davydumper
Well-Known Member
Is this not just a waste of time and money exercise, what happens if no one wants to sell and what happens if they do, my head is nipping with all this shite.
Dave King and the TAB ruling
- Thread starter Craig
- Start date
Shouldn't the alleged group or concert party be obliged then rather than 1 part of it?
Fondablondes
Well-Known Member
Panel On Takeovers and Mergers believes the Ibrox boss has not complied with the law.
Dave King: Accused of action 'in concert' with three wealthy fans. SNS Group
A judge has been urged to force Rangers chairman Dave King to make an £11m offer for the remaining shares in the club.
Advocate James McNeill QC told Lord Bannatyne the Panel On Takeovers and Mergers believes the Ibrox chief has not complied with the law.
The lawyer told the judge how the 2006 Companies Act dictates that entrepreneurs who hold a 30% stake in businesses are compelled to make an offer to buy remaining shares.
He said financial investigators believe they have established Mr King acted "in concert" with three wealthy fans nicknamed the Three Bears.
Mr McNeill said Mr King teamed up with George Letham, George Taylor and Douglas Park to acquire more than 30% of voting rights in Rangers in late 2014.
He told the Court of Session how financial investigators concluded Mr King was in control of the shares and should be liable to make an offer for the remaining shares.
The court heard how Mr King told the investigators he did not act with the three other businessmen.
He told the financial investigators 14% of the shares were controlled by a company called New Oasis Asset Management Limited, registered in the British Virgin Islands.
Mr King allegedly told investigators these shares were purchased using money from his family trust.
The businessman said the company was independent from him.
The court heard financial investigators had obtained emails showing Mr Letham had been in touch with him over the share purchase.
The investigators also concluded Mr King controlled New Oasis Asset Management Limited shares and was therefore liable to follow company law and make an offer at 20p per share.
Urging Lord Bannatyne to pass an order, Mr McNeil said: "Mr King is in fact in control of the voting rights.
"The court should be satisfied that it can make an order seeking compliance under the legislation."
Mr McNeill was speaking on the first day of a two-day session at the Court of Session.
The panel, which regulates deals in the UK, said it started proceedings in Edinburgh after Mr King ignored an order to make an offer for the remaining shares.
This is despite the fact that the club is no longer listed.
Under UK rules, any group of shareholders that builds up a 30% stake in a public company has to make a cash offer to buy the rest of the shares at the highest price they have paid over the past 12 months.
The court also heard Rangers shares are currently worth around 27p and Mr King would be expected to make an offer at 20p.
The hearing, before Lord Bannatyne, continues.
The part in bold concerns me a bit and could be damaging to King's case. I wonder how they obtained these emails?
Ho-Lee-Fook
Well-Known Member
Won't it also cost a lot of money to make these offers, Money which would be far better spent on the club than an absolute pointless exercise and money down the drain.
The tangent we went off on was to debate whether anyone would accept 2op a share, which is obviously pertinent to the court case.
I'm giving you reasonable reasons why I don't think anyone will as there are other avenues to possibly get a higher price. You're explaining nothing.
Maybe you're just not the best at multi tasking
I think you are stating the common sense position. Nobody will sell at 20p if the current market value is more than one third higher than that. If the Court of Session decides to apply it's famous "common sense" judgement (as per the HMRC case) then King will win. I think, however, that they will probably choose to uphold the ruling that a 20p offer needs to be made. It will cost King a fair bit of cash in administration charges to contact shareholders, but I don't think he'll get many acceptances. Basically it is a waste of everybody's time and money.
Islandblue
Active Member
I am quite sure DK knows exactly what he is doing
Now and forever
Well-Known Member
Lets make one thing clear here, if this goes against King (and it looks that way at this point) he will most probably be cold shouldered.
If he is then anyone that thinks that has no bearing on us is naïve in the extreme. It would probably lead to the end of King being at our helm.
If he is then anyone that thinks that has no bearing on us is naïve in the extreme. It would probably lead to the end of King being at our helm.
NorseGod
Well-Known Member
Good question, hope it's asked & answered mate.
Bertie Bassett
Active Member
Respect a small % of our support dont know the meaning of the word
Terry Tibbs
Well-Known Member
Is it just me or can anybody spot the alter bhoys among these pages?
Fergie11
Well-Known Member
Exactly this.
I trust Dave King to do whatever is necessary to keep us on the road to recovery. If that means bending rules then so be it.
Some would be better taking a step back to stop and think to where we've been over the last 5 years, before posting hysterical drivel on here.
johnnybravo
Well-Known Member
And a waste of money!
chilebear
Well-Known Member
The press have always portrayed him as dodgy cause of his SA trial and his love of the Rangers.
Theyd never do it with dodgy Desmond
Alex Venters
Well-Known Member
Conspiracy theories?
I just find it strange that some Rangers fans seem to be revelling in the fact that our chairman looks like he going to be on the wrong end of the court's verdict.
