[Larry-AV]

Post this, 'for the record'.

SFA and Ashley shareholding, 24/12/2014 : Rangers FC - Club Statement

The Board of Rangers Football Club are very disappointed with the SFA's decision and we will now consider all our options.

[TIN TIN]

El Car- don't think there will be a new share issue as the shareholders at the shambles of an AGM voted against- 55- 45 per cent. So,what now? You need to cut yer spending dramatically to try and live within your means, which has not been happening over the last couple of years when you guys seriously overspent getting out the lower leagues.

[El Car]

You've misunderstood. The company can still issue the shares; what the shareholders voted on was permission for the board to launch a share issue without offering the shares to existing shareholders first. The motion failed not because of a minority of disgruntled shareholders but because some of the significant shareholders don't want their holding diluted, but it's unlikely they'd be totally against the investment required to give their own current investment any value.

[Fredstersafool]

How many can Ashley buy?

[El Car]

Not very many I should think, but he's not the only person offering to give us cash. The problem isn't sourcing the finance, it's structuring it in a way that the existing shareholders are happy with.

[Fredstersafool]

Dave King offered £16m, turned down for £2m so yer chairman could keep his job,but it's all the fans fault.

[El Car]

Well firstly Somers didn't say anything at all about turning down King just so he could save his job. He mentioned in a private email that he didn't think he would stay in his role if King was in charge, but that's not actually the same thing. Being in a position of independence doesn't mean you're prohibited from having thoughts. I would hope he acted in the best interests of the company since he holds shares and doesn't take enough from the company in fees that he should be desperate to hold in to his position.

Secondly, Dave King didn't offer anything. He said he was representing a group of people (whom he wouldn't name) who had £16m to invest over a period of time, but that he couldn't demonstrate that they had even as little as the £1-2m the company needed to borrow at the time, only offering to put up the money once an agreement was in place to secure him control of the company and its assets. One of his most public supporters is Paul Murray, a man whose attempted takeover of the club while in administration involved using the club's own future income to fund his takeover ie. the Craig Whyte strategy. Why do you think that would have been a sound business decision to go along with in any way, Fred, especially when the alternative was an interest free loan from an existing shareholder who met the due diligence requirements?

Thirdly, there's nothing to stop King investing if a share issue goes ahead and it's not taken up entirely by existing shareholders. There's never been anything stopping him purchasing shares from existing shareholders, nor was there anything preventing him investing in the initial flotation. He has demonstrated a singular unwillingness to part with cash for a stake in the club, but there are always opportunities for him to do so, and to buy his way to control if he wants to. He could still offer a loan now if he's able to demonstrate there's any money available, or to name the people who would be putting that money up. Think he'll do any of that?

Finally, Dave King is largely responsible for the boycott, as he spearheaded the public movement and set up a phony 'buy the club' trust fund to make some of the more gullible boycotters think they could somehow withhold money from the board but still see it help the club. The loan would never have been necessary if the fans had been buying tickets and merchandise in line with previous years. That's a simple economic truth. It's been known for a long time that we were likely to run out of money and need new funding for the second half of this season, and without the boycott we'd have been on target for that.

So Dave King helped engineer the shortfall, and then 'offered' a loan to cover that shortfall - a loan which was to be used as leverage to force the board to issue him with a controlling stake in the company, and you think that would have all been fine and dandy?

[Fredstersafool]

Pish he sold yer club for himself it's in black and white.

I think there's plenty stopping him i.e Ashley.

He's quite right too your club is being eaten from the inside out and the only way to oust them rot is by using yer feet,ok it's no ideal but you canny be happy wi things how they are now surely??

[Larry-AV]

Fred,

Did you read El Car's post, number 377 ?
If not, I suggest you do, as it gives a comprehensive summary of the financial situation at Rangers.

[Fredstersafool]

So Somers never said in an e-mail he feared he would be booted out??

---

And did he or did he not engineer the best deal for HIMSELF NOT THE CLUB??