Unknown user Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Concert Party? http://www.investegate.co.uk/takeover-appeal-bd-/rns/rangers-international-football-club-plc/201703131139222798Z/ Aw I hate opera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) The decision of the Takeover panel was that King and the 3 Bears were working in concert and as such will have to make an offer to all other shareholders to buy their shares at 20p. in practical terms it is unlikely that many people would take up the offer at that price, so it is doubtful that much will change. However it might prompt one or more of the parties to try to get out themselves rather than risk having to come up with more cash for "worthless" shares.. The investigation is probably the reason why the Resolution 10 share offer has not been progressed before now, despite it having been authorised at the last couple of AGMs. The outcome We dismiss the appeal and affirm the ruling of the Committee, save that we vary the date and direct that within 30 days of this decision (i.e. by April 2017) Mr King announce an offer pursuant to Rule 9 of the Code and, save as to the offer date, such offer to be in accordance with the Executive's ruling of 7 June 2016, as summarised in paragraphs 19 and 20 above. Edited March 13, 2017 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Statement from King Statement by Rangers Chairman Dave King on the decision of the Takeover Appeal Board The Takeover Appeal Board (TAB) has today ruled that I was acting as a concert party with George Letham, George Taylor and Douglas Park when we acquired shares in RIFC over 2 years ago. The TAB requires that I, as the principal member of that group, must make an offer to acquire all of the shares in RIFC held by the rest of its shareholders at a price of 20p. I do not agree with TAB?s much delayed ruling nor follow its logic and I shall take the appropriate time to reflect upon it and consider the best course of action for myself, RIFC and its shareholders. My view on one individual not being able to exert undue influence on Rangers is already well known. The complaint to the Takeover Panel was made by RIFC?s former Chairman, David Somers, as part of the old Board?s efforts to preserve their positions without regard to what was best for Rangers Football Club, its supporters and shareholders. Today?s decision by TAB is part of the price I have had to pay for being determined to rescue Rangers Football Club from its previous regime and the drastic consequences of their actions. I do so willingly. It is my belief that the TAB has not understood the true nature of what occurred at Rangers and the tremendous role that the activism of supporters played in ensuring regime change. I am only one of a vast number of Rangers supporters and shareholders who fought to rescue our Club. The Rangers Football Club should never have become caught up in a takeover struggle. Those who placed it in that position bear a heavy responsibility. I do not believe that there is any substantial group of RIFC shareholders that would be willing to sell its shares in RIFC at the price at which the TAB has determined I should make an offer. 20p is not a price that I personally believe represents a fair price for RIFC?s shares, nor is it the price at which shares in RIFC are currently trading. I would anticipate that, if I was to proceed with an offer on the terms TAB require, it would be rejected by the overwhelming majority of RIFC?s shareholders and therefore not receive the level of acceptances necessary to proceed. I cannot see how making an offer that is doomed to fail can benefit RIFC?s shareholders. TAB confirms in its decision (para 95) that it understands my position on this point but that the Rule to which they are giving effect ?does not include considerations of whether the shareholders will benefit from an offer in a particular case?. I will communicate further in due course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 It will only cost him substantial sums if everyone sells will it not? Most likely the cost of the proposal will cost six figures and I assume that it's King personally and not the club liable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 You have to laugh at the clown. The ruling is he MUST make an offer by April so no matter how much time he takes to consider it he is duty bound to act.Is the share price of 20p higher than they are trading at ? I would imagine it would cost a bit just to make the offer available. Can't see many orcs selling their individual shares, but other bigger investors may see this as an out and jump at it. King and the others will have to pony up a fair bit and may well stop them dipping their pockets for wages this month. Could be the catalyst for an implosion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diadora Van Basten Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The shares are not trading so how can 20p below the price they are currently trading at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The shares are not trading so how can 20p below the price they are currently trading at. True they are not on a the shares index thingy, but they can still be bought can they not? Don't know what they are actually worth tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 8. Mr Letham was also aware that the appellant, Mr Dave King, was interested in acquiring shares of Rangers. He was a businessman from Glasgow, but was then, and still is, living in South Africa. He had invested money in the old Rangers club before it went into administration in 2012 ?So old club, not old company. ?Damn these people that have to stick to the law of the land... