Mike Ashley, dual club ownership and the 10% rule rumour

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I will be surprised if this lot can find someone to provide them with a set of audited accounts.

 

Never a truer word said in jest, or perhaps not in jest.

 

I will be astonished if Deloittes remain our auditors.

[Rangersitis 0]

Never a truer word said in jest, or perhaps not in jest.

 

I will be astonished if Deloittes remain our auditors.

 

They will get the Saul Goodman of the accountancy world to do his magic!

[der Berliner 3,743]

Never a truer word said in jest, or perhaps not in jest.

 

It took the SFA about 15 secs to throw all its weight behind the Yahoo's bid for having that player registered. So if it's for the good of Scottish football, they will no doubt get behind us too. (No laughing at the back!)

 

The club should simple test the waters with UEFA first, providing all the info that we have thus far on Whyte's actions. IMHO, this 3-year rule was essentially whipped up to stop Arabian or Russian oil barons whipping up teams out of nothing and have them compete against the CL establishment and thus diluting UEFA's much cherrished competition.

[Zappa 0]

I will be surprised if this lot can find someone to provide them with a set of audited accounts.

 

It depends on events over the next couple of weeks.

 

Firstly, the board needs this share offer to bring in at least £3m from achieving the minimum subscription and if it fails to do that then they'll need to find more emergency loans/credit facilities.

 

Then, they'll need to quickly (ASAP!) get shareholder approval for a bigger public share issue like an FPO.

 

If they get the shareholder approval, then they can proceed (ASAP!) with another round of fundraising.

[craig 5,199]

They will be able to get audited counts without too much bother.... The bigger problem is the audit opinion they get. Right now the BEST they could hope for would have a going concern rider to the audit opinion. No self respecting audit firm would give our club an unqualified audit opinion at this moment in time

[Rangersitis 0]

It depends on events over the next couple of weeks.

 

Firstly, the board needs this share offer to bring in at least £3m from achieving the minimum subscription and if it fails to do that then they'll need to find more emergency loans/credit facilities.

 

Then, they'll need to quickly (ASAP!) get shareholder approval for a bigger public share issue like an FPO.

 

If they get the shareholder approval, then they can proceed (ASAP!) with another round of fundraising.

 

It was stated yesterday that the AGM would be held in September or October. They will need accounts prior to that, plus give the required notice of the meeting. All that for a board who seem to do everything as slow as a week in the jail.

[Zappa 0]

It was stated yesterday that the AGM would be held in September or October. They will need accounts prior to that, plus give the required notice of the meeting. All that for a board who seem to do everything as slow as a week in the jail.

 

That was a dodgy statement from our QC in court yesterday because I don't think they'd be able to hold an AGM this month, would they?

[Rangersitis 0]

That was a dodgy statement from our QC in court yesterday because I don't think they'd be able to hold an AGM this month, would they?

 

Not unless the stuff was at the printers already, and even then I'm not sure of the minimum notice required.

[Zappa 0]

Not unless the stuff was at the printers already, and even then I'm not sure of the minimum notice required.

 

I think the minimum notice period for a UK PLC is 21 days. It's possible to hold one at short notice, but only with 95% shareholder approval and I doubt they'd manage to get that.

[Rangersitis 0]

I think the minimum notice period for a UK PLC is 21 days. It's possible to hold one at short notice, but only with 95% shareholder approval and I doubt they'd manage to get that.

 

As forlanssister noted yesterday, there is also the small matter of the accounts!