Jump to content

The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.


Sergio Garcia

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Has there ever been a previous case involving a UK company/TOP which has led to contempt of court proceedings ? King must find £11 milion to be lodged in the UK  and  get a bank with the necessary experience in these matters  which will take on the risk to meet the potential £11 million cost. No UK bank will touch him with a barge pole, he can't (and never could) get £11 million out of S Africa  so where the money will come from is anyone's guess.  The TOP have him by the balls and they are squeezing. I think this is a whole new experience for GASL  and he won't be enjoying it. They have his measure and they are not messing about but it's a completely different issue from any trading issue (IMO). Sevco may or may not go bust but this isn't going to go away.

 

Is the share issue hes trying to do not a way to raise extra capital then move it about n use that toward the TOP? Or is that too blatant and difficult to move the monies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst
10 minutes ago, Rents said:

 

I am not sure it is bailing out as such.  He has moved them to a company he probably owns.

 

My guess is he is not wanting to lose the cash but he is also not wanting his name associated with Rangers and King.

 

It's impossible to say whether it was a sale or a transfer.  The contact name works for Gillespie Macandrew, commercial and property law specialists, in Edinburgh.

 

There is a lot to be said for not wanting to be associated with King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye Dave proceed to the jail id reckon. It will interesting to see the TOP response to the claim they are Bullies! Imagine bullying someone to adhere to the law and regulations. 

Edited by Dannie Boy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tokyowalnut

Surely the SFA or whoever did the 'fit and proper person' nonsense needs to be brought to task. The problem is, our governing bodies are so desperate to have Rangers 'back to where they belong' that nothing will be done. It's this arrogant attitude which breeds the utter contempt we have for them, no wonder we all want admin part whatever it'll be.

 

While i' m ranting, it still annoys and confuses me why no action was taken against them and Hibs after the cup final!

 

Bonkers. Corrupt. Arseholes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sadj said:

 

Is the share issue hes trying to do not a way to raise extra capital then move it about n use that toward the TOP? Or is that too blatant and difficult to move the monies?

From TSFM - to move the required £11M to the UK attracts a 20% tax in SA (I don't know if that is true or not or whether he can get that money back from the SA authorities if he repatriated the full £11m).  So on the face of  it  he's £2.6M down already , before he buys the shares (assuming he has the £11M ). 

 

AFAI undestand it, he has to make an offer and if that is taken up HE will own the shares , there is no capital injection from the TOP exercise to the extent I understand this.

 

There will only be additional funds generated iF he is able to sell the (so far) unsold shares and he's been trying to do this for a long time.   He can't do this until he complied with TOP ruling (I think) . Even then, it won't generate much and the directors sift loans may have to be repaid (not o mention Close Bros circa £3M).

 

I reckon he  is plotting a way to get the money from a 3rd party into the UK , it will need £11M to satisfy TOP but the final bill may be a lot less than that if  there are no takers at a 20p share buy out. Watch for a charm offensive , emotional attachment etc to distract possible sellers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
2 minutes ago, 7628mm said:

 

It sounds to me that the 'school bully" is claiming that he is being bullied by the Head Teacher and all his/her staff. 

The thing is. His sycophants in SMSM will agree with him. The man has no shame. He is at least a spiv at most an out and out crook. I side with the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John Findlay said:

The thing is. His sycophants in SMSM will agree with him. The man has no shame. He is at least a spiv at most an out and out crook. I side with the latter.

Lamont didn't have the balls to ask King when he expected to complete the share buy out. Just a "reaction". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
8 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

Europe is the key. If Rangers get turfed out at the first hurdle, or early on, then that would necessarily bring administration much closer.

When I saw their last accounts Rangers 2012 acquired assets for £5m and promptly revalued them to  about £85m. Only £6m of this appears to be the Auchenhowie Training Centtre which has Sports Scotland has a security over. Rangers also have about £4m of players but 72% is apparently made up by 5 registrations (Wonder who these 5 are?). They have also valued the Rangers brand at £16m. Whilst their liabilities have shot up, as long as they can keep covering their cashflow needs then they won't go bust in the near future.

