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.
21000 tickets have arrived down ibrox way for the league cup semi final …payment to be taken on monday 12 th jan , those funds will help them out or are they waiting on that cash before pulling the plug ..funnily enough celtic said today they had yet to receive their allocation!!
easyJambo says:
January 9, 2015 at 5:43 pm
‘.Worthington have just issued an update on their position indicating that the FCA has ruled their refinancing proposals to be a “reverse takeover” so it will be a few months before they are back in a fully operational state (and capable to progressing their claim against TRFC?)’
——–
I would imagine that their ‘legal persona’ is still alive and well, and free to pursue its legal battles,suspension of share trading notwithstanding.
But I’ve emailed them to seek confirmation! 😀
John Clark says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:27 pm
With what John? Counsel have this annoying habit of demanding lots and lots of real beer tokens for their work, not toy town equity
4424me says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:19 pm
1 0 Rate This
21000 tickets have arrived down ibrox way for the league cup semi final …payment to be taken on monday 12 th jan , those funds will help them out or are they waiting on that cash before pulling the plug ..funnily enough celtic said today they had yet to receive their allocation!!
RANGERS can confirm today that it is in receipt of the 21,000 tickets allocated for the upcoming Scottish League Cup semi final with Celtic.
In conjunction with the Rangers Fans Board, the following ticket sales processes have been agreed.
Season ticket holders will receive 83% of tickets.
Rangers Supporters Clubs will receive 10% of the tickets
The remaining 7% will be utilised by the Club
Season Ticket holder sale
All season ticket holders enrolled in the Continuous Credit Card Scheme for Semi Finals and Finals will be guaranteed a ticket. The payment will be taken from Monday 12 January.
A priority sale will commence at 9am on Tuesday 13 January for season ticket holders who have purchased a full price season ticket. The sale will be strictly 1 ticket per season ticket and a maximum of 2 per transaction.
Season ticket holders who have purchased a three quarter or half price season ticket may have the opportunity to purchase a ticket on completion of the full price season ticket holder sale. The date for this will be confirmed in due course. (All subject to availability)
Rangers Supporters Clubs.
Tickets allocated to Supporters Clubs should only be used by season ticket holder club members who have not been successful in purchasing a ticket in the priority sale or the continuous credit card scheme allocation.
Special Match applications should be returned by 5pm on Monday 12 January. Tickets will be processed on Wednesday 14 January and available for collection on Monday 19 January
4424me says: January 9, 2015 at 7:19 pm
————————-
The SPFL may take a dim view of those monies being spent.
According to the rules of the competition, 20% of the amount goes to the host club (QP/SFA), 5% goes as a levy to the SPFL, the net proceeds are then pooled with those from the other semi final and divided equally between the four clubs. VAT is also payable on the tickets.
John Clark says:
January 9, 2015 at 4:06 pm
20
0
Rate This
Incognito Leverage
______________________________________________
Imagine a scenario like this:
Resin’s bike minders looks after people’s bike’s.
John Clarke agrees to pay Resin 50p to mind his shiny new £200 bike.
John’s bike does not become Resin’s asset in accounting terms because he does not derive the benefit of using it.
John owes resin 50p. This become’s a debt in John’s accounts, and a 50p asset appears in resin’s accounts. All is proper.
Resin has an ‘off book’ debt to John of 1x £100 bike and 1 ‘off book’ asset of 1 £100 bike. All is proper.
In the normal course of events John gets his bike back and Resin gets his 50p minding fee.
But if Bully boy Green comes along, offers Resin some magic beans in exchange for a wee shot of John’s bike, then disappears over the horizon with it never to be seen again, oops: Resin suddenly owes John £100 from out of nowhere!
Doh!
93% of 21000 tickets at £35 = £683,550 hope the sfa have some mechanism in place to get the cash
4424me says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:19 pm
‘….funnily enough celtic said today they had yet to receive their allocation!!’
———
Oh, how my heart would sing if Celtic, knowing the contempt their support feels for anything connected with acknowledging the legitimacy of TRFC, had dismissed the idea of taking any tickets whatsoever!
I know that that that not likely to be the case. But I just hope masses of Celtic fans decide that they will have something better to do on that match day than support the continuation of the Big Lie.
4424me says: January 9, 2015 at 7:35 pm
————————-
Tickets are priced at Adults £30 / £25. Prices for the Family Section are Adults £25 and Juniors £10.
As everyone else is offering £6.5m could it be Uncle Mike who is doing the asking? 😛
John Clark says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:39 pm
But I just hope masses of Celtic fans decide that they will have something better to do on that match day than support the continuation of the Big Lie.
