Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be clear, what is proposed is a rights issue. All of the current shareholders have the "right" to subscribe for new shares; only the current holders, no-one else.

If all current shareholders subscribe, there will be no dilution. Everyone's percentage stake will remain the same.

If every current shareholder did subscribe, then they would own exactly the same percentage of the Company as they had before. However, that percentage of the overrall shareholding would now have cost them more money.

More money paid, for the same percentage of the company as before, with no evidence the Company is actually going to be worth any more than it was before.

Haud me back!

[Rumble de Thump]

I'm looking for two tickets to the concert party if anyone's got any spare.

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm looking for two tickets to the concert party if anyone's got any spare.

This one?

[GlesgaeHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Q: If you’ve got the money, why did you agree a £3 million overdraft with Close Brothers?

A: "...It’s our single greatest achievement..."

Absolutely mental. He was going on about their business plan being about running a deficit until the 'House of Cards' at Celtic collapses.

[hibees 7062]

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I was bored enough to look this up, he might actually be right about this bit ...



Not sure how much of Sevco's parent, RIFC, is currently owned by the concert party?

Ahh nothing like actually looking up the regs before we spout opinions

Makes sense in a way I suppose.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ahh nothing like actually looking up the regs before we spout opinions

Makes sense in a way I suppose.

I'm still not clear about this.

DK has to make an offer to all minority shareholders. The accepted wisdom now seems to be that he only has to buy 16% to satisfy the rules.

What happens if everyone accepts the offer? How does he choose which 16%?

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm still not clear about this.

DK has to make an offer to all minority shareholders. The accepted wisdom now seems to be that he only has to buy 16% to satisfy the rules.

What happens if everyone accepts the offer? How does he choose which 16%?

Isn't what's being suggested just that, though he makes the offer to everyone, unless a minimum proportion (in this case the additional 16%, to get to 50%) accept, no purchase needs to take place?

[ballengeich]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm still not clear about this.

DK has to make an offer to all minority shareholders. The accepted wisdom now seems to be that he only has to buy 16% to satisfy the rules.

What happens if everyone accepts the offer? How does he choose which 16%?

The way I read it is that if less than 16% accept he doesn't have to buy any, but if more than 16% accept he has to buy from everyone who wants to sell.

I think the underlying principle aboaut reaching 50% is that if the majority of shareholders are happy with the status quo there's no reason to change it.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm still not clear about this.

DK has to make an offer to all minority shareholders. The accepted wisdom now seems to be that he only has to buy 16% to satisfy the rules.

What happens if everyone accepts the offer? How does he choose which 16%?

No, he has to make an offer to all shareholders but if <16% accept, he doesn't have to buy the shares of those who accepted. If >16% accept, he has to buy the shares of all who accepted.

Edit: as ballengeich already said. D'oh!

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn't what's being suggested just that, though he makes the offer to everyone, unless a minimum proportion (in this case the additional 16%, to get to 50%) accept, no purchase needs to take place?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The way I read it is that if less than 16% accept he doesn't have to buy any, but if more than 16% accept he has to buy from everyone who wants to sell.

I think the underlying principle aboaut reaching 50% is that if the majority of shareholders are happy with the status quo there's no reason to change it.

Ahhh, that makes sense, cheers.

[Alan62]

My sketchy understanding is that he has to make an offer of 20p per share to all of the shareholders outside of the concert party. IF that offer is accepted by a number of shareholders that would then take the concert party's stake to 50% + 1 share (or above), the offer becomes mandatory and King has to pony up the cash to them that wants it.

If there's little or no acceptance for the 20p offer then all King has to fork out for is the cost of putting his prospectus together plus his legal fees. This in itself would be a fair amount of money assuming he did it properly.

King suggests nobody will want 20p a share. Others suggest that lots of people will want 20p a share - bearing in mind that although there's a notion that they're currently valued at around 27p, King's looking for a rights issue that will dilute the value of the current stock.

If you believe the hype, and you're a full-on fantasist, you could imagine a time when the resurgent Rangers conquer Europe and make some cash. But if you're any kind of realist, then 20p looks a lot better than the next to nothing no time soon that they're likely to return.

For me, everyone that hates King on the current shareholder register has a reason to sell. As do the institutional investors - though why they're even there in the first place is a mystery to me.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, he has to make an offer to all shareholders but if <16% accept, he doesn't have to buy the shares of those who accepted. If >16% accept, he has to buy the shares of all who accepted.

Edit: as ballengeich already said. D'oh!

The d'oh is all mine

I suppose we're wanting as full a take-up as possible for the impecunious Mr. King now.....

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The d'oh is all mine

I suppose we're wanting as full a take-up as possible for the impecunious Mr. King now.....

I doubt the offer will ever get made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Springbank]

young mac giolla bhain suggesting that uefa have refused rangers a license to participate in european football next season

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/0...-at-crisis-fc/

disastrous news for the jambos - we would be now guaranteed a europa league spot

[jacomo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The d'oh is all mine

I suppose we're wanting as full a take-up as possible for the impecunious Mr. King now.....

