George Letham, George Taylor and Douglas Park offer Rangers £6.5million alternative

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Oh its a rule alright.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Oh its a rule alright.

 

Indeed, and if I'm not much mistaken, it's a law and anyone in breach of that law makes themselves liable to criminal prosecution.

[Rangersitis 0]

Oh its a rule alright.

 

It's also a, quite intentionally, subjective rule.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Fairly sure it doesnt allow for a desperation to keep your club tie and blazer cause

[Dragonfly Trumpeter 50]

if they have six million and king has thirteen million lump together and buy the blinking club otherwise go away and stop building up the supporters hopes

 

No one has ever thought about that perhaps? Because £19 million would not buy you the club today? Because 23p a share, whilst over the market cap, is not enough? Because the wigs' well is not completely dry yet? Because you cannot buy what somebody else will not sell? Because we live on a different planet maybe?

Edited December 29, 2014 by Dragonfly Trumpeter

[Rangersitis 0]

Fairly sure it doesnt allow for a desperation to keep your club tie and blazer cause

 

That could be true!

[der Berliner 3,245]

Indeed, and if I'm not much mistaken, it's a law and anyone in breach of that law makes themselves liable to criminal prosecution.

 

So shareholders have to act?

[The Real PapaBear 0]

So shareholders have to act?

 

Depends. It is possible for a company to be deliberately mismanaged but for certain shareholders to benefit from this mismanagement. What is in the best interests of the company is not always what's in the best interests of some shareholders.

[govan_derriere 3]

I have sent another rant off to the NOMAD, together with a copy of Somers leaked email.

 

I append an extract from AIM Rules for Nominated Advisers

 

 

ER2 – In assessing the appropriateness of an existing AIM company and its securities for AIM, a nominated adviser should (i) investigate and consider the suitability of each director and proposed director of the AIM company and (ii) consider the efficacy of the board as a whole for the company’s needs, in each case having in mind that the company is admitted to a trading on a UK public market

 

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/companies-and-advisors/aim/publications/aim-rules-for-nominated-advisers.pdf

 

I think much of what appears in the Somers email needs to be addressed by the NOMAD in light of ER2 above.

 

Once again, though, not going to hold my breath awaiting a meaningful response.

Sent the email to both Paul Shackleton & Adrian Hadden. Have received a standard out of office response from Hadden. He isn't back in the office till 5th Jan!

[forlanssister 3,050]

Depends. It is possible for a company to be deliberately mismanaged but for certain shareholders to benefit from this mismanagement. What is in the best interests of the company is not always what's in the best interests of some shareholders.

 

Here's a story of a company being deliberately mismanaged doesn't take Einstein to work out who benefited the greatest from said mismanagement, in fact there's a wee clue in the story itself.