 

They have net assets of about £40m IIRC. As long as they keep getting soft loans from directors and associates then they'll be ok. I can understand why King doesn't want to spend £11m on an offer for shares he doesn't want or need. This is money, assuming he has it,  that he could use to buy players for a couple more years...In the meantime, moves like appointing Gerrard, encourages the Bears to keep pumping money in so he doesn't need to put so much in himself. His "bullying" moan is all about him trying to feed the natural paranoia of Glaswegians and fostering a bomb shelter mentality. He doesn't want to obey TOP because he doesn't want other shareholders to sell up to him! He wants other people to take up Rights Issues on worthless shares not cash out for 20p, resulting in him to have to fund both that AND any future investment. 

 

King runs Rangers  as if it is his own already, what would he want more shares for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kirkierobroy

On Bears' Den they think King and Rangers are being treated shamefully by the SPFL and SFA.

 

This apparently involves King being allowed to run a football club from SOuth Africa and describe due legal process as 'bullying'.

 

So much for UEFA doing 'due diligence' before the SOuthside half of Scotland's Shame were allowed to play in Europe. They are an embarrassment on every level. How I hope those brave Macedonians wallop them like thy have Alexander the Great as captain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see this latest engine room subsidiary going down with all red hands and sashes. Cold shoulder and winding up order. Rip.

Edited by JackLadd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gasman
On 04/07/2018 at 12:59, Mysterion said:

 

Very pathetic giving into the knuckledragging element of the Rangers support by going with an orange coloured strip. It's not traditional Rangers colours and all a GIRUY to Celtic fannys. It's promoting bigotry whilst Rangers exploit fans for £££. 

 

Rumours that the SFA have refused to allow the orange top to be registered as a strip due to its religious (bigoted?) connotations - if it’s true, I’m guessing that’ll make it their best seller....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
19 minutes ago, The Gasman said:

 

Rumours that the SFA have refused to allow the orange top to be registered as a strip due to its religious (bigoted?) connotations - if it’s true, I’m guessing that’ll make it their best seller....

It was set up by a rangers fan on twitter, when you clicked the link it took you to a letter about celtic fans hygiene issues.

 

They can't ban a colour, that would be stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jambovambo said:

He might not be to far from the mark with some of this. People on the board still actively involved in business must be seriously concerned at Kings behaviour and worried that their reputations will be sullied by their association with him. There is little doubt this is why others jumped ship recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Gasman said:

 

Rumours that the SFA have refused to allow the orange top to be registered as a strip due to its religious (bigoted?) connotations - if it’s true, I’m guessing that’ll make it their best seller....

 

Calling bollocks on that one. Not the first orange top in Scotland and won't be the last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Deevers said:

He might not be to far from the mark with some of this. People on the board still actively involved in business must be seriously concerned at Kings behaviour and worried that their reputations will be sullied by their association with him. There is little doubt this is why others jumped ship recently.

 

I Doubt the GASL will set foot on UK again if there is a warrant out for his arrest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Old Tolbooth
30 minutes ago, Dunks said:

 

Calling bollocks on that one. Not the first orange top in Scotland and won't be the last.

 

Not even the first orange top the Rangers have had 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Spellczech said:

When I saw their last accounts Rangers 2012 acquired assets for £5m and promptly revalued them to  about £85m. Only £6m of this appears to be the Auchenhowie Training Centtre which has Sports Scotland has a security over. Rangers also have about £4m of players but 72% is apparently made up by 5 registrations (Wonder who these 5 are?). They have also valued the Rangers brand at £16m. Whilst their liabilities have shot up, as long as they can keep covering their cashflow needs then they won't go bust in the near future.

 

They have net assets of about £40m IIRC. As long as they keep getting soft loans from directors and associates then they'll be ok. I can understand why King doesn't want to spend £11m on an offer for shares he doesn't want or need. This is money, assuming he has it,  that he could use to buy players for a couple more years...In the meantime, moves like appointing Gerrard, encourages the Bears to keep pumping money in so he doesn't need to put so much in himself. His "bullying" moan is all about him trying to feed the natural paranoia of Glaswegians and fostering a bomb shelter mentality. He doesn't want to obey TOP because he doesn't want other shareholders to sell up to him! He wants other people to take up Rights Issues on worthless shares not cash out for 20p, resulting in him to have to fund both that AND any future investment. 

