22 Jun 2015 09:08:26
I noticed some article from that guy with the made up name saying king offerrd Ashley his shares I find it hard to believe but why does the club not take action against him then? Ed would you say this story is a load of nonsense

{Ed001's Note - yes it is nonsense, as usual.}

1.) 22 Jun 2015
22 Jun 2015 13:18:04
I think it is a load of invented nonsense, King on the day that the Rangers board under his instruction voted on a resolution to not pay Ashley back his loan for the time being is supposed to have went cap in hand to London to ask Ashley to buy him out. No chance and I am no King sycophant.

Personally I would like the Rangers board to ridicule the claims, explaining that this will be the one and only time they will respond to the rumours of this bitter man. Which would humiliate him and put off others who make about fake stories about the club.

2.) 22 Jun 2015
22 Jun 2015 14:21:02
Naz and Ed I agree this story seems ridiculous. But as for making a statement saying "this is the one and only time we will respond to this guy" - well, it's too late for that. Remember the Wallace board did previously publicly refute his claim, last January or February I think it was, that we were running short of cash and unable to secure any City investment. Total rubbish, said the board. But then we announced to the AIM just a few weeks later that we had taken the first of what was to be many (and ongoing) emergency loans. So he doesn't always get it wrong apparently. I hasten to add that I very rarely read his stuff, although I hear about it through this and other banter sites, and i'm certainly not sticking up for him, he clearly has an anti-rangers agenda. But that episode from last year was the first time I paid attention to what he said and the fact it turned out to be basically true did stick in my mind. As far as I understand the main thrust of his overall narrative is that we still desperately need external finance and it's far from clear where that's going to come from. Even if he's a d#ckhead, it frankly is difficult to argue against that. That said, I can't see DK bailing out. Not quite yet anyway.

{Ed001's Note - that story of cash running short was not something he had to source, it was well known that there was no money. It is just that Rangers were refusing to admit to it. Just like it was well known David Murray had put the club into serious trouble but no Rangers site was running with it, purely because at that time you could not criticise Murray. I can remember getting so much abuse I stopped even editing this site for a while after mentioning something that was not favourable to Murray. Fans just want to hear good stuff about their own club and bad things about their rivals, so he is one of a multitude of 'journalists' that pander to it. The odd true story does not make up for the fact that a lot of what he does is guesswork. Even the CIA will put mostly facts in their misinformation, as a lie is more believable when surrounded by checkable facts.}

3.) 22 Jun 2015
22 Jun 2015 17:20:35
Completely agree Ed, I'm sure a lot of it is misinformation laced through the facts. But equally if someone is printing facts that are true and important to us, but which our club is refusing to admit, then why reject the source of those facts just because he is a smug t#sser?

I'm sure you'll agree that there is a very unhealthy lack of questioning of those in blazers amongst us bears in general. Many of the fans who are now deriding the last board are the very ones who unquestioningly believed that same board's statement last year when it was lying to us that we weren't skint. And relying on that to call this guy out as as a liar when it turned out what he was saying was the truth (and, as you rightly say, it wasn't exactly very difficult to believe.)

So what i'm saying is, if the lies of our own board won't be exposed by our own fans and those who have our interests at heart, perhaps we shouldn't be too quick to knock sources of info that do sometimes tell us the uncomfortable facts. Even if those sources have an anti-rangers agenda. And even if it's only the odd story that genuinely hits the target. It's always possible to exercise sensible discretion over what sounds plausible or not. But why reject them out of hand completely? If we do that we just play into the hands of Traynor's lame #ss PR for the board, without any alternative to measure that against.

{Ed001's Note - the difference is that this story is just a lot of crap. Everyone and his dog know that Ashley can't buy any more shares. So why would King be begging Ashley to buy them? He is not an idiot.}

4.) 22 Jun 2015
22 Jun 2015 18:39:18
Don't know the story ,but this is exactly how you have ended up where you are, by not questioning the custodians of your club ,this has allowed a group of business men working in concert to asset strip the old and new clubs, and they ain't finished yet, why don't the supporters ask the uncomfortable questions and hold these people to account ,its their business but it's your club ,without the supporters these people are grubbed this will be your last chance to get back on your feet,ask the questions!

5.) 22 Jun 2015
22 Jun 2015 19:13:53
Yeh your correct utter bollocks.But the meeting between DK & MA last week did take place . 7 years is the retail deal & MA fee for walking away is 25 million(that's with loan & interest included)