Turnbull Hutton
is the chairman of Raith Rovers. He has been lauded by TSFM readers as a man of courage and integrity who shares our views about the game – and who has never shirked away from calling out those who don’t.
But what motivated him to take on the largely thankless challenge of devoting himself to his local team?
What are his plans for Raith Rovers? What are his views on the SFA, League reconstruction, Armageddon, and a whole load of other things.
Not to mention the savouring of a still-fresh recent cup win.
It would I think, take an earthquake of Jovian dimensions to disconnect Hutton’s connection to terra-firma. Born and brought up in Burntisland, he is wedded to plain speaking and of course to Raith Rovers.
My sense is of a man who eschews the Scottish Football Blazer culture, who is instinctively suspicious of politicians and other bandwagon jumpers, and who has a sense of optimism about the future of our game.
Like many other directors at clubs across the country, he and his colleagues are often required to dig deep into their own pockets to keep their clubs alive, their sole reward being the satisfaction of doing so (and the occasional cup win!).
Before retirement he was joint managing director of Diageo Operations Scotland, and in that role he helped facilitate the Bells sponsorship of Scottish football.
Just short of buying a Rovers Season ticket, I couldn’t have been more charmed, but had I expected a dewy eyed idealist with zealot’s agenda over the sins of the authorities, I would have been wrong.
Hutton is very much pragmatist. He knows exactly what has gone wrong, but feels that the game most urgently needs some of Auldheid’s “Truth & Reconciliation” before it can sort itself out.
Hutton is a somewhat reluctant hero. He is flattered when I tell him of the regard he is held in here, and complimentary about the level of debate on TSFM, where is a regular reader .
When I spoke to Turnbull at his Edinburgh home, I was treated to a warm welcome by him and his wife Margot, as well as coffee, biscuits, chat, and a lesson in the dynamics of running a championship club; from leading a debt-ridden Rovers into profit last year, to the dilemmas inherent in boardroom redecoration 🙂
Could it be that Mr Somers share transactions are his bonus?
While scrutiny has been on Wallace and his bonus has everyone forgot what Somers is on.
I would think he will be on a package at least comparable with Wallace.
As for Keevins use of the word ‘relocated’, well I wonder how many more words they can come up with without saying the dreaded ‘L’ word.
Perhaps someone should phone in and say that for ‘The Rangers’ to restore their balance sheet they should simply sue every reporter and newspaper that said that the club had died the day after the CVA failed. It is easy money for them because everyone who wrote these stories has later changed their stance so quite clearly there is a defamation case to answer. The poor club, sorry company’s, name was dragged through the mud by gutter journalists and these people should pay. Not only that but the newspapers that allowed this dreadful slur to go to print are also actionable.
Financial problems solved!!!!
Dave King and Richard Gough have achieved between them something which on the face of it is quite unique. Rangers fans or at least some of them are not as ill disposed to a bit of good old fashioned rebellion as some, myself included, imagined.
Perhaps all that was lacking was the right vehicle, something the regular fans could buy into (when I say ‘buy’, I’m not exactly talking about money changing hands here, there are issues in that regard ) or pledge into, or in some as yet to be defined way erm…trust into. (Not sure that’s even a thing).
In any event the rebels are out there making noise on the inter web and drumming up support.
All rebellions start in chaos, if they achieve anything it’s usually the result of widespread unrest and shared aims coalescing around an effective leadership.
The Rangers saga continues to surprise and dumbfound.
In this instance it looks like the rebels are organised and effective but disastrously coalescing around an ill defined and consequently chaotic leadership.
ecobhoy says:
May 8, 2014 at 7:40 pm
If HMRC lose the UTT then I think it’s a certaintly they will appeal again although if the Murray Companies and Rangers lose then I’m not so sure they will appeal although it will all be down to the bank at the end of the day I would imagine.
===========
I agree. HMRC won’t give up on this short of the Supreme Court, there is far too much at stake in other football cases. I can’t honestly see Murray taking this further if he loses at the UTT- he got what he wanted when he wanted it with the FTT result.
And on the subject of the use of the word relocated, I’ve noticed recently several people linked with Rangers talking about “since we entered administration” etc. Never heard anyone say “since we entered liquidation”. It’s annoying to me to be honest. If you want to tell the same club story then tell it, but don’t pick and choose bits of the story and hope nobody will notice.
It doesn’t really bother me one way or another, everybody knows the events that occurred and where we are now, I just don’t like how some public people are so selective with the way they refer to things. Probably annoys me for different reasons than a lot of people here (!) but annoying it surely is.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 8, 2014 at 6:47 pm
13 0 Rate This
Blue Order rep on SSB(I know) claims TRFC have only sold 1800 STs at this time against 15,000 at the same time last season.
