Jump to content

 

 

John Greig and John McLelland have resigned


Recommended Posts

Yes, it is. At least under the Companies Act definitions.

 

So by legal definition it's ok, but would it not be considered unusual for a company the size of Rangers Football Club to essentially only have it's owner and his lapdog acting as the companies board of directors?

 

I'm just trying to get my head around why so many board members have either been removed or resigned and none of them replaced.

Edited by Zappa
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Gordon Smith had been formally announced as "Director of football"?

 

Director of football isn't the same as either an executive or non-executive director.

 

Changes in Directorships have to be announced to the market, hence the changes http://www.plus-sx.com/companies/plusCompanyDetail.html?securityId=10824

Link to post
Share on other sites

Director of football isn't the same as either an executive or non-executive director.

 

Changes in Directorships have to be announced to the market, hence the changes http://www.plus-sx.com/companies/plusCompanyDetail.html?securityId=10824

 

Right, so given that King and Betts were (and presumably still are) non-executive directors, that would mean that the company no longer has any executive directors other than Whyte himself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, so given that King and Betts were (and presumably still are) non-executive directors, that would mean that the company no longer has any executive directors other than Whyte himself?

 

It would appear so yes, not exactly the paragon of the Cadbury Code of Practice is it ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear so yes, not exactly the paragon of the Cadbury Code of Practice is it ?

 

Not quite sure about Dave King though. Did he remain a non-executive director after his large investment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So by legal definition it's ok, but would it not be considered unusual for a company the size of Rangers Football Club to essentially only have it's owner and his lapdog acting as the companies board of directors?

 

I'm just trying to get my head around why so many board members have either been removed or resigned and none of them replaced.

 

Unusual perhaps Zappa, but doesnt necessarily mean people should be suspicious either.

 

I have only come across companies with one or two directors in private companies. Public companies tend to have larger boards - it would be hard to have Board committees with only 1 or 2 board members.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.