compo 6,141 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 The case has just been put back for legal clarification it's not been thrown out . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 The "thrown out" line looks like deliberately placed spin to be pushed to the support. Doesn't tend to be a good sign. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted August 18, 2018 Author Share Posted August 18, 2018 7 hours ago, gaspard said: "Looking likely it will get thrown out" where do you get that from ? The hearing, which was to have take place today before Lady Wolffe, was postponed at the last moment after what was described as a ‘legal problem’. Lady Wolffe rescheduled the proceedings until October Report by MD on FF. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 It's a dispute over a technicality. There is a chance it could be thrown out but it would set precedent so doubtful. Guess we have better lawyers now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 To be fair to Bearger, he didn't say "looking likely it will get thrown out" He said "looking likely it may be thrown out" He may or may not be spinning as suggested but re-inventing his words doesn't help these debates. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 5 minutes ago, Bill said: To be fair to Bearger, he didn't say "looking likely it will get thrown out" He said "looking likely it may be thrown out" He may or may not be spinning as suggested but re-inventing his words doesn't help these debates. To be clear, I wasn't suggesting that Bearger was spinning. I was refering to the article from which Bearger was getting the info from and from which any discussion regards to wording should IMO be focused. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,247 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 Here's an FFers take on it ... imlying that keeping the TP at bay for the time was perhaps done on purpose so the share issue solves the problem. Just an opinion, of course ... Quote The idea is that, for example, before this share issue 50% of existing shareholders need to accept the King 'concert party' offer to make it enforceable. Lets say the 'bad guys' had 25% - they only needed another 25% to make it enforceable. After this share issue, because there are more shares in circulation, they still need 50% to make it enforceable but their shareholding has dropped down from the previous 25% to, lets say, 15%. Therefore they need not 25% but 35% of other shareholders to support them in order to make it enforceable. King will go to Court/TP and say 'look there is no way 50% are going to accept the concert party offer so lets scrap it'. Common sense says the Court/TP will agree. Nevertheless, if they don't, they can still make him go ahead with the offer regardless of what percentage King and the others own after the proposed share issue. That's all a bit vague but hopefully understandable. https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/judge-throws-out-contempt-of-court-case-against-rangers-chairman-dave-king.41911/page-3 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,141 Posted August 18, 2018 Share Posted August 18, 2018 1 hour ago, der Berliner said: Here's an FFers take on it ... imlying that keeping the TP at bay for the time was perhaps done on purpose so the share issue solves the problem. Just an opinion, of course ... https://www.followfollow.com/forum/threads/judge-throws-out-contempt-of-court-case-against-rangers-chairman-dave-king.41911/page-3 Courts don't go with common sense only the laws . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted August 20, 2018 Author Share Posted August 20, 2018 IMPORTANT VOTE - RIFC Share Issue Resolution - General Meeting August 2018 A general meeting of Rangers International Football Club Plc has been called for August 31st 2018. At the meeting a resolution will be put to shareholders to authorise a share issue. Should the majority of voting RIFC shareholders vote yes to the resolution, Club 1872 will invest £1m directly into RIFC in return for five million additional shares. The price per share is 20p. In line with our constitution, where Club 1872 members take all key decisions. a Club 1872 vote is now open on this resolution to determine how Club 1872 will vote at the RIFC general meeting. For further information and to vote, click the link below and log into your account - you will then be automatically directed to the poll. VOTE NOW Club 1872 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted August 20, 2018 Share Posted August 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, BEARGER said: IMPORTANT VOTE - RIFC Share Issue Resolution - General Meeting August 2018 In line with our constitution, where Club 1872 members take all key decisions. a Club 1872 vote is now open on this resolution to determine how Club 1872 will vote at the RIFC general meeting. VOTE NOW Club 1872 So the investing of £1 million is now a key decision, whereas it wasn't when they bought Ashley's shares..... 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.