Is this what “slower,rather than lower” means?.
========================================
I heard that caller earlier. He phones into the show a lot. Not the worst speaker in the world and likes to portray himself as being ‘in the know’ regarding affairs down Ibrox way. Whether he is accurate in his season ticket sales figures, who knows.
What perplexed me most though was that discussions on Dave King potentially gaining control of Rangers appear now to have completely moved on from whether he is fit and proper to do so, given his tax evasion convictions. It’s as if it’s no longer an issue, save for only a couple of media people. The danger of this is of course the SFA may adopt the view, ‘we won’t ask if you don’t’.
And I can understand that. But why did he do it in two separate tranches and for such relatively piddling amounts? Anyway, if that’s all the Chairman is prepared to buy then it surely decreases confidence rather than increases it.
As for ST renewals, so far I’ve heard the following figures mentioned: 1800, 2000, 2308, 3500, 5000, 16-18000, and 18-19000. Not that it matters as according to Rangers’ QC the original investors will stump up any shortfall. Oh yes.
RyanGosling says:
May 8, 2014 at 7:56 pm
“since we entered administration”
_____________________________________
I’ve always felt that ranked along with “since we came out of administration”. Both impossible for something that isn’t a limited company.
Both numbers could be described as high teens. (Or maybe it is literally just 17 or 18. )
y4rmy says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:10 pm
As for ST renewals, so far I’ve heard the following figures mentioned: 1800, 2000, 2308, 3500, 5000, 16-18000, and 18-19000. Not that it matters as according to Rangers’ QC the original investors will stump up any shortfall. Oh yes.
===================================================
Always worth remembering that the Rangers QC was very careful to make it very clear he wasn’t giving any undertaking about what the investors would do but just advising the court the instructions he had received from his client.
Of course even if the investors don’t pony-up to cover any shortfall in ST sales there is no sanction that can be applied to them as they haven’t directly – as far as we know – given the court any assurances.
And such are the vagaries of investing and the ever-changing nature of the ‘Market Beast’ then even if they did provide written guarantees I’m sure they would be couched to the effect that at this moment in time they would be prepared to step-in.
But 2-3-4 months down the line things could change and they might no longer be in a position to post bail so to speak to get Rangers outa ‘jail’ because the community chest is bare.
I still think it’s impossible to figure out what lies ahead but I don’t believe that things can remain the same because I just don’t believe that any investor – spiv or otherwise – will throw money into the potentially bottomless pit of Ibrox. They have no interest in football but just in making the maximum possible return on their dosh.
Of course maybe all the mystery overseas-based investors like Blue Pitch, Margarita, Norne Anstalte, Putney et alia are actually fronts for Real Rangers Men who will emerge as saviours when the time is right. I still believe in Santa as well btw 😆
Just a wee thought on ST sales. If it is 16,000 – 18,000, mostly paid by cash or cheque, that’s some number of applications they’ve processed in a few days – manually. Must have been huge queues around Ibrox and ATM machines emptied in the area 😯
First Casualty of War is Truth
Ever Was
RM [In between glottal stop staccato niceties] must have subscribed 20,000+ alone ❗
justshatered says:
May 8, 2014 at 7:51 pm
Could it be that Mr Somers share transactions are his bonus? While scrutiny has been on Wallace and his bonus has everyone forgot what Somers is on. I would think he will be on a package at least comparable with Wallace.
===============================
I would very much doubt it. Was Malcolm Murray not on £50/60K + exes without a bonus and Walter Smith was on £50K from memory.
I just can’t see a NED chair getting the same as the Chief Exec – that would be luidicrous and what would Easdale, who I don’t think is taking any dosh now, have to say about it?
I am grateful to Neepheid for his reply I was indeed referring to EBT “loans” but omitted to correct my spell check.
I was not totally au fait with the Jersey situation so thanks for your clarification on that point.
I too, am aware of the importance of the result at the tribunal. This is a major test case for HMRC, and I am sure you are correct in your assertion that HMRC will pursue it to the end.
Allyjambo says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:38 pm
Just a wee thought on ST sales. If it is 16,000 – 18,000, mostly paid by cash or cheque, that’s some number of applications they’ve processed in a few days – manually. Must have been huge queues around Ibrox and ATM machines emptied in the area 😯
======================================
Absolutely ! Must have been queuing overnight perhaps ?
If the ST sales are indeed as ‘low / slow’ as rumoured, then presumably most of the Ibrox staff will be only too aware and deeply concerned.
