A Sanity Clause for Xmas?

A Guest blog by redlichtie for TSFM

From what I can see Mike Ashley is likely to be the only game in town for RIFC/TRFC fans unless they want to see another of their clubs go through administration/liquidation.

That particular scenario potentially allows for a phoenix to arise from the ashes but on past evidence it is probably going to be an underfunded operation with overly grandiose pretensions taking them right back into the vicious circle they seem condemned to repeat ad nauseam.

Ashley has the muscle to strongarm the various spivs to give up or greatly dilute their onerous contracts and I suspect that is what has been happening behind the scenes.

From Ashley’s point of view I believe that what is being sought is a stable, self-financing operation that he can then sell on whilst retaining income streams of importance to SD.

I also suspect that he will come to some arrangement with the SFA to dispose of his interest once he has stabilised the club.

The problem for RIFC/TRFC fans is that Ashley is not going to fund some mythical “return to where they belong”, though that is beginning to appear to be the second division of the SPFL where they are heading to have a regular gig.

Like at Newcastle, Ashley will cut their coat according to their cloth. This will mean, again like at Newcastle, a mid-table team with good runs every so often. If the finances can be fixed then they will have an advantage over most other Scottish clubs but in the main we will be back to actual footballing skills and good management being what is important (pace “honest mistakes”).

With recent results and footballing style clearly those are issues that will require attention and McCoist seems likely to present RIFC/TRFC with an early opportunity to address at least one aspect of that if he continues with his current “I’m a good guy” press campaign. It may take just one unguarded comment or action and he will be out.

But will the Bears go for Ashley’s plan? So far they seem antagonistic and still cling to their belief that the world owes them a top football club regardless of cost.

If the fans don’t get behind the current entity I can see Ashley deciding the game’s not worth it and cashing in his chips. Some ‘Rangers Men’ will probably turn up and create a new entity for The People to believe in and Ashley will continue to draw in income from shirt sales and, most likely, charging fans at the world famous Albion car park which he will then own.

The upcoming AGM is crucial and from what we have seen of Ashley so far he gets what he wants.

The crushing reality about to descend on The People is that there really is no Santa Claus. A Sanity Clause, perhaps but no Santa Claus.

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,813 thoughts on “A Sanity Clause for Xmas?


  1. Tincks says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:26 pm

    We need to know who sold before we can understand how this affects the balance down Ibrox way.
    —————————————————-

    I hadn’t finnished typing before that got answered


  2. Top Cat 1874 says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:15 pm

    2

    0

    Rate This

    Liquidation? No problems, big Neil says it will still be the same club. He’s an insolvency law expert you know lol!

    _______________________________________________________

    aah… I think I understand now. Its like the matrix?

    Rangers died.
    Their spirit then descended to a hellish netherworld.
    Whereupon the administrators of the game slipped some red pills to the all of the other clubs in Scotland, casuing them to follow the *Neo like Rangers and wake up in that very same vault of nether-hell.
    Same Rangers. But different universe!

    How deep does your rabbit hole go, Doncaster?
    Time for a blue pill, methinks!

    *he is the chosen One!


  3. The latest development will probably see Ashley quietly walk away. Now that some of the RRM have finally stepped up to the plate, it’s a battle he can’t win. It’s definitely not a development that King and the other RRM welcomed either.
    For the money they have spent buying shares in the past few days, they could have bought the farm in 2012. One must conclude that the recent purchases have been out of a perceived necessity.

    What exactly did they fear from Ashley to make them depart from their tight-wad stance?

    Liquidation doesn’t look like a goer either, since they would have to purchase the assets all over again – and they can’t guarantee a successful outcome on that.

    Maybe they are betting that the last minute cavalry charge will galvanise the bears into parting with the real cash required to restore rightful places etc. Given the institutional shareholders’ experiences this time, I wouldn’t bet on that kind of investment again in a new share issue.


  4. Well, with the re-emergence of King we now have the answers to what brought about the SFA’s new found adherence to the rules and why Doncaster gave his nonsensical New Year statement. I wonder if King will be met with the same resistance as Ashley found, or will he already have received directions fromm the SFA on how to negotiate the problems created by his continued run in with the SA tax authorities?

    Looks very much like the sport’s governors prefer a convicted criminal to someone owning another football club, though neither should be allowed to participate in the running of any club in any meaningfull way.


  5. All these shares changing hands, one faction or another jockeying for position is all very well, but who is going to pay the wages?


