Rangersitis 0 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Are mash now legally obliged to renegotiate the contracts memtiond in resolution 2? No, and if resolution 2 had gone the other way that wouldn't have been enforceable either. It's all posturing from King and Ashley. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 No, and if resolution 2 had gone the other way that wouldn't have been enforceable either. It's all posturing from King and Ashley. At the expense of our football club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 At the expense of our football club. Both in terms of finance and reputation. All this unseemly nonsense cannot be a great advert for a club which is supposedly looking for new investment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoodyBlue 0 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Does this suggest Cashley controls more shares than he has? I don't think so mate. I make it that it works out about 29% of the total shareholding that voted for the resolution. We know that Ashley has 9% and I think the Easdale block had around 20% at the EGM - so by my calculations, it would only have been them that voted for it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 2,027 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Its not quite posturing from King. In the sense that the Board now has a mandate to bring to the AGM a motion to disapply the voting rights of any shareholder breaching the SFA's dual ownership rules. Not sure what percentage of votes would be needed to get this passed, but this isn't over. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 2,027 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Also, we've still to have the full hearing in court with regards to the confidentiality interdict that was granted... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Worrying results. We need to dilute the green co shareholding with a share issue ASAP. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,678 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Its not quite posturing from King. In the sense that the Board now has a mandate to bring to the AGM a motion to disapply the voting rights of any shareholder breaching the SFA's dual ownership rules. Not sure what percentage of votes would be needed to get this passed, but this isn't over. Ashley isn't breaching the SFA's dual ownership rules is he? He is below the stipulated 10% 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 At the expense of our football club. King only tagged his on after Ashley requisitioned the meeting 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 2,027 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Ashley isn't breaching the SFA's dual ownership rules is he? He is below the stipulated 10% Not according the SFA who have fined both Ashley and the club. 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.