Is This the Hokey Cokey or a Rangers FC Takeover Process?

[UCF2008 0]

Wow!! Now D&P are saying they need unconditional bids on the table? Is there such a thing as an unconditional bid in this particular situation?

 

Assuming that Whyte DID secure the Ticketus deal with his own assets as opposed to the club itself, then Whyte & Ticketus CAN'T be dealt with separately ...at least not withstanding a lengthy court case or two.

 

Then there's the ACTUAL financial state of the club which can only be truly assessed via due diligence ; undetermined SPL/SFA sanctions ; the CVA ; the BTC ; plus whatever the lot of them have in store for the next hurdle.

 

To answer your question - NO

Edited April 19, 2012 by UCF2008

[Zappa 0]

Best solution to that (and the whole situation in general imo) would be for TBK's and Ng (and Kennedy) to join forces

 

I really don't think that's something which will happen.

 

Brian Kennedy has had plenty of time to join TBK consortium and back them with some of his clout/cash, but he hasn't done it and the Ng Asian Pacific bid is supposedly another consortium so the idea of all three bidding parties suddenly getting together to form a single bid is really stretching the realms of possibility.

[Zappa 0]

What like saying Whytes' shareholding is irrelevant then despite assurances that you could deliver it when push comes to shove you haven't got a f*&king clue how to separate Whyte from his shareholding?

 

We've asked Whyte politely to sign over his shareholding but for some strange reason he isn't obliging

 

Do you think D&P are throwing out a load of red herrings then?

 

Do you think they maybe have no intention of separating Whyte from his shareholding?

[UCF2008 0]

I really don't think that's something which will happen.

 

Brian Kennedy has had plenty of time to join TBK consortium and back them with some of his clout/cash, but he hasn't done it and the Ng Asian Pacific bid is supposedly another consortium so the idea of all three bidding parties suddenly getting together to form a single bid is really stretching the realms of possibility.

 

1. They all claim to want to exit via a CVA.

 

2. They all claim to have the best interests of Rangers at heart.

 

3. They all (as you put it) appear to be playing the 'Hokey Cokey' with their bids to allow the other to get the job done.

 

4. None of them independently have been able to do so.

 

5. Combined, they actually WOULD have the vast majority of fans on-side.

 

6. Combined, they would have the financial and tactical advantage in the negotiations.

 

7. Is the number of individuals involved in a consortium relevant?

 

8. I was hoping for 10 reasons.

 

9. Might get there yet

[forlanssister 3,050]

Do you think D&P are throwing out a load of red herrings then?

 

Do you think they maybe have no intention of separating Whyte from his shareholding?

 

Why have they not attempted to do anything about his shareholding or to challenge the validity of his floating charge, they throw about phrases like "has no value" "irrelevant" yet their sole method of separating Whyte from his shareholding has been simply to ask him to sign them over.

 

You have to remember MCR/Duff & Phelps have been working since late summer 2010 devising a business plan for Craig Whyte to takeover RFC plc, they know everything. Their bill would have been substantial well on the way to 7 figures but who paid it? Whyte's not known for paying bill is he? pity we never got to see the accounts for the six months from Jan 11. One notable absentee from the creditors list was Grant Thornton, I doubt that's a coincidence.