  6. Barcabhoy says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:27 pm
    2 0 Rate This

    It will be interesting if King tries to force a board position for himself.

    could the SFA possibly sanction a recently convicted criminal as an appropriate director of a board of a member club ?
    ==================================================

    I know Doncaster does not represent the SFA, but in my view his recent comments indicate the football authorities in this country can do as they please regarding the club from Ibrox.


  7. Big Pink says: January 2, 2015 at 5:47 pm
    ————–
    I think you could be right. That would mean Somers and Llambias walking away within days, King (FPP test?), Paul Murray and associates installed on the Board.

    Ashley will surely seek to protect his Retail and Advertising/Sponsorship interests in addition to getting his loans back, so would be looking for a large pay-off.


  8. Smarter Than The Average Bear ?

    Mr Doncaster hangs his whole OC/NC argument on Lord Nimmo Smith’s opinions. But let’s be clear on a few things before we accept that premise.

    Lord Nimmo Smith was not acting in his publicly funded role as a judge in Scottish law when he expressed his opinions on club, company and EBTs. As such, those opinions have no meaning in law and were not subject to the checks, balances and due process of a legal judgement. Such scrutiny would have clearly identified that his opinions are at odds with Scottish law.

    Lord Nimmo Smith was in fact, a consultant chosen by the SPL and paid by the SPL to express his opinions on club, company and EBTs by interpreting the ambiguous rules of the SPL based on evidence selected by the SPL to answer the questions posed by the SPL, with no oversight from outside the SPL Is it surprising that Lord Nimmo Smith’s non-legal, moonlighting opinions served the purposes of the SPL and its officers? If they had not, do you think they would have ever seen the light of day? Incidentally, the fact that the SPL (a football governing body) cannot write rules that clearly define the meaning of a football club says all that needs to be said of their incompetence and complacency.

    When reading Lord Nimmo Smith’s comments, I find it best to replace his name with SPL-Paid-Consultant or Yogi Bear or Boo-Boo or similar in order to remove any lingering impression that he was acting in his publicly funded role as a judge in Scottish law with the checks, balances and due process that entails. Instead SPL-Paid-Consultant reminds me that Lord Nimmo Smith was a carefully chosen consultant, paid handsomely to read the time from the SPL’s own watch.


  9. What if….a TRFC insolvency event takes place soon.

    What if….MA bids more for the assets than the RRM at RIFC?

    Or even…just for devilment 😈 … what if… MA strikes a deal with Worthington/Law Financial over their claim to own Ibrox/MP and starts to pursue it on their behalf?

    Scottish Football needs to be on guard for more dodgy dealings down Govan/Hampden way.


  10. Bam Potter says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:26 pm
    3 1 Rate This

    Danish: Simply, to control what happens to the assets when they are liquidated.
    ————

    Just as well the original asset sale isn’t a matter of dispute ithen 😮


  11. Apologies if this has been already covered.

    What will BDO have to say about the return of a director from the entity that is in liquidation? Especially now that the CEO of the SPFL claims that the club did not die?


  12. King has clearly deliberately dodged the “concert party” rules by acting “independently” of the Three Bears, thus avoiding the need for a full takeover offer.

    That’s an investment of just over £5M in the past three days, which has almost certainly gained control of the club.

    The question now is, how much more are they prepared to invest to put the club on a stable footing, or is there an insolvency alternative to achieve the same result at a lower cost.


  13. For the sake of it let’s presume King’s consorteum, for that is what it surely must be, has got it’s hands on this £16m they said they had a few weeks ago! How much will they have now used to get to where they are now, how much more will they have to spend to get control and/or fight off Ashley and others? Then they will have to repay the man himself for the loans that have kept the lights on. With sundry other debts and onerous contracts £16m isn’t going to last too long, the end of the season perhaps.


  14. It doesnt actually say he has bought them and there is no trace of the sale on the lse web site. Gerry braiden of the herald has also tweeted his info is king has proxy on the shares but has not bought them


  15. Andy Newport
    ‏@AndyNewportPA
    Artemis and the Miton Group have both confirmed to Press Association Sport that King has bought their shares.


  16. macfurgly says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    In addition to the points made above over the last 24 hours or so on Doncaster’s remarks and the contradictions with SPFL rules, it is worth noting that he has legitimised the claims of victimisation from the more vocal of the TRFC fans as to why they were “dropped” into the bottom tier.

    ————————————————————-

    On a similar note, Brechin City must feel aggrieved at losing in the Scottish Challenge Cup in July 2012 to a team which, based on their placing at the end of the previous season, should have been busy preparing for their customary early exit from the European Cup.


