forlanssister 3,114 Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Low cost. 26percent of all retail income and 75 percent of all shirt sponsorship. What the fuck is high cost then. 26% extra retail income (75% all in) and 50% shirt sponsorship (from 2017 iirc) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Yep, as BlueSolace says...we play our football in Scotland, not in one of the rich football nations. We are only an excellent manager and ridding ourselves of the Ashley camp away from returning to the top. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 It still means King will have to raise a few million this month to keep Rangers afloat if he hopefully can reject Ashley's loan, then who knows how much more to put the club on a sound financial basis. We all knew this to be the case anyway 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 It is a damning indictment of our modern allegedly regulated market that people can behave in such a selfish unscrupulous manner. More so when it comes to a massive football institution such as ourselves that has lurched from crisis to crisi over the last 4 years all at the hands of so-called captains of Industry ...(one honoured with a knighthood)... And yet despite this leadership, vast salaries business experience, and AIM listing were we to approach banks for funding we would be refused. Corporate Goverance / AIM listing / Institutional Investors .....dont make me laugh People become politicised through struggle. I hope what's happened to us has opened eyes to the vagaries of capitalism and we'll no longer be associated with the myth that The People are stuck in right wing support for the establishment I don't want Dave King or anyone else to "pour £millions into our club" It's just not sustainable. I want the club to be run without debt and us spending what our revenue allows. we can play good football with what we've got if we have decent managers and on a much tighter budget. Aberdeen, Dundee Utd. and Hearts can do it. Why can't we ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,663 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 None of this will be a huge surprise to King even if (most) fans will be disgusted (again) by the actions of the incumbents. Like others, I suspect this is just another card being played to secure a pay off so we'll see if King finds this palatable enough to clear the decks ahead of his crowning on Friday. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,808 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 In an ideal scenario - should King and the 3Bs agree to that - we could check out Sarver's investment plan again and use his money to pay back SD & Co. immediately. That said, it would require more detailed info about how much money of the 10m has actually been used by the board* and how much can be returned immediately. I would reckon that if there is another share issue or Sarver is giving the company a long term loan etc. more directors can be brought onto the board and thus sway any vote in favour of the good guys. Speaking of that, I canot see how King or Murray can work along with Llambias or Leach, nor that the latter two can keep their jobs. Well, at the end of the day, one has to assume that King and the 3Bs have evaluated all possible scenarios and have a few alternative plans at the ready. We'll know soon enough. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,663 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I can't see Sarver wanting to be part of King's vehicle just as King wouldn't have wanted to be part of Sarver's. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,808 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Have they actually spoken to one another? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumshie RFC 0 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 As someone who has no business experience at all could King & Co not just set up a new company to handle our retail operation rather than RRL and SD? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,663 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 As someone who has no business experience at all could King & Co not just set up a new company to handle our retail operation rather than RRL and SD? I think there has been some chat about that but you'd imagine the existing contract will be written in such a way to plug such an outcome. 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.