If I had shares in the Rangers - ha! - and had read Dave Kings ‘business plan’ I would now be desperate to get out at any price. 20p a share sounds increasingly attractive.

[Sergio sledge]

By my very limited understanding of a rights issue is correct, the number of shares in the company is increased but the value of the total shareholding stays the same, therefore any existing shares you hold are devalued.

The below is based on the rights issue looking to raise £6m from a new share issue

So if there is an investor who has, for example, 5m shares in RIFC at present value these would be worth £1.35m (if you could find someone to buy at 27p per share).

If you sold them to King at 20p per share you would get £1m (in theory a loss of £350k).

If you subscribe to the rights issue it will cost you nearly £370K and your existing shares would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

If you don't subscribe to the rights issue it won't cost you anything in cash but the shares you already own would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

It will be interesting to see the price per share in the rights issue as this could devalue the example 5m shareholding by £270K at 30p per share up to £570k at 10p per share.

Which means unless you look at Kings plan, to run at a deficit (thus requiring more rights issues or loans) until they finally beat Celtic, and see Rangers increasing in value any time soon, you are probably better off taking Kings offer of 20p per share unless the rights issue is at more than 20p per share.

[Alan62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It will be interesting to see the price per share in the rights issue as this could devalue the example 5m shareholding by £270K at 30p per share up to £570k at 10p per share.

I think King said 25p for the rights issue.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

By my very limited understanding of a rights issue is correct, the number of shares in the company is increased but the value of the total shareholding stays the same, therefore any existing shares you hold are devalued.

The below is based on the rights issue looking to raise £6m from a new share issue

So if there is an investor who has, for example, 5m shares in RIFC at present value these would be worth £1.35m (if you could find someone to buy at 27p per share).

If you sold them to King at 20p per share you would get £1m (in theory a loss of £350k).

If you subscribe to the rights issue it will cost you nearly £370K and your existing shares would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

If you don't subscribe to the rights issue it won't cost you anything in cash but the shares you already own would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

It will be interesting to see the price per share in the rights issue as this could devalue the example 5m shareholding by £270K at 30p per share up to £570k at 10p per share.

Which means unless you look at Kings plan, to run at a deficit (thus requiring more rights issues or loans) until they finally beat Celtic, and see Rangers increasing in value any time soon, you are probably better off taking Kings offer of 20p per share unless the rights issue is at more than 20p per share.

Which is why I can’t see it being allowed to proceed. Anything the disadvantages small shareholders is surely what the takeover panel are acting against?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FilipinoHibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

By my very limited understanding of a rights issue is correct, the number of shares in the company is increased but the value of the total shareholding stays the same, therefore any existing shares you hold are devalued.

The below is based on the rights issue looking to raise £6m from a new share issue

So if there is an investor who has, for example, 5m shares in RIFC at present value these would be worth £1.35m (if you could find someone to buy at 27p per share).

If you sold them to King at 20p per share you would get £1m (in theory a loss of £350k).

If you subscribe to the rights issue it will cost you nearly £370K and your existing shares would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

If you don't subscribe to the rights issue it won't cost you anything in cash but the shares you already own would be devalued by a certain amount depending on the price of the new rights issue.

It will be interesting to see the price per share in the rights issue as this could devalue the example 5m shareholding by £270K at 30p per share up to £570k at 10p per share.

Which means unless you look at Kings plan, to run at a deficit (thus requiring more rights issues or loans) until they finally beat Celtic, and see Rangers increasing in value any time soon, you are probably better off taking Kings offer of 20p per share unless the rights issue is at more than 20p per share.

not true a rights ussue raises new capital. The amount of capital raised depends on the discount that you are buying new shares at. a one for one rights at 25p with the shares at 25p doubles the capital but dilutes the earnings. A one for one at 10p with share price at 25p sees the share price drop to 17.5p and capital go up by 40%. In a full offer he has to accept all shares tendered once 50% is reached. on a partial offer say 60% he has to prorata all offers once 60% reached. If the target is not reached in both situations the takeover fails and all offers are cancelled.

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If I had shares in the Rangers - ha! - and had read Dave Kings ‘business plan’ I would now be desperate to get out at any price. 20p a share sounds increasingly attractive.

Don’t know how much River & Mercantile paid nor do I understand what an established investment house is doing with a holding in Rangers but they might well be tempted to cut and run on their remaining 4% or so.

[hibees 7062]

[O'Rourke3]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

young mac giolla bhain suggesting that uefa have refused rangers a license to participate in european football next season

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/0...-at-crisis-fc/

disastrous news for the jambos - we would be now guaranteed a europa league spot

If that news came from somebody else, I might have taken it seriously.

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If that news came from somebody else, I might have taken it seriously.

I believe that Richard Wilson has been reporting that as well.......

[Peevemor]

Baldy diving ****!

[CropleyWasGod]

They've been granted their licence.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[PatHead]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They've been granted their licence.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Bugger

[weecounty hibby]

I see they've missed out on another rumoured "transfer target" Rooney looks like signing for DC United for 300k per week. The Lure of money is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay stronger than the lure of Stevie G!!