  17. More questions than answers.

    What will the South African Revenue Service (SARS) think of Dave King’s overseas “investment”?

    Nevet mind BDO and the SFA isn’t Dave King banned from being a director of anything remotely purporting to be Rangers for another 2 years?

    While our Jambo’s have part answered the question, given that at least Letham of the 3 Bears was part of the £16m King consortium of about a month ago will AIM and/or LSE consider the recent combined share trading as that of a “concert party”? If so the 30% threshold has well and truly been passed!


  18. easyJambo says:
    January 2, 2015 at 6:02 pm
    =====================================
    Mr King and the Bear trio have (collectively) around 28%.
    Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita Holdings are the King makers now.


  19. So over the last 24 hrs we’ve learned that the laws of the land on liquidation don’t apply to this football club and if DK has indeed bought into the club/company he must have been in touch with the SFA and others to clear the way ie an ex director and convicted fraudster is indeed a fit and proper person 😳

    Stopped buying season books a couple of years ago …… I will not put one more brown penny of my hard earned cash into scottish football ……… Beyond disgusting


  20. @Phil the RNS announcements today (6+6+4+14%) add up to over 30% because those figures are all rounded down. Letham’s 100 shares of convenience are not significant but Taylor already had 2.5m+ (3%+) and Park and King may already have had minor holdings too. Or are you suggesting RIFC may have misled AIM with it’s announcements? 😈


  21. Apologies 😕 only stated a fact […] back to the ironing 😐


  22. Oh no, another year of the SMSM breathlessly reporting Smiler ‘jetting in’ on a frequent basis ?! 🙄

    Very suspicious of this latest ‘share purchase’, but and would like to see more info.

    On the face of it, King could also be the perfect front for anyone else. Nobody in the SMSM questions his motivation, his Rangersness – or his ability to realise and put up the cash.

    I’m sticking with the earlier suggestion that King is a tyre-kicker, until proved otherwise of course… 😉


  23. There is a concert party involved with TRFC, of that there can be no doubt. It is made up of the three bears, Dave King, the SFA and, at the very least, Neil Doncaster of the SPFL – though possibly others of that shameful body!


  24. oddjob says:
    January 2, 2015 at 5:50 pm

    All these shares changing hands, one faction or another jockeying for position is all very well, but who is going to pay the wages?
    ——————–
    That’ll be Lewis Macleod.


  25. @James Doleman you are not suggesting Ally’s support of the 3 bears may depend on their willingness to rescind his gardening leave? 😈


  26. Resin_lab_dog says:
    January 2, 2015 at 6:16 pm

    DR pushing the boat out here. Seems that their copy DOES extnd beyond photocopied Ibrox press releases intermixed with plagiarism of PMcG website, after all.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2015/jan/02/daily-records-rangers-scoop-borrowed-from-french-website
    ============================================================
    Ah there’s much more skullduggery afoot here than meets the eye.

    The sory was actually first run on Rangers Media at 2.29pm on 31 December – Hogmanay no less.

    Interestingly the RM poster ‘Francis Bacon’ still had the paint drying on his forum membership with only 8 posts to his moniker.

    He gave a link to the original French footie site – more than The Record did 3 days later with its exclusive which it now turns out wasn’t an exclusive story but a rip-off and wasn’t even an eexclusive translation.

    What a shoddy move by the Record – of course it’ll probably secure Reporter of the Year 😆 🙄 😆

    The mysterious Mr Bacon added:

    Found this interview with Seb Faure on a French website. Thought I’d translate it and post it here since he says some quite revealing things. Was done just before Ally left I think. Says a lot of positive things but decided to highlight the most interesting bits about life at Ibrox since its pretty long…make of it what you will, and sorry if I got the meaning of anything wrong…if anything it gives yet another reason why Foster should be chased

    A lot of effort by a brand new poster to translate such a long and relatively difficult piece. Being an old cynic I’m sure he did it for no other reason than his lifelong love of Rangers.

    I mean shirly it wasn’t a ploy to put it in the Scottish public arena to provide a once reputable publication to do a quick cut and paste jon on it?