So, TRFC must encourage sales: a massive charm offensive – or a massive threat offensive – or both ?
And roll out as many ex-pros as possible to support ST sales.
…or do nothing and let the football club sink ?
mungoboy says:
May 8, 2014 at 7:45 pm
why buy two tranches of shares at different prices two days apart? Surely one purchase would have covered either base? Still think it’s an artificial pass the parcel manoeuvre, but what do I know about the City and shares etc?
====================================
I don’t think any people not in the loop have a clue about the vagaries of the AIM Casino.
But as to why two separate sales – perhaps he couldn’t get as many as he wanted first time round and it was the next day before more became available and of course the price was up. That’s me playing Devil’s Advocate btw 😆
There could be other reasons but not being an AIM insider I wouldn’t even begin to try and figure it out. But trading volumes in RFC shares tend to be very low and I’ve never had the feeling that there’s usually a lot about for sale.
But as you say – what do we know and more importantly do we want to ❓
See all these ‘…you have mail’, ‘….you have PM’, well they remind me of all the Valentines I never got 😥 😉
( Janis Ian, ‘At Seventeen’)
Jean7brodie
Good one, lol I know how you felt 😀
oddjob says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:51 pm
‘…This is a major test case for HMRC, and I am sure you are correct in your assertion that HMRC will pursue it to the end.’
————-
I can throw in to this discussion, perhaps,the fact that during the UTTT hearing, the FD of the MG as good as told me in so many words that if the verdict went against the MG, they will not appeal.
In reply to my observation to the effect that HMRC , in the event that they lost this round,would probably appeal because they were looking for a precedent-setting clear statement of how the law should be applied in these kinds of EBT arrangements, he said that that puzzled him and annoyed him, for his legal people took the view that the verdict in this case could NOT be used as a precedent in English cases. So he couldn’t understand quite why HMRC were so persistent, having earlier been unwilling to settle out of court. ( Perhaps he was looking enviously at ‘ settlements’ reached in far distant countries by Castlemilk-born frodsters?)
PS My fellow poster at the Ahmad hearing the other day mentioned that just last week Lord Doherty had been asked when the verdict of the UTTT would be announced. “No comment” was the answer.
jean7brodie says:
May 8, 2014 at 9:07 pm
‘ ..‘…you have mail’, ‘….you have PM’, well they remind me of all the Valentines I never got ‘
—————-
jean7brodie, you have PM . or will have when I get into my email later on! 😀
John Clark says:
May 8, 2014 at 9:28 pm
Aw bless!! Whoopee!!!!
Hope it’s got xxxxx’s
StevieBC says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:59 pm
I seem to recall some gent in a white shirt personally thanking all those in the season ticket queue at Ibrox few years back.
If they need a salesman to drum up business I wonder if they still have that guys number?
jean7brodie-you definitely now have PM!
StevieBC says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:59 pm
I seem to recall some gent in a white shirt personally thanking all those in the season ticket queue at Ibrox few years back.
It’s the Tea and Biscuits you need to do the trick 😀
wottpi says:
May 8, 2014 at 9:36 pm
2 0 Rate This
StevieBC says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:59 pm
I seem to recall some gent in a white shirt personally thanking all those in the season ticket queue at Ibrox few years back.
===========================================
Yep, only two short years ago, and they lapped it up. That, plus clapping Craig Whyte up Edminston Drive are just two reasons I don’t go for the ‘feel sorry for the fans’ stuff. On both occasions they saw it as a swift return to the days of hubris and domination under Murray. They see King getting into power as exactly the same thing.
The fans are as much of a problem as anyone else, because they simply refuse to accept the concept of living within your means. All they want is to be above Celtic, no matter how it is paid for. Why should anyone feel sorry for them when that is the type of thinking that prevails?
Is Dave King actually setting up a ‘government in exile’? Gough (coach), McLeish (manager), and is Traynor about to make a comeback (PR guru)?
Some Traynor rumours circulating tonight I see.
upthehoops says:
May 8, 2014 at 9:56 pm
They see King getting into power as exactly the same thing.
I just can’t see him giving out tea and Biscuits but 😉
John Clark says:
May 7, 2014 at 10:57 pm
“All I can say is that I’m pretty sure the words ‘former dean of faculty’ were used…”
—————————————–
I think this might be where my own recollection of that phrase stems from. It may be entirely unconnected to the case in point.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/qc-to-oversee-ibrox-investigation.20960458
Neepheid
Why is that you think that the funds in the Jersey trust cannot be chased by BDO? I accept that there will be no funds there now, but if the trust/trustees can be made insolvent in Jersey (and I would imagine they can be) then that would be a route to chase the recipients.