=========================================================
I have no doubt the Celtic allocation will be well oversubscribed. I won’t be going myself but plenty of others will. I will watch it on the telly though.
John Clark says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:27 pm
3
0
Rate This
easyJambo says:
January 9, 2015 at 5:43 pm
‘.Worthington have just issued an update on their position indicating that the FCA has ruled their refinancing proposals to be a “reverse takeover” so it will be a few months before they are back in a fully operational state (and capable to progressing their claim against TRFC?)’
——–
I would imagine that their ‘legal persona’ is still alive and well, and free to pursue its legal battles,suspension of share trading notwithstanding.
But I’ve emailed them to seek confirmation! 😀
————————————————-
Canny see it John.
However all it does is delays the uncertainty until such times as they can nail the letter to the door sometime in the future.
arctophobicly yours Ianagain
ulyanova says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:16 pm
12 0 Rate This
Off topic but may be of interest.
Today I learned a new word. In addition to lurking on here I also attempt to complete the Guardian cryptic crossword online.
The clue to 22across was ‘Operatic production interrupted at intervals by hard left teddy bear fan’.
The answer is ‘Arctophile’.
The dictionary definition is someone who has a fondness for teddy bears. Thus we would have the word ‘arctophilia’ which may be loosely defined as rangersitis.
And again this site may be felt by some to be arctophobic.
I am not bigging myself up here. The online Guardian crossword has a cheat button.
———-
Nice OT diversion. Needed a bit of etymology (it’s alll Greek to me) to see the connection to bears. I actually misspelt it and ended up with actophile which I was well chuffed with as I can now call myself something of an actophile 🙂
Lots of chat on SSB about Lee Wallace going ‘for money that could save the club’. Where’s that coming from? Been no a mention of anyone else oot the door after MacLeod. More whistling in the dark?
Resin_lab_dog says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:35 pm
‘.. Resin suddenly owes John £100 from out of nowhere!’
———
Eh,Resin your pedagogic skills are greatly to be admired and I understand the lesson, thank you.:smile:
neepheid says:
January 9, 2015 at 7:06 pm
16 0
Rate This
…Surely, but surely the SFA/SPFL must act now.
================================================
And so, they have. :irony:
Livingston Football Club face expulsion from the Scottish game if their owner Neil Rankine fails to dispose of his dual interest in both the West Lothian side and East Fife Football Club.
Livi have been found guilty of breaching Scottish FA rules over Rankine’s involvement with both teams.
Livingston have until April for Neil Rankine to dispose of his shares. Failure to do so could mean club banned from game
Danish Pastry says:
January 9, 2015 at 8:03 pm
Sorry DP, couldn’t resist, enjoy
http://www.lexicolatry.com/2013/02/arctophile.html
nickmcguinness says:
January 9, 2015 at 6:35 pm
0 0 Rate This
GoosyGoosy:
Sevco 5088 did receive the assets from D & P and did transfer them to Sevco Scotland. There is hard evidence to this transaction that will stand up in court. But the paper work was “lost” at the time leading to wrongful registration of Sevco Scotland as owners of the assets and wrong accounts thereafter.
________________________________________________
How sure are you of the above?
,,,,,,,,,,
It’s an opinion that fits the known facts with a bit of deduction thrown in
Here’s an example
You are reporting the school Sports Day for the local rag which is read by the parents
Political correctness demands that every child in a 5 kid race is deemed to “win”
Would you name the runners?
If so
Would you name them in order of finish?
Would you name them in random order?
Would you name them in alphabetical order?
Most people would name them in alphabetical order
Why?
To demonstrate that the result wasn`t important
And that’s often a reason for using alphabetical order.
But in business speak it’s often used to emphasise , bury or hide relationships
Its rarely used for no reason
So
When Sarver is “asked” on this site and other sites whether he is in league with Ashley, his PR man answers for him
He doesn’t simply say “Sarver has never spoke to Mr Ashley”
He says “Mr Sarver has never met or spoken to Mike Ashley, Sandy Easedale or James Easedale He has never met or spoken to Charles Green or Craig Whyte. He is not working with, acting for, or alongside any of these individuals.”
i.e.
The PR man answers a question he wasn’t asked
And
He attempts to hide the TRFC takeover significance of being in contact with Ashley by redefining the question as a general enquiry about knowing the Ibrox Spivs
And
He names the Spivs in alphabetical order This demonstrates that he thought about the sequence in which these names should be written and whether anything was being given away by a particular sequence. He concluded that alphabetical order fitted a general question about Ibrox Spivs
Then
He repeats the message the following day and slightly rephrases it to separate the names in order of their chronological involvement in TRFC
“To be very clear, Mr Sarver has never met or spoken to Mike Ashley, Sandy Easedale or James Easedale.“
“And for the complete avoidance of doubt, he has never met or spoken to Charles Green or Craig Whyte.”
