Past the Event Horizon

ByBig Pink

Past the Event Horizon

On the Old Club vs New Club (OCNC) debate, the SFA’s silence has been arguably the most damaging factor with respect to the future of the game. Of course people get frustrated when there is a deliberate policy of silence on the part of the SFA which results in the endless cycle of arguments being trotted out again and again with no resolution or closure possible.

The irony (it’s only irony if you assume that the SFA have gone to great lengths to create the conditions for the unbroken history status of the new club) is that the mealy-mouthed attitude they have adopted has actually polarised opinion in a far more serious and irreconcilable way than had they just made a clear statement when Sevco were handed SFA membership. A bit of leadership, with a decision either way at that time would have spiked a lot of OCNC guns very early on, but as history shows, they were afraid of a backlash from wherever it came.

I am now convinced that Scottish Football has passed the Event Horizon and is broken beyond the possibility of any repair that might have taken it back to its pre-2010 condition. Rangers fans will never – no matter what any eventual pronouncement from Hampden may be – accept that their next trophy will be their first. The trouble is that no-one else – again despite anything from Hampden – will cast them as anything else other than a new club who were given a free passage into the higher echelons of the game. Furthermore, they will forever force that down the throats of Rangers fans whenever and wherever they play. A recipe for discord, threats of violence, actual violence, and a general ramping up of the sectarian gas that we had all hoped, only a year or so ago, was to be set to an all-time low peep.

There is a saying in politics that we get the government we deserve. It works both ways though, and the SFA will get the audience it deserves. In actual fact it is the one it has actively sought over the last couple of years, for they have tacitly (and even perhaps explicitly) admitted that Scottish Football is a dish best served garnished with sectarianism. They have effectively told us that without it, the game cannot flourish, and they stick to that fallacy even although the empirical evidence of the past year indicates otherwise.

That belief is an intellectual black-hole they have now thrust the game into. They have effectively said that only two clubs actually matter in Scottish football. The crazy thing is that to put their plans into action they have successfully persuaded enough of the other clubs to jump into the chasm and hence vote themselves into irrelevance and permanent semi-obscurity.

That belief is also shared by the majority in the MSM, who despite their lofty, self-righteous and ostensibly anti-sectarian stance, have done everything they can to stir the hornet’s nest in the interests of greater sales.
Act as an unpaid wing of a PR company, check nothing, ask nothing, help to create unrest, and then tut-tut away indignantly like Monty Python Pepperpots when people take them to task.

Consequently the victims of all the wrongdoing (creditors and clubs) walk away without any redress or compensation for the loss of income and opportunity (and history) – stripped of any pride and dignity since they do so in the full knowledge of what has happened. But even as they wipe away the sand kicked in their faces, those clubs still insist on the loyalty of their own fanbases, the same fans whose trust they have betrayed with their meek acceptance of the new, old order.

The kinder interpretation of the impotence of the clubs is that they want to avoid the hassle and move on, the more cynical view that they are interested only in money, not people. In either case, sporting integrity, in the words of Lord Traynor of Winhall (Airdrie, not Vermont), is “crap”.

The question is; which constituency of 21st century Scotland subscribes to that 17th century paradigm?
Sadly, this massive hoax, this gigantic insult to our collective intelligence, is working. Many will leave the game – many already have in view of the spineless absence of intervention from their own clubs – but many, many more will stay and support the charade.

If you doubt my prediction, ask yourself how many tickets will be unsold the first time the New Rangers play Celtic at Parkhead? That my friends will be final imprimatur of authenticity on just exactly who New Rangers are, no matter the proclamations of both sides of the OCNC argument.

About the author

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

3,926 Comments so far

andygraham.66Posted on3:17 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Bryan Swanson on SSN

22 months ago they faced administration and then a few months later they faced liquidation

Let me reword that for you.

Rangers 22 months ago were placed in administration and after the failure to obtain a CVA, the club was liquidated.

It’s not rocket science

View Comment

andygraham.66Posted on3:26 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Weighed in

Same board

P Murray relegated (which to be fair was a better result than Rangers got in 2012)

View Comment

ParanoidWellFanPosted on3:30 pm - Dec 19, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1146)
December 19, 2013 at 1:30 pm
19 0 i
Rate This

ST sales aren’t treated on a cash basis. The turnover is recognised as the games take place, so it will be spread pretty evenly over the season

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on3:32 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Various hacks on Twitter now reporting results of Sevco AGM votes are confirmed. Current board remain and none of the four most honest, dignified and trustworthy men in history have succeeded in their attempts to be elected.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on3:35 pm - Dec 19, 2013


upthehoops says: (743)
December 19, 2013 at 3:32 pm
1 0 Rate This

Various hacks on Twitter now reporting results of Sevco AGM votes are confirmed. Current board remain and none of the four most honest, dignified and trustworthy men in history have succeeded in their attempts to be elected.
———-

Nobody expected the Scottish Requisition.

View Comment

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on3:36 pm - Dec 19, 2013


upthehoops says: (743)
December 19, 2013 at 3:32 pm

BBC are reporting as fact that the current board remain and none of the “rebels” got in. Nothing unexpected about that. Only questions are whether they resolutions to offer penny shares got through, and what the fans do next.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on3:40 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Just to confrim what others are saying

Peter A Smith ‏@PeterAdamSmith 11m Rangers AGM results in. All 5 board members win reelection. None of the requisitioners are elected. #RFCAGM
————————————————————————————————————————————-
Must say Peter Smith has done fairly well in covering the whole debacle.
Seems to be first with the news from the TV journos a lot of times

View Comment

wottpiPosted on3:44 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Results here

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:RFC.L&display=news&it=le#RNS

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on3:45 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Rangers AGM Results – Official Notification

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11812355

Company Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
TIDM RFC
Headline Result of AGM
Released 15:21 19-Dec-2013
Number 0229W15

RNS Number : 0229W
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
19 December 2013



19 December 2013

Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, “RIFC” or the “Company”)

Result of AGM

The Company announces the results of the voting by poll on the resolutions put to its Annual General Meeting held at 10:30am on Thursday 19 December 2013 at Ibrox Stadium, 150 Edmiston Drive, Glasgow G51 2XD.

