Zappa 0 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 forlanssister posted this on another thread, but it warrants a thread of it's own too. Our club's board of directors are now releasing official statements via McMurdo's blog....... October 4, 2013 Rangers Board Statement Statement on behalf of the Rangers Board Speaking for Rangers board Jack Irvine said: “A small group of shareholders served notices on the Club seeking to have themselves appointed as directors at the AGM. “The Club is obliged to take steps to verify that the shareholders had made a valid request. The club’s lawyers were of the firm view that the notices were not valid and entered into open discussions with the shareholders’ lawyers on why they took that view. They sought clarification from the shareholders on the question of validity. The Club extended an open offer to those shareholders to meet to discuss the issues. That offer was not even acknowledged. “Instead without any warning the shareholders went to court seeking an order to stop the AGM taking place. The court declined to grant the order and the legal process will now continue”. http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2013/10/04/rangers-board-statement/ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,259 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I don't think the requisitioners are going about this the right way either. How much support do they actually have from the shareholders and was it a good idea to let the AGM go ahead as planned before this attempt to stop it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossy 0 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 How did McMurdo go from being a well-respected, balanced and interesting blogger to being the mouthpiece for the Board and people like Ahmad? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossy 0 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I don't think the requisitioners are going about this the right way either. How much support do they actually have from the shareholders and was it a good idea to let the AGM go ahead as planned before this attempt to stop it? I think the requisitioners felt that they had a deal with the Board. They would abandon the EGM and instead all matters would be decided at the AGM. Subsequently the Board either reneged on the deal or the requistioners misunderstood its terms so that there would be no vote on appointing new directors at the AGM. The requisitioners have stated that they have the support of at least 28% of the shareholders. It could well be more given the strenuous efforts of the Board in preventing this from coming to a vote. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Cornered animals. Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,259 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I think the requisitioners felt that they had a deal with the Board. They would abandon the EGM and instead all matters would be decided at the AGM. Subsequently the Board either reneged on the deal or the requistioners misunderstood its terms so that there would be no vote on appointing new directors at the AGM. The requisitioners have stated that they have the support of at least 28% of the shareholders. It could well be more given the strenuous efforts of the Board in preventing this from coming to a vote. they certainly reneged on a deal - if there ever was one in the first place. Were the requisitioners really that naive ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 They didnt need to trust them they have recourse to the courts to back them up. Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,259 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 They didnt need to trust them they have recourse to the courts to back them up. Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4 are you sure about that? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Yes. Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,141 Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 it just looks like another huge pay day for layers 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.