EGM - Proxy Voting for independent shareholders (content now applies to AGM)

[Zappa 0]

For anyone who wants to give the RST proxy over your shares at the forthcoming EGM fill out the form at the bottom of this link.

 

http://www.therst.co.uk/proxy-voting/

 

Note - If you bought shares through the Trust's BuyRangers scheme, then there's no need to do this. This is for RST members & non members who have independent share holdings to give the RST their proxy vote.

 

Note 2 - If you give the RST or anyone else proxy voting over your shares, you technically sacrifice the opportunity to attend the EGM in person, but this is perfect for any independent shareholders who won't be able to attend the EGM.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Zappa

[simplythebest 0]

Not read the link yet but is that not basically asking individuals to cease being shareholders?

[Zappa 0]

Is that not basically asking individuals to cease being shareholders?

 

No, it's purely for independent shareholders to give the RST proxy voting over their shares and only for the forthcoming EGM.

[simplythebest 0]

No, it's purely for independent shareholders to give the RST proxy voting over their shares and only for the forthcoming EGM.

 

Fair enough, and I suppose the RST are making it clear what they'll be voting.

[bossy 0]

Fair enough, and I suppose the RST are making it clear what they'll be voting.

 

I have had this conversation with one of the RST Board members (edit: make that two) and pushed it over on FF. My recommendation to the RST is to make it clear that this is a one-time proxy because the EGM is so important and that, as part of the proxy deal, they will ask for meetings with both sides, report back to their members and to those who have given them their proxy, make a recommendation and then ballot their members and proxy givers with the majority deciding which way the vote goes.

 

The advantages of this approach are:

1. It is democratic

2. It allows us to get a better idea of where both sides stand

3. It leverages the supporters shares in a way we have never done before.

4. It puts the support on the map as a real force.

Edited August 16, 2013 by bossy

[Zappa 0]

A little bit more info here:

 

The proxy voting form is in draft at present and will be available for download, email, post, Twitter link, Facebook link within 48 hours of the notification of the date of the EGM and the resolutions to be voted upon.

 

It is available to RST members and non-members seeking to proxy their vote to the RST Chairman to create a collective, single voice.

 

The proxy form will include a slip detailing how you would wish your proxy to be used and the Chairman will vote accordingly. As the RST is a membership organisation the Chairman's vote must reflect the views of the members in the first instance however we have undertaken to reflect the larger view of the non-members as best we can unless there is a significant difference of opinion.

 

Just so those proxying are clear, the proxy form will ask for you to vote on the resolutions and we will collate the votes and this will be reflected in the block vote. The block vote will therefore be reflective of the Community Share holders, the members who proxy direct shares and the non-members who proxy.

[rbr 1,247]

Is this EGM going ahead , I havent heard or seen anything anywhere about it

[Zappa 0]

Is this EGM going ahead , I havent heard or seen anything anywhere about it

 

Green & co have till the 22nd to make the board changes proposed in the requisition letter from McColl and the group of shareholders & investors who are signatories to said requisition letter or an EGM will go ahead and must take place within a further 21 days, which would be September 12th as far as I know.

[Tannochsidebear 2,306]

Why would someone who bought proper Rangers shares in the IPO (as opposed to a share in the RST), proxy their vote to the RST when it is unknown which way the RST is going to vote on the resolutions.

 

I understand it is a bit chicken and egg in that the RST can't say how they are going to vote until they count their proxy votes, but similarly how can someone wanting to vote a certain way be sure that the RST is going to be able to vote the way they want them to?

 

For RST members and shareholders, I understand that they all signed up to this and that all makes good sense, but I must say I am a bit puzzled as to why the RST would be trying to obtain non-members proxy votes and will count them in with their own members votes before announcing which way they are going to vote. It doesn't seem to be very well thought out to me on that basis.

 

For example if Charles Green (an honorary member of the RST if I remember right) decided to give the RST his percentage of Rangers shares to proxy and wanted to vote against the resolutions, then his votes would overwhelm the ordinary members votes as he is the largest shareholder. Therefore the RST block vote would have to vote towards CG's intentions, which might be against what the majority of RST members wish to vote for.

 

It is dangerous ground to play on and I believe the RST would have been better served just to ask it's own shareholders which way to vote, announce it publicly, and then ask for proxy votes from non-members.

[bossy 0]

It may be dangerous ground to play on. But, as they say, Who Dares Wins. This is about trying to organise the small shareholders into a voting block and then to leverage the power of that block to have a say in what is going on.

 

There is a bit of chicken and egg here. The RST needs the proxies in order to get into substantive discussions with both parties. If you only have 1% then you can be safely ignored. If you have 5% then that is a whole different situation both legally and practically. Having those discussion will allow them to report back to their members and to those shareholders who gave them their proxies. The alternative is that we continue to vote as individuals and, once again, our voice gets lost simply because none of us own enough shares to be relevant.

 

There is no silver bullet here. You just have to make the best of the situation you find. However, taking your Charles Green scenario, I think that would become public very quickly, might count against him decisively with the other investors and, even if he was successful, a 2nd EGM would probably follow in pretty short order. The disadvantages would outweigh the advantages.