We spend an inordinate amount of time on this blog arguing about what the re-emergent Rangers should be called. It is a rather circular debate with no way of finding any consensus. The dispute between Rangers (“The Rangerists”) or The Rangers or Sevco (“The Sevconians”) and its claim to be the club that was formed in the 19th century is spurious. Whichever way you look at it, the continuity of the “brand” is undeniable and as long those who wish to keep buying that package are satisfied that the wrapping is authentic – where’s the harm?
The red herring in the argument is that “history” is important. To the average football fan, it is nothing of the kind. As a Celtic fan myself, and a bit of a student of the history of the club, I am constantly dismayed by the Thousand Yard Stare I get from your average Celtic fan who is confronted with the names of people who contributed significantly to the club’s identity. Key figures like Sandy McMahon, Jimmy Delaney, Jimmy McGrory and (God help us) John Thomson rarely elicit recognition.
Modern football fans who live in the instant gratification society of the the WWW and mobile communications may pay lip service to their clubs’ history, but that’s not what gives the modern football fan wears as his badge of honour. That is a commodity often erroneously confused with history – the bragging rights associated with the trophy haul.
The ability to claim that “we have more titles than you” is far more valuable to a supporter than which 19th century attacking centre-back won the Scottish Cup with a last minute header; and the value of said cup wins is heavily weighted in favour of the most recent (save for the honourable exception of the European successes).
The maintenance of that illusion of superiority is crucial if Rangers fans are to believe that their club is still Rangers. Perhaps in time they may even come to fully believe it themselves, but the cataract of column inches devoted to propagating that myth, both from the MSM and from information outlets controlled by Charles Green’s organisation, betrays a lack of total belief by the chief Bear-existentialists. Protesting too much may not be subtle, but that never put off your average fitba’ man either.
The upshot though is this. There is a belief – or at least a hope – amongst Rangerists that the continuity argument holds. They will call the new club Rangers. Fans of other clubs who make up the vast majority of the Sevconian tendency, believe nothing of the kind. They will call it something else.
Many will remind Rangerists that the old club died, and this is factually correct (or at least will be very soon). Rangerists will counter that the Rangers ethos lives on at Ibrox, and despite the worrying overtones (for some) contained in that statement, that is also factually correct.
Rangerists will also point out, as Rangers fans on this blog already have, that the SPL bent over backwards to assist the continuity of the club in order to minimise the financial consequences for Scottish football, and that the SFL too, have agreed that they are the same club.
Why? Simply because Scottish Football thinks it needs to help perpetrate they illusion of continuity to avoid the loss of thousands of paying customers to the game altogether.
So round one has gone to the Rangerists, with the Sevconians pretty much taking an eight-count.
So is the name thing important? I don’t think it is of critical importance. The name in itself doesn’t matter, but to merely agree that everything is as before is to join forces with the MSM, SFA & SPL who have sought to give RFC and their tax theft a pass.
Whatever happens in the future though, the illusion hasn’t worked completely. The Sevconians’ wish to call the new club by a different name was for the purpose of making it synonymous with tax evasion, however the name Rangers now evokes exactly that response. There is now a discernible pause when people mention Rangers. A pause that reflects on the dis-service they did to the country, and to the game of football in Scotland.
Which brings us to the really important point. Throughout this saga rules have been bent. Conflicted individuals, alleged to have been involved in the tax and registration scam and its subsequent cover-up, have remained in positions of authority and power, despite being under a cloud throughout. The media have been complicit, except in rare cases, in allowing the wrong-doing to go unquestioned, actively campaigning for rules not to be applied.
What we have been saying all along is this. Please play the game by the rules, and do not manufacture special cases for the financially powerful.
Call Rangers whatever you wish, but deal with their transgressions appropriately in the spirit of sporting fairness, and within the framework of the existing rules. That is the least – and most – we expect. We don’t ask for much. Just give us back some pride in our sport .
http://www.football365.com/news/21554/8158991/Green-to-buy-shares-shortfall
Green will not underwrite this coming share issue as such, but said: “My personal view is that the figure is low.
“But if we don’t raise £20m then I will buy whatever the shortfall is. I’ve listed or floated maybe 30 companies and done fundraising as well.
“There’s not been anything underwritten in London in the past seven or eight years to my knowledge. Whenever it occurs someone takes a fee for it.
“I’d be happy to underwrite it but what will happen is in three weeks’ time you lot (media) will have my trousers around my ankles saying ‘Charles Green underwrit Rangers’ and took a three per cent fee when it didn’t need doing.
“The reality is we don’t need to underwrite it as there will be no shares left over.
“But if they’re not (taken up) of course we’ll take them.
Making money from a loss making business, and Rangers is a loss making business, will only be achieved by getting that money from the fans.
It will be a one off cash injection, which will almost certainly shoot straight out of the other side.
Enough money may be left to cover the business for the rest of the season, or until the new season tickets are sold.
However the problem with that is that it will still be a loss making business.
If CG times it right he can get money out, and keep the whole thing going until late 2013, or even January 14 when players can be registered again.
Debenture anyone (basically long term loan from fans). in order to fund things further.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:04
0 0 Rate This
Charles to sceptical Randall on Sky, in answer to the question if the 26,000 fans who lost their previous investment would be offered any special deal or discount: What they will have is the chance to be part of the first group to buy shares, along with employees, plus former & current season-ticket holders. (My paraphrase)
=============================
So how does that work? Isn’t this a public offering? Are they allowed to prioritize certain groups? (apart from employees)
paulmac2 says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 20:00
After all if a guy can sell Tower Bridge to a Yank…
——
Apologies in advance for pointing out your error there. It was London Bridge, not Tower Bridge. 😉 🙂
London Bridge needed modernising, and some bright spark at the council decided to sell the old one, which IIRC is now mostly in Arizona. The buyer has always denied that he thought he was getting Tower Bridge.
