Andy Kerr statement from sunday's meeting

[craig 5,199]

What are the desires looking to be fulfilled ?

 

Not sure what there is to gain by using a stooge to bid other than to flush out other interested parties. If to bump the price then that could be done simply and directly, rather than circumvention.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

What are the desires looking to be fulfilled ?

 

Not sure what there is to gain by using a stooge to bid other than to flush out other interested parties. If to bump the price then that could be done simply and directly, rather than circumvention.

 

Potentially if there are others looking to bid but waiting for their optimum time, another bid might see them forced into making a decision. Your point is valid though, it is a lot of effort and presumably expence to go to in order to gain not a lot, if anything. That said, I am far from a financial wiz and it is more than feasable that because just I (or you, unless you are in the trade?) cannot see the reasons it does not mean there are none, hence the asking of questions

[Bluedell 5,365]

Would it be correct to say that 'yes, they have broken the law (if they have, for artguements sake, pushed the price up) but it would be very hard to prove both the intent and the effect'?

 

 

There are strong rumours that Ellis is directly influanced by Murray and is only 'bidding' or showing interest in order to fullfill a couple of desires held by Murray. I am just rrying to work the idea around to see if it is viable, likely or plain rambling. It i hard to just discount the idea though.

 

 

Thanks again

 

I would have thought that if he was a hired gun then there would be a law that has been broken. Probably something stock exchange related.

 

I'd agree that it is hard to totally discount the idea, and has always been a possibility.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

I would have thought that if he was a hired gun then there would be a law that has been broken. Probably something stock exchange related.

 

I'd agree that it is hard to totally discount the idea, and has always been a possibility.

 

 

I am trying to balance the risk/reward aspect of it in my head. If Ellis is under the pay of Murray and assuming they have broken some fiscal legislation, there would need to be a decent level of reward to justify the risk. I am struggling to see that there is a level of reward at a high enough level. On top of that, and assuming Ellis and Murray have had little or no previous dealings, Murray would have needed to aproach and seduce him, presumably with cash or deals. That means that Murray will have forked out promises of cash or actual money and be taking a risk in terms of being caught. On top of that, he is an egoist and should it be true and come to light, his reputation would take a severe beating. The rewards seem to be at a level way way below what you would expect for that risk. As said though, without the neccessary experience it is more than likely I am missing plenty from the picture, it is hard to guess what though. Any thoughts on what benefits the whole thing could give Murray, or indeed Ellis, to make that worthwhile?

[craig 5,199]

If he is using a stooge to bump the price then I am almost certain that would breach stock exchange rules. It is, effectively, insider trading.

 

I just don't see that SDM has a great deal to gain from taking this type of approach. SDM probably has the phone numbers of King, Murray, Park et al - so if the club was in such a crisis that he NEEDED to sell quickly then he more than likely has the means to get the word out to those most likely interested in taking over.

 

Very risky move to make with, as you say, very little reward...

[Bluedell 5,365]

I'd look upon it as low risk as I doubt there is much evidence to prove anything, as I said above, and if it can flush out King/Park now rather than in 6 months time and get them to put another �£13m on the table then it's well worth it.

 

Not that I'm saying that this is the case.

[wabashcannonball 0]

7 years jail and unlimited fine.

 

 

Market abuse is improper conduct that undermines the UK financial markets or damages the interests of ordinary market participants. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) section 118 creates civil penalties for market abuse which run parallel to the criminal offences.

 

The criminal offences are making a misleading statement and engaging in a misleading course of conduct for the purpose of inducing another person to exercise or refrain from exercising rights in relation to investments.

 

In addition, Part V of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 sets out the criminal offence of insider dealing. We are a prosecuting authority for the criminal offence of insider dealing (as defined in the Criminal Justice Act 1993). Insider dealing is where individuals use, or encourage others to use,information about a company which is not generally available, to deal for their own financial advantage. In other words, they have received information through inside contacts and use it to make a profit or avoid a loss.

