at be allowing the board to bring in their own administrators again. That was a huge mistake last time and in hind sight I cannot see how it was allowed to happen. Ashley, with large debts owed to him, will become the main creditor throughout administration, and if a CVA is agreed it will be upto him to agree it. He gets some money, he hopefully then s off. If the company is liquidated, he still owns the assests, and as before, he is bound to accept the best offer for them when someone else takes over. That or he wants to cling on to the assets and rent them back to us - but by doing that he is risking us going elsewhere - new training ground, stadium, who knows. It will be a case of starving him of cash again, eventually he would have to sell up. The less money that goes to them now, the quicker this will happen. Where we have to be careful is if and when someone comes in to buy the club. There is likely to be a lot more people interested this time around as there is no big tax case looming, and we as fans have a duty to see that no more wigs or Wigs get in. If it means blocking roads to stop them getting to meetings then so fecking be it!! It's hopefully less likely now without the big tax case - we weren't buyable" I think that you seriously over-estimate the influence the fans have here. 3 years ago, Rangers fans were marching around Glasgow promising that this, that and the next thing would never happen because the fans would never allow it. Turns out, the fans have had no influence at all. Rangers died, and a host of lunatics have been running the asylum ever since...caring not a jot about the fans. Ashley will be the same. He'll look at any way possible to make a red cent out of Rangers, and the fans are at the very bottom of the list of 'people he cares about'. Sorry, but it's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 I think that you seriously over-estimate the influence the fans have here. 3 years ago, Rangers fans were marching around Glasgow promising that this, that and the next thing would never happen because the fans would never allow it. Turns out, the fans have had no influence at all. Rangers died, and a host of lunatics have been running the asylum ever since...caring not a jot about the fans. Ashley will be the same. He'll look at any way possible to make a red cent out of Rangers, and the fans are at the very bottom of the list of 'people he cares about'. Sorry, but it's true. wouldn't it be magic if things worked out well though.? We can but dream. That's what fans do isn't it?Now my guess is you don't want things to work out well. Hence the prophet of doom sermon from the mount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 wouldn't it be magic if things worked out well though.? We can but dream. That's what fans do isn't it?Now my guess is you don't want things to work out well. Hence the prophet of doom sermon from the mount. Well, I doubt that it's a secret that very few non-Rangers fans care what happens to your club. I was merely pointing out what's happened in the last few years. 3 short years ago, Rangers fans were confidently predicting that 'fan power' and the pressure that Rangers supporters would put on everyone and awbody, would have a huge effect. It didn't. I just don't see why anyone thinks it'll be any different with Ashley.....he doesn't care about Rangers, he's only in it for a quick buck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 (edited) I don't want Ashley anywhere near Rangers Edited December 25, 2014 by EddardStark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Well, I doubt that it's a secret that very few non-Rangers fans care what happens to your club. I was merely pointing out what's happened in the last few years. 3 short years ago, Rangers fans were confidently predicting that 'fan power' and the pressure that Rangers supporters would put on everyone and awbody, would have a huge effect. It didn't. I just don't see why anyone thinks it'll be any different with Ashley.....he doesn't care about Rangers, he's only in it for a quick buck. Yeah but they are the peepul... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrelhumper Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 I don't want Ashley anywhere near Rangers Neither do i. I want another chuck green. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 When you feel that you have had just about enough... (A sincere Merry Christmas to all of our the The Rangers supporting TAMBers.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintlyscot Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Don't quite see why people on here have do much ire towards Eddard and other bears so much. The fact is OUR chairman had the future direction of scottish football and rangers in their hands for the past few seasons and done hee haw for the greater good. Don't have the time or patience the now but as iv said before shared gates and Proper voting rights with independent sfa board would be huge step in right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Farrington Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 I see the South African tax authorities are looking into Dave King's affairs again. We've seen enough bad eggs - the SFA cannot allow any more near the Rangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 Letham, Park & Taylor have offered £6.5m as an alternative to Ashley's funding. SFA are aware of the offer and proof of funding has been provided to the Rangers board. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 Haters gonna hate hate hate And the fakers gonna fake fake fake fake fake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 And the takers goin' tae take, take, take, take take... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) Douglas Park,George Letham and another have offered Rangers £6.5m as an alternative to Ashleys continued loans. This will be in return for shares. Proof of funding has been provided. Edited December 27, 2014 by EddardStark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 just seen fairbairn's previous post on the investment from Park and Co. Agree with his comments. This is going to get very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibelieve!!! Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 So did the SFA know about this offer before Ashley was rejected? If so, would that have influenced their decision knowing there was another possibility for funding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) So did the SFA know about this offer before Ashley was rejected? If so, would that have influenced their decision knowing there was another possibility for funding. Its all very strange. The article on King in the Record is dubious in terms of timing. I also doubt the SFA would reject Ashely if they didn't think there where other alternatives. Edited December 27, 2014 by EddardStark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 Richard WilsonBBC ScotlandThree businessmen have offered £6.5m investment to Rangers as an alternative to further funding from Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley.George Letham, Douglas Park and shareholder George Taylor want to buy all 40,739,000 shares due to be issued in a fundraising offer in January.But current shareholders must be allowed first refusal on maintaining the size of their stake.The trio have provided club chairman David Somers with proof of funding.Letham has previously loaned the Championship club money while Park, the owner of coach hire firm Parks of Hamilton, is one of Scotland's most successful businessmen. Taylor already owns 3.2% of the club.The three businessmen emailed their offer - which included two representatives being appointed to the board - to Somers immediately after the club's annual general meeting at Ibrox on Monday, but before the results of the shareholder vote were known.The proposal was also sent to the company that oversees Rangers' listing on the Alternative Investment Market and Rangers' lawyer, while the Scottish Football Association has also been informed.In their annual accounts, the Rangers board revealed the business needs at least £8m of fresh investment in January to continue trading for the next 12 months.Ashley is keen to raise his stake from 8.92% to 29.9% but that request, made on the behalf of the Newcastle United owner by new Rangers chief executive Derek Llambias, was rejected as it contravenes SFA ownership regulations.An offer from Dave King, a former Rangers director, also remains on the table.Attendances at Ibrox have been dwindling this seasonAt the AGM, a resolution allowing the directors to hold a share issue was passed.However another, which would have allowed new investors to buy all of the available shares without them being first offered to existing shareholders, was rejected.A non-shareholder can still underwrite the share issue or current shareholders can apply to purchase more shares than they are entitled to buy to maintain the size of their stake."We find it disturbing that resolution failed to gain approval," said a spokesman for the consortium."Everyone knows the company is in dire need of investment and yet shareholders represented on the board decided to vote against investment from new shareholders."Presumably they believed the SFA would clear the way for Mike Ashley to increase his holding, but we now know that this was not approved."The SFA would have been aware there is a credible alternative and we would like to make sure the fans are aware of that, too."The three men believe that, as existing shareholders, they can still secure a significant holding and insist the funding is in place."We are trying our best to do what is right for Rangers and the supporters," added the spokesman. "Why on earth would anyone not want a hugely successful businessman like Douglas Park involved?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) This is how it explained by a fan who understands these things. .Would love to see the grounds the board will use to turn this down. 40m extra shares would represent 32% of the total issued we'd go from 81m to around 121m. existing shareholders have the option to maintain their % - except Ashley who is barred by the SFA. Ashley by my reckoning will drop to 6.3% holding if all 40m new shares are issued. It'll cost Easdale and his proxy about £1.7m to maintain their holding %.... Laxey about £1.2m... Every £ they don't spend is an extra £ available to Park,Letham and Taylor to buy shares Edited December 27, 2014 by EddardStark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 More reasons why it might be rejected by the existing board for self interest reasons alone. This is from another poster "By my calculations, provided no-one else takes up on their first refusal.Letham, Taylor & Park (33.33% plus what they already hold)Easdale Bloc total 21,304,505 shares (would reduce to 17.4%)MASH 7,265,000 shares (would reduce to 5.94%)Which is why it'll be rejected." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibelieve!!! Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 This is how it explained by a fan who understands these things. .Would love to see the grounds the board will use to turn this down. 40m extra shares would represent 32% of the total issued we'd go from 81m to around 121m. existing shareholders have the option to maintain their % - except Ashley who is barred by the SFA. Ashley by my reckoning will drop to 6.3% holding if all 40m new shares are issued. It'll cost Easdale and his proxy about £1.7m to maintain their holding %.... Laxey about £1.2m... Every £ they don't spend is an extra £ available to Park,Letham and Taylor to buy shares But will Ashley not be allowed to maintain his current percentage? Therefore he would be allowed to buy more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 But will Ashley not be allowed to maintain his current percentage? Therefore he would be allowed to buy more. Yes he could but only up to the allowed %. It all about how serious this board are about raising the required capital in the share issue. This proposal is straightforward. £6.5m into the club. Easdales and others would have to fork out real cash to maintain their % stake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Farrington Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 All sounds so easy. You'd never think Ashley is a shark who has all their revenue streams tied up & has several million in loans to call in. Not to worry - motor moguls & wealthy Rangers fans will save the day ha ha ha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scunnered Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 Not long now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TartanJon Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 After the £6.5m investment where do Rangers from there ? Will these guys have the funds to throw large amounts of money at pretty average footballers ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.