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.
HirsutePursuit says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:05 am
A wee question. Would the SPL lawyer in preparing his case know that LNS was going to say what he did that Doncaster later uses as justification for his same club statement?
Had he done would the SPL have briefed him to argue the case or would they be quite happy to have an uncontested view emerge to suit the SPL intent?
Apart from the evidence of irregular ebts being withheld a s well as getting the status of Rangers membership of the SFA wrong, if this were a criminal case would there be an argument for a mistrial?
The Cat NR1 says:
January 7, 2015 at 9:38 pm
16 1 Rate This
I started to skim through it and then saw Neil Patey quoted, so decided not to bother going any further.
=========================================================================
…and so say all of us…(sadly!)
Auldheid says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:39 am
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:07 am
No point muddying the waters with Art 12 although my reading of it is Rangers FC PLC were the club applying for the UEFA licence not MIH on their behalf in some parent/owning company role.
I accept LNS might not have been able to use it but does that mean we have to accept LNS as the sole authority on the matter as Doncaster claims? (nothing to do with wtc btw).
—————————————————
The actual authority on the matter comes from the SPL and SFA Articles and Rules. LNS is actually a poor reference source because of his tribunal’s silence on key matters.
UEFA quite simply IMO tends to have more clearly written rules and the problem we have particularly with the SFA is that the rule book is archaic and needs to be ripped-up and rewritten for the 21st Century.
But I agree with you that Rangers FC Plc applied for the European Licence and not MIH because MIH didn’t hold the SPL share and legally didn’t qualify as the owner and operator of TRFC Plc.
I will probably wrap it up by dealing with Doncaster’s attempts to spin his web of deceit by misrepresenting LNS to what IMO can only be the advantage of Rangers.
He may well be doing that for what he views as the greater good of Scottish Football but that raises the thorny question as to whether he ran it past his member ‘clubs’ and got permission for his utterances.
That is the question we need answers to.
Or was
redlichtie says:
January 7, 2015 at 8:46 pm
73 4 Rate This
Je suis Charlie. 😥
====================================================
Redlictie…nous sommes Charlie(s)… 😥 😥 😥 😥
Puts all our media criticisms into context… 😥
Another new manager punted for Rangers and a sighting of Jim Traynor – it’s all happening in Cumbernauld apparently 😆
http://www.talkingbaws.com/2015/01/07/rangers-line-up-shock-move-for-felix-magath/
After a few years of reading bampot analysis of the whole LNS debacle, and more just keeps coming, thanks guys, I am totally convinced that the football authorities were not disappointed in the result, and as many have pointed out such establishment reviews are well planned to achieve the required result.
Can we agree that in legal parlance, it was indeed rigged, wholly rigged and nothing but rigged. Clever minds took a long time to get it right despite the facts and precedents involved.
Regan, Doncaster, Ogilvie and assorted club boards did what they did as they thought it was required.
Pity they were wrong, and that it really only put off the inevitable.
No-one can see a good outcome for TRFC in all this, and I believe our football will actually benefit from it all even if not in the ways imagined by those who chose financial rather than sporting priorities (I hesitate to allege complete corruption or favouritism being over-riding factors).
Other clubs have improved and prospered, and the reputations of those involved in the omnishambles (SMSM & authorities) will suffer in the longer term.
Keep the faith folks, the end is near, – armageddon only happened to one club & two companies (all related).
Im hearing a lot of talk about what the fans of TRFC can do
There is only 1 thing they can do
Walk away and start their own club
Not point in boycott’s, fan participation on the board etc
1.The so called fans don’t believe in anything other than You have to spend spend spend
2. The club Couldn’t sustain itself When it had sell out crowd’s and playing in the Champions league year in year out
There is no solution for the so called fans
Because 99% of the so called fans believe that this is how it is and always should be 🙁
The remaining 1% start you’re own club and forget the rest
essexbeancounter says:
January 8, 2015 at 1:10 am
‘.Redlictie…nous sommes Charlie(s)… :
Puts all our media criticisms into context… :cry:’
——–
Yes.
The context being that in which pusillanimous, partisan, truth-distorting sports hacks have the nerve to claim to be journalists. Men so afraid of being excluded from dining on succulent lamb or ‘banned’ from Ibrox or upsetting those who might cause ‘civic unrest’ that they act as propagandists for and supporters of the biggest cheating scandal there has been in Scottish Football and Scottish Football governance.
The contempt I feel for them is as deeply felt as the respect and indeed reverence I feel for those true journalists so brutally and insanely murdered in Paris today.
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 1:13 am
‘..Another new manager punted for Rangers and a sighting of Jim Traynor – it’s all happening in Cumbernauld apparently :lol:.’
———————-
Jim Traynor?
The Traynor who out-brownnosed Chick and got himself a wee berth with a club that WE paid him to propagandise for ( with the consent of his BBC Scotland editors)?
Surely not!
Hope he’s not claiming overnight subsistence from any source. Airdrie to Cumbernauld is surely within daily travelling distance!
Surely not.
The Rangers nil? Who missed the penalty? says:
January 7, 2015 at 7:26 pm
jimlarkin says:
January 7, 2015 at 6:06 pm
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11782/9635768?
