Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Rangers Rumours Member Posts
JG.'s Profile
JG.'s Posts and Other Poster's Replies To JG.'s Posts
To JG.'s last 5 rumour replies
To JG.'s last 5 banter replies
JG.'s rumours posts with other poster's replies to JG.'s rumours posts
06 Jan 2015 07:10:38
statement at 7am, I think its worth posting in its full version
Further to statement issued by Rangers Int. Football Club Plc ("RIFC") on 5 January 2015, Robert Sarver, the US financier and majority owner of the National Basketball Association franchise Phoenix Suns, confirms that he has made an approach to the Board of RIFC with a view to explore the possibility of purchasing the entire issued share capital of the company. Mr Sarver also notes the deadline of 5. 00 p. m. , 2 February 2015 in accordance with Rule 2. 6 (a) of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (the "Takeover Code"). Nothing in this announcement constitutes an announcement of a firm intention to make an offer in accordance with Rule 2. 7 of the Takeover Code. There can be no certainty that an offer will be made nor as to the terms on which any offer might be made.
Mr Sarver revealed that it was conversation with former Rangers player, Davie Robertson, now a successful youth football director in Phoenix, Arizona, which first sparked his interest in the club.
Speaking from Arizona, Mr Sarver said: "My three sons all play soccer, as we call it here in the US, for Davie's club.
"Initially, I'd had some of my advisors examining potential investments in teams in the English Premier League and in Spain, but Davie encouraged me to take a close look at Rangers.
"Like all Rangers fans, he's really upset about how far the club has fallen in recent years and the more we spoke, the more interested I became.
"I'd be the first to admit that I'm not a lifelong Rangers supporter, but anyone who knows me is aware that I'm a genuine sports fanatic and owning two major basketball franchises for the past decade has been an enormous privilege.
"I've spent the vast majority of my career in public companies and I'm used to working in very highly regulated environments. I understand the crucial importance of business integrity and transparency.
"Rangers fans have every right to be wary about someone showing an interest in the club they love, especially given some of the events of recent years.
"First and foremost I believe what the club needs today is a very quick, major injection of capital to stabilise things and I can give the Rangers supporters a categorical assurance that I have the resources and ability to get this club back to its elite level.
"I'm looking forward to building a consensus amongst supporters and prominent Rangers-minded figures who have the long-term success of the club at heart.
"I've had detailed research carried out on Rangers and I'm convinced that we could take it back to the top of the Scottish game on a stable and sustainable basis. "
Mr Sarver is a highly-respected CEO of New York Stock Exchange-listed Western Alliance Bancorporation, a $10 billion dollar bank holding company, and also sits on the board of directors of two other major publicly-listed US companies, Meritage Homes and Skywest Airlines.
He has already provided proof of funds to the Rangers board.
A high-profile figure in US sports, he purchased a majority ownership in the Phoenix Suns basketball franchise in 2004. During Mr Sarver's tenure the team boasts the fourth-best winning record in the NBA. Women's basketball is also big in the US and, under Mr Sarver's ownership, Phoenix Mercury has won three WNBA titles.
Former Rangers Football Club player, Davie Robertson, said: "I've known Robert for several years. He has been very supportive of our local club and has a very good reputation in the US.
"When he said he was looking to invest in football in Europe, I told him right away that Rangers could really be doing with someone with his track record. I explained how far the club has fallen, but that there was huge potential to rebuild it. "
Mr Robertson, who played 245 times for Rangers over six seasons and was part of the side which won nine-in-a-row, continued: "Even though I'm now based over here, I always watch really closely how things are going at Ibrox and it's tragic to see how a club which was once a force in Europe has been brought so low.
"I can tell every Rangers fan in Scotland and abroad, if Robert Sarver is successful in becoming part of the club, he'll not rest until they are back on top again. "
- Ends -
JG
1.) He comes over very well and D Robertson vouching is a big plus. clearly the knockback from the person board also backs him up as genuine were he a crook linked to AShley they would have accepted or encouraged his interest. It has never been cl;earer that the board are dancing to Ashley's tune havoing now turned down 16million and 18million thry are only interested in self preservation and at the possible cost to our club.
