What do we need to get back to the top?

[Smile 26,622]

3 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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. 

 

 

 

 

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.

[William McBeath 2,154]

31 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.

 

Fucksake BA I'll be sending Marge to fetch my rifle again.

His Rangers credentials better be water-tight because he has had a bad run of things. If it was someone else we'd be breathing right down the guys neck. What is it with bad track records, directors, and our club? No don't answer as we know why.

Surely the rest of them vouch for him? Don't see that we had a better option myself as that last lot did not even want to have our AGM in the country. They were ripping us off to fuck anyway and who knows were it would have ended.

Better this devil stumps up even if it is only securing our future before selling us on.

 

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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.

[Smile 26,622]

3 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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.

You are the one who stated it now prove it.

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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.

[Smile 26,622]

2 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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.

 

Show us your workings young squire.

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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?

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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 

[Smile 26,622]

Just now, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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?

 

He has no money to invest in Rangers if he has where is it. ?

[Smile 26,622]

3 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

I figured you couldn't prove it. You lost the argument. Have a good day 

So no fact and figures since yesterday another username awaits enjoy your selection box this Christmas.

[cushynumber 25,178]

 

6 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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.

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.

[William McBeath 2,154]

35 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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. 

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. 

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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.

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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. 

[cushynumber 25,178]

2 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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 out 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.

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....

[cushynumber 25,178]

Just now, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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. 

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.

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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?

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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?

[cushynumber 25,178]

Just now, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

And I'm telling you. If he did fuck all and contributed nothing. Would he be on thr board? Yes or no?

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? 

[cushynumber 25,178]

Just now, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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?

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

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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.

[Thermopylae 15,287]

Dare I say we need a manager who can make shrewd signings who do well for us and then we can sell on for a lot of money. The truth is I don't think rogers will be at breezeblock boulevard for as long as the tims believe and their next boss will be back to the deila days of papering over the cracks 

Bottom line is things can change very quickly in football and often in the most unexpected ways  ... that is what my 40 years watching it have taught me 

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

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.

[cushynumber 25,178]

3 minutes ago, TheBillyBoys1872 said:

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.

thats incorrect. "He's the only one with the cash. Its why he is the chairman and he's not even in thr country. If King goes then who steps in?"

Thats your first response to me in the topic when asked what makes DK "special".

 

 

Crowdfunding a £6.3 million loan with 6 others and buying shares from other shareholders is not investment and it certainly doesnt show he has cash.  Not even close. 

 

[TheBillyBoys1872 25]

8 minutes ago, cushynumber said:

thats incorrect. "He's the only one with the cash. Its why he is the chairman and he's not even in thr country. If King goes then who steps in?"

Thats your first response to me in the topic when asked what makes DK "special".

 

 

Crowdfunding a £6.3 million loan with 6 others and buying shares from other shareholders is not investment and it certainly doesnt show he has cash.  Not even close. 

 

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?