Zappa 0 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 forlan, I meant to say that I think Green's consortium might be looking for a couple of million north of ten. Source = unknown. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 forlan, I meant to say that I think Green's consortium might be looking for a couple of million north of ten. Source = unknown. I don't doubt you one bit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 The most frustrating thing from my viewpoint is that I think we could have actually achieved the CVA. Despite, HMRC announcing their opposition I think if the CVA proposal had been improved significantly then HMRC could have been persuaded to vote in favor today. It's even possible that the WS group could have gained close to a majority shareholding in the process, had they approached Green instead of attempting to hijack the bid. They might even, had they offered enough in those type of negotiations, been able to stake a claim to a newco if it failed. Opportunity missed and yet again it's the fans that suffer for it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 The most frustrating thing from my viewpoint is that I think we could have actually achieved the CVA. Despite, HMRC announcing their opposition I think if the CVA proposal had been improved significantly then HMRC could have been persuaded to vote in favor today. It's even possible that the WS group could have gained close to a majority shareholding in the process, had they approached Green instead of attempting to hijack the bid. They might even, had they offered enough in those type of negotiations, been able to stake a claim to a newco if it failed. Opportunity missed and yet again it's the fans that suffer for it. I think the Private Eye article out today goes a long way to explain HMRC's attitude, Whyte is the reason. I also think HMRC were of the opinion that there was no value in the CVA proposal at all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,249 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Unless I am mistaken, no one shareholder will own more than 15%, according to Green's proposal. What, if I may ask, stops anyone from the Walter Smith group to buy themselves into this and see how it goes on. Thus we'll have Rnagers men there and Green himeslf said that he is not in there for long. We already have a Rangers man as chairman now. Or will it be normal business with McColl and Co., as they may look for a greater share? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 d&p have much to answer for in terms of the cva. even greens intimated that much. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Unless I am mistaken, no one shareholder will own more than 15%, according to Green's proposal. What, if I may ask, stops anyone from the Walter Smith group to buy themselves into this and see how it goes on. Thus we'll have Rnagers men there and Green himeslf said that he is not in there for long. We already have a Rangers man as chairman now. Or will it be normal business with McColl and Co., as they may look for a greater share? didn't he only name about 3 investors. what's 100 divided by 3. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,249 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 didn't he only name about 3 investors. what's 100 divided by 3. While we are at it, the selling of the "shares" has not yet started, has it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 While we are at it, the selling of the "shares" has not yet started, has it? The shares of the newco will =100% it in turns owns 100% of the club, at least one investor must presently own over 15%. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 didn't he only name about 3 investors. what's 100 divided by 3. There's the two guys Green previously anounced as investors as well..... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.