Dave King

[der Berliner 3,219]

It’s the cost of all preparity legal work, accountants paperwork postage etc. etc

 

... and this was estimated to cost him 500k, according to some folk when the ruling was made in the first place. Not sure if he has to buy any of the shares if not all are actually willing to sell to him (or at all)?

 

That said, is the quoted 11m required to be deposited somewhere in full before he makes this "forced offer" or is that just a hypothetical thing if he actually gets all shares that he not already owns?

Edited December 22, 2017 by der Berliner

[Walterbear 557]

Some may accept. It's not a particularly liquid market, and although you may be able to sell 100 shares at 27p, you may not be able to sell 1,000,000 at that price.

 

Plus some may think that the share price may fall.

 

He has to put together an offer package with prospectus, etc and underlying admin associated with a share issue. No doubt somebody brokerage involved. I think the cost is likely to be six figures and there will be little benefit except to those for example who had penny shares (and brokers etc). It’s unlikely to benefit the club and by definition the majority of shareholders. It seems this is an example where common sense is not being used by the law. It would have been more understandable if he had been asked to cough up the market rate.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Walterbear

[Barrheadboy 16]

Seems if you are a bank that has been robbing us all blind year after year or a UK company avoiding paying taxes or registering your HQ overseas as do Daily Mail, Tescos but to name two to avoid paying any taxes at all .

Sir Philip Green robbing his workers pension fund he is only asked to pay back apparently no law or rule broken.

However if you are Glasgow Rangers it seems the British Tax Authorities and British takeover panel take lots of interest and find rules and laws that can be deployed.

Moral of the story if you are viewed as part of the British Establishment it seemsyou are above the law ,if you only think you are part of the establishment you are fair game.

[ian1964 10,386]

According to SR on the press conference he stated when asked that this would have no bearing on the club going forward!, he said it is an issue for DK to deal with.

[Walterbear 557]

Seems if you are a bank that has been robbing us all blind year after year or a UK company avoiding paying taxes or registering your HQ overseas as do Daily Mail, Tescos but to name two to avoid paying any taxes at all .

Sir Philip Green robbing his workers pension fund he is only asked to pay back apparently no law or rule broken.

However if you are Glasgow Rangers it seems the British Tax Authorities and British takeover panel take lots of interest and find rules and laws that can be deployed.

Moral of the story if you are viewed as part of the British Establishment it seemsyou are above the law ,if you only think you are part of the establishment you are fair game.

 

Yep the only real aggression from HMRC against EBTs was Rangers. It would be no surprise if a certain Celtic former director wasn’t involved in this given the proximity of senior civil servants to government ministers. However with respect to the TOP that was David Somers who complained and King who fecked up. One thing is sure that for all the shenanigans in football no one is getting hit like us. Even the TOP had never actually cold shouldered anyone before Rangers.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Walterbear

[Walterbear 557]

According to SR on the press conference he stated when asked that this would have no bearing on the club going forward!, he said it is an issue for DK to deal with.

 

Technically of course he is correct. King and the TOP both previously have said it’s a matter for King and not Rangers but when we can’t sign decent players and when we need cash to keep afloat in the form of loans and when we are in danger of slipping further behind Celtic it indirectly affects us that our wealthiest board member has to go through this charade and divert cash that could otherwise be given to the club.

 

I suppose SR had to say something to prove he can still actually talk. It’s a pity his first utterance for some time is to take us all for fools.

[calscot 0]

The question that hasn't been answered, is does he want to buy a load of shares for 20p?

 

The delay has seen the price drop to levels that some might be tempted...

 

Of course, he does seem to prefer an share offer that increases his holding but also puts money into the club.

 

If it's just a waste of money then he'd have probably been better just doing it earlier without the cost of the court case and the embarrassment of his defence.

[Walterbear 557]

The question that hasn't been answered, is does he want to buy a load of shares for 20p?

 

The delay has seen the price drop to levels that some might be tempted...

 

Of course, he does seem to prefer an share offer that increases his holding but also puts money into the club.

 

If it's just a waste of money then he'd have probably been better just doing it earlier without the cost of the court case and the embarrassment of his defence.

 

He doesn’t have an option. He must offer buy them at 20p if someone or everyone wants to sell their shares at this price. His share holding will almost certainly be increased but at the expense of liquidity for the club. He could have done it earlier but he pretended he wasn’t part of a takeover. It’s a waste of money for him and Rangers but not for those who have shares they want to sell and perhaps were given them for nothing by people like Charles Green. I

[Gaffer 1,665]

This is a ridiculous waste of taxpayers' money to chase him on this case. It should have been thrown out. However, if anyone decides to take him up on the offer, it might be a good opportunity for Club 1872 to then buy those shares from him.

[BalooBear 7]

Why did King/advisors allow this situation to arise surely they could have kept under the threshold and still acquired the control of the club.

Edited December 22, 2017 by BalooBear