Dave King what is he about?

[youngsy]

King a fraudster to he out for himself like rest of them I dont care how the gers fans decide where there season ticket money goes withold it club prob go under because u got massive wage bill and players get paid over summer regardless hopeu lot sort it out scottish football pish when ur club not in spfl gave up season ticket at paradise this season it a procession to the title

Would i be correct in stating that the English language is not exactly your specialist subject?

[WILLIEA]

With your intellect I'm surprised you survived childhood!

I'm guessing he hasn't made it that far yet?

[sjc]

I'm guessing he hasn't made it that far yet?

you might be right there mate!

[shakav]

I am a doctor u foolish followers and happen to no exaclly what is going on inside those marbelled stairs and it not pretty is my english up to standard now considering I see myself as scottish and a sort of republican haha fucking ha xx

[sjc]

has to be a windup.

A Bennett alter ego alias perhaps?

[Henrik's tongue]

hi tim.

i unfortunately have my name til a die to.

^^^ Engelbert.

[Kamenitza]

I am a doctor u foolish followers and happen to no exaclly what is going on inside those marbelled stairs and it not pretty is my english up to standard now considering I see myself as scottish and a sort of republican haha fucking ha xx

Are you Dr. Know?

[GreenockRover]

^^^^^ Bought his Dr title on the internet....

[weeto]

The truth about Dave King is that I don't trust that guy any more than the current board.

He seems to be trying to get the fans to run the club totally into a brick wall so he or his cronies can get the club for scrap value like when Green came in after liquidation.

He isn't going to put the kind of money needed to beat Celtic on a regular basis and that is what the fans expect.

If Rangers still had the side they had before the meltdown happened and were in the Premiership, they'd be kicking Celtic's backside as Celtic have declined too on the field as they have ZERO competition in the Premiership. Again though, probably Celtic would have a stronger side on the field if Rangers were on par with them at the moment. Rangers are around mid table quality in Premiership terms and should find their way out of the Championship straight away but with Hearts in there and maybe another fairly big name if another Premiership team goes down in the playoff, Rangers might need serious player investment to patch up the gaps to avoid a potentially financially disastrous second season in the Championship.

The worry about Scottish League football is that not even Old Firm clubs can make enough money to survive without European participation. With the dreadful European form of Scottish clubs, it could take years to get a second Champions League place back and if Rangers weren't digging deep into the pockets, Celtic could stay ahead for years.

If Rangers were to find a backer and spend big and still failed to get into the Champions League in the coming years, it could cripple the club again while they could keep the spending down but struggle to get ahead of the likes of Dundee United and Aberdeen, never mind Celtic for the next four or five years.

So it could be either the speculative risk of the Souness era or the conservative penny pinching of the early to mid 80s. The first risks the financial base of the club, the second risks any chance of success on the field.

The fans will be desperate for an immediate return to Rangers immediately challenging for the Premiership title when they do get back up but chasing it with overly stretched resources could land the club back in huge trouble again but getting the place in the Champions League would damage Celtic's finances and income as a result.for the seasons where there would be a single place and could level the playing field to an extent, although there is quite a bit of ground to make up.

At the moment, Rangers seem to have penny pinching guys with questionable track records hanging around like vultures and there are no signs of a hugely wealthy chairman coming in and regenerating the club. The potential for being able to make credible runs for the Premiership title is questionable.

[sjc]

The truth about Dave King is that I don't trust that guy any more than the current board.

He seems to be trying to get the fans to run the club totally into a brick wall so he or his cronies can get the club for scrap value like when Green came in after liquidation.

He isn't going to put the kind of money needed to beat Celtic on a regular basis and that is what the fans expect.

If Rangers still had the side they had before the meltdown happened and were in the Premiership, they'd be kicking Celtic's backside as Celtic have declined too on the field as they have ZERO competition in the Premiership. Again though, probably Celtic would have a stronger side on the field if Rangers were on par with them at the moment. Rangers are around mid table quality in Premiership terms and should find their way out of the Championship straight away but with Hearts in there and maybe another fairly big name if another Premiership team goes down in the playoff, Rangers might need serious player investment to patch up the gaps to avoid a potentially financially disastrous second season in the Championship.

