der Berliner 3,747 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If there's admin, would that mean Laxey walking away with the Albion and Edmiston? I guess "walking away" with a parking space and parts of a brick house could prove to be difficult. As far as I see it, if they get their money back - by September 1st - all should be fine. Looks like Thomson dropped another H-bomb. Trying to look at it from the outside, these media-leeches obviously want to milk this current scenario much like they milked the admin event. If completely false, you would like to see some sort of reaction untowards reporters and journos spreading such blatant conjecture, which is bordering to libel and is harming the club's image. As Frankie said, we are sitting in a vacuum regarding factual information, a "vacuum" that gives people like Thomson and Mad Phil a stage. Meanwhile ... Rangers deny administration rumours Submitted by WG on Mon, 03/03/2014 - 06:19 Rangers have rejected internet rumours that the club will enter administration for a second time on Wednesday, but faced demands from supporters to answer claims that former chief executive Charles Green still has influence within the club. A spokesman for the club said last night: “There is absolutely no truth in these claims [about the club facing administration], which appear to come from agenda-driven bloggers who are out to damage the club. There is no chance of administration while there is no board meeting tomorrow. This is all completely false.” Quite why these bloggers want to damage the club or what their agenda is remains unclear. I would be surprised to learn that they are Celtic fans. The Union of Fans – a coalition group representing six supporter bodies – released a statement seeking clarity about what happened to the Yorkshire businessman’s 7.68 per cent stake in the club after he ended his second stint with the club as a paid consultant last August. It comes after former director Dave King spoke out at the weekend about his fears that it was “quite possible that Charles Green is still de facto controlling the club”. King now plans to travel to Scotland from his base in South Africa to launch his bid for boardroom change after claiming his previous attempts to invest in the club in order to avert a planned downsizing of the budget were thwarted by the current Ibrox regime. King's intentions have been welcomed by the Union of Fans. They have also argued that the club should not just speak about but actually provide transparency. The difficulty is that if one does not, for example, provide access to the shareholders' register, fans will, rightly or wrongly, suspect there is something to hide. All sorts of institutions from hospitals to universities are required these days to disclose more than they had to in the past and to refrain from covering things up. These arrangements do not work perfectly, but the 'world of football' often seems to think it is outside them altogether. FootballEconomy I've underlined the part that I pointed at in this debate before. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,570 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 It's exactly how it reads To be fair, the opposing argument could also be made in that perhaps King is attempting to use the threat of admin to achieve his aims. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 It's exactly how it reads So what are the options for consideration ? 1. That the current board persuaded 3 names to tie up a Q & A with DK - and DK was ill judged enough to participate ? And they then got 3 names to weave that interview into his latest piece which suggests admin is impending for our club ? (Considerably raising the pressure on the current board I may add) And this was all orchestrated by the current board for the purpose of blackmailing King to pay more for the shares they own ? OR 2. 3 names saw another opportunity to extend the range of his poison and e-mailed a series of questions to DK who was ill-judged enough to participate - not knowing the poisonous one would than weave the responses into his latest attack on Rangers ? I know which one I believe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 To be fair, the opposing argument could also be made in that perhaps King is attempting to use the threat of admin to achieve his aims. I have seen this muted elsewhere Frankie - I sincerely hope it is not true. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 To be fair, the opposing argument could also be made in that perhaps King is attempting to use the threat of admin to achieve his aims. To be fair the article begs king to buy shares. It's exactly as I describe it. Plus king rubbishes the idea of admin. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,570 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 To be fair the article begs king to buy shares. It's exactly as I describe it. Plus king rubbishes the idea of admin. We will all interpret such situations differently. Until both the club and DK are clear about their aims then we will remain cynical. As I wrote on TRS the other day, that's as dangerous a situation as any. Some bears simply will not pay an increased renewal if the uncertainty prevails. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I have seen this muted elsewhere Frankie - I sincerely hope it is not true. People allowing their prejudices to cloud what they are reading. King is being implored to buy out the spivs and is saying there will be no admin. How can that read any other way 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,570 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 People allowing their prejudices to cloud what they are reading. King is being implored to buy out the spivs and is saying there will be no admin. How can that read any other way Wait a minute - I have no prejudices here but form an opinion based on a variety of information from very different (and proven) sources. Personally I don't think we'll enter administration (at this moment in time) but there's no doubt debate about it serves some people well; from those who gave out recent secured loans to those who want more pressure on the incumbents. That conclusion isn't prejudicial but just common sense. Once again, let those that know differently say so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 So what are the options for consideration ? 1. That the current board persuaded 3 names to tie up a Q & A with DK - and DK was ill judged enough to participate ? And they then got 3 names to weave that interview into his latest piece which suggests admin is impending for our club ? (Considerably raising the pressure on the current board I may add) And this was all orchestrated by the current board for the purpose of blackmailing King to pay more for the shares they own ? OR 2. 3 names saw another opportunity to extend the range of his poison and e-mailed a series of questions to DK who was ill-judged enough to participate - not knowing the poisonous one would than weave the responses into his latest attack on Rangers ? I know which one I believe. He got kings email adress from somewhere 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Wait a minute - I have no prejudices here but form an opinion based on a variety of information from very different (and proven) sources. Personally I don't think we'll enter administration (at this moment in time) but there's no doubt debate about it serves some people well; from those who gave out recent secured loans to those who want more pressure on the incumbents. That conclusion isn't prejudicial but just common sense. Once again, let those that know differently say so. That wasn't aimed at you. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.