Katie-Moo Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Is anyone else going to the EGM tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vladsmad Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 No It will be over in 10 minutes I would think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jambomickey Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 i be there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMAJAMBO Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Yes will be there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Thought about it but decided against. No doubt I'll lose my small share of the club tomorrow as I'll be surprised if they don't decide to "force" a sale of the remaining (non UBIG) shares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Maroon Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 I'm going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 I'm going. And as VR is still in the Country - will he be going ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Thought about it but decided against.No doubt I'll lose my small share of the club tomorrow as I'll be surprised if they don't decide to "force" a sale of the remaining (non UBIG) shares. I haven't heard it reported that is one of the resolutions. Another poster on a previous thread suggested that even after the swap and creation of new shares, that a squeeze out is not possible in this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobbyshambles Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 im not-i thought about it but it's not worth making time up at work for based on the whitewash of the last two i went to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut The Crap Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 I haven't heard it reported that is one of the resolutions. Another poster on a previous thread suggested that even after the swap and creation of new shares, that a squeeze out is not possible in this situation. This move will give UBIG and its subsidiaries control over 95% of the stock, which would be enough to allow them to purchase the rest of the shares if that's what they want to do? Having said that, I don't really see the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 This move will give UBIG and its subsidiaries control over 95% of the stock, which would be enough to allow them to purchase the rest of the shares if that's what they want to do? Having said that, I don't really see the point. I know it's not much of a point but it would allow UBIG (or whoever) to hold club AGMs with no outsiders attending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 This move will give UBIG and its subsidiaries control over 95% of the stock, which would be enough to allow them to purchase the rest of the shares if that's what they want to do? Having said that, I don't really see the point. That was my initial thought - that a squeeze out would be possible. However another poster (at the time when the swap was announced - and a credible poster at that) suggested that a squeeze out would not be allowed as the shareholding didn't go through the % threshold through a takeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Very low key. No RR or VR or Pedro. Sergi chaired the meeting - what a difference he is compared to that erse RR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut The Crap Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 That was my initial thought - that a squeeze out would be possible. However another poster (at the time when the swap was announced - and a credible poster at that) suggested that a squeeze out would not be allowed as the shareholding didn't go through the % threshold through a takeover. Fair enough. As I said, I don't really see the point anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Very low key. No RR or VR or Pedro. Sergi chaired the meeting - what a difference he is compared to that erse RR. Other than the swap, were there any other resolutions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the voice from above Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Very low key. No RR or VR or Pedro. Sergi chaired the meeting - what a difference he is compared to that erse RR. has it been? nothing noteworthy at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 has it been? nothing noteworthy at all? Honestly nothing at all except I shook Csaba's hand at the ticket office - I think he thought I was press where I was merely enquirying about Rangers tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Did not go, but having now been passed Hearts have freed up ?12m of the debt and as such released some capital as we will also make ?600k saving per annum on Interest alone? Where are all the Hoboeconomists when you need them to assure us this is still a bad thing? Because the Hibs model where Petrie keeps the ?millions in his sky rocket has certainly worked wonders over there? as their squad has been pilfered, they have not scored in about 20 hours of hoofball, and Mixu is getting fatter and balder by the day. I might go over to havingnodebtandplayingstilllikebrazilwithoutbeingabletoscoreanygoalsliksy.net and ask? Oh I forgot they are going into meltdown:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 As mentioned, it all very low key and only a couple of questions from the floor on matters relating only to the issue. One thing that seems certain though is that the AGMs will indeed continue, as some raised fears that it would end as a result of this mornings EGM. It was all over so quickly, that a few of us ended up in drinking in the Tynie Arms before noon! Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 It was all over so quickly, that a few of us ended up in drinking in the Tynie Arms before noon! Buffalo Bill . Good to see you made full use of your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blairdin Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 I might be wrong, but were assurances not given by Romanov previously (possibly at one of the meetings arranged by Kickback) that he was not interested in buying shares owned by fans who just want to own their own little bit of the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 I might be wrong, but were assurances not given by Romanov previously (possibly at one of the meetings arranged by Kickback) that he was not interested in buying shares owned by fans who just want to own their own little bit of the club? Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Other than the swap, were there any other resolutions? There were 3 resolutions - all to do with the debt for equity scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmiyaRomanova Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 As BB says, a pretty quick meet - and not very well attended either, at least compared to the last couple of AGMs. Didn't see a single hand raised in objection as the three resolutions were rubber-stamped in rapid succession. Can't recall exact numbers, but of the proxy votes, almost 20k votes were for the resolutions, with just under a thousand against. One wag asked whether it might be possible that future AGMs could be held in Lithuania..... swiftly rebuffed, though it could have put ideas into their head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Correct. he wont want the shareholders association to close down ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The xx Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Just heard on the radio that shareholders who attended agreed 100% with the debt for equity scheme although there were a few postal votes against the motion. Is there anyone on here who doesn't agree with going ahead with this, and if so, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 A couple of questions were asked re small shareholders and I think they were trying to get assurances that the club wont just force us to sell (even if they can) but the guy was a bit hesitant in asking it direct. The lawyer said as shareholders we are all guaranteed certain rights. Another question from a well known pub landlord was an interesting one. Asking whether future AGMs/EGMs could be taken away from Edinburgh (i.e. Lithuania)?. Sergie asked if that was a request (joke) and again the layer answered theoretically it can be held anywhere but as we are a Scottish company it would be difficult to justify taking out of Edinburgh let alone Scotland. And that was about it apart from the Lithuanian (guess) crumpet that was milling about afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 There were 3 resolutions - all to do with the debt for equity scheme. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 As BB says, a pretty quick meet - and not very well attended either, at least compared to the last couple of AGMs. Didn't see a single hand raised in objection as the three resolutions were rubber-stamped in rapid succession. Can't recall exact numbers, but of the proxy votes, almost 20k votes were for the resolutions, with just under a thousand against. One wag asked whether it might be possible that future AGMs could be held in Lithuania..... swiftly rebuffed, though it could have put ideas into their head. Think it was over 95,000 for and 9,000 odd against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 In a sense, it doesn't matter anyway - but did anyone ask for clarification on the point I made on here the other week: that the announcement on the website spoke of ?12m debt being converted to shares, and a 30% reduction overall... which would mean our debt had hit ?40m, which post the sale of Gordon, makes no sense at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 In a sense, it doesn't matter anyway - but did anyone ask for clarification on the point I made on here the other week: that the announcement on the website spoke of ?12m debt being converted to shares, and a 30% reduction overall... which would mean our debt had hit ?40m, which post the sale of Gordon, makes no sense at all? Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Nope. Thought not. Ho hum, and cheers anyway: in many ways, none of this matters, because it's UBIG's money, and we're in their hands whatever happens I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Thought not. Ho hum, and cheers anyway: in many ways, none of this matters, because it's UBIG's money, and we're in their hands whatever happens I suppose. Next time get a shareholder to give you their proxy vote then you can submit a written question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pivotno1 Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 wonder who used 9k shares,to vote against the resolution,even if you totally detested romanov,its surely a good move for the club,wonder if it was our old friend calum sandcastle playing games again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 wonder who used 9k shares,to vote against the resolution,even if you totally detested romanov,its surely a good move for the club,wonder if it was our old friend calum sandcastle playing games again. Was thinking the same - surely a 'institutional' type of investor - someone like Lancastle. Is it time to get the pitch forks out again? A you say - it's only good news for the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Just heard on the radio that shareholders who attended agreed 100% with the debt for equity scheme although there were a few postal votes against the motion. Is there anyone on here who doesn't agree with going ahead with this, and if so, why? Not strictly true there were a few abstentions but nobody voted against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3,483
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.