The Clumpany read the newly-released results of the RIFC AGM with some interest.
I will leave others to digest the precise implications of
- the voting turnout of 69%, which seems low given that it was the world’s most hyped meeting of all time; and
- the failure of Resolution 10 which would have allowed the Board to allot shares and effectively dilute the holdings of existing shareholders. [Hint: it closes down one way of raising money and converting existing loans to equity].
But I will note that it means His Big Mikeness won’t need to go back to court to obtain an injunction against the implementation of Resolution 10, which the recent MASH statement threatened in no uncertain terms.
Never mind, he’s got plenty of other Scottish football-related business on which he can use his Court season book…
I will also take a moment to draw attention to the RIFC Board’s comments on the failure of Resolution 10:
“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.”
Nae luck lads!
You will note that the Board says the votes were “considerably higher than the Directors had anticipated”.
Because only the other day The Clumpany read this piece by Martin Hannan in The National.
“Sources close to the businessman say he will, however, take immediate court action against the board if they attempt any equity release following the two resolutions at the AGM authorising such actions – though the results of the vote have not been confirmed, both resolutions were expected to achieve the required majority.”
‘…both resolutions expected to achieve the required majority’.
What went wrong Dave?