Jump to content

 

 

Anchorman

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,407

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Anchorman

  1. Anchorman
    There is nothing really mystic in what he is saying or has said. "David - this guy Whyte is an imposter - get rid!" or "I'm worried that Whyte is still lurking in the shadows pulling strings" (aren't we all - can any of us be sure he isn't). Nothing mystic there for me, just a man who still cares.
  2. Anchorman
    I've always maintained a high regard for AJ and would gladly have him back. Not enough Rangers men around these days with the same level of dignity. Whenever he says anything I always feel it is what he truly believes and that there is never any hidden agenda in his words. Although I hope he is talking absolute bollocks this time!!
  3. Anchorman
    .............dare open their lunchbox in front of them in the canteen?
  4. Anchorman
    Another balanced informative article from Mr Wilson (OK we knew a lot of it already, but he always fills in gaps that smooth off the edges for some of us less informed). That is the difference between Richard Wilson and the likes of Spiers. Wilson is a proper no-nonsense informative journalist, while Spiers is...................well Spiers!!
  5. Anchorman
    100% - its 'Jaws' Forsyth
  6. Anchorman
    Back three, left to right - Tim Nice But Dim (Harry Enfied), Jamsie Cotter (Rab C), DCI Roy Slater (Only Fools & Horses)
  7. Anchorman
    You are probably right and I am reading too much into it. It's what this Club does to you these days!!
  8. Anchorman
    "As a matter of priority, the company, working with its advisers, will now seek to strengthen the board, both to meet the standards required for an AIM company, and to achieve stability through a consensus amongst major shareholders, which can then be considered by all shareholders at the Annual General Meeting." Am I reading too much into this after the comments during the week (spun by toxic Jack no doubt) about Dave King not meeting the AIM required standards?
  9. Anchorman
    I can understand your anger mate as it is a very heated subject. Maybe I'm too old school, but there is just something about the word. I never heard it used against other Rangers folk in all the years I can think back to, but as I say maybe I'm too old fashioned in my ways.
  10. Anchorman
    Don't be so fucking stupid. Scum? Other Rangers men with a different opinion from you and that makes them scum?? So they would be OK calling you the same thing then, if it is justified by having a difference of opinion? Go and have a lie down pal.
  11. Anchorman
    I can see this turning even nastier now. This has got the Easdales all over it I believe, and I can't help feeling this is them digging the trenches getting ready for a dirty war. I don't think we will see Dave King anywhere near the place over the coming weeks at least.
  12. Anchorman
    Another good piece by Richard Wilson: http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/king-ready-to-take-the-throne-but-ball-is-in-rangers-court.22429434 Is Dave King returning to Ibrox as chairman or not? Dave King, left, and Paul Murray are long-time allies That remains a possibility. Craig Mather, the Rangers chief executive, and Brian Stockbridge, the finance director, agreed the terms of King's return when they met him in South Africa last week. The confidentiality of the discussions was broken, and proper regulatory procedures have still to be followed through, but the Glasgow-born businessman wants to help the club with his experience and, potentially, his wealth if a new share issue is launched. Would this be as chair of Rangers International Football Club PLC or the football club board? King would be joining the PLC board as chairman, once the proper procedures have been carried out. What is delaying this proposal? The board has yet to meet to vote on King's appointment. Ultimately, it is the directors and the shareholders who appoint the chairman, and if King assumes the role ahead of the forthcoming annual meeting, he will be up for re-election along with the rest of the current board. It has been suggested that Rangers' nominated advisor (NOMAD), Daniel Stewart, would not recommend King for a directorship of a company listed on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM). However, it is understood the board have not been told this by the Nomad. King has settled his issues with the South African Revenue Service over breaches of the Income Tax Act and all fraud charges against him were withdrawn. He is executive chairman of Micromega Holdings, the South African investment company that is listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, and as one experienced city source said, "It's highly unlikely that he would fail an AIM test if he's already chairman of a PLC in a 'competent' jurisdiction elsewhere". King has completed all of the necessary disclosure paperwork. What if the board and the Nomad disagree? The Nomad must ratify any appointment, but it is the decision of the board and shareholders to appoint a chairman. Normally, the Nomad would take soundings from regulators ahead of any proposed appointment. In the unlikely event of a disagreement, the Nomad would resign and be replaced. Rangers are on to their third Nomad in less than 12 months. So where does the power lie? As with any PLC, it is the shareholders who exercise ultimate control. The dynamic within the boardroom has been highlighted by King's proposed involvement, since Mather, Stockbridge and non-executive director Bryan Smart are all understood to favour King's appointment. The stance of James Easdale, the fourth member of the PLC board, has not been declared publicly. He and his brother, Sandy, who sits on the football club board, own or have the proxy for almost 25% of the club's shareholding. King has popular opinion and wealth behind him, so could become the ultimate power broker, but his motives are well-established: he will first and foremost act in the best interests of the club. How does all of this affect the forthcoming agm? King would chair the meeting, but his presence could be seen as an endorsement of the