bmck 117 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Bluedell said: As a director of over 20 companies, yes, I'd be delighted if you could tell me about directors' discretion The directors have a duty to act in good faith as well, and I'd suggest that they haven't, given that they've issued shares to themselves at a cheaper rate than to what they presumably now think that the shares are worth. Thanks for responding needlessly dickishly to a sincere offer of help. Apologies I haven’t read your autobiography. Edited June 17, 2021 by bmck 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 6,012 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 I don’t bother much about the ins and outs of Rangers share dealings so I may have grasped the wrong end of the nettle. Were the directors’ recent acquisitions in lieu of loan repayments? If so might the consideration have been discounted to reflect advantage accrued to the company by not having to fund cash repayment? If I’m barking up the wrong avenue, or just plain barking, someone will tell me in the friendly tone that permeates this topic. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonzo79 15,294 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 49 minutes ago, Scott7 said: If I’m barking up the wrong avenue, or just plain barking, someone will tell me in the friendly tone that permeates this topic 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 3 hours ago, bmck said: Thanks for responding needlessly dickishly to a sincere offer of help. Apologies I haven’t read your autobiography. Company secretaries aren’t real directors ?? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 2 hours ago, Scott7 said: I don’t bother much about the ins and outs of Rangers share dealings so I may have grasped the wrong end of the nettle. Were the directors’ recent acquisitions in lieu of loan repayments? If so might the consideration have been discounted to reflect advantage accrued to the company by not having to fund cash repayment? If I’m barking up the wrong avenue, or just plain barking, someone will tell me in the friendly tone that permeates this topic. It doesn’t matter which tree anyone is barking up. The directors have done what they were entitled to do and no amount of armchair experts will change that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 don't think anyone is expecting it to change. Doesn't make it right doesn't mean we have to like it and contrary to some peoples beliefs we are allowed to feel like that and discuss it. You really just have to hope this gaffe doesn't see the offering fail. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 (edited) The only "gaffe" will be if the issue is over-subscribed and the board could have got 30p per share. Share values are set by how much people will pay for them today, not by how much someone paid in the past. Otherwise no one would ever have lost money on the stockmarket. Where did this ridiculous notion come from that directors who effectively saved the club by risking their own money shouldn't have enjoyed the same 20p price as everyone else? The same directors who like everyone else will have to pay 25p for new shares today. I think what we're seeing is an attempt to find grievance on the basis that someone might have been smarter of more successful than someone else. It seems to the the hallmark of Scotland today. Edited June 20, 2021 by Bill 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 21 minutes ago, Bill said: The only "gaffe" will be if the issue is over-subscribed and the board could have got 30p per share. Share values are set by how much people will pay for them today, not by how much someone paid in the past. Otherwise no one would ever have lost money on the stockmarket. Where did this ridiculous notion come from that directors who effectively saved the club by risking their own money shouldn't have enjoyed the same 20p price as everyone else? The same directors who like everyone else will have to pay 25p for new shares today. I think what we're seeing is an attempt to find grievance on the basis that someone might have been smarter of more successful than someone else. It seems to the the hallmark of Scotland today. Thanks for this. I see the other side’s point of view, as from the fan side this isn’t really about an investment, but the board have to maximise what’s incoming. End of. Ironically on behalf of those new shareholders. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonzo79 15,294 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 This is a bit like moaning about three new strips every season, except on a larger scale. We all have an emotional investment in Rangers FC and opportunities to get involved are a bit like an addiction. And just like an addiction, it's up to the individual to sort themselves out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 40 minutes ago, bmck said: Thanks for this. I see the other side’s point of view, as from the fan side this isn’t really about an investment, but the board have to maximise what’s incoming. End of. Ironically on behalf of those new shareholders. lol now they are doing us a favor. Just when you think it can't get any more ridiculous. they are doing this to protect their own investments. 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.