Resolutions 1-9 were successfully passed but Resolutions 10-14 did not achieve sufficient votes to be passed.

The Directors note that Resolution 10 was supported by 67.9% of the votes cast but as it is a special resolution it required a majority of 75% of the votes cast. In line with the Chief Executive’s statement of earlier today the board may seek the relevant authority again once it has completed a robust business planning process as appropriate.

David Somers, Chairman commented “We are pleased that the board, with its focus on corporate governance, prudent financial management and strategic commercial development, has been decisively re-appointed by a high turnout of Shareholders at the AGM.”

Graham Wallace, CEO commented “The Board sought a clear and decisive mandate from shareholders to provide a platform for stability and is pleased that the voting has provided this. The Board recognises that improved engagement with supporters is a major area of focus and is committed to reviewing how the Club engages with the wider supporter base. We now require a period of stability in order to take the business forward and I encourage everyone with the best interest of Rangers at heart to support fully the new Board in developing the Club and growing shareholder value.”

================================================

See link for actual voting results.

I think the phrase “total landslide” just about covers it

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on3:47 pm - Dec 19, 2013


“The game is over. The requisitioners have had their baws felt!.”

View Comment

JLeeHookerPosted on3:47 pm - Dec 19, 2013


According to those results, the requisitioners took a pasting. It is not even close 😯

“Nobody expected the Scottish Requisition” – Brilliant Danish

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on3:47 pm - Dec 19, 2013


beatipacificiscotia says: (209)
December 19, 2013 at 3:36 pm

BBC are reporting as fact that the current board remain and none of the “rebels” got in. Nothing unexpected about that. Only questions are whether they resolutions to offer penny shares got through, and what the fans do next.
===================================
I was gobsmacked to see a so called intelligent resident of Sevconia state on Twitter that the word ‘rebel’ can never be used because it’s a ‘Celtic word’. No wonder they are where they are!

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on3:51 pm - Dec 19, 2013


ParanoidWellFan on December 19, 2013 at 3:30 pm
3 0 Rate This

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1146)
December 19, 2013 at 1:30 pm
19 0 i
Rate This

ST sales aren’t treated on a cash basis. The turnover is recognised as the games take place, so it will be spread pretty evenly over the season
———————
I agree with what you’re saying.What I’m trying to establish is,
Where did the money come from?.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on3:54 pm - Dec 19, 2013


wottpi says: (1344)
December 19, 2013 at 12:49 pm

So if Graham Wallace is the man with the track record in running football clubs then it is clear that austerity is required to overcome “short term profitability challenges”.

Therefore Ally must be on his last months full salary as an immediate cut should be sorted by Jan 2014…
=============
Absolutely.

If the CEO of a plc states at an AGM that there are “short term profitability challenges” – then this very public message to shareholders / the market would reflect, [or be a precursor to], highly visible attempts to severely reduce the cost base, and attempts to raise additional funds.

If the company is not seen to be cutting costs drastically, then why should anyone give the CEO more money to fritter away in an unprofitable plc ?

So, yes McCoist must be punted ASAP : a ‘no brainer’, to give everyone a clear message.

But you would perhaps expect that from a ‘normal’ company… 🙄

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on3:55 pm - Dec 19, 2013


upthehoops says: (744)
December 19, 2013 at 3:47 pm
1 0 Rate This

beatipacificiscotia says: (209)
December 19, 2013 at 3:36 pm

BBC are reporting as fact that the current board remain and none of the “rebels” got in. Nothing unexpected about that. Only questions are whether they resolutions to offer penny shares got through, and what the fans do next.
===================================
I was gobsmacked to see a so called intelligent resident of Sevconia state on Twitter that the word ‘rebel’ can never be used because it’s a ‘Celtic word’. No wonder they are where they are!

———————————–

i guess that means a Boycott is out of the question as well then?

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on3:57 pm - Dec 19, 2013


the shareprice is holding up well at it’s all time low….mon the shareprice!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on3:58 pm - Dec 19, 2013


paulsatim says: (668)
December 19, 2013 at 2:55 pm
4 0 Rate This

Jum Spence ‏@jum_spence 4h
Thuts sum size ae tull receipt yon Wallace fellay hus! Us thaut Stoackbrudges expunses? #rfcagm pic.twitter.com/nqqWRHXV2e
———-

That Jum Spence is hilarious. Just went through his day’s coverage. Awffy braw 🙂

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on3:59 pm - Dec 19, 2013


10 To renew the Directors’ authority for the disapplication of pre-emption rights

“The Directors note that Resolution 10 was supported by 67.9% of the votes cast but as it is a special resolution it required a majority of 75% of the votes cast. In line with the Chief Executive’s statement of earlier today the board may seek the relevant authority again once it has completed a robust business planning process as appropriate.”

================================

Note

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-emption_right

A pre-emption right, or right of pre-emption, is a contractual right to acquire certain property newly coming into existence before it can be offered to any other person or entity.[1] Also called a “first option to buy.”[1] It comes from the Latin verb emo, emere, emi, emptum, to buy or purchase, plus the inseparable preposition pre, before. A right to acquire existing property in preference to any other person is usually referred to as a right of first refusal.

and see here for the relevant legislation

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/17/chapter/3/crossheading/disapplication-of-preemption-rights

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on4:00 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Certainly no chance of a bhoycott.

I’ll get me bhoy coat.

