Jump to content

Recent Bids and Reference to the Bond Holders.


Recommended Posts

I was reading on the BBC website about the two new bids and it mentions that both bids depend on taking the club's bond holders' debt out of a CVA.

From the BBC website...

"Both bids depend on taking the club's bond holders' debt, around £7m, out of a Company Voluntary Arrangement.

But it is thought the Knights' bid uses that figure as part of its offer"

Sorry for being thick but I was wondering what that means? I have a seat up in the club deck.

Just wondering what it meant for bond holders and what it means by the knights using it as part of their bid.

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading on the BBC website about the two new bids and it mentions that both bids depend on taking the club's bond holders' debt out of a CVA.

From the BBC website...

"Both bids depend on taking the club's bond holders' debt, around £7m, out of a Company Voluntary Arrangement.

But it is thought the Knights' bid uses that figure as part of its offer"

Sorry for being thick but I was wondering what that means? I have a seat up in the club deck.

Just wondering what it meant for bond holders and what it means by the knights using it as part of their bid.

Cheers.

Could be they are wanting the debt the club carries to be removed and will probably try and re sell them003.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are taking it out of a CVA, to Protect the holders. Their holding will be worth a lot more if the club gets back on a solid footing, it is not in the holders best interest to be included in the CVA, I think it would be more a slap in the face to find that their holding was worth 10p (or whatever the figure is) in the pound.

Best they get to keep them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are taking it out of a CVA, to Protect the holders. Their holding will be worth a lot more if the club gets back on a solid footing, it is not in the holders best interest to be included in the CVA, I think it would be more a slap in the face to find that their holding was worth 10p (or whatever the figure is) in the pound.

Best they get to keep them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are taking it out of a CVA, to Protect the holders. Their holding will be worth a lot more if the club gets back on a solid footing, it is not in the holders best interest to be included in the CVA, I think it would be more a slap in the face to find that their holding was worth 10p (or whatever the figure is) in the pound.

Best they get to keep them.

There again that could have an impact on other creditors saying we want to e repaid in full. Also did Miller not say the same thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the sound of this better in terms of protecting the investment - but would that not risk allowing another major creditor to become powerful enough to veto a CVA?

They are taking it out of a CVA, to Protect the holders. Their holding will be worth a lot more if the club gets back on a solid footing, it is not in the holders best interest to be included in the CVA, I think it would be more a slap in the face to find that their holding was worth 10p (or whatever the figure is) in the pound.

Best they get to keep them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are taking it out of a CVA, to Protect the holders. Their holding will be worth a lot more if the club gets back on a solid footing, it is not in the holders best interest to be included in the CVA, I think it would be more a slap in the face to find that their holding was worth 10p (or whatever the figure is) in the pound.

Best they get to keep them.

Is it not the case that tbk are presuming influence over the debenture holders under the auspices of acting in the best interests of the club. This seems to be what the papers are deducing and is likely to have some merit, albeit I can't see how a bid so undervalued in front loaded cash will be as attractive to the admins compared with Miller's. Either way tbk better have an equity stake for the debenture holders in return, otherwise they are cashing in on the goodwill of fansfor personal gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a slap in the face for the club deck bond holders.

The bond holders I know don't care - they just want The Rangers to survive. One notable gent is desperate for a chance to repurchase when the time is right.

I'm not the least bit surprised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bond holders I know don't care - they just want The Rangers to survive. One notable gent is desperate for a chance to repurchase when the time is right.

I'm not the least bit surprised.

My take on this too.

Might consider share purchase rather than debenture, but will wait to see what's on offer, effect of no longer being a debenture holder, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bond holders I know don't care - they just want The Rangers to survive. One notable gent is desperate for a chance to repurchase when the time is right.

I'm not the least bit surprised.

I appreciate if everyone is acting solely in the interests of the club most won't care but for Murray & Kennedy to end up with the assets and equity and the debenture holders to just have pissed away a donation is unfair - hopefully they'll get an equity stake.

Anyone else concerned that the frontloading of cash and risk on Murray/Kennedy is despairingly reminiscent of what we now know about the bid that went through last year?

Link to post
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

×
×
  • Create New...