 

The civil offence, as defined in section 118 of FSMA, can be any of seven types of behaviour:

 

1.Insider dealing ââ?¬â?? when an insider deals, or tries to deal, on the basis of inside information.

 

2.Improper disclosure ââ?¬â?? where an insider improperly discloses inside information to another person.

 

3.Misuse of information ââ?¬â?? behaviour based on information that is not generally available but would affect an investorââ?¬â?¢s decision about the terms on which to deal.

 

4.Manipulating transactions ââ?¬â?? trading, or placing orders to trade, that gives a false or misleading impression of the supply of, or demand for, one or more investments, raising the price of the investment to an abnormal or artificial level.

 

5.Manipulating devices ââ?¬â?? trading, or placing orders to trade, which employs fictitious devices or any other form of deception or contrivance.

 

6.Dissemination ââ?¬â?? giving out information that conveys a false or misleading impression about an investment or the issuer of an investment where the person doing this knows the information to be false or misleading.

 

7.Distortion and misleading behaviour ââ?¬â?? behaviour that gives a false or misleading impression of either the supply of, or demand for, an investment; or behaviour that otherwise distorts the market in an investment.

 

 

 

 

However all will be sweetness and light , when Ellis skips up the yellow brick road to the Takeover Panel office in Munchkin land, clutching the Mints letter of intent to sell the world famous Rangers to said Ellis for a handful of beads and a lucky bag. Word from the badlands of Partick is "fek it get them in make mine a double"...

[maineflyer 0]

7 years jail and unlimited fine.

 

 

Market abuse is improper conduct that undermines the UK financial markets or damages the interests of ordinary market participants. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) section 118 creates civil penalties for market abuse which run parallel to the criminal offences.

 

The criminal offences are making a misleading statement and engaging in a misleading course of conduct for the purpose of inducing another person to exercise or refrain from exercising rights in relation to investments.

 

In addition, Part V of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 sets out the criminal offence of insider dealing. We are a prosecuting authority for the criminal offence of insider dealing (as defined in the Criminal Justice Act 1993). Insider dealing is where individuals use, or encourage others to use,information about a company which is not generally available, to deal for their own financial advantage. In other words, they have received information through inside contacts and use it to make a profit or avoid a loss.

 

The civil offence, as defined in section 118 of FSMA, can be any of seven types of behaviour:

 

1.Insider dealing ââ?¬â?? when an insider deals, or tries to deal, on the basis of inside information.

 

2.Improper disclosure ââ?¬â?? where an insider improperly discloses inside information to another person.

 

3.Misuse of information ââ?¬â?? behaviour based on information that is not generally available but would affect an investorââ?¬â?¢s decision about the terms on which to deal.

 

4.Manipulating transactions ââ?¬â?? trading, or placing orders to trade, that gives a false or misleading impression of the supply of, or demand for, one or more investments, raising the price of the investment to an abnormal or artificial level.

 

5.Manipulating devices ââ?¬â?? trading, or placing orders to trade, which employs fictitious devices or any other form of deception or contrivance.

 

6.Dissemination ââ?¬â?? giving out information that conveys a false or misleading impression about an investment or the issuer of an investment where the person doing this knows the information to be false or misleading.

 

7.Distortion and misleading behaviour ââ?¬â?? behaviour that gives a false or misleading impression of either the supply of, or demand for, an investment; or behaviour that otherwise distorts the market in an investment.

 

 

 

 

However all will be sweetness and light , when Ellis skips up the yellow brick road to the Takeover Panel office in Munchkin land, clutching the Mints letter of intent to sell the world famous Rangers to said Ellis for a handful of beads and a lucky bag. Word from the badlands of Partick is "fek it get them in make mine a double"...

 

Beans .... not beads, BEANS. A handful of beans. Murray always deals in beans, especially lucky beans. But never beads. Beads are for red indians.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I was toying with the idea of rattling beads, but I know that some here are of an indeterminate disposition, do we know if Ellis is of the bead rattling worriers,,,,...:fish:

[Zappa 0]

Beads are for red indians.

.

As well as hippies, far eastern doorways and mad religious sects (not to generalize or anything).