Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

As I'm no financial expert and there's a few on here. What happens to everyone that bought shares in the company if honest dave has them delisted because he doesn't have a nomad. ?

Shares are still tradeable. BUT this has to be done privately between parties. So with a listing you just sell the shares at a market price there is no need for a specific buyer. After De - listing there needs to be a buyer. Typically the value of De - listed shares will be much lower. It is lower because De - listing is seen as bad.

So the small scale investors (fans) get screwed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers men back at the helm so all is well.

Was it not Rangers men that got the club in such a state that Craig Whyte got it for £1.

Dave King, Paul Murray ? oh, think they might have been there too!

Football fans blind faith in their clubs makes them easy prey for dodgy directors the length and breadth of the country.

Always the fans who end up putting their hand in their pocket, whilst directors walk away money intact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shares are still tradeable. BUT this has to be done privately between parties. So with a listing you just sell the shares at a market price there is no need for a specific buyer. After De - listing there needs to be a buyer. Typically the value of De - listed shares will be much lower. It is lower because De - listing is seen as bad. So the small scale investors (fans) get screwed.

It's okay. No one will get screwed over. The good guys won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the jokes just keep on coming from Mr Murray!

Imagine signing players without a medical! ( Newcastle Loans) Has he forgotten all about the dodgy medicals of previous signings in the good old days? I seem to remember some never kicked a ball for the club!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the jokes just keep on coming from Mr Murray!

Imagine signing players without a medical! ( Newcastle Loans) Has he forgotten all about the dodgy medicals of previous signings in the good old days? I seem to remember some never kicked a ball for the club!

You mean Daniel Prodan who cost £2.2m and played 0 games from 1998-2001?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the jokes just keep on coming from Mr Murray!

Imagine signing players without a medical! ( Newcastle Loans) Has he forgotten all about the dodgy medicals of previous signings in the good old days? I seem to remember some never kicked a ball for the club!

His other example was £300,000 for the EGM. Does he mean the one in London that didn't take place? That cost £300,000 did it aye?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shares are still tradeable. BUT this has to be done privately between parties. So with a listing you just sell the shares at a market price there is no need for a specific buyer. After De - listing there needs to be a buyer. Typically the value of De - listed shares will be much lower. It is lower because De - listing is seen as bad.

So the small scale investors (fans) get screwed.

Not really something I know a lot about but an interesting post.

________________________________________________________________________.

When uncle Charlie started his aim floatation, a lot of posters claimed that in the long term it would be detrimental to the club. Now a lot of posters are saying "ye gods ye Cannae delist".

So what is best for the club \company, listing or delisting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really something I know a lot about but an interesting post.

________________________________________________________________________.

When uncle Charlie started his aim floatation, a lot of posters claimed that in the long term it would be detrimental to the club. Now a lot of posters are saying "ye gods ye Cannae delist".

So what is best for the club \company, listing or delisting?

For us delisting would produce another endless cycle of mirth, with King claiming lots of stuff from the Minty book of Orc Fables, for anyone who has shares and thinking of reinvesting in more shares when they inevitably have another issue to fleece the gullible then effectively you are giving DK the dosh and letting him spend it without any real say or an independent looking over his shoulder.

Was the review that took 120 days not to fulfil the requirements of the Nomad for the AIM on transparency and to put strategies for the viabillity of the business as a going concern. You could go back to the Murray era but then you'd have to find a bank willing to prop you up without any real chance of a return unless you do another Ticketus deal and sink the place.

The real question is forget all the nonsense of 500k support and the worlds biggest club bullshit and get to the nitty gritty of a realistic apprasial of income streams and expenditure and then have a real examination of who will fund that shortfall in the future. Remember you already had £70million from 2 share issues in 3 years and that money is gone so is that sustainable ? Even in the 2nd tier success is not guaranteed and anyone of the age who remembers the pre-Murray era will know there is a volume who deem that unacceptable.

So that means no point in peering down south with envy at their TV deals or indeed Europe as with the past success in terms of staying in the competition has been rather unreliable and thats when you were cheating the tax system and you'd still be putting on the Punch & Judy show with your nearest and dearest rival.

So if you continue to spunk the £ forget the AIM, your best option is finding a giant money tree at the bottom of the garden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting laughing at Ranger aside. De-listing is not somethig I would want for a company that I was a Shareholder in.

1) its more expensive to raise funds. Share issues are relatively cheap and risk free (compared to secured loans) ways of raising funds.

2) you are viewed with suspicion by almost all of the money men.Still difficult to raise funds

3) the additional regulations of being on the AIM are removed. BAD because it removes transparency. This is part of the NOMADS role, by ensuring the company is being ran correctly.

As an investor it can be more difficult to get information. You are starting to see this already with King. its all just talk and no substance just now.

De-listing is fine with companies that don't need to raise cash or have sufficient resources to trade away unhindered.

Burning cash at the rate Rangers do. if de-listing is the end game I would be very worried about surviving/avoiding admin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really something I know a lot about but an interesting post.

________________________________________________________________________.

When uncle Charlie started his aim floatation, a lot of posters claimed that in the long term it would be detrimental to the club. Now a lot of posters are saying "ye gods ye Cannae delist".

So what is best for the club \company, listing or delisting?

You see matey. The absolute perfect thing is that the Rangers fans waited far too long and missed every opportunity to save Rangers from the vultures. Now that the vultures have their grip nothing that happens will favour the fans. Nothing. Ye fucked it up all by yourselves.

Suits us just fine. We get a winner no matter what happens.

We get to enjoy your journey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...