Dave King

[compo 7,060]

It looks like genealogist in court in the case about the takeover and he will have to make an offer to the shareholders

[der Berliner 3,749]

if it happens, simply a waste of money. As folk have said, he probably should have heeded the word in his ear about the percentage he bought, but so be it. I would hope it is his money that he will need to pay for this.

Edited December 22, 2017 by der Berliner

[Bluedell 5,627]

Rangers owner Dave King this morning suffered a crushing blow as a top judge ruled he must make an £11 million shares offer.

 

The decision at the Court of Session potentially plunges the Rangers owner into a major cash crisis as King’s lawyer previously told Lord Bannatyne the entrepreneur was “penniless”.

 

King, who has faced turbulent conflict with tax authorities in South Africa, argued that King’s money was tied up in onshore and offshore trusts but they were in the name of his family and he didn’t have control of them.

 

But Lord Bannatyne’s ruling favours the view of The Takeover panel, who argued that he controlled the cash and was legally bound to offer to buy out other Rangers shareholders at 20p a share - amounting to £11 million.

 

King’s advocate, Lord Davidson of Glen Clova QC, earlier told the court: “Mr King is penniless. Any order wouldn’t secure compliance. It won’t. It is pointless.”

 

He also recommended judge Lord Bannatyne dismiss the order because the shares were currently worth 27p.

 

The hearing at the Court of Session in Edinburgh was told King didn’t know he’d be legally required to fund the £11million share purchase as part of his takeover.

 

But Advocate James McNeill QC, acting for the Takeover Panel, rubbished the suggestion he was unaware of the 2006 Companies Act provisions.

[Walterbear 557]

Yet another payday for the penny share charlatans.

[Barrheadboy 16]

Am I right in saying if he makes an offer for all the shares which today are at 27p he has to offer 20 p most if not all would refuse his offer ,so what is the problem with him just making the offer?

I am not a financier so maybe I am missing something fundamental.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Barrheadboy

[ian1964 10,724]

Am I right in saying if he makes an offer for all the shares which today are at 27p he has to offer 20 p most if not all would refuse his offer ,so what is the problem with him just making the offer?

I am not a financier so maybe I am missing something fundamental.

 

Same as me, if he ''offers'' and they aren't taken then what?

[chilledbear 16]

If there is a share offer will they still be worth 27p?

[BEARGER 1,830]

Am I right in saying if he makes an offer for all the shares which today are at 27p he has to offer 20 p most if not all would refuse his offer ,so what is the problem with him just making the offer?

I am not a financier so maybe I am missing something fundamental.

 

It’s the cost of all preparity legal work, accountants paperwork postage etc. etc

[forlanssister 3,114]

If there is a share offer will they still be worth 27p?

 

Doubtful as they're usually (but not always) held at a discount to market price.

[Bluedell 5,627]

Am I right in saying if he makes an offer for all the shares which today are at 27p he has to offer 20 p most if not all would refuse his offer ,so what is the problem with him just making the offer?

I am not a financier so maybe I am missing something fundamental.

 

Some may accept. It's not a particularly liquid market, and although you may be able to sell 100 shares at 27p, you may not be able to sell 1,000,000 at that price.

 

Plus some may think that the share price may fall.