der Berliner 3,257 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) I was under the impression that while King and the Three Bears work in unison, they are all like-minded but seperate shareholders and not "one entity". Couldn't help but thinking that Ashley might have forced the issue a bit from behind the scenes ... but have put that thought back into the cellar. Edited March 13, 2017 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 This could if handle correctly, ultimately benefit club1872? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 No one will accept 20p a share IMHO 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 No one will accept 20p a share IMHO I'm lost.... It has been ruled that DK & the 3 Bears were working together & that their collective shareholding is greater than 30%. Therefore they are obliged to make an offer of 20p per share to all other shareholders. But as rbr says, that is way below market value and (virtually) no-one will accept. Therefore, DK/3Bears have made the offer, sellers have refused,....all conditions met. Where's the problem. Am I also right in thinking that DK is arguing this point & that offering to buy shares at 20p is a complete waste of everyone's time coz no-one will sell at that price??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,159 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The laws the law and rules ARE rules get your money out Dave , before big Mike see's an angle to get rid of you and take the club into his portfolio . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer 1,665 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 He won't need any money because no one will sell at that price. It's an unfortunate requirement to go through this bureaucratic governance, but it's important to satisfy the law even if it doesn't make common sense at all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The problem might be if they are forced to get rid of some of their shareholding 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The problem might be if they are forced to get rid of some of their shareholding would that not only be the case if they DIDN'T offer the other other shareholders??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoger64 0 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 I don't get this 'no one will sell' angle. There were plenty of people who were given shares for next to nothing. What if Ashley decides this is a get out, DK has to give him 1.5million. Similarly the Easdales another 1.5m ish. DK doesn't need their shares, he has control of the club, why the hell would we want DK to give any of these chancers anything? He has to get round this somehow, but buying out ****s is not the answer. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,257 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The laws the law and rules ARE rules get your money out Dave , before big Mike see's an angle to get rid of you and take the club into his portfolio . Even if Ashley offers more than 20 p per share, he would have to find sellers first. 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.