wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 By delaying it and allowing a window to sign and register players, the embargo was altered you pillock. It wasn't imposed, withdrawn, imposed again.............. Sevconians, what are they like? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mylothedog Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 My question regarding Chucky is how much of his own money has he put in to the club? He bought it for £2, of which, half was a tip i think. The £5.5m, was this his own money? Was it borrowed? The debts to Scottish football clubs, did he pay this out of his own pocket? The legal fees? I know i am showing my ignorance here, but I only sporadically read this thread, and its mostly mud-slinging so I'm unsure of the facts. Any help would be appreciated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 C) This is what the prospectus should answer, remember it has to stand up to FSA scrutiny, the share issue was always going to have this reception from non-rangers fans, it would not matter who was doing it, and as for the loan, your guessing Does it require scrutiny from the FSA on the AIM? Isn't this another porky by Green? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 A) Is what we fans hope (but then you already knew this) B) No I think Ticketus are fucked and nobody gives a f**k, the people who set ticketus up have already made their money and fucked off, whats left is numerous shareholders that were sold a false promise, go and look at the number of shareholders ticketus has and tell me if you think this is normal C) This is what the prospectus should answer, remember it has to stand up to FSA scrutiny, the share issue was always going to have this reception from non-rangers fans, it would not matter who was doing it, and as for the loan, your guessing Do I Trust Green, no he has not done anything near enough to make me trust him, in fact the opposite, it has nothing to do with all the tic forum wet dream stuff like ticketus, floating charges, HMRC plots, this is total bullshit, the main reason I don't trust him is that as yet he has not shown that Rangers have a sustainable business model, which in my opinion should be easy for him to do, a simple list of income and outgoings would show that the club can stand on its own two feet without the share issue, proving that the share issue would be used for developing the club, if some of that money raised is used to let the short term investors walk away then so be it I don't have a problem with this B) You honestly believe Ticketus got ripped off for £24 million and just walked away? C) Who's word are you talking that the prospectus has to stand up to FSA scrutiny Charles Green? RANGERS CEO EXPECTS FSA TO GREEN LIGHT SHARE FLOTATION PROSPECTUS by EcojonRangers investors look like receiving a cast-iron imprimatur that the Financial Services Authority has declared the club ‘fit to go on the stock market’. This will come, according to Rangers CEO Charles Green, when the FSA approves the upcoming share flotation prospectus. Rangers’ Top Man gave the commitment on air while being questioned on STV regarding the re-emergence of former Ibrox owner Craig Whyte claiming he introduced the gritty Yorkshireman to D&P the administrators who sold all of the oldco Rangers’ assets to Sevco for £5.5 million. Amazingly Charlie, with a glint in his eye, revealed that the Ibrox property assets alone had just been revalued at £80 million. He gave a number of assurances on controversial issues raised by the interviewer and said: ‘And all of the things that you are raising have got to be cleared. ‘So that when the Financial Services Authority approve Rangers as being fit to go on the stock market none of these questions lie unanswered’. So this very comforting FSA ‘guarantee’ looks like another lead into gold bonanza as far as Rangers and the proposed AIM flotation is concerned, or is it? In 2000 the FSA took responsibility for the Listing Regime which focuses on the eligibility of securities for admission to the ‘Official List’ and uses the name UK Listing Authority (UKLA) when carrying out this function. In this role, the FSA is a securities regulator, focused on the companies which issue the securities traded in our financial markets. However, the FSA website states: ‘The UKLA does not have the power to make subjective qualitative judgements about a company’s suitability for listing’. OK so I get that bit but what about a share flotation on the AIM Market? Let’s go to old friend wikipedia which states: ‘The Official List is the list maintained by the FSA (UKLA) in accordance with Section 74(1) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the Act) for the purposes of Part VI of the Act. ‘The Official List is a list of securities issued by companies for the purpose of those securities being traded on a UK regulated market. An example of a UK regulated market is the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market.’ Right that’s the Main Market dealt with – What about the junior AIM Market, is that a regulated market? Well the London Stock Exchange (LSE) created AIM with the objective of offering smaller companies the opportunity to raise capital on a market with a pragmatic approach to regulation. LSE further states that AIM: ‘Under the directives that form the EU’s Financial Services Action Plan, AIM is not a Regulated Market but instead falls within the classification of a Multilateral Trading Facility (MTF) as defined under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2004 (MiFID)’. Wait a minute, come again! So AIM isn’t a Regulated Market but are the prospectuses of companies applying to float approved by the FSA or UKLA or even LSE? The first bit is quite easy to answer: ‘AIM companies and Nomads are regulated by a dedicated team at the London Stock Exchange – AIM Regulation – a team of professionals including lawyers, accountants and corporate financiers’. Well to my untrained eye that seems to rule out the FSA and UKLA. But what about the LSE? This appears to be answered by the first page of a company’s AIM application document having to state prominently and in bold type: “AIM is a market designed primarily for emerging or smaller companies to which a higher investment risk tends to be attached than to larger or more established companies. AIM securities are not admitted to the official list of the UKLA. “A prospective investor should be aware of the risks of investing in such companies and should make the decision to invest only after careful consideration and, if appropriate, consultation with an independent financial adviser. “The London Stock Exchange has not itself examined or approved the contents of this document.” Well it appears that the FSA, UKLA and LSE don’t actually vet AIM flotations and give a thumbs-up or