king statement

[SteveJ 743]

Timing is everything, the loan is hardly a huge one. Seems King wants a new share issue yesterday, the board probably aren't ready.

Timing is everything, you are right.

I asked for an opinion from one I respect on here, earlier. That was related to what would have happened to Rangers if Ahmad had won his bank fund freeze plea yesterday - had we not had enough funds to cover it. The reason for that query is all about the timing of this loan.

[simplythebest 11,453]

Timing is everything, you are right.

I asked for an opinion from one I respect on here, earlier. That was related to what would have happened to Rangers if Ahmad had won his bank fund freeze plea yesterday - had we not had enough funds to cover it. The reason for that query is all about the timing of this loan.

I'd think the club would have been aware Ahmad had no case about us trading insolvently, because we aren't.

[Big Al 55 9,248]

What are your thoughts on it? Why would a board not consider this an option, and instead take a heavy weighted loan from an existing shareholder? Why would that existing shareholder make that loan so heavily weighted in their favour?

It just does not sit right with me.

I don't think the loan is OTT to be honest, a company I worked with was owned by a hedge fund and charged us 25% interest for a £10m loan.

I've no idea why they'd be so against a new share issue, other than diluting their shareholding which is already worth far less than initially invested. Laxey are a bit if a worry, they have previous for using a relatively small shareholding to dictate to boards.

[SteveJ 743]

I'd think the club would have been aware Ahmad had no case about us trading insolvently, because we aren't.

The judge mentioned the loan we just received as a reason why we are not running insolvent and why he threw out his plea. Again, my query on what could have happened if we had not had those funds injected, stands.

[bawsburst 1,381]

There wasn't before this morning when he had his u turn

He is up to something but people can't, or don't want to see it

This is not about £1.5 million in loans

That was just the trigger for them to make their move as they didn't dare wait for the interims and the 120 day review in case it was favourable news

Just to refresh what Judge Southwood said;

Southwood said the court had seen King testify for four days and “are unanimous in finding that he is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is support by documents and other objective evidence”.

“It was remarkable that King showed no sign of embarrassment or any emotion when he conceded that he had lied to the (Sars) commissioner in a number of his income tax returns. In our assessment, he is a glib and shameless liar.”

Excellent character reference for those jumping into bed with king.

[gogzy 31,195]

If he does that Gogzy there will be no way back. We might not have a league to play in, or be in the wilderness for a long, long time.

it wont be a liquidation scenario though mate so there would be no license issues like last time.

although we would most likely get a ridiculois points deduction.

the club itself would suffer though as would the fans.

[simplythebest 11,453]

The judge mentioned the loan we just received as a reason why we are not running insolvent and why he threw out his plea. Again, my query on what could have happened if we had not had those funds injected, stands.

I don't see any reason why it would have affected things greatly, albeit it wouldn't have been ideal. Not like he was going to get millions frozen

[SteveJ 743]

I don't see any reason why it would have affected things greatly, albeit it wouldn't have been ideal. Not like he was going to get millions frozen

What did we have in the bank before the £1.5m?

Considering we have three active months remaining where outgoings will match every other month of a season, before settling slightly with the lack of travel, hotels, etc. - we may be spending £3m until June 1st.

So if we only had £1.5m in the bank and Ahmad was asking for £750,000 to be frozen (obviously to include fee's), the judge could have been right to agree and that would have been a PR disaster.

[bawsburst 1,381]

I don't see any reason why it would have affected things greatly, albeit it wouldn't have been ideal. Not like he was going to get millions frozen

What Lord Tyre really said;

But Lord Tyre rejected the motion for arrestment following an opposed hearing.

The judge said he was satisfied that a case at first sight had been made out based on a contractual term, a letter from former chief executive Charles Green and an acknowledgement that some work had been done.

But he added: "I readily acknowledge there is a great deal to argue about at the proof."

The judge said that he was not satisfied that there was a real and substantial risk that enforcement of any court order if Ahmad succeeded in his claim would be prejudiced by insolvency.

Lord Tyre said that the finances of a company such as Rangers were cyclical and there is a dip at this time.

But he found no clear evidence in what had been placed before him that there has been a deterioration in the position since June beyond any cyclical effect.

The judge said, he would not regard it as reasonable in all the circumstances to grant a warrant at a time when Rangers has received a pounds 1.5 million working capital injection to take a third of that out of circulation.

No mention of the loan being why we were still solvent, and saying he saw no reason to remove a third of it from circulation, somewhat different to the spinners slant.