IMO
This was an attempt to explain why the first response was in alphabetical order without actually saying so
Conclusion?
If someone is asked a question with a Yes /No answer , deliberately tries to confuse the answer, then frets about the response his answer generated
He is lying
And if he is lying
Carver is an Ashley puppet doing what Ashley wants
ecobhoy says: January 9, 2015 at 5:47 pm
—————————
Both the Lease and the security appear to have been transferred, It is referenced in the 2014 accounts in Note 18, although the name of the Lessor is not given.
“The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets.
A standard fixed security has been granted over these assets.”
The amount is reasonably consistent with Close’s Oldco position as the amount due went down from 1.647M to 953K between 2013 and 2014. Looking at the due dates and amounts outstanding it seems that the Lease will be paid off in 3Q of 2016.
There seems to be a set of SFA rules that apply to Livingston.
For transgressing those rules, punishment is swift and pretty much unforgiving.
Some may find the censure harsh, others may find it fair, still others may say that it should be discussed further.
Whatever, the SFA have been decisive, which is what you would expect from a governing body.
On the other hand, there seems to be a set of SFA rules that apply to a club called Sevco (or whatever their “nom de jour”) and that club only.
All of us know why – it’s the “secret de Polichinelle”.
Excuse my French…
Therein lies the reason that the SFA is slowly strangling the game in Scotland.
Clear out the blazers at Hampden, and watch out national sport thrive!!!
If Goosy is correct then perhaps Hector should pay a visit to Ibrox.
If Sevco Scotland have to pay Sevco 5088 or Whyte through the back door has the money been declared at the other end or is it to be found in an offshore nestegg.
I do not believe that an American Banker can make an offer blind without having done due diligence.
He would stand a better chance at the Casino.
Nothing makes sense and I sincerely hope it all goes belly up before Celtic have to play them.
For me it would avoid the trouble normally associated with that fixture.
So burger bars and Wifi the true demise of a “giant of Scottish fitba”.
Fitting.
And all with added 20% on top as the top club deserves.
I’m guessing the Wifi still doesn’t work as the code will be locked by the unhappy supplier
Thought I would post this as it may be groundhog day soon.
Apologies if it has been recently posted.
https://scotslawthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/duff-phelps-report-july-2012.pdf
First post for ages.
Wasn’t there supposed to be a court case about the Rangers debacle starting this month?
GoosyGoosy says:
January 9, 2015 at 8:21 pm
‘……The PR man answers a question he wasn’t asked.’
———–
A trick disastrously attempted in another context by Mr Doncaster last week!
Goosy
” to be very clear” ranks with “So” in the first sentence of a response from any consultant/PR/Media/Marketing dude as
!!HELLO IM LYING TO YOU PLEASE DONT NOTICE!!
In the words of the Sherriff o Calton Creek.
They’re down in the Dry Gulch no way oot lets git down there.
Fascinating edition of Clyde SSB (I know)
Keevins telling every RFC supporting caller that their club is doomed without £6.5 million on Monday.
The jig may be nearly up.
GoosyGoosy says:
January 9, 2015 at 8:21 pm
nickmcguinness says:
January 9, 2015 at 6:35 pm
GoosyGoosy:
Sevco 5088 did receive the assets from D & P and did transfer them to Sevco Scotland. There is hard evidence to this transaction that will stand up in court. But the paper work was “lost” at the time leading to wrongful registration of Sevco Scotland as owners of the assets and wrong accounts thereafter.
________________________________________________
How sure are you of the above?
————————————–
@Goosy Goosy – I haven’t included your latest reply to @nickmcguinness as I genuinely can’t see that it has any connection to your original statement and the points raised by @nickmcguinness.
I had been hoping your response might answer some of the many issues I have tried to resolve vis-a-vis Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland which is a subject I have been deeply interested in since May/June 2012.
In particular your mention that ‘hard evidence’ exists that will stand up in court that Sevco 5088 received the assets from D&P and transferred them to Sevco Scotland is the Holy Grail that many have searched for without success.
Just so I am clear when you say that hard evidence exists do you really mean that you think it exists rather than that you can prove it exists?
There’s obviously an important distinction as I’m sure you’ll appreciate.
