Rangers are Rocking; Scottys Financial insight inside. - Page 157 - Football related - Discussion of non TA football - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Rangers are Rocking; Scottys Financial insight inside.


Speirs  

64 members have voted

  1. 1. Was Speirs talking the truth or lying

    • Yes
      54
    • No
      10

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

King has made himself out to be the saviour and some Rangers fans are lapping it up much like they did with whyte and then green.

A 'where were you moment' ffs.

Hearts went about everything in the correct way after their troubles. It's a total circus with Rangers though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said they're in "duck and cover mode" and are " "tidying" " up.

Look at my post. That's my opinion and I actually said "I suspect they are in full duck and cover". Subtle yet important difference from your misquoting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"King eventually reached an agreement with the South African High Court whereby he pled guilty to 41 criminal counts of contravening the South Africa Income Tax Act and agreed to pay a fine of 80,000 Rand per criminal conviction or 3.28 million Rand in total."

Fair enough. I couldn't remember if he had managed to avoid any actual conviction or not. Hence my last minute caveat of I believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

King has made himself out to be the saviour and some Rangers fans are lapping it up much like they did with whyte and then green.

A 'where were you moment' ffs.

Hearts went about everything in the correct way after their troubles. It's a total circus with Rangers though.

Has King made himself out to be a saviour? Don't get me wrong I don't necessarily trust him but he can't work alone with such a small shareholding. He has to have others to actually run the club.

Are they all in collusion? Seems highly unlikely to me.

Also King and the 3 Bears are the only people with anything resembling a plan. The current board have lost all of the fans and the corporate sponsorships would have followed. They were turning Ibrox into a morgue.

The Rangers fans joy is around getting shot of the current diddies that have done nothing positive rather than in King being "The Saviour" you are trumpeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

King has made himself out to be the saviour and some Rangers fans are lapping it up much like they did with whyte and then green.

That's not really true though is it? I mean, he's actively encouraged anyone who has a like minded vision for the club to join him and encouraged fan ownership aswell. Not exactly like the one man saviour picture you are trying to paint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, the Rangers fans (I'd say the majority) want a Sugar Daddy to bring the good old days back. King ticks all the boxes - minted, Rangers diehard, lost money before & said he'll do it again, said he wants to stop Celtic, etc.

It's not difficult to understand & to be fair, I'd be the same if I was a bear.

this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, the Rangers fans (I'd say the majority) want a Sugar Daddy to bring the good old days back. King ticks all the boxes - minted, Rangers diehard, lost money before & said he'll do it again, said he wants to stop Celtic, etc.

It's not difficult to understand & to be fair, I'd be the same if I was a bear.

Pretty much bang on the money.

It's taken their club nearly dying again for at least some of them to wake up m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much bang on the money.

It's taken their club nearly dying again for at least some of them to wake up m

Not really. Most Rangers fans realise no one is going to play sugar daddy. That and we've been burned a couple of times by that approach already.

Most fans now seem keen on at least partial fan ownership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point me in the direction of a post where any Rangers fan on this board has ever mentioned about him being a "good Rangers man". It's getting really blinking tiresome.

ing, it's getting really ing tiresome!

This. The posting style of many on here appears to be putting words in mouth, snide childish comments, misrepresenting other peoples posts, hyperbole and exaggerated and out of context comparisons. I think there must be something about rangers that prevents people from having a reasonable discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point me in the direction of a post where any Rangers fan on this board has ever mentioned about him being a "good Rangers man". It's getting really blinking tiresome.

ing, it's getting really ing tiresome!

I'm sure TartanJon did but it's a bit much to trawl back through 250-odd pages to find it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

apologies if i missed it,

what is Kings financial plan? Is he going to be blindly pumping in his own money or does he have a plan to raise funds?

As I see it if/when King gets control, Rangers are £10M in debt (to Ashley) plus they are losing close to £1M a month.

Has King detailed his financial restructuring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qn: Given the £10m due to Mr Ashley following the club drawing down the second tranche of £5m, and the onerous contracts in place regarding merchandising, would Mr King be better putting the club into administration soon after taking over in order to remove the financial burden from the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. The posting style of many on here appears to be putting words in mouth, snide childish comments, misrepresenting other peoples posts, hyperbole and exaggerated and out of context comparisons. I think there must be something about rangers that prevents people from having a reasonable discussion.

Irony overload.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qn: Given the £10m due to Mr Ashley following the club drawing down the second tranche of £5m, and the onerous contracts in place regarding merchandising, would Mr King be better putting the club into administration soon after taking over in order to remove the financial burden from the club?

Seems plausible to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. The posting style of many on here appears to be putting words in mouth, snide childish comments, misrepresenting other peoples posts, hyperbole and exaggerated and out of context comparisons. I think there must be something about rangers that prevents people from having a reasonable discussion.

Bruce you need to remember this is a place for opinions. A lot of what is posted is what people think rather than know because not many of us know all the facts. Just because those opinions do not match yours does not make them unreasonable. And it does not necessarily make the posts "irrational" or "sensational nonsense".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. The posting style of many on here appears to be putting words in mouth, snide childish comments, misrepresenting other peoples posts, hyperbole and exaggerated and out of context comparisons. I think there must be something about rangers that prevents people from having a reasonable discussion.