 

King runs Rangers  as if it is his own already, what would he want more shares for?

 

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of what is going on but I reckon most of this post is bollocks.

 

It's all very well having assets to borrow against but if they can't service the debt against them they lose them and that's IF he can find someone to borrow from. Soft loans won't always be available.

 

It doesn't matter if King wants or needs the shares, he is bound by law to offer to buy them worthless to him or not.

 

Probably shouldn't have used the word bollocks, apologies if that offended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
15 minutes ago, johnmitchell said:

 

Not even the first orange top the Rangers have had 

I wonder if it is in honour of all their Dutch players again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Old Tolbooth
11 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I wonder if it is in honour of all their Dutch players again?

 

That old chestnut :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
Just now, johnmitchell said:

 

That old chestnut :lol: 

Indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
41 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of what is going on but I reckon most of this post is bollocks.

 

It's all very well having assets to borrow against but if they can't service the debt against them they lose them and that's IF he can find someone to borrow from. Soft loans won't always be available.

 

It doesn't matter if King wants or needs the shares, he is bound by law to offer to buy them worthless to him or not.

 

Probably shouldn't have used the word bollocks, apologies if that offended.

If servicing debt then the easiest way to do it is via soft loans, and even better if the the people lending the money later say "repay it at your leisure" when it becomes due or "ok convert it into equity" as those who have loaned to current Rangers have done...Can they get more money this way? Perhaps or perhaps not. Basically a rights issue is the next step, whereby all the shareholders get asked to put more money in to maintain their stake - total waste of money for small shareholders to do this other than as charity, but they still do it in droves and multiple times.

 

The key part of my post, which you thought was bollocks but I stand by, is that King doesn't want to have any more shares, as the more shares he actually owns the more he has to put in at any Rights Issue. King runs the club without currently owning it - a great position to be in. If you can get others to put the majority of money in for you to then spend, then how fun is that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tntjambo said:

 

I Doubt the GASL will set foot on UK again if there is a warrant out for his arrest.

If he doesn't show face again due to the contempt charge, does that mean he won't be able to hold the share issue?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
2 minutes ago, Elmore said:

If he doesn't show face again due to the contempt charge, does that mean he won't be able to hold the share issue?  

I think they would seek an injunction to stop any share issue whilst this TP thing is ongoing anyway. How can you possibly ask small shareholders to put more money in to maintain their holding, whilst at the same time you are bound to offer to buy their existing shares at a fixed price? Perhaps the new shares could be a different class of shares which would make them less attractive to any fool who is thinking of buying them for anything other than sentimental reasons? But then you lose the "fan ownership" selling angle...and whoever is underwriting the issue (surely can only be King himself) would have to buy most, so he may as well just pump the money in directly...which defeats the purpose of trying to get others to "invest" instead 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Elmore said:

If he doesn't show face again due to the contempt charge, does that mean he won't be able to hold the share issue?  

IIRC he can't sell the unsold shares until he satisfies the TOP requirement to make a 20p offer to shareholders for existing shares. After that he can sell the unsold shares to club 1872.  Ergo, when he satisfies the TOP panel requirement he will no longer be in contempt of court. At least the TOP, not being Scottish, doesn't lack the balls to go after him - and the recent judgement reflects that as they have jumped all over him as soon as it became apparent he wasn't going to comply. So there isn't going to be any "warchest" for Stevie G (would there be anyway if the directors want their soft loans repaid ?). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

I think they would seek an injunction to stop any share issue whilst this TP thing is ongoing anyway. How can you possibly ask small shareholders to put more money in to maintain their holding, whilst at the same time you are bound to offer to buy their existing shares at a fixed price? Perhaps the new shares could be a different class of shares which would make them less attractive to any fool who is thinking of buying them for anything other than sentimental reasons? But then you lose the "fan ownership" selling angle...and whoever is underwriting the issue (surely can only be King himself) would have to buy most, so he may as well just pump the money in directly...which defeats the purpose of trying to get others to "invest" instead 