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 True they are not on a the shares index thingy, but they can still be bought can they not? Don't know what they are actually worth tho. What they are saying is he must make an offer of 20p a share for every share he doesn't already own. Just because they aren't listed doesn't mean you can't buy and sell them. You just need an agreed price. That's been mandated to them at 20p. You've misunderstood in your earlier post. It's not 20p more than they are trading at (they don't have a market price), it's 20p per share he has to offer now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) Uncomfortable truths. [emoji6] The shares are traded privately through a broker at present ... Yes - I work in finance so I know how privately traded shares work. The point i was making was the other poster said 'they are 20p above market price' - there is no market price for privately traded securities. It's what is agreed via a buyer and a seller. Edited March 13, 2017 by Dalstonjambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sac Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 He has been put on the spot by the TAB & now has to either put up or shut up. He has more or less made it clear that he won't cough up, so are we about to see another walking away event? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/acting-in-concert/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 A concert party you say? Like this one...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzbomb1958 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Oh dear looks like the proverbial is about to hit the fan ,lovely Mr Cashina better ringfence his wages just in case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) There is a dilemma facing King as he makes his decision over the next 30 days. The risk King faces if he makes the offer, as required of him, is if Ashley and the Easdale blocks decide to take up King's 20p a share. Mash holds approaching 7.3m shares which would cost King approx ?1.5m to acquire At the last count Sandy Easdale and his proxies control 16.4m shares which would cost King ?3.3m The shares are effectively worthless to those who hold them. There is no upside for them as it is the concert party's intention to dilute their holdings through debt for equity swaps. Ashley would still retain the retail deal in any event. Does King have ?4.8m cash to spend on shares that don't really buy him anything. Oh I forgot about his ?30m war chest. The other option for King is to resign and put his shares up for sale. Then we might find the true value of his 11.9m shares. Edited March 13, 2017 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 The gift that just keeps on giving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 There is a dilemma facing King as he makes his decision over the next 30 days. The risk King faces if he makes the offer, as required of him, is if Ashley and the Easdale blocks decide to take up King's 20p a share. Mash holds approaching 7.3m shares which would cost King approx ?1.5m to acquire At the last count Sandy Easdale and his proxies control 16.4m shares which would cost King ?3.3m The shares are effectively worthless to those who hold them. There is no upside for them as it is the concert party's intention to dilute their holdings through debt for equity swaps. Ashley would still retain the retail deal in any event. Does King have ?4.8m cash to spend on shares that don't really buy him anything. Oh I forgot about his ?30m war chest. The other option for King is to resign and put his shares up for sale. Then we might find the true value of his 11.9m shares. What a dilemma indeed for Mr King! FF do you have any idea what price the shares are currently trading at? I know they are only trading privately but do we have an idea as to their value? King suggesting that 20p is derisory to put people off obviously. He needs this share proposal like a hole in the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What a dilemma indeed for Mr King! FF do you have any idea what price the shares are currently trading at? I know they are only trading privately but do we have an idea as to their value? King suggesting that 20p is derisory to put people off obviously. He needs this share proposal like a hole in the head. They have been "trading" at 27.5p on the JP Jenkins share exchange, but that isn't a true reflection on the value of the shares at the moment. It's a "matched bargain" service where potential sellers are match with potential buyers and they agree the price. That's where Club1872 has been buying small lots of shares, probably from individual small bears who bought at 70p, but are in desperate need of some cash. Separately, The Offshore Game's Twitter timeline from this afternoon is worth a read https://twitter.com/theoffshoregame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What a dilemma indeed for Mr King! FF do you have any idea what price the shares are currently trading at? I know they are only trading privately but do we have an idea as to their value? King suggesting that 20p is derisory to put people off obviously. He needs this share proposal like a hole in the head. Phil McBigot reckons 4p. SELL SELL SELL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) Yes - I work in finance so I know how privately traded shares work. The point i was making was the other poster said 'they are 20p above market price' - there is no market price for privately traded securities. It's what is agreed via a buyer and a seller. What I actually said was: Is the share price of 20p higher than they are trading at ? I know they are not trading as such, and what I was asking is, is the 20p each more or less than you can buy them at present. If they are selling ( privately ) for 10p then he has to pay a lot more than they are really worth to everyone else. I don't know how to find out what people are willing to pay/sell at hence the question. ( maybe should have worded it better ) Looks like FF has answered while I was typing. So 27.5. Not many will sell for lower I would think. Edited March 13, 2017 by Lincon Premier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 If King etc all have to spend almost ?5m on shares which are worthless, where will sevco's next soft loan come from? Is the barrel not being scraped already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What I actually said was: Is the share price of 20p higher than they are trading at ? I know they are not trading as such, and what I was asking is, is the 20p each more or less than you can buy them at present. If they are selling ( privately ) for 