Total boycott until removed is the only course of action unless the King/Bears team can oust them
Sick of the criminal element trying to cling to the cash cow they see our team and fans as
redsox555
2.) So the Americans offer to gain a controlling interest did not match the valuation of the club. excuse me-Green got it for a hell of a lot less than the offer.
3.) 07 Jan 2015 14:15:18
"Rangers fan" my ar$e! Yet another pretentious suitor whose only semblance of credibility could as an Ashley stooge. The battle is joined .!
27 Oct 2014 08:51:08
Wallace resignation announced
JG
1.) 27 Oct 2014 10:22:55
I reckon Wallace will seek damages, his position became compromised by the actions of his employers. The action of his other board members would see Rangers be vicariously liable. Take it from someone who deals with employment law, I think he would be succesfull his reputation has been tarnished and he has been undermined. The £2M loan from Ashley could end up in Wallaces pocket for damages. You better believe he will be given hush money. Wallace knows stuff the remaining board won't want the fans to know.
2.) I'm also hearing a rumour today that Mccoist has been called into a meeting with the Easdales to either be sacked or resign. Anybody else heard this?
3.) Nbts calm down mate, is it no possible he's been pumped because he never performed?
JG
27 Nov 2013 13:31:58
Notice of AGM has been issued and now available to read on the website
JG
JG.'s banter posts with other poster's replies to JG.'s banter posts
20 Jan 2015 19:22:55
Just noticed Nigel Adkins is out of work, he would do for me
JG
1.) 20 Jan 2015 20:21:10
Is Bernard bresslaw still about fit right in
2.) Think rangers keep the job inhouse to save money fu@@ knows who will get it maybe durie, we won't bring in anybody to save wages
3.) 20 Jan 2015 21:31:58
Mibee Alan Titchmarsh at least when he stands down in a couple of months he'll enjoy his gardening duties
08 Jan 2015 13:25:19
Ed this is way too long for a poll but it would be good to get a feel for the way regulars on RR are thinking
Excluding a rights issue which seems to be on the back burner right now and probably would not have much affect on shareholdings, The way I see it we have 5 possible scenarios in front of us
3 Bears and king stay with 34% and make a coalition with A N Others existing shareholders to have 51% control
3 bears and king buy more shares to get to the magic 51% and have control
Ashley challenges the SFA ruling and buys more shares to get to 51% and have control
Sarver has a complete takeover and has 100% control
Admin #2
Which do you prefer?
How probable is it?
How will that take us forward for the future?
JG
1.) Jg. the 3 Bears will not sell sarver their shares so the scenario that sarrver has 100% control will not happen. however I think the best scenario for us is that blue pitch, marguerite, easdale and Ashley sell sarrver their shares. whether that happens or not we will have to wait and see. admin 2 is never going to happen. a judge will never allow that to happen when there is investment on the table.
2.) Bigcol1872 I don't think these feckers would see up there shares unless server was willing to pay way over the top for them, plus server would want at least half of the club (ieover 51 per cent), as he is into it for money, which is fair enough, but I would rather have mr king and the 3bears, guys that we know, there eyes are not bigger than there bellies, they will make money ok, but they are willing to wait for it, unlike fat mike and the plebs from greenock
07 Jan 2015 12:24:54
See a few posters on here jumping on the old boycott wagon and encouraging others to join in, I still don't agree
Sure we can demonstrate that we are not happy with the way our club is being run, but the place to do it to more effect would be inside Ibrox, from the stands
There has been a boycott in place since ST went on sale last year
Can someone tell me what that has achieved? Other than deprive the club of much needed revenue and force us to take loans off the very people the boycotters seem to want to get rid of
Did no one notice we just had an AGM,
After 7 or 8 months of boycotts the shareholders voted for the board,
Again did no one notice the results of the AGM
Llambias had 53m votes for and 5m against
Easdale had 52m votes for and 6M against
That proves that the boycott is not working, the message never got to the shareholders and will not change the boardroom
At the end of the day it is up to each individual to decide (or be drawn in to the throng) but really it can only be the shareholders who can force change
JG
1.) 07 Jan 2015 13:42:34
I've said exactly the same thing on here the boycotts don't work and won't work as long as these people can still get loans and for boycotting ashleys shops with the money he makes on other merchandise I'm sure he won't miss it, the only solution is for park, king and like minded shareholders, is to force them out I'm sure king has reached this conclusion as well and that's why he & others are now buying shares.
r. f
2.) @JG - Yeah but what percentage of votes were cast from Rangers men or fans! Nowhere near the amount of shares we have now.
