MrMccoist 204 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Two chances.Two chances.I know mate, i backed PM etc, and they lost , time to accept GW needs some time. Jesus, he's about a quarter in to a big review and already the req's have reared their head again.Like McColl, DK should either invest, or shut up. I doubt their ego will allow them to do it, but if they are true rangers men, they would allow GW to get on with it for the greater good.Highly doubt this will happen tho Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Why should he be "rewarded" You change your opinions like the weather on such matters.King wants to invest according to you...so why not give the money to Rangers with stipulations on where it can and cannot be spent?My opinion on Boardroom matters has not changed since the crisis began!There is no way that DK (or any investor, for that matter) would invest £20m without getting an appropriate number of shares in return. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I know mate, i backed PM etc, and they lost , time to accept GW needs some time. Jesus, he's about a quarter in to a big review and already the req's have reared their head again.Like McColl, DK should either invest, or shut up. I doubt their ego will allow them to do it, but if they are true rangers men, they would allow GW to get on with it for the greater good.Highly doubt this will happen tho DK is desperate to invest but the existing shareholders do not want his money! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Smails 13 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 wallace is 1 month into a 120 day process, how about dk and the rst give him some time, then wait till commenting furtherI'm an impatient fan and actually don't mind Wallace being put under pressure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 so he is going to buy a majority stake then?No. He wants to invest in a new share issue and, depending on the amount, gain a controlling interest that way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hubbard 280 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 King is hoping to get the club for nothing that way he recoups most of the £20 million the boy David stitched him up for.That is perfectly acceptable as tax specialist dave is a "real Rangers man".quite a disgraceful comment. The sort of thing being peddled on tim websitesI'm going to be up front here. I think you're a plant by the board.........if you tell me I'm wrong then I'll accept your word for it Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cushynumber 25,178 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I think we should cut and then invest and then cut then invest and then cut then invest and then cut then invest because it will even itself out in the long run.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 My opinion on Boardroom matters has not changed since the crisis began!There is no way that DK (or any investor, for that matter) would invest £20m without getting an appropriate number of shares in return.For him to get a controlling stake without buying out the current stakeholders just wont happen.There is no way that the current batch of investors will watch DK come in and take a whole share issue to himself, and seriously diluting their sareholding. IMO they will invest first, then DK can either buy, or not buy anything that is left. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehost 11,061 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 No. He wants to invest in a new share issue and, depending on the amount, gain a controlling interest that way.If I were him I'd just buy it now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willygers4life 1,031 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 DK is desperate to invest but the existing shareholders do not want his money!Does Dave king love the club, if he does then why should shares matter to him, why doesn't he buy ally's shares off him. If the club really mattered to Dave king he would give the club money with stipulations as already been mentioned and receive token gesture, only doing it to get rewarding is poor showing from a rangers man IMO. Even give the club it as a loan I turn for shares to be released to him Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 For him to get a controlling stake without buying out the current stakeholders just wont happen.There is no way that the current batch of investors will watch DK come in and take a whole share issue to himself, and seriously diluting their sareholding. IMO they will invest first, then DK can either buy, or not buy anything that is left.There is no prospect of any more money coming from the existing institutional shareholders. They will all agree to a new share issue when the cash runs out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willygers4life 1,031 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 There is no prospect of any more money coming from the existing institutional shareholders. They will all agree to a new share issue when the cash runs out.Any shred of evidence to say that is no prospect of more money from the investors Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 quite a disgraceful comment. The sort of thing being peddled on tim websitesI'm going to be up front here. I think you're a plant by the board.........if you tell me I'm wrong then I'll accept your word for itI am cut to the first big red hunner in my wallet..... lol.