    Apparently the French website owner now plans to sue the Daily Record for Breach of Copyright – rumour has it that Ashley has offered him the services of his copyright and brand protection experts free of charge 😉


  27. 4424me says:
    January 2, 2015 at 6:17 pm

    It doesnt actually say he has bought them and there is no trace of the sale on the lse web site. Gerry braiden of the herald has also tweeted his info is king has proxy on the shares but has not bought them

    It’s on the Stock Exchange website. The lse site is London South East


  28. 02 January 2015 Rangers International Football Club plc (“Rangers” or the “Company”)

    Holding in Company

    The Company was informed on 2 January 2015 that New Oasis Investments Limited (“New Oasis”), a Company 100% owned by the Family Trust of Dave King, acquired 11,869,505 Ordinary Shares in the Company on 2 January 2015. Following the transaction, New Oasis will be interested in 11,869,505 Ordinary Shares in the Company, representing approximately 14.57% of the Issued Share Capital.

    It’s on AIM – maybe somebody’s been winding-up the company who has informed AIM. Seriously – hope it isn’t another wind-up – that would be terrible 🙁


  29. Andy Newport @AndyNewportPA
    On PA wires: Dave King insists he is prepared to work with Douglas Park’s Three Bears group in the battle to rescue Rangers.
    Dave King said: “I will work with any like-minded group.”
    On plans possible boardroom changes: “I now have to consider what is doable”.
    On Artemis and Miton’s decision to sell: “I believe that they just lost faith in the present board and its ability to move the club forward”
    On what he believes Mike Ashley will do next: “He will likely put pressure on board to protect and entrench Sport Direct’s commercial interests, particularly as we now know from the leaked email that Mr Somers believes the agreement can be repudiated.”
    If King does join with Three Bears, they will have a combined stake of around 34 per cent, which means two parties could potentially call an EGM and insert a motion to be voted on. They can also prevent any significant assets – such as Ibrox or Murray Park – being sold off or used as security on a loan. However, if stock market bosses decide they are working too closely together, they may force them to make an offer to buy the whole club.


  30. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: January 2, 2015 at 6:48 pm

    Mr King and the Bear trio have (collectively) around 28%.
    Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita Holdings are the King makers now.
    ====================
    I don’t dispute that they may have or plan to “switch sides”, but until there is a notification to AIM to the contrary, Sandy Easdale will retain the proxy over their voting intentions.


  31. Just thought it was funny the announcement of “aquisition” being on the site but not details of the trade , agree it will probably be updated tomorrow in light of kings interview above


  32. Just to be clear, there is no sour grapes from me re the actions of the real rangers men. They have finally ‘put up’ (admittedly not my preferred option) and assuming they’re not expecting favours re concert parties and the likes and as long as the anticipated ‘actions’ against Ashley are at least legal then good luck to them.

    The last two years were ‘doping’ but it was essentially their own money although I’m not sure Laxey et al would agree.

    It still doesn’t give them their club back ON PAPER but it is what they now do with it that will define the cloudy ‘Rangers’ for the next wee while.

    And it doesn’t let the other 41 clubs off the hook either.


  33. Isn’t it the case that the SFA have no powers over anyone having ownership or directorship of RIFC as it’s TRFC that has the SPFL share?
    Is Greens ploy of having two companies to confuse the hard of thinking / regulating continuing to pay off?
    I do wonder just how things work when RIFC want things done..do the directors of TRFC just rubber stamp stuff? Abrogating responsibility? Was it RIFC or TRFC that decided to sell a player? Just how much governance goes on at TRFC?
    In a sane world, TRFC directors should be shitting themselves with worry over the possible legal repercussions of running up so much debt, don’t they want a future in the commercial world?
    Now no laughing at the back, front or in the Hampden, but if RIFC are making executive decisions about TRFC what should regulators be doing with regards to the oversight and governance of the body that has the SPFL share? The football rules should only apply to TRFC, but…
    I also wonder about the amount of scenario planning and risk assessment going on, never mind all the time spent looking under cushions and in back pockets for next months cash for the payroll, – which company is likely to fail / be wound up first?
    TRFC cannot pay its own bills and RIFC is likely getting nearer insolvency as well, and there is infighting galore for control over RIFC.
    I wonder what the Easdales chat about over their fish suppers…
    Anyhoo, its a mess, and well past time for clubs to be honest about their motives and actions.


  34. iMO
    Next step. Call EGM to vote on res for MVL of RIFC


  35. easyJambo says:
    January 2, 2015 at 7:35 pm

    PhilMacGiollaBhain says: January 2, 2015 at 6:48 pm

    Mr King and the Bear trio have (collectively) around 28%.
    Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita Holdings are the King makers now.
    ====================
    I don’t dispute that they may have or plan to “switch sides”, but until there is a notification to AIM to the contrary, Sandy Easdale will retain the proxy over their voting intentions.
    =========================================

    Well I’m beginning to think the Easdale Camp must have smelt the wind was no longer backing but veering quite dramatically. Perhaps that’s why we had the rumbles of walking away in recent days.

