stewarty 1,876 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Forced what issue ? De-listing ? You're missing my point - They said they'd a NOMAD lined up. They clearly didn't Not quite.... Pre-EGM they had a nomad who was happy to work for the new board. King had spoken to the previous nomad and current board who had indicated that they would work with kings nomad to ensure smooth transition Mysteriously (sic!), the cooperation of the board and the previous nomad disappeared. The previous nomad resigned and refused to work with the new nomad, thus creating the scorched earth policy I referred to. This is all in the public domain. Check king's pre and post EGM statements. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Forced what issue ? De-listing ? You're missing my point - They said they'd a NOMAD lined up. They clearly didn't Not so. Having one lined up doesn't mean they are appointed. They said they had one lined up, which they may very well have done. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Not so. Having one lined up doesn't mean they are appointed. They said they had one lined up, which they may very well have done. Really ? So why weren't they appointed then ? Had the old board behaved like this they'd have been slaughtered. But this standard seems acceptable to some who will accept anything as long as there's 'rangers men' in the boardroom. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Really ? So why weren't they appointed then ? Had the old board behaved like this they'd have been slaughtered. But this standard seems acceptable to some who will accept anything as long as there's 'rangers men' in the boardroom. Things don't change before contracts are signed ? As I said, having one lined up doesn't mean that they are guaranteed. Did King say they were guaranteed ? Im not sure what the fuss is about with this NOMAD stuff, seems a red herring to me, especially considering the shysters that we had for NOMAD's before and that AIM is nothing more than a casino. As for the suggestion that there is a better chance of transparency with a PLC than a private entity.... you wouldn't have noticed given the distinct lack of transparency we had as a PLC under Green, Ashley et al. Transparency is all about the individuals running the company and what they believe in. PLC's are subject to more scrutiny but the transparency you seek isnt necessarily going to happen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 So you think it was perfectly acceptable what they did?FWIW I believe we'd have a better chance of getting the promised openness & transparency as a listed PLC rather than one that isn't. As the period between December 2012 and March 2015 proves that's just utter bollox as I in my capacity as a shareholder proved in regards to Section 228 of the Companies Act 2006. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Funny how quickly folk forget things that only happened a couple of months ago. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 As the period between December 2012 and March 2015 proves that's just utter bollox as I in my capacity as a shareholder proved in regards to Section 228 of the Companies Act 2006. I'm not defending the previous board. They had to go but I'm starting to ask questions of the new board. FWIW I do believe there's a better chance of openness & transparency as a PLC regardless of the old board 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,254 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Funny how quickly folk forget things that only happened a couple of months ago. And I'm getting concerned at what has ( & hasn't happened) in the couple of months since 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 And I'm getting concerned at what has ( & hasn't happened) in the couple of months since Fair dos. all I'm saying is that the answers you seem to be looking for are there already. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 And I'm getting concerned at what has ( & hasn't happened) in the couple of months since Aye because we had total honesty and transparency under Minty 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.