Bluedell 5,679 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) So do you think that being unlisted would be beneficial to the club, the shareholders and the fans? I suppose my real question is would fans like yourself, Craig & Boss who work in the financial industry rather the club be listed or unlisted? One of the big sources of income for the club over the last 20 years has been through share issues. If Whyte is planning to do something similar in the future it may be beneficial to retain the listing as shares are more attractive if they are easily tradable, and that is why Murray kept our listing. That, to me, is the biggest benefit. PS I don't work in the financial industry Edited January 10, 2012 by Bluedell 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) taking a slightly different slant.... I am assuming that the PLUS membership isn't free.....with that being the case, maybe they are weighing up the cost of being listed compared to the benefits gained from it!!! for example....if it costs £50k per annum to be listed, which in turn generates £20k in share trading it doesn't seem worthwhile to maintain the PLUS membership. That £20k of share trading could still be generated, but without the £50k outgoing.... (Note: The above numbers are for example only....I have absolutely no idea if they are remotely true...) Addition: Just found the PLUS Annual fees: Up to £3m market capitalisation = £5,665 minimum fee - increment per £1m market capitalisation thereafter = £258 Maximum fee = £51,500 Based on the above....I'm not sure what the annual cost would be to Rangers.....its gonna be several thousand pounds anyway.... Edited January 10, 2012 by Darthter 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 PS I don't work in the financial industry You're an accountant though, right? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) Just found the PLUS Annual fees:Up to £3m market capitalisation = £5,665 minimum fee - increment per £1m market capitalisation thereafter = £258 Maximum fee = £51,500 Based on the above....I'm not sure what the annual cost would be to Rangers.....its gonna be several thousand pounds anyway.... There are 108.8M shares currently valued at 12.5p each (source - Bloomsberg) valuing the Company at £13.6M, so on that basis the cost would be £8,399.80. Typical transactions are for 50 shares at that price i.e. £500; most people only hold them for sentimental value. BTW before the takeover the shares were valued at 32.5p valuing the Company at £35.36M! Of course shares, like houses, are only worth what the next man will pay for them and Mr Whyte paid £1 for more than 90M of them which works out at not a lot each. RST were paying about £5 ea. for "unallocated" shares including costs in 2009/10. Edited January 10, 2012 by BrahimHemdani Deliberate Error! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 You're an accountant though, right? I prefer the term "financial guru". 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 RANGERS have today issued the following statement: The Club's board is currently considering the merit of maintaining its listing on the PLUS market after 6 May 2012. The May 6 date will be 12 months following the acquisition of 85.3 per cent. holding by The Rangers FC Group Limited. The board is currently assessing the benefits of remaining a listed company on PLUS. Chairman Craig Whyte said: "Given the structure of the shareholding in the Club, there is very little, if any, tangible benefit for the Club to be a listed company. "The fact that the club has a majority shareholder controlling more than 80% means there is very little trading in shares. In reality, a public listing means more bureaucracy. Rangers does not need to remain a listed company in order for people to buy and sell their individual shares and since becoming chairman I have always questioned what is really being achieved with a public listing. "Whether or not we are a listed company, accounts will still be published and there will still be a shareholders' AGM. All shareholders would be able to hold the directors to account." As a result of the delay in publishing its audited accounts to 30 June 2011 the board announce that the Company's shares have been suspended from trading on PLUS pursuant to Rule 51. The delay has been caused as a result of finalising the audit, which the board believe will be complete on or around 31 January 2012. The delay in finalising the audit is related to an ongoing HMRC tax tribunal. Last year's postponed AGM will be held as soon as possible after the accounts are finalised. Bump . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,808 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Around could very well mean February 1st to 5th ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Around could very well mean February 1st to 5th ... Correct, but equally it may well mean never. 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.