Dave King promised transparency at Rangers ... at the AGM he’s going to have to finally deliver it

[bennybongo 111]

17 minutes ago, The Dude said:

In what way does it do more harm than good?

"Despite heavily spending on reinforcements in the summer..." 

"While King has undoubtedly put money into the club..." 

Poor Dave has ploughed in the cash, and is a victim of bad luck and the mismanagement of others. 

[loyal 136]

I think the question most people would want too know. what criteria does the board use too pick a manager the board in my opinion has backed both warbs and Pedro but they have  made a huge dent in our financial state with really poor choice of players.it’s imperative that they get this appointment right .

I honestly believe if we can get a experienced solid manager in we could challenge.

just out of curiosity  watched forest the other night warburtons tactics are  so predicable 9 loses already he is just as fucking clueless with the same cavalier approach that eventually every team works out 

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, bennybongo said:

"Despite heavily spending on reinforcements in the summer..." 

"While King has undoubtedly put money into the club..." 

Poor Dave has ploughed in the cash, and is a victim of bad luck and the mismanagement of others. 

The first sentence is quickly followed by “the club seems to be without any sort of leadership whatsoever as they lurch from one shambles to another.” 

The second sentence you quoted literally continues “it seems nowhere near the £30-50m he mentioned previously.” That’s not blaming bad luck or anyone other than Dave King. 

The final sentence - “Let’s see if King suddenly decides to start delivering on at least one of his promises” - again doesn’t lay the blame anywhere other than Dave King and the board. There’s no suggestion it’s bad luck or anyone’s fault other than the board. 

 

[writingranger 1,425]

I don't understand the article. Dave has delivered transparency. You can see right through him.

[bennybongo 111]

44 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The first sentence is quickly followed by “the club seems to be without any sort of leadership whatsoever as they lurch from one shambles to another.” 

The second sentence you quoted literally continues “it seems nowhere near the £30-50m he mentioned previously.” That’s not blaming bad luck or anyone other than Dave King. 

The final sentence - “Let’s see if King suddenly decides to start delivering on at least one of his promises” - again doesn’t lay the blame anywhere other than Dave King and the board. There’s no suggestion it’s bad luck or anyone’s fault other than the board. 

 

The problem is one of opinion and perception. In my opinion Dave King has no real interest in Rangers; he just wants to make money. I think for some abstruse financial reason, it suits him to use Rangers as a vehicle for his capital. The perception you have given is probably along the lines of a reasonably well intentioned Dave, who has invested quite heavily - perhaps not 50 million, but still... there's nobody else pouring money in. 

How about, is Dave King a criminal charlatan who is realistically threatening to put Rangers back into administration through his bizarre attitude to business norms and the enforcement panels which oversee these? 

[Malvern 11,329]

2 hours ago, The Dude said:

He's got a real thing about the idea I'm a "junkie" because I smoke weed as an alternative to taking a shit-load of tablets for arthritis.  

People who had a thing about smoking weed really get on my tits, especially in cases when it is not used for recreational means but for support to medical conditions.

I don't smoke the stuff myself, can't really as I giggle too much like a wee girl and have to watch my epilepsy but fair play to anyone who needs to use it. I am no drugs advocate and never have been, some shit is hugely dangerous but weed is nothing that is worse than 1000's of drugs on the market legally.

[The Dude 20,026]

22 minutes ago, bennybongo said:

The problem is one of opinion and perception. In my opinion Dave King has no real interest in Rangers; he just wants to make money. I think for some abstruse financial reason, it suits him to use Rangers as a vehicle for his capital. The perception you have given is probably along the lines of a reasonably well intentioned Dave, who has invested quite heavily - perhaps not 50 million, but still... there's nobody else pouring money in. 

How about, is Dave King a criminal charlatan who is realistically threatening to put Rangers back into administration through his bizarre attitude to business norms and the enforcement panels which oversee these? 

You appear to one of a very small number to have got that impression from the blog. Most have seen it in the way it was intended - highlighting some of the board's failings and questioning those.

It's said a few times that King has made promises which he has yet to come close to fulfilling.

I completely disagree with the idea he's just here to make money. Scottish football isn't exactly the easiest place to make money and it's made even worse when you look at how much of a shit show we are. You'd probably have more chance of making money investing in Blockbuster video than you would Rangers just now. 

[The Dude 20,026]

29 minutes ago, Malvern said:

People who had a thing about smoking weed really get on my tits, especially in cases when it is not used for recreational means but for support to medical conditions.

I don't smoke the stuff myself, can't really as I giggle too much like a wee girl and have to watch my epilepsy but fair play to anyone who needs to use it. I am no drugs advocate and never have been, some shit is hugely dangerous but weed is nothing that is worse than 1000's of drugs on the market legally.