I confess – Jersey is a mystery law to me and tax law is worse.
ianagain says:
May 7, 2014 at 11:06 pm
“Is this a hark back to the Pinsents “clean bill of health” ?”
—————————————
I seen your comment after I had posted. You likely have a feel for the context in play here.
Danish Pastry says:
May 8, 2014 at 10:15 pm
7
0
Rate This
Is Dave King actually setting up a ‘government in exile’? Gough (coach), McLeish (manager), and is Traynor about to make a comeback (PR guru)?
Some Traynor rumours circulating tonight I see.
________________________________________
I don’t get the bears on this at all.
For DK to get the assets it has to be liquidation surely? (There is surely no way the existing owners will part with the shares they paid good money for, so a CVA leaves them in the hotseat!).
And liquidation MUST mean League 2 start BEST CASE! i.e. if they are lucky.
Personally, I really think that if they liquidate then the appetite will be to cast the new newclumpany into the nether hells (from their pov) of the pyramid leagues.
I see the Rovers and the New Diamonds deny ground sharing at Cliftonhill. Lets say they do ground share, that opens up a football ground to be used. Who might want to use a relatively new ground with good transport links in North Lanarkshire (Dare I say, a ready made support)?. Who knows!
It might to expensive for the Diamonds but maybe just right, for another up and coming team.It never looks good when a team doesn’t own its own ground, trouble lies there!
Iron Men from the Iron Burgh
Resin lab dog- I think liquidation this time would result in several splinter groups forming several “versions” of Rangers, with divided support and dwindling enthusiasm, none of them anywhere near the top leagues. Eventually, these groups may band together and begin moving up through the leagues, which I believe would quickly build up a head of steam and progress would be swift. But that is probably ten years at least down the line. For the Rangers fan, this time liquidation would be far more final than it was last time. And I’m aware of how stupid that sentence sounds, but I think you know what I mean.
According to the gers site there are options to pay, not just brown paper bag with reddies..
Castofthousands says:
May 8, 2014 at 10:35 pm
‘..I think this might be where my own recollection of that phrase stems from’
———-
That is probably right, and I’m relieved because I know now why I hadn’t been aware of it: I was just back from Oz and knackered for a couple of days. Thanks for the link.
I can see what Summers QC was getting at: that the view that Ahmad had a ‘prima facie’ case in his claim for bonus might be more questionable than thought, because the contract document had not been unearthed.
It was a funny observation to make, though, given that he said he was not saying that Lord Tyre had erred.He surely didn’t have the hope that Lord Armstrong would take a different view from that of Lord T on Ahmad’s claim, and decide that the application for arrestment did not pass the first of the three tests?
y4rmy says:
May 8, 2014 at 8:10 pm
As for ST renewals, so far I’ve heard the following figures mentioned: 1800, 2000, 2308, 3500, 5000, 16-18000, and 18-19000. Not that it matters as according to Rangers’ QC the original investors will stump up any shortfall. Oh yes.
=============================================================
the whole T sales numbers v pledge numbers is just a massive squirrel…one of record breaking proportions no doubt, but a squirrel all the same
the clumpany is experiencing £14.4M a year (operational) losses.
Cash in bank on dec 30th was 3.5M, they have had to borrow 1.5M from shareholders/fans and theyhave pulled in st renewals earlier (a world record?) to bring in cash.
How many tickets are sold is irrelevant. Even if they sold same number as last year at an average price of £342 (up from £222) last year – it only brings in an extra £4.5M, so, operational losses are now down to £10M
So, that should see the last 4 months – September.
They can issues 40M new shares, at current share price and less arrangement fees, they’ll get about £9M
So, still at a loss but maybe see out the season…MAYBE
Then what? next year they might get promotion premiership, but they’d need to punt 50,000 season tickets at over £600 a pop (average price) to cover the operational losses – as there can’t be a further share issue
Simply enough, the numbers just don’t stack up….so, ignore the squirrels, unless there is a complete overhaul of the business to slash costs and increase turnover, it’s a question of WHEN not IF it all crashes down again.
Castofthousands says:
May 8, 2014 at 10:43 pm
ianagain says:
May 7, 2014 at 11:06 pm
“Is this a hark back to the Pinsents “clean bill of health” ?”
—————————————
I seen your comment after I had posted. You likely have a feel for the context in play here.