    If their proxies switch then the Easdale Camp does seem to become a bit surplus to requirements – I think the chilly winds of late will certainly prove fatal for a fragile chairman ere the Somer blooms.


  36. tykebhoy says:
    January 2, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    4424me/Eco I assume you mean Monday. Today is Friday
    ===========================================

    Smartypants 😆


  37. GoosyGoosy says: January 2, 2015 at 7:49 pm

    iMO
    Next step. Call EGM to vote on res for MVL of RIFC
    ===========================
    Who benefits from such a move if the main contracts are with TRFC?


  38. The Game of Throes

    It’s clear that a real power struggle has started for control of the company.
    Who will the victor be?
    Who will be the lucky one who will have to pump hard cash into the car crash club to keep it on the road?
    If an administration event is indeed imminent, will Doncaster have a sudden change of heart:
    – a 15 point penalty, from which promotion is possibly still do-able?
    – a 25 point penalty, meaning another year in the lower league (with no Hearts/Hibs)?


  39. A few members in the clubhouse were having a wee celebration this evening and wondering who will be coming to TRFC in January now that the three bears and King have invested £6.5m into the club. They reckon that should be enough to buy the players they need to overtake Hearts. They weren’t too pleased when I pointed out that TRFC had actually received no cash in the last 48 hours and were still in the same financial position that they were this time last week. They couldn’t get their heads around the fact that the money for the shares went to the previous owners of the shares and not to the club. I also pointed out that the money for McLeod was to pay the wages and that Mike Ashley was still owed £3m so they were far from being out of the woods. I fear that I may have dampened their New Year spirit somewhat, especially after my team had earlier taken them down 4 and 2 on the 16th.


  40. Panic buying?

    Looking at the numbers it would appear so.

    Lets say they started with the £16.5 million mentioned last year. £6M gone already just to get a minority stake. £3M still owed to big Mike, so £7 million left. Losses (give recent cost-cutting) £1M a month so enough to get through until August?

    Just don’t see how this makes sense, unless as I said at the start, it was panic stations.


  41. @sixtaseven a 25 point penalty puts TRFC 9th and only just ahead of Livi. If they have to sell more of their best players for working capital this month the automatic relegation spot isn’t totally out of the question and the relegation play-off spot may be their best hope. Have they yet to beat currently 9th placed Alloa this season? Could be a couple of genuine 6 pointers against them to come.


  42. Not posed for a long time but do view the site each and every day for the true information on Scottish football and especially the circus surrounding Doncasters favourite team/club/company(s). Happy New year to all contributors for keeping up the good fight. The reason I post is just to comment on the glib And shameless ones use of “New oasis” as the name for his purchase vehicle. For anyone not fully aware of the housing scheme from which Dave came from, This is the current name of the one and only public watering hole. I should add that the local residents and patrons of said pub know it as “the zoo” 🙂


  43. I’m actually beginning to wonder if Doomcaster’s unsolicited outburst yesterday was a wee bampot friendly reminder that it will be a 25 point deduction and not 15 when the goodies crash the bus.

    Nah, must’ve bumped me heid!


  44. It’s all a giant squirrel. If Laxeys, Artemis & Milton all sold up because their combined 30% was insufficient to influence daily outcomes at Ibrox, how is that 30% is now able to move mountains?

    Conversely, if they sellers were all unhappy with the situation they could have voted together on issues where they disagreed with the board. If their combined vote was ever gonna be significant, why sell?

    From what I hear, this is no concert party either. In my granny’s words – and wise ones at that – “there’ll be a stink when the chanty breaks”.

    The egos involved – particularly King’s – do not make for a game of happy families, and if they were to wrest control away from the current bunch, the fallout will make the Bear blogosphere infighting look like a picnic.

    Something has forced this alliance upon them which makes me think that Ashley is holding all the high cards – at least enough to get the hell out of Dodge with the loot.


  45. GoosyGoosy says:
    January 2, 2015 at 7:49 pm
    5 1 Rate This

    iMO
    Next step. Call EGM to vote on res for MVL of RIFC

    If they were to push for an RIFC MVL though, would they not face a legal challenge from the minority shareholders demanding the repayment of the TRFC debt? Alternatively, do they take the properties and tie them up in RIFC then sell on TRFC to Real Rangers Men for a pittance?


