PDA

View Full Version : AGM Results



stevethebluenose90
01-12-2015, 12:13
http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/agm-result-notice/

Resolutions 1-9 passed
Resulotion 10 did not achieve enough votes to be passed.

jjloyal1979
01-12-2015, 12:18
Resolution 10 had more votes than Resolution 7 :confused:

Blue Phoenix
01-12-2015, 12:18
Not keeping up with the AGM - is not passing Resolution 10 going to have significant implications - good or bad?

superrangers
01-12-2015, 12:18
In layman's terms where does this leave us?

BlueWorldOrder
01-12-2015, 12:19
Resolution 10 had more votes than Resolution 7 :confused:

Resolution 10 required 75% of the vote to pass.

stevethebluenose90
01-12-2015, 12:19
Resolution 10 had more votes than Resolution 7 :confused:

You need 75% of votes for it to be passed.

WATP85
01-12-2015, 12:20
Missed resolution 10 by 1.2%.

I hope every fan actually voted and didn't sit on their arse.

cambridgeblue
01-12-2015, 12:20
In layman's terms where does this leave us?

2% short of a pass for resolution 10.

Seems to be a hardcore block of 26% against every motion - likely the MASH block.

But 31% didn't vote.

loud and proud
01-12-2015, 12:20
A pretty steady 25% ish voting against everything, I take it that's someone's block of votes?

wabmcfarlane
01-12-2015, 12:20
around 25% against each resolution! is that fat man/wig votes?

stevethebluenose90
01-12-2015, 12:21
2% short of a pass for resolution 10.

Seems to be a hardcore block of 26% against every motion - likely the MASH block.

But 31% didn't vote.

I don't understand why shareholders wouldn't vote? 31% is a large chunk.

okeydokey505
01-12-2015, 12:21
Who were the major voters against The Resolutions ?

klostheboss
01-12-2015, 12:21
So what does not passing res 10 mean then?

HARTHILL_GER
01-12-2015, 12:21
Missed resolution 10 by 0.8%.

I hope every fan actually voted and didn't sit on their arse.

Sadly this is probably the reason res 10 did not pass

glasseye
01-12-2015, 12:21
Resolution 10 had more votes than Resolution 7 :confused:

certain resolutions require a 75% majority to pass.

giantchelsea
01-12-2015, 12:21
Resolution 10 had more votes than Resolution 7 :confused:

Resolution 10 needed over 75% to be passed.

Blue Phoenix
01-12-2015, 12:23
I don't understand why shareholders wouldn't vote? 31% is a large chunk.

Bit of complacency setting in mate. People maybe thinking all is hunky dorey and that not casting the odd vote on an individual level is neither here nor there.

giantchelsea
01-12-2015, 12:23
I don't understand why shareholders wouldn't vote? 31% is a large chunk.

Some couldn't vote.

cambridgeblue
01-12-2015, 12:23
I don't understand why shareholders wouldn't vote? 31% is a large chunk.

Some may have been banned like BP and Marg.

To be honest there wasn't really a big push from the board.

grascots
01-12-2015, 12:24
Disappointing that some seen fit not to vote. Perhaps more publicity would have facilitated a better turnout. Can this be resurrected in an EGM?

stevethebluenose90
01-12-2015, 12:25
Bit of complacency setting in mate. People maybe thinking all is hunky dorey and that not casting the odd vote on an individual level is neither here nor there.

This is true!

[QUOTE=cambridgeblue;23790660]Some may have been banned like BP and Marg.

How much % do they hold?

Derek Trotter
01-12-2015, 12:26
Was Res 10 for a share issue?

If so, not ideal that it failed to get enough votes

BlueWorldOrder
01-12-2015, 12:27
Disappointing that some seen fit not to vote. Perhaps more publicity would have facilitated a better turnout. Can this be resurrected in an EGM?

I said at the time having it that early would put people off from traveling, our plans changed and it was too late at that point to proxy sadly.

glasgowguy87
01-12-2015, 12:32
Was Res 10 for a share issue?

If so, not ideal that it failed to get enough votes

There can still be a rights issue to existing share holders since resolution 9 passed but there can't be a public offering and King & T3B can't convert their soft loans to equity just now. Looking at the board's comments it looks like they weren't expecting resolution 10 to pass and they were only 1.2% away from getting enough votes for it to.

cambridgeblue
01-12-2015, 12:33
Still room for a LOL in the statement :D



"The votes For Resolution 10 were considerably higher than the Directors had anticipated and almost enough to see the vote carried as a special resolution. The Directors will consider carefully shareholders’ views on this vote, consult (where practicable) with those who did not vote or opposed the Resolution and identify the Company’s next steps after that process is complete."

cambridgeblue
01-12-2015, 12:34
There can still be a rights issue to existing share holders since resolution 9 passed but there can't be a public offering and King & T3B can't convert their soft loans to equity just now. Looking at the board's comments it looks like they weren't expecting resolution 10 to pass and they were only 1.2% away from getting enough votes for it to.

After a rights issue a vote pass will be a formality surely ?

glasgowguy87
01-12-2015, 12:39
After a rights issue a vote pass will be a formality surely ?