The worry about Scottish League football is that not even Old Firm clubs can make enough money to survive without European participation. With the dreadful European form of Scottish clubs, it could take years to get a second Champions League place back and if Rangers weren't digging deep into the pockets, Celtic could stay ahead for years.

If Rangers were to find a backer and spend big and still failed to get into the Champions League in the coming years, it could cripple the club again while they could keep the spending down but struggle to get ahead of the likes of Dundee United and Aberdeen, never mind Celtic for the next four or five years.

So it could be either the speculative risk of the Souness era or the conservative penny pinching of the early to mid 80s. The first risks the financial base of the club, the second risks any chance of success on the field.

The fans will be desperate for an immediate return to Rangers immediately challenging for the Premiership title when they do get back up but chasing it with overly stretched resources could land the club back in huge trouble again but getting the place in the Champions League would damage Celtic's finances and income as a result.for the seasons where there would be a single place and could level the playing field to an extent, although there is quite a bit of ground to make up.

At the moment, Rangers seem to have penny pinching guys with questionable track records hanging around like vultures and there are no signs of a hugely wealthy chairman coming in and regenerating the club. The potential for being able to make credible runs for the Premiership title is questionable.

It's quite ironic that the European competition that Rangers played a major part in instigating the formation of is the very one that financially destabilised numerous domestic European leagues and lead to the downfall of numerous Clubs across the Continent..........including Rangers.

[Monkey Tennis]

It's quite ironic that the European competition that Rangers played a major part in instigating the formation of is the very one that financially destabilised numerous domestic European leagues and lead to the downfall of numerous Clubs across the Continent..........including Rangers.

Yes, I don't know that Rangers would really have been as influential in bringing about change as the press liked to pretend, but the fact is that they were squarely behind the idea of turning the European Cup into the self-serving circus it's become. Unfortunately, I think the changes were inevitable anyway and much bigger clubs than Rangers would have broken away from UEFA if the body didn't bend to their will.

Where clubs like Rangers really got it wrong though was in pressing for the scrapping of the eight diddies rule. They thought that the rule handicapped them, coming from a small country. The reality though is that allowing clubs from big countries to buy whoever they could afford became insurmountable for clubs from outside these countries as the income they could generate, fell miles short.

There is something cute about the CL and its pursuit hastening Rangers downfall, but it's a shame that its existence ensures Celtic will remain so far ahead of the others.

[sjc]

Yes, I don't know that Rangers would really have been as influential in bringing about change as the press liked to pretend, but the fact is that they were squarely behind the idea of turning the European Cup into the self-serving circus it's become. Unfortunately, I think the changes were inevitable anyway and much bigger clubs than Rangers would have broken away from UEFA if the body didn't bend to their will.

Where clubs like Rangers really got it wrong though was in pressing for the scrapping of the eight diddies rule. They thought that the rule handicapped them, coming from a small country. The reality though is that allowing clubs from big countries to buy whoever they could afford became insurmountable for clubs from outside these countries as the income they could generate, fell miles short.

There is something cute about the CL and its pursuit hastening Rangers downfall, but it's a shame that its existence ensures Celtic will remain so far ahead of the others.

Give it a few years in a row of them not making the group stages and they'll get drawn back towards the rest of us.

[weeto]

The Old Firm will never really be able to compete at the highest level without getting TV money similar to the bigger European leagues and the only way that could happen is if clubs from smaller countries were able to either join bigger leagues, with say the Old Firm going to England, Ajax joining the German or English league, Porto and Benfica going to Spain and so on. The other alternative is the 'Atlantic League' idea, which has actually been done in some sports like basketball, although generally more in Eastern and Southern Europe.

What would be wrong though, is that taking the likes of the Old Firm, Ajax, PSV, Feyenoord, Benfica, Porto,Sporting Lisbon, Anderlecht, FC Copenhagen, Red Bull Salzburg, Panathanikos, Olympiakos, Galatasaray, Fenerbahce, Besiktas, Shaktar Donetsk and Dynamo Kiev out of their national leagues would weaken them even further and destroy any TV and commercial revenue that their leagues get already.

Clubs like Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hibs and Motherwell would struggle if they weren't getting the TV money they're used to getting. The Sky and BT deals would probably disappear if the Old Firm did and while those clubs were soaking in the millions they need to compete at a higher level, the rest would stagnate and the standard of youth football and players coming through would decline at the clubs that didn't jump ship.

