Ongoing new manager discussion and speculation

[Uilleam 5,965]

In a continued period of utter dismay, desperation and despondency..... this is the first post in a long time Rangers related that has me hoping it is true. Probably won’t be and we will continue to just meander along aimlessly.

 

QUOTE=craig;715907]In a continued period of utter dismay, desperation and despondency..... this is the first post in a long time Rangers related that has me hoping it is true. Probably won’t be and we will continue to just meander along aimlessly.

 

We'll see; but previous rumour has fingered these fellows as having an interest in the fortunes of the Club, and an interest in investing therein. The current suggestion is that they now intend to jump the gun, so to speak, and bring that interest forward. It seems that the whole T/O Panel imbroglio has led to this rethink. Quite how the mechanics of what, I imagine, would be a takeover, will work is unclear.

 

While I should be loathe to advise wagering the housekeeping monies, there does seem to be an assumption, from other sources not unrelated to the Club that some kind of takeover is afoot.

 

Interesting times, as they say in the Far East......

Edited November 26, 2017 by Uilleam

[forlanssister 3,114]

That only applies if we accept that King, although saying there's money he'll provide to put into Rangers it is coming through a family trust which he does not control personally.

The difficulty King is going to have with TOP is his previous statements which imply that the whole trust is in fact under his stewardship.

Whatever comes out in the wash and however this ends I don't think there is any question that King has, whether intentionally or by mistake told porkies to somebody.

 

It doesn't as the TOP order is for King not NOAL to make the offer, the TOP's view appears to be that King and NOAL are for all intents and purposes one and the same and having read the report it's not hard to see why they formed that view.

 

King cannot claim he can't make an offer while simultaneously guaranteeing future funding.

[forlanssister 3,114]

that the TOP should take an obviously vexatious complaint from an ex board member to court for the first time ever seems very strange. The fact that the COS has not delivered any judgement I think tells you they know fine well something reeks.....I wouldn't be surprised if Ashley is exploring ways of Stockbridge (?) withdrawing the complaint as part of the retail deal he's done with us and selling his shares

 

It was Somers who made the complaint, ironically enough one of the few times he actually did his job.

 

The whole sorry episode was entirely avoidable and is alas solely of Dave King's making.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

That's it! We're now so desperate, we're scraping the bottom of the barrel for names...

He's doing well in the second tier of English football. That's a much higher level than the general standard of manager being linked. A manager on course of EPL promotion isn't going to come to us anyway. Though you are right, scraping the barrel is exactly what we're doing.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Kings covering the cost of his choice, it's just a matter of waiting till he has the cash available. Not sure if he's using the usual means of getting it out of SA for a sum of that size will take 5 weeks easy or if he is waiting on the cash he is due from liquidator (no idea when that's due, putting 2+2 together and could be getting 10). Either way it's going to be a while yet.

[Gonzo79 15,299]

I get the feeling we'll all be underwhelmed by whoever is appointed.

 

All that matters is he can sort this squad out. What about the England woman's team manager - won't cost anything and likes a bit of banter*.

 

 

*humour

[pete 2,499]

It was Somers who made the complaint, ironically enough one of the few times he actually did his job.

 

The whole sorry episode was entirely avoidable and is alas solely of Dave King's making.

 

Surely the health of the company should come first and foremost. if the person involved has decided to pump in millions to the company then surely that is to the advantage of all shareholders and the health of the company.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Surely the health of the company should come first and foremost. if the person involved has decided to pump in millions to the company then surely that is to the advantage of all shareholders and the health of the company.

 

When the complaint was made the one who had "pumped millions into the company" was Mike Ashley, was that "to the advantage of all shareholders and the health of the company"?

[boabie 230]

It doesn't as the TOP order is for King not NOAL to make the offer, the TOP's view appears to be that King and NOAL are for all intents and purposes one and the same and having read the report it's not hard to see why they formed that view.

 

King cannot claim he can't make an offer while simultaneously guaranteeing future funding.

 

Which is exactly what I said mate. TOPS have obviously seen that King is in fact NOAL.

[pete 2,499]

When the complaint was made the one who had "pumped millions into the company" was Mike Ashley, was that "to the advantage of all shareholders and the health of the company"?

 

Well money wise it was actually at that time as the club needed that money to keep going. It was the side issues that made Ashely a rat. Kings offer is interest free and repayable in shares. Ashely was a stripping of assets. So the answer is in "Health of the company." That was not the case with Ashely.