I think King knows the game is up (at least for now) - Sevco will get battered if they try to go ahead with another share issue without complying with TOP.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
3 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

IIRC he can't sell the unsold shares until he satisfies the TOP requirement to make a 20p offer to shareholders for existing shares. After that he can sell the unsold shares to club 1872.  Ergo, when he satisfies the TOP panel requirement he will no longer be in contempt of court. At least the TOP, not being Scottish, doesn't lack the balls to go after him - and the recent judgement reflects that as they have jumped all over him as soon as it became apparent he wasn't going to comply. So there isn't going to be any "warchest" for Stevie G (would there be anyway if the directors want their soft loans repaid ?). 

TBH if the TP allow King to do what he is doing, then there is no raison d'etre for the TP...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

If servicing debt then the easiest way to do it is via soft loans, and even better if the the people lending the money later say "repay it at your leisure" when it becomes due or "ok convert it into equity" as those who have loaned to current Rangers have done...Can they get more money this way? Perhaps or perhaps not. Basically a rights issue is the next step, whereby all the shareholders get asked to put more money in to maintain their stake - total waste of money for small shareholders to do this other than as charity, but they still do it in droves and multiple times.

 

The key part of my post, which you thought was bollocks but I stand by, is that King doesn't want to have any more shares, as the more shares he actually owns the more he has to put in at any Rights Issue. King runs the club without currently owning it - a great position to be in. If you can get others to put the majority of money in for you to then spend, then how fun is that? 

 

The key part about your key part is that he has no option here, he must offer to buy the rest of the shares whether he wants to or not.

 

ps, I'm not disputing the fact that he won't want to buy those shares and indeed doesn't need them but ..........

Edited by graygo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire
13 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

TBH if the TP allow King to do what he is doing, then there is no raison d'etre for the TP...

It has to be remembered that the sole raison d'etre for the TP is to protect the smaller shareholders, and so they probably won't do anything that might harm the company involved, but they will most likely only view that from a financial point of view. So they might very well view that there is more value for the shareholders in winding up the company, if they can't force compliance in the law, than allowing a concert party or individual to run roughshod over the law. Nobody knows, possibly not even the TP, how far they will be prepared to go to uphold the law.

 

I very much doubt they will go so far as to do anything that might force a winding up of TRFC directly, but as long as they view RIFC as an ordinary company, which I imagine they must do, and ignore the emotional attachment of the bulk of small shareholders, they might well be prepared to block a share issue that may well result in the diminution of the value of the small shareholders holdings. Particularly one that is being used to fund a speculative strategy that offers little, if any, likelihood of increasing the value of the shares, even if it does pay off in a trophy or two.

 

While the TOP might be swayed by an appeal to go soft on a 'part of the fabric of Scottish society', I think it is important to remember that they view protecting the value of the shares as their priority, and not making the shareholders happy because their football club is successful, or even exists.

 

This is all speculation on my part, but I am sure the TOP are not just going to walk away if King refuses to comply. They might seek to force the rest of the concert party to comply, or remove King's, and maybe the whole concert party's, voting rights, which would obviously force them off the board, but what sort of a crisis that would cause for the club would be anybody's guess.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

The key part about your key part is that he has no option here, he must offer to buy the rest of the shares whether he wants to or not.

 

ps, I'm not disputing the fact that he won't want to buy those shares and indeed doesn't need them but ..........

I'm well aware of that though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spellczech said:

I think they would seek an injunction to stop any share issue whilst this TP thing is ongoing anyway. How can you possibly ask small shareholders to put more money in to maintain their holding, whilst at the same time you are bound to offer to buy their existing shares at a fixed price? Perhaps the new shares could be a different class of shares which would make them less attractive to any fool who is thinking of buying them for anything other than sentimental reasons? But then you lose the "fan ownership" selling angle...and whoever is underwriting the issue (surely can only be King himself) would have to buy most, so he may as well just pump the money in directly...which defeats the purpose of trying to get others to "invest" instead 

I thought that. It looks like he's cornered.  If he decides tostayout the country to avoid the contempt charges, he can't have the share issue. Comes back for the share issue, he gets arrested on the contempt charges. If I've got that right, does that mean either way he has to cough up. Is there another out for him?  Even rangers fans must be getting pissed off with all this now.  If he fails to come and face the contempt charges, will they issue an arrest warrant?  If is the case, does he not have to be in the country for the EGM so he can vote on the share issue? 

