Dave King and the TAB ruling

Add Easdale shares and River Mercantile's too. Why would either want to keep their shares in Rangers. Selling at 20p is a good option.
Have River & Mercantile not usually been an ally of the good guys?
They have been in since the start of this debacle, do they really think 20p is as good as it is going to get?
 
Have River & Mercantile not usually been an ally of the good guys?
They have been in since the start of this debacle, do they really think 20p is as good as it is going to get?
The thing about them is they are an institutional investor. They bought in at the IPO and Rangers were listed on AIM. Markets like AIM and LSE cater to big institutional investors. They are not particularly interested in exchanges for small investors like NEX and have even less in unlisted companies. Like Rangers are now. River and Mercantile have a duty to their customers and an offer of 20p is probably in their best interests. Especially given the history of our shares.
 
Ah the "Don't need all the details just Common Sense " line being trotted out I see.


having read everything from the Takeover panel so far, this could go either way really. Felt they'd have it nailed on and King would be forced to make offer eventually. But they don't appear to have a watertight case.
 
If King loses, and doesn’t want to (or can’t afford to) make an offer for all remaining shares, can he simply sell enough to take him and the three bears to 29.9% or does he have to sell all of his shares?
 
Another issue is why are the Takeover Panel showing such interest in a very small AIM company which has been delisted ?

There are thousands of listed companies many of whom have had similar issues, yet the first time TAB have gone to The Supreme Court to enforce a ruling is with RIFC,

As with the the HMRC, there is a total lack of proportionality.

I used to be paranoia free, times change....
Probably because it's pretty unprecedented that someone (King) would ignore their ruling meaning they had to go to COS to have it enforced.
 
If King loses, and doesn’t want to (or can’t afford to) make an offer for all remaining shares, can he simply sell enough to take him and the three bears to 29.9% or does he have to sell all of his shares?
It'd be good to know what his options are in the event of the court upholding the take over panel ruling. Hopefully someone with expertise in market regulations will be able to let us know.
 
It is when it's the highest offer they are ever going to receive.

Well, if their reason for selling is to maximise their return I think they would prefer to sell them at the current price of 27.5p on the JP Jenkins Platform
 
Yes you're right. However, DK was represented at the TOP hearing by James Blair. He just wasn't there in person.
To clarify JB attended the TP hearing to represent the club not DK. He was at pains to stress he was not representing DK even although they asked him questions as if he was representing him.
 
He really doesn't have many other options but to make the offer.
I would have thought everything will be in the courts verdict. He must have options to sell some or all of his shares. It's only if the aggregate of shares is above 30% an offer is necessary. But I honestly don't know a thing for certain.
 
To clarify JB attended the TP hearing to represent the club not DK. He was at pains to stress he was not representing DK even although they asked him questions as if he was representing him.
This is from the ruling document produced by the take over panel:
Mr Blair, ostensibly representing the board of Rangers, presented Mr King’s case on his behalf and put to the Committee Mr King’s interpretation of the various relevant events and documents.
 
Well, if their reason for selling is to maximise their return I think they would prefer to sell them at the current price of 27.5p on the JP Jenkins Platform
I'm sure they would. If someone offered them that price for all of their shares.
 
I am not legally minded, nor I am aware of Takeover Rules. Is the worst case scenario, that DK has to make an offer for the rest of the shares?
 
These are the days I wish I’d sat at the front in school as opposed to hiding up the back.
Can’t follow what’s going on here. Well, I can follow it , but understanding it is another matter. ( mind you, an Indian scout couldn’t follow some of this stuff)
To the more savvy bears, keep us informed in layman’s terms please.
 
I am not legally minded, nor I am aware of Takeover Rules. Is the worst case scenario, that DK has to make an offer for the rest of the shares?


Yes he does.

Not all will want to sell though.

it's the unnecessary cost of an offer he was concerned with., as the majority do not want to sell
 
I am not legally minded, nor I am aware of Takeover Rules. Is the worst case scenario, that DK has to make an offer for the rest of the shares?
It does seem likely the court will enforce the take over panel's ruling. However, it may not be the worst case scenario to Dave King. He's said this case will have zero impact on him and Rangers. He also said NOAL have it in their capacity to make the offer. DK doesn't appear to be too troubled but if he does make an offer it means putting a huge sum of money up front. Reports say between 11-14m.
 
I'm sure they would. If someone offered them that price for all of their shares.

I know, it's not like there's a massive fan ownership vehicle out there that are hungry to snaffle up shares, especially those shares that are held by toxic shareholders.
 
"DK responds NOAL would not have same restrictions as me. May be in position to make offer. Hasn't transpired."

He is really pushing this DK and NOAL differentiation.
 
I know, it's not like there's a massive fan ownership vehicle out there that are hungry to snaffle up shares, especially those shares that are held by toxic shareholders.
If C-1872 bought those shares at 27p it would be irresponsible of them. They can get a much better deal for supporters contributing their cash.
 
All the tims on this thread will be having a chuckle again :mad: so too any looking in 54 and counting. We welcome the chase


WATP
 
"Counsel looking at futility argument by respondent. Takes this to mean that no one would accept an offer of 20 pence per share."
 
Reading Al Lamonts tweet again it sounds like the board are happy to go ahead in King and noals absence today rather than at the board. Ambiguous to say the least.
Is King represented and by whom?

He is but Alasdair Lamont just naming him DK Council on twitter.
 
If C-1872 bought those shares at 27p it would be irresponsible of them. They can get a much better deal for supporters contributing their cash.

So it would be irresponsible for a FO vehicle, that was set up to buy shares, to actually buy shares.

Next you'll be claiming that they were irresponsible in buying Ashley's shares!
 
DK knows what he is doing, don't swallow the BBC Scotland nonsense and you will be fine.

Ashley recently said the exact same thing.
It's not BBC nonsense if King's Counsel states it in court !
I think DKs position is that all his assets are tied up in a trust.
 
Back
Top