Note that the “Newbridge” is still called “London Bridge” and has quite probably taken over the history of all the “Oldbridges” which preceded it.
http://www.thelawyer.com/ffw-and-travers-smith-score-roles-on-rangers-20m-ipo/1014851.article
Apologies if this has already been posted or is already known.
Field Fisher Waterhouse (FFW) and Travers Smith have been instructed to advise on Rangers FC’s £20m flotation on AIM.
The club announced the IPO this morning, with FFW corporate finance partner Christine Phillips advising Rangers.
Travers Smith corporate partner Philip Cheveley has been instructed by Cenkos Securities, the nominated adviser on the deal.
FFW’s relationship with Rangers includes being instructed by its new owner Charles Green during his takeover of the club, with Phillips on a team led by sport head Patrick Canno alongside corporate partners David Wilkinson and Amerjit Kalirai.
The firm’s links with Green go back years to an instruction for AIM-listed construction management specialist Formation Group when Green was chairman.
=============
Some comments of posters:
What hasn’t been announced today is that 22 million shares have already been issued to the original investors who provided the money to but the assets of the old club which was in administration and is shortly to be liquidated.
It also faces having 10 years of titles stripped by the SPL and is banned from Europe for 3 years and isn’t allowed to buy any players for another 18 months.
The CEO Charles Green, was deputy chairman of Panceltica which is well remembered by AIM shareholders who lost 85 million in the shortlived company. Green has also publicly barred Rangers from playing in the top scottish league the SPL while he is still in charge. I think shareholders should know that.
=====
We cannot buy players until after Xmas next year. We need £6M to just get to the end of the season to cover our shortfall. This is simply being rushed to put money back into Green and Cos pockets. Are they offering us “ordinary share holders” to be the same deal as they have had the opportunity to take up. I guess we will see the master plan after 5pm!. I’ve not trusted them from the start.
On under-writing.
I would thought you would only really go to the expense of using an under-writer if you were raising capital. For example to fund a project, and you need to make sure you get a specific amount.
As Rangers are actually trying to get revenue, and not really a specific amount (though they will price it at a specific amount) there’s no need to do it.
He will take what he can get.
Thoughts from accountants appreciated.
A bit like Millwall
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8591a814-cd82-11df-9c82-00144feab49a.html#axzz290bi9rw2
neepheid says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:17
===========================
The attempted CVA was never going to happen, it was simply not on.
Let’s see if the IPO actually happens as an IPO.
==================================
Wait a minute, has Mr Green already promised who can buy the shares in the event of an IPO failure. At a pre-determined price.
Is that a bit like promising who can buy the assets after a CVA failure. At a pre-determined price.
He wouldn’t would he, not twice. They aren’t that gullible.
“My name is Will E. Coyote, and while it might appear that I have run off a cliff and am simply treading on air until the inevitable force of gravity pulls me down, I would like to assure you that this is not the case and that, far from mere empty space, the thing I am currently treading on is in fact the latest, most technologically advanced hover-road, the technology of which is far too complicated for me to explain to you but in which I am nevertheless willing – nay excited – to offer you the opportunity to purchase some degree of proportional ownership-as-I-define-it, which ownership must, for reasons completely unrelated to a desire to fill the canyon with cash in order to cushion my fall (for how could I fall when I have never left the road?), be bought pretty damn quick because…er, well, just because, that’s why, and so I encourage you one and all to buy as many shares-as-I-define-them at the earliest possible opportunity by contacting my most reputable agents at AIM (Anvil In Motion).”
Okay can the clever chaps explain Phil MacG’s tweet about rule 21 which is a s follows from
A I M R U L E S F O R N O M I N AT E D A D V I S E R S given that FFW have been involved with Green for years and helped in the purchase by Sevco?
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/companies-and-advisors/aim/publications/aim-rules-for-nominated-advisers.pdf
Independence and conflicts
21. Independence on a continuing basis
A nominated adviser must be able to demonstrate to the Exchange that both it and its
executives are independent from the AIM companies for which it acts such that there is no
reasonable basis for impugning the nominated adviser’s independence.
Where the Exchange requires a nominated adviser to demonstrate clearly that neither its
independence nor that of any of its executives has or will be compromised by any potential
conflict of interest, the burden of proof will be upon the nominated adviser.
In cases of doubt about its independence a nominated adviser should consult the Exchange in
advance of entering into any arrangements.
Schedule One sets out further rules in relation to the independence of a nominated adviser.
Is there a set penalty/points deduction for an SFL team going into administration mid season?
Figured this would be the place to ask! 😉
Basically Zeus can’t be the Nominated Advisor as there is a conflict of interest.
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:48
0 0 Rate This
Basically Zeus can’t be the Nominated Advisor as there is a conflict of interest.
============
I take it then that ZEUS and Cenkos are related, or are they FFW, who would clearly have a conflict of interest?
What would happen, I wonder, if 94,500 taxpayers all registered their interest in buying £1,000 of shares. Will Green & Co then assume this share issue malarky is a breeze and decide to set the price higher than expected due to unprecedented demand. Then come the day to part with the cash the taxpayers all decide to change their mind because really, why would anyone want to help fund the continuation of a club that has defrauded HMRC, and by extension all of us, to the extent of £94.5m.
There’s only one way to find out so i’ve registered my interest in £1,000. Is there another 94,499 likeminded taxpayers out there?
Must read all posts, must read all posts, must read all posts. 🙂
Found all the earlier postings on the conflict of interest, sorry.
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:09
Chuckie says …..
“The investors rescued it so are entitled to a profit. They’ll have now, based on the figures we talked about earlier, made a profit of 100 per cent and if they’re not happy with that then tough.
