TheBillyBoys1872
-
Posts
209 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by TheBillyBoys1872
-
-
9 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
just for clarity - do you regard that as proof he has invested? over and above whats in our audited accounts? He is on the board therefore he has invested?
My point with him being on the board is if he didn't put money into the club the board would kick him of the board as he is doing fuck all and spends most of his time in South Africa. If you had a business and nominated a chairman to be chairman but he lived in South Africa and didn't bother his arse to be at Rangers full time, would you keep him on? Or get rid? You would get rid cause he is doing fuck all. But if he has out money or is putting money in then he would keep his seat as the club couldn't afford to get rid if he has the money. That's how i see it.
-
2 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
He has partly funded the £6.3 million loan along with 6 others and purchased 15% of the available shares, I'll give him that
So he has put money in? Yes? God ffs.
That's all i said he did. It's money we never had and he helped pay up for thr clubs losses. If we spend in January who is going to pay if we buy a player?
You just answered and proved my point.
-
3 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
This is the best summation to any argument i have ever heard - EVER.
And your the one denigrating bears as idiots that haven't been to school as well....
They clearly haven't ffs if they think a man can get on the board and be chairman without putting money in. So you're saying you could be the chairman and fly around the world whenever you want without putting any money in? Really?
Wow, do you really believe has hasn't put money in?
-
1 minute ago, cushynumber said:
you keep saying this - and all we are asking you to do is come up with some proof - any proof - because the audited accounts dont show it.
And I'm telling you. If he did fuck all and contributed nothing. Would he be on thr board? Yes or no?
-
14 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
I never said he hadnt put money in. I asked you to prove he had significantly invested and to prove your assertion he was the man to take us forward.
Heres another thing. In last years accounts we stated a £6.3 million loan was included - £5million of which was used to pay off SD. The facilities had been provided by existing lenders New Oasis Asset Limited (Dave King), Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor and by three new lenders, RIFC Director John Bennett and two additional Hong Kong based supporters, Barry Scott and Andy Ross.
That £6.3 Million is between 7 people. Again hardly conclusive proof DK is shelling out money left right and centre is it?
By the way this is the only evidence I can find in our annual accounts of any DK "investment" at all. Assuming he isnt giving backhanders out his pocket THATS IT.
Where did I say he put in significant sums of money? I said he's put money in. I can't give you an exact figure i don't know the board personally. But am sure he's put in millions. It mighy not be a lot to some but its money Rangers don't have as we're running at a loss. That's all i was saying. I'm not a King fan or any board member fan. I am a Rangers fan. A fan that wants us to succeed but not be put at risk like administration. I want us to grow our brand and business and spend wisely till we're in a position we can spend larger sums of moneu. But that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
-
17 minutes ago, William McBeath said:
I'm more or less of the same approach as you. I don't like the way King promised the earth but the last lots are lucky I don't really possess a rifle as it was like being in admin for years because of the way we were being run. Always wondering what embarrassment they would bring to the club next. We seem to be a lot better run now and more stable which is no small mercy. Not ideal but at least I don't wake up at 4am wondering what the fucks going to happen that day.
Never realised so many people on here were so sceptical of King. We'll need to be like this with everyone of them from now on in. Still amazes and depresses me some of the people who were able to just waltz into the most famous of all Scottish institutions. You just expect a society is able to safeguard such things.
I knew King didn't have his fans but people literally twisting the truth to support there argument. It's like they want us to fail. They're willing to put the club at risk so we can beat the tarriers. Half these idiots haven't been to school or any form of education. I've tried to explain why we can't spend 20 million and whatever huge sums of money being branded. It then gets turned into a Dave King argument. He may not be an angel but he's helped us.
People can't prove King hasn't put any money in just proves my point altogether.
-
1 minute ago, Smile said:
Show us your workings young squire.
I figured you couldn't prove it. You lost the argument. Have a good day
-
3 minutes ago, Smile said:
You are the one who stated it now prove it.
And you've stated he's put no money in. So prove he's put no money in. I'm waiting. If you can't prove he's not put money into Rangers then it means he has put money in. You think he'd be on thr board, flying back and forth when he liked from South Africa if he didn't have money? Surely you can't be that fucking stupid?
-
7 minutes ago, Smile said:
Show us your workings for the money he has invested. You don't like King but defend him constantly makes perfect sense.
I asked you for this yesterday when you said you had studied the Accounts.
All I'm asking for is the Transparency promised and the investment promised.
And I've said why we can't chuck money at it. If i knoe that don't you think King knows that now, now he knows what the fucks going on with Rangers.