I done nearly a decade on codeine, tramadol and anti-inflammatories every day in life and got sick of it. I'm only 31 now and there's no danger I was spending the rest of my life banging down strong painkillers so went from smoking the odd joint for recreation to looking into the medical side of it all and what would help and what wouldn't etc. 

Even just going off the difference it's made to my standard of living, it infuriates me that I ended up with a couple of fines for possession.

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

27 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You appear to one of a very small number to have got that impression from the blog. Most have seen it in the way it was intended - highlighting some of the board's failings and questioning those.

It's said a few times that King has made promises which he has yet to come close to fulfilling.

I completely disagree with the idea he's just here to make money. Scottish football isn't exactly the easiest place to make money and it's made even worse when you look at how much of a shit show we are. You'd probably have more chance of making money investing in Blockbuster video than you would Rangers just now. 

So why is he here, and please don't say cos he loves the club, it's clear he doesn't. 

[Malvern 11,329]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

I done nearly a decade on codeine, tramadol and anti-inflammatories every day in life and got sick of it. I'm only 31 now and there's no danger I was spending the rest of my life banging down strong painkillers so went from smoking the odd joint for recreation to looking into the medical side of it all and what would help and what wouldn't etc. 

Even just going off the difference it's made to my standard of living, it infuriates me that I ended up with a couple of fines for possession.

Like I said mate, I have no probs with your decision to smoke it and fair play to you, some people find it a help and if it makes your life more comfortable run with it. Doubt there are many courts that who would give a shit these days and it really should be legalised to assure the quality but no doubt it would then get taxed.

It took the doctors 34 years (over your entire age) to diagnose my epilepsy and I am stuck on Keppra for my whole life but it works, if weed did better I would go on that tomorrow for sure and would take the problems that involves.

[Malvern 11,329]

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

So why is he here, and please don't say cos he loves the club, it's clear he doesn't. 

Dinky loves Liverpool more than us.

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

So why is he here, and please don't say cos he loves the club, it's clear he doesn't. 

Ego. I do think he is a Rangers fan and think that despite being a shambles as chairman he does want to see us do well - beyond the obvious financial rewards it could bring him but have always believed that his main motivation in coming back was to be the guy at the helm when Rangers were returned to their rightful place.

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

2 hours ago, loyal said:

I think the question most people would want too know. what criteria does the board use too pick a manager the board in my opinion has backed both warbs and Pedro but they have  made a huge dent in our financial state with really poor choice of players.it’s imperative that they get this appointment right .

I honestly believe if we can get a experienced solid manager in we could challenge.

just out of curiosity  watched forest the other night warburtons tactics are  so predicable 9 loses already he is just as fucking clueless with the same cavalier approach that eventually every team works out 

Enny menny minny moo. 

 

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

19 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Ego. I do think he is a Rangers fan and think that despite being a shambles as chairman he does want to see us do well - beyond the obvious financial rewards it could bring him but have always believed that his main motivation in coming back was to be the guy at the helm when Rangers were returned to their rightful place.

Loves us so much he comes to two games a season if your lucky. 

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Loves us so much he comes to two games a season if your lucky. 

I agree there. It's more about Dave King than it is about Rangers for him. There's still a certain gravitas that comes with being 'Rangers Chairman' even if we've had a parade of cowboys in the role in the last five years

[bennybongo 111]

11 hours ago, The Dude said:

You appear to one of a very small number to have got that impression from the blog. Most have seen it in the way it was intended - highlighting some of the board's failings and questioning those.

It's said a few times that King has made promises which he has yet to come close to fulfilling.

I completely disagree with the idea he's just here to make money. Scottish football isn't exactly the easiest place to make money and it's made even worse when you look at how much of a shit show we are. You'd probably have more chance of making money investing in Blockbuster video than you would Rangers just now. 

I don't want to be confrontational, as you seem like a decent guy, but let's explore your reasoning:

"There is no money to be made in Scottish football." This would seem obvious, but you fail to provide any theory at all regarding WHY, in that case, King is involved at all. 

Choice 1. Dave King loves Rangers. 

Choice 2. Dave King can use Rangers as a vehicle in which to place capital, for reasons best known to him. 

If (1) - fine, get behind him 100%. Even if he exaggerated, he has the club's best interests at heart, and there are apparently no major investors who want to take his place. 

If (2) - you should be launching an all out investigation into this dubious, murky criminal who will likely sink Rangers permanently. 

[The Dude 20,026]

56 minutes ago, bennybongo said:

I don't want to be confrontational, as you seem like a decent guy, but let's explore your reasoning:

"There is no money to be made in Scottish football." This would seem obvious, but you fail to provide any theory at all regarding WHY, in that case, King is involved at all. 

Choice 1. Dave King loves Rangers. 