Edited by Elmore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
27 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

It has to be remembered that the sole raison d'etre for the TP is to protect the smaller shareholders, and so they probably won't do anything that might harm the company involved, but they will most likely only view that from a financial point of view. So they might very well view that there is more value for the shareholders in winding up the company, if they can't force compliance in the law, than allowing a concert party or individual to run roughshod over the law. Nobody knows, possibly not even the TP, how far they will be prepared to go to uphold the law.

 

I very much doubt they will go so far as to do anything that might force a winding up of TRFC directly, but as long as they view RIFC as an ordinary company, which I imagine they must do, and ignore the emotional attachment of the bulk of small shareholders, they might well be prepared to block a share issue that may well result in the diminution of the value of the small shareholders holdings. Particularly one that is being used to fund a speculative strategy that offers little, if any, likelihood of increasing the value of the shares, even if it does pay off in a trophy or two.

 

While the TOP might be swayed by an appeal to go soft on a 'part of the fabric of Scottish society', I think it is important to remember that they view protecting the value of the shares as their priority, and not making the shareholders happy because their football club is successful, or even exists.

 

This is all speculation on my part, but I am sure the TOP are not just going to walk away if King refuses to comply. They might seek to force the rest of the concert party to comply, or remove King's, and maybe the whole concert party's, voting rights, which would obviously force them off the board, but what sort of a crisis that would cause for the club would be anybody's guess.

 

Indeed, but the irony of this situation is that it is the bigger "small" shareholders who are most likely to accept King's 20p (if it ever comes) - King will have to buy out people like Ashley, Green and the Easdales - all people he hates, and at a price that he is not happy with...

 

I agree that the majority in number, but not of value, of small shareholders will probably ignore his offer (if it ever comes). If the total offer must be £11m, then he is probably likely to have to shell out a chunk of that. His problem appears to be that his money is stuck in South Africa, or maybe that just suits him...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
8 minutes ago, Elmore said:

I thought that. It looks like he's cornered.  If he decides tostayout the country to avoid the contempt charges, he can't have the share issue. Comes back for the share issue, he gets arrested on the contempt charges. If I've got that right, does that mean either way he has to cough up. Is there another out for him?  Even rangers fans must be getting pissed off with all this now.  If he fails to come and face the contempt charges, will they issue an arrest warrant?  If is the case, does he not have to be in the country for the EGM so he can vote on the share issue? 

Add to this that if he gets convicted of contempt, ignoring any prison term or fine, he will be banned from being a company director in the UK...This could then have consequences for him in South Africa perhaps, not to mention that he might find it difficult to go to Augusta for the Masters next year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Add to this that if he gets convicted of contempt, ignoring any prison term or fine, he will be banned from being a company director in the UK...This could then have consequences for him in South Africa perhaps, not to mention that he might find it difficult to go to Augusta for the Masters next year...

Dear Mr Spellczech

Thank your informative reply

I can now start my weekend with a massive smile on my face knowing that there is no easy way out for the shameless liar. 

Yours sincerely

Yee-fecking-ha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IveSeenTheLight
8 minutes ago, Elmore said:

Dear Mr Spellczech

Thank your informative reply

I can now start my weekend with a massive smile on my face knowing that there is no easy way out for the shameless liar. 

Yours sincerely

Yee-fecking-ha

 

Agreed, great start to the weekend

 

 

popcorn.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire
32 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Indeed, but the irony of this situation is that it is the bigger "small" shareholders who are most likely to accept King's 20p (if it ever comes) - King will have to buy out people like Ashley, Green and the Easdales - all people he hates, and at a price that he is not happy with...