3.) The current board are on an asset sale and strip mission to earn whatever they can before they are ousted by an EGM and 51% vote.
Any money paid into Rangers will only benefit the persons on our board not our club why would anyone want to give them more money? They are not running the club properly in any form at all Ashley gets around 90% of all or kit money and they are all still on huge salaries draining the club every day they remain in charge. Mind every time they employ another Director they end up leaving with 6 figure settlements that is all part of their asset strip plans.
A question that needs to be answered for us the fans and possibly the Police eventually is what the funk did Ashley pay under the counter in cash to get the kit deal that favours his company and not Rangers, why would a Rangers board under sell our kit deal worth millions, and how in hell can a stadium naming rights also be sold for 1 pound? These two deals are to me stinking of dodgy under counter backhander deals. The same as the security and catering favouring Green and Stockbridge. The level of corporate mismanagement to suit the boards in place at the time and never to suit Rangers is mindblowing when you start to add up the millions. Green onwards we have lost/wasted 50million pounds after 30million being "lost" by whyte and gang. I say mismanagement and lost purely as to state the obvious st**en and fr**d is risky with all the trials due this year and next.
So seriously mate after all the money "lost" to you really expect Rangers fans to hand money to this board? I respect and admire all Bears who love Rangers and that love is blind which makes you think irrationally so you need to try to think with head based on all the past actions of our 'boards' not with your heart. The team and Rangers will all survive after this we cannot allow these persons one more cent of Rangers money going to their wallets not Rangers bank.
RTID redsox555
4.) 07 Jan 2015 14:12:12
look at it from these point of views the board will continue to laugh at us by going inside the stadium you will give them more money and with this board this is all they want not a single penny has went towards the good of the club what has it achieved if there was full houses at ibrox do u think the 3 bears and david king would have been able to buy those shares answer is no so we now have them in place with rangers best interest at heart unlike current regime so the message clearly got to a big percentage of shareholders to sell up and this board where always got to need more money for rest of season and next and loans ain't the answer board will not take investment of anyone else so what are they hiding we as fans do have the power to force change as already proving and its a demonstration and show of unity from the fans untill this board do not get a penny more they will not move on
5.) @2 caiesdayke - thanks for reinforcing my point,
that's exactly how change is going to happen, either by changing the view of some shareholders willing to change and by buying out others
JG
6.) Unfortunately what's on the park is putting a lot of fans off from attending. There is virtually no quality and the stuff being served up is dire. Why should fans pay money to watch players like Simonsen, Foster, Moshni, Black, Smith and Aird? Most of these players can't do the basics! Tactics are non existent and whole game plan consists of a punt up the park
7.) There is no quality on the park whatsoever, we have still got these people saying we need more numbers to go along and help the team, 500 or 50000 we will still play the same punt the ball from back to front football and by going along were just lining that fat greasy cockney ashleys pockets
8.) All,
Starve the board. They feed on money and in lining their own pockets. STOP FEEDING THEM! FFS! Your not supporting the team by going to IBROX. your prolonging the agony and lining pockets. Full boycott now! Only answer.
30 Dec 2014 05:43:39
I am surprised that the SFA did not refer back to previous examples when one person had interests in two clubs at the same time, before making their decision to refuse Ashley's proposal to up his shareholding
A good example for liewell to consider may have been his own major shareholder who was part of a consortium that owned 28. 7% of Manchester United at the same time as he was the major shareholder of a scottish club.
On second thoughts, no I'm not at all surprised!