The BS and Myths continue
…relegated, blah blah blah !!!!!!
///////////////////////////////////////
We have a winner:
“Rangers recorded a £14m loss for the first 13 months following liquidation.”
Wow, just Wow.
===============
Sounds like a good strategy to me…
I plan to live well beyond my means for several years.
Following my demise, I then plan to rack up huge financial losses…
Eh ? 😯
If the club is a separate entity from the company and its the company that enters administration, and then liquidation should a CVA not be agreed, how can they say sevco would get a 25 point penalty if they enter administration again. Its a completely new “company” from the one currently being liquidated. Isn’t it? Or do “clubs” enter administration and “companies” get liquidated? Is this what the rule book says?
“Rangers deny making move for Valencia assistant coach Ian Cathro who revolutionised Dundee United youth set-up…”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-deny-making-move-valencia-4937262
================================================
So let’s consider: stay at Valencia or move to TRFC ?
Decisions, decisions…or not.
No quotes in the DR piece.
They couldn’t be @rsed to insert a feeble, ‘a source said’.
And not even a name to the article: only attributed to “By Record Sport Online”.
The ‘Daily Record’ is such a p!sh newspaper, as if we didn’t know already !
But some people still believe what they read in this rag – including my father-in-law. 😥
Confirmation to AIM this morning that Sandy Easdale has had his loan repaid. I don’t know what he charged as a fee though.
Good morning.
While doing a quick and dirty search for puff pieces this morning I notice the Daily Record has one for none other than Keiran Prior. The headline is:
‘Rangers investor Kieran Prior backs Three Bears and says ‘Throw all the Sports Direct deals in the bin’.
So Mike Ashley will say, ‘okay Keiran, sorry to have troubled you all, here you are, do what you like with them’.
What is the point of such nonsensical stuff? I’m guessing the only way to get the S.D contracts in the bin is through liquidation, in which case Keiran Prior’s share certificate would find a nice resting place beside them.
Sarver or is it Ashley has upped his offer to £20m and £6.5m of immediate funding according to Chris McLaughlin
easyJambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:10 am
0 0 Rate This
Confirmation to AIM this morning that Sandy Easdale has had his loan repaid. I don’t know what he charged as a fee though.
///////////////////
Going by previous loans by Easdale I would have to say 0%
They take no wages and the last loan was also 0%
But you never know with this whole charade
The offer of £6.5m is a 90 day loan payable from the proceeds of the placing.
upthehoops says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:12 am
0 0 Rate This
//////////////////
I think you will find the SD contracts would survive liquidation
As Rangers retail are a separate company
Besides if it came to it MA would just invent some financial disagreement and buy out RIFC 51% b shares
AIM announcements
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12207694.html
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12207658.html
tcup 2012 says: January 8, 2015 at 7:18 am
—————————-
The original announcement of the loan was “on a fee and interest free basis”. I read that as a fee being payable but no interest charged, although I can see it being read as being free both of fees and interest.
Will the Board now recommend the offer? If Ashley is behind it then I expect they will. It will still require an EGM to allot the new shares, but would King and the Three Bears block it. They have sufficient shares to do so, but would risk an immediate liquidation.
Do King and the Three Bears have enough money available to submit an alternative bid?
Edit: Goosy – is your alter ego Mike Ashley?
Managers touted, huge loans offered, possible takeovers, Jim Traynor. Jings. Spinmeister overdrive.
Difficult to see which side Sarver is aiding, if any.
Good Morning
So now we have another offer of £20 M.But from that the loan of £6.5M is to be repaid.
If you take off expenses you should be left with roughly £13M.
It is going to take £14.5M to get to the end of the season.
So how do you put a team on the park, refurbish the stadium and provide a war chest?
Maths admittedly was never my strongest point but it doesn’t stack up to me.
Time to liquidate and start again (or not at all) in my opinion.
SFA/SPFL must act now and I would like to see the evidence which was produced to prove rules not breached re Tax.
NI & PAYE due 19th, wages due 28th and VAT due February.
If you cannot pay your bills as they fall due, you have a question mark over the assets and those which you do own are secured you cannot be solvent.
It is highly unlikely that Robert Sarver just appeared and made a bid for the team talked about in such high esteem by the coach of his kids.
There will be a connection just like there was with his compatriot Mr Miller a couple of years ago who also came in and had a role to play.
(A bit like street magician’s stooges or straight men)
Does anyone know who Mr Sarver’s connection is with.
Who is he doing a favour for?
Himself?
Charlie?
Mike?
Someone else?
There will be a link.
Administrator for the Ashley clothing company being shut down in Ayrshire
Duff and Phelps
@Finloch, think I’ve solved it. Possibly a big misunderstanding generated by:
http://www.matchmaker.com/mm/dating/pennsylvania-sarver.htm
upthehoops says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:12 am
What is the point of such nonsensical stuff? I’m guessing the only way to get the S.D contracts in the bin is through liquidation, in which case Keiran Prior’s share certificate would find a nice resting place beside them.
=============================================================
As someone else mentioned Rangers Retail Ltd is a separate legal entity but more importantly the joint-venture agreement between TRFCL and SportsDirect has an automatic trigger.
