Imagine for a moment if five men of very substantial wealth could possibly come together and work for the greater good of Rangers.
Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor - the so-called Three Bears - have various degrees of wealth and are all current Rangers shareholders, with a 19% collected stock.
Dave King and Mike Ashley - perceived enemies across the Ibrox lawns - are in the "super wealthy" category, with the means to absolutely transform Rangers.
Ashley's personal wealth was recently quoted as £3.75bn. Sports Direct's most recent figures showed a £2.7bn turnover, with pre-tax profits at £240m. Ashley, still with a 60% stake in the company he founded 30 years ago, is utterly minted.
King has made so much money that SARS, the exasperated South African revenue service, at one point wanted £300m in unpaid back-taxes off him, before King pled guilty to his law-breaking in a South African high court in 2013.
I mean…how much money do you actually have to earn to have estimated unpaid taxes of £300m? So King, while no Ashley, can certainly be categorised as super-rich.
What an irony Rangers FC is right now. Here are these super-wealthy men all clamouring around the club - and you can throw in Robert Sarver, this Phoenix Suns bloke - while Rangers itself is virtually passing the bucket up and down Sauchiehall Street looking for shrapnel.
But it is a mess soon to be cleared up.
These five men - King, Park, Letham, Taylor and Ashley - have been involved in various struggles for influence. In recent times King and Ashley were seen as sworn enemies, and Ashley, until one week ago, was viewed as having completely out-foxed King on the Rangers front.
Might all of this change? It could do, it's not inconceivable. And if an Ibrox consensus or peace can be found among most or all of these men, then Rangers, at long last, will no longer be a great beast floundering in agony.
By whatever means - probably via a fresh rights issue - money will at long last be pumped into Rangers. King will surely now gain power and increase his stake and influence at Ibrox. If that happens the question is, who will be the casualties?
The Easdales would almost certainly be out - and that could turn ugly. Members of the "Easdale bloc" - Margarita and Blue Pitch etc - may also bail out in the process. The intriguing question is, could King and Ashley ever work in tandem?
Yes, they could, as much as we have all portrayed the pair as vying titans. There is no reason why a King-led coalition could not also tolerate Ashley, who could preserve his 9% Rangers stake and have his retail shirts. King and Ashley need not be sworn enemies, as much as they have been up to now.
If personalities and agendas can somehow be pacified, there is the potential for a bright new dawn for Rangers. And one where money is not short to repair the damage and disrepute done at this broken club.
In saying this, I've not changed my mind one jot on King. His conviction for illegal activity in South Africa is a supreme embarrassment, and the SFA, should King ever want boardroom status at Ibrox, would be laughed out of the country if they crumpled and ever afforded him "fit and proper" status.
It is worth saying again: King fails "fit and proper" with trumpets blaring and bells clanging. Unless the SFA are made of straw, this is the all-singing, all-dancing version of failing "fit and proper".
Don't worry, though, King could get round all that - it he actually needs to. He may not need Rangers boardroom blazerdom, or even desire it. He could be the power behind the throne, with a Letham or a Paul Murray figure there as his man. What else is Mike Ashley doing right now with Derek Llambias?
There are doubtless ways that Dave King could get round a potentially tricky situation. He'll be well versed in that.
Rangers, for all their past shame, need to escape this current agony. It cannot go on. The reincarnated Ibrox club needs to be set free from these factions and machinations, and simply be a football club again.
My heart doesn't bleed for Rangers. But I do desire a day when this club is strong and fit and ready to compete at the top of Scottish football.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article