Ruling On Latest Fat Mike Court Case – Still Waiting...

Just going by this thread, I've seen it suggested the SD own 51% and the only 2 directors are Ashleys placeman and Dave King.
If that's the case, would it need the agreement of both directors or would SD being 51% shareholders be able to make that call?

Obviously I'm hoping for good news but the last 7 years have taught me that it's usually followed by a boot in the balls.
Seen this here which suggest we have taken control of the 51% shareholding in 2016

https://www.insider.co.uk/company-results-forecasts/questions-raised-rangers-retail-ltd-9874858.amp

Rangers Retail Ltd's latest annual return, outlining who its current shareholders are, has been listed as “overdue” on the Companies House website since July 13.

However the most recent annual return, filed on July 13 2015 and covering Rangers Retail's 2015 financial year, shows SDI Retail Services Ltd held 49 A shares, and Sportsdirect.com Retail Ltd held 26 B shares and The Rangers Football Club Ltd held 25 B shares.

The Rangers Football Club Ltd (TRFC) secured the 26 B shares held by Sportsdirect.com Retail Ltd in January after repaying the £5 million loan.

Rangers Retail notes Sports Direct owner Mike Ashley was the ultimate controlling party at the 2015 financial year end.

The ultimate controlling party as of the 2015 accounts being signed off on August 5, 2016 is The Rangers Football Club Ltd, “by virtue of their 51 per cent ownership of the company”.
 

tintin69

Well-Known Member
So much shoite from folk who don't have a clue but pretend to be ITK.
We will find out soon but the situation is very frustrating.
So much for the new regime being open and transparent and keeping the fans informed.
Our club business is as secretive as ever.
 

alex wright

Well-Known Member
What I meant is the case is closed and we await the judgement being issued.
What case though? If Marty101 finds the whole thing a bit confusing what chance have the rest of us?

In this instance I don't think public statements would help with the confusion or the ongoing struggle.
 

tintin69

Well-Known Member
What case though? If Marty101 finds the whole thing a bit confusing what chance have the rest of us?

In this instance I don't think public statements would help with the confusion or the ongoing struggle.
You have just answered my question mate.
No one fully knows what the case was even dealing with. Should we not even be told these issues??
I just think we the biggest stakeholders in the club could be kept in the loop.
 

alex wright

Well-Known Member
You have just answered my question mate.
No one fully knows what the case was even dealing with. Should we not even be told these issues??
I just think we the biggest stakeholders in the club could be kept in the loop.
Going by previous court cases SD are very big on confidentiality clauses, there is probably little Rangers can say.
 
So much shoite from folk who don't have a clue but pretend to be ITK.
We will find out soon but the situation is very frustrating.
So much for the new regime being open and transparent and keeping the fans informed.
Our club business is as secretive as ever.
Cheap dig at the board when ye don't have the first idea what they would be able to disclose!
 

Gibraltar Loyal

Well-Known Member
So much shoite from folk who don't have a clue but pretend to be ITK.
We will find out soon but the situation is very frustrating.
So much for the new regime being open and transparent and keeping the fans informed.
Our club business is as secretive as ever.
You're correct. At the same time as letting everyone know the inner workings of the club and its commercial business we should be up front on our signing targets and a step by step update on how the negotiations are going....
Im away to put my heid in the oven...far more satisfying.
 

tintin69

Well-Known Member
You're correct. At the same time as letting everyone know the inner workings of the club and its commercial business we should be up front on our signing targets and a step by step update on how the negotiations are going....
Im away to put my heid in the oven...far more satisfying.
If that's the sarky pish your posting the oven might be a good idea :))
 

Recoba

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Guys the huddleboard aka (fenian board) has said its either 22 million or 4 million in damages so there you go, no need to search for official news or updates.:rolleyes:
 

Coisty09

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I am now more convinced than ever that both parties having had early sight of the judgment know what the court wants to happen.
As the fat man hates anybody knowing anything about his dodgy dealings, there will be little doubt he is trying to reach agreement where there is no disclosure.
Similarly as the club may have to pay out some damages it will not be over keen to be letting the whole world know the details at this stage.
It is very likely that it is in the interest of both parties to agree an out of court deal that never sees public light of day.
However no doubt someone will leak it at some point.
This is how these things work in real life...
 

Craig

Well-Known Member
they truly are demented.

any damages awarded is £1m capped
Capped damages cannot be used as an escape from a contract, where the respondent would clearly benefit at the expense of the plaintiff - something the Judge alluded to in granting the previous temp injunction.
 

SuperGers07

Well-Known Member
my own view is that if the club have had to pay even a few million in damages, to get rid once and for all? Price worth paying. We'd make that money back with upcoming shirt releases etc
 

Dempster

Well-Known Member
my own view is that if the club have had to pay even a few million in damages, to get rid once and for all? Price worth paying. We'd make that money back with upcoming shirt releases etc
Hope you’re right bud . I’ll pour a large Johnnie Walker the day that rodent is finally gone .
 
Top