My understanding is that the £5.5 million to buy the Rangers assets from D&P was raised by the small original band of consortium investors who agreed to make that money available to Green with the stipulation that Sevco 5088 was to be the acquisition vehicle to purchase the assets from from D&P. They each received documentation to this effect and, of course, Sevco 5088 paid an exclusivity fee to be able to purchase the assets.
However – according to the TRFCL Board Minute for 31 October 2012 and other documentation – the actual purchasing vehicle was Sevco Scotland. The Board Minute I refer to states that directors of Sevco 5088 spoke to the original investors who apparently verbally agreed that the acquisition vehicle be switched from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland and that their investment be similarly switched.
Obviously there are various theories about why the switch was made but it seems obvious the end result cut Whyte out of the picture.
I wrote a detailed piece on this back in September 2013 at: http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/mystery-directors-and-the-rangers-sevco-5088-switcheroo-by-ecojon/
If you have any information that I could use to amplify or correct that piece I would love to hear it.
Nice one @scapa. Nice bit here:
Sounds like a line from SSB 🙂
Btw, I’m more of an actophile (without the ‘r’)
Danish Pastry says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:13 pm
Partial to a quiet beach myself, (and yes I had to look it up too)
For some reason I can’t seem to access SSB podcast tonight ❓ 😉
Anyone got a link?
James Doleman says:
Fascinating edition of Clyde SSB (I know)
Keevins telling every RFC supporting caller that their club is doomed without £6.5 million on Monday.
The jig may be nearly up.
==================================
Well if Keevins is saying the same then the PR machine has fed the truth for once.
Hang on. Did I say that?
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
————————-
There is also the fact that the heritable properties were transferred by way of a Disposition by the joint administrators of RFC PLC direct to Sevco Scotland. There was no third party to this deed. No Sevco 5088.
Registration of those heritable properties proceeded on this deed. They have been in the name of Sevco Scotland since then.
While a Court can reduce a Disposition, I don’t see what evidence has been produced at this point which allow such a course of action.
Unless the claim is that there is another Disposition, similar in its terms, but in favour of Sevco 5088 and yet another Disposition by said Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland and this is the paperwork which was “lost”.
Remember folks there was the “novation”
Sorry, I should have added to “They have been in the name of Sevco Scotland since then” – “other than the change of name from Sevco Scotland Limited to the Rangers Football Club Limited”
Or alternatively the purveyor of said 6.5m which no one is entirely sure what it’s for but it is spoken for, honest, will be immediately bestowed with greatness but arrive with no real expectation of war chests since after all, they’ve already put in 6.5m haven’t they? Brogue wearers should line up at the foot of the marble stairs. Actually having 6.5m? Optional (depends on the brogues).
Cynical, moi?
easyJambo says:
January 9, 2015 at 8:23 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 5:47 pm
—————————
Both the Lease and the security appear to have been transferred, It is referenced in the 2014 accounts in Note 18, although the name of the Lessor is not given.
“The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets. A standard fixed security has been granted over these assets.”
The amount is reasonably consistent with Close’s Oldco position as the amount due went down from 1.647M to 953K between 2013 and 2014. Looking at the due dates and amounts outstanding it seems that the Lease will be paid off in 3Q of 2016.
==============================================================
I have always wondered why this lease wasn’t cleared when they were flush with money after the IPO.
There are various reports that the catering revamp cost £3 million and that Azure put-up £1 million with Rangers putting-up £2 million financed by Close Leasing who was given a security that guaranteed that future Catering Revenues from Azure to the Club would pay the money financed.
In 2010 Azure – which started life as a Murray Group Company – renewed its Ibrox catering contract for 9 years and also picked-up the cleaning contract in a £35 million deal. As far as I can make out that at the same time there was a Murray Park deal for 5 years although I don’t know if that is included in the £35 million figure.
However it means that the Murray Park deal could end in 2015 if not renewed and the old press reports are correct.
I had wondered whether Imran was blowing hot air when he said he got Azure to cough-up another £7 million and I still wonder if he was or not. And what does he mean that he got them to cut their charges or got them to pay more rent for the Ibrox food kiosks.
I now wonder what kind of deal they have with Rangers – is it a rental for the various kiosk and hospitality areas plus a percentage of their sales with them employing and paying catering staff?
It then makes me look at the £35 million contract figure apparently paid by Rangers and I can’t figure out what the club gets for that payment.
Meanwhile you have a fans favourite notorious for his deep pockets and short arms who coincidentally had exactly 6.5m to invest but then had to spend some cash to keep his place at the table. But that’s ok, I’m this was a separate 6.5m. And it’s coming, absolutely. It’s just it’s then going again. To who knows where.
Me definitely cynical! And disbelieving.