JG
{Ed001's Note - Lawell was a minor part of a consortium and it is not the same at all. He wielded no power at Man Utd, while Ashley is in complete control of Newcastle and wanted complete control of Rangers to be ratified by the SFA. You should be thanking Lawell, Ashley is not a good owner. He put Pardew in place because Pardew owed Llambias money, so his wages are infinitesimal, not because he thought he could do a good job. Everything he does is about maximising profit margin for himself. He has even gone public that he has no interest in winning trophies or even competing for them, as that would involve investing in Newcastle. All he wants is to take money out. Is that really what you want as an owner? Surely what you want is someone who wants to maximise the club's revenue to give it more money to spend and enable it to win trophies, rather than to line his already bulging pockets with more money taken off the back of other people's hard work. Hard work which they get little compensation in return for doing.}
1.) Ed001 – you read my post wrong
It was not Liewell, it was Dermot Desmond who was part of a consortium that owned 28. 7% of Manchester United (before selling out to glazier) while holding over 50% in Celtic, much the same as Ashley wants to own with us
If you believe he had now power then read Fergies book, in there you will see that he personally called Fergie and told him not to make an offer for Larrson who was with Celtic at that time, sporting integrity anybody?
It appears to me there are many in Scottish football backed up by a media campaign who do not want to see Ashley taking over Rangers, makes mne wonder why, but if he could turn Rangers into a company that makes a profit three years in a row, with solid management and a decent team on the pitch which includes promising youngsters, then that would do for me, if he makes a few quid along the way that’s business, the guy Desmond takes 4% dividend on his shares every year, nobody boycotts about that, what's the difference?
Anyway you got your opinion I got mine
JG
{Ed001's Note - and yet the Celtic fans are fed up of seeing their team being weakened so that the board can pocket that money.....
The rules were set up to stop situations like the one you are referring to, how is that a bad thing? You are so bitter and deluded in your bias that you think people are against you because they aren't rolling over and doing all that the spivs currently in charge at Rangers ask them to. It is pathetic and embarrassing that bitter fans are attacking everyone else instead of the ones who are really at fault in this situation. Stop looking short term and think of the future of your club, and not be blinded by the fact Ashley's fat wallet is only matched by the size of his fat gut. He will do nothing but take from the fans to feed his own greed.}
2.) I suppose your right in one sense JG you say Desmond takes 4% every year and no one boycotts if Ashley did the same he might get better support but in merchandise alone he takes £9. 25 out of every £10 spent by the fans bit more than your 4% then he lends us our own money back in secured loans against assets he already has holds over Albion Car Park and Edmiston House at this rate he will own everything by the end of the season look at Newcastle they owe Ashley £140 mill they are stuck with him now just because he is a billionaire does not mean he wants to bank roll us he wants as much as he can get out of us wake up our club is on the edge and for me thank god the SFA had the balls to say no their are Rangers men offering investment NOT loans let get them involved before its to late we need people we can trust to run this club we had close to £70 mill three years ago look at us now sending out emails at 4am on boxing day begging people to invest in us while there is two investment offers on the table I along with two other friends renewed our season tickets after weeks of soul searching lost our seats of over thirty years but after attending the share holders meeting and seeing the utter contempt shown to the fans (minor shareholders) like us we all agreed we won't be back not a boycott not because of Ally or McDowall nor the poor form of the team but because of a board that is rotten to the core and while we the fans sit fiddling Rome is burning
23 Dec 2014 13:44:17
Resolution #9
votes for 44. 84% - against 55. 16%
board lost their resolution to allow them to have an open share offer
JG
1.) 23 Dec 2014 14:00:48
JG : What does that mean to a mere football fan like myself?Is that good or bad?
2.) 23 Dec 2014 14:11:44
the current crop of ashley easdale ect did not want there shares diluted so voted against it even though this was there proposal in the first place this is just a complete farce they are not allowing anyone outside of there gang to invest in the club something needs to give cause they have no money to run our club
3.) Gkk - means the majority of existing shareholders did not agree with the proposal to give the board the power to have an open share offer which could have diluted their shareholding
it also means that it will be down to the existing shareholders to pump more money into the club to keep us going
either that or its just another excuse for some to boycott
Craig8688 - anybody, even King, can go to a stockbroker today and buy up any available shares in RIFC, once they have a shareholding they can apply for more shares in any future rights issue, and can apply to take up any shares which are left over
remember the last rights issue? there were approx.5m shares not taken up,
somebody outside "the gang" could have had them
JG
4.) 23 Dec 2014 15:09:24
JG:Cheers pal.