In the event of TRFCL’s insolvency SportsDirect can legally purchase the 51% of Rangers shares in the joint venture for 50% of the net profit of Ranger Retail over the last 12 months.
One of the quirks of fate is that recent boycotts of SportsDirect merchandise will actually allow Ashley to buy-out Rangers Retail more cheaply.
Money certainly does go to money 😆
upthehoops says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:23 am
Robert Sarver has made a fresh takeover proposal to Rangers to spend up to £20m on shares and provide £6.5m in immediate short-term funding.— Grant Russell (@STVGrant) January 8, 2015
——————————————————————–
Wonder what security will be given or is it just walking-about money to be squandered on whims and flights of fancy?
I’m not even sure there is anything left that’s worth £6.5 million and that includes the stadium & Murray Park even if their ownership wan’t legally iffy.
Could be they want to get to the end of the season
RIP 🙁
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/heartbreaking-cartoons-from-artists-in-response-to-the-ch#.efWEk2RG4V
Sports Direct are the major sponsors of Oldham FC. Wonder if there will be any fallout from the Ched Evans signing?
Personally, I’m unsure on this case. He’s done his time, he still pleads he is not guilty hence no statement of remorse but I’d probably be more convinced to make a decision after his appeal has been heard.
Ecobhoy
Can I just clarify something becaus semantics are vitally important here – witness the clumpany debate for example.
MIH is a holding company, however, it was never the holding company of Rangers.
Nor was Wavetower, which purchased the entirety of MIH’s shareholding in Rangers for £1 and which was a specially-formed takeover vehicle.
UK company legislation specifically protects the interests of ALL shareholders so, although MIH (and, subsequently, Wavetower) was the main shareholder and beneficiary, it did not have the complete control over Rangers that it would have needed to be classed as Rangers’ holding company.
Rangers never had a holding company because it went from club to limited company to plc without creating another company above it holding 100% of all shares (contrast this now with the Sevco-RIFC structure where Sevco is 100% owned by RIFC plc).
Furthermore, MIH has numerous other interests and share holdings so it would be very difficult for anyone to argue that it would fall foul of the owner/operator insolvency rule unlike Southampton where there was a holding company which, crucially, did nothing else but own the club.
This may seem a tad pedantic but it is important that we get it right. I remember when the old club/new club debate transformed on RTC into oldco/newco and helped sow the seeds of confusion that we have today, and we are dealing with an enemy (in the SFA, SPFL & SMSM) who are deliberately playing fast and loose with words and history to suit their own agenda.
As auldheid has pointed out, the introduction of owner/operator rules are a welcome addition which brings the rule book into line with modern business practices. However, we should not forget that those rules did not exist at the time Rangers were liquidated and ceased to exist.
Having seen and read the BBC/Doncaster interview, I am certain that Doncaster is deliberately sowing the idea that those rules were in place back then to justify the continued existence of something which, in law, ceased to exist.
To sum up: the owner/operator is a red herring as far as Rangers are concerned: the rules didn’t apply at the time and there was never, in any case, a holding company. Sevco is another matter altogether, but let’s not conflate the two.
Just had a look at AIM RNS wrt the Sarver offer.
In terestingly the £6.5 million loan is secured but it doesn’t state what it is secured on.
Interestingly Sarver feels confident enough at this stage to tell the Rangers Board what his loan should be spent on with more than half going to clear the loans to Ashley and Easdale viz £3.5 million IIRC although Easdale has apparently already been repaid presumably from the sale of the two youngsters.
It’s amazing how time scales are slotting together almost seamlessly as my memory tells me that Ashley was to be repaid by April.
Sarver stated:
I now begin to understand how the Banking collapse began in the US and engulfed the rest of the world. Obviously Sarver doesn’t understand or doesn’t want to understand that Rangers will never be free of debt until their is a massive cultural shift within its fan base and the ‘Rightful Place’ myth consigned to the dustbin.
To be followed by living within its means – we’ll see. The only way I can see long-term Rangers survival is by the building of a fan-owned club and that won’t be easy and possibly not realisable.
Morning all.
Apologies if I’ve got this wrong.
Sarvers original offer was £18m for a controlling stake plus £15m to buy out existing shareholders.
Total £33m
This offer is £20m for the lot with £6.5m up front in emergency funding to be repaid when new shares are issued.Assuming expenses of around £500k that’s an actual offer of £13m.
A whopping £20m LESS than his original offer.
I don’t see how the board could accept this.
If Uncle Mike says yes, then Goosy is right, and Sarver is just a screen for him to hide behind. If Uncle Mike keeps on saying no, then Uncle Mike must have an alternative plan.
As for the 4Bears, having just bought in for £5m between them, they seem remarkably passive so far. I’ve hardly seen a quote from any of them, while giant squirrels are spotted in Cumbernauld (I used to live there, I just hope those furry coats are nice and thick!) and even as far away as Valencia.
One thing is certain. We will only be able to find out what Uncle Mike’s intentions really are by watching what he actually does. No PR, no leaks to the sports hacks, he will just make up his mind and act according to what he sees to be his best interests. Which makes for a refreshing change in this soap opera.
