BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Why would he or anyone else do it unless it is or becomes necessary? Your taking this out of context, dB. The highlighted comment is in relation to the SFA fit and proper test. I see no reason why King should not lend the club money whilst he is still subject to the SFA fit and proper test to become a director. But in answer to your question, T3B have lent the club money and allegedly he has much more of the stuff than all of them put together so why not? Half a million each would have made it a nice round £2m and that's petty cash to him, is it not? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 7,055 Posted April 3, 2015 Author Share Posted April 3, 2015 Help me here how do we now buy shares in the club I was waiting for a new share issue to get some shares for the grandchildren 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Deedle 0 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Another statement of the obvious; it's clear we are not being told the whole story here. I think we dodged a long term bullet in disposing of the last board but your right about this kind of crap. We deserve better than to be left to mull over this sort of stuff again. Too long in the tooth not to see these gaps. I hope they come out with something solid soon because the last thing we need is doubts and we all knew this mess would take some time to sort out. Just looks to me like they're not willing to put enough on the line to convince the nomad to see beyond the accounts and past mismanagement. I wasn't expecting much but its disappointing if they have failed this initial challenge due to finance after all the previous talk. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
les186 271 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Help me here how do we now buy shares in the club I was waiting for a new share issue to get some shares for the grandchildren From Tuesday the club says there will be access to "a matched bargain-trading facility" with JP Jenkins. To use this facility you will have to go through a stockbroker which probably won't be worth it, if it is a relatively low amount of shares you are after. Better to wait and see if the shares get listed on ISDX or similar. Edited April 3, 2015 by les186 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Deedle 0 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Help me here how do we now buy shares in the club I was waiting for a new share issue to get some shares for the grandchildren There will still be a share issue mate. I asked earlier in the thread 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I have consistently stated that I do not want King any nearer our club than I wanted S Easdale but the reason is well documented and has nothing to do with their wealth or lack of it. Let's be clear, your EGM voting was for Llambias & Leach to stay on the board and for none of Dave King & co's director appointment resolutions to pass. We don't need to get the wee violins out and hear a new rendition of your bizarre reasoning. The facts are very simple. On the contrary to what you say, actually I was in the vanguard or trying to get high net worth individuals to invest in the club, the most notable being the highest net worth person in Scotland, Jim McColl. No wonder that old Jim McColl deal fell through then, eh! :fish: Nah, seriously though, were you not involved in some sort of controversy regarding that Jim McColl deal? What was it again? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I have consistently stated that I do not want King any nearer our club than I wanted S Easdale but the reason is well documented and has nothing to do with their wealth or lack of it. On the contrary to what you say, actually I was in the vanguard or trying to get high net worth individuals to invest in the club, the most notable being the highest net worth person in Scotland, Jim McColl. My actions as a supporter do indeed speak louder than words: I have followed Rangers from the north of Scotland (and since you mention it, nearly had MY dick frozen off in Peterhead) to the south of England and through 32 matches in 21 countries in Europe; from Shearer and Caldow to Foster and Wallace; just who exactly are you to question my loyalty to the Club. Most of the rest of what you say is just utter nonsense but I'm not going to not dignify your comments or personal attacks with any further response. The only tangible contribution I can see you have ever made is chasing people away. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I think we dodged a long term bullet in disposing of the last board but your right about this kind of crap. We deserve better than to be left to mull over this sort of stuff again. Too long in the tooth not to see these gaps. I hope they come out with something solid soon because the last thing we need is doubts and we all knew this mess would take some time to sort out. Just looks to me like they're not willing to put enough on the line to convince the nomad to see beyond the accounts and past mismanagement. I wasn't expecting much but its disappointing if they have failed this initial challenge due to finance after all the previous talk. This has nothing to do with the present board and finance. Somewhere back in the thread, I think it was Frankie that was talking about the risk shown in governance and the flouting of the rules by the previous board, caused Cantor Fitzgerald to decline to represent us - as would, apparently, other NOMADS. In fact, if you look at Murray's statement on the club website yesterday - http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/8956-paul-murray-statement ... "You could say the behaviour of previous directors has poisoned the well with AIM but even so we might have expected a little more understanding from certain quarters." - I think you could say that the present board expected to be represented by their choice of NOMAD. If it was only about money it would have been done. Somebody, behind the scenes, wants their pound of flesh - and in the process cause this present board as many difficulties as possible. I wonder who that could be? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Nah, seriously though, were you not involved in some sort of controversy regarding that Jim McColl deal? What was it again? Absolutely not, that's a scurrilous suggestion; I may have been involved in some controversies in my time but none in relation to the introduction of McColl. I was introduced to McColl's lawyers as a person of standing in the financial community, with Rangers connections (I had just been elected to the Board of the RST about 6 months earlier), who could be trusted not to reveal his identity until he wished it to be so. I introduced a top accountant to the RST and worked diligently with colleagues to produce the 5-year financial plan under which McColl was going to underwrite the fans' £30m bid for the Club; and I physically delivered it to the lawyers on behalf of the RST. McColl approved the Plan but against advice took it to his bank, who promptly showed it to SDM, who then leaked the story, causing McColl major embarrassment and he withdrew from the deal. If that plan had gone through, there is every chance that the fans would own the club by now and none of what has transpired in the intervening years would have happened. Which part of that is it that you find controversial? Edited April 3, 2015 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Absolutely not, that's a scurrilous suggestion; I may have been involved in some controversies in my time but none in relation to the introduction of McColl. I was introduced to McColl's lawyers as a person of standing in the financial community, with Rangers connections (I had just been elected to the Board of the RST about 6 months earlier), who could be trusted not to reveal his identity until he wished it to be so. I introduced a top accountant to the RST and worked diligently with colleagues to produce the 5-year financial plan under which McColl was going to underwrite the fans' £30m bid for the Club; and I physically delivered it to the lawyers on behalf of the RST. McColl approved the Plan but against advice took it to his bank, who promptly showed it to SDM, who then leaked the story, causing McColl major embarrassment and he withdrew from the deal. If that plan had gone through, there is every chance that the fans would own the club by now and none of what has transpired in the intervening years would have happened. Which part of that is it that you find controversial? Was there not something about you turning up at an RST meeting with a Celtic supporter or was that not related to the McColl deal? 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.