The biggest clubs in the small countries have struggled to compete in Europe in recent years as TV money and commercial revenue has dried up outside the 'Big 5' of England, Spain, Germany, France and Italy.

Even England has the race for a top 4 spot every year now, as a Champions League spot is so important now as the financial penalties of not qualifying will push you further away from being able to compete against those that get the cash pot. So this has created a division even in their league, while everyone gets great TV and commercial revenues just for being in the English Premier League, being in the Champions League gives a huge financial boost on top of this.

It has got to the stage where Champions League teams are often the same teams year in and year out as the benefits of qualification can make getting back in almost a formality unless other teams spend huge sums to chase the dream and wealth associated with getting to the promised land. Obviously the risks involved have damaged and crippled several clubs while others have flourished.

This culture of 'haves and have nots' have messed up football in many ways as the likes of Scottish, Dutch and Swedish teams that used to be able to make some impact in Europe have found the gap has grown to the extent they can't compete like they did in the past.

[dave.j]

The Old Firm will never really be able to compete at the highest level without getting TV money similar to the bigger European leagues and the only way that could happen is if clubs from smaller countries were able to either join bigger leagues, with say the Old Firm going to England, Ajax joining the German or English league, Porto and Benfica going to Spain and so on. The other alternative is the 'Atlantic League' idea, which has actually been done in some sports like basketball, although generally more in Eastern and Southern Europe.

What would be wrong though, is that taking the likes of the Old Firm, Ajax, PSV, Feyenoord, Benfica, Porto,Sporting Lisbon, Anderlecht, FC Copenhagen, Red Bull Salzburg, Panathanikos, Olympiakos, Galatasaray, Fenerbahce, Besiktas, Shaktar Donetsk and Dynamo Kiev out of their national leagues would weaken them even further and destroy any TV and commercial revenue that their leagues get already.

Clubs like Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hibs and Motherwell would struggle if they weren't getting the TV money they're used to getting. The Sky and BT deals would probably disappear if the Old Firm did and while those clubs were soaking in the millions they need to compete at a higher level, the rest would stagnate and the standard of youth football and players coming through would decline at the clubs that didn't jump ship.

The biggest clubs in the small countries have struggled to compete in Europe in recent years as TV money and commercial revenue has dried up outside the 'Big 5' of England, Spain, Germany, France and Italy.

Even England has the race for a top 4 spot every year now, as a Champions League spot is so important now as the financial penalties of not qualifying will push you further away from being able to compete against those that get the cash pot. So this has created a division even in their league, while everyone gets great TV and commercial revenues just for being in the English Premier League, being in the Champions League gives a huge financial boost on top of this.

It has got to the stage where Champions League teams are often the same teams year in and year out as the benefits of qualification can make getting back in almost a formality unless other teams spend huge sums to chase the dream and wealth associated with getting to the promised land. Obviously the risks involved have damaged and crippled several clubs while others have flourished.

This culture of 'haves and have nots' have messed up football in many ways as the likes of Scottish, Dutch and Swedish teams that used to be able to make some impact in Europe have found the gap has grown to the extent they can't compete like they did in the past.

Whilst you are right in what you are saying with a lot of that. Surely as a rangers fan, you must now realise that Scottish football is bigger than 2 teams. Bigger than the 4 who qualify for Europe.

You've now played through two divisions where not one of them probably gives two shits about European football, tv money etc. excluding the pars.

The problem is the media put so much stock in the importance of a strong rangers and Celtic being able to compete. But the majority of football fans in Scotland couldn't give a shit about it.

Partick thistle have played in Europe once in my lifetime. We have aspirations to get there eventually. But it's a pipe dream that can only be realised in a far off future.

As a fan, Europe serves no purpose for me. I don't have sky sports. I rarely watch the ITV game. Even the final I won't make myself available to watch.

It's boring.