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 8:58 am
Could be they want to get to the end of the season
________________________
Can’t see that as a good plan, in a football sense, at least. With promotion being a non-certainty, wouldn’t it be best to take the 25 points hit this season giving themselves next season to have a real go at promotion? If they did get promoted this season, they’d start next with a 25 points penalty (if they did go into administration after the end of this one) and have the prospect of fighting relegation until Xmas, at least. Not a crowd pulling proposition for the bears.
If I was pulling the strings at Ibrox, and actually bothered about the football side, even if only to acknowledge that a more successful team, potentially, leads to bigger profits, I’d view this season as a washout and decide to clean up the mess and leave next season as the one in which to make the big push.
As ever, though, nothing makes sense at Ibrox.
Probably of no significance, but what is it with this figure of £6.5m that suitors keep mentioning? Is it the company’s own estimate of how much is needed that they’ve given to so called hostile bidders, or is it a figure that has been agreed upon by two, apparently, separate interested parties? On the list of strange coincidences it’s probably very low down on the significance meter.
Vampire Squirrel Zombie Hydra Apocalypse – The Pitch
It’s the nightmare scenario writ large. Every time you kill one of the little furry critters it comes alive again, bigger, stronger, hungrier, more aggressive, more insane. So the faster they are killed the more outrageous they become – the more defenceless we are.
We’ve tried everything – but they just keep coming. The only thing we haven’t tried is to leave them alone and hope they will die a natural death and become extinct. It will take courage, it will take balls of steel, but it is what we have to do – for the sake of the children – god help us.
But maybe – just maybe – if we’re lucky and we’ve all been nice not naughty, in time – these abominations of nature may fall victim to a weakness we have never imagined – that could save the universe – something mundane, something so simple, something so obvious that we’ve overlooked it time and again – something – well something like arithmetic or NVQ accountancy.
God Dammit – it might just work! We just need to hole-up and hold-out till the furry feckers meltdown under the weight of their own implausibility.What choice do we have – let’s do it – let’s do it now – before it’s too late.
THE END
(until Vampire Squirrel Zombie Hydra Apocalypse II, II, IV & V)
Bawaman
He has most definitely not served his time, he is out on licence, which is why he was refused permission to take up a job offer overseas, given that he will be having weekly sessions with a parole officer.
Secondly, as a convicted sex offender, he will be on the sex offenders register, and rightly, he will be disbarred from working with kids.
He does claim to be innocent, and he is awaiting appeal, but, in the meantime, he is a convicted rapist/sex offender.
Short career or not, the smart move would have been for him, to at least express some remorse for the suffering the lassie has endured, which could have been done without prejudicing his appeal, and not returning to football until his fast tracked appeal had been heard.
Frankly, the way he has behaved post-conviction, has done himself no favours at all, if/when he loses the appeal, I hope he is sent directly to jail, without passing go, and without collecting a nice footballing contract, to serve the remainder of his sentence!
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
January 8, 2015 at 9:22 am
It is confusing, and not necessarily as you’ve understood it to be (hence the confusion). The question then becomes, who is he trying to confuse, or, who benefits most from any confusion?
Allyjambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 9:46 am
Or has he had a look at the books, and presented a revised offer they can easily refuse, thereby allowing him to get the hell out of dodge, while saving a little face and keeping his bank account intact?
Given all the up to date financial has anyone taken a stab at what it takes per month to run T’Rangers.
Fed up of saying it but in the Murray days all the accounts showed the general annual operating costs outwith the football wages etc as being £14m. Other than a few redundancies there doesn’t seem to have been anything major that has been reported to make a dent in that figure.
Even if (and its a big if) you got down to £10m you still have to consider the footballing costs which is currently around £7m for a duff team with many contracts coming up for an end and no players having any sell on value. Therefore you either have to pump in at least a further ten million or more to refresh the squad or it is bargain basement trawling using a coaching/scouting set up that has a poor record in such activities.
Regardless who puts money in and even with promotion and season ticket money coming in, the cash would be used to pay back loans, be allocated for running costs and if any spare it would most likely spent by August. As said before it is all do-able but very tight and expectations of ‘success’ would need to be severely tempered.
Danish Pastry says:
January 8, 2015 at 8:51 am
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
At the risk of being overly personal… Danish, how the hang did you ‘stumble’ upon with that link?! 😳 😆
I read someone’s post yesterday which boiled down the ONLY way forward for the funders at £1brox was a “Ticketus style” deal
. . . Skim the money from future ST sales.
Makes sense (for the money men, not the gullible) to me, as long at is under the Scottish Legal system
(unlike Ticketus’ English system – faux pas)
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
January 8, 2015 at 9:22 am
Is the offer not for 100m new shares at 20p and then if this ‘placing’ is successful a mandatory offer of 20p for the issued shares (81.45m at present) and ‘to be issued’ – How many is that, the 40 odd million they can issue just now?? – would follow.
So is that not, if all came to fruition, £20m plus £16.3m plus, plus unknown, plus the £6.5m loan but the £6.5m comes back out of the placing.
As Allyjambo says all very confusing!!!
scapaflow says:
January 8, 2015 at 9:40 am
=============================
I have 2 grown up daughters mate, every man should be blessed with a daughter, they have a civilising effect on men, rape is the worst of crimes IMO.