===================================================================
I thought so but read back to Ecos more searching post –
ecobhoy says:
May 8, 2014 at 9:41 am
I see the VB do math for beginners, Dazzle your reader into submission. Sorry if already linked.
http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/evidence-based-mathematics.html
RyanGosling says:
May 8, 2014 at 11:02 pm
4
1
Rate This
Resin lab dog- I think liquidation this time would result in several splinter groups forming several “versions” of Rangers, with divided support and dwindling enthusiasm, none of them anywhere near the top leagues. Eventually, these groups may band together and begin moving up through the leagues, which I believe would quickly build up a head of steam and progress would be swift. But that is probably ten years at least down the line. For the Rangers fan, this time liquidation would be far more final than it was last time. And I’m aware of how stupid that sentence sounds, but I think you know what I mean.
_________________________________________
Putting myself in the boards shoes and the bear shoes, what should decent TRFC fans do?
I see a game of chess like this:
DK & UoF are unquestionably harming the club. There is no prospect of the board acquiescing to DKs demands, And I believe he is being disingenuous. I think he had ample opportunity to engage.
I think if he was on the level he could have come up with a strategy that could have given the current board an out while looking after the ‘interests of fans’.
He has showed no inclination to do this because that is not his play. Ibrox on the cheap is his play. Because he knows that is now the lynch pin.
Hell, he could buy enough equity for £5m to take control. For someone bandying around £50m investment that would be the straightforward, honest and legal move. Personally, I think he is none of those things.
Best option for the bears seems to be pay at the gate.
But the board – if they can make it through the close season (a massive IF there!) – simply need to crank up the gate prices to counter this and get a chunk of the bears round to money up front.
If STs are up by 15% and there are concessions available, simply up the pay at the gate by 30% and limit availability of concessions , while offering sweeteners to the ‘loyal fans’ whio stand by the club, you can see the pay at the gate set capitulating. (e.g. partial refund of gate money for those who convert their gate ticket into an ST in the first month of the new season)
There are angles here.
John Clark says:
May 8, 2014 at 11:16 pm
“It was a funny observation to make, though, given that he said he was not saying that Lord Tyre had erred.”
—————————————
Although your notes were comprehensive I think your understanding goes further than can be gleaned from them. Like you, I am intrigued by this reference. If it does indeed concern the Pinsent Mason report (Ianagain & Giovanni recollection acknowledged), why would this be material to Ahmad’s claim concerning outstanding bonus? The pertinent excerpt from your note appears below:
“Mr Nash, Chief Finance Officer at Ibrox, says Deloitte’s gave an unqualified report.
They had a former {?dean of faculty??) look at the investigation who found no evidence of inadequate disclosure [ edit: I have no idea what that refers to. Anybody?] “In arriving a their decision which was not “qualified” Deloitte’s had no criticism to make.”
Pinsent Mason were investigating alleged links between Craig Whyte and RIFC/TRFCL. Ahmad’s contract was purportedly provided by Charles Green. Why would Whyte’s name crop up in this context (if indeed it has)? My first instinct is that any CW claim on the fixed assets (Ibrox/MP) might make an arrestment involving fixed assets more complex.
Summer’s argument is that “…the investigation who found no evidence of inadequate disclosure…”. Does that perhaps imply that IA’s argument was that the assets may well in some way be encumbered? Would any potential such encumbrance fortify IA’s case since effectively absence of the fixed assets from any ‘money pot’ might place the clumpany closer to administration?
Just when you thought it was safe to come out from behind the sofa…
MercDoc says:
May 8, 2014 at 11:42 pm
“I see the VB do math for beginners, Dazzle your reader into submission.”
—————————————-
This looks interesting I thought. Haven’t seen it before. Then I read the opening line:
“Much has been said and written about the finances of Britain’s most successful sporting institution, Rangers Football Club.”
Now you know that the analysis that follows such a comment is unlikely to be searching or insightful never mind balanced. I was looking forward to an interesting bit of mathematics too. No point in reading any further than that first line however.
Leeds owner is reported to be axing more than 70 staff in a major cost cutting exercise.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/377820/EXCLUSIVE-Leeds-Massimo-Cellino-will-sack-at-least-70-members-of-staff-at-Elland-Road
Castofthousands says:
May 9, 2014 at 12:00 am
1
0
Rate This
MercDoc says:
May 8, 2014 at 11:42 pm
_________________________________________________
Actually not too bad.
Basically says that using standard financial valuation tools, the share price should be between 0 and 94p depending on valuation method used. Some methods imply the company is already valueless, others that it is heavily undervalued, and one measure that aligns closely with where the mkarket has placed the share price at this point in time.
Can’t argue with that. No attempt to hide difficult truths, if you don’t count couching them in esoteric language.
Also says that the credit risk score suggest insolvency is a risk but not a certainty.
In fact, the analysis would chime with recent RIFC board statements.