10p then he has to pay a lot more than they are really worth to everyone else. I don't know how to find out what people are willing to pay/sell at hence the question. ( maybe should have worded it better ) I think the bigger question is if people do want to sell, how will King fund it?! Will it come out of that inheritance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What are the consequences if King either doesn't make the offer or doesn't have the funds to carry it through? Can he resign and sell or is there a punishment involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Another thing that bothers me. The Lying King is being held up as the leader,does that mean the others get off scott free? Will there be sanctions applied to them too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzbomb1958 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What are the consequences if King either doesn't make the offer or doesn't have the funds to carry it through? Can he resign and sell or is there a punishment involved?Resignation could be his get out but money which is paying the bills may have to be used meaning no more loans ,season ticket money will have to be used to pay back any outstanding bills and loans ,Ashley could cripple that club if he wants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 More evidence that he is not a fit an proper person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazzas right boot Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 More evidence that he is not a fit an proper person Lol, aye because being found guilty of tax fraud wasn't enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Lol, aye because being found guilty of tax fraud wasn't enough. aye I know but this is under the watch of the SFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Another thing that bothers me. The Lying King is being held up as the leader,does that mean the others get off scott free? Will there be sanctions applied to them too? It appears that King is getting the full treatment here. Skimming the report it looks as if it was him and Taylor who co ordinated the deal. Taylor handed over his emails (he's an investment banker with Morgan Stanley in Hong Kong) while we can only speculate that King was as opaque and uncooperative as he was with the South African revenue in his tax dispute (where he was first given the glib and shameless accolade). Taylor's career may have been on the line if he didn't co operate but it appears that Park, him and the others have been absolved (the evidence presented will never be made public). I can see a small queue of people who bought in at a penny a share forming to accept Mr King's cheque. Or equally likely he'll walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Meanwhile the SPFL and SFA won't lift a finger. Except to say. Move along please there isint anything to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Wonder what the SFA's view on this development? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diadora Van Basten Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Can't see the investors who paid 70p a share rushing to cash in at 20p a share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 So if there is a split on the board as has been rumoured, what are the chances of the likes of Park, Letham etc seeing this as a chance to get out with a slight return rather than no return? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alicante jambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 More evidence that he is not a fit an proper person Was he not passed fit and proper by the sfa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky_26 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Was he not passed fit and proper by the sfa? wasn't it a self declaration by rangers that declared it? or was that green or white? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) Was he not passed fit and proper by the sfa? No is the short answer. Everyone thought he had, however, when Ashley sought to challenge the SFA in court, the SFA decided to disclose that King was ruled unfit to be involved with the football club (TRFC), but was OK to have a stake in the holding company (RIFC). Ashley dropped his action as a result. That is why King has never been appointed.a director of the football club. From a Mash Statement: ?MASH notes that the SFA did not approve Dave King to be a director of the football club (The Rangers Football Club Limited, the body which has membership of the SFA), but instead only approved him as a director of the club?s holding company (Rangers International Football Club plc). Edited March 13, 2017 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alicante jambo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 No is the short answer. Everyone thought he had, however, when Ashley sought to challenge the SFA in court, the SFA decided to disclose that King was ruled unfit to be involved with the football club (TRFC), but was OK to have a stake in the holding company (RIFC). Ashley dropped his action as a result. That is why King has never been appointed.a director of the football club. Cheers buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambogemz Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 I wonder what spin Richard Wilson will put on this during this evening's sportsound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 I wonder what spin Richard Wilson will put on this during this evening's sportsound. He will take the position that King did in his statement. that Real Rangers Men won't want to sell their shares so it's a pointless exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie1874 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Ally McCoist with his 1p a share amount to pocket ?200k? Will keep him above the bread line for a few more years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Meanwhile the SPFL and SFA won't lift a finger. Except to say. Move along please there isint anything to see here. Birds of a feather flock together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzbomb1958 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 