[Reformation Bear 6,453]

My first reaction to the DK statement is it is aimed at fundamentally undermining the Board. So much for 120 days to deliver a review that people - all Rangers people - could judge the merits of and take a view on the foundation it would lay for taking us back to the top (acknowledging that further significant investment would be needed from whatever sources in due course). DK patience seems to have run out and with it any implicit support of the Board. So anarchy it is then. We're getting used to it. Anarchy by media statement aimed at undermining the Board with the specific aim of starving them out. Timing was everything - as it always is - make the statement the day after a win that takes the Club to within 3 / 4 wins of promotion so its all effectively in the bag and the real battles can begin again for control of the Club. Anarchy and commercial piracy. Rather than make a bid to win control his preference - like the Reqs - is to gain control by Dick Turpin methods - hand over your rights as execs and shareholders at the point of the commercial gun of starvation of ST funds. Well, lets see what the Board response is. For a response there must be. So much for football. It used to be about football once upon a time. My mate gave up his ST this week after the awful performance last Saturday (sent it back to Wallace). At least it was for football performance reasons (whether or not people agree with him is another matter but at least it was because of what he saw on the pitch over the last few seasons and not for Board stuff). They thought the Boardroom anarchy stuff was all over - it isn't now.

[stu43rigger 327]

It would cost DK at least £30 million to effect a successful takeover. Would you not prefer him to give all that money to the club in a new share issue?

and what happens when the easdales and laxey have bought all the new shares and there is none left for King to buy??

You do realise the existing shareholders get first offer right

[gogzy 31,195]

and what happens when the easdales and laxey have bought all the new shares and there is none left for King to buy??

You do realise the existing shareholders get first offer right

IIRC they wont get the chance to buy all the shares. Only enough to protect their shareholding. the rest goes on open sale.

I think.

[Big Al 55 9,248]

and what happens when the easdales and laxey have bought all the new shares and there is none left for King to buy??

You do realise the existing shareholders get first offer right

Probably why they seem to be adverse to the idea.

[simplythebest 11,453]

What did we have in the bank before the £1.5m?

Considering we have three active months remaining where outgoings will match every other month of a season, before settling slightly with the lack of travel, hotels, etc. - we may be spending £3m until June 1st.

So if we only had £1.5m in the bank and Ahmad was asking for £750,000 to be frozen (obviously to include fee's), the judge could have been right to agree and that would have been a PR disaster.

That's assuming that the loan means we're out of cash though, I don't believe that.

[SteveJ 743]

What Lord Tyre really said;

But Lord Tyre rejected the motion for arrestment following an opposed hearing.

The judge said he was satisfied that a case at first sight had been made out based on a contractual term, a letter from former chief executive Charles Green and an acknowledgement that some work had been done.

But he added: "I readily acknowledge there is a great deal to argue about at the proof."

The judge said that he was not satisfied that there was a real and substantial risk that enforcement of any court order if Ahmad succeeded in his claim would be prejudiced by insolvency.

Lord Tyre said that the finances of a company such as Rangers were cyclical and there is a dip at this time.

But he found no clear evidence in what had been placed before him that there has been a deterioration in the position since June beyond any cyclical effect.

The judge said, he would not regard it as reasonable in all the circumstances to grant a warrant at a time when Rangers has received a pounds 1.5 million working capital injection to take a third of that out of circulation.

No mention of the loan being why we were still solvent, and saying he saw no reason to remove a third of it from circulation, somewhat different to the spinners slant.

'Spinners slant'?

This is a forum for debate and you have the ignorance to join it but look the other way to the other party and talk as if they are not there. What a sad twat.

I am not spinning anything, I stated facts. The judge added that loan mention within his reasoning for throwing the plea out of court.

Also, Ahmad was seeking £750k according to reports only yesterday, so again, not my spin.

Sorry to dampen your theory.

"Former Director Imran Ahmad looking for £750k to be frozen tomorrow as he claims Rangers is trading insolvently."

More info:

Lawyers for Rangers' former commercial director, Imran Ahmad, will on Tuesday ask a judge to arrest funds of £750,000 as their legal battle continues.

Ahmad's lawyers will argue that the Rangers Football Club Ltd is trading insolvently and would be unable to pay if he won his claim against them.

The man who arrived at Ibrox along with former chief executive Charles Green initially intended to pursue £3.4m.

He claims he is owed at least £500,000 in unpaid bonuses.

The case will be heard by Lord Tyre at the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Tuesday morning.

It emerged earlier this month that Ahmad's lawyers wished to call Green as a witness, something Rangers are reluctant to see happen.

Rangers currently do not have their financial woes to seek and announced on Monday that they had secured loans totalling £1.5m to help them meet cashflow requirements for the remainder of the season.

Players also refused to accept a 15% pay cut proposal as the Rangers chief executive Graham Wallace seeks to make savings.

[stu43rigger 327]

I can give you the answer right now, "Season tickets will be sold under the auspices, terms and conditions of the the club/PLC not of anyone else or under their blackmailing conditions or threats"

Something else to think about, Laxey if they can get enough support and feel that their investment is threatened wouldn't think twice about padlocking the gates and selling for houses supermarkets, or any development that covered their investment and more, think on wreckers you may accomplish your objective a legacy to be proud of....who helped kill The Rangers..