My opposition to all things satanic could be interpreted as an obstacle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

King is merely a conduit to better days ahead for the fans and club. Fan share ownership has taken root and its only going to get bigger. 10% of shareholding is not a dream its probably going to be a reality in a years time. Also the involved of Park, Murray and Gilligan are crucial. This is not a one man show although his money is going to be important and the club needs a lot of repair in terms of infrastructure, King did the right thing yesterday by stating his place on the board is on hold until due diligence is completed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"rangers fans say" comments on here are like when Jordans husband shags her mum and you get quotes from neighbors and inside sources etc. I don't know any rangers fans who want king and co to come in and spend millions straight away, the fan movement has been about stopping the loses, as the income is there already in the club, but somehow nearly 80 million has been spunked away, and only 33% of that has been player costs. sure that means 20 odd million to get through 3 divisions blah blah blah, but money was there to spend it so why not?

Here's to some stability, and housekeeping that gets the club steady and ready to roll again. I'd take another season in championship for mcculloch to be released though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qn: Given the £10m due to Mr Ashley following the club drawing down the second tranche of £5m, and the onerous contracts in place regarding merchandising, would Mr King be better putting the club into administration soon after taking over in order to remove the financial burden from the club?

So, Rangers now owe Ashley £10M?

What if, days after King takes control tomorrow, Ashley demands his £10M back ( I'm sure that I read somewhere that these loans are payable "on demand").

Does King plough in £10M just to pay off these loans? (Which don't themselves get rid of Ashley - he's still got the retail stuff tied up, does he not?)

Or does the club/company fold again, declare liquidation and start again with King in charge (personally or by proxy) with no debt?

And is the suspension of share trading facility on AIM simply procedural because of the resignation of the NOMAD, or is it much more dangerous for the company than that?

Still interesting times down Govan way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Rangers now owe Ashley £10M?

What if, days after King takes control tomorrow, Ashley demands his £10M back ( I'm sure that I read somewhere that these loans are payable "on demand").

Does King plough in £10M just to pay off these loans? (Which don't themselves get rid of Ashley - he's still got the retail stuff tied up, does he not?)

Or does the club/company fold again, declare liquidation and start again with King in charge (personally or by proxy) with no debt?

And is the suspension of share trading facility on AIM simply procedural because of the resignation of the NOMAD, or is it much more dangerous for the company than that?

Still interesting times down Govan way.

King & Co will be forced to lend RFC the money to pay off Ashley if they want to remove his two board representatives. At that point it will be very interesting to see if they also take securities over Ibrox etc on the loans like Ashley did.

What's more is Easedale & Sommers(?) both said they had not taken a penny out the club. Sommers said he looked forward to seeing how is successor would deal with problems faced. I thought that an interesting comment...

RFC were losing about 500k a month last I checked and that does not change with the arrival of King. RFC were losing that before the boycott not after. They simply spend more than they earn and I am not sure how King will reverse that as none of his predecessors have been able to achieve it.

So he will become the new Ashley, pumping in loans to keep it afloat.

I would imagine in a year from now King will be disliked about as much as Ashley is now.

If the contracts are water tight and inescapable he may take the view that an administration event is the only option. But then he could potentially lose control again.

Edited by thplinth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

King & Co will be forced to lend RFC the money to pay off Ashley if they want to remove his two board representatives. At that point it will be very interesting to see if they also take securities over Ibrox etc on the loans like Ashley did.

What's more is Easedale & Sommers(?) both said they had not taken a penny out the club. Sommers said he looked forward to seeing how is successor would deal with problems faced. I thought that an interesting comment...

RFC were losing about 500k a month last I checked and that does not change with the arrival of King. RFC were losing that before the boycott not after. They simply spend more than they earn and I am not sure how King will reverse that as none of his predecessors have been able to achieve it.

So he will become the new Ashley, pumping in loans to keep it afloat.

I would imagine in a year from now King will be disliked about as much as Ashley is now.

If the contracts are water tight and inescapable he may take the view that an administration event is the only option. But then he could potentially lose control again.

There may be one problem to that. Apparently a lot of the contracts may be tied into the holding company and therefore only able to be got rid of by another liquidation. If thats the case, clever boy our Charlie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may be one problem to that. Apparently a lot of the contracts may be tied into the holding company and therefore only able to be got rid of by another liquidation. If thats the case, clever boy our Charlie.

They have been doing it for a long time. They will have RFC 2012 stitched up good and proper. The fact the current board were unable to alter the situation says a lot.

The stark choice will be cut the player wages or face insolvency over and over again. So then as you suggest possibly liquidation again as there is no way out...

I noticed as well - even in the annual report there is almost zero disclosure over what these big 'other operating' costs are exactly. So I suspect they are wrapped up in non disclosure agreements as well. Meaning they cannot even show it is not their fault. King may find himself in exactly the same position. i.e. Sending Charles Green & others all his money, in instalments.

Edited by thplinth
Link to comment
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...