This will actually show these two bodies for what they are incompetent buffoons who think the arse cheeks are what Scottish football is about everyone else is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Well that is the rest of the warchest gone! Going to need to start trading players to make some money now. Now about those assets...How much will their best player Kenny Miller be worth?...ah he's 37...or how about their scorer in the OF derby? ah Hill is 38...Well I guess the Daily Record will have to talk up Barry MacKay as a ?6m man again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Good judgement 100% correct imo The sort of thing Mike Ashley usually picks up on in business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What I actually said was: Is the share price of 20p higher than they are trading at ? I know they are not trading as such, and what I was asking is, is the 20p each more or less than you can buy them at present. If they are selling ( privately ) for 10p then he has to pay a lot more than they are really worth to everyone else. I don't know how to find out what people are willing to pay/sell at hence the question. ( maybe should have worded it better ) Looks like FF has answered while I was typing. So 27.5. Not many will sell for lower I would think. But if you check FF's earlier post, there may be good reason why Ashley and the Easdales would accept 20p. Firstly, they are likely to see the value of their shareholding diluted if and when the Board can get a resolution passed that allows them to swap debt for equity. Secondly, as things stand, they can only sell their shares to someone who wants to buy them, and it will be on a matched deal basis. Given the size of their holdings, and as things stand, there is probably nobody interested in buying them out at anything like 27.5p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
132goals1958 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Well that is the rest of the warchest gone! Going to need to start trading players to make some money now. Now about those assets...How much will their best player Kenny Miller be worth?...ah he's 37...or how about their scorer in the OF derby? ah Hill is 38...Well I guess the Daily Record will have to talk up Barry MacKay as a ?6m man again! Not forgetting that Warburton and Weir are disputing they ever resigned. Wonder who will be believed when the case is heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincon Premier Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 But if you check FF's earlier post, there may be good reason why Ashley and the Easdales would accept 20p. Firstly, they are likely to see the value of their shareholding diluted if and when the Board can get a resolution passed that allows them to swap debt for equity. Secondly, as things stand, they can only sell their shares to someone who wants to buy them, and it will be on a matched deal basis. Given the size of their holdings, and as things stand, there is probably nobody interested in buying them out at anything like 27.5p. Good point! The individual shareholders won't sell as they are for sentimental reasons but as you say maybe some of the bigger holders will see this as an out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Good point! The individual shareholders won't sell as they are for sentimental reasons but as you say maybe some of the bigger holders will see this as an out. Someone also raised the question earlier of whether any of the other concert party members might be tempted to sell up at 20p. Given they are the guys who seem to be stumping up the soft loans to keep the club afloat, maybe this would be an opportunity for them to cut their potential losses. They would get a decent chunk of their hard investment back (not sure what price they paid for their shares, but they bought in fairly low), and would still be owed the soft loans (presumably unsecured). I'd be interested to hear FF's take on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Would it be correct to suggest that if King makes the offer and people sell - if he was to gain enough then it would mean he is able to force an EGM to push the share resolution vote through? If that is the case and he plays the game he could potentially do the matched share issue and start milking the gullible Club1872 lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) Someone also raised the question earlier of whether any of the other concert party members might be tempted to sell up at 20p. Given they are the guys who seem to be stumping up the soft loans to keep the club afloat, maybe this would be an opportunity for them to cut their potential losses. They would get a decent chunk of their hard investment back (not sure what price they paid for their shares, but they bought in fairly low), and would still be owed the soft loans (presumably unsecured). I'd be interested to hear FF's take on this. If King proceeds with the offer and any of the 3 Bears bailed out, then it could leave King in an awkward position. The 3 Bears bought in at 20p so there would be no loss on their initial investment, however it would be unlikely that they would subsequently want their loan converted to equity. Would it remain as a soft loan with no repayment date or would they look to seek repayment? If I was a gambling man, I would bet that King will now look to get out on similar terms, by selling up and seeking repayment of his loans over a period. King holds 14.57%, bought at 20.1p for ?2.4m. The 3 Bears currently hold 19.5%, so wouldn't want to hit the 30% threshold, should they purchase some of King's shares. One solution would be for the 3 Bears and Club1872 each to buy half of Kings shareholding. That would leave the 3 Bears with around 27% and Club1872 would go up from 6.25% up to 13.5%. Club1872 should have around ?1.5m in cash reserves so could easily afford a 20p deal for half the shares. ?1.5m of King's loans are repayable on demand. The other King and 3 Bears loans are due for repayment in December 2017 (but would probably be rolled over if not converted to equity). Edited March 13, 2017 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts