Zappa 0 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 It is right there Zappa. Securities=shares That sanction is withdrawl though mate, not suspension. There's a distinct difference. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Just on the an absolutely nothing story. SSN as well. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 That sanction is withdrawl though mate, not suspension. There's a distinct difference. That's what happened today they withdrew the trading facilities for our shares. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 That sanction is withdrawl though mate, not suspension. There's a distinct difference. A withdrawal from trading. Which is, in effect, a suspension. A withdrawal from trading has the same impact as a suspension, unless the withdrawal is permanent. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 That's what happened today they withdrew the trading facilities for our shares. The statements that were released by Rangers talk about a suspension though, when the PLUS disciplinary sanctions clearly mention nothing about suspension as a possible sanction for the issuer, whereas for the PLUS Corporate Adviser the PLUS sanctions clearly define three options: "suspension, variation or withdrawal of the PLUS Corporate Adviser’s membership". They would have mentioned suspension AND withdrawl as possible sanctions in those rules if both were options, but only withdrawl is mentioned which is contradictory to the statements released which talk about contemplating withdrawl in May after the 12 month period has lapsed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think you are reading more into this than needs be read Zappa. A withdrawal is no different to a suspension. The shares cant be traded. They are, as forlans says, withdrawing the trading facilities, which is no different to suspending our shares from being traded. Non-event in my mind. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Thanks Craig and I hope you're right, but the new Directors do now have "previous" in terms of releasing deliberately misleading/misworded statements. They failed to make the appropriate Disclosure statement and went on to release a misleading one when forced to do so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 The statements that were released by Rangers talk about a suspension though, when the PLUS disciplinary sanctions clearly mention nothing about suspension as a possible sanction for the issuer, whereas for the PLUS Corporate Adviser the PLUS sanctions clearly define three options: "suspension, variation or withdrawal of the PLUS Corporate Adviserâ??s membership". They would have mentioned suspension AND withdrawl as possible sanctions in those rules if both were options, but only withdrawl is mentioned which is contradictory to the statements released which talk about contemplating withdrawl in May after the 12 month period has lapsed. By the intents and purposes of the rules we are the 'issuer' the Corporate Advisor stuff is irrelevant. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 By the intents and purposes of the rules we are the 'issuer' the Corporate Advisor stuff is irrelevant. I understood that we are the 'issuer' mate. My point is that PLUS made a point of saying that suspension and withdrawal were different options in their list of possible sanctions, but in the case of the issuer there's only "withdrawal", with no mention of suspension. That leads me to think that the use of the word "suspension" in the statements released by the club is possibly misleading. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I understood that we are the 'issuer' mate. My point is that PLUS made a point of saying that suspension and withdrawal were different options in their list of possible sanctions, but in the case of the issuer there's only "withdrawal", with no mention of suspension. That leads me to think that the use of the word "suspension" in the statements released by the club is possibly misleading. Got you now! Don't think there was any intentional to mislead on this occasion. ( not like me to defend Whyte !! :surprised: ) I found this remark quite interesting, it reads like they're taking the matter very seriously maybe it's a lot more problematic than a mere "technicality"? James Goodwin, director of regulation at PLUS, said: 'The PLUS Stock Exchange is also currently conducting an investigation into the circumstances under which Craig Whyte's seven-year disqualification from acting as a director in 2000 were not disclosed at the time of his appointment to the board of Rangers FC on 6 May 2011.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2084248/Shares-Rangers-suspended-Ibrox-club-submit-unaudited-accounts.html#ixzz1j0RRdDub 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.