Choice 2. Dave King can use Rangers as a vehicle in which to place capital, for reasons best known to him. 

If (1) - fine, get behind him 100%. Even if he exaggerated, he has the club's best interests at heart, and there are apparently no major investors who want to take his place. 

If (2) - you should be launching an all out investigation into this dubious, murky criminal who will likely sink Rangers permanently. 

I explained elsewhere in the thread why I think King is back. Ego and the adulation he thinks it would bring him by being the one who rode to the rescue and restored the club to it’s rightful place. 

Theres nothing like that in the article because it had nothing to do really with the article I was asked to write - questions I would like asked at the AGM. 

[bennybongo 111]

20 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I explained elsewhere in the thread why I think King is back. Ego and the adulation he thinks it would bring him by being the one who rode to the rescue and restored the club to it’s rightful place. 

Theres nothing like that in the article because it had nothing to do really with the article I was asked to write - questions I would like asked at the AGM. 

Ego and adulation? No, I'm not buying that at all. He's doing this for financial reasons. 

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, bennybongo said:

Ego and adulation? No, I'm not buying that at all. He's doing this for financial reasons. 

Based on? There’s little chance that he walks away with any return on his money. Including his original £20m that he lost, that would mean the club would need to have an incredible turnaround to allow him to walk away with over £30m for 15% of the club.

[Malvern 11,329]

6 minutes ago, bennybongo said:

Ego and adulation? No, I'm not buying that at all. He's doing this for financial reasons. 

The guy makes bad decisions all the time and I think in this one his motivation was to sell us on for a profit.

Personally I think he has made a right rip roaring cunt of it and people are waiting for the club to fall again and king to resign before they do anything. dinky doesn't have the best track record in business dealings, hence his fabled £20 Million.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Malvern said:

The guy makes bad decisions all the time and I think in this one his motivation was to sell us on for a profit.

Personally I think he has made a right rip roaring cunt of it and people are waiting for the club to fall again and king to resign before they do anything. dinky doesn't have the best track record in business dealings, hence his fabled £20 Million.

And that’s the thing given where we were when King and the huge spend required to simply get us back on a level-footing with celtic, the idea he’s only here for a profit doesn’t make any sense. 

Unless we somehow figure out how to consistently beat celtic on a much smaller budget - or someone else throws in tens of millions of pounds knowing they are never going to see it again - there is never going to be any profit. 

[Malvern 11,329]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

And that’s the thing given where we were when King and the huge spend required to simply get us back on a level-footing with celtic, the idea he’s only here for a profit doesn’t make any sense. 

Unless we somehow figure out how to consistently beat celtic on a much smaller budget - or someone else throws in tens of millions of pounds knowing they are never going to see it again - there is never going to be any profit. 

We were purchased for just over £5 Mil, he has invested the sum of fuck all that I know of but has loans all over the shop which is now "significant investment". Our management situation is a shambles and he sits in SA drinking beers in the sunshine with the lions.

we are not going to beat Ceptic with this board that is the end of it, they are too weak (the board, not ceptic). Even the fans are starting to see they have no backbone.

[bennybongo 111]

13 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Based on? There’s little chance that he walks away with any return on his money. Including his original £20m that he lost, that would mean the club would need to have an incredible turnaround to allow him to walk away with over £30m for 15% of the club.

Based on it is what business men do. Somehow King has an angle here, even the most credulous should see that. Your theory boils down to - he's throwing away a fortune with no hope of a return, not because he loves Rangers (which most people don't believe anyway), no, it is because he is a crackpot egomaniac. 

[bennybongo 111]

3 minutes ago, Malvern said:

We were purchased for just over £5 Mil, he has invested the sum of fuck all that I know of but has loans all over the shop which is now "significant investment". Our management situation is a shambles and he sits in SA drinking beers in the sunshine with the lions.

we are not going to beat Ceptic with this board that is the end of it, they are too weak (the board, not ceptic). Even the fans are starting to see they have no backbone.

Of course, ffs. And that's why I'm pissed off with the Dude's shite. Fine from some money grabbing parasite like Keith Jackson, but you'd expect a tad more from a freelance blogger who genuinely supports us. 

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, Malvern said:

We were purchased for just over £5 Mil, he has invested the sum of fuck all that I know of but has loans all over the shop which is now "significant investment". Our management situation is a shambles and he sits in SA drinking beers in the sunshine with the lions.

we are not going to beat Ceptic with this board that is the end of it, they are too weak (the board, not ceptic). Even the fans are starting to see they have no backbone.

 

And if he’s here for a profit he’d want that back plus the loans. Plus his original 20m apparently. So how does he make 15% of the club (because that’s all he owns) worth over £30m because it’s nowhere near it just now.

Has Roman Abramovich invested in Chelsea? Every last Ruble he has given them has been a loan (over £1.1billion worth)