[Florentine_Pogen]

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=25635

Test match cricket commentators are a little over-fond of saying that “the next session is crucial.” BUT… the “next session” in the “Rangers” saga looks very crucial indeed. There is no-one left to deny that Rangers desperately need money. And their early-April call for current season-ticket holders to renew said tickets by May 6th is Plan A for getting that money in before it is too late. In a direct response, South Africa-based ex-Rangers director Dave King renewed his call to said season-ticket holders not to renew unless or until they are granted security over Rangers’ main assets, Ibrox Stadium and the Auchenhowie training ground formerly known as Murray Park. In a very direct response to this direct response, the Rangers board, effectively, told King to go away and boil his head. In a very direct response to this very direct response… oh, you get the message…

Meanwhile, The Rangers Football Club Limited (TRFCL) released their first annual accounts – to June 30th 2013. These garnered little attention, as the story they told was largely that of parent company Rangers International Football Club (RIFC), when their accounts for that period were published last October. However, one small chapter needed retelling and could…SHOULD help Rangers ease their current predicament. The RIFC board and King issued statements after their March 14th meeting, carrying differing but compatible interpretations of events. There appeared to be mutual agreement over “the aims of the club.” “Compete at the highest level of Scottish and European football”, said the board. “Competition with Celtic and in Europe,” said King.

However, the Rangers “Union of Fans” (UOF) said the board were “no longer considering the massive scaling back of club operations,” a statement which appeared to come from thin air. While King claimed: “In a couple of weeks we can expect a business review,” Wallace’s well-publicised “120-day” review of RIFC’s operations, “that will reflect the board’s ambition and a funding plan to achieve this,” which no-one was going to translate as “massive scaling back.” And King emphasised that “statements from a public company board are intended to be relied upon,” adding: “if circumstances change, the board would be bound to advise the public in advance.” So, while critics had interpreted his call to halt fan protests as backing down, he was, actually, backing the board into a corner by letting people assume they’d made ambitious and somehow legally-binding spending commitments.

This was his strategy in a series of newspaper interviews he gave once he was back in South Africa – including an embarrassing near-hagiography in the Scottish Daily Mail – late last month. And this was his strategy last week, when the board issued renewal forms to Rangers’ season-ticket holders. However, fans’ spokespeople were unsure of their next move. The UOF’s biggest mouthpiece, Chris Graham, spoke of a “need to decide over the next couple of days how we proceed,” in an April 10th Glasgow Evening Times interview mostly so vague it almost wasn’t there. Graham said fans were “working in the background” on the Trust into which King said season-ticket holders should place their money. But the words between Graham’s lines were “Dave, tell us what to do.” Fortunately for them, Dave did.

The following day, King expressed his “surprise” that the board had reneged on their commitment to give fans “access” to the business review “prior to advancing funds by way of season-ticket renewals.” He explained he had given the board time because “breach of such a share-price sensitive commitment would be an ethical, moral and possibly criminal breach.” And he accused them of “an extreme act of bad faith,” while apologising to fans “for…lending credibility to the board’s false representations.” Followers of King’s dealings with South Africa’s Revenue Service (SARS) will have recognised the language. Indeed, you could believe King was a bad faith magnet, so often did SARS allegedly show it to him during their 13-year battle over unpaid tax millions.

The board responded within hours, exposing King’s claims as rubbish. They noted his statement “with astonishment”, claimed his allegations of “bad faith and false representation” were “untrue” and said “Mr King is well aware” that their position on the business review’s publication timetable was “unchanged.” It was. King hadn’t had the monopoly on ‘clever’ wording in March. The board’s “commitment” then was “to announce the results of the business review…in the next few weeks, ahead of the season-ticket renewal deadline” (my emphasis). That deadline is May 6th. The board have now said that the results announcement will be on April 25th. Commitment met. The board also said King had “made it clear…that he did not want to put another penny” into Rangers and would “prefer” to see them “use other investors’ money.” So “the board was surprised, but gave him the benefit of the doubt, when Mr King made media comments about a willingness to invest.”

“This is an easy statement to make, but is contrary to what he told the whole board” they stressed. And they were clearly angry; refuting King’s allegations “in the strongest possible terms”; announcing that they had “referred Mr King’s statement to the club’s legal advisors”; and concluding that “for someone who claims to have the interests of Rangers at heart, and as an ex-director, King’s untrue comments are nothing short of disgraceful.” No more “Mr” King, then. King responded 48 hours later, focusing – perhaps unwisely given his South African tax travails – on the board’s integrity. He cited their “ill-judged attempt to discredit me” by “disclosing” his true investment intentions, in breach of an agreement that the “balance of our discussions” (whatever they were) “would remain private.” And he added: “This attempt at a ‘juicy’ leak… merely proves that it is impossible to engage with the board on a basis of confidentiality and integrity.”