  46. …and another thing about King…

    Phil had mentioned recently that King could be facing further problems with SARS. I can’t remember the specifics, but if that transpires then presumably King could again be at risk of a sentence and/or hefty fine(s) ?

    If King paid for these shares out of his own pocket, was it from offshored resources, [IIRC he was supposed to repatriate his wealth to SA as part of his SARS agreement].

    But in such circumstances, I would expect a spiv to be busy hiding his assets wherever possible. I certainly would not be buying a high profile stake in any football club.

    Has King bought the shares for himself – and with his own funds ?

    Confused.com


  47. In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.

    Benjamin Franklin

    In this World nothing can be said to be certain, except death & taxes unless of course it involves any club playing out of Ibrox.

    Neil Doncaster


  48. Theoldcourse
    @ 8.05 pm

    And there lies an example of the mindset that has made things so easy for the spivs. These people clearly do not have a clue about what’s going on at their club, very likely because they only read the succulent hacks, and even then, only digest what they want to eat :slamb: How on earth, though, can any bear be so ignorant or naive to have such little grasp of what happens when a shareholder buys shares on the market after all that has been happening at their club over the past three years. Lack of investment knowledge was par for the course at the outset, but three years of reading as much about the financial dealings of TRFC as the playing side has failed to educate so many of them to even understand that they are a long way from safety yet. They better wise up soon, because, should the King and his performing bears get control, they’ll be expecting more gullibles to pony up to keep the show, or it’s replacement, on the go by buying those shares they are so ignorant of!

    Congratulations on your win at the golf today 🙂


  49. I wonder if Dave King’s circa £2.67M share purchase today was funded by what he expects to receive from BDO as an interim dividend from Oldco. BDO expect to declare a dividend in Q1 of 2015.


  50. Barcabhoy says:

    January 2, 2015 at 5:27 pm It will be interesting if King tries to force a board position for himself.

    could the SFA possibly sanction a recently convicted criminal as an appropriate director of a board of a member club ?

    ______________________________________________________

    Several months ago, I was told by a director of a top league club that King could not possibly be considered fit and proper, even if the UK authorities were to allow him to take up a directorship (which my source doubted). He also opined that “Celtic would go absolutely crazy” if King were to be passed as fit and proper – that last morsel delivered to imply that nobody wanted to fall out with Celtic at that moment in time.

    My sense was that I was being fed a line in the hope that the theory would never be tested. I thought that the comment about Celtic was gilding the lily a tad, and designed to hit the right notes (though not necessarily in the right order 🙂 )

    The context of the SFA’s refusal to allow Ashley’s increased stake is now becoming apparent, and in a rare moment of prescience, I thought at the time that it was a green light for a King intervention.

    Long road for a short cut I know, but will the SFA deem King fit and proper? Unequivocally, “Yes!”


  51. bad capt madman says:
    January 2, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    Isn’t it the case that the SFA have no powers over anyone having ownership or directorship of RIFC as it’s TRFC that has the SPFL share?
    ======================================================
    Ah well that poses an interesting one for the SPFL Rule Book and I must have another look – having not realised it’s Friday I won’t be heading for town to meet the mates 🙁

    Still I’ll make up for it tomorrow and watch the Edinburgh Derby – could be a good game.

    However back to rules: The SPFL share according to its rules is held by the owner and operator. To me TRFCL is the ‘operator’ and as it is fully owned by RIFC Plc then that is the ‘owner’ in which Ashley currently has an approved level of shareholding agreed by the SFA.

    I don’t think that ‘owner and operator’ means one entity and this seems to be confirmed by the SPFL Articles of Association which state: ‘If more than one person holds a Share, only one certificate may be issued in respect of it’. By SPFL definition ‘person’ also means ‘company’ which is the norm in most rules and articles.

    If I’m right then that does allow TRFC and RIFC Plc to hold the same share but I can’t see anything in the SPFL Rules or Articles to deal with a fall-out situation. I may well have missed it of course.

    I don’t know if that makes sense or helps.


  52. Can we please put this one to bed. The shareholding is bought in New Oasis Inc ‘s name. When it comes to judging if New Oasis Inc are FPP please be assured King Dave’s name won’t be anywhere near it.


  53. ecobhoy,

    I assume the rules must apply to both the operating company and any holding company. TRFC is the operating company which owns the share, but the SFA blocked Ashley’s ownership of shares in the holding company, whilst ironically approving the convicted Easdale brother (too confusing to know who is who) as fit and proper to be on the board of the operating company.

