Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[buster. 5,200]

On 02/12/2020 at 14:45, forlanssister said:

For those yearning for a sustainable model going forward this proposal takes us futher from that goal not closer.

Going through the thread, I think this post points toward the main current and ongoing issue for the board.

 

In a covid world, I don't think many realise how fragile the financial situation is. 

 

 

IMO, it's not really about debating whether the price of 20p a share is good, bad or simply fair.   

Nine months down the line, things could be looking very good, but if they aren't, they could be looking very black.

 

Are C1872 about speculation or is it about a vested interest ?

A relationship that was not to allow a repeat of what has gone before. I see that along at least two different lines; 1) Prevention of bad agendas/characters and 2) Financial,............   that both, whether seperately or together, lead into the matter of Survival, as we know it.

 

Right now for the board, it's about the finance and keeping the plates spinning.

 

Do C1872 really think sending a prospective 13M to South Africa is the way to go ?

 

Could they delay signing up for 9 months to see how the cards fall and where the club find themselves?

[der Berliner 3,747]

Regarding "fan-ownership" ... even if Club 1872 (I try to avoid C1872 with respect to the common C19 abbreviation) gets King`s shares, we are a long long way off "fan-ownership". So why beat that drum? This is - much like Club 1872`s prime intention - about safeguarding the club as such by acquiring a  set amount of shares that prevent *hostile actions. I would like to hear more info from Club 1872 and how they want to tackle this and what they intent to do. 

 

*BTW, given the amount of Bears amongst the major shareholders, we are long way off anything "hostile" anyway.

[Bluedell 5,627]

11 hours ago, Frankie said:

At this moment time of course it doesn't but, let's say we win the league, make the EL quarters, and qualify for the CL group stages next season on the top of other investment, e.g. Edmiston House.  What is the share price then?

 

Yes, if my aunty had baws she'd be my uncle and 50p is daft right now but fast forward to next December and 20p could easily be a bargain and that comes before the chance our co-efficient takes us directly into the group stages for 2022/23 and we've sold three players for £50m before then.  And we're still only two years into the three year payment term.

 

To be honest, I'm not sure the price is the main factor anyway.  Yes, it's worth discussing but the intentions now and after the fact hold more interest to me.

 

I just want people to be open-minded and see both sides of the literal coin.

 

PS: I have to temper my comments by saying I'm nowhere near as knowledgeable as others on the financial side and that the share price can go down as well as up...

I don't think that the share price changes much under your scenario. Directors loans get repaid, the funding is used to pay the costs of the club and to buy replacement players. There won't be that much change in the balance sheet unless we get a consistent run in the CL.

 

The price in itself isn't a major issue per se, but rather an indication as to C1872's lack of playing hard ball.

 

In respect of your both sides of the coin, it's quite simple, as far as I see.

 

Pros

C1872 increases its shareholding towards or over the 25%

Dave King is recompensed for putting the cash in

 

Cons

The cash isn't going to the club

The holding could and probably will be diluted

 

The intentions of C1872 are fairly irrelevant as they're not going to influence much due to their increased holding, although as a member, the corporate governance leaves a lot to be desired.

 

There are a lot of related side issues but generally it comes down to whether or not people are relaxed about the cash not going to the club when it desperately needs it.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

if the club wants the cash it needs to offer an option for that. 

 

the only choice right now is take over Dave Kings holding or not. 

 

Talk of putting the money into the club is while correct currently pointless. 

 

 

[Bluedell 5,627]

49 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

if the club wants the cash it needs to offer an option for that. 

 

the only choice right now is take over Dave Kings holding or not. 

 

Talk of putting the money into the club is while correct currently pointless. 

 

 

Not sure how you can say that. If C1872 has serious cash to invest, I really doubt that the club would refuse it. It's up to C1872 to let the club know. The club is obviously open to new investors, given the 2 or 3 that appeared in the last 18 months, and current investors increasing their stakes

 

C1872 don't appear to be in a position to invest in the club anyway so what's the point of the club asking them to invest. They're having to raise cash for King's shares. It seems crazy to make a decision of where you want to invest your cash in 3 years time when we don't know the state of the club at that point.

