As always we conducted our discussions with the club adhering to the request for strict confidentiality.

However, following the announcement of the Sports Direct (SD) loan facility we now feel it important to make the fans aware of details of our funding offer in order that they and other shareholders can make up their own minds as to which would have been the best financial arrangement for the club.

Our main aim was to make short term funding available to the club to ensure that an insolvency event would be avoided. In addition, we wanted to make certain new equity was invested in the club rather than large loans which will need to be repaid in the future.

Our final offer to the Board was for a facility totalling £6.5m. A £4.5m tranche of the facility could be converted to equity at a future share issue (which we would partially underwrite). To the extent that this was not converted to equity it would remain available to the club as a loan for 2 years at an interest rate of 2%.

A £2m tranche of the facility was for short term working capital purposes to be repaid in 12 months and interest free. £1m of this tranche was available unsecured until the current notice relating to Murray Park expired.

It was a condition of our facility that the £3m MASH loan be repaid and that security be given to us over Murray Park, Edmiston House and Albion. Our request for a negative pledge on Ibrox to prevent it being used by anyone else as security was not accepted.

We also requested two positions on the board reflecting both our c 20% shareholding and £6.5m funding offer.

At one stage during the negotiations we indicated that we could increase our funding package to £10m to match the SD facility and indeed provided proof of funds in excess of this amount. However after the EGM was called we felt that agreeing an excessive long term loan package with a Board who may be removed in 6 weeks was not appropriate.

We were subsequently advised by Derek Llambias that our funding offer would be difficult for the Board to accept if we did not provide irrevocable undertakings to vote against EGM resolutions to remove certain existing board members. We felt this was completely inappropriate and advised that our current funding offer was not affected by the EGM process.

The announcement from the Board suggests that the SD facility is interest free but the loss of revenue to the club from the transfer of 26% of the share capital in RRL and 50% of the shirt sponsorship proceeds from 2017/18 equates to an annual interest rate significantly higher than our offer and probably in double digits.

Security for the SD facility involves the club's registered trademarks and a floating charge over the club's assets. This is disadvantageous to the club compared to the security required under our offer.

It appears that the only measure by which the SD facility could be considered favourable to our offer is in respect of the quantum and duration of the second tranche of £5m but there appears to be some uncertainty as to whether this will actually be required and it is subject to further due diligence by SD.

We fail to see how the SD facility can be described as better for the club than the funding offer we made. It isn't and should not have been accepted if the best interests of all the shareholders were considered.

Acceptance of the SD facility will do nothing to repair relationships with the fans which is critical in improving the revenue streams of the club.