Just because I have misgivings about the source, my objective assessment of the analysis therein is ‘plausible;.
I’ve read and heard that another two former Rangers Managers are about to back Dave King. If this is true, and given McLeish has publicly declared, that leaves a choice of Smith, Le Guen, Advocaat, and Souness, and possibly also John Grieg. I think we can safely rule out Le Guen, but any of the others would have a damned cheek in my opinion. Given either their reckless determination to basically finish in front of Celtic at any cost, or their involvement in EBT’s, why should their opinions count?
Of course, the harsh reality is the media will collapse at their feet.
Castofthousands says:
May 9, 2014 at 12:00 am
“I see the VB do math for beginners, Dazzle your reader into submission.”
—————————————-
This looks interesting I thought. Haven’t seen it before. Then I read the opening line:
“Much has been said and written about the finances of Britain’s most successful sporting institution, Rangers Football Club.”
Now you know that the analysis that follows such a comment is unlikely to be searching or insightful never mind balanced. I was looking forward to an interesting bit of mathematics too. No point in reading any further than that first line however.
===================================================================
CoT…whilst you are correct in your reasoning as to reading no further, you have missed some of the most creative mathematical/econometric analysis ever to see the light of day. This has obviously been produced by some sympathetic bear market analyst.
The most entertaining part is the comments from bears who simply have no clue as to the underlying nonsense but say “it must be true then…!”
PS thanks also to Ecobhoy for the late night headache!
StevieBC says:
May 9, 2014 at 12:15 am
Leeds owner is reported to be axing more than 70 staff in a major cost cutting exercise.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/377820/EXCLUSIVE-Leeds-Massimo-Cellino-will-sack-at-least-70-members-of-staff-at-Elland-Road
==================================================================
Just an indication that if Signor Cellino can appeal successfully against the refusal of the English FA to allow him to acquire LUFC, I assume that our own SFA would not even challenge Mr King in the first place, were the situation to arise – why waste time…?
Resin_lab_dog says:
May 9, 2014 at 12:28 am
1 0 Rate This
Actually, the analysis is rubbish – the conclusion is that the only meaningful valuation is the Earnings Power Value Valuation Method which gives a share price of around 26p.
The numbers used appear to be based on the 13 month accounts to 30th June 2013 and seem to take the earnings base as Profit Before Tax of 1,128k and add back Finance costs of 233k to give an EBIT of 1,491k. This gives the “operating margin of 7.8% on Revenue of 19,107k. However, that result was after all the non-recurring items which included repaying football debts etc but also the release od 20,465k of negative goodwill – the difference between their valuation of the assets they acquired from D&P and what they actually paid.
On this basis, the shares are worth 26p if they can get a repeat D&P deal every 13 months!!
Morning all.
The “BlueOrder” spokesman on SSB last night claimed that 2 ex managers and 9 ex players are ready to publicly back king.A concerted effort like this would almost certainly kill off ST sales.
I still think the trump card lies with the board though.They can just close down TRFC and I assume that if all other creditors are paid,then taking control of the assets would not be that difficult.
Using my rusty calculator,and a potential asset value of £20m,coupled with the derelict areas around Ibrox, you could be sitting on a site worth between £25-30m.Not withstanding the problems with regard demolishing the Ibrox facade,I’m sure the council would bend over backwards to help facilitate the renovation of that area.(State aid’s a great thing).
So,this would give a potential share price of between 38-46p.
They could offer King and Co the club for next to nothing and lease back the properties.A nice regular income whilst still retaining ownership of assets that someone else is paying the maintenance on.Not a bad deal.
ST applications need to be in by next Friday.If there’s not enough cash will the board pull the plug before the May payroll is due?.
Campbellsmoney says:
May 8, 2014 at 10:43 pm
3 0 Rate This
Neepheid
Why is that you think that the funds in the Jersey trust cannot be chased by BDO? I accept that there will be no funds there now, but if the trust/trustees can be made insolvent in Jersey (and I would imagine they can be) then that would be a route to chase the recipients.
I confess – Jersey is a mystery law to me and tax law is worse.
============
I am not a lawyer, the following is my layman’s understanding, so please be kind to me!
What claim against the Trustees would BDO have? As I understand it, the money wasn’t loaned to the Trustees, but given to them irrevocably, to deal with in accordance with the terms of the trust document. So far as I am aware, the Trustees have carried out the terms of the trust, so how could a claim against them arise? The trustees may have some power to reclaim the loans from the beneficiaries, but even if they did that, I don’t believe that the money can revert to the settlor under any circumstances. But then I don’t know what the Trustees would do if all the loans were repaid. Await further instructions from Murray, perhaps?