View Comment

scottcPosted on4:00 pm - Dec 19, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1147)

I agree with what you’re saying.What I’m trying to establish is,
Where did the money come from?.

Did CG not change the accounting period to include two sets of ST books in the first year?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:02 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Shares sitting nicely, equalling the all time low of 33.50p
Will be interesting to see how things change tomorrow.

Reading between the lines it is Austerity or Bust.

Given the reaction of the fans today will they put up with it and for how long.
Lots of hard sell needed to keep a baying mob onside and patient.
Ally (if he even stays put) will have to work twice as hard now for half his current salary. 🙂

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on4:03 pm - Dec 19, 2013


The board are actually fecked anyway

They know they need to cut costs dramatically. They know the support will see this as more treachery. They really are in a no win situation.

I remain of the opinion that sale of the ltd company, as a going concern but without the stadium and training ground is the only real option. However who would want to buy it.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:09 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Looking at the results then main split in relation to the Requisitiners getting on the board were 70-30.
If we say that fans (12%) were all for it then that leaves 18% two of which the Gang of Four owned.
Therefore it could be that the Requisitioners only had around 16% of the ‘institutional’ investors on their side. Maybe 20% tops.

View Comment

normanbatesmumfcPosted on4:14 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent says: (1074)

Think Copland Road tweets said Puma was a 5 year deal.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hope they didn’t pay it all up front and learned from JJB mistake.

So it’s status quo at Ibrox………………………….

“Goin down the dustpipe, with a $10 bill in my jeans………… 😛

Happy days

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on4:17 pm - Dec 19, 2013


StevieBC says: (949)
December 19, 2013 at 3:54 pm

So if Graham Wallace is the man with the track record in running football clubs then it is clear that austerity is required to overcome “short term profitability challenges”.
=================================================
I must admit to being a bit bemused at the number of times these past few days I’ve read and heard that Graham Wallace is ‘respected’. I honestly can’t recall that word ever being used to describe the CEO of any other Scottish club, despite the really good job many of them clearly do. it just goes to show the real underlying problem we still have regarding the media and the preferential treatment continually handed out to the club from Ibrox, old and new.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on4:28 pm - Dec 19, 2013


upthehoops on December 19, 2013 at 4:17 pm
######
Should read ‘respected by the media’. Mr Wallace will find that, if he tries any o’ thon austerity measures on the well-fed hackery of scotland’s fourth estate, his coat nail will shoogle like the manager’s bathroom scales.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on4:36 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Resolution 10 re the disapplication of pre-emption rights

10. “THAT the Directors be and they are empowered pursuant to Section 570(1) of the Act to allot equity securities (as defined in Section 560(1) of the Act) of the Company wholly for cash pursuant to the authority of the Directors under Section 551 of the Act conferred by Resolution 9 above, and/or by way of a sale of treasury shares for cash (by virtue of Section 573 of the Act), in each case as if Section 561(1) of the Act did not apply to such allotment provided that:
(a) the power conferred by this resolution shall be limited to:
(i) the allotment of equity securities and sale of treasury shares for cash in connection with an offer of, or invitation to apply for, equity securities (but in the case of the authority granted under paragraph (c) of Resolution 9, by way of a rights issue only):
(A) in favour of holders of Ordinary Shares in the capital of the Company, where the equity securities respectively attributable to the interests of all such holders are proportionate (as nearly as practicable) to the respective number of Ordinary Shares in the capital of the Company held by them; and
(B) to holders of any other equity securities as required by the rights of those securities or as the Directors
otherwise consider necessary, but subject to such exclusions or other arrangements as the Directors may deem necessary or expedient to deal with treasury shares, fractional entitlements or legal, regulatory or practical problems arising under the laws or requirements of any overseas territory or by virtue of shares being represented by depository receipts or the requirements of any regulatory body or stock exchange or any other matter whatsoever; and
(ii) in the case of the authority granted under paragraphs (a) or (b) of Resolution 9 and/or in the case of any sale of treasury shares for cash, the allotment, otherwise than pursuant to sub-paragraph (i) above, of equity securities or sale of treasury shares up to an aggregate nominal value equal to £66,000; and
(b) unless previously revoked, varied or extended, this power shall expire on the date of the next Annual General Meeting of the Company, or if earlier 19 January 2015, except that the Company may before the expiry of this power make an offer or agreement which would or might require equity securities to be allotted (and treasury shares to be sold) after such expiry and the Directors may allot equity securities (and sell treasury shares) in pursuance of such an offer or agreement as if this power had not expired.”

My reading of the situation is that the Board was given the right to issue more shares under resolution 9, but did not gain sufficient votes (75%) to pass resolution 10, which would have allowed them to disapply pre-emption rights, i.e. avoid having to offer the new shares to existing shareholders first.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on4:38 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Austerity is not the “Rangers way”, that’s not how Rangers operate, they are different from other clubs.

View Comment

FinlochPosted on4:40 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Nothing earth shattering or even surprising was ever going to be decided today which was just a show of strength by the consortium of asset spivvers and some posturing by the gang of four and their pal King who are playing a long game and maybe even praying for another opportunity for a reduced point penalty or conditional licence from their pal Campbell.
The club will not sell for a premium now or never because nobody on the horizon has Craigie’s mythical wealth.
But like Gollum in LOTR that wee man still has a role to play.
Ticketus will want paid.
Instead of clarity breaking out things will just get messier.
And the only short term smiles will be on the faces of lawyers who some people think are just spivs in silk and wigs anyway.