Jimbo
Member
Nothing sinister as I recall. They were simply handed over as part of the process. Not sure about the obligatory nature of the handover mind you.
Bigbilly2017
Active Member
Possibly.... Will go either of 2 ways:
- King wins. This is my gut feeling. Best ruling all round and we move on
-King loses. Seems unlikely and even if he does he has set things up so that there is no offer for shares made... Game over for King and paves the way for Murray to walk back in.
Craig
Well-Known Member
Whether anyone takes up his offer or not is irrelevant. He has to lodge somewhere in the region of 9 million in an escrow account on the assumption that his offer will be taken up.
It's pretty obvious he doesn't have it.
Terry Tibbs
Well-Known Member
Why is it obvious?
tazzabear
Well-Known Member
How so?
Fondablondes
Well-Known Member
I have to admit that I don't know how these investigations are conducted. I would have thought if King and the 3 Bears were working in concert they'd have covered their tracks. Time will tell, although I suspect there will be few willing to sell at 20p if the court forces the issue.
Haining84
Well-Known Member
Craig
Well-Known Member
Firstly, from todays hearing:
Secondly:
If he had it - he would have put this shit to bed when it first raised it's head instead of failing to comply and incurring fcuk knows what legal costs on top.
nybear
Well-Known Member
even with my eyes closed
Bigbilly2017
Active Member
Every court case against us over the last few years has had some amount of 19th Century Terrorist names in the prosecution side.
And they complain that they are the underclass.
And they complain that they are the underclass.
doesnt mean he doesnt ave teh money readily available rather than doesnt have it?
SDR
Well-Known Member
The answer is in the report......
Under UK rules, any group of shareholders that builds up a 30% stake in a public company has to make a cash offer to buy the rest of the shares at the highest price they have paid over the past 12 months. The court also heard Rangers shares are currently worth around 27p and Mr King would be expected to make an offer at 20p.
Terry Tibbs
Well-Known Member
Very good wee sacks
There's clearly stuff happening in the background
Of course there is, did Phil White tell you that?
Checks reported posts, none.
Double checks reported posts, still none.
Suggests opening eyes and using report button and desisting with sniff sniff posts unless a holiday is required.
SDR
Well-Known Member
Hard to blame DK though. As I see it, when RFC was in Green's hands DK had three options:
1. Do nothing
2. Take RFC back from the spivs by buying shares, at the same time as (but not in concert with) the 3 bears. This is what he is claiming that he did.
3. Same as #2, but this time doing it openly in concert.
We should all be grateful that he didn't do #1. At least, I am. So, he tried to do #2. If the court decides "nope, you did #3, and you have to make the additional offer" then - even if it costs DK / RFC some dosh, it's a helluva lot better than #1.
Craig
Well-Known Member
Baloo72
Well-Known Member
Indeed
People appear to forget he has ran rings round everyone set against him with regards to his takeover
Just ask fat Micky with his tanks
nybear
Well-Known Member
trying to send message, not sure if it works.
Virgil Hilts
Well-Known Member
D K & T3B et al prized our club back from a sinister bunch of spív cuńts.
Is there anything that we could do to help out?
Is there anything that we could do to help out?
MarkWayneHateley
Well-Known Member
Are you seriously suggesting that king doesn't have 9 million quid ? He's worth about 600 million ffs
Craig
Well-Known Member
MarkWayneHateley
Well-Known Member
Erm, no he's not
What makes you say he doesn't have 9 million ??
D
Deleted member 3807
Guest
The problem for DK here is it is out of his hands. Lord Bannatyne will rule if he must make an offer.
There are potentially very serious repercussions for DK and Rangers here. Refusing to acknowledge this fact won't make it go away.
TheMilster
Well-Known Member
If you were a rancid mhank that would be your stance.
Well played Dave King.
Feck them all, feck them all
Baloo72
Well-Known Member
Do you think think he might be able to secure the funds to lodge if he is forced to do so?Erm, no he's not
Baloo72
Well-Known Member
And given his record, regards the takeover, I'm not in the slightest concerned
High Society
Well-Known Member
Because they were legallly obliged to hand over all correspondence between them.
I wish people would stop trying to explain things they don't understand. This is in court because DK challenged it. He has based his challenge on NOAL being the shareholders and not him personally.
The court will decide on this, the outcome is debatable but DK is used to legal battles.
All we can do is wait...
The Goalie
Well-Known Member
what are the very serious repercussions for DK and Rangers?
Craig
Well-Known Member
If he had, then this shitfest would never be where it is. He would have complied, share offer made and refused and we carry on - Kings refusal to deal with it speaks volumes.
Please document where it states he's worth 600 million? ..unless of course you mean 600 million rand which is about 30 million and locked up in his kids family trust / inheritance - the one he claimed he would spend.
So, link please to this 600 million fortune
