Jump to content
Gandhi1872

Dave King Full Q&A

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, MattyBlue said:

Is this true? If so what the utter fuck ?

I have no issue with that at all.

Nobody wanted him sold at that point so to act like you did now is utter piss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, .Williamson. said:

I have no issue with that at all.

Nobody wanted him sold at that point so to act like you did now is utter piss

Lots of us would have sold him, would have to have been a  bid first for the chap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, backup said:

Lots of us would have sold him, would have to have been a  bid first for the chap. 

Away and take a flying focus to yirsel :wanker:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BridgeIsBlue said:

Away and take a flying focus to yirsel :wanker:

He certainly needs to, might engender some effort from the tubby little fellow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, backup said:

Lots of us would have sold him, would have to have been a  bid first for the chap. 

Bollocks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, .Williamson. said:

Bollocks 

Of course it is it couldn't be anything else, only if you hang on king's words and can't spot the glaring contradiction in them. People who believe in Santa and morelos offers need to get out more.

 

And, secondly, the manager made a decision not to sell him, it was completely up to the manager. He knew that we could have sold the player but for Graeme’s own targets (and) for what he wanted to do for the second half of the season ... if Morelos went out he couldn’t bring another player in. He said: “I would rather have the player. If you’re not putting me under pressure to get the money I would rather keep the player,” and we told him there was no pressure, you make a football decision.

That’s a huge decision to leave in the hands of Murty?

He didn’t have the responsibility of turning it down...it’s opportunity. Outside in it looked like a lot of money - from the inside out too - but the money in the bank didn’t help us. That’s what we said to our football manager. We couldn’t spend the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

A BBC journalist backed the story up :lol:

After first deriding it, the bbc :hmmm::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, backup said:

After first deriding it, the bbc :hmmm::lol:

That was because they phoned Guangzhou evergrande who weren't the team that made the offer ya fucking pecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can this Q&A be used to call for an EGM, It had a embargo on it until 11pm so he must have signed something legal to say it was his words and make the embargo happen. There are so many questions King needs to answer for shareholders about mismanagement.

"I’m in this unwanted situation because I tried to save the club".
From what? 
"This is not some third party corporate raid and I have had a ruling against me"
Imho, it is a third party corporate raid when all what King as done is combined. He was the protaginsist, leading boycotts and giving the press stories that damaged the Rangers brand, drove the share price down, led the concert party made their move when the share price was low, froze shareholders votes and broke city rules bringing the companies stock to a standstill until he complies.
"The offer is a technical thing that I have to do to comply".
 It's a punishment, which gives the current shareholders a chance to get back some of their money. 
"We have exchange control"
 Which trust fund do TOP have control of?
"I am not a UK resident...my business interests are not in the UK therefore I have to open bank accounts and that does take time".
King could have used Cantor Fitzgerald to escrow the money as he used them to buy his shares or the London bank account that posters mentioned in the debates about funding after DL asked 'that' question.
"We have now given the go-ahead for the rights issue, the share issue, to commence immediately".
 TOP won't like that, King is waving a red rag to a bull with that answer. 
"£6 million new cash and the balance converted to loans" "we are consciously and deliberately running at a loss, you’ve got to let the authorities know you can fund the loss". "I am not fussed about having shares, I will give loans". 
Deliberately running at a loss is a bad business model,  no shareholders will receive dividends, so how does King plan to attract investors? King can only fund the club with loan4shares up to the point of FFP rule. he then has to convert some of the loans for shares. rinse and repeat until he's got the shareholding he wants. King is not fulfilling his duty to all shareholders and the club by this business model. This is a money ball business model where he is acquiring as much of the undervalued stock as he can for as little money as he can, he will reap the rewards when the company is re-branded on the back of SG's brand the stock price rises. He'll then invite Chinese investors to the table. 
"I don’t actually know" 
The chairman should know why Murray and Scott resigned.
 "I think we have got enough supporters on the board so I would rather see independent business people"
 That's club1872 (2nd largest shareholder on the board) answer to having a rep on the board.
"There is not a single person participating in the share issue who is talking to me about the Takeover Panel"
Club 1872 asked about TOP in one of their recent Q&A's are they not participating in the share issue?
"I’m underpinning it". 
 For transparency which trust fund is going to underpin the money? 
"We want facilities - I’d love to get an overdraft facility".
 King was on SDM and CW's boards but seems to have learnt no lesson about debt. He promised the club would follow a self sustainable model when being voted in.
 "It’s our single greatest achievement. To me, the best thing we did was getting that Close facility". Was this the best deal King could get as part of his fuduciary duty, As he says he refused funding from the Hong Kong investors.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sweetheart said:

Can this Q&A be used to call for an EGM, It had a embargo on it until 11pm so he must have signed something legal to say it was his words and make the embargo happen. There are so many questions King needs to answer for shareholders about mismanagement.

