DAVE King, Paul Murray and John Gilligan pulled up chairs in an office in central Glasgow shortly after 11am, and spent a full hour outlining their vision for taking over Rangers and moving the club forward.

You say you will be voted in when the EGM is held. How can you be sure some institutional investors won't flip-flop and back the current board at the last minute?

DK: "That has been taken out of the mix. I think the key event was the removal, the very non-strategic removal by the board, or the powers-that-be behind the board, of Norman Crighton [from Laxey Partners]. That was the single biggest tactical error that the board made because once he was gone the institutions said 'look, that's enough now, this is not being run on a proper basis'. That was the basis for The Three Bears being able to acquire their shares from Laxey and it was the basis for me acquiring shares. That became a turning point and if you look at it now, really other than River & Mercantile there is no real institution in there. So I feel very, very strong and solid about the current shareholder mix."

The club has yet to announce a date for the EGM, might they try to trip you up on a technicality?

DK: "I don't expect it. They have had almost 21 days and if there were any concerns about the technical aspect, whether the Is were dotted and the Ts were crossed, I would have thought I would have had some communication by now."

When you listen to fans and shareholders, what are they saying?

PM: "In the last four years, with the chaos and the financial mismanagement it has been through, the club is now disengaged from its customers. It is unsustainable. There is no ability for this board to recover from that position. The only group that can bring the supporters back - and it's really a question of trust now - is this group."

Was Mike Ashley's £10m loan package a final move for power because he knew he would lose EGM?

PM: "Part of the problem is you don't know what Mike Ashley's plans are because he doesn't speak to anyone. It would be helpful if he was to set out what his plans are but that's probably not going to happen and it certainly hasn't happened at Newcastle. I think the board made its decision. They had other options. They chose to go with Mike Ashley and what I can see from the outside, speaking as a shareholder apart from anything else, is I didn't think the terms of that loan were particularly attractive to the club."

DK: "Can I just say on the Ashley point, I certainly don't see Ashley being a complication in this process whatsoever. If he has advanced money to the club presumably he would like to get it back. He can get it back, we just refinance it in friendly hands and he gets his money back. The debt itself really doesn't give him undue influence, the club can afford to refinance a debt. I really don't think that's an issue. Ashley is a commercial guy and he is someone who I think one can do business with."

But surely the Sports Direct contracts have strangled Rangers' future income streams?

DK: "If the contracts are attackable we will deal with that in due course. They are either fair or they're not fair. But that is a commercial decision we will make as a new board once we investigate it. That's just commercials and commercials can always be dealt with. He is a commercial guy and he doesn't need a dispute. Quite frankly the only possible way to analyse what is in Mike Ashley's interest is based on one thing that we know for sure: he is a businessman and his real interest is in Sports Direct. It has got to be in his interests for us to succeed, because the fans are disconnected. He needs the fans to come back and be sitting there and start buying retail. He needs that to happen."

What happens to Sandy Easdale if you take over?

DK: "I think he continues to be a key player. As long as Easdale retains his influence over the shareholder block then you can't ignore him. The difference is that he won't be a controlling key player. Right now he is the power behind the throne, he is the dominant person. Even forget the Mike Ashley influence, Sandy Easdale is the key dominant figure. Once there is regime change, that fact disappears."

The Stock Exchange and the SFA have to believe you are a fit and proper person...

DK: "I was engaged in litigation for 11 years and it's a difficult and harrowing process. If you can imagine how intense that litigation was for 11 years, it was a bruising thing. If you trawl the million pages on Google I could pick up 50 quotes where SARS [South African Revenue Services] were hugely criticised and you can do the same against me. You are left with what really happened at the end of the day, which is what the final settlement was. What is the unalterable, irreversible position of the court? It was settled in my favour with no fraud charges etc etc. South Africa is no different to the UK, our companies' act is directly based on the UK's. I can be a director in South Africa. Do I have to be interrogated? Of course I do.

"The SFA is going to be more interesting because they will be challenging me in a number of areas. They'll be saying: 'Why did you continue on the board when Craig Whyte was there?' Why? Because I wanted access to accounts, I was trying to get transparency. They were hiding things from me as well and I refused to go off the board. I hung in there as long as I could. I expect to go through a very, very robust interrogation by the SFA as well and they have every right to do so, but I still expect to survive it."

What if you don't?

DK: "It wouldn't change anything. Actually, it's just something that makes no difference. If I couldn't contest that I'd say: 'Fine, I'd go off the board then and appoint someone else.' The game is much bigger than me being on the board."

How much will it cost to turns Rangers around?

DK: "When I was over here in November my initial thinking was the £16million that we suggested would be enough to stabilise and get back to an even footing. Since then, though, I have heard that there are other areas that require investment. I have heard that the maintenance at Ibrox is virtually non existent, that the scouting is non existent. So I would imagine that £16million figure, it will be north of that. Whether the stadium requires millions, I don't know. If I was to say a figure, I would say £25m. I am talking about a figure where I think Rangers would be competitive with Celtic again, maybe not at Europe but at that level with Celtic. I am giving minimums to give a Rangers that would recognise in Scottish terms. Frankly, having watched the game at the weekend, I didn't recognise that as a Rangers team."

What is the timescale for refinancing?

PM: "Rangers is broken and has to be fixed and repaired. It will take time. There have been four years of chaos, mismanagement, financial crises. It will take time - I believe between three-five years to rebuild the club back to where it was because so much damage has been done."

How do you assess where Rangers stand now?

DK: "In time, we will look back on this period as something that happened in Rangers' history. It will be part of the history of the club and one that rallied the fans. It is something we must recognise. Living in South Africa makes it a bit easier for me because I don't see a lot of what is written in the media and some of the suggestions on radio shows that I get what I am in Glasgow. One of the interesting ones, the pictures of the chairman, was hanging the one of Craig Whyte the wrong way round facing the wall. It is quite amusing. At the end of the day, that will be part of the history. Craig Whyte will be part of the history of the club. You don't start to self edit your history. It is what it is."

You said the Nomad, Paul Shackleton, phoned you offering a compromise. What was his deal?

DK: "It was about the existing four directors remaining and me getting a couple of appointments and a couple of independents, and 'given that Llambias and Leach are really independents the board would be balanced'. It was really, quite frankly, a nonsense, a nonsense suggestion."

Is this your last chance to take control?

DK: "I don't think it's the last chance. It will happen. We are across the line, we will win. But let's say I woke up in the morning and found a shareholder with 15 per cent had sold to the Easdales and it ended up being 51 per cent against us at the general meeting. I don't think that will happen, but if it did I'd go out and buy another five per cent in the marketplace and do it again. It's not the last chance but I think it is the end game."