King is neither a Rangers director nor an employee. He is not yet a major investor or a significant shareholder. Essentially he is yet another outsider joining the long list of characters who have attached themselves to the ownership of Rangers over this prolonged debacle and farce. But here's the thing: King's statement was released by the club itself.
Before his application to join the board, and to become its chairman, had been considered by the existing directors, he was given the tacit endorsement and validation of having his words published on the Rangers website. That is something Jim McColl, Paul Murray et al have never had - they have been kept at arm's length - and it confirmed that there are plenty within Ibrox desperate to wave King through the front door and into control.
Remember all those declarations that fan ownership was the way forward for Rangers? That the club must never again fall into the control of a wealthy individual, that one rich benefactor was a discredited model and Rangers must never again be exposed to that risk? At the first sign of a familiar face with money to spend that was kicked into the long grass.
King equates to serious dough as far as most Rangers fans are concerned and the majority are comfortable with his background and suitability for their club. It has been others who have been howling that he cannot conceivably meet the Scottish Football Association criteria of a "fit and proper" person.
If you support Rangers you will argue that he has reached his settlement with the South African Revenue Service and (belatedly) paid his dues. If he has made peace with SARS and admitted reduced charges then why should the SFA object to his involvement? If you dislike Rangers, King is guilty of the most heinous tax crimes and approving his chairmanship would be an utter scandal. In time this could become yet another no-win scenario for the SFA - with its new board member, Peter Lawwell - to process.
Being convicted of dodging taxes carries the sort of stink that can never be washed away, especially for someone trying to get into Rangers, yet the fit and proper issue could turn out to be utterly meaningless. Vladimir Romanov controlled every aspect of Hearts without having to be the chairman or even a director. If King's agenda is delivering stability and growth for Rangers, then he can do so without the ego massage of becoming chairman. He need only invest on the condition that "his" people are placed on the board. Given that King will continue to live in South Africa it is difficult to imagine he places too much emphasis on the blazer and status of being the chairman, or that being denied that position would end his interest in trying to bring order to the club.
The real issue around King is not what the SFA makes of him, but what the Easdales do. They have been very quiet throughout all of this. Conspicuously so, come to think of it.
James and Sandy Easdale own or hold the proxy to almost 25% of the shares and it is reckoned they could call on the support of a significant further proportion of the shareholders. They are enormously significant, yet there has not been a word from them about the guy who wants to become their chairman and who their club is effectively approving via press releases.
Does that mean they are okay with King? Somehow there is the sense that Ibrox is not big enough for the Easdales and King to co-exist. They have a PR advisor of their own and if they do have reservations about King and decide to go public on them the spin doctor will have his work cut out to package and present those objections. The Rangers support, the Ibrox staff, even its chief executive and finance director, have pretty much decided that King is the only man who can unify and finance a club which will be down to £1m in the bank by April.
Today the Court of Session will decide whether the nominations of four new non-executive directors - Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson - must be added to the order of business at the annual meeting scheduled for October 24. If the ruling goes in their favour the agm could be delayed until November. That would create breathing space, but neither peace nor clarity.
The key questions remain: what do the Easdales think of King, and what do they intend to do about him?
And Another Thing...
Scotland's World Cup officially ends at Hampden tomorrow night. Good riddance to it. The sense of renewal and hope under Gordon Strachan is fragile and it could be undone if Croatia assert their superiority and avenge their shock defeat to Robert Snodgrass's goal in June. But at least Strachan has brought some optimism and freshness at the end of what has been a wretched campaign.
This was not a formidable group, Belgium excepted, yet Scotland have won only two out of nine games and so far failed to beat anyone at all at Hampden. If Croatia, Belgium and Macedonia win tomorrow night (that treble is not inconceivable) Scotland will finish bottom of Group A. Yet there is a feeling of momentum and progress, which amounts to a minor miracle. Roll on the Euro 2016 draw in February.