Jump to content

 

 

Dave King claims he has first refusal on Whytes shares


Recommended Posts

It's hard to know the script with King. Buying the shares for £1 wouldn't be a problem to SARS, but the £10m plus it'd cost to agree a CVA / newco and invest in the business would be. He certainly picks his moments, like when everyone was debating Whyte's shares over the last 4 months why didn't he point out then that he has first refusal?

 

It'd also be intersting to see how HMRC dealt with an individual that's being investigated for tax avoidance in another country as I don't imagine it would go down too well.

 

All we're needing is for someone to grab the bull by the balls, take control, and get this bloody thing over with. All we're getting is people prancing about pretending to be hard men when in fact they're just shadow boxers in ballerina outfits. It's gone way way way beyond a joke now.

 

 

And it’s us, the fans that get a boot in the balls everytime someone pipes up. Just let CG get on with it, that’s the stage i’m at now. I’m worn out

Link to post
Share on other sites

King seems to me like a soldier who enters the battlefield to bayonet the wounded.

 

- If he has the club's interest at heart, why did he not tell us of this deal before hand, so that this could be publicly known and verified with Whyte?

 

- Why did he not follow up in writing to crystallise the deal?

 

- What has changed in his circumstances to allow him to bid for the club if Whyte actually honoured this deal?

 

- Why should we believe him?

 

As Tom English is fond of quoting, a South African judge described him as wholly unreliable as a witness and that his statements should be ignored unless backed up with verifiable evidence. Given Whyte has denied he made the deal, we now have the scenario where two (allegedly) proven liars are bickering over some shares that neither has any control over if we believe Charles Green and D&P. Jesus wept, I need a lie down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another question for you:

 

If King was so certain a couple of months ago that the club would be liquidated why would he be bothering about Whyte's shareholding now? :thinking:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a thought....

 

Who has legal precedence??? Whyte/King allegedly have a verbal agreement (legally binding under Scots Law), and Green/Whyte allegedly have a documented/signed agreement.

 

According to Google Fights - The Green/White agreement wins!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.