T-1000 174 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Going to go out on a limb and say it won't happen. Possibly,but what would you do if you had a significant investment in a company,had no say in its running and you wanted to sell your shares but found no ready market but instead are dependent on some wealthy individual wanting to purchase them at a certain price. You might be a bit concerned about the likelihood of such a person coming forward and if so you would probably want to seek legal advice about any rights you might have against the company and its directors. The fact that Easdale is reportedly following this line should not come as a surprise. I suspect Easdale will not be the only investor who is a bit concerned about this move by Rangers. We may have to wait and see how this situation plays out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/competitions/scottish-football/9785834/easdale-considering-legal-action 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Poor sandy. Hope he loses his shirt over this. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 There's no chance of Easdale taking legal action for the consequences of a board he was a member of. It's all pish 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 (edited) I think Sandy may need to check his details. In this interview from King on his arrival before the EGM, he doesn't actually say he has a NOMAD signed, sealed and delivered ... http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/312774-dave-king-insists-he-has-a-nomad-lined-up-ahead-of-rangers-takeover/ ... "Arriving at Glasgow Airport ahead of the EGM, King said that he already had a Nomad who were happy to deal with him and that they would act for Rangers if happy with the club’s accounts. He would not reveal the identity of the company involved but when asked to confirm he had one lined up he said: “Yes but when you say ‘I have a Nomad’ ....I think we’ve addressed the money issue. I think the point I wanted to make is it’s not my Nomad. The club has to have a Nomad. “I think Llambias should understand that. He’s confusing the AIM listing with the club. It’s the club that has to have the Nomad. “All I have done is, in advance of the change of board, ensured there is another Nomad willing to come in. The club has to appoint them so that process can only happen after the general meeting. “I’ve got one [lined up] who has done due diligence on the individuals but the key component for any Nomad is the club itself. “Nomads are concerned about the financial affairs of the club. It’s the one area where I’ve been able to give no more input than what I’ve read in the newspapers. “If we succeed tomorrow, and I think we will, then we will get it immediately. It’s a process that would be done in a day or so.” ... on the clip he's very clear, starting at 14:34. Edited April 2, 2015 by barca72 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSolace 0 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Anything that upsets Easdale can only be positive. Hopefully when this share-dealing platform is set up all the ****s and hangers-on will run to dispose of their shares, further cementing ownership in Ragers fans hands. We are unlikely to be able to raise capital from institutional investors anyway and i would prefer any loans to be kept in-house away from external predators like Ashley. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 End of the day it's now up to King, Murray and co to prove we don't need any money from institutions 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 The interviews I saw with King he stated categorically that it would all depend on the Nomads due diligence of the company. I don't see how SE can sue King for the Nomad not 'taking the club on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Daft Sandy was part of the Ashley regime that assembled this delisting parcel bomb, it was then handed on to the new board. Now he wants to sue the new board for the bomb blowing up in their hands. Pity it didn't blow up in Sandy's hands, 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 (edited) Possibly,but what would you do if you had a significant investment in a company,had no say in its running and you wanted to sell your shares but found no ready market but instead are dependent on some wealthy individual wanting to purchase them at a certain price. You might be a bit concerned about the likelihood of such a person coming forward and if so you would probably want to seek legal advice about any rights you might have against the company and its directors. The fact that Easdale is reportedly following this line should not come as a surprise. I suspect Easdale will not be the only investor who is a bit concerned about this move by Rangers.We may have to wait and see how this situation plays out. I'm pretty sure that if I'd significantly contributed to the reasons why the club didn't have a NOMAD and were considered toxic by AIM, I wouldn't be suing anyone because of any subsequent de-listing. I'm also pretty sure if I did, the judge and almost every Rangers fan would laugh me out of court. Would you support me? Edited April 2, 2015 by Frankie 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.