 

I agree that the majority in number, but not of value, of small shareholders will probably ignore his offer (if it ever comes). If the total offer must be £11m, then he is probably likely to have to shell out a chunk of that. His problem appears to be that his money is stuck in South Africa, or maybe that just suits him...

I think that suits him, alright, and I also think that he was hoping to be allowed to leave the £11m 'guarantee' in S.A. in the hope that the 50% mark wasn't reached, but if it was, he'd use the S.A. Exchange Control excuse for not proceeding. As was seen in the SARS case, King was prepared to fight battles he couldn't win, just to kick the can further on Down the road. It looks like that is something he still likes to do when in trouble with authorities and the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Spellczech said:

TBH if the TP allow King to do what he is doing, then there is no raison d'etre for the TP...

I don't get your point. The TOP isn't allowing King to do what he wants - quite the opposite. They have him by the balls and they will do whatever they can do get him to obey UK law.  King gets it. His Investec ruse was booted into the long grass without a second thought.  He has been told quite explicitly he has to find £11M and equally explicity by TOP and a court judge they don't buy his story for any delay. TOP isn't in this for the long haul IMO , they have wasted no time in getting the case into court and their written comms have virtually been by return of post on receipt of anything from King. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech
25 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

I don't get your point. The TOP isn't allowing King to do what he wants - quite the opposite. They have him by the balls and they will do whatever they can do get him to obey UK law.  King gets it. His Investec ruse was booted into the long grass without a second thought.  He has been told quite explicitly he has to find £11M and equally explicity by TOP and a court judge they don't buy his story for any delay. TOP isn't in this for the long haul IMO , they have wasted no time in getting the case into court and their written comms have virtually been by return of post on receipt of anything from King. 

That is my point. The TP has to chase King to whatever conclusion. TP rules have been in place for years but it is only King who has tried to ignore them. He left them no option but to "bully" him into conforming, because if the Companies Act rules don't get enforced then there is no purpose in having a TP...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, johnmitchell said:

 

Not even the first orange top the Rangers have had 

Classed as tangerine, I think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, farin said:

King thumbing his nose at the courts again, hopefully they’ve finally lost all patience with him & he gets what’s coming to him. 

What can they do? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire
20 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

What can they do? 

There is no precedent on which to base an answer, and quite possibly the TOP don't know the answer to that either. But that doesn't mean there is nothing they can do, and it appears to have started with the contempt proceedings against King. On the other hand, we know what King could have done, and would have done if TRFC means as much to him as he'd have the bears believe. What we do know is King is in trouble, and that means the man who's promises of funding are what TRFC's future is based on is in trouble, and that means TRFC are in trouble. How much trouble they are both in is what the question should be, and only time will tell us that.

 

What we do know is that RIFC were mooting a £16m share issue, that was then reduced to £6m because the TOP proceedings prevented the concert party from taking part. That £6m share issue was supposed to take place in June, but it is now July and nothing's happened. So far, the TOP haven't done much, or appear not to have, but the effect of them doing nothing seems quite palpable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

There is no precedent on which to base an answer, and quite possibly the TOP don't know the answer to that either. But that doesn't mean there is nothing they can do, and it appears to have started with the contempt proceedings against King. On the other hand, we know what King could have done, and would have done if TRFC means as much to him as he'd have the bears believe. What we do know is King is in trouble, and that means the man who's promises of funding are what TRFC's future is based on is in trouble, and that means TRFC are in trouble. How much trouble they are both in is what the question should be, and only time will tell us that.

 

What we do know is that RIFC were mooting a £16m share issue, that was then reduced to £6m because the TOP proceedings prevented the concert party from taking part. That £6m share issue was supposed to take place in June, but it is now July and nothing's happened. So far, the TOP haven't done much, or appear not to have, but the effect of them doing nothing seems quite palpable.

Are we talking criminal or civil. I don't know much about him other than SA where he should be in jail for the rest of his life. 

 

 

Oh thanks for the reply, sorry my manner are terrible sometimes. 

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

jacklivi1874

Times an anesthetic they say..6 an Half Years down the line and that shower still do what they want and when..Stinks form the off and aint changing for the best sadly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maple Leaf locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...