5.) 23 Dec 2014 15:28:01
yeh but ma point it is just another way of them all sticking together its complete farce why did they want raise this issue then reject it themselves just doesn't add up mate and I hope ashley proves me wrong but am not getting my hopes up on that one
6.) I suppose if the board wanted it to lose one good point might be that it was actually so close and therefore if someone could get their hands on a few shares they might tip the balance against the current board which would be a good thing.
Now Durie is on Board let's see some talented kids getting a game. If Durrant had self respect he should walk, what a slap I the face.
7.) 23 Dec 2014 17:03:45
@6 Yes mate he has been treated a bit shabbily,plus they got McDowall to do the deed,bit surprised at that one regardless of how much our standards have dropped on and off field.I expect him to walk.
8.) @6 & 7 slap in the face, treated shabbily, very short memories
Rangers treated durrant very well, he had a job sitting next to WS in the stand for a couple of years and then three years sitting next to ally titchmarsh,
so he has been treated well by the club
JG
9.) Look neither of them lost their job and are both are well paid
10.) @6. The vote on Res wasn't close though. It had a 75% barrier to be passed. It was there purely to show that the board were 'exploring all options'; the fact that they themselves recommended then voted against it speaks volumes.
11.) 24 Dec 2014 13:57:40
@8 I've not got your obvious business acumen or knowledge of shares etc,but my memory is sound.I was referring to the fact that one of the "board" should have told Durrant he was being demoted.
Bigwull, are you just in from your works christmas party mate?
JG
R. f
I am not legally minded but I think this is self-explanatory mate
BDO, the liquidators, are having a meeting as is required by the insolvency rules and have invited all the creditors of RFC 2012 to give them an update on the winding up proceedings, be interesting to see what they tell the creditors though
JG
Christmas comes early ????
JG
Nbts calm down mate, is it no possible he's been pumped because he never performed?
JG
"after the Lpool game" !! WTF
he has to wait until he watches the Lpool game
seems like he is going to make his statement on the steps of the plane back to RSA, and say I tried my best but the big bad easdales widnae let me,
too little and far far too late King
JG
Billyb it would be better if they took him to the side and taught him how to take a man on, take a corner and how to cross a ball
JG
Doiger hearts need 29 points from 13 games to win the league, that's if we win all our remaining 16 games, including the two against them, never give up hope but realistically it is a big big ask,
JG
George - something not right here m8, that's twice in two weeks I have had to agree with you,
I wish Ashley would give us another loan - of 3 or 4 decent players from now to the end of the season!!
JG
Penny arcade, going by Gordon's post you better redo your sums
It's been well known that easdale has proxy for 26% including his own, bph and margarita
JG
I am George - let me try and explain my diddy comment in simple terms and maybe you can then explain to your London experts
51% required
Its 51% of all votes that will be cast at the EGM that are required to pass a resolution
NOT
51% of all shareholder votes i. e the 81m shares issued
what do I mean?
ask your experts to look at the AGM results and tell you how many votes were counted for each resolution, they should come back and tell you it was 68m not 81m which is the total of shares issued
Individual shareholdings
Again tell your London expert pals that everyone who owns more than 3% of shares has to make a declaration. There is a big thing in London called the stock exchange and they have a website page for RIFC, if your experts look through the announcements they will see exactly who hold what shares as per the holdings in company announcements
17. 5% not In public hands
This has constantly been stated on the shareholder information of the RFC website for the last two years
I would have thought that those 3 wise businessmen would have been able to tell you that as well and again its obvious looking at the AGM results that these votes were not used
I have a question for your experts to finish
if king and 3bs hold 34% who will make up the other 17% to reach the 51% they are telling you about?
don't know about the big London but anywhere else in the world you cannot have 103. 5% of a whole
JG