All this is my limited understanding of the position in English law, so maybe in Scotland it is possible to create a trust and then recover the settled capital later. However I am fairly certain that such a trust would be ineffective for tax purposes.
The payment to Jersey has all the hallmarks of a gift and so could be challenged as a gratuitous alienation. The fact the recipient is a trust is irrelevant I believe.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:09 am
3 0 Rate This
… They could offer King and Co the club for next to nothing and lease back the properties.A nice regular income whilst still retaining ownership of assets that someone else is paying the maintenance on.Not a bad deal.
_________
Morning @TorreJohn, the above seems the most logical and sensible option by far. It would put he onus on King and the ‘real Rangers men’ to come up with the money for rental – and those lovely ‘war chests’ for the irreplaceable, manager-for-life. A face-saver solution for everyone that would probably say kerching at the ST ticket office.
No idea what rental would be, but that, with stadium maintenance and upkeep thrown in, would make a dent in the income, though. Without massive overspending of other people’s money and EBTs the world looks a very different place. The D&P deal with Charles looks like the sale of century. Wonder how the creditors feel when they see all of this money swishing about the assets that should, in a just world, have been sold for their benefit?
On Share Valuation
Surely,
with properties = more
with properties and spoilt, high maintenance, high expectation, poorly managed, poorly run, shallow pocketed football club = less
On relocation to Cumbernauld,
“sentenced” surely
One thought occurs though. If King was to form an alliance of enemies with Whyte could that also freeze the assets out of RIFC?
Danish Pastry says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:57 am
————————
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:09 am
… They could offer King and Co the club for next to nothing and lease back the properties.A nice regular income whilst still retaining ownership of assets that someone else is paying the maintenance on.Not a bad deal.
—————————
Morning @TorreJohn, the above seems the most logical and sensible option by far. It would put he onus on King and the ‘real Rangers men’ to come up with the money for rental
====================================================================
This works if there’s not a cheaper rental option with sufficient capacity….
DK moves them to Hampden….short/medium term lease….would starve them out as (IMO) no short term (or in all probability long term) value in the property assets without a football tenant.
From Twitter:
@pmcn888: Don’t know why Imran v TRFCL listed for next Tuesday.Procedural?
Main case not due till 2015
https://t.co/DnmetgH0HI http://t.co/npiUTH7abT
With all the talk of EBT’s is nice to have an aide memoir to hand:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18148818
parttimearab says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:14 am
0 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:57 am
————————
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:09 am
… They could offer King and Co the club for next to nothing and lease back the properties.A nice regular income whilst still retaining ownership of assets that someone else is paying the maintenance on.Not a bad deal.
—————————
Morning @TorreJohn, the above seems the most logical and sensible option by far. It would put he onus on King and the ‘real Rangers men’ to come up with the money for rental
====================================================================
This works if there’s not a cheaper rental option with sufficient capacity….
DK moves them to Hampden….short/medium term lease….would starve them out as (IMO) no short term (or in all probability long term) value in the property assets without a football tenant.
——_________
The problem with that is,where could they go short term,and would the Bears accept it?.
Hampden will not be available for some time due to reconversion after the Commonwealth Games and Celtic Park would be a non starter.
If they want the large attendances from the start of next season,remembering that pre season friendlies,Challenge cup etc, will be starting towards the end of July then the timescale for Kings takeover is very limited.
Neepheid – sorry the last response was a bit short.
the fact that a payment is made to a trust does not protect it from a challenge under insolvency law. Imagine I am just about to go bankrupt. I want my children to get some assets so that my creditors don’t get them. So I transfer the assets to my kids. When I am bankrupted, the trustee in bankruptcy will challenge those payments and haul the assets back from my kids.
So I decide to try and be clever and instead of transferring to my kids, I set up a trust with my best mate as trustee and my kids as beneficiaries. I then transfer the assets to the trustee to be held on trust.
Then I go bankrupt.
My trustee in bankruptcy will haul the assets back from the trustee in exactly the same way as in the “straight to the kids” scenario.
Obviously if the trustee has already distributed the assets to the beneficiaries, the analysis is a wee bit more complicated (it involves one more step) but the basic position is that I cannot avoid the effects of insolvency law by interposing a trust into the situation.
Campbellsmoney says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:53 am
0 0 Rate This
The payment to Jersey has all the hallmarks of a gift and so could be challenged as a gratuitous alienation. The fact the recipient is a trust is irrelevant I believe.
