Dave King to vote against the re-election of Douglas Park

[BEARGER 1,830]

Dave King has lit the fuse ahead of next month’s powderkeg Rangers AGM by revealing he’ll be voting against the re-election of chairman Douglas Park.

The former Ibrox chief has jetted back into Glasgow ahead of the December 6 shareholder summit to declare it’s time for a change at the top of the marble staircase. The South Africa-based tycoon has voiced fears that Rangers will be left behind if they do not find the fresh impetus needed to challenge Celtic’s domination of Scottish football.

Park is on the lookout for a new manager after sacking Gio van Bronckhorst on Monday, with the Dutchman paying the price for allowing their Old Firm rivals to surge nine points clear and towards an 11th title in the last 12 years. Now King - who mounted an unsuccessful attempt to dislodge Park’s son Graeme from the Ibrox boardroom at last year’s AGM - is coming back for the main man

Asked if fans should back the chairman’s re-election, the Castlemilk-born tycoon said: “What I would say is I’m not voting for that. The situation is recoverable.

"I think we can be back winning the title, but the way things are going at the moment, unless changes are made to the leadership of the board and the executive of the club, I fear we’ll be stagnating for a long time to come.”

King has been involved in a long-running dispute with the men he once joined forces with as they wrestled control of Ibrox back from Mike Ashley in 2015. The fall-out stems from his decision to stand down from the board just as the Covid pandemic was sinking its teeth into the club’s balance sheet.


King, still the club’s biggest individual shareholder, has spent much of the two years-and-a-half years since sniping from the sidelines - with his attacks ranging from the failure to deliver on budget promises to former boss Steven Gerrard in the wake of the club’s 2021 title win to the treatment of supporters as customers and “ATMs”. The former Ibrox supremo - who also plans on voting against a motion allowing the board to issue shares to hand-picked investors - said: “The fact is, I was already having concerns about where this regime was headed.

“I felt some of the things happening were unacceptable, un-Rangers-like. The treatment of ex-players, the treatment of supporters. I felt voting against Graeme would make that point.


“I had to put my money where my mouth was and use my vote to go along with what my concerns were. It was heading in the wrong direction.

“I didn’t like the way Steven Gerrard was forced out of the club. It’s not the way to treat people that delivered a title for us. I couldn’t not vote with my conscience.

“We really should have invested and kicked on. We could have bought Steven what he wanted. There were reasons why I had to go (from the board).

“At the time, I felt the board would continue. I regret what happened. When I go back to 55, we should have kicked on with a great manager and defended the title. I think the board thought they could do it on the cheap.”

King has struck a deal with Club 1872 that could one day see the fan group take control of his 15.13 percent stake in the club. But he hit out at the board’s refusal to engage with the organisation, saying: “Douglas makes the point that he’s put in all this money and he’s not letting supporters tell him how to spend his money.

“I’ve put in more than Douglas. I’ve put in more money than any one person in the history of the club. But I’ll tell you what. The supporters have put in a lot more than me.

“They put in more than any investor and always have done. Just be honest with the supporters. Tell them what you are doing with the money. Then they’ll still back you.

[Sutton_blows_goats 5,345]

File under she's turned the weans against us rubbish. Unless you want to tell us the full story of Gerrard being forced out.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Sutton_blows_goats

[Frankie 8,570]

I've increasingly little interest in what King has to say.

 

When your primary motivation is recouping money then your opinions don't often make for sympathetic reading. It's a real pity Club1872 have become his cheerleader instead of remaining neutral. 

 

Of course we should be critiquing the board where necessary but I'm unconvinced by King and he has no-one to blame but himself for that.

[Tannochsidebear 2,420]

2 hours ago, Frankie said:

I've increasingly little interest in what King has to say.

 

When your primary motivation is recouping money then your opinions don't often make for sympathetic reading. It's a real pity Club1872 have become his cheerleader instead of remaining neutral. 

 

Of course we should be critiquing the board where necessary but I'm unconvinced by King and he has no-one to blame but himself for that.

I would agree that his motives for his statements are as you state, but it is hard to argue with any of his comments. A case of shoot the messenger but listen to the message perhaps? Under Park's (short) chairmanship, the club seems to have fallen to pieces in several areas. That much seems clear and on that basis and that basis alone his leadership must be called into question. 

[Bill 13,717]

2 hours ago, Tannochsidebear said:

I would agree that his motives for his statements are as you state, but it is hard to argue with any of his comments. A case of shoot the messenger but listen to the message perhaps? Under Park's (short) chairmanship, the club seems to have fallen to pieces in several areas. That much seems clear and on that basis and that basis alone his leadership must be called into question. 