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on4:41 pm - Dec 19, 2013


easyJambo says: (610)
December 19, 2013 at 4:36 pm

Resolution 10 re the disapplication of pre-emption rights

My reading of the situation is that the Board was given the right to issue more shares under resolution 9, but did not gain sufficient votes (75%) to pass resolution 10,

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Good spot and a bit of a bugger for the board who may have a few sales to their mates planned out the back door – to raise some cash for the meter. So even more austerity needed then 🙂

View Comment

nawlitePosted on4:48 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Also means they can’t now just allow King to give them money for new shares too, right? Unless of course he buys out the current shareholders, which he has said is unlikely. Seems King is out of the picture for a while at least.

Will Wallace have to be sold for whatever they can get in January now?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:50 pm - Dec 19, 2013


easyJambo says: (610)
December 19, 2013 at 4:36 pm

I think in the past you have been up on these matters.

Is it not the case that they have another 30m- 35m or so shares that were approved but held back at the IPO.
Given the present shares are down at an all time low who is going to invest and what would an issue of the remainder actually bring in/
Who would be up for having their shareholding diluted?

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on4:55 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Not getting Resolution 10 approved just puts 1 extra step into the plan.

They will execute res 9 , its unlikely the requisitioners supporters will take up their allocation. Which means that when the board will have the 75% necessary when they go back with Res 10 in the (near) future.

In the unlikely event everyone took up their rights allocation , the board gets more cash. I outlined this scenario on here a couple of weeks ago, and its all falling into place as predicted.

Fly in the ointment is the Ticketus and other legal claims outlined by BRTH earlier today

View Comment

100BJDPosted on4:57 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Oh well the expected result means that the board have won the battle (except for res 10) but have they won the war. It is to be hoped that this board will now unleash their save the club/company plan. They need to raise cash and cut costs….sounds simple although in reality it is pretty tough. On the cost cutting side they will need a restructuring budget to fulfil the TUPE obligations of anybody made redundant. They will be hard pointed by existing contractual positions and the general economy of scale issues associated with their current turnover……good luck at this late stage of the game with that one Graham.

So how can they get some hard readies-:
(1) Share issue……at todays price you will be diluting all the institutions and your fans by over 50% plus the institutions seem mostly to be in the Malcom Murray camp. Not being too personal here although I would not want that man leading me anwhere. Plus the costs of the share issue and remembering the costs of the last one…………………….no not a winner
(2) Loan from Dave King… well maybe.. you could have a loan which converts into equity…..everybody (except the penny share boys) gets diluted again.
(3) Loan from anyone with warrants….well the warrants will have a performance aspect so more dilution or a floating charge on the debt……maybe not
(4) Raise asset finance using The Big Hoose…….I favour this one personally although it might sound a bit too far for the average supporter who they are trying to woo. I can imagine Leggo writing about the wickedness of asset based financing right now!
(5) Soft loans from Rangers minded wealthy punters….this would work but where have they been during all this lot.
(6) Sell players………………to who.. for what

So I will wait with interest to see how the board can square the circle here…….

View Comment

Sugar DaddyPosted on5:02 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Oh my aching sides! This Sevco Circus is the gift that just keeps giving.

Boos all round for the the guys that actually paid out a lot of money to wear those snazzy ties but a standing ovation for the guy who wont hand back half his salary despite saying he would 3 months ago.

Ally, old chap, its really very simple. You write a letter to the payroll department stating what you wish to be paid irrespective of what your contract says and, er, well, um, that’s it.

Now I hope you haven’t being trying to negotiate a deferred payment or a longer contract in order for you to accept this change to a contract you haven’t read.

Thursday 19th December 2013 the day the good ship Dignity slipped beneath the waves.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on5:06 pm - Dec 19, 2013


100BJD says: (107)
December 19, 2013 at 4:57 pm

(5) Soft loans from Rangers minded wealthy punters….this would work but where have they been during all this lot…
==========
Unfortunately, the self-styled ‘King of Chavs’ has blown his lottery fortune, so no more loans possible.

View Comment

100BJDPosted on5:13 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (315)

December 19, 2013 at 4:55 pm

0

0

Rate This

Quantcast

Not getting Resolution 10 approved just puts 1 extra step into the plan.

They will execute res 9 , its unlikely the requisitioners supporters will take up their allocation. Which means that when the board will have the 75% necessary when they go back with Res 10 in the (near) future.

In the unlikely event everyone took up their rights allocation , the board gets more cash. I outlined this scenario on here a couple of weeks ago, and its all falling into place as predicted.

Fly in the ointment is the Ticketus and other legal claims outlined by BRTH earlier today
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Barca,
Technically correct although why would the existing shareholders take up the issue….where is their exit. I look at this and see the exit strategies of the pros like Green and Ahmad although I cannot see what the other shareholders have to gain by pumping more money in to secure a resolution. Even if res 10 had been agreed there is limited value in any share potential to say the least. What for example are Laxey doing? I cannot believe their position so I have to conclude that the property assets (or distraint liabilities depending on your view) are the only potential winner for the existing shareholders. As ever we will see although it is a total disaster and I wonder how long the fans are going to put up with it.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on5:20 pm - Dec 19, 2013


wottpi says: (1348) December 19, 2013 at 4:50 pm

Barcabhoy covered the point in his post above, but there were only 6.85M shares not taken up in the IPO.

As Barca says a small share issue may go ahead with the existing (Spiv) shareholders taking up sufficient to allow them to pass resolution 10 at the second time of asking. e.g. if the 6.85M shares already authorised were issued and only taken up by the Spiv camp, then it would represent 9.5% of the new total of shares in circulation. That would be enough to get them over the 75% threshold, so that they could be creative in offering a proportion of free or heavily discounted new shares to any of their Spiv mates.

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on5:27 pm - Dec 19, 2013


A bit off topic, but these favorite lyrics come to mind for the requisitioners:

Hey babe, come over here, let me buy you a beer, what’s your name?
She said “boy, it doesn’t really matter,
Don’t you see?
You ain’t what I want,
You ain’t what I need,
You ain’t what I fancy,
You ain’t what I dream of”
and I’d silently leave – ugly.

