Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Rangers Rumours Member Posts
Dougie57's Profile
Dougie57's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Dougie57's Posts
To Dougie57's last 5 banter replies
Dougie57 has no Rumour Replies
The sáme day Ashley announces money for new signings!! I guess Kenny didnae believe him - what a surprise
Stuart. The first 18 million is for 100 million new shares so that is money that would go into the club. He would then have to offer to buy out all the other shareholders at the same price. That is all in his offer. The board says that they don't believe 75% of the shareholders will accept, so the offer is rejected. That was one way to get 18 million into our club!
Ed. Can I ask the SFA question the other way round. What is our argument for saying investment by MA should be allowed. I think it's a given the rule about 3% cross ownership has been in place for a while. Ashley got agreement to allow up to 10% subject to some conditions, which I guess was to stay true to the intent - not controlling two clubs. While we might not agree or like it, let's just accept that is the rule that we signed up to. So why do we think there is a good case to go to 30%. Was he trying to argue no one else would invest, so this is the only way to get money into the club. It would appear this is not true. If the SFA are aware there are other potential investors, what other good reason is there for further changes to the rule. It just makes me more suspicious that they don't want anyone else close to the club. Maybe, just maybe they are doing us a favour.
{Ed001's Note - I think people are getting mixed up on this issue anyway. This should not be Rangers v SFA at all, this is Mike Ashley trying to get his grubby mitts on Rangers despite owning Newcastle already. Ashley who is deliberately putting Rangers into financial jeopardy to further his aims of taking control. I am not sure whether or not the SFA have Rangers' best interests at heart or not, but I really don't see why anyone would want that man to run their club. He is a spiv of the worst kind. A leech. All he is interested in is profit. If people weren't so ready to attack everything to do with the SFA, they might realise that backing Ashley would be a disaster for the club.}
JG. You are completely correct. Assumptions are very dangerous. However, given that Rangers Retail is our only partially owned business I feel quite confident that Ashleys share of profits is the amount on the financials - and given it is a 50/50 business then our share of profits would be the same. I was only looking at it from our perspective and I think it is reasonable to say we only get 75p for every 10 quid in sales that we buy. I would never speculate on anything else!! Not an accountants way. Best wishes to all for 2015
I hate to tell you steerpike, but the answers are in the audited financial statements. I am a CA and I checked it. There is an allocation of profits that shows others made £567,000 - it is safe to assume that is Ashley's 50% of profits from Rangers Retail. As revenue was over £7.6 million then the amount coming to Rangers is just under 75p for every £10 we spend. It is what it is!