Frankie 8,562 Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 This'll be Ashley preempting the move by King and co. covered in the Jackson story. Given he's said he doesn't want to invest, we can look forward to afat Cockney gobshyte with bottomless pockets leeching money away from the club indefinitely or a bunch of supporters with some, though not limitless, money trying to look after it. I can already see what way this is going to go. Equally it could be King et al reacting to Ashley's notice. Ultimately, fans - and especially shareholders - have to make up their own mind. Last year showed us we'll be given minimal information on a future under Ashley or King so we'll just have to trust our hearts and heads in that sense. It won't be an easy decision for some as not many of the relevant people have convinced us that their hearts and heads are in the right place. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Well, 51% but what I meant was, it's not clear who'd vote what way in each resolution. For example, just because Laxey may vote for a new share issue doesn't mean they'd vote against removing a director. It's all up in the air. If it is as you say, Wallace is a goner. I was wondering if it would be 75%. Thanks. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 They are perfectly valid reasons for him to lose his job, and despite me not agreeing with the intentions of those trying to force him out, he should be seen off the premises forthwith. I realise that you have put on your Dave King hat once again, but please leave the politics aside, and view as one, all those who have sought to damage Rangers in return for personal gain. what do we gain from more pay offs and another even more fearful ceo patsy. even knowing king wont be allowed in i want wallace to stay. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Personally, it's far too late for rats like Wallace to be allowed to jump ship when his position is becoming precarious. He was always going tof be the next Mather. Sink the lot of them. Agree, but may as well use people for our own gain. Dirty war springs to mind and nothing wrong with a spot of collusion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 if Wallace and Nash have indeed been talking to King in defiance of the Easdale faction then surely they deserve some credit for it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 what do we gain from more pay offs and another even more fearful ceo patsy. even knowing king wont be allowed in i want wallace to stay. Wallace isn't staying. Wallace never was staying. You knew the score with his appointment, as did many others, so don't try to flip-flop now. Wallace and Nash are side shows whose removal will not alter the root of the problem one bit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 If it is as you say, Wallace is a goner. I was wondering if it would be 75%. Thanks. Let's look at the club's investor centre: Laxey Partners Ltd 16.32% Artemis Investment Management LLP 9.95% MASH Holdings Limited 8.92% River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP 7.06% [blue Pitch Holding 5.43%]* Alexander Easdale 26.15% Miton Capital Partners 4.98% [Margarita Funds Holding Trust 3.19%]* * - Sandy has their vote That means we have at least 36% who'll vote for the removal of Wallace and Nash. Now, some people are suggest Laxey and Artemis may have changed horse to back King so that suggests around 27% who'll vote for the status quo. It looks very tight. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Agree, but may as well use people for our own gain. Dirty war springs to mind and nothing wrong with a spot of collusion. Wallace doesn’t bring anything to the table. He is a busted flush, powerless in the boardroom, dismissed by the City investors and now attempting to ingratiate himself with the pro-King faction. If he had any clout he would be leading from the front, not skulking around in the shadows trying to save his sorry arse. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,184 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 what do we gain from more pay offs and another even more fearful ceo patsy. even knowing king wont be allowed in i want wallace to stay. If Ashely starts to dominate and appoint his people then prepare for the gradual journey that sees us fade away. Whatever way you look at this, we don't look like getting out of the 'hole' anytime soon, if ever. We are a Corporate Vehicle to extract cash with the appearence of a football club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Would be good but this is just Groundhog Day. A re-run of last year's AGM 'battle'. It's all about the votes. I'd be shocked if they've called this without already having 50% + 1 vote in the bag. 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.