“That’s what we promised to do and that’s what we’re doing.”
http://www.football365.com/news/21554/8158991/Green-to-buy-shares-shortfall
Working out what he says, but really means, is like deciphering a politician. Is he saying that the original investors have now, at this minute prior to the share sell, made their 100% profit? If so, then the only substantial money taken in, as far as I know, was the season books. Has Chuckie already paid them off using this? Is this the hole in the finances which needs the rapid share issue to fill?
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:52
A couple of the guys behind Zeus, Imran Ahmad and Brian Stockbridge, are already among Green’s backers.
I was just thinking, whilst in exile outside smoking a fag in the brewing storm … what would I think if a bloke came and took charge of my club (I know…) and then declared he was only there to make money?
I think I would not be best pleased, and nor would I be inclined to contribute towards his plan.
But as that other great purveyor of hokum, PT Barnum, once said, “Every crowd has a silver lining”.
forweonlyknow says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:46
0 0 Rate This
Is there a set penalty/points deduction for an SFL team going into administration mid season?
Figured this would be the place to ask!
==============
Here is the excerpt from the SFL rules that I can see – in summary – they can do what they want, including points deductions, but its not specific
—————
44.5 The Board shall have full power to deal with as it thinks fit, including power
to deduct Championship points before or during a season and/or to impose
a player registration embargo on a Member whom it finds to be guilty of
conduct contrary to the interests of the League and its Members or which
is potentially likely to prejudice the orderly progress of the League
Championship and/or the League Challenge Cup Competition in any
season. For the avoidance of doubt such conduct may include a Member
being in or taking steps to enter or being subject to proceedings which may
result in the Member entering Administration, Liquidation, Sequestration,
or having a receiver or judicial factor or trustee appointed to it or to
substantially all of its assets, or becoming subject to any other form of
insolvency procedure or arrangement or compromise with or for the benefit
of its creditors. For the further avoidance of doubt, a Member in or going
in to any such process will remain responsible for the purposes of these
Rules for the conduct of its undertaking by any Administrator, Liquidator,
Receiver, Trustee, Factor or Supervisor or any other such officer appointed
to it or to its undertaking.
scottyjimbo says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:59
0 0 Rate This
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:09
Chuckie says …..
“The investors rescued it so are entitled to a profit. They’ll have now, based on the figures we talked about earlier, made a profit of 100 per cent and if they’re not happy with that then tough.
“That’s what we promised to do and that’s what we’re doing.”
http://www.football365.com/news/21554/8158991/Green-to-buy-shares-shortfall
Working out what he says, but really means, is like deciphering a politician. Is he saying that the original investors have now, at this minute prior to the share sell, made their 100% profit?
=============
I read this as meaning that if the IPO raises £20m, then the consortium walk away with 100% profit. But it would be nice if some of these so-called journalists would ask a few obvious questions to clarify matters, on behalf of us, the chumps who actually pay their wages.
scottyjimbo says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:59
=======================
I believe it’s smoke and mirrors.
He is effectively saying that they bought X% of the business for £Y, and that once the shares have been sold their holding will be worth £2Y. However that is based on his own nonsense valuation.
He also said
“If I was doing it for the benefit of the original investors, if we did it in three years’ time when we’re making massive profits, the share price will be higher and the company will be worth £100million, it would be more expensive for the fans. But the club belongs to the fans.
So in three years time Rangers will be worth £100m and making massive profits.
At best just back into the SPL and just maybe just eligible for Europe again, and making massive profits and worth £100m.
Does this bloke ever listen to what he says.
neepheid says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:17
4 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:04
0 0 Rate This
Charles to sceptical Randall on Sky, in answer to the question if the 26,000 fans who lost their previous investment would be offered any special deal or discount: What they will have is the chance to be part of the first group to buy shares, along with employees, plus former & current season-ticket holders. (My paraphrase)
=============================
So how does that work? Isn’t this a public offering? Are they allowed to prioritize certain groups? (apart from employees)
______________
It sounded like a fudge and a spin to me. He was put on the spot regarding the 26,000. What he basically seemed to say was that they will have the ‘privilege’ to invest again. Aye, right. Very clever with words is Mr Charles. Thinks on his feet. May turn out to be too clever for his own good.
neepheid says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:07
0 0 Rate This
scottyjimbo says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:59
0 0 Rate This
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:09
Chuckie says …..
====
I thought he meant that the original investors got their shares at 50p and did he not say recently that the share issue price would be £1.00 each, therefore 100% profit for original investors.
5starsorbehindbars says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:06
——————————
Ta. So it’s kind of up to David Longmuir then? I’m kidding! ;
I’m very aware of how SFA see a ‘second’ insolvency event within 3 years. That could be messy!?
J
The Rangers Standard @RangersStandard
Be sure to catch @ChrisGraham76 discussing the IPO on @ScotlandTonight 10.30pm.
– will he be asking tough questions or ‘toeing the party line’
Was it just me or did Sally have a very, very haunted look in that interview on SSN. Look at the body language, hunched, shoulders forward, rabbit in the headlights expression?
liveinhop says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:54
Following on your Stirling pun
A true story from about 25 years ago. A lady enters Thomas Cook in Falkirk a company who at the time were the main experts in Foreign money to buy her travellers cheques for impending holiday. The conversation opens: Cashier “Hi how can I help you” lady ” I’d like £150 worth awe travellers cheques please” Cashier (now they sold cheques in about 8 different currencies) “would you like them in Sterling?” Lady ” How! cana no get them in Falkirk”.
Someone earlier in the week described the share offer as a jobby on a stick. Sums it up nicely if you ask me.
angus1983 says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:03
‘what would I think if a bloke came and took charge of my club (I know…) and then declared he was only there to make money?’
