Rangers Banter Archive October 12 2013

12 Oct 2013 23:34:20
Well for the moment it looks as if D. King is putting cash in, once again we have the scenario of the Blue Knights, Mcoll etc, etc, mouthing a lot but not willing to put cash where their mouths are, how many people are there going to be shouting everything the punters want to hear and believing that gives them the right to step on board but with their pockets firmly closed.

King can put in money all he wants but it's still going to be waste on over inflated wages. Cost need reduced dramatically or any money being brought in will be wasted.

Just a thought surely if McColl,
Murray etc got rid of the present
board they would have to open
there pockets and invest?
billy h {The Ed039's Note - no they wouldn't, they represent shareholders)

Cheers E. D
billy h

Billy don't confuse shareholders with directors, you don't need shares to be a member of the board, the shareholders will elect the board on 24th Oct

but my question for ED 39 is

who exactly do they (McColl and co)represent? and how many shares do they have the voting rights for?

JG {The Ed039's Note - The official line is he is representing a range of digruntled institutional investors and shareholders so it is hard to say)

Ed and n4 there must be a lot of angry shareholders or we wouldn't be in current predicament

12 Oct 2013 11:22:50
Comment: Hopes of crowning King at Ibrox premature.

Every rangers fan should read this article in the Edinburgh based paper today or online (press more articles). It succinctly positions King's situation.

If King wants control he needs 51% of shares. If he tries to buy more than 30% he has to offer the price to all 100% shareholders at a cost of £31m. Stock market rules. None of which goes into club. His position is very difficult.

If that is the case then why is not in national papers plus who said anything about king wanting controlling shares the way I've read it is the club need his money so hence how he can dictate his terms also is it not over 50% of shares before he has to offer to buy the rest of the shares

UUmm No 1 - The Scotsman IS a national paper. It isn't a rag though so it tends to be more balanced and accurate.

Just read a mather statement saying he doesn't require kings money is he f stupid were only6 months away from admin what a dick the man is

Op one resolution that will be put forward at the AGM is to allow the board the option to sell 6.6m shares which are currently not in public hands, if king were to buy that tranche of shares that would be just under 10% and the money would go into the club coffers just over 3m

JG

It's doesn't tend to be written by munchers of the succulent lamb and fine wine brigade!

Come to think of it, where is Mr Traynor plying his trade these days?


You lot don't hearing things that aren't "we arra peepul" orientated.

@4. unless he gets them for the usual 1p per share and then would only have to pay £660,000 all going into Rangers coffers which in my opinion would not make a whole lot of difference to finances. JohnnyG

Evening Bears. Been thinking, if we have been surviving on money in the bank then we technically have no debt. What would be achieved by going into admin with no debt? Surely if admin 2 ( which I don't believe will happen tbh) were to happen, better owing DK millions? On a lighter note I have my laptop back so will be posting again not just reading. CheltBlue

It should be remembered that you don't need to own a majority of the shares, but have control of the majority.
You are correct CheltBlue, the £1M. in the bank at April 2014 quoted, with nothing secured, is a reasonable position to be in. However if you read the statement by Brian Stockdale, in full, there will be further income outwith investment by that time.
Administration is more likely if the Murray gang win their action on Monday. The continued unrest will continue to divide us and possibly destroy our beloved club.
billyb

@3 would tend to agree. Mather "we won't need DK's money until we are back in the SPL"
Stockbridge "In April there will only be £1M in the bank"

Do they not talk to each other?

@6 stop all the p@sh, nobody bought shares for 1p,
shares in RIFC are called 1 p ordinary shares that was never there value, green Ahmed, Mather and all the original investors in rfc ltd got there shares as part of a share transfer agreement whereby all assets were transfered to RIFC in exchange for shares in the proportion of shares that each of them held in rfc ltd
It was all in the prospectus FFS

JG

@8 is it not just merchandise money to come in which will not be enough so then they get a loan which puts us in debt and that money will disappear just like the 50m already what really bugs me is the fact that all rangers supporter groups have had two meeting with Mather and Stockbridge and still they do nothing

Ed dave king has just made a statement on gers website and its good news at last watp

N11 they had 2 meetings and stockbridge and mathers diverted questions so we will find out at agm if the spivs done themselves any favours with the diversions eh I don't think they helped themselves accept to the 14mill get them out