Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[Bluedell 5,627]

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

There are three huge mysteries in all of this.

1. Why did King step down as chairman when he did, with what seemed like undue haste and without a ready successor in the wings?

2. Why is Dave King only willing to sell to Club1872 in what looks like an attempt to deny those shares to other current shareholders and what does that say about the crucial matter of board cohesion?

3. Why is Club1872 such an opaque organisation and why does it have so little to say about how it will use a controlling shareholding?

1. He wasn't willing to invest further cash?

2. I doubt that there's anyone other than C1872 looking to buy his shares. I can't see the other shareholders willing to fork out for them. It therefore suggests that he's a forced seller and C1872 should have looked to negotiate the price down.

3. I'll pass on that one.

[ranger_syntax 4,330]

17 minutes ago, buster. said:

Like the Mr. Beaton (Castore), he seems to have signed up for the full tour of Rangers podcasts.

 

Like Mr.Beaton, he has something to propose/sell. 

Who?

[Bill 13,717]

Just now, ranger_syntax said:

I can only guess that the board are not interested in doing that just now.

 

Does Club1872 have money in place to make such an offer just now? I would also guess not.

It's not up to the board to make the offer, merely to decide whether or not to accept it and any refusal would likely not go down too well.

 

In any case, you're right, Club1872 seems so far from achieving this sort of money that you begin to wonder exactly why Dave King is going down this road.

[craig 5,199]

5 hours ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

Wow, that’s some reply and what a way to speak to someone.

 

Have a good day 
 

 

Seriously Stevie ?

 

What a way to speak to someone ?  Elaborate please because nothing I said was disrespectful and I attempted to explain that I wasn't speaking AT you.

 

Sorry, but your response comes across as being a tad snowflake.

 

You are taking my posts on this subject far, far too personally.  And despite my best efforts to explain I am talking about the topic rather than at you, you are willfully ignoring that.  You did the same with Bluedell too.

 

It is OK to disagree, as we do.  And I did it respectfully.  Yet you take offence, I can't help that.

 

You have a good day too.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

4 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

I'm not sure why people think that a investment directly into the club isn't an option. The club needs cash and I can't see why the directors wouldn't accept a reasonably sized investment.

 

Yes, the club needs funds to remain operational. They need £8m for this season and £14.4m for next season.

The fact they have never asked or offered the opportunity. Quite the opposite in fact. 

 

those funds are already committed.

[Bill 13,717]

4 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

1. He wasn't willing to invest further cash?

2. I doubt that there's anyone other than C1872 looking to buy his shares. I can't see the other shareholders willing to fork out for them. It therefore suggests that he's a forced seller and C1872 should have looked to negotiate the price down.

3. I'll pass on that one.

1. That seems clear but didn't require him to step down as chairman - that role is the gift of the shareholders.

2. Agreed.

3. It might have been a rhetorical question ?

[craig 5,199]

4 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

Worrying about this is putting the cart before the horse, no?

 

The first priority, for anyone, should be to gain a significant degree of control.

Gaining control using all of your financial resources just as easily lends itself to having control over nothing more than a carcass

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

Just now, craig said:

Seriously Stevie ?

 

What a way to speak to someone ?  Elaborate please because nothing I said was disrespectful and I attempted to explain that I wasn't speaking AT you.

 

Sorry, but your response comes across as being a tad snowflake.

 

You are taking my posts on this subject far, far too personally.  And despite my best efforts to explain I am talking about the topic rather than at you, you are willfully ignoring that.

 

It is OK to disagree, as we do.  And I did it respectfully.  Yet you take offence, I can't help that.

 

You have a good day too.

You are responding saying don’t go ‘greeting’ and the likes, hardly friendly 

 

It wasn’t an explanation, it was another example of you forcing your opinion at me 

(When people do this stuff it shows - YOU) 

 

As for being a snowflake? Really?! Lol - More like I have no desire to waste my time arguing about a subject that many points we actually agree on & I’ve never challenged you about but you still don’t see it 

 

However, this thread is getting clogged up with crap like this, so DM & we’ll discuss or we’ll move on - isn’t worth wasting the thread on 

 

Big game tonight an all ??

[rbr 1,256]

6 minutes ago, craig said:

Seriously Stevie ?

 

What a way to speak to someone ?  Elaborate please because nothing I said was disrespectful and I attempted to explain that I wasn't speaking AT you.

 

Sorry, but your response comes across as being a tad snowflake.

 

You are taking my posts on this subject far, far too personally.  And despite my best efforts to explain I am talking about the topic rather than at you, you are willfully ignoring that.  You did the same with Bluedell too.

 

It is OK to disagree, as we do.  And I did it respectfully.  Yet you take offence, I can't help that.

 

You have a good day too.

The two of you need to take a step back from this subject , I like and respect both of you , so please , walk away from this and agree to disagree 

[ranger_syntax 4,330]

2 minutes ago, craig said:

Gaining control using all of your financial resources just as easily lends itself to having control over nothing more than a carcass

All depends how the company is run.