down to the application. I know that will bring great sorrow to many of my fellow internet bampots But I cannot rest on my laurels as I may have missed vital evidence or misinterpreted what I have read and am well aware of how experienced Charlie is at floating companies. So I think it best to have the FSA to actually confirm what the correct position is as it could have a direct bearing on whether football fans purchase shares or not. I doubt if it will affect the judgement of institutional investors who probably already know the answer to my question. And if anyone out there does know then I will be happy to hear the answer which might set a lot of minds at rest and actually boost the amount raised for Charlie’s Rangers which I’m sure would please him. Posted by Ecojon I think you are right not to trust Charles My link 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I think somebody has alreadyconfirmed on here that it does Sorry, but it must have been a Sevconian that confirmed it, because it doesn't. Why do you think he went for the AIM and not the FTSE ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Loving the fact some thick c**t has had to update his signature to tell me that he is ignoring me !!!! Comedy gold ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I think somebody has alreadyconfirmed on here that it does The FSA has no governance over AIM. Thats anothe Green lie that you and your fellow The Rangers followers are only too ready to be suckered by. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Loving the fact some thick c**t has had to update his signature to tell me that he is ignoring me !!!! Comedy gold ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 As usual I ignore anything that Paul says and skip to the comments underneath and here we have no agreement if what Paul says is genuine, the problem is Paul jerks off while writing these articles, you can almost see the stains splattered across the page Charlie has said on national TV that FSA will approve the listing, if they dont, he will have been proved a liar, nobody will trust him and nobody will buy his shares, I bet FSA would also have something to say if he is using them to back up his claim I would like to point out Paul did not write this article and as for your second point Charlie said on national TV he had only met Craig whyte 4 times and then last week this had been reduced to 3 has this not proved him to be a liar, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 So tedi5stars do you still believe in the fantasy european super league made up by chuckie cheese? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) You are believing what Paul says or you have some other evidence? look at the comments and tell me if you see agreement, I dont He is on record as saying that this share deal will have FSA approval, national TV, if he has lied it will come out and he will be fucked He was also on record about renaming Murray Park, having £30 million pound's worth of investment by the end of july and having umpteen billionaires on board. Edited October 21, 2012 by Umbungo1874 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 So tedi5stars do you still believe in the fantasy european super league made up by chuckie cheese? or that the Taxman gave him a nod and a wink and told him the CVA would be ok :lol: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 They really shouldn't need cash pumped into the club. Organic growth should be a formality given the idiotic cash cow being milked. Green wants money pumped in so he can get out of Dodge. Nothing more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If he can demonstrate that he is leaving behind a sustainable business model, then he can go, in fact he has already confirmed this is exactly what he will do, he gets 10% of the company on completion of a successful share issue, at which point he wants voted out Really? And who can vote him out Tedi? Not the people that buy the shares that is for certain as there is no voting rights with this flotation I believe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If he can demonstrate that he is leaving behind a sustainable business model, then he can go, in fact he has already confirmed this is exactly what he will do, he gets 10% of the company on completion of a successful share issue, at which point he wants voted out If he can't put forward a sustainable business model to progress through the lower echelons of Scottish football, with 50k punters desperate to buy in, then something is drastically wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If he can't put forward a sustainable business model to progress through the lower echelons of Scottish football, with 50k punters desperate to buy in, then something is drastically wrong. Exactly, for who would want out now what with all the untold off the radar wealth about to pour in? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenolly Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If he can demonstrate that he is leaving behind a sustainable business model, then he can go, in fact he has already confirmed this is exactly what he will do, he gets 10% of the company on completion of a successful share issue, at which point he wants voted out You mean like the one he has just now spending £6 million a year in basic wages in the 3rd division 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 It is on Pauls blog page, no offence but anything written on that blog or the Scotlands Rangers Football Monitor will have the same logic applied to it, they are simply tic wet dreams Does the 3 or 4 times have some relevance? could it have been a slip of the tongue? FFS Tedi(ous)..Have a day off mate, seriously. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The other board members And voting rights is one of the questions he has dodged / not answered, this for me is a key question, not vote = no shares the board members that he was told to put in place, hardly democratic. I am certain it was posted a while back about the AIM, and one of the 'advantages' was you could dodge the voting rights if that is your want. If indeed there is a prospectus, which he is under no obligation to provide, it will be interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 You are believing what Paul says or you have some other evidence? look at the comments and tell me if you see agreement, I dont He is on record as saying that this share deal will have FSA approval, national TV, if he has lied it will come out and he will be fucked http://www.londonstockexchange.com/companies-and-advisors/aim/publications/documents/a-guide-to-aim.pdf Check out page 6 which clarifies that there is no pre-vetting by the UKLA ( ie the FSA ) 0 Quote Link to comment 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.