I've told you repeatedly now. You're asking me how much King has put in. I can't give you a definitive answer but it was more than Ashley did. It is more than anyone else on this forum. He wouldn't be on the board, who comes and goes when he pleases if he wasn't putting money in. I'm done repeating myself to you.
-
3 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
oh my god back to this.
"He is the Chairman so must have money"
You are simply skirting round the questions i have raised and Im getting a bit annoyed because thats a few of your arguments that have been blown out the water and this is the retort.
- He didnt pay millions to the SA tax man.
- He hasnt actually put a lot of his money into rangers - his 15% shares were only £2.4 million and thats not investment
- Its on public record that we are supplying soft loans (equity for cash) - to cover our debts and keep the lights on - and not to DK but 3rd parties.
Your arguments are redundant and you dont have one shred of proof DK is investing in this club AT ALL other than say "he must have money".
I'll away and talk to posters who actually put up a coherent argument.
The fact is you don't have evidence he hasn't put money in. So its a flawed argument which you consider an argument. I've proved it.
Do you think a man who was nominated the chairman, doesn't need to be in the same county, comes.and goes when he pleases back to South Africa has no money or hasn't invested in Rangers? What sane person would allow King to be on the board then if he contributed nothing? Surely the board would have kicked him out if he has not invested.
Again, prove he hasn't put money in. I'll await your response if you can find any evidence. Which you won't.
-
3 minutes ago, Smile said:
You have stated it it's up to you to prove he has, even initially his shares bought from a private company so no actual money went to Rangers.
Can you make you mind up whether you like King or not it's simple defend him = Liking him.
I've told you. I couldn't give two fucks about King. But he is the man running our club. Who else would you suggest? Go ahead. And if he really is a liability as you say. Why not try and get him removed? Like protesting? Just a thought. Why don't you prove to all the Rangers support that Dave King doesn't have two pennies to rub together. Is using Rangers for whatever it is he's using us for. Go ahead. Cause if i believed that shite was the truth I'd be doing everything in my power to expose that cunt. You don't know anything about what Kings put in and until you do, you should just let it go.
-
2 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
You dont get it.
The point is I completely understand given our financial situation why we would not throw money at the CL for example and that we are loosing money. I have seen our accounts I do know what a P&L looks like.
However, the upshot is that DK's promises have amounted to very little. So he invested £20 million allegedly years back so what?
As i have shown in previous posts he wasnt throwing " millions" at the SA tax man and actually only paid about £2.4 million for his majority shareholding - which the club didnt get a cent of - so i dont class that as investment.
The point is what is DK actually putting in? it appears mostly to be money from 3rd parties via soft loans that is keeping the lights on, so what is DK actually contributing? if DK is actually shelling that money out of his own pocket then that would be one thing - but its not. Its soft loans from 3rd parties.
So I'll ask again - what exactly is it that DK is doing that is saving us?
He's obviously the leader of the group who are our board. He's the chairman so he must have the money. You actually think Paul Murray is the one with the money? Loooool.
So you think a man who has no money, comes and goes when he pleases back and forth to South Africa was nominated chairman of the board by other members all this and he isn't the cunt with the money?
-
4 minutes ago, Smile said:
What's he put in his initial money in shares to a private group then to own 15% of the club, Kings spent 10 million your heads puddled.
Quote me correctly.i said between 5 and 10 million. Prove to me he hasn't put in money at all.
-
9 minutes ago, Smile said:
What happened to the money he said he had and would invest? How do his Liverpool supporting kids feel about him robbing their piggy bank.
How much money has he invested so far himself?
Well, take into account last year losses this years losses. His shareholding and paying back Ashley loan. I know he didn't fork all that out hinself but hr must have spent at least over 5 to 10 million. But nobody knows.
-
8 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
Im saying he doesnt have the money he is making out he has - and if he has then he isn't spending it on Rangers.
Look, I'm not going to argue with you. I've just argued with at least 5 members trying to explain my point and they don't understand or don't want to understand because as a fan, you can't accept such things. I get that. But i am telling the truth in why money won't be thrown at Rangers until the business begins to grow and develop.
1.8 million on Garner is funds we can't afford since we're running at a loss. Where are we getting that money from? It doesn't matter if have money now. In a few months all the money will have run out till next season's season money comes through and the cycle starts up again. But before that thr board have to pay for the losses because there is no moneu left after March or April. Where are we getting that money from exactly if we run at a loss?
-
18 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:
He was chased before for not providing proof of funds. We can't get listed because of him, but neither does he want it, because of the transparency required to be so. He has no transparent or coherent plan for our future, just drip feeding loans to keep the lights on and of course eating up the asset at the same time in the proposed conversion. Now, does that not strike you in the least in being rather suspicious of someone's intentions? He's only a 41 count convicted crim ffs into the bargain, who at one time purported to be a CA?