Rain, Ian Hunter

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:37 pm - Dec 19, 2013


easyJambo says: (611)
December 19, 2013 at 5:20 pm

Hear what you say.

I just thought that I had seen somewhere that , although only 70m or so were issued in the IPO (and the fans baulked at taking up their allocation), they had initial authoriastion for around the 100m mark.

Of course my grey matter could be spouting mince. 🙂

View Comment

nickmcguinnessPosted on5:51 pm - Dec 19, 2013


easyjambo & Barcabhoy,

If you were a heartless asset stripper looking to make as many quick bucks as you could before the ship hit the rocks, what would be your tactics?
Personally, I don’t fancy Mr Wallace’s chances of being around there in 120 days to finish his “comprehensive review” of the clumpany’s finances. The fact he has had to announce this means he hasn’t a clue what is going on. I don’t think the spivs will be in any rush to enlighten him. Now the AGM is out of the way their enthusiasm for proper corporate governance can be expected to wane rapidly.
And what is the purpose of the “Investments Committee” that the clumpany announced recently? Do they intend to invest some of their rapidly diminishing reserves elsewhere?
Check the history of Gama spA of italy 2000-2002 for an idea of what that could lead to.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on5:54 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Anyway, back to more mundane matters like football and administration penalties.

Hearts are now faced with the reality of not being able to field a competitive side for Saturday’s game at Celtic Park, mainly because of a growing injury list and the registration embargo which has forced them to regularly field a crop youngsters who are not physically ready to play every week in the top league.

It got me thinking about how the SFA/SPL(SPFL) apply penalties for administration.

There is nothing in insolvency law that prevents the administrators from spending money to maintain a business on a footing that will allow it to be ultimately sold on for the benefit of creditors and become a sustainable business following a CVA. However, the footballing sanctions, as applied in Hearts case, actually have a restrictive effect on the administrators ability to carry out their duty to creditors. i.e. preventing them from keeping a competitive team on the park (but still living within their means).

The application of the rules by the footballing authorities has been one dimensional, i.e. apply footballing punishments.
The SPL (implemented by the SPFL) applied a 15 point penalty
The SPL (implemented by the SPFL) applied a registration embargo while administration continued
The SFA independently applied a further registration embargo covering the upcoming transfer window.

It is the nature and application of these penalties that could be questioned. I’ve no problem with a quick and proportionate penalty of a club being relegated for going into administration. Had Hearts been relegated during the close season then we would currently be in the “Championship”, but able get on and rebuild the club appropriate to our new income. The sanctions as they stand only serve to hamper the recovery and rebuilding of the club by a year. i.e. the club will almost certainly be in the second tier next August but only able to start a recovery some 14 months after going into administration.

With regard to sanctions I do have an issue with being punished for the same offence by two bodies (SPL and SFA) that should be working as one. I fully understand the need for a footballing penalty by the SPL, although I do think that there have been unintended consequences in Hearts case. Basically the extended administration period could adversely affect the longer term development of the young talent at the club, because of the club’s inability to rest some of the younger players.

The SFA are meant to be guardians of the game in Scotland, therefore the sanctions they should be looking at are against those individuals who caused one of their member clubs to suffer an insolvency event. The limit of action they appear to apply to individuals is through any future Fit and Proper Person test, which oddly enough would not prevent Vlad (since he was neither a director nor a shareholder in his own name) from taking control of a club in the future.

View Comment

BawsmanPosted on5:57 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Are they insolvent?

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on6:07 pm - Dec 19, 2013


nickmcguinness says: (150)
December 19, 2013 at 5:51 pm

Lord, grant me corporate governance. but not yet?

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:12 pm - Dec 19, 2013


nickmcguinness says: (150) December 19, 2013 at 5:51 pm

Nick – I read your earlier posts on Abela with interest and I suspect that you are right. None on the current shareholders (or the Board) has a history of long term investment in an “institution”, therefore you have to ask, as 100BJD did above, “what is the exit strategy?”

The accepted approach of getting a business back on track by cutting costs through austerity measures will not readily be accepted by the “peepil”

I don’t know what the future strategy will be, but the Bears should be very scared of what lies ahead.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on6:21 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Bawsman says: (239)
December 19, 2013 at 5:57 pm
1 0 Rate This

Are they insolvent?
==========================
Not in the technical sense, since on paper assets exceed liabilities. However they are in the throes of a cash flow crisis, and the trouble is that their assets, basically the properties and the player registrations, are not instantly convertible into cash. They can maybe sell a couple of players in January, but how much are they likely to get for them? Not a lot, is my guess.

They need a lot of cash and they need it soon, because once the cash runs out and they can’t pay the bills or the wages, then they have to close the doors. It’s as simple as that. Of course if they stop paying wages, then any employee can apply for a winding up order. But I’m sure that the football side will be in the hands of some real Rangers men before it comes to that. They will then have the task of finding lots of cash in a hurry to pay the bills. Where from is anyone’s guess.

View Comment

taxman comethPosted on6:24 pm - Dec 19, 2013


easyJambo says: (613)
December 19, 2013 at 6:12 pm
1 0 Rate This

nickmcguinness says: (150) December 19, 2013 at 5:51 pm

Nick – I read your earlier posts on Abela with interest and I suspect that you are right. None on the current shareholders (or the Board) has a history of long term investment in an “institution”, therefore you have to ask, as 100BJD did above, “what is the exit strategy?”

The accepted approach of getting a business back on track by cutting costs through austerity measures will not readily be accepted by the “peepil”

I don’t know what the future strategy will be, but the Bears should be very scared of what lies ahead.

====

But then private equity firms/hedge funds look to taking as much out of the cash flow for as long as they can before they have bled the beast dry – the simplistic view of ra peepill is that the only way they can make a profit is to make the club so successful that the share price rockets – this requires lots of cash – this seriously is how they think and they are allowed to buy shares

What did PT Barnum say again?