directors. This may sway some shareholders, but ultimately the four current board members will be up for re-election and all the shareholders who vote will decide on their future. King is seen as independent of the disgruntled institutional investors who wish to see the four directors replaced with nominations of their own - Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson - but they want the same outcome as King: a stable, financially strong, well-run business with experienced corporate governance practitioners on the board. What about King and Paul Murray? Murray could have joined King on the board immediately, but the price for this was to withdraw the court action taken by the disgruntled shareholders to have their director nominations included in the AGM resolutions, which they won at the Court of Session yesterday. Murray, on a point of principle, did not want to abandon those shareholders or Malcolm Murray, Murdoch and Wilson. King and Paul Murray, though, are supporters of each other and if King does eventually gain full control, Paul Murray would likely serve on the board alongside him. And how does yesterday's Court of Session result affect the state of play at Ibrox? It is a setback for the board, since the judgment was they were wrong to block the four nominations. The agm was to be held on October 24, but will now take place 21 days from new resolutions being posted to shareholders, so the likely date is in early November. King's potential appointment would not make any difference to the boardroom changes being sought by the disgruntled institutions. Equally, King's involvement is on his own, unattached to any other faction. The agm vote is too close to call, since the Easdales - whose near 25% holding is essentially the group of shareholders once fronted by Charles Green - and the shareholders behind the four nominations have almost equal backing from committed supporters. There is a further 12% of shares held by individual fans or the Rangers Supporters Trust, and the rest of the investors are disparate individuals, including Mike Ashley of Sports Direct, Richard Hughes of Zeus, Laxey Partners and, even Ally McCoist, the Rangers manager.
  13. Anchorman
    Does anyone have a link to the PM interview on Sportsound last night?
  14. Anchorman
    A bit of everything I think. The NOMAD is obviously dancing to someone's tune. The Easdales not wanting to see their substantial shareholding diluted before their eyes. Certain parties on the board trying to down play the urgent requirement to have King aboard (the Easdales probably see the need to keep using King's name as a carrot for the fans to get them beyond the AGM now that he has been courted in public, but will gladly dump him at first opportunity). It is also extremely contradictory in that it alludes to no new financial injection being required until we are back in the top league, but in the same breathe they state we will be down to £1m by April. Some will argue that King said the same thing about the top league, but what King actually said was that we need to act now to have it in place to be ready for the time when we are back. He actually stated that we are running out of time if we don't act. Someone has obviously gone very cool on the King issue or never got warm and fluffy about the idea in the first place, and are flexing their muscle to show they are in charge.
  15. Anchorman
    I feel dizzy after reading Spew's article. It's all over the place - probably much like his state of mind right now about the thought of King coming back.
  16. Anchorman
    Unlike many others King 'doesn't do walking away'. After Whyte (I hate even typing that name) got rid of everyone else look at the job he had trying to get rid of the last man standing i.e. Dave King. King stayed for the fight but ran out of munitions.
  17. Anchorman
    Fairly cryptic.
  18. Anchorman
    I agree they are worried but I fear his article holds a lot of truths as to King's standpoint.
  19. Anchorman
    The only thing I would say about that is that it wouldn't really be news to anyone. That is the status quo (until we hear otherwise from King) i.e. he doesn't trust the current board enough with his money to make any investment. It wouldn't really be earth shattering if they came out and said "King still doesn't trust us". It might say more about them than King.
  20. Anchorman
    King has been negotiating with the SFA throughout the last year and more, which came from the man himself. If anyone knows the SFAs position on this then it is Dave King himself. Why the hell would he agree (if he has) to take a seat on the board if the SFA had not been giving him some positive feedback? [As a matter of interest, would Liewell have a say in this process? You can bet your bottom dollar that the thought of King coming back is not what they wanted to hear over at the San Giro]
  21. Anchorman
    I think he does Frankie. I would say if there was any man out there who could outsmart the lot of them then King is that man. I honestly feel that they are amateurs in comparision. Any bets on AJ being brought back into the fold at some stage by King? He will want someone that he can trust in there with him.
  22. Anchorman
    What King has said for sure is that he will 100% not put in any money whatsoever if there was even a remote chance that he might be lining someone else's pocket. I don't believe, regardless what way I look at it, that the current board would be able to convince him this was the case. That is why I think DK will have said "let me tell you where I am..........and for that reason I'm out!".
  23. Anchorman
    I think many would debate that!
  24. Anchorman
    Juventus when they gubbed us 4-0 (Nov' 95) with Del Piero, Toricelli, Ravanelli, Vialli, Sergio Porrini (too many names to mention). They destroyed us and we were no slouches then.
  25. Anchorman
    ''When I became manager, I had a contract placed in front of me and I just signed it. I didn’t look at the wages or the length of contract or anything.'' I find that line very insulting. If the contract had said £45K plus car, would he have "just signed it"?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.