That is a load of nonsense, the main stand at Ibrox is a category b listed building and cannot be altered in such ways, plus laxey don't have that type of power at Ibrox to do such a thing

Plus theres plenty of abandoned warehouses and open land around that area which any property developer would get much cheaper than Ibrox

[SteveJ 743]

That's assuming that the loan means we're out of cash though, I don't believe that.

So why did we just risk £5m in resources, if we don't need the money. Surely you are not joining the camp that think Wallace took the loan to setup some scouting scheme or attract future business, are you?

Whatever the bank balance, we needed that £1.5m badly or we would have taken the £500k interest free loan from Sandy Easdale on its own.

[SteveJ 743]

That is a load of nonsense, the main stand at Ibrox is a category b listed building and cannot be altered in such ways, plus laxey don't have that type of power at Ibrox to do such a thing

Plus theres plenty of abandoned warehouses and open land around that area which any property developer would get much cheaper than Ibrox

Builders can get around a lot of land rulings. Building apartments with the main stand fascia intact would be one proposition.

[stu43rigger 327]

IIRC they wont get the chance to buy all the shares. Only enough to protect their shareholding. the rest goes on open sale.

I think.

what if one or both of them decides to underwrite the share issue

[blue No11 235]

Good summary of the thread.

A sad footnote is that it has descended into Bear v Bear again (with the odd agent provocateur mixing it to vile effect).

Knock of the hefty abuse guys... I like a laugh and have the occasional bit of needle with some guys on here (you know who you are) but one thing I could never argue with them about is their absolute passion and love for Rangers. So let's hope there are no casualties of war tonight as we aspire to tear each other to cyber-shreds, post by post.

I do not like the emotive language that Dave King has chosen in the statement; not one bit. But I do not trust and have no great love for some of the current board either. To coin a phrase, often used by us about players, the Brothers Easdale are not 'Rangers Class.'

Like any Rangers fan, because of the past couple of years, I wield a shield of scepticism... and it is a heavy shield. Sometimes it can be a weary burden. We all want the same thing... so if we can have these differences of opinion and still remain brothers with the same ultimate aim, then perhaps we can move forward, even a little, as a fanbase.

This trend I see on here of wishing (almost willing) someone to be wrong about these huge issues just to point-score is starting to become pathetic. The very fabric of our great club hangs by these issues. So, let's keep the raging, flaming pseudo-telekinesis by keyboard at a minimum.

To wish bad karma on a fellow fan is to wish heartache upon yourself.

Stop it. It's stupid.

Hear Hear.... There not Rangers class lol. Its sadly true though.

[gogzy 31,195]

what if one or both of them decides to underwrite the share issue

had not thought of that.

[bawsburst 1,381]

The judge mentioned the loan we just received as a reason why we are not running insolvent and why he threw out his plea. Again, my query on what could have happened if we had not had those funds injected, stands.

'Spinners slant'?

This is a forum for debate and you have the ignorance to join it but look the other way to the other party and talk as if they are not there. What a sad twat.

I am not spinning anything, I stated facts. The judge added that loan mention within his reasoning for throwing the plea out of court.

Also, Ahmad was seeking £750k according to reports only yesterday, so again, not my spin.

Sorry to dampen your theory.

Not spinning the Law Lord never inferred that at all you spun it.

That is a load of nonsense, the main stand at Ibrox is a category b listed building and cannot be altered in such ways, plus laxey don't have that type of power at Ibrox to do such a thing

Plus theres plenty of abandoned warehouses and open land around that area which any property developer would get much cheaper than Ibrox

Highbury is listed, nice flats, the school in front of the girodome was listed, nice pile of rubble.

[stu43rigger 327]

Builders can get around a lot of land rulings. Building apartments with the main stand fascia intact would be one proposition.

it's a lot of hassle getting consent from the local authority for it though, dont believe any property developer worth his salt would consider it given other options available in the local area

[SteveJ 743]

what if one or both of them decides to underwrite the share issue

If they underwrite the shares, they only get them if nobody else purchases them and it must be made clear that they are doing so. If we had people wanting to buy up a large amount, then they would still do so and the person who guaranteed the underwrite would not have to buy them.

[Carson's cat 744]

Builders can get around a lot of land rulings. Building apartments with the main stand fascia intact would be one proposition.

Fortunately for us, the cost of converting the Main Stand into apartments would greatly exceed the the likely sale prices of these apartments. With all due respect to the people who live there just now, Ibrox is hardly Mayfair. In short, Bawburst's threat (although no doubt considered by Laxey and others) is likely to be an empty one.