The Glen says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:34 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
Unless the claim is that there is another Disposition, similar in its terms, but in favour of Sevco 5088 and yet another Disposition by said Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland and this is the paperwork which was “lost”.
================================================================
I have always believed that to be the case although have no proof. It’s the only way I can think that Whyte would have been conned the way he seems to have been.
If you all remember “George” from Rangers rumours. The guy who printed his own flyers started (I guess) the SOS thing.
He was adamant that Edmiston house deals attached onerous contracts and in his parlance the building was unusable.
Others included definitely Catering, security, groundwork.
Some were via (then) Directors wives companies and so on.
Unfortunately RR doesn’t seem to have an archive but I’m sure I replicated some of it on here from time to time.
Seems he was correct.
Thinking about amounts close to £6.5 millions which appear to be cropping-up all over the place 😆
What about the statements made by D&P about the £24.4 million ST sales to Ticketus to fund CW’s takeover. They said that £18 million had been taken to pay-off the Lloyds debt.
That leaves £6.4 million 😆
James Doleman says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
Keevins telling every RFC supporting caller that their club is doomed without £6.5 million on Monday. The jig may be nearly up.
==========================================================
Yea but Keevins’ ban from Parkhead won’t be 😀
GoosyGoosy says:
January 9, 2015 at 4:06 pm
EDIT
..”What we are seeing now is the Lessor exercising the option to call up the balance due… The amount outstanding would make the Lessor the largest Creditor this would give him the right to name the Administrator/Liquidator
In a word
It’s got nothing to do with the 4Bs or the Ashley (Sarver) pretend bid
It’s about who is going to be the biggest Creditor in a forthcoming Administration/ liquidation
All speculation of course
But IMO
The end game beckons”
——————————–
Hi Goosy, where does this leave the Ashley loan drip,drip…bang! Theory? He must now be less certain of further secures lending.
Cheers
Brenda where are you?
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:51 pm
—————-
Agreed.
That being the case, then the surely the joint administrators must have been aware that executing 2 legally binding Dispositions, of the same subjects, in favour of 2 different parties, only one of which was presented for Registration, would be best described as “cavalier” in its approach.
Personally, despite the rather bizarre way in which the Administration was handled, I just can’t that kind of risk being taken.
There was no Consideration stated in the Disposition itself, only that the transfer was “in terms of an Agreement” – as to what this agreement was, I have no idea. I presume there answers are contained therein.
Perhaps it was the Novation mentioned by ianagain: January 9, 2015 at 9:36 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:51 pm
0 0 Rate This
The Glen says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:34 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
Unless the claim is that there is another Disposition, similar in its terms, but in favour of Sevco 5088 and yet another Disposition by said Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland and this is the paperwork which was “lost”.
================================================================
I have always believed that to be the case although have no proof. It’s the only way I can think that Whyte would have been conned the way he seems to have been.
=================
There was a long exchange of posts on here some time ago regarding a deed of novation, transferring the benefit of the agreement for the transfer of RFC’s assets from Sevco5088 to Sevco Scotland. Such a deed would have allowed D&P to transfer the properties direct to Sevco Scotland, cutting out Sevco5088 altogether, although clearly the deed of novation would have to have been signed by D&P, Sevco Scotland and Sevco 5088 to be valid.
Whyte could in theory have been duped at the point the deed of novation was signed without his knowledge or consent. Assuming he had any rights, of course.
neepheid says:
January 9, 2015 at 10:14 pm
There was a long exchange of posts on here some time ago regarding a deed of novation
=========================================================
Yea but if my memory serves me correctly that whole discussion was based on a faulty reading of the TRFCL Board Minute of 31 October 2012.
IIRC correctly the novation that was being referred to was in connection with Imran Ahmad and the share deal for the money extended for the Sevco 5088 exclusivity fee.
It wasn’t actually a novation of assets from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland. I could be wrong but I feel sure the whole basis for the discussion was flawed and was eventually accepted to be so at the time.
Gunnerb
If that’s the case then it would probably be worth mike sticking in the 6.5m since it would keep him in control of admin, keep the lights on and the shirts selling, put him well on top of the creditor role and, crucially, he is the only one who could spare 6.5m even if it was just temporarily. They’re not going to vote against it are they? Risk would be a board reversal (of direction) where they accepted and spent the 6.5m and then took in Sarver/whoever on a dilution play. For that reason I think mike would hold out for a security on Ibrox or more likely Murray Park. And that ain’t happening by Monday!
Wasn’t there some doubt about the actual existence of a deed of novation?
‘Define ‘deed”.