Evens is coming across as a completely selfish turd of an individual, however, he proclaims he is innocent and deserves the opportunity to fight that corner, I would like (as I said) to reserve judgement until then. If he is indeed innocent, it does justify his anger towards his accuser.
I was under the impression that you were not allowed parole until you admitted the offence I.e. Owen Oyston, the Blackpool FC owner), did the full stretch for having sex with an under age girl because he denied guilt (he IS a sleazeball of a man too). Is Evans on parole? Or has he done the time ?
easyJambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:47 am
Will the Board now recommend the offer? If Ashley is behind it then I expect they will. It will still require an EGM to allot the new shares, but would King and the Three Bears block it. They have sufficient shares to do so, but would risk an immediate liquidation.
Do King and the Three Bears have enough money available to submit an alternative bid?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IMO
What we are witnessing is not a serious bid by Ashley or his surrogate to buy out the other shareholders. That is the expensive route to Liquidation. The cheap route is to become the biggest Creditor through secured loans and then liquidate by ceasing to lend any more. The opposition are then faced with matching your loans without any security
So
What we are witnessing is probably a PR exercise to soften up the Fans for a mega loan by Ashley (or Sarver) secured against Ibrox and MP. If so we can expect a string of pro LLambias/Ashley/Sarver moonbeams to be peddled concurrently.
The 4Bs are helpless to stop this happening since they would be forced to make unsecured loans just to keep the business afloat .Their only hope is to buy out the Onerous Spivs and force a liquidation ASAP
However
The Ashley (Sarver) involvement to this degree only makes sense in the long term if the plan includes taking out the Onerous Spivs by Liquidation. Buying them out seems unlikely otherwise the 4Bs would have got them by now
So
If Ashley (Sarver) do not liquidate the business it could suggest that the Onerous Spivs were fronts for Ashley all along starting with the Green Consortium. If so his aim would be to keep them quiet until the court cases are long past.
Finally
IMO
Charles Green is the key to unlocking a route for the 4Bs.He knows where the bodies are buried and in particular the precise role if any that Ashley played in the run up to Administration and sale of RFC assets
Whether Green could be persuaded to help is another matter. However as a true Spiv he will have his price
Junior27
January 7, 2015 at 11:13 pm
Phil,
Are there stock market rules which would govern Mr King’s behaviour.
Earlier in the season he actively encouraged supporters to not buy season tickets. In doing so, it could be argued, very persuasively, that he helped cause the clumpany severe hardship which, in turn, has had a significant effect on the share price. This has meant that he has been able to purchase shares for significantly less than he might have paid last year.
Surely this breaks some kind of City rules?
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Read this on Phil’s site.
It’s a very good point.
Surely at the very least, the AIM should investigate King’s actions
Bawsman says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:20 am
He is out on licence, as I pointed out, the fact he was out on licence meant he had to seek permission to work overseas, the permission was denied.
In the meantime, as Oldham are finding out, he is a walking, talking reputational issue, which has already cost them far more, than whatever talent he might have will bring in.
GoosyGoosy says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:24 am
The explanation as to how Ibrox and Murray Park can now be offered as security given the previous written in blood promises that they were sacrosanct will be intriguing.
It will signal that courting the fans is no longer required – Ashley will offer what he does at Newcastle: A team wearing his jerseys on the park and an end to the financial turmoil. It will be a middle of the road team in footballing terms and make Ashley a little bit richer.
The fans that remain will have to accept that this is their new ‘Rightful Place’ and possibly 20-25k will do so. It will probably be more interesting to watch the glitzy SportsDirect ads plastering Ibrox than watching the football which will marginally better than that dished-up by McCoist.
The ranters, ravers and boycotters can GTF – they are now surplus to requirement. Possibly the RRM might get a few crumbs by way of a Board seat to keep moderate fans on board.
But I simply don’t think they have the cash to take Ashley on – oh they might have it but they can’t afford to lose it. That’s the difference between them and Ashley.
The rest have the choice of starting a new club more to their liking and culture and some of the more sensible ones might start from the actual bottom and build a new club based on youth.
One way or another we are witnessing the end times of the ancien regime IMO.
Here is an extract from the RNS announcement-
I am missing something here. There are currently 81 million shares in issue. To buy all those at 20p costs over £16m. So how big can this “placing” be? Just £4m? Remember that these are the new shares that actually put money into the company bank account. I know that not all shareholders will accept the 20p per share, but he has to make the offer to all of them. And since the placing is to happen before the offer to existing shareholders, how does Sarver know how many new shares he wants, since at that stage he wont know the level of acceptances for his offer?
Leaving that aside, let’s say 90% accept his offer, that would cost about £14m, leaving £6m to go into the new shares. That won’t even get him his £6.5m loan back, never mind repaying Ashley’s loans. So he will have spent £20m to acquire a company with zero cash or less, bills to pay, and yet more funding required?
It makes no sense to me, but I may have got the figures totally wrong, of course.
jimlarkin says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:24 am
Surely at the very least, the AIM should investigate King’s actions
———————————————————
Why – King as a private citizen has/had every right to do and say what he wants. He wasn’t even a shareholder of the new club so AIM had absolutely no jurisdiction over him.