—
It depends on the ‘bloke’, I suppose.
We had Fergus: absolutely straight-talking if somewhat crabbit wee man, but a man of his word.
He said what he was going to do and did it successfully.
He left most of us staring in delighted disbelief at the transformation in the whole structure of CFC.
He made money, certainly, but few Celtic fans would have begrudged him that then.
And even the most vociferous anti-Fergusite of the time would now, in the light of what Rangers fans have had to endure at the hands of charlatans, will now be quietly saying “Thank God for Fergus”.
In my humble opinion.
Hear Hear.
Said what he was going to do and did it.
forweonlyknow @ 22:21
When the insolvency event occurs, there won’t be a problem, as it won’t be the club that has gone phut !
Oh wait a minute, we tried that one the last time !
geordiejag says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:30
Someone earlier in the week described the share offer as a jobby on a stick
Bit of trivia for you but the origines of the expression “getting the wrong end of the stick” comes from Roman times. As they sat in their communal toilet having a toli and reading the local rag they apparently had a stick which at one end had a shammy leather. This end was used to wipe thur arses, it was washed after use and handed round. As was passed around you tried to ensure you didn’t get the wrong end of the stick.
McCoist must be a wealthy individual.
But he has shown in recent months – and today – that despite his familiarity with the media, he is not adept when discussing non-football matters.
IMO, he has already dropped a clanger by apparently backing Charlie’s share scam – I mean offer – today, without reservation.
Shirley, even McCoist can now see that there is a real risk that he – and he alone – could be left to answer the angry bears when Charlie and co. have done a runner?
McCoist has the financial resources to engage his own PR advisors, [i.e. NOT Jack], to try to help him manage his own position. If not, Charlie could just pull McCoist’s strings to help him – again – to extract the cash from the punters.
McCoist has been delivering poor football results: now he is delivering poor financial advice. Oh dear… 😉
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:42
‘… As they sat in their communal toilet having a toli..’
—
Reminds me a bit of Connolly’s description of the prank in the shipyards’ communal shit-dooneries: lighting little paper boats to sail down under the arses of those communing with nature while reading real rags like the DR.
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:42
geordiejag says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:30
Someone earlier in the week described the share offer as a jobby on a stick
Bit of trivia for you but the origines of the expression “getting the wrong end of the stick” comes from Roman times. As they sat in their communal toilet having a toli and reading the local rag they apparently had a stick which at one end had a shammy leather. This end was used to wipe thur arses, it was washed after use and handed round. As was passed around you tried to ensure you didn’t get the wrong end of the stick.
…………………………
A fascinating explanation.
I’ve got to hand it to you…. 🙂
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 18:03
essexbeancounter says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 17:33
You can’t be looking properly because the Crow has had a paint job in the past week. They have even a new carpet and recovered the seats, downstairs that is. The toilets alas are still the shitiest in smelliest in the Briggs. Apparently the Old Briggs bar is to become a Wotherspoons which is why I suspect the Crow has gone for a paint job. Best bar service is in the Crow. Quin’s I never enter and haven’t done so for over 5 years or more and I don’t expect to enter it for the next 5. I sometime head into AG’s club.
Not seen a paper today so I can’t comment, in fact not been out the door for days due to the dreaded lurgie, you’d huv thought I was on 40 a day and I don’t smoke.
=======================================================================
Briggsbhoy…I will send Mrs Beancounter round to rub your poor chest…and I will have another look at the Crow and its new paint job tomorrow.
PS I agree re the toilets…I can still remember the smell from 30 years ago…probably the as present.
Watching chris graham on STV tonight.
As my auld mum used to say
“HELL MEND THEM”
Just a wee word of warning.
I am as sceptical as the next poster with regard to how many will take up the share offer and what Mr Charles will do with the money.
However on RTC many, myself included, predicted that T’Rangers crowds in Div 3 would be a lot less than they are.
Do not be surprised if there are enough people out there to help make this work.
Afterall this is backs to the wall stuff. While they may not like to admit it if they don’t cough up the cash there is a good chance that the club will be toast again and this time the zomboe will not rise from the grave.
Desperate times need desperate measures and thats what Mr Charles is gambling on.
What would happen to “The Club” if Greens Companies are Liquidated? Do the SFA just store it in the shed until it is bought again?
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 13:23
27 0 Rate This
doontheslope says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 13:11
Is the AIM a diddy stock exchange?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Right result – my favourite kind of question – an easy one – and of course the answer is yes.
____________________________________________________________________________
The AIM and Sevco are very similar in the way they are run and managed. The AIM is rather tightly regulated and hands out rather stiff, some may say Draconian, punishments to those company’s that do not abide by their rules and regulations.
The application of rules and regulations is done in a rather similar fashion to the way that Sevco, the SFA and the SPL don’t.
In three out of the last four financial years I have made enough on the AIM to have to pay CGT, currently at 28% on profits over 10.5k sterling.
I won’t discuss the other year….
Or as the ancients used to say (OK, as google translate says) “feces baculo”.
mirrenman says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:24
He did indeed toe the party line.
wottpi @ 22:57
Fair point, however they can only go to this particular well once
Despite Charlie’s vision of the glorious future, they will still face a shortfall until Europe becomes a reality again
mirrenman says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:24
The Rangers Standard @RangersStandard
Be sure to catch @ChrisGraham76 discussing the IPO on @ScotlandTonight 10.30pm.
– will he be asking tough questions or ‘toeing the party line
————————–
Dark suit, brown brogues. Obviously toeing the party line!