Yet King also admitted he “had already, as part of my frank discussions with the fan groups, advised them that I had no prime ambition to invest further into the club.” And the board had not “disclosed” anything not already put in the public domain by the Scottish Daily Mail on March 28th when King HIMSELF said he didn’t “want to put new money in” and called himself “the last resort guy, no more than that.”
Nevertheless, he had already announced his “season-ticket trust,” and revealed that ex-Rangers centre-half, California-resident Richard Gough, “has agreed to join me as a custodian of the bank account that will be established, and fan groups can nominate additional members” while “specific terms and conditions will be made available to fans” and announced “shortly.” Whether this was what fans’ groups had been “working on in the background” was not immediately obvious. But they dutifully announced their plans “in line with (i.e. slavishly following) Dave King’s statements.”

The UOF also queried Wallace’s remuneration and “whether or not he has ended the bonus culture” at Rangers. As Wallace was appointed last November, the “shareholders” who had “contacted” the UOF “to express their concerns” about this culture seemed a bit slow. A cynic might think such moves were timed to discredit Wallace ahead of any cost-cutting announcement… and might think this too to be “in-line with King.” King’s main strategy, however, is readily exposable – if Scotland’s mainstream media were of a mind to do so. The issue of giving security over Ibrox and Auchenhowie is a charade, although fans groups appear to be unaware of this, given their insistence that there is no “legitimate reason to reject this proposal.” The board could happily tell King that “it has no intention of using these properties for any measure of security” because they were unable to do so. All “Rangers” recently-published financial results noted the “contingent liability” of ex-owner Craig Whyte’s claims on the properties. This liability scuppered RIFC’s January efforts to secure loan financing from City of London institutions.

King knows this. He can read accounts. His demand that a “loan” of perhaps only £12m season-ticket money be secured by assets valued at over £60m is merely another attempt to cast the board as unreasonable and less-than-transparent. He knows the board could not comply, being hamstrung by issues pre-dating them and far beyond their control. But the contingent liability need not BE an issue, as was methodically explained by a caller to local Glasgow radio station Clyde’s Superscoreboard football phone-in show on April 10th. The caller, ‘Eddie’, asked a clearly bemused panel of journalists about the location and existence (or otherwise) of a “deed of novation” from the transactions which formed the new Rangers.

From TRFCL’s accounts, Eddie read: “On 14 June 2012, Sevco 5088 entered into agreements for no consideration to legally reassign the beneficial interest in funding placing letters held and to novate the trade and assets purchase agreement with RFC plc 2012 (in administration) to Sevco Scotland (now TRFCL).” The significance of this was/is that Sevco 5088 was Whyte’s company, while Sevco Scotland was successor Charles Green’s company. Also, Rangers were admitting “that Sevco 5088” (Whyte) “had a legally-binding agreement” which “was novated” (transferred) “to Sevco Scotland” (Green). And Eddie added: “The reason Rangers can’t get a loan just now from a normal source is that they cannot secure these loans against assets because there’s a question mark over them,” i.e. Whyte claims this transfer of, effectively, the new Rangers’ ownership, did not take place as agreed.

Eddie explained the transfer was “only possible if you have a legal document in place… a ‘deed of novation’ where (all) parties agree on what’s going to happen and why and how and who benefits in what way.” He didn’t “understand why people are not asking ‘where is this document, what did it say and who signed it?’” And he asked: “If they won’t show us this deed of novation, why not?” They could “show what it says, who signed it and that clears (everything) up, (Rangers) will be able to borrow in a normal way and move on as a normal business.” He also said Rangers, Whyte, Green and the administrators who made the agreement (Duff and Phelps) should have been signatories and have copies.

Eddie was promised that “if and when Mr Wallace does some kind of news conference after his 120-day review, we will try and get the question asked,” though why they were waiting until then wasn’t explained. It was as if they hadn’t understood Eddie at all. So forget the “statement war” with King and UOF. The current Rangers has an opportunity to wipe out the most damaging legacy of its conception and shrink its financial woes, without succumbing to King’s strategy. The only logical reason for not doing so, apparently, is that somehow Whyte has a claim on the assets. The deed of novation might defeat Whyte’s claim. Its non-existence would confirm it. The next session of the Rangers saga, therefore, WILL be crucial. Very crucial indeed."