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Does Dave king love the club, if he does then why should shares matter to him, why doesn't he buy ally's shares off him. If the club really mattered to Dave king he would give the club money with stipulations as already been mentioned and receive token gesture, only doing it to get rewarding is poor showing from a rangers man IMO. Even give the club it as a loan I turn for shares to be released to himI see. So the supposed saviours of our club can all get millions of shares at 1p each, but if you happen to be a wealthy Rangers supporter, you're expected to gift millions of pounds to the club and get no shares in return. Sounds fair to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willygers4life 1,031 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I see. So the supposed saviours of our club can all get millions of shares at 1p each, but if you happen to be a wealthy Rangers supporter, you're expected to gift millions of pounds to the club and get no shares in return. Sounds fair to me.We'll did you read it all or just little bits, I also said he could give the money as a loan and convert the money owed into shares. But since your quick to say the the current board ain't got a chance of investment, why is that, and you still seem to be smarting that the true rangers men never got into the boardroom, why the desperation for Dave king Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hubbard 280 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 There is no prospect of any more money coming from the existing institutional shareholders. They will all agree to a new share issue when the cash runs out.that's what will happen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Any shred of evidence to say that is no prospect of more money from the investors1. Institutional investors whose shares were worth 90p a year ago and 27p now tend not to make the same mistake twice.2. If there were any mugs around who were willing to throw more money at the present Board, why did Wallace have to ask the players to take a 15% pay cut?3. If Wallace is so sure about the financial health of the club, why's he not bought any shares himself? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I see. So the supposed saviours of our club can all get millions of shares at 1p each, but if you happen to be a wealthy Rangers supporter, you're expected to gift millions of pounds to the club and get no shares in return. Sounds fair to me.The guys who got the 1p each were the ones who clubbed in to put the £8m up front, apart from Ally.If King had put £8m up front then he could have done likewise and 100% owned the club. Why didnt he ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedart1952 1,364 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 The Clowns of the RST and the Mhedia are a laugh a minute. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 The guys who got the 1p each were the ones who clubbed in to put the £8m up front, apart from Ally.If King had put £8m up front then he could have done likewise and 100% owned the club. Why didnt he ?No kissing but that sums it up succinctly, partial assets of his had been unfrozen at the time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 The guys who got the 1p each were the ones who clubbed in to put the £8m up front, apart from Ally.If King had put £8m up front then he could have done likewise and 100% owned the club. Why didnt he ?1. DK had his assets frozen at the time by the RSA government.2. D&P did not give anybody else the opportunity to bid for the assets of the liquidated company. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willygers4life 1,031 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 1. Institutional investors whose shares were worth 90p a year ago and 27p now tend not to make the same mistake twice.2. If there were any mugs around who were willing to throw more money at the present Board, why did Wallace have to ask the players to take a 15% pay cut?3. If Wallace is so sure about the financial health of the club, why's he not bought any shares himself?Wallace never actually asked the players to take a pay cut, he put a preposition to see of they would consider it, 2 different things, also it is part of cost cutting, Wallace light not have bought shares but creighton has bought shares are you trying to say cause Wallace ain't bought shares then the club is heading to admin. Why the constant shout for Dave king exactly, how wold you feel if current investors but up all the shares at the next share offering, would you still be shouting that they all crooks and wrong uns, and that the club is in the wrong hands Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 There is no prospect of any more money coming from the existing institutional shareholders. They will all agree to a new share issue when the cash runs out.How could you possibly know this?Laxley have already said they are willing to reinvest more IIRC.and like I said, I think the current investors will be given first chance to buy more shares and protect their shareholding. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willygers4life 1,031 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 1. DK had his assets frozen at the time by the RSA government.2. D&P did not give anybody else the opportunity to bid for the assets of the liquidated company.Point 2 who would have outbid greens lot Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson's cat 744 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Wallace never actually asked the players to take a pay cut, he put a preposition to see of they would consider it, 2 different things, also it is part of cost cutting, Wallace light not have bought shares but creighton has bought shares are you trying to say cause Wallace ain't bought shares then the club is heading to admin. Why the constant shout for Dave king exactly, how wold you feel if current investors but up all the shares at the next share offering, would you still be shouting that they all crooks and wrong uns, and that the club is in the wrong handsI will not rest until a majority of the shares are owned by people who actually support the club. We will never make any progress as long as we're just another tradeable commodity for the speculators. Quote Link to post 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.