Does anyone actually claim to be in possession of it? Maybe the word ‘deed’ was merely used to describe an action not an actual document (long shot, I know, but Charles had a way with words).
Sounds like a pre disposition side letter inter Sevco companies which would of course be rather ironic ‘live by the side letter, die by the side letter” Could such a side letter provide for consideration greater than the 5.5m paid to D&P? It quite plausibly could be -moonbeams as they say.
James Doleman says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
Keevins telling every RFC supporting caller that their club is doomed without £6.5 million on Monday. The jig may be nearly up.
——————————————————-
Once again dear old Hugh is forgetting himself. Surely he should be telling everyone that the latest ‘holding company’ is doomed without £6.5 million on Monday!!!
Remember Hugh, once you start telling a lie you have to keep going.
As for the ‘lost’ paperwork, I find it very hard to believe that such documentation could be ‘lost’ given the accusations flying about concerning RFC. I would have thought that everyone involved would have kept copies galore to ensure their propriety was beyond question.
But alas no!
We have Duff and Phelps, who began their first news conference, insisting their was no link between them and the previous owner. They also had to defend themselves regarding Charles Green’s sudden appearance. I’m also sure that they would have employ one or two lawyers but not one of them thought to make a copy of probably the most important document they created during their tenure.
You would have thought that Charles Green, and his team of lawyers, would also have kept a copy as it was the purpose of the creation of a new company.
You would possibly even think that the SFA may have asked for a copy as proof of purchase otherwise anybody could present themselves at their door saying they were the owners. Jeez, what am I saying why would these buffoons check.
Possibly even Craig Whyte may have had a copy spirited to him from Ihmran’s aunt who knows.
Strange therefore that no one, either individuals, lawyers, or administrators have a copy of that important document. It is almost as if it has been ‘lost’ on purpose. No, it couldn’t be!!!
“keith jackson @tedermeatballs 3 mins3 minutes ago
Ok, this RFC funding package is edging closer to completion. Expect a decision to be made tomorrow and a stock exchange klaxon on monday.”
I would presume that the Administrators must have had sight of some sort of documentation (or deed) that would allow them to, in good faith, transfer the properties direct to Sevco Scotland – you would think that would be, at the very least, some kind of agreement executed by the authorised signatories of Sevco 5088, if the purchase agreement was in their favour.
Someone may have been “duped”.
And not for the first time in this sad, sorry saga.
Re Goosy’s speculation, I cannot envisage any set of circumstances whereby Sevco Scotland has a bona fide deal with Sevco 5088 re the assets.
To do so opens the floodgates for all sorts of legal claims by the institutions left out of pocket from the IPO. Why risk a class action from these serious players? The police are already looking at the takeovers so why risk new charges? Why do something so clearly devious when there are perhaps some equally profitable deals which can be more easily defended?
So I’m going to go the other way and suggest something remarkably simple.
For the avoidance of doubt, I’ve just woke up from a nap 😀 and I’m guessing at everything here, just trying to work out how a large, genuine liability can suddenly appear.
So… let’s go back to just after the IPO. RIFC, under control of the original board, enter into some sort of contract with a spiv supply company of some description (maybe a security firm, or a catering sub contractor, maybe even property maintenance – heck, maybe all of them).
The contract is for the relevant services but the spiv company is a specialist agency/recruitment type operation. It goes along the lines that they’ll source the staff but crucially they’re acting only as introducers; not as employers of the sub-contractors. Once introduced, RIFC contract with and pay the service provider directly.
This is all perfectly normal and the fee usually paid to these type of agencies is 10% to 15% of each employees salary, but for “specialist” recruitment it can be much higher.
Of course, normal agencies will request payment of their fee within the quarter the employees were placed. But what if there was a clause around discounts for settling early or… costly extensions?
What if expensive (but not unreasonable) fees have been growing at Wonga style rates since 2012?
Unlikely isn’t it? This would’ve been spotted by now, right?
But what if the only people aware that agencies were used to place staff have all left? The revolving Board room door certainly means this is possible.
But the 120 day review would have found this contract, right? Well what if the original Board didn’t want them found? What if they’ve been filed in a separate place to the rest of the contacts or even “lost” someplace else in the office? Is it beyond the realms of probability that the administration work in the RIFC offices is amateurish? That throughout administration, liquidation, police raids etc some folders which were deliberately misplaced weren’t noticed?
The Board would’ve concentrated on what they were paying out. If they hadn’t paid anything yet, and didn’t even know about the contract, what could they have done about it?
And now this spiv company have called in the debt, the Board are confused, call around the old directors and some helpful chap has said “Have you tried looking…?”.
And lo, it was found. And they saw that it was good.