    Easy to see why lawyers are seldom skint …


  54. Well the last couple of days have certainly offered a glimmer of hope to ‘The Rangers’ fans and it is something that they have desperately needed for months now.

    Hope can go a long way.
    It may entice the ten thousand, that are staying away, back again although ultimately it will be performances on the park which will probably determine this. There is no money to bring in players and there is a rookie coach in place whose first game was an absolute disaster.

    There is still obstacles to over come however;
    Mike Ashley still needs to be dealt with whether it is his £3M loan or his merchandising deals. These could ensure the club/company is impoverished for years to come.
    There are three SFA charges to be dealt with at the end of the month. This could cost more money.
    There are still the huge annual loses to be dealt of somewhere between £6M-£9M per annum.
    There is the crumbling infrastructure, both on the sporting and structural, sense.

    Someone is going to have to stump up the cash to pay for the above so forget King’s £16M war chest as the total for the above will be somewhere in the region of £30M and that is simply to stand still.

    I think, as I stated a while back, word has gone out on the QT to the interested parties that the business was about to collapse and that it would be so spectacular there would be no return.

    This smacks of utter desperation from the businessmen involved as there is no rhyme nor reason to it.
    Dave King said he would only put money into the club directly and not buy shares on the open market. What did he do today?
    That money will not go to pay any outstanding bills and it will not go to pay January’s wages.
    The irony is that for the amount the two groups have spent in the last 48 hours they could have almost bought all the assets thirty months ago. Now all they have done is buy into a financial madhouse. None of these guys would consider spending this amount of cash on any other dysfunctional business which I think tends to back up the belief I stated above.

    There is hope for the fans but someone still needs to write the cheques.


  55. Smugas says:

    January 2, 2015 at 9:10 pm
    ______________________________________

    Ownership of shares is not the issue. Any fit and proper investigation would come about if King was appointed to the board – although which board I do not know. See my previous post for indications of confusion.


  56. Big Pink says:
    January 2, 2015 at 8:42 pm

    7

    0

    Rate This

    _____________________________________________

    It appears then that this “sport” is corrupt beyond all credence.
    So include me out.
    Enjoy your WWF with pantomime villains.
    I don’t know how those Chinese betting syndicates will react to such a rigged endeavour, so I suspect there will be a reckoning at some point.

    Scottish Football is dead. Long live Rangers.


  57. Here is another scenario. What if Ashley had previously agreed to buy some of the shares that King and his pals have bought. Say from Laxeys or Artemis (he must have been buying them from somewhere to get to 29.5%), but the SFA put the kybosh on that. Ashley now takes the SFA to court and gets the ban on increased ownership overturned.

    Will he have a claim against the SFA if he has lost the opportunity to buy those shares and any subsequent commercial benefits because of an illegal SFA edict?


  58. Resin_lab_dog says:

    January 2, 2015 at 9:21 pm

    Scottish Football is dead. Long live Rangers.
    __________________________________________________________

    Seven words which describe the situation perfectly.


  59. Here’s one for all the hack lurkers for next time they meet up with Neil Doncaster.

    Just let him know that I am as eager as he is to help The Rangers into the SPFL 😳 so that he can close his big (imaginary)sponsorship deal.

    I am happy to write a stonking big cheque to ‘the club’, who clearly exist, but clearly wouldn’t want this money going to the Spivs who own the ‘operating companies’.

    So Neil if you could just let me have the name of the ‘club’ and their bank account details my multi-million pound cheque will be on its way.

    Neil? Hello Hello? where are you? just give me the club’s details…is there a problem?


  60. StevieBC says:
    January 2, 2015 at 8:30 pm

    Has King bought the shares for himself – and with his own funds?
    ================================================================
    Doesn’t appear so. They have been bought by New Oasis Investments Limited (“New Oasis”), a Company 100% owned by the Family Trust of Dave King.

    I’m not sure where the Family Trust is situated but Jersey seems to ring a bell. I’m also not sure where New Oasis is registered – it certainly isn’t registered yet on Companies House UK.

    King isn’t stupid and it would seem to me that the money for the shares won’t be subject to any South African jurisdiction wrt his personal tax issues.

    It will be protected by legal firewalls beyond the reach of SARS IMO and quite possibly it never has been within their reach in legal terms.