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 18:10
Essexbeancounter says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 17:49
0 0 Rate This
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 12:17
Torrejohnbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 11:49
following Saturday there I was on the frosty ash pitches that used to be in front of the BarL pre M8 motorway …
=======================================================================
Briggsbhoy…I remember those pitches too…it always seems that we remember mouldmasters in the winter…!
PS I may be wrong but I am sure that all talk of “mouldmaters” was frowned on RTC, the father of this site…!
——————-
Sorry to veer OT:
In the shadow of Barlinne in the mid-Sixties I scored a lobbed goal at the end of a match we lost 1-9. People cheered though. The greatest feeling in the world it was too – for a wee left back. To think that back then the country could produce world-beaters brought up on those frosty, ash pitches. Now it’s all Charlie Spiv and the Share Options. What have we come to?
===================================================================
DP…I see we share two common points…:
1) Playing at left back (No 3!)
2) Scoring a lobbed goal…(fluke as much as skill!)
Sadly, the roving reporter from the Evening Times, whose articles used to appear in the pink Saturday evening edition, was not there to report on my earth shattering deed…!
PS I have just come in from that same Riddrie/Lethamhill area but could not see any trace of the playing fields…mind you even the Bar-L was hiding in the rain and mist!
Charlie on a rant again
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/351597
GERS CHIEF DEMANDS TOP-FLIGHT CHANGES
Ibrox chief executive Charles Green
Friday October 12,2012
By Scott Burns
Have your say(0)
FUMING Charles Green is ready to lead the fight for top-flight change because he doesn’t want Rangers to return to the Scottish Premier League.
Green, who announced plans for a £20million share issue yesterday, will never forgive SPL chiefs for the way they gave the Light Blues the boot last summer.
The fiery Yorkshireman insisted he would be against a return to the SPL and hopes reconstruction might see the current set-up disbanded.
He said: “The SPL threw us out. They then stole our money due for last year and also are pursuing us to strip titles.
“It’s like coming home, finding your wife in bed with the milkman, asking for a divorce, then a week later asking, ‘Can you forgive me? We’ll make up.’
“I can’t make up. If the Rangers fans can make up, get on with it. But Charles Green will never forget what the SPL has done and that’s why I am anti going back where we were told we weren’t wanted.”
It’s like coming home, finding your wife in bed with the milkman, asking for a divorce, then a week later asking, ‘Can you forgive me? We’ll make up.’
Ibrox chief executive Charles Green
The Ibrox owner believes Scottish football is on its knees and there needs to be radical change from top to bottom. He feels there need to be talks and a master plan put in place to try and save the game.
Green added: “On the SPL, Stewart Regan said the other day they will be looking at reconstruction.
“Scottish football is broken. Attendances are not there, the gates are falling, the interest is falling and it needs to be fixed.
“Where we are, as the biggest club in Scotland – by fans, by numbers, by any number of multiples – we need to be sat round that table with Celtic and the other people to look at how Scotland can move forward.”
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 18:33
Lord Wobbly says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 18:31
Superb, I’m childminding tonight
=======================================================================
Scapa…would you please explain the difference between “childminding” and “babysitting”…?
Is one “professional” and the other “amateur”
Do you have a contract and is it registered with the appropriate supervisory body?
Do you have more than one contract and is your agent aware of the arrangements?
Are you elibible for an EBT loan from any of the parties interested in your contract?
“…we demand to know…!”
wottpi says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:57
That’s why everything had to fail, it really is possible to make money out of abject failure.
You sell over-priced shares to gullible and naive dolts, and when the business fails they expect no return and you keep the money they gave you.
If Max Bialystock has taught us anything…
gie’s a gonk says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 21:55
14 0 Rate This
What would happen, I wonder, if 94,500 taxpayers all registered their interest in buying £1,000 of shares. Will Green & Co then assume this share issue malarky is a breeze and decide to set the price higher than expected due to unprecedented demand. Then come the day to part with the cash the taxpayers all decide to change their mind because really, why would anyone want to help fund the continuation of a club that has defrauded HMRC, and by extension all of us, to the extent of £94.5m.
There’s only one way to find out so i’ve registered my interest in £1,000. Is there another 94,499 likeminded taxpayers out there?
____________________________________________________________
I know its childish and a wee bit naughty but I like the cut of Gonks jib! Lets all “register an interest” in Chuckies big rip off! Costs nothing to do (I’m in for £2500 lol) When they ask you to confirm in a cuppla months, just tell them you have thought it over and realised that Jaws wouldn’t swallow the sheeit they are peddling 🙂
campsiejoe says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:05
From some of my earlier posts you will see I agree.
They can only go to this ‘well’ the once.
The question then is will Mr Charles put the club on the right track for someone else to take it in or will those who need a return take the money or run and leave them on the toilet rim ready to fall into the pan.
That will leave them needing another cash injection in a year or two’s time. Certainly before they ever get a sniff at European football.
nowoldandgrumpy @ 23:13
Charlie couldn’t give a flying thingy about Scottish football, as his only concern is Sevco and how to make money
What the SPL did to Sevco
What did he expect, to pretend nothing had happened and that normal service would be resumed ?
Well he probably did think that, based on the promises from Stooges Inc
This man’s arrogance knows no bounds
I have posted a link on this either on RTC or TSFM, I can’t recall which but since the old share isssue is out today please excuse me for reminding you all of the plot from the great Mel Brookes comedy ” The Producers” which has so many parallels with this sorry story.
Max Bialystock is a washed up Broadway producer. Leo Bloom is a mousy PA (public accountant). When the two meet, their combined expertise points them toward the ultimate scam: Raise more money than you need for a SURE-FIRE Flop Broadway Show. No one will expect anything back and you can pocket the difference. They need the worst play to do this
Change Max to Chuck and broadway producer to Yorkshire entrepenuer. Change Leo to Swally a shite football manager and SURE_FIRE FLOP Broadway show to a poor excuse for a football team in the SFL3. So buys a club for 5.5m and oversells to tune of £20m that’s the plan any but as in the film it’s pure comedy and doomed to failure. 🙂
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:31
I have posted a link on this either on RTC or TSFM, I can’t recall which but since the old share isssue is out today please excuse me for reminding you all of the plot from the great Mel Brookes comedy ” The Producers” which has so many parallels with this sorry story.