[rbr 1,256]

5 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Not sure how you can say that. If C1872 has serious cash to invest, I really doubt that the club would refuse it. It's up to C1872 to let the club know. The club is obviously open to new investors, given the 2 or 3 that appeared in the last 18 months, and current investors increasing their stakes

 

C1872 don't appear to be in a position to invest in the club anyway so what's the point of the club asking them to invest. They're having to raise cash for King's shares. It seems crazy to make a decision of where you want to invest your cash in 3 years time when we don't know the state of the club at that point.

To be fair to club1872, they need to watch as any money they have needs to be used to keep their shareholding as is , without getting further dilution.

However to go from that position to the DK situation is the same as walking your first steps to beating Usain Bolt in the 100 m 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

13 hours ago, Bluedell said:

the cost

then what are the chances of the opportunity arising in the future.....

 

my belief is it's all been about only giving shares to the "right people" for years now. That may change or we may be sitting here in 5 years going wish i hadn't kept my money for a share issue that didn't happen. 

 

 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

9 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Not sure how you can say that. If C1872 has serious cash to invest, I really doubt that the club would refuse it. It's up to C1872 to let the club know. The club is obviously open to new investors, given the 2 or 3 that appeared in the last 18 months, and current investors increasing their stakes

 

C1872 don't appear to be in a position to invest in the club anyway so what's the point of the club asking them to invest. They're having to raise cash for King's shares. It seems crazy to make a decision of where you want to invest your cash in 3 years time when we don't know the state of the club at that point.

Club 1872 have chosen their option. I am saying the club need to offer an alternative if they want the cash instead. 

 

I agree they have chosen the wrong option. I agree with all you say. 

 

I just point out it's currently irrelevant for me. 

Edited December 4, 2020 by the gunslinger

[alexscottislegend 2,328]

On 03/12/2020 at 04:08, craig said:

Could have waited till, hopefully, there has been success on the field of play. Didn’t need to be done now.  I suspect it was done because of a) we are playing well b) the positivity surrounding the club just now and c) the negativity across the city.

 

 

Could it not also have something to do with his complicated financial affairs in South Africa - he maybe needed to divest himself of any distractions?

I like the phrase 'justified questioning' but let's not make the mistake of thinking that there is a Green and Whyte shyster lurking behind every corner. Have they infected us with an incurable dose of cyncism? I love the idea of us possibly becoming the biggest fan-owned club in the world rather than one being at the mercy of some foreign consortium interested only in big bucks.

 

And I don't see why Rangers supporters couldn't make a success of it. After all, we have plenty of business experience just on this board -not to mention ex-players who might well become involved. Better the devils we know than the ones we don't.

 

I gather 1,000 have already signed up and I will follow events with interest before deciding whether I will join them.

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, der Berliner said:

Regarding "fan-ownership" ... even if Club 1872 (I try to avoid C1872 with respect to the common C19 abbreviation) gets King`s shares, we are a long long way off "fan-ownership". So why beat that drum? This is - much like Club 1872`s prime intention - about safeguarding the club as such by acquiring a  set amount of shares that prevent *hostile actions. I would like to hear more info from Club 1872 and how they want to tackle this and what they intent to do. 

 

*BTW, given the amount of Bears amongst the major shareholders, we are long way off anything "hostile" anyway.

Let's get one thing crystal clear, nothing in the latest announcement is about fan ownership. The fans, albeit not the fans but Club1872, will never own Rangers. That much I would stake my house on.

 

What is being proposed is that buying King's shares will mean the club is safeguarded from future malfeasance by rogue owners. That's the promise but until someone can show me how that promise will not only be kept but guaranteed, it can only ever be an empty promise.

 

Safeguarding Rangers from a repeat of past mismanagement won't be achieved by owning shares and expressing good intention. It will only be achieved if that shareholding is used in the right way by astute people acting with honest intentions. And here's the thing - nothing I've read gives me any assurance that Club1872 and the people controlling it, as it currently stands, are either astute or entirely open and honest.

 

The only thing I see clearly is that Club1872 does not run its affairs in anything like the right way. I'm not particularly close to the organisation, which makes this view all the more valid, since I have no personal axe to grind about personalities involved, for or against. While Club1872 remains the opaque, clandestine and quasi-democratic outfit it is today, there is no way I can believe it worthy of using a blocking shareholding wisely. Right now the changes required are at least as much about Club1872 as Rangers. In my opinion, Club1872 could be a trustworthy safeguarding presence on the Rangers board but not as things stand and that's why, with Rangers' interests at heart, I could never join the blind faith queue or put my trust in an outfit that simply hasn't shown it deserves it.