Darthter 542 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 does it no simply come down to notification periods that have to be given??? Also, if the current Board are voted off, then instantly call for an EGM does that not fly in the face of their reasons for refusing MCcollCo's EGM ie. needlessly wasting money??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 does it no simply come down to notification periods that have to be given??? Also, if the current Board are voted off, then instantly call for an EGM does that not fly in the face of their reasons for refusing MCcollCo's EGM ie. needlessly wasting money??? Yes but consistency has never been prevalent throughout this... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 the board are in court today wasting rangers money out of fear for there own jobs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,231 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 For those willing to follow, this STV lass updates the case during the next break. https://twitter.com/carasulieman 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 1m Petitioners are Malcolm Murray, Paul Murray and other shareholders. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 1m Petitioners are asking Lord Tyre to grant an interdict forcing Rangers to include the notice in AGM and to stop the AGM from happening. Expand Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 2m Righty, we've broken for lunch. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 4m When I say notice I mean attempt to appoint Murrays, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson to the board 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 32s Petitioners say that, anyway, Rangers received an "on the face of it" authenticated motion & it should go to AGM. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 1m Petitioners are arguing enough evidence was submitted to Rangers to authenticate the signatures. Expand Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 3m Rangers are arguing they didn't accept motion as it was not authenticated. They say 3 signatures were not authenticated. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 5s With AGM in 10 days, petitioners say not enough time to post motion, statement & allow shareholders to nominate proxy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 37s Lord Tyre: "It just boils down to whether they (signatures) should be validly authenticated or not." Expand Cara Sulieman @carasulieman 1m Lord Tyre responded: "It seems to me you want me to think this is a nitpicking exercise you want me to disapprove of." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted October 14, 2013 Author Share Posted October 14, 2013 No doubt the incumbents are being pedantic but I'm really annoyed that the requisitioners didn't ensure the paperwork was perfect before submission. 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.