However there are a whole string of characters up to their necks in the skulduggery that has beset Ibrox in the last few years that AIM does or did have jurisdcition over.
And what has AIM done about it? ZILCH ❗
GoosyGoosy says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:24 am
============================================================
GG – very good summary – and of course Ashley needs a surrogate because the SFA have blocked him buying more shares and having any influence (titter ye not!)
Would it be boring and naive to ask who controls Blue Pitch and Margarita – yes – thought so – but with combined 8.5% of shares they are the swing-voters in this whole affair.
causaludendi says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:07 am
4 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
January 8, 2015 at 8:51 am
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
At the risk of being overly personal… Danish, how the hang did you ‘stumble’ upon with that link?!
———
Haha, wouldn’t you like to know 🙂
I was actually checking some Sarver things, after this latest statement, all dry and dull — but that link popped out. Got my attention first of all because it was a link to Sarver Dating for Catholic Singles that I stumbled on. The thought struck me, ‘What if he runs a Catholic dating site?’ Is that un-staunch?
Humour is a big part of this, for me at least. I can’t help seeing the funny side. Me bad.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-stay-silent-over-speculation-4939398
Ashley about to tighten his iron grip on the Blue Room?
I think Ashley’s current arrangement with Rangers Retail is about as favourable as it could be. More likely it’s the badge and all the other IP that he wants.
neepheid says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:58 am
I would say that in a normal Plc you would be quite right to scratch your head. But this ain’t a ‘normal’ Plc.
The majority of the shares are in very few hands and even looking at the list might provide an educated guess.
However for all we know perhaps certain blocs have already made their mind up and I am not suggesting anything like insider knowledge being used but legit indications I feel sure can be garnered in the very incestuous environment of share trading.
And perhaps it’s not meant to make sense but is merely a North American furry rodent let loose in Scotland. It will be interesting to see if the climate and culture sees it flourish or die.
neepheid says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:08 am
Given that the SPFL now seem to interpret a Football Club as merely a brand owned by a succession of companies, would owning the IP give Ashley ownership of what the SPFL consider to be the entity formerly known as a Football Club?
easyJambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 7:20 am
The offer of £6.5m is a 90 day loan payable from the proceeds of the placing.
—————————————————————-
The placing proceeds will also have to repay Ashley so that adds up to £9.5 million deducted plus say £500k in costs. And no doubt Easdale will have chipped in more money as well so you could be looking at £11 million being immediately wiped-out.
It’s all utter madness!
scapaflow says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:23 am
neepheid says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:08 am
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:32 am
That is indeed what a plain text reading of the rules says, however, as you point out, the SFA’s Director of Sophistry has yet to be heard from
I still think the rules need to be changed to stop Footballing Businesses describing themselves as clubs, unless they actually are clubs.
If the authorities, in reality the footballing businesses, want Scottish Football to be a franchise system, they should bloody well come out and say so, and explain how it would work, and how it would be better.
Evan’s Oldham deal is off, no big surprise there then, Oldham will be counting the cost, long after the story is tomorrow’s chip wrapper
Wet Ear Syndrome
My Dad used to say that if out of the blue, a total stranger bets you a tenner that a frog will jump out of his pocket and piss in your ear, there are two things for certain – you’ll end up with an ear full of frog piss and you’ll lose a tenner – if you don’t walk away.
Sarver – out of the blue, cock & bull story about sudden interest in Rangers, an offer that doesn’t even work,
Someone’s heading for a wet ear.
neepheid says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:08 am
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-stay-silent-over-speculation-4939398
Ashley about to tighten his iron grip on the Blue Room?
I think Ashley’s current arrangement with Rangers Retail is about as favourable as it could be. More likely it’s the badge and all the other IP that he wants.
————————————————————
Totally agree with you – Gary should stick to football as he obviously hasn’t a clue on the business front.
Ashley will be tying-up everything that can be legally separated from TRFCL. After the dust settles if crowds collapse I reckon he’ll still make as much money as when crowds were plus 40k.
And Ashley can afford to play the waiting game and wait for fans to return but under his terms.
The only real blip on his radar is what the SFA are going to do – it means he’s currently fighting with at least one hand tied behind his back as he has to downplay his ifluence/control over Rangers.
I am in no doubt that if the SFA don’t cave then he will have them in the courts ASAP. And it could be one of the best things ever to happen to Scottish Football.
He will destroy their cosy club culture and secret dealings – and could prove to be the much-needed modernising spark that Scottish Football is crying out for.
However that won’t remove the pain that many Bears will be faced with – but unless the RRM come-up with a pot of gold I just don’t see them having the backbone and deep pockets required to see off the spivs and I don’t include Ashley in that category.
He might be a barker of a barrow boy but he provides value for the money paid over but he does operate in the bargain basement level IMO on the football side of things.
But who knows? He will get fed-up with amassing money at some point and perhaps he sees Rangers as something to keep him occupied in semi-retirement.
Even the pacified support will probably whet his appetite for a barney. And the world famous Albion is handy for parking the tanks in case some heavt artillery is required. It could even be turned into a military theme park.