I think that’s a bit harsh. I’m more interested in what he does to lead us out of this difficult period but the important thing to remember is Park is Chairman, not dictator. The Chairman’s job is to ensure the board conducts its business properly, not to tell them what to do. The days of chairman rulers like SDM are long gone. 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Bill

[compo 7,051]

Looks like the AGM will be fun and games 

 

[Frankie 8,570]

 

2 hours ago, Tannochsidebear said:

I would agree that his motives for his statements are as you state, but it is hard to argue with any of his comments. A case of shoot the messenger but listen to the message perhaps? Under Park's (short) chairmanship, the club seems to have fallen to pieces in several areas. That much seems clear and on that basis and that basis alone his leadership must be called into question. 

In terms of his comments, you could definitely could argue with some of them whilst one or two are certainly valid but, as usual, battle lines have been drawn between groups A and B so I doubt there's much to be gained from getting into the middle of it.

 

King is a clever man I respect to a reasonable degree. However, the moment he put his own wealth above that of the club and took over a fan group to achieve it, he lost a lot of credibility. Does this mean Park et al are faultless?  Of course not but I don't see anything changing anytime soon when it comes to the leadership of the club so if King or anyone else has something of note to say then the AGM will be the only place to do so - outside of protests which hopefully we're a long way away from.

[Uilleam 5,948]

I was sent the following, without comment, not from Bill Copeland, and I post it here, without comment, for your edification or outrage:

 

From Bill Copland;

As you know, last night, I attended a Q&A with Dave King arranged by Club1872  at the Village Hotel in Govan. It was very interesting and he spoke frankly and openly, perhaps more than I thought he would. There were a wide range of discussion topics and he commented on the following:
He considers the current board unfit for purpose and following offering Douglas Park, as chairman, some advice, there has been a disengaged relationship between them. While Park remains as chairman, Dave King will not return. DK is against resolution 8 at the upcoming AGM as this would allow the board to exclude any investors, including him, and issue shares only in the Board's favour.

 

He spoke about how some fan social media had made wildly inaccurate allegations about him and how the board seem to want to engage with such spin doctors. (See Follow Follow) He feels the club have let their values slip, specifically in how they have treated former players, the appointment of David Graham as press liaison (who has a track record of inappropriate actions, including bigotry) and he was highly positive and complimentary about James Traynor and his role as media and communications person.

Dave also spoke highly of Ross Wilson, though he expressed concerns that he may be operating with his hands tied behind his back.

 

He further stated that any director opposing the Park's, would be removed, and used Barry Scott as an example, someone DK personally rated.

 

He was convinced Steven Gerrard would have won 56 immediately after 55 and set us off on a run to 10 or more, but, as opposed to being guilty of desertion, the board highlighted the Aston Villa job as being something he should consider especially as the Board were unwilling to fulfil promises made to Gerrard.

He added that GVB had been similarly let down and based on the Europa League and CL money plus the fees for Patterson, Aribo and Bassey, the club is on a good financial footing but the current board do not have the personal wealth to increase their investment and improve all aspects of the club.

 

He did charge interest on a £5m loan which the board asked him to suspend which would have put him in breach of South African FRS rules, but instead offered to give a further loan as soon as the initial loan was repaid and to follow any other course of action could have ended with us going into administration again and him going to jail.

He has met the US Financier, Kyle Fox, for forty minutes and was impressed not only by her, but how much information she had gathered and some of the potential investors identified, and while urging caution, felt something like this opportunity would allow the club to grow.

 

He feels the current board see us as customers, not fans, and therefore try to get money from us at every opportunity. He believes Club1872 to be the vehicle to give the fans a greater voice, as it should be and he explained why he had remained as the club director on our commercial operations, building an 'understanding' of Sports Direct and Ashley and he believed he could get out of their clutches for £2m, and as per our current accounts, it cost £7m+ due to the Board's mismanagement and lack of 'understanding '.

He had no opinion as to who the new manager would be but felt paying compensation for a current manager elsewhere, when there was a considerable pool of similar talent already available, was not good business.

 

The meeting lasted an hour and I asked him 2 questions:

What can the rank and file supporters of our club do to bring pressure on the current board, without causing excessive ill feeling or disharmony, in a concerted and united manner to move the club forward at this time?

In what ways would he like to see the structure and infrastructure of the club and its management and direction changed, while limiting the possible damage and poor publicity that such changes may cause?
His response to my first question was 'very little' other than encourage people to join Club1872 
and to my second question, this is where he made comments  regarding the current chairman and board as previously noted.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Uilleam

[lenny3k 662]

13 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

He had no opinion as to who the new manager would be but felt paying compensation for a current manager elsewhere, when there was a considerable pool of similar talent already available, was not good business.

sooooo, he's not a fan of Beale basically 🤣

[stewarty 2,027]

My initial reaction to the headlines from this meeting were that he made some valid points that broadly reflect what some supporters also think.  But that summary just adds more fuel to the view that he’s just looking for ways to cash out - this Fox woman for one.  

 

And if he had a legal strategy that would save the club around £5m in terms of the Sports Direct settlement, why on earth was he not sharing that with the club and using his shareholding to make sure he was heard?  What did he uniquely know that our lawyers didn’t?

 

Feels like he enjoys the attention a wee bit too much.