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on6:34 pm - Dec 19, 2013


The important type of “insolvent” is whether or not you can pay your bills as they fall due.

That can’t be far away and a cash injection is required.

View Comment

AngusloonPosted on6:45 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Lots being said about the need to sell players in January, Wallace seemingly the golden child ❗ But any club that does fancy him are not going to pay top $, club chairmen etc know the score at ibrokes so they’ll offer well below the supposed market value, also why would any of the players want to move? They’re on pretty good contracts or they wouldn’t have left SPL clubs to go there in the first place. Might not be so easy to punt some players on.

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on6:59 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Angusloon says: (34)

December 19, 2013 at 6:45 pm

Exactly, they would be well advised to stay put on their generous contracts, after all, if there’s an insolvency event, there is already a precedent for “heading for the hills”

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:00 pm - Dec 19, 2013


I do like a healthy sceptic, and the Craig they have on Sportsound tonight is one of the few who seems able to make criticisms of His Walterness, and others. I know one of these guys has a very dodgy background, but this Craig sounds more of a more reasonable origin.

I wonder how the Stockbridge clan will isolate Wallace. You’d think Wallace can not afford to risk his reputation and future career on this project.

View Comment

AngusloonPosted on7:00 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Just seen 2 ragers season tickets nailed to the front door at ibrox,
I thought,I’m having them !
Well you can never have too many nails! :mrgreen:

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on7:21 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Angusloon says: (35)
December 19, 2013 at 6:45 pm
Lots being said about the need to sell players in January, Wallace seemingly the golden child ❗ But any club that does fancy him are not going to pay top $, club chairmen etc know the score at ibrokes so they’ll offer well below the supposed market value, also why would any of the players want to move? They’re on pretty good contracts or they wouldn’t have left SPL clubs to go there in the first place. Might not be so easy to punt some players on.
===================================================

This could get like Leeds Utd when they were still paying players wages long after they had left the club for pastures new but on lower wages.

But will any player/agent trust them to still be in existence a year or two hence?

And why the lack of proper questioning today? Are they hoping that the big, nasty mountain their Plummet Airlines plane is heading towards is going to move out of the way?

Scottish Football needs Ticketus to pick up CW’s claim against Ostrich* FC.

*Ostriches do NOT in fact bury their heads in the sand. Certain football supporters clearly do however.

View Comment

tobyPosted on7:22 pm - Dec 19, 2013


They really are in a bit of a pickle. Old club – new club – sevco, call them what you will. They are, again or for the first time, depending on your own take, an ‘omnishambles’. Look up the ‘Word of the year 2012’ and a likely synonym for it would be ‘Rangers’ or ‘The Rangers’. Today’s AGM provided pretty much what most knew on here for a long time. The spivs are in complete control and there is nothing an angry seated shareholder mob shouting ‘out out out’ can do about it. Mr Murray & Co, your boys took a hell of a beating, to quote Norwegian football commentator, Bjørge Lillelien. The board, competent or not, are now safely installed til the last pound has been drained. Its been a foregone conclusion for a long time despite the exultations of Paul Murray and his cohort, and the impotent flashing of red cards at the last couple of home games. Even Stockbridge who somehow has the look of a man constantly enjoying the waft of his own fart, raked in over 65% support.

What gets me today though is the notion that whatever excuse for a club resides at Ibrox til it slides into financial and legal meltdown, can call itself the most successful club in Scotland. Is that the same club that ‘overlooked’ to pay tens of millions into the country’s coffers while paying millionaire footballers nearly tax free salaries ? Is that how you measure success ? Or not pay dozens of companies whats due them ? Very impressive – setting a new low standard for the rest to follow ? I doff a chapeau to the absurdity of your claim of success. To the sheer audacity of your sheer bloody ignorance to facts of liquidation, bravo.

As a club riven with in-fighting, as cash burn continues unabated, as the manager resides on empty promises of salary reduction, the ones in power will make hay while the sun shines. That’s spiv success. But hey, who am I but a mere bampot, laughing and in awe in equal measure incredulous at the ‘most successful club in the world’ or whatever it hilariously calls itself. ‘Ready’ ? Aye, just for the next implosion. If you could do fireworks when it goes up, I’m sure they’d be the most impressive and successful firework show ever, just mind and pay the supplier and the VAT. Cheers.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:26 pm - Dec 19, 2013


OT, but very good blog from Alex Thomson, http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/headline-written/6897 re the Limond abuse of Angela Haggerty

View Comment

Caveat EmptorPosted on7:27 pm - Dec 19, 2013


taxman cometh says: (113)
December 19, 2013 at 6:24 pm
4 0 Rate This
– the simplistic view of ra peepill is that the only way they can make a profit is to make the club so successful that the share price rockets – this requires lots of cash – this seriously is how they think and they are allowed to buy shares
******************************************************
As I’ve said many times before, this attitude is more than prevalent among ra peepil. It has become almost a mantra. It’s fair ruined my Friday nights with the boys where heated debates on matters fitba were a regular feature. Now, such ‘chats’ are avoided. It got to the stage that they very quickly descended into a series of ‘proclamations’, ‘battle cries’ and barely concealed (so far) threats, both personal and involving all ‘Rangers Haters’.
And I’m not talking inarticulate knuckle draggers here .Normally intelligent, articulate guys, who to a man are susceptible (admittedly with drink taken) to the ‘Blue Mist of Rangersness’.
Is there a known cure?