Max Bialystock is a washed up Broadway producer. Leo Bloom is a mousy PA (public accountant). When the two meet, their combined expertise points them toward the ultimate scam: Raise more money than you need for a SURE-FIRE Flop Broadway Show. No one will expect anything back and you can pocket the difference. They need the worst play to do this
Change Max to Chuck and broadway producer to Yorkshire entrepenuer. Change Leo to Swally a shite football manager and SURE_FIRE FLOP Broadway show to a poor excuse for a football team in the SFL3. So buys a club for 5.5m and oversells to tune of £20m that’s the plan any but as in the film it’s pure comedy and doomed to failure.
……………………………………………………………………………….
Er… hate to be a Jeremiah here, but the Producers’ planned failure was an unintended rip-roaring, soaraway SUCCESS!
I, for one, do NOT want to see such a parallel continue…
Tho our Brooksian protagonists do end up in the pokey. 🙂
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:42
geordiejag says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:30
Someone earlier in the week described the share offer as a jobby on a stick
Bit of trivia for you but the origines of the expression “getting the wrong end of the stick” comes from Roman times. As they sat in their communal toilet having a toli and reading the local rag they apparently had a stick which at one end had a shammy leather. This end was used to wipe thur arses, it was washed after use and handed round. As was passed around you tried to ensure you didn’t get the wrong end of the stick.
=================================================================
Briggsbhoy…I have never seen “toli” spelt that way…even in nearby Springburn…!
However, that explanation probably accounts for the smell in the bogs at the Crow…!
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:13
‘..Where we are, as the biggest club in Scotland – by fans, by numbers, by any number of multiples – we need to be sat round that table with Celtic and the other people to look at how Scotland can move forward.”
—
What can the lunatic mean?
I suspect that he has made overtures to Celtic, soliciting a public expression of ‘old firm’ solidarity, and has been given the very cold shoulder ( the bold Dermot’s daft nonsense notwithstanding!).
john clarke says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:50
3
0
Rate This
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:42
‘… As they sat in their communal toilet having a toli..’
—
Reminds me a bit of Connolly’s description of the prank in the shipyards’ communal shit-dooneries: lighting little paper boats to sail down under the arses of those communing with nature while reading real rags like the DR.
========================================================================
“…Et tu Brute…?”…from “Julius Caesar”, written by your favourite “scribe”
JC…you seem to have “plumbed” the depths in joining the contributors to the “bog wall” metaphor this evening…I feel in hallowed/honoured company…!
The good thing from Mr Green’s perspective in the Bialystock scenario is that Ally, the star of the show, has played his part beautifully.
Not for him the Producers’ mistake, where the sure fire flop is an unexpected and unwelcome success. Quite the contrary, he has failed more than anyone could ever have hoped. He has taken failure to a whole new level.
Malmo
Maribor
Falkirk
A 15 point lead in the SPL
Queen of the South
Stirling Albion.
If ever anyone played their part it is Mr McCoist. That lad could fail for Scotland.
He probably will.
geordiejag says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:58
Or as the ancients used to say (OK, as google translate says) “feces baculo”.
=================================================================
“……”.Magna cum laude…”…or in Glaswegian…”….pure dead (shit) brilliant
essexbeancounter says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:18
After 20 odd years hitched to a social work type, I’m afraid the terminology seeps in by a process of osmosis,.it’s not the first time when picking swimbo up from a works night out, I have been mistaken for a social worker by one of her colleagues….
Collective noun for drunken party of social workers? Nightmare
essexbeancounter says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:53
Whilst I’m sure your wife is a very attractive lady if you have 25 year old daughter with a figure like Pamela Anderson’s I’d much prefer that,:)
give me advance notice so I can get the kids out as their off school the noo. lol
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 18:10
what’s more impressive is lobbing anyone with a moldmaster. You boots of course in your days were the ones that only came in brown and wrapped your ankles 🙂
wottpi says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 22:57
On a more serious note I think what you say is true and I mentioned this earlier in the day, this isn’t like the Murray share issue or the Celtic share issue this could potentially be about the survival of their club (that they still believe exists in old form) and so it’s a delemma for them
john clarke says:
What can the lunatic mean?
===================
“the other people” sounds petty and intentionally insulting.
“The SPL threw us out. They then stole our money due for last year and also are pursuing us to strip titles” probably intended to get a reaction from the compliance officer. This will allow him to play the martyr again saying that he wanted peace talks, but they want revenge.
He is obviously a desperate man.
john clarke says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:38
0 0 Rate This
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:13
‘..Where we are, as the biggest club in Scotland – by fans, by numbers, by any number of multiples – we need to be sat round that table with Celtic and the other people to look at how Scotland can move forward.”
—
What can the lunatic mean?
I suspect that he has made overtures to Celtic, soliciting a public expression of ‘old firm’ solidarity, and has been given the very cold shoulder ( the bold Dermot’s daft nonsense notwithstanding!).
———-
Perhaps it means a bigger full stadium (Celtic Park) is smaller than a smaller full stadium (Ibrox)! He’s a complex guy.