"I’m in this unwanted situation because I tried to save the club".
From what? 
"This is not some third party corporate raid and I have had a ruling against me"
Imho, it is a third party corporate raid when all what King as done is combined. He was the protaginsist, leading boycotts and giving the press stories that damaged the Rangers brand, drove the share price down, led the concert party made their move when the share price was low, froze shareholders votes and broke city rules bringing the companies stock to a standstill until he complies.
"The offer is a technical thing that I have to do to comply".
 It's a punishment, which gives the current shareholders a chance to get back some of their money. 
"We have exchange control"
 Which trust fund do TOP have control of?
"I am not a UK resident...my business interests are not in the UK therefore I have to open bank accounts and that does take time".
King could have used Cantor Fitzgerald to escrow the money as he used them to buy his shares or the London bank account that posters mentioned in the debates about funding after DL asked 'that' question.
"We have now given the go-ahead for the rights issue, the share issue, to commence immediately".
 TOP won't like that, King is waving a red rag to a bull with that answer. 
"£6 million new cash and the balance converted to loans" "we are consciously and deliberately running at a loss, you’ve got to let the authorities know you can fund the loss". 
"I am not fussed about having shares, I will give loans". 
Deliberately running at a loss is a bad business model,  no shareholders will receive dividends, so how does King plan to attract investors? King can only fund the club with loan4shares up to the point of FFP rule. he then has to convert some of the loans for shares. rinse and repeat until he's got the shareholding he wants.

King is not fulfilling his duty to all shareholders and the club by this business model. This is a money ball business model where he is acquiring as much of the undervalued stock as he can for as little money as he can, he will reap the rewards when the company is re-branded on the back of SG's brand the stock price rises. He'll then invite Chinese investors to the table. 
"I don’t actually know" 
The chairman should know why Murray and Scott resigned.
 "I think we have got enough supporters on the board so I would rather see independent business people"
 That's club1872 (2nd largest shareholder on the board) answer to having a rep on the board.
"There is not a single person participating in the share issue who is talking to me about the Takeover Panel"
Club 1872 asked about TOP in one of their recent Q&A's are they not participating in the share issue?
"I’m underpinning it". 
 For transparency which trust fund is going to underpin the money? 
"We want facilities - I’d love to get an overdraft facility".
 King as sat on SDM and CW's boards but seems to have learnt no lesson about debt. He promised the club would follow a self sustainable model when being voted in.
 "It’s our single greatest achievement. To me, the best thing we did was getting that Close facility". Was this the best deal King could get as part of his fuduciary duty, As he says he refused funding from the Hong Kong investors.
 

:lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, .Williamson. said:

I have no issue with that at all.

Nobody wanted him sold at that point so to act like you did now is utter piss

Loads of us wanted to sell him :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had we sold him, there's a good chance we'd have threw away that money on making Martin and Goss permanent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, .Williamson. said:

I have no issue with that at all.

Nobody wanted him sold at that point so to act like you did now is utter piss

Are you fucking mental mate I wanted shot of the cunt as soon as i heard there was a chance.

Not even because i dont rate him, but because of the fee we paid and the supposed offer on the table, what a bit of business that would have been for 6/7 months of service.

 

And hes so fucking replaceable thats why its an outrage IMO that he wasnt let go, let alone giving GM the final say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ger_onimo said:

Loads of us wanted to sell him :confused:

My head is spinning at that comment also!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is not a chance in hell King would have allowed a temp manager to decide on a sellable asset let alone turn down the alleged £8 million. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

On 08/05/2018 at 22:07, MattyBlue said:

:lol: I picked that part out about Hong Kong in the first page, unbelievable.

How do you even begin to understand what goes on in DKs head 

It starts with one word.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, .Williamson. said:

I have no issue with that at all.

Nobody wanted him sold at that point so to act like you did now is utter piss

I think once the price went up the majority wanted him sold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smile said:

I think once the price went up the majority wanted him sold.

What is the morelos £ exchange rate these days, probably leave for an undisclosed fee or by mutual agreement !  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, backup said:

What is the morelos £ exchange rate these days, probably leave for an undisclosed fee or by mutual agreement !  

If we got 3 million for him I would say that's a good deal but I still think his old clubs due a percentage. 

Unless the Chinese deals real and there is a pre-arranged deal at the end of the season which I'm sceptical about given the close bros loan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Blue Avenger said:

Like Morelos was ever worth 10 mil. 10 fuckng bob mer like.

The manager decided to keep him, so we then go to wonga for a loan. 

No fucking wonder we are a laughing stock, believng absolute shite like that.

Backed up by the bbc no less.

Seriously plausible.

:rofl:

Aye and Osman Sow was worth 1 million, and Oscar 52 million and Tevez 71 million. They're known for paying over the odds for players.

If you genuinely believe we lied about the bid, then you're a complete moron in my eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/05/2018 at 15:51, BridgeIsBlue said:

A BBC journalist backed the story up :lol:

I would have preferred his agent to back the story up https://www.worldinmotion.com/  Some journalists live in fairy land 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

Some journalists live in fairy land 

Ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×