Perhaps I’ve been watching this soap opera too long and not even RIFC are this amateurish.
But it kinda fits. It allows CG and his ilk to have built enough of an interest to control the administration process, and kept it under the radar. It’s “legal” and diverts blame to the current directors for not paying just before the discount period expired and it keeps the true beneficiaries hidden behind shell companies. And best of all, they’ve already used the service!
Too simple? Maybe. But the simplest explanation is usually the correct one…
😛
I’m here Jean just waiting and hoping that the good guy wins 😉
ModgePKR
What better and simple way to screw those who have just screwed you, than to ensure disposal of one or two important documents.
After all, with the ever revolving front door, who will know.
Au Revoir.
jean7brodie says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:26 pm
For some reason I can’t seem to access SSB podcast tonight
Anyone got a link?
____________________________________________________________
Fill yer boots…
http://www.clyde1.com/superscoreboard/features/listen-again/
“keith jackson @tedermeatballs 10m10 minutes ago
Park consortium appear to be very positive tonight. Experience says it ain’t over till it’s over. But an answer from the board is imminent.”
Sooner or later, there has to be some sort of permanent resolution, one way or t’other, this hand to mouth stuff, can’t go on forever, not even on Planet Fitba, surely?
scapaflow says: January 9, 2015 at 10:52 pm
“keith jackson @tedermeatballs 3 mins3 minutes ago
Ok, this RFC funding package is edging closer to completion. Expect a decision to be made tomorrow and a stock exchange klaxon on monday.”
======================
He seems to feel that a deal with the Three Bears is close. I wonder if that will include King and leave the merchandising as is. A long term deal might be enough for Ashley if that is the case.
@scapa, Keith J. very upbeat. Park group eager to part with their money. Quite a price they’ll pay for a few seats on the board and the opportunity to spend spend spend. They must be loaded.
easyJambo says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:31 pm
It still leaves them, heading into year 3, facing largely the same issues they started with at the beginning of year 1.
By anyone’s standards that is a fail of epic proportions.
Brenda says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:20 pm
1
0
Rate This
😛
Brenda says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:21 pm
2
0
Rate This
I’m here Jean just waiting and hoping that the good guy wins 😉
========================
Brenda Jean
How are you both? OK?
The gals back
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:04 pm
GoosyGoosy:
Sevco 5088 did receive the assets from D & P and did transfer them to Sevco Scotland. There is hard evidence to this transaction that will stand up in court. But the paper work was “lost” at the time leading to wrongful registration of Sevco Scotland as owners of the assets and wrong accounts thereafter.
Just so I am clear when you say that hard evidence exists do you really mean that you think it exists rather than that you can prove it exists?
…………
Hi ecobhoy
Although my post is written assertively
I make it clear at the beginning that it is a speculative joining of the dots and also at the end that it is “all speculation of course”
I would need to be Charles Green to prove that the above transaction happened (or didn’t happen) the way I described it.
When I say “There is hard evidence to this transaction that will stand up in court”. I mean there is one or more people in this saga who have a vested interest in proving the switcheroo
I am not Charles Green and have never been involved in any of these shenanigans
I am joining dots with arguments that hang together when you consider the facts in the public domain and the motivations of those involved
I did think about writing an extensive explanation of how these arguments hang together based on information in the public domain and the known behaviour of Spivs
However it was going to be an epic . So I quickly gave up
@nickmcguinness asked a similar question to you and I responded by trying to explain how my thought process worked. I thought this might help others who like me are trying to join the dots
In hindsight perhaps I should simply have referred to my comments above
Hope this helps
Nell Doncaster says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:22 pm
0 0 Rate This
ModgePKR
What better and simple way to screw those who have just screwed you, than to ensure disposal of one or two important documents.
After all, with the ever revolving front door, who will know.
Au Revoir.
========================================
To do so would be a criminal offence. I can’t see the current directors risking time inside to protect this entity. If the fees/debt is legally valid they’ll pay it or sink the company before they break the law.
It’s also completely pointless to do so as the spiv company would have copies. Any accusations of fraud are easily disproved as CG or other RIFC signatory at the time simply has to say it’s genuine.
RIFC could maybe challenge the fees under the unfair contract terms legislation but given the panic to raise funds they seem willing to find the cash to pay it…
Neepheid
Whyte could in theory have been duped at the point the deed of novation was signed without his knowledge or consent. Assuming he had any rights, of course.
===============================
Which of course his whole defence or indeed attack will be I believe will correctly be based on.
Meantime the clock ticks and no one owns the stadium.
And the band played on………………………….