Is it possible that chuckles will sell shares privately to his undead family at, say 100p per share with a minimum sale of £500 per deal prior to floating on the AIM? He has stated that he would use the cash to strengthen the playing squad and to use as working capital. This is a major concern. If chuck sells 500 shares at 100p as a minimum private investment and has say 10000 individual buyers this will gross him £5 million. He then approaches the AIM with his public floatation. Now, any one who invests on a company listed on AIM is investing in a company exposed to higher risk than say the FTSE 100 or 250, but the rewards can be oh so much greater (especially if you’ve invested in FOGL at 56p then sold at 96p), but the important factor here is that people invest in a company to make a profit, albeit the AIM offers higher risk for higher gains. Under normal circumstances a company will use any finance raised via a share issue to invest in capital projects such as expansion or modernisation of technology and the like. The one thing they don’t do is use raised finance as working capital to pay bills and daily running costs. If a company uses the proceeds of a share issue to fund the day to day running and states this openly prior to an issue, it is bound to fail due to the fact that investors will not see a return on their investment as their investment has been eaten up by paying the company’s bills. If chuckles is planning something of a similar ilk, at 8 am on the first Monday that Sevco are floated at 100p per share, I guarantee that within 20 minutes those shares will be worth single pennies as no one in their right mind will go near them as there is no immediate possibility of a profit of any kind. Realistically, you will be looking at between 2-4p per share. Now if chuckles keeps his word and buys any unsold shares, he’ll spend about four bob and still retain full control of the vast majority of the shares. Investors do not invest in sentiment whereas fans do, in fact chuckles is banking on this as its where he’s gonna make his money. The Sevconians are going to be falling over themselves to give him their savings, christmas money, even their kids university funds.
Chuckles is a very cold and calculating man with one aim (sic), and that is to make as much money from his Sevco family as possible in as short a time as possible and to bolt with the proceeds as quickly as possible. He may come across as a complete and utter Buffoon with the things he says to his followers, but I believe everything he has said and done in the past five months has been calculated and the quality that makes him so dangerous is that he is able to sell to the masses the very things that they want to hear and believe in order to make them part with their cash and more of it without question and smile whilst doing so.
I genuinely feel sorry for all the real fans of Sevco that only want to see and follow a successful team and believe that putting their hands in their pockets will facilitate this, they are so sadly mistaken and woe betide chuckles when the penny drops and the Sevconians awake in the morning with big smiles on their faces, check their share price on the lse site and suddenly realise what has happened. New Dawn Fades.
Mr chuckles had best be advised to invest some of his ill gotten gains in hair dye, cosmetic surgery and a new suit as the bears will not be happy bunnies. Monaco will not be far enough away from I-Broke for him to be free of the breath of the angry bear. There are only so many times you can poke the bear with a big stick before he gets angry and eats you.
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:49
essexbeancounter says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:18
After 20 odd years hitched to a social work type, I’m afraid the terminology seeps in by a process of osmosis,.it’s not the first time when picking swimbo up from a works night out, I have been mistaken for a social worker by one of her colleagues….
Collective noun for drunken party of social workers? Nightmare
=======================================================================
Scapa…in another life I was FD to a group of recruitment companies, the most profitable being that of placing social workers, mainly in the Greater London area. I fully understand the “Nightmare” scenario, since I lived it daily for a good few years.
Then when I think I am cured of this “Nightmare”, I meet and marry a beancounter from the country’s largest children’s charity….!
…best off to bed…but no nightmares any more!
Agree totally with Frank Forrest’s succinct analysis of what Chuckles intentions are with regard to fleecing the bears. If they cannot see this one coming, well, hell mend them.
Several posters have mentioned in the past, and Frank, you alluded to this, that Chuckles is some sort of Svengali of sales. As someone who makes a living in sales, I take this as an insult.
In fairness though, I consider my customers (and potential customers) to be rational professionals to whom I am making a value proposition which will be to our mutual benefit. Chuckles is targeting a demographic who will consider that buying a share certificate is somehow an act of defiance against the hordes who do not like them. And they don’t care!
You could write the script. Pub collections, supporters club collectives, the weans Xmas, all passed to a charlatan who cares for his customer base not a jot.
When realisation dawns on the Vanguard Bears et al, there will be the devil to pay. Is Chuckles slippery enough to dodge that (literal!) bullet?
Frank Forrest says:
Thursday, October 11, 2012 at 23:53
6 0 Rate This
Is it possible that chuckles will sell shares privately to his undead family at, say 100p per share with a minimum sale of £500 per deal prior to floating on the AIM? He has stated that he would use the cash to strengthen the playing squad and to use as working capital. This is a major concern. If chuck sells 500 shares at 100p as a minimum private investment and has say 10000 individual buyers this will gross him £5 million. He then
Frank
You got it in a nutshell.
Its an emotional sell by a “charismatic” character.
His track record at this is unbelievable. By my reckoning he has so far “burnt” 10-30 million of OPM in his various failed enterprises.
The sad fact is they will buy it. But not in enough numbers to make the books balance till end 2013,
Not that he cares he doubles his dough and is off.
Thanks Rangers familly and oot of pocket Ally.
You know, leaving aside all kidding and swanking, I do believe the sentiment of this blog has shifted a little.
It’s difficult to plot with precision, but there is now more focus on CG as being the baddie/con-man stitching up the loyal support.
There is an aura almost of sympathy for the doomed club, a regretful shaking of heads at the blind folly of so many ordinary joes swallowing every word uttered by Charles, and eager to line his pockets.
I think we need a wee re-statement of the fundamentals:
a) a delinquent club lost its entitlement to be in the SPL
b) a conspiracy to get it back in was attempted , but thwarted
c) a conspiracy to get it at least into the 1st Division was attempted and likewise thwarted
d) in desperation, the very authorities broke basic rules to get it even admitted into the SFA
e) the Scottish sports media helped in the rule-breaking by their insistent ‘Rangers must be saved’ propaganda, in which they were assisted by Henry McLeish and Alex Salmond and sundry other politicos
e) the delinquent club is now about to be thoroughly shafted by its ‘saviour’
f) and all of Scottish Football will suffer because of SDM and his bloody arrogant nonsense and Lance Armstrong cheating mentality
g) and no steps have been taken to rid the SFA of the canker of cross-pollination between the doomed club and the the powerbrokers in the Footballing Authorities
These are the fundamentals.