That would depend on how much the spiv block is diluted by them not taking up their share entitlement.

cambridgeblue
01-12-2015, 12:40
That would depend on how much the spiv block is diluted by them not taking up their share entitlement.

Some can't (BP, Marg) - and MASH refused to participate last time - will fatty hand over cold hard cash to DK ? I doubt it.

salsoul
01-12-2015, 12:40
Not great that Resolution 10 didn't get the number required.

More should've been done by all parties (current board , fan groups) to get the word out to proxy the votes, there was a large attendance on the day, but we are obviously up against a determined opponent in Ashley & chums and the message should've went out that every shareholder vote counts and we needed the votes FOR

Go_Bert_Go
01-12-2015, 12:43
After a rights issue a vote pass will be a formality surely ?

Exactly, unless the 26% fully subscribe to the rights issue. Which they won't... and even if they did it would be a nice cash injection from an unexpected source. It would be like Ashley writing us a cheque then could afford legal action to get out of the SD contract (for example!).

Also, the issue would likely be underwritten by King and/or T3B, so assuming some of the non-voters don't subscribe either, that will definitely be enough to get them over the line.

InsanicDrunk
01-12-2015, 12:44
We will just do a share issue to existing shareholders. I would say most of the 25% block wont take up their option as it would mean putting money into the club.

Once that has happened they will have less % and we can offer this special res again.

Shongo
01-12-2015, 12:45
Disappointed about res 10 not going through when so close. Do people think a share issue will come now we have auditors, corporate broker in place etc.?

We only appointed these in the past few months so likely were unable to rush through an issue prior to the AGM.

Eric Hitchmo
01-12-2015, 12:45
Can we call an EGM to have a 2nd go at getting resolution 10 passed? 31% of shareholders didnt vote so I think it would be doable if we make a big enough noise about it in the media and online etc

Altogether_now
01-12-2015, 12:46
There can still be a rights issue to existing share holders since resolution 9 passed but there can't be a public offering and King & T3B can't convert their soft loans to equity just now. Looking at the board's comments it looks like they weren't expecting resolution 10 to pass and they were only 1.2% away from getting enough votes for it to.

So resolution 10 was about a share issue to outside investors? Wasn't sure exactly what that was but I trusted the board and voted for with my massive 150 shares :D

DerekTheElephant
01-12-2015, 12:52
I don't think it's a big issue regarding resolution 10.

King said at the AGM that now is not an ideal time to try for external investment due to the level of active litigation.

If resolution 10 was successful, it would have triggered yet more litigation as indicated by MASH.

jjloyal1979
01-12-2015, 13:07
Why did all the board members retire and offer re-appointment? Not too clued up on the why this is.

imbran
01-12-2015, 13:15
I don't think it's a big issue regarding resolution 10.

King said at the AGM that now is not an ideal time to try for external investment due to the level of active litigation.

If resolution 10 was successful, it would have triggered yet more litigation as indicated by MASH.

I agree, but would have been a boost to see every Resolution passed as a demonstration of faith in our Board.

bedsblue
01-12-2015, 13:26
Why did all the board members retire and offer re-appointment? Not too clued up on the why this is.

Matter of courtesy i think.

Topofthehill
01-12-2015, 13:30
Missed resolution 10 by 1.2%.

I hope every fan actually voted and didn't sit on their arse.


2% short of a pass for resolution 10.

Seems to be a hardcore block of 26% against every motion - likely the MASH block.

But 31% didn't vote.


I don't understand why shareholders wouldn't vote? 31% is a large chunk.


Bit of complacency setting in mate. People maybe thinking all is hunky dorey and that not casting the odd vote on an individual level is neither here nor there.

31% is just over the amount of shares that are not in public hands. This explains it for everybody.
http://i64.tinypic.com/2wfsnjm.png

Laudrup1
01-12-2015, 13:36
Does Easdale still have that block? I'm not sure what he's gaining at this point by holding on to them...unless it's a matter of protecting himself ahead of the court case...and I can't really comment on why I might think that. ;)

glasgowguy87
01-12-2015, 13:42
Does Easdale still have that block? I'm not sure what he's gaining at this point by holding on to them...unless it's a matter of protecting himself ahead of the court case...and I can't really comment on why I might think that. ;)

Part of the Easdale block couldn't vote because their shares are restricted, that includes Blue Pitch and Margarita.

Dumfriesbear
01-12-2015, 13:57
I think what the voting shows is that Fatso has a much larger percentage of shares than he admits to considering BPH/MH cannot vote.

watp
no surrender

giantchelsea
01-12-2015, 13:59
I think what the voting shows is that Fatso has a much larger percentage of shares than he admits to considering BPH/MH cannot vote.

watp
no surrender

You forgot all about Toxic's clients already?

Eric Hitchmo
01-12-2015, 14:00
I think what the voting shows is that Fatso has a much larger percentage of shares than he admits to considering BPH/MH cannot vote.

watp
no surrender

I disagree, King won the EGM with 85% and ashley would have used all his to vote against.