View Comment

BrendaPosted on7:28 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Sorry guys but had to listen to SSB tonight 😆 Guidi thinks the ‘rangers saga’ has been good for scottish football and agreed with P Murray that the fans/shareholders behaviour today was fine ?????? 😆 absolutely beggars belief 😕

View Comment

twopandaPosted on7:32 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Bogeymen thing
Then Jack nonsense
Any Questions?
Where did the money go?
`Risk` – Oh it was `risk` was it?
Where’s the risk in 38,000 paying supporters every other week?
Well, – It was expensive risk you see – they had to get all their money back in 6 months – add pay-offs etc etc – and still be in control
[D`oh – no answer]
Oh and……
We need time to be trusted – that’s why we postponed the agm till the last minute
.. And waited till the day after TU case
.
Any more questions? – Fine – see you next year
& – don`t forget to buy STs and shares on your way out.
Ally we salute you 😉
.
.
Blimey

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:39 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Dr. Mike McDermott ‏@MikejMcDermott 17m
Guddi #SevCo spin

“they’ve helped out lot of smaller clubs with money & given other clubs in top league chance”

ha ha ha
@ClydeSSB #FARCE
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
#CFCNOTPLC ‏@Themayancsc2012 17m
@MikejMcDermott @ClydeSSB Its brilliant satire…
Reply Retweet Favorite More Expand
Dr. Mike McDermott ‏@MikejMcDermott 15m
@Themayancsc2012 @ClydeSSB

See that’s the thing once you realise it’s comedy being played straight it’s a laugh a minute
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More
#CFCNOTPLC ‏@Themayancsc2012 13m
@MikejMcDermott @ClydeSSB Its bloody unbelievable that they are serious…

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:44 pm - Dec 19, 2013


andygraham.66 says: (87)
December 19, 2013 at 3:17 pm

Bryan Swanson on SSN

22 months ago they faced administration and then a few months later they faced liquidation

Let me reword that for you.

Rangers 22 months ago were placed in administration and after the failure to obtain a CVA, the club was liquidated.

It’s not rocket science
===========================
He was saying similar last night, tweeted him, but still no response!

Free our fans ‏@p4ulsatim 18h
@SkySportsNews @skysports_bryan

How can a club thats liquidated now be having an AGM? You said this is 1st AGM in 3 years.Illogical! 1/2

Free our fans ‏@p4ulsatim 18h
@SkySportsNews @skysports_bryan
Thats the problem when promoting a lie, it catches up with you!! 2/2

View Comment

chancer67Posted on7:46 pm - Dec 19, 2013


The events of today are being reported far and wide it seems,but you have got to laugh at the inaccuracies in this piece,if left unchecked the illusion that they are the same entity will become common place.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
London South East Logo | UK Share Price information

Home::Alliance News::Rangers Says Will Need New Funding But Will Complete ReviewBookmark this page
Alliance News

Rangers Says Will Need New Funding, But Will Complete Review First
Thu, 19th Dec 2013 11:01

LONDON (Alliance News) – Rangers International Football Club PLC Chief Executive Graham Wallace Thursday said the club will need further investment, but it will only be sought once the club has completed a business planning process.

Scotland’s most successful football club is trying to draw a line under a tumultuous period in which it went into administration, was relegated from the top division, and faced a boardroom battle over the future direction of the company.

It went into administration under the weight of a large debt burden and as the tax man claimed back money it said was owed for a large number of years due to undisclosed payments made to players.

Ex-Manchester City executive Wallace was appointed CEO in November. In a statement ahead of the Rangers annual general meeting, he said he would focus on delivering financial sustainability, reconnect with the fans, and make sure its facilities, including the Ibrox stadium, are set up to maximise business potential.

His first task will be to complete a detailed business review of all the club’s operations, and to re-motivate staff and re-engage with fans.

“It is reasonable to assume that in order to take the club back to competing at the top levels domestically and in Europe that (future financial investment will be needed). However, this funding will only be sought once we have completed a robust business planning process that will allow us to engage with shareholders and potential investors from the platform of a well thought out strategic plan,” Wallace said in the AGM statement.

Rangers shares were flat at 34 pence Thursday morning.

By Steve McGrath; stevemcgrath@alliancenews.com; @SteveMcGrath1

Copyright © 2013 Alliance News Limited. All Rights Reserved.

Alliance News

Related Shares: RFC.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on7:59 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Its actually quite an achievement to write that article and not mention the L word.

A bit like saying Germany was a major economic power in 1913 and by 1951 had cemented its position.

Serious question for anyone thinking this is mirthful banter. If RFC can find some mug punters to lend them some money, a lot of money, what is to stop them doing this again – given that this whole liquidation malarky is allegedly nothing but an administrative hiccup that apparently “gives money to smaller clubs and gives other top tier clubs a chance.”

View Comment

fergusslayedthebluesPosted on8:07 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Oh what a quandary
The MSM are now left squirming and having to plead to the Sevco 2012 fans not to boycott and withhold their cash from the incumbents .
They may believe the peepil running the clumpany are spivs and money has been flying down the marble staircase but they cannot ask the Sevco 2012 fans to starve the spivs and turn off the tap of cash .
In fact having just listened to one of the phone ins ,they are actually pleading with the fans to keep digging deep and it’s “or the club will go into admin again” “or the club will be in trouble again” .
How can this be ,they have spent the last year or so telling us all that it was just the company that suffered the last time round .
Why are the peepils puppets in the media not championing an immediate withdrawal of fans financial backing ensuring the liquidation of the company full of spivs and all round bad guys ,thus leaving the immortal club to sail on until good peepil come along and bobs yer uncle.
Why are the Sevco 2012 fans so worried if their club CANNOT die . :slamb: :slamb: 🙄

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on8:08 pm - Dec 19, 2013


OT and due many TDs 🙁

Message to Broadswordcallingdannybhoy:

I see Where Eagles Dare is on ITV4 right now. Please switch off PC and give full attention to television. Duty is calling you!