Let’s not forget them, however much sympathy we may feel for our neighbours/friends/colleagues who will be enticed into paring with £500 on the invitation of a man who has a track record of seeing himself all right, and bugger every other sucker.
M8Dreamer
John Clarke is 100% correct when he says that the TSFM Blog should be concentrating on the numerous misdeameanours of Rangers Football Club and the associated conspiracies by the SPL/SFA/SL which allowed Sevco/Rangers Tribute Act to enter SL3.
The forthcoming Share Issue is of no importance to the bigger picture, as it will only confirm how many Rangers supporters are willing to part with their own money to fill Chuckies pockets, before he rides into the sunset and leaves Sevco/Rangers Tribute Act in the the brown stuff.
It is imperative for the future of Scottish Football that every guilty party in this fiasco is dealt with appropriately by the Courts, Police and Scottish Football Authorities, to ensure that there will never be a recurrence of the cheating and associated conspiracies that has ocurred in this instance.
john clarke says:
Friday, October 12, 2012 at 01:19
The share issue is a slight red herring: for me the heart of the issue, which is likely to kill the Club is its self serving sense of entitlement – we need to be in the top tier of Scottish and European football. We need to be at the top quickly because we are a big Club and that’s where we belong.
If the Club went through a normal administration, then liquidation, they would have been faced with the task of rebuilding from scratch (with perhaps the exception of looking for another stadium). Starting from scratch with a large base of loyal fans would have been financially sustainable. The problem here is that it looks as if they need cash to continue in operation and to pay off the investors, many of whom probably want to walk away quite quickly.
Building a team from scratch, and progressing through the leagues at a natural level was always going to take much longer than the Club believed was appropriate for a team of their standing. It sounds as if they have cut their cloth in part, but not enough. Big name players need 5 star hotels to stay in before the game.
The Club will only have one bite of the cherry in the short to medium term. If the share issue raised the required sum of finances what happens when another cash injection is required? Its unlikely that the Club will attract significant corporate sponsorship and I also see a longer European ban on the horizon.
The FTTT decision will be published soon. If it reports of off the scale deliberate tax evasion and also points to abuse of sporting rules etc. the Club will find it much harder to attract corporate sponsorship. Then there is the dual contracts – from which I see an additional European ban coming about. Its more likely than not that the clubs who faced RFC in Europe will go to their national associations and UEFA to complain about illegal player registrations. Will UEFA let bygones be bygones? Probably not. A large fine would kill the club, a ban for another 3 – 5 year sounds about right? If it comes to pass a longer European ban will turn off investors, sponsors, banks where it becomes clear that the Club will have to earn their keep from domestic football. Then, there is the nuclear event (what ever that may be). What type of fall-out will that bring? In short, the Club will struggle to win friends and sponsorship when all the sins of the past are laid out on the table.
The sense of entitlement that the team playing in light blue at Ibrox should be at the top of domestic and European football will kill Rangers in their current form. They need cash to get to the top. Following the money is important in terms of deciphering the events going on at RFC, and for that reason I think it is important that we also, here, focus on the share issue.
The share issue is also important from a SFA governance perspective. The Club have said that in part the share issue is needed to keep the team going, they need cash. What then of the licence process followed by the SFA that gave TRFC entry to the SPL?
Charles Green
“Its a bit like coming home and finding your wife in bed with the milkman…. then the milkman asks you and your wife for £500 each.”
There, fixed that for you, Charlie.
Mr Green wants fans to end up with 15% to 20% of the club, with institutions holding another 50% to 60% and existing investors the balance.
Dismissing previous development proposals as “not realistic”, he unveiled schemes including a hotel in the grounds of Ibrox and a £3m plan to buy and renovate Edmiston House next to the stadium and turn it into a members’ club.
“I am going to stop Ally and the players speaking to the
press. We want to put that on to Rangers media.”
Mr Green floated the idea of a £2-a-minute phone line for
questions to be put to the manager.
Meanwhile, Rangers’ wage bill will be capped at around 30% of
revenues. Mr Stockbridge said this is half the level of Celtic’s.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-deny-20m-drive-is-bid-to-keep-club-afloat.19124987
http://m.scotsman.com/news/rangers-analysis-financiers-will-take-a-lot-of-convincing-1-2568675
“I’d like to get the cash in the bag. I’m 60 next year, I want to get this finished before I finish. The reality is, if Israel bombs Tehran this will not list – it’s nothing to do with whether it’s a good business, or whether Charles Green’s mad, just that someone took off in an aeroplane.
http://www.cityam.com/latest-news/rangers-shoot-20m-junior-market-offering
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
erm….and there you have it!
I registered. My reference number is 33880.
1. There will be no institutional investors
2. A lot of people will register, but not invest
3. A lot of the supported investment will be for small amounts
However, there may still be enough in there for Charlie to double/triple/quadruple his money and leg it.
From the same article that Lord Wobbly referenced above…
Green, who spent yesterday in London selling the plans with Rangers manager Ally McCoist, explained that the club’s enormous and loyal fanbase could power its financial revival. He laid out bold plans to develop land around Ibrox stadium, including a new hotel, tap into new overseas fanbases and extract greater revenue from media and merchandising operations.
That’s the business plans then, more money from fans, more money from fans and more money from fans.
I guess the total lack of international media interest is an indicator of the size of the overseas fanbases.