the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Ultimately, it's not the board who will block DK share investment.....it's the current shareholders. The board are only acting on their behalf. If the shareholders don't vote for a share issue, how is DK gonna invest his cash??? It needs to be put to a vote. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 It needs to be put to a vote. so, round up the required 5% (ithink) of shareholders and call an EGM with the sole purpose of voting on the issue...... If the required percentage is obtained to get an open share issue, DK will get his chance. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted June 26, 2014 Author Share Posted June 26, 2014 I think this is what DK is possibly doing privately - i.e. drumming up support for an EGM in order to take part in any share placement. However, I'd still imagine the idea of a suitable issue on his terms compared to BPH's will only result in ongoing conflict. Welcome to 2013. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 It needs to be put to a vote. Look at the votes at the AGM - even Stockbridge was deemed a worthy asset by a hell of a lot more than 27% of shareholders. I think you may be underestimating the power that is now held by a handful of individuals. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted June 26, 2014 Author Share Posted June 26, 2014 Look at the votes at the AGM - even Stockbridge was deemed a worthy asset by a hell of a lot more than 27% of shareholders. I think you may be underestimating the power that is now held by a handful of individuals. I agree with that. Before purchase/IPO, Greenco talked about spreading the power amongst many groups/people to ensure there was no majority player. In actual fact there clearly seems (to me) to be an existing bloc that will prove very difficult to remove unless you compensate them well. This is probably (again IMHO) why we'll never know the identities of the various trusts and holdings: mainly because the same people are behind a few of them. What we have is the impression of a spread of ownership when it's probably more likely the same people control upwards of 31-51% of the club. Paper trails only go so far... I strongly believe the only way out of our current predicament (if you believe this exists) is for King (or someone else) to pay a substantial amount of money for these people to go away. I doubt King is up for that so I think we'll see the power games for a long while yet. Clearly this will continue to affect the performance of the club and the faith of the fans. It's a hugely difficult conundrum for supporters which takes us back to my original article. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Look at the votes at the AGM - even Stockbridge was deemed a worthy asset by a hell of a lot more than 27% of shareholders. I think you may be underestimating the power that is now held by a handful of individuals. Oh I think it is all powerful. But the 27 percent control the board and buy the rest off. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Oh I think it is all powerful. But the 27 percent control the board and buy the rest off. Read Frankie's post above. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 The 27 percent put all the board in place bar one. 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.