I would be happy to pay admission to watch his XXXXL shirts tackle the assault course 😆 Yip under Ashley Rangers will be a fitter leaner place 😈
scapaflow says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:38 am
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:32 am
I still think the rules need to be changed to stop Footballing Businesses describing themselves as clubs, unless they actually are clubs.
If the authorities, in reality the footballing businesses, want Scottish Football to be a franchise system, they should bloody well come out and say so, and explain how it would work, and how it would be better.
======================================================
I think you raise an interesting point in that possibly Ashley’s long-term aim is to see a UK-wide franchise system.
That, at least, would make some sense of Sarver’s arrival from Planet Pluto 😉
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:10 pm
Its a possibility, I’ve been wondering about for a while.
Not sure its a good solution, but, on the other hand, I don’t think the NFL would tolerate the bullsh!t from Edmiston Drive for a New York minute
ecobhoy says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:04 pm
He will destroy their cosy club culture and secret dealings – and could prove to be the much-needed modernising spark that Scottish Football is crying out for.
===================================================================
If Mike has the inclination to fight, even if just for a bit of entertainment, he certainly has the resources,
I think a couple of writs from him would put the fear of God into the SFA, SPFL etc. “You want to throw your poxy little rule book at me, I’ll throw the whole bloody legal system back at you – come and have a go . . . ”
Eric Hoffer
You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses to frighten you.
Repaid the bus conductor, how.
Rob Peter and pay Paul.?
How much longer can this farce be allowed to continue.?
Nell Doncaster says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:25 pm
Until about 5 minutes after people run out of the capacity to give soft loans, and/or RIFC run out of things to put in the pawnshop window.
mcfc says:
January 8, 2015 at 11:05 am
2 0 Rate This
GoosyGoosy says:
January 8, 2015 at 10:24 am
============================================================
GG – very good summary – and of course Ashley needs a surrogate because the SFA have blocked him buying more shares and having any influence (titter ye not!)
Would it be boring and naive to ask who controls Blue Pitch and Margarita – yes – thought so – but with combined 8.5% of shares they are the swing-voters in this whole affair.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
They may not be the only swing voters
I reckon there is another big Spiv in the background
Here’s why
“From a contradiction you can deduce everything” ( Alan Turing)
The IPO prospectus described 46.3% of holdings as “acquisition shares” meaning shares that belonged to Sevco Scotland i.e. Green Consortium investors. These shares were not included in the offer meaning the fund raising came from the Pre-IPO placing of £5.575m (15.585 shares at an average sp of 35p) and the public offer of the balance at 70p
https://scotslawthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rifc-prospectus.pdf
But
When you add up the significant “acquisition investors” who were obliged to be named since they held over 3%…..
The total is only 38.13%
This means the Green consortium contained investors totalling 8.17% of RIFC whose name was never disclosed because their holding was under 3%
So what you might say there could be hundreds of small investors making up this 8.13%
Not so
We are dealing with Spivs. People with no ethics. People who exploit the law to make money
Or put another way
Did Charles Green go round dozens and dozens of Spivs begging them to find OPM to invest in a great scam Letting the world of spivvery know he was onto a great scam with his partner?
Nope
He limited his contacts to some really good Spivs he could rely on but not trust. It makes no sense otherwise
So
IMO
My money would be on the assumption that there were 3 Green consortium investors under 3% whose holding added up to 8.13%.People who were not named as the held under 3%
And
These investors were nominees for a single Mr Big Investor who didn’t even want the name of his Nominees to be published so he split his investment 3 ways.
Why the secrecy?
Because Mr Big wanted to stay out of the limelight
If these assumptions are correct they beg the question
Who is Mr Big?
And
Why did he want his name kept out of the limelight?
Well here’s one reason
Mr Big wasn’t concerning himself with the here and now of the IPO apart from the legality of the SEvco5088/Sevco Scotland switcheroo
He was thinking long term
He figured the Institutions would bail out sooner or later
He knew the Spivs would only be around for the short term. That’s how they work
But he was different .He had an eye on the longer term
Because he had a vested interest in the longer term
If so
Who is the mystery member of the Green consortium?
Bawsman says:
January 8, 2015 at 9:07 am
_________________________________________________
I make no claim to be an expert but I think there is more to this case than meets the eye. My initial reaction was similar in that offenders have to be considered to be rehabilitated.
From my (limited) reading of a couple of pieces though, Mr Evans’ point blank refusal to admit to having done anything wrong whilst admitting to having sex with a young woman, incapacitated through drink or drugs, and his refusal to speak out against the online abuse the victim has suffered does not paint him in a good light.
Angela Haggerty has written a piece for Bella Caledonia concerning the issue.
Been trying to make sense of this latest Sarver offer (we can ignore the old one and what it meant) and have come up with the following, which is more than likely mince (but the best quality Scotch beef mince, not lamb 🙄 )
Sarver is offering £20m for, presumably 100m New Shares. An EGM will have to be called to approve the disapplication of the prior rights thingy, and will require a 75% acceptance. If approved a separate offer of 20p per share will be made to buy the currently issued shares. That’s what I read into the offer itself.