Only managed to skim over the last few days, but would defer to any Bampot with audit experience who could perhaps clarify…
We’ve had the GBP2.5M funding facility which disappeared, the Stockbridge ‘unknown’ share option deal, and now Phil mentioning significant off balance sheet items…
Where the hell does this leave the auditors Deloittes ?
How can they provide an opinion when there must be real concern that they don’t have access to all the financial information – and neither do the current Board members ?
Apparently the auditors were deeply unimpressed with the GBP2.5M funding facility disappearing into the ether, so would/should they walk away/run away ASAP ?
Or do they need the fees that badly ?
So it now Saturday.
Whats happening on Monday?
Anyone got any plans?
ianagain says:
January 10, 2015 at 12:18 am
Dunno, it could all be an evil plot by keyboard manufactures, anticipating the need for replacements – worn out F5 keys 😉
StevieBC
Auditors with their annual accounts have a lot in common with J k Rowling, they both write works of fiction, and make a mint from doing so
peterjung says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:26 pm
jean7brodie says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:26 pm
For some reason I can’t seem to access SSB podcast tonight
Anyone got a link?
____________________________________________________________
Fill yer boots…
http://www.clyde1.com/superscoreboard/features/listen-again/
__________________________________________________________________________________
Correction:
Apologies Jean… just noticed Friday nights podcast has not been posted – mixed my dates up…
Danish Pastry says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:36 pm
@scapa, Keith J. very upbeat. Park group eager to part with their money. Quite a price they’ll pay for a few seats on the board and the opportunity to spend spend spend. They must be loaded.
——————————————–
Absolutely super. Climb aboard chaps.
Scotland’s world class bus company climbs aboard err the other one,
See Scotland See busses.
Keith Jackson
Funding package (what’s that in reality). Unless its cash nothing.
Everyone can make a moonbeam.
Get real.
Get a pencil.
@ModgePKR says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:43 pm
Nell Doncaster says:
January 9, 2015 at 11:22 pm
0 0 Rate This
ModgePKR
What better and simple way to screw those who have just screwed you, than to ensure disposal of one or two important documents.
After all, with the ever revolving front door, who will know.
======================
Anyone following events at Ibrox with the benefit of a little bit of evidence could not help but notice a consistent modus operandi at play.
For at least 10 years from 2000 to 2010 side letters that were part of contracts with a large number of players were kept from the SFA.
In 2005 when HMRC asked Rangers if they held side letters for De Boer and Flo their existence was denied.
In 2011 it is likely, on the basis of a leopard not changing its spots, that evidence of a tax bill that showed tax overdue to HMRC was not provided to SFA or UEFA.
In April 2012 when asked by the SPL to provide details of any ebts and documentation relating to them going back to July 1998, documents dated Sep 99, Aug 2000 and Feb 2011 were not supplied.
Anyone see a pattern here? Not our footballing authority by the looks of it, in fact chances are they applied Nelson’s eye.
How there can be a case to allow such an evasive organisation back into Scottish football without recognition of their modus operandi and introduction of steps to counter it, I just don’t know.
Where ignorance is bliss….
ianagain says:
January 10, 2015 at 12:18 am
“Whats happening on Monday? Anyone got any plans?”
——————————
I’m considering making some popcorn 😯
Remind me (apologies I am totally lost again) what are the 3 bears offering?? And has D.C.K. paid up? And how did this bill get missed?? And who’s paying the wages this month? And And And 😕
ecobhoy says:
January 9, 2015 at 9:45 pm
10
0
Rate This
______________________________________________
Thinking about what we know about the structure of the MASH deal.
CG could have set up any number of deals cash loaded, with contract terms that would pay suppliers at a future date: e.g. minimum guaranteed shirt sales at a pre agreed price in exchange for upfront wonga for the franchise.
Extend this to other suppliers: Pies, hospitality and catering, you name it.
Charles clears off with bunce, throwing a bagful of fivers over his shoulder for the bluenoses to chase after in the way of player contractsm ally wages etc.
Maybe they are being hit with the bills for unsold pies etc. now?
Ashley may have sensed the opportunity of a d4e swap in a distressed but otherwise viable business, which would be an opportune moment to up his investment cheaply.
But if his contracts survive liquidation of TRFC/RIFC, then he is sitting pretty whatever the case.
Wouldn’t surpise me if BPH and margareta have their fingers in ‘Ibrox pies’, as well as controlling the company.
In which case the endgame is afoot in the sense that the last bit of bears milk is being extracted from those with an emotional attachment over those who are happy to explore more beneficial land use options on Edmiston drive.
If the pony up, a hamstrung club is theirs.
Otherwise… car park.