aweebluesoandso 290 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 A club of our size should be able to open another store at Ibrox, in competition with Ashley? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,397 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 When does the PUMA contract finish ? End of next season ? Surely then we'll have a new kit manufacturer and where will these kits be sold ? Surely not in SD I'd have thought. What happens to RRL then? The new kit manufacturer will deal with the Rangers board won't they? These questions weren't asked today but will need answered soon along with who replaces 32RED as shirt sponsors. Red Bull ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 I don't disagree, but folk are talking about the lease deal with SD and how SD are saving so much cash, when it isn't the case. It would be interesting to see the deal that RR has in place with SD to provide the retail "expertise" to the store. I don't know where you get they are not saving cash. they are making profit without the overhead of paying rent for a shop. I do not know who pays the manufacturing or if Rangers Retail and RFC both share in the profit (pitance) that comes back from SD. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 Two things that are maybe worth talking about. 1/3 of the shareholding does not support the boards strategy to raise additional finance. Ashley & Easdale block has opposed the resolutions. Does that mean Res.11 has failed or is that based on last years result. King now says £13m invested in loans by all investors, and £6m worth of shares bought. . #RFCAGM Who bought these shares? Is that the money King paid to buy his shares? Are the club owners of them? If not and they are Kings shares why are they mentioned as an investment into the club when the money would have gone to a 3rd party. . "So far, between myself and my co-investors we have invested 6m by way of shares and 13m of interest free loans taking the total to a little less than 20m. " As you suggest, Pete, this is deliberate obfuscation. The loans MAY be become an investment in the Club if converted in whole or in part into new shares; but the purchase of shares from third parties is not an investment in the Club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 "So far, between myself and my co-investors we have invested 6m by way of shares and 13m of interest free loans taking the total to a little less than 20m. " As you suggest, Pete, this is deliberate obfuscation. The loans MAY be become an investment in the Club if converted in whole or in part into new shares; but the purchase of shares from third parties is not an investment in the Club. It is a little bit in the fact that if he had not bought them Rangers would not have got rid of (and I hop[e you now also agree) the rogue board. He said at the time he would have proffered to put that money into the club. It is a technical fact he did not invest that money in the club but it is a fact he did invest that money and he will probably never get it back. If we are thankful to King for buying those share we should also be very thankful to the company that sold them to him. They have mostly been forgotten. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 "For various reasons, a significant part of our increased player budget has been tied up in resources that have not, up to this point, made a meaningful contribution on the pitch." This is a true and very telling statement. How many of the 11 players brought to the Club in the summer are playing regularly in the team? Answer: 2 or 3. Yes "It is inevitable that there will be setbacks such as this as players adjust to the higher level required of Premiership football and the special demands of playing in Glasgow for a club like Rangers. Injury has also played its part." But questions must be asked about the advisability of signing such as Crooks, Dodoo, Hodson (OK perhaps cover at FB was justified), Gilks (did we need two first team keepers?), Rossiter, Senderos, even Garner (essentially a League 1 player) and yes Barton (given his past record). How many of those are ever going to be regulars in the first team? Some of those are going to have to be off-loaded to make way for players who can take us to the next level i.e. Europe. The question that was posed about the one dimensional role of McParland is valid. I well remember Mr Murray once lamenting at an AGM about the hundreds of thousands in wages that were sitting in the stand; that was bad enough when we were blessed with a team of internationals; it is quite another in our current circumstances, even if the numbers are now tens of thousands of pounds, we can't afford to carry passengers and rotate for the sake of rotation as often seems to be the case in team selections and substitutions. "It is an ongoing requirement for Mark and his team to review and rotate the player pool to ensure that we are getting the best possible value for our investment in players ". I disagree; every player we have in the first team squad MUST be capable of playing a starting role, right now that is manifestly not the case. "It is my belief that Rangers is presently well enough resourced to achieve our next major football objective – a return to Europe. Perhaps, Mr King, but if so it will be a close run thing. " A further investment in players will be required at that point." No argument with that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 It is a little bit in the fact that if he had not bought them Rangers would not have got rid of (and I hop[e you now also agree) the rogue board. He said at the time he would have proffered to put that money into the club. It is a technical fact he did not invest that money in the club but it is a fact he did invest that money and he will probably never get it back. If we are thankful to King for buying those share we should also be very thankful to the company that sold them to him. They have mostly been forgotten. I agree that the current Board are better than the previous charlatans. I also agree that is was necessary for King to buy the shares to take control; although I think those that sold were happy to get out. My point is that he is deliberately trying to disguise his personal share purchases as "investment in the club" which it is not. Where I think we may also disagree is that he used others to help him drive the share price down to a point where he could no longer resist buying and that in the short term at least that action was detrimental to the Club. It would be interesting to know, the total of his personal loans to the Club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 I agree that the current Board are better than the previous charlatans. I also agree that is was necessary for King to buy the shares to take control; although I think those that sold were happy to get out. My point is that he is deliberately trying to disguise his personal share purchases as "investment in the club" which it is not. Where I think we may also disagree is that he used others to help him drive the share price down to a point where he could no longer resist buying and that in the short term at least that action was detrimental to the Club. It would be interesting to know, the total of his personal loans to the Club. I don't follow the price of shares so I can't disagree with you on that. As far as I can remember is that Park has invested and the Hong Kong boys have invested and King has invested. Who paid the 5 mill I have no idea. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 I don't follow the price of shares so I can't disagree with you on that. As far as I can remember is that Park has invested and the Hong Kong boys have invested and King has invested. Who paid the 5 mill I have no idea. I think one or two others are in for a half mil or so. FS follows this closely, perhaps he can advise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 I think it was your pals driving the share price down in fairness bh 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.