If you actually think that all that is credible and good for us, get more tinfoil on ffs.
I never said it was good enough. But that's what we have running our club. Stop trying to claim I'm in favour of him. I'm not. I want the best for Rangers. He's the only cunt who's willing to put money in. It might not be a lot but its money we don't have currently.
Unless you can get us someone richer who is willing to take over then you really need to support the man because he's our only option. Until there is another option then why you complaining? We can't throw money at it ffs. It's to much of a gamble for anyone who has any business acumen. I'm done trying to explain to you and others.
-
Just now, Smile said:
So what happened to the money Promised.
Money is being spent. Money we currently don't have.
-
8 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
Having more money than me means he has enough to run rangers?
also this " he paid millions to the govt for tax evasion" well heres the thing King eventually reached an agreement with the South African High Court whereby he pleaded guilty to 41 criminal counts of contravening the South Africa Income Tax Act and agreed to pay a fine of 80,000 rand per criminal conviction or 3.28 million rand in total.
That 3.2 Million rand. Go and work out how much that is in sterling today. Go on.
Och I'll tell you cause the suspence is killing me - its equivalent to £191K at todays exchange rates.
So he has no money? That's what you're saying, right? Even when he put 20 million into Rangers in the past. But he has no money...... Okay then.
-
11 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:
How do you know it was his money?
How do you know its not his money? We can keep going round and round in circles. He's put 20 million into us before. He has businesses in South Africa. He paid millions to the South African government for his tax cases. He has money ffs.
-
8 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
Again, I dont jump to that conclusion at all. He has purchased the minimum amount of shares required at a time when they were rock bottom to get a majority shareholding - and then withdrew us from the stock market so that no one could gazump him. he has then used contacts to get a number of soft loans - not his money.
That doesnt strike me as a man swimming in money
How do you know how much he's put in? He put 20.million into us before. He paid the South African government millions for the tax cases he was involved. He's no angel but he does have money. Whether he has enough is a different question. He clearly has enough if he bought shares. I mean do you or any other fan on here have 15 percent of the club?
-
8 minutes ago, BonjourBonjour said:
What part of you need to speculate to accumulate do you not understand fudbaws ?
We need to invest to get back in CL where the big money is.
Canny wait for these wee bellends like @TheBillyBoys1872 to go back to school.
And I've said we need to spend. Just not the sums being branded about ya fucking spaz. What part of that didn't you understand? Its you that needs to go back to school and learn to read.
I've said we need to spend money at least 5 million, that's manageable. What you want is for us to go to far when the club is not ready for that expense yet. Learn business then come back to me.
-
7 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:
We are trying to compete with the scum, not the Milan clubs, Lazio, Roma and the like. Their league was not a two horse race and of course ours is now a one horse race. Every season we don't win the title, the ST sales will drop and that is both DCK's lifeblood and the Club's due to their underfunding. Can you image the dire straits we would be in, if we even dropped 10k in ST sales? That alone should alarm us.
If we're improving every year, why would the fans abandon their club? Would you abandon Rangers if didn't win the league next season?
You're asking a business that is making a loss already to make more losses based on a gamble of champions league football? Are you fucking high?
-
3 minutes ago, cushynumber said:
£20 million was years ago - in a different company even. Saying he is the only one with cash - well lets be honest so far is actions simply dont back that statement up.
I am aware we are making looses and I am not suggesting we simply throw £20 Million at MW, but at the moment all DK appears to be doing is knowing people that have some money and can supply some soft loans. I really dont think thats what the Rangers fans bought into when they supported his bid.
Suggesting he is the only one with cash therefore thats why he lives in SA and thats why he is chairman is ridiculous. He is also very far from being the only person who can run a company. He has bought the majority of shares, he has put in place a block that supports him and he withdrew us from the stock market so he couldnt be bumped. He is a clever manipulative businessman. I have serious reservations whether he is the messiah you are painting here.
Not once did i say he was the messiah. But that's what we have. He obviously has money or he wouldn't bother his arse with Rangers. I'm sure he could be getting on with his life without a business that makes no money. If he can make us turn a profit and sells his shares then good luck to him. As long as he leaves behind a strong Rangers, business and football wise then I'll be happy.
-
1 minute ago, Blue Avenger said:
20 mil that wasn't his as it turns out.
Really? How much does King have.... Give me a figure.
What do we need to get back to the top?
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
That's what a share issue is all about. He doesn't own the club. At least wait till the share issue and see how much we generate.
You're still failing to understand that the club needs to grow its income streams. No bank will touch us so we need those loans from the board and the others who put money in. The fact you've admitted King has put money into thr club backs up my point. The share issue will happen and we will see how much is invested. Is that fair?