plgsarmy

You can't give your vote to a proxy then turn up and cast it in person as well, surely.

So, does your vote then count twice?

You can't give your vote to a proxy then turn up and cast it in person as well, surely.

Well, according to the instructions you can. It suggests that any vote of hands would have no impact. E.g. I have 10 shares in my own name (the rest held collectively in Buy Rangers). If I sit next to the Chair of the RST who is behind 350,000 votes plus proxies how would the AGM deal with that?

I will be attending the agm.

Its states on RST proxy guidelines that "you cannot attend the meeting if you have proxied your shares to them(RST)". On the attendance card note 7 it states "Completion and return of this proxy will not prevent you attending and voting at the agm if you wish"

 

Does this mean that to attend I must fill in proxy form and send to Capita? Have the RST got it wrong? If the Form of Proxy is not completed before the agm will my vote(s) not count if a card vote is called?

I've been told that this is down to RST rules that we have to follow. I'd suggest filling in the form and sending it to Capita by the due date. I'm not sure what to do about the part that says to proxy to the Chair of the meeting, whether to score it out and initial and put self into the box. Frankly I think they have been deliberately awkward about this to confuse people. Some folks think their vote will be counted by a show of hands, it won't.

i'd heard frankie sold out to zappa in a multi million pound deal.

Nah, Zappa got it for 1p - he was in at the start and took all the risks.

I take it you have irrefutable evidence of this event actually happening and are willing to share it with all ?

I don't have a tape of the conversation if that is what you mean.

Why hasn't Dave King highlighted this?

I'm not sure Frankie, perhaps keeping his options open?

Can you enlarge on this latest conspiracy theory, might help matters all round if you took McColl's lead.

Sandy Easdale to Dave King - 'I'd shake your hand right now and have you on the Board but I can't'. Why not?

Stockbridge and Irvine? Would. Be surprised if many would want them around the club much longer. Get the impression that many less consider Easdale to be unacceptable. Is this view shared?

I would like the Easdales removed as they are working to the instructions of others who do not have Rangers best interests at heart.

No, it's not someone widely known though their name has being doing the rounds for some time.

 

I'd rather their name wasn't posted on here as I don't fancy another lawyer's letter.

I agree. Ooh la la.

No danger of that is there? they don't seem to have any shares in their own names at present let alone the 30% before they are required to make a mandatory offer for the business

I'm talking about the 28% they are representing.

Initially at least, the argument that Murray and McColl had not put money in was rather weak given that they were representing investors who had put a lot of money in.

 

However, what we have seen in the past months and even more so in the last week is that a couple of investors - Laxey and the Easdales - have been buying up large blocks of shares and this has given them a significant degree of influence. I don't know where the requisitioners stand in terms of the percentage of shares they control but it is becoming increasing clear that, if they want to prevail, they probably need to start acquiring a few more blocks themselves.

 

But let's be clear and honest here. These acquisitions of shares are not new money for the club and there is no financial benefit to the club from McColl, Murray, the Easdales or anyone else in buying them. The only way the club will benefit from share purchases is through a new issue.

They certainly can't be seen to be buying shares in their own names at the moment as concert party rules would come into play and they would be forced to make an offer for all the rest of the shares.

Perhaps the RST were in favour of Green at the time.

To be honest it was a token gesture as you have to be a member to gain entrance to the AGM.

So when he said that he would wait until the shareholders voted for him he was lying.

I'm going - got confirmation email yesterday

I got one too.

they already knocked him back when he wanted to come in

Actually they didn't but the people controlling them did.

Malcolm Murray was on BBC Radio Scotland tonight (black marks for him appearing on it and for me listening to it...) and he spoke well. He doesn't believe Whyte has any official involvement with the club and was told Blue Pitch are a group 'wealthy Arabs' who don't want publicity and fronted the initial money to Green.

 

He said his issues are a total lack of corporate governance at the club. He doesn't believe the Easedales are running the club, he believes they are acting for another. He was asked directly if we could go into administration again and he said he believes so. His concerns surround the payouts made to our recently departed staff. We were told we'd have a million left by April, he thinks a large chunk of that has now gone too.

I think the Dave King situation proved that beyond doubt.

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/011113-Rangers-v-Airdrie/G0000JExx8Stb1ys/I0000_q9EhyXScro/C0000UHw15hcii1k

My legs and feet are in that photograph but my head has disappeared. Some would say that isn't a bad thing.

I've said it before. Any fans rep needs to be squeaky clean, thick-skinned and have no Internet access.

This is the quote I am referring to from the minutes - PLG that to me reads like its in respect of the groups represented at the meeting.

 

If I have mis-interpreted it and it does mean the general support then it still means he does not have the backing of all the fans.

Sorry D'Art, you are correct. I hadn't read the minutes properly.

He claimed to have the backing of the fans Zap.

 

The RST minutes of the meeting suggested otherwise.

I think he said the fans groups whereas the minutes were talking about the wider fan base.

Correct, like for like would have been the same open scrutiny in the Ibrox suite as that the board accepted rather than another selective meeting.

How would you suggest PM/ JM arrange such a meeting? (Haven't we been here before?)

I was as you are probably aware thinking more of 8 Aug 2013 and the ambush.

You are talking about the session in the Ibrox Suite. I'm talking about the meetings the three groups had with each side. You are not comparing like with like.

Yesterdays timid affair was nothing like the meeting with the board, either in numbers or content a sham in my eyes.

Mmmm....10 at one and 11 at the other.

PLG

 

I noticed in another thread on this subject the current board were asked for a similar type meeting. Did they respond and if so can you elaborate on what they said ?

That meeting was the one with Stockbridge and Mather held a couple of weeks ago.

I think we'd have been more surprised if these issues weren't a given. Problem is we still lack specifics so until see that all those words are just sound-bites.

 

Perhaps we're guilty of expecting too much but, hey, we didn't invite Willie Vass and broadcast the meeting to the media.

 

Let's look at it this way:

 

 

 

Do you think these perception percentages changed after this report or will have stayed the same? Or indeed, do you think McCollco may lose support for their continued lack of detail? I'd certainly doubt you've changed their critics' mind to be perfectly honest.

 

That's maybe unfair and such meetings are to be welcomed. But with the evening media fanfare has to come realism the next day and, all things considered, if you're failing to excite people like Bluedell and FS then that should be a worry.

I can't really answer for others Frankie but I feel I already know what they want to put in place with everything being for the benefit of the Club and our assets protected. I feel that I know a lot more than what the current Board is planning. If FS and Bluedell want to send me the questions they sent in then I'll try and find out why they weren't asked.