  61. Having watched Back to the Future over Christmas, I can’t believe that the the SPL have got hold of that old de Lorean – well how else do you explain Aberdeen, Celtic and Dundee Utd fighting it out with others at the top of one of /the most competitive leagues in Europe? And yes as a Celtic fan I want us to win the league, but what a stramash (as dear old Arthur M might have said once or twice) and it’s fabulous!
    In other news, a game of very public poker between some very rich individuals (although some not as rich as they once were) continues to be played out where the only true losers will be the lower paid employees of a company that should provide more protection than it will, some local businesses that failed to recognise the warning signs (again) and a large number of people who have been on an emotional roller coaster (that has cost them significant amounts of cash as well) for no other reason than following their team (an emotional attachment we may at times deride but can surely understand all the same).
    An inability to protect the interests of the fans -personally I feel this goes back to the fundamental purpose of the SFA, which it has clearly demonstrated itself as being incapable of exercising).


  62. Big Pink says:
    January 2, 2015 at 8:42 pm

    “The context of the SFA’s refusal to allow Ashley’s increased stake is now becoming apparent”

    ————————————-
    BP, I can’t help but think that this was a no win situation for the SFA.

    If they had allowed Ashley to increase his stake in Rangers, would the fans of other clubs have been happy?

    I doubt it.


  63. redlichtie says:
    January 2, 2015 at 9:58 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-day-late-and-a-rand-short/#more-5649

    Phil’s latest…….is John Clark around?

    Sounds like a letter to the Takeover Panel is needed re Dave & The Three Bears’s wee party. Concert party.

    Scottish Football needs to get a grip quickly before all of this gets out of hand.
    ———–

    When I read that one the lateness of the hour and the day’s whirlwind events led me to wonder what songs might be appropriate at a concert party for bears…


  64. ‘Well done again and thx Craig, from all of us normal wee guy supporters all over the globe!’

    The above is a message to Craig Houston of Sons of Struth which encompasses the spirit of fans of a Football Club, any Football Club.

    Justshattered at 9.17pm got it right also when he commented

    Well the last couple of days have certainly offered a glimmer of hope to ‘The Rangers’ fans and it is something that they have desperately needed for months now.

    Hope can go a long way.
    It may entice the ten thousand, that are staying away, back again although ultimately it will be performances on the park which will probably determine this. There is no money to bring in players and there is a rookie coach in place whose first game was an absolute disaster.

    And hope does go a long way, and yes, there are obstacles along the way but that hope is what Rangers supporters have tonight.

    So give us that.

    My hope is with Rangers minded men at the top we can now see decisions made that are the best for Rangers and no longer what is best for individual directors and their bank balances.

    It will be a long road and many set backs, but at the moment the winning of trophies is secondary, we may have our club back.

    So be negative, be scathing but just remember what the wee guy said at the top of the post, and all the wee guys like him.

    Good Night.


  65. Sounds like another fine mess by DK and a concerto of bears.
    Court action on the horizon and only just started.
    Hilarious.


  66. Hope is a fine thing @rhaps. I expect the rest of the clubs in league will also have hope that sound finances being adopted at Ibrox will lead to FFP and a more level playing field.


  67. Big Pink says:
    January 2, 2015 at 9:16 pm

    ecobhoy,

    I assume the rules must apply to both the operating company and any holding company. TRFC is the operating company which owns the share, but the SFA blocked Ashley’s ownership of shares in the holding company, whilst ironically approving the convicted Easdale brother (too confusing to know who is who) as fit and proper to be on the board of the operating company.
    ———————————————–
    It all depends what the rule means when it states:

    The owner and operator of a Club participating in the League shall become a Member of the Company by acquiring one Ordinary Share

    Does that mean the owner and operator is one combined legal entity or could they be two distinct legal entities?

    The SPFL Rules & Articles also state that an SPFL Member means a person who or which is the holder of an SPFL share. ‘Person’ means either a natural person as in a human or an artificial person as in a corporate entity.

    And then the bit that only one certificate can be issued for an SPFL Membership share but that more than one person can hold that share. Once again ‘person’ can be a natural human legal entity or a corporate one.

    It’s also worth remembering that the SFA initially had no problems with Ashley having up to 10% of the RIFC shareholding but baulked at the proposed increase in shareholding.

    As to the Easdale conviction I very much doubt if the SFA would have been able to legally sustain any ban on him. I don’t know whether Companies House ever applied any penalties but if so they obviously are time spent.

    However, on top of that the guy did a crime and did his time – Some crimes I personally would never forgive but I don’t necessarily put a carousel fraud in that category.

    And I never judge people unless I know a helluva lot of the facts involved and in his case I know next to nothing and have never thought it that relevant to his role in the Rangers saga.

    I may well be wrong but until I have evidence to the contrary I won’t lose any sleep over it 😆

Comments are closed.