Jump to content

Dave kings 1m interest free loan


ianferguson

Recommended Posts

So either Wallace or King is lying?

Wallace has said the board have spoken to King, King says they have not it was sandy easdale he has spoken too but i remember sandy's interview a while back where he said he was on a separate board at the club , so two different boards is what this will turn out to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Wallace was quite categoric with KJ in the DR:

GW: The board has had a dialogue in recent weeks with Dave King. He has not been rebuffed by the board. He is not currently a shareholder. He has indicated he’d be an interested participant in a future equity raising at the appropriate point in time. Our shareholder base has also expressed willingness to invest in fresh equity.

Dave King has not come to the club with an offer, other than an interest in participating in a future equity.

KJ: Just to be clear, are you saying Dave King has not offered the club short-term funding?

GW: He has not done that, no. Dave is not a shareholder and he has not made the club any offer of financial assistance. That’s not a criticism of Dave King. I have not met him but as a board we have had some dialogue to try to understand his intentions because there has been a lot of talk about his interest in investing. There has been no other proposal made by him at all.

Very pointed questions by KJ. Either someone is at it, or the Sun is playing tabloid wars - Wallace give the DR an exclusive and they get miffed and come up with something to rubbish him

I read this yesterday and thought at the time Jackson was focusing on King a bit too much.

If he knew about Kings offer and upcoming statement then they look, as I thought at the time, a bit loaded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the Wallace interview and the piece in the sun it is apparent the Wallace and King have not been in direct contact and it's possible that the full extent of Kings offer was not passed on to Wallace. I think it would be in Wallace's best interests to contact King directly to find out what his position is and if someone on the board is withholding information from him which would be a major slap in the face for Wallace.

Correct. It is entirely possible that SE did not reveal the true extent of his conversation with DK to GW. That would mean that GW did not lie to KJ but it would make his position as chief executive untenable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine - so you want us to be owned by the likes of Blue Pitch, Margarita and Laxey for the next 10 years. Some success that will bring us!

You mean the folk that don't talk shite in the media and actually put their hands in their pockets?

I don't want to hear his mouth anymore, playing this drama out in the media is the last thing we all need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. It is entirely possible that SE did not reveal the true extent of his conversation with DK to GW. That would mean that GW did not lie to KJ but it would make his position as chief executive untenable.

:lol:

Run that one past us again. How can a discussion between 2 other parties that he has no knowledge of make his position untenable exactly ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

Run that one past us again. How can a discussion between 2 other parties that he has no knowledge of make his position untenable exactly ?

It doesnt make his position untenable, but it does certainly give an impression that he is being mislead by supposed allies.

Wallace really should be reaching out to a potential major investor to ensure that he is in control of the situation, not allowing the Easdales to stear the ship IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact is anyone like king or paul Murray can say what they like in the pishy tabloids. Wallace is bound by stock market rules by what he can and cant say. I actually wonder if any other club has a warped fan faction that thinks you must be a man of that club to run it.

I wonder if the ceo of harvey Nicholls was born wearing armani suits or not. Cos that will determine if he can be trusted or not

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone get the feeling that maybe if king was a shareholder the board would entertain him, but he not being a shareholder prevents this happening, and that the board don't want to go down the route of getting goodwill loans from NON investors, just incase king ends up in the shit again and brings the club into it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone get the feeling that maybe if king was a shareholder the board would entertain him, but he not being a shareholder prevents this happening, and that the board don't want to go down the route of getting goodwill loans from NON investors, just incase king ends up in the shit again and brings the club into it

The rebels are up in arms cos some unnamed shareholder didn't get a chance to give us a mystery interest free loan

They were up in arms cos the Easdales gave us an interest free loan

Now they are up in arms because a non shareholder didn't get a chance to give us an interest free loan

I wish the cunts would make up their minds

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found

×
×
  • Create New...