[sjc]

Agree with some of this but not all.

Rangers and Celtic have sucked the life out of the Scottish Game since the late 80`s, not that I am really blaming them, it was just the financial reality of a wider change that swept football in general, Scottish Football allowed it to happen so has to share the responsibility.

This season has shown that the other teams are desperate for that competition to return, as Aberdeen have shown the crowds are there, they just need the incentive to return, a European league would offer the escape that the OF need to compete and they would certainly not lose any fans but it would also open up the domestic league to a much wider competitive set of teams, this would help the game, the fans would return and with this continued interest from TV companies, the OF could still compete in the domestic cup competitions where there is (again as this season has shown) a much higher chance of them being eliminated but again the lack of familiarity would probably mean that these games draw higher viewing figures.

Against this would be the fact that both clubs still have too high an arsehole content, again demonstrated this season by celtic with their daft banners and the trouble in Amsterdam, I am not claiming Rangers would be any different.

I disagree with Clubs moving to a European league still competing in domestic cups........either you're here or you're not I say. Personally I think UEFA has a far bigger question to ask itself, in that their competition is destabilising football across the continent. What happens if in 20years time we hear the same shite we do here "people only want to watch Rangers & Celtic" but replaced with Real Madrid & Barcalona? Smaller European League/Competition?

With regards to crowds.....I'm not so sure Tedi......both OF Clubs have seen their crowds dwindle during short periods of not winning trophies. Can you imagine what would happen if either went 10-20years without a trophy?

[Florentine_Pogen]

I may have this all wrong as I'm not versed in "bezness", perhaps someone with proper knowledge could confirm :-

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC473553

My layman's understanding - McLay Murray & Spens shelf company (Vindex) set up on behalf of Dave Glib. Christine Truesdale (Legal Exec at MMS) is company secretary for 3 weeks till Dave takes over and changes company name to "Ibrox 1972 Ltd".

As Cartuja on KDS asks "Is this Dave Glib's vehicle to fleece the gullible Orcs ?"

[Apache Don]

I may have this all wrong as I'm not versed in "bezness", perhaps someone with proper knowledge could confirm :-

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC473553

My layman's understanding - McLay Murray & Spens shelf company (Vindex) set up on behalf of Dave Glib. Christine Truesdale (Legal Exec at MMS) is company secretary for 3 weeks till Dave takes over and changes company name to "Ibrox 1972 Ltd".

As Cartuja on KDS asks "Is this Dave Glib's vehicle to fleece the gullible Orcs ?"

Yes

[Apache Don]

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=25635

Test match cricket commentators are a little over-fond of saying that “the next session is crucial.” BUT… the “next session” in the “Rangers” saga looks very crucial indeed. There is no-one left to deny that Rangers desperately need money. And their early-April call for current season-ticket holders to renew said tickets by May 6th is Plan A for getting that money in before it is too late. In a direct response, South Africa-based ex-Rangers director Dave King renewed his call to said season-ticket holders not to renew unless or until they are granted security over Rangers’ main assets, Ibrox Stadium and the Auchenhowie training ground formerly known as Murray Park. In a very direct response to this direct response, the Rangers board, effectively, told King to go away and boil his head. In a very direct response to this very direct response… oh, you get the message…

etc etc.

^^^

This post (with many more paragraphs) - Relevant to thread and well worthy of further discussion.

I think the idea behind the Atlantic league was to shorten the gap, there would be much more interest and this in turn would attract more TV money.

I have always disagreed with the notion that OF fans only attend while trophies are being won, sure there is the thing about following a successful team but it is also about quality of product, loyalty and the big occasion, big games draw big crowds, look at the likes of Arsenal or even Newcastle, they never win anything but the punters keep going because the product (the EPL) is good.

^^^

This post - not relevant to thread or further discussion.

[weeto]

The problem with this Dave King situation is that Rangers need money very soon and King seems determined to wait until the vultures are circling again and the obvious reason is that he wants to swoop in and get the club for buttons by bullying the existing board out.

I think he should be putting investment into the club. If he puts sufficient money in then he can have control, if not then he shouldn't be trying to gain control with the investments of others.

And there are people at the club I would rather see leaving, preferably by bus as their number 23 runs just past Ibrox...