In the meantime, presumably if the board back the offer, Sarver will lend the company £6.5m to be paid back within 90 days from the Placing monies, this seems to be an integral part of the offer. I’d expect that, by the time the Placing monies are available the £6.5m will be all but gone.
Ashley will have had his loans repaid, and will get 20p per share and will, from his sojourn at Ibrox, have made a profit of… well nowt, probably a loss, though he will still have his onerous contracts, but he’d probably still have had them without his more ‘hands on’ involvement in RIFC/TRFC. King and his bear friends will also make a profit of…nowt, though have maybe upped their bear-cred, but they surely want more than just credibility, they want to ‘be Rangers’ (at least King does).
So, still assuming Sarver is working on his own, what happens if things proceed, an EGM is called, and Sarver lends the club £6.5m?
An EGM, quite expensive for a business in RIFC’s state, is called and the votes are counted. If the motion is carried, it’s full steam ahead and TRFC sails on. If, on the other hand, the motion fails, and I’d expect that’s quite a possibility, then the cost of the EGM will be the least of TRFC/RIFC’s worries as Ashley and sundry other creditors (if they are lucky) will have been paid (if for no other reason than to keep the show on the road) but Sarver will now be owed £6.5m!
A deeper hole than ever, and a good excuse for Ashley, or whoever, to take the club into administration or even (whisper it) liquidation.
If I am in any way close to correct, then it’s going to be a very difficult call for King and the 3 bears who may find themselves voting alongside Ashley and the board to keep their personal dreams alive, and that would only strengthen Ashley’s position and make them as ‘guilty’ as him if insolvency does follow!
I can see this scenario, or something similar, being a reasonable excuse, ie, the board can’t proceed on the assumption the disapplication will be passed – as it leaves the company open to an even greater disaster, to again block Sarver’s bid!
Allyjambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:42 pm
RIFC board are allegedly consulting the major shareholders, I would be truly astonished if Lofty and the boys say yes, their No would kill the offer stone dead
GoosyGoosy says: January 8, 2015 at 12:41 pm
===============================
I believe some of the mysterious investors are managed under the Beaufort Securities banner which forms part of the Easdale proxy.
From 21/11/13: Beaufort also purchased 3,040,000 Ordinary Shares on behalf of unnamed clients (each of whom hold Ordinary Shares equal to less than 3% of the issued share capital of the Company) and has assigned the voting rights over those Ordinary Shares to Alexander Easdale.
From 09/12/13: The Company announces that it was notified on 9 December, by Beaufort Securities (“Beaufort”), an FCA registered company, that further voting rights on 2,036,337 Ordinary Shares of 1p each in the Company (“Shares”) held by its clients had been assigned to Alexander Easdale.
The Easdale Proxy currently amounts to 17,062,365 (20.94%)
The only ones we know about are:
BPH – 4,426,485 5.43%
Margarita – 2,600,000 3.19%
Beaufort – 5,076,337 7.80% (may be higher after Sep 2014 share offer)
That leaves 5M of the proxy unaccounted for.
GoosyGoosy says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:41 pm
Who is the mystery member of the Green consortium?
========================================================
GG – So
We are looking at someone with access to considerable resources, their own or OPM
We are looking for someone with spiv credentials and know how
We are looking for someone with a long term interest in Rangers (The, 3rd etc) for emotional or financial reasons.
We’re looking for someone who may not be visible as a player in the day to day machinations.
“How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”
To me, what remains:
DM (S) – somewhat hampered by MIH financial mess – but investment needed smaller than his EBT.
CW – Ticketus debt and legal proceeding may have caused him to bail out by now . A good plan scuppered by AMcC – may have sold on his interest
CG – has proved a very effective spiv with easy access to OPM
DK – tied up in other things until recently, no stranger to the edges of legality and almost certainly has some rainy day cash stashed on a sunny islands.
Or some alphabetti spaghetti combination of the above.
Could it possibly be so Holmes ?
ghirl1888 says:
January 8, 2015 at 4:06 am
The rules were changed to ‘accommodate’ a “same or different member”.
http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__therulesofthescottishprofessionalfootballleagueasat11september2014_1411980004.pdf
“E5 Where a Club, whether owned and operated by the same or a different Member, suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event which results in a deduction of points in terms of these Rules and within 5 years of the date of such Insolvency Event suffers or is subject to a further Insolvency Event which is not part of the same Insolvency Process as the Insolvency Event then suffered, the points deduction applicable in terms of Rules E1 in respect of that second or further Insolvency Event, shall be 25 points with the 15 points in Rules E2 and E3 being 25 Points.”
easyJambo says:
January 8, 2015 at 12:55 pm
,,,,,,,,,,
From 21/11/13: Beaufort also purchased 3,040,000 Ordinary Shares on behalf of unnamed clients (each of whom hold Ordinary Shares equal to less than 3% of the issued share capital of the Company) and has assigned the voting rights over those Ordinary Shares to Alexander Easdale.
,,,,,,,,
My post refers to the aggregate of sub 3% Investors in the Green Consortium These investors had their investment converted into TRFC shares some time after TRFC got the assets from D&P in June 2012 This holding was diluted by the IPO in Dec 2012 and accounts for 12.3% of TRFC which was projected to be diluted down to 8.13% in the prospectus