My apologies to all for interrupting this blog with a message to one of our most important military geniuses 😉

View Comment

fergusslayedthebluesPosted on8:12 pm - Dec 19, 2013


chancer67
I am sure the guy who wrote that piece was about when I was a boy ,although I think he went by the name of Asop back then

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on8:12 pm - Dec 19, 2013


I suppose the ‘academic/legal ‘ attention now to turns to the question of CW’s claim that he is the true owner of the Ibrox assets and was defrauded of them, by CG (possibly with the connivance of good old Dee and Pee).
He had doubtless had the sense to put all his personal assets such as Castle Grant, the pad in Monaco etc. out of reach of his creditors (so TU can go whistle for their money.)

And he will be declared bankrupt.

Where, then, would he find funding to pursue his claim? No decent law-firm would act for him unless they were sure they would get paid, win or no win.

That leaves him only the hope that some kind of police/fraud enquiry is quietly bubbling along in the background and that criminal prosecution ( costing him nothing) will unearth the ‘Fraud’ and establish that the assets are well and truly still his and Earley’s.

Wouldn’t that be something?

View Comment

auchinstarryPosted on8:13 pm - Dec 19, 2013


That was a scene and three quarters today……The Christians thrown to the Dinosaurs!!! Even Ron and Ron looked queasy. Ally seemed expressionless, like a shotgun bride who had just found out the tests were negative!
Now it’s onwards and upwards with the business plans (tryin hard not to pee masel)….Stockbridge on the other hand, if body language don’t tell lies, appeared as Mr. Fu or F. U… …….it wont be long now till Departure call.
Canny wait for the Daily Ranger Loyal tomorrow……..much better than “Private Eye”……and about as intellectual as “Viz”. Cmon Jack Tell us a story..!

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on8:25 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Have been catching up on the AGM developments and pleased to see all went as predicted; as predicted everywhere other than the MSM that is 🙂

Fortunately I’ve been on a first aid course today and have learned how to put a sticking plaster on a finger. So, if RIFC, TRFC or whatever they are want sorted, I’m your go to guy!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:29 pm - Dec 19, 2013


john clarke says: (1449)
December 19, 2013 at 8:12 pm
6 0 Rate This

… That leaves him only the hope that some kind of police/fraud enquiry is quietly bubbling along in the background and that criminal prosecution ( costing him nothing) will unearth the ‘Fraud’ and establish that the assets are well and truly still his and Earley’s.

Wouldn’t that be something?
——–

Cue, Charlotte Fakes 5?

View Comment

iceman63Posted on8:32 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Delighted to see the full range of outstanding issues raised, all legitimate concerns addressed and all potential problems solved at Ibrox today.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on8:36 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Allyjambo says: (729)
December 19, 2013 at 8:08 pm
‘…..I see Where Eagles Dare is on ITV4 right now..’
———
I gather that earlier today there were several hundred Clint Easton types metaphorically holding the ‘plane door open while looking fixedly at Mr Stockbridge in the expectation that he would do a Colonel Turner ( Patrick Wymark) and step outside with dignity!
It may still happen.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on8:42 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Brenda says: (725)
December 19, 2013 at 7:28 pm

LOL, 4 TDs, is that because you tuned in to SSB?

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:44 pm - Dec 19, 2013


iceman63 says: (313)
December 19, 2013 at 8:32 pm

Delighted to see the full range of outstanding issues raised, all legitimate concerns addressed and all potential problems solved at Ibrox today.
=====================================
We also saw the emergence of a man who is apparently shaping up as the best football club CEO ever to hold a position in Scotland – step forward Graham Wallace. As I said in an earlier post, I can’t ever recall any other CEO being given the red carpet treatment by the media this guy is rapidly receiving. The CEO of my club, Peter Lawwell, is treated with suspicion at best, and openly derided at worst, yet he has done an outstanding job. Previous Celtic CEO’s Ian McLeod, Alan MacDonald and Jock Brown were also treated with utter contempt by the media.

I can only conclude Wallace has been looked into and ticks all the right boxes in terms of what a ‘real’ Rangers man is.

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on8:44 pm - Dec 19, 2013


John Clarke @8:12pm

Of course it may well be in Ticketus’ interest if any Trustee in Bankruptcy were to pursue the claim re Sevco as per my earlier post here:

http://www.tsfm.org.uk/2013/11/past-the-event-horizon/comment-page-56/#comment-78156

In the absence of actual payment from Craig– most unlikely— Ticketus would have over 18Million reasons for funding the Trustee to a certain extent in pursuing this.

Even better if Castle Grant could be flogged to raise enough for some legal expenses.

A surplus of a few hundred thousand on the castle or whatever else Craig has lying about will not make a great dent in the £18M plus expenses due, but it may put enough petrol in the tank of the lawyers to allow them a good tilt at RIFC, Green & co who will all have to weigh up what it would cost to defend the claim and the potential outcome if Charlie has been anything less than truthful about his dealings with the MBB.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on8:46 pm - Dec 19, 2013


Today must go down as one of the major days in the Rangers saga.

We have had Sheriff’s Officers at Ibrox and arrestments at banks.

We have had Craig Whyte standing on the steps of Ibrox warning them that administration was possible, only for HMRC pushing them into it almost immediately.

We have had a failed CVA

We have had liquidation and the creating of a new club, with new spivs taking over.

We have had a failed IPO, with all or most of the proceeds spent in about a year and a half.

We have had the Spivs repel the rebels with ease and show that Rangers and everything belonging to it was theirs and no-one could do anything about it.

The support have been warned about most if not all of that. Their response – WATP and you are just Rangers haters. We are too big for any of this to happen and we will survive, come back stronger, and crush all of you.

Well here you go chaps – I Told You So, and since you won’t listen it will just keep happening until there is nothing left.

View Comment

Comments are closed.