====================
All of these tax avoidance schemes use similar trust arrangements, and they all have the hallmarks of gifts, but in 50 years of tackling such schemes, the Revenue has never to my knowledge challenged the legal validity of the trust arrangements, so long as the trusts had been properly set up.
From memory, at the FTT hearing Counsel for HMRC explicitly accepted the legal validity of the trusts. There was certainly no attempt to argue that the trust was ineffective, presumably because all the paperwork was properly done, resulting in a valid settlement.
Since BDO are currently being funded by HMRC, I don’t see them pursuing the Jersey trustees for the return of the trust money. Any attempt to do so would probably provoke a diplomatic incident, given the importance of such trust work to the Jersey economy!
Even ignoring all that, to show gratuitous alienation, wouldn’t it have to be demonstrated that there was inadequate consideration? Surely RFC obtained consideration in the form of the services on the pitch of various footballers, not to mention whatever Mr Ogilvie has done in return for his £90k “loan”. Money well spent, some would argue.
Sorry if off topic but sadly,Wee Oscar has passed away.
His fight against a dreadful illness was an inspiration to many.
RIP wee man.
Torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:25 am
The problem with that is,where could they go short term,and would the Bears accept it?.
Hampden will not be available for some time due to reconversion after the Commonwealth Games and Celtic Park would be a non starter.
————————————————————–
True…keep forgetting ’bout the games…though I guess timing a factor.
I think I’m right in saying that the Hampden available some time in October so would be a financial and logistical nightmare if board went for leaseback before then.
I suspect board v King has a long way to run before they get to this point.
Could be what we’re seeing is attempts by both sides to manouver into position of strength from which to strike a deal?
Talk of former managers and players declaring for DK might actually be the final straw for the spivs.
Obviously the fan sites are deeply and bitterly divided and have been for some time – mainly thanks to persistent PR penetration – but if a large enough group of club legends effectively declare that the current Rangers playing out of Ibrox isn’t the Real Rangers with no right to the history of that semi-mystical but ethereal concept then I think it could be game over time for the spivs.
I previously thought there was the possibility of several ‘splinter’ clubs being formed by different Rangers fan groupings but I think that DK has actually created – deliberately or accidentally – a simple pro and anti Board position. That makes the threat of a viable alternative Rangers a much more likely proposition IMO.
It’s easy for the warring fan groups to tear lumps out of each other and especially their leadership who are automatically fair game with the mere label of ‘blue blazer seekers’. But a phalanx of the Ibrox Greats is a totally different matter as they are not only already have blue blazers but earned them playing football. It allows a lot of influential Rangers Men who may have fallen out in the past the ideal opportunity to bury the hatchet for the Greater Good of Rangers.
Lots of very potent totems and symbolism being mixed-in here and DK might be many things but having clawed himself out of Castlemilk I doubt if he’s a quitter.
It must also be remembered that organised fan groups make up only a tiny percentrage of the Rangers support and the real test of any ST boycott will be the overwhelming mass of the ordinary fans who go to watch the footie.
And that is the group who will be most influenced IMO by the lead given by respected former players and managers. If Wallace thinks he can counter the legends by bringing back Miller and Boyd then Ally has played him well 😆
All the talk of ‘Sell and leaseback’ as being the best/only way forward for RIFC/TRFC all makes sense to me but could this be hampered by the fact that they do not actually own the property. I believe that if sale and leaseback was an option for them then it would have been done and dusted already. Craig Whyte is still a serious thorn in their side IMHO.I may of course have this all wrong.
neepheid says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:35 am
Campbellsmoney says:
May 9, 2014 at 8:53 am
The payment to Jersey has all the hallmarks of a gift and so could be challenged as a gratuitous alienation. The fact the recipient is a trust is irrelevant I believe.
====================
All of these tax avoidance schemes use similar trust arrangements, and they all have the hallmarks of gifts, but in 50 years of tackling such schemes, the Revenue has never to my knowledge challenged the legal validity of the trust arrangements, so long as the trusts had been properly set up.
=====================================
It should be remembered that HMRC specifically stated at the FTTT that it did not regard the EBTs as ‘sham trusts’ so they won’t pursue that avenue.
@TORREJOHNBHOY such a shame, lovely wee fella..
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/inspirational-little-celtic-fan-oscar-3516641
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:25 am
… Hampden will not be available for some time due to reconversion after the Commonwealth Games and Celtic Park would be a non starter.
————
I mentioned before the concept of The Great Gesture — Celtic offering to temporarily house a homeless TRFC at Celtic Park on alternative weekends?
A gesture like that could help end the decades of (century-old?) animosity. How could any bluenose ever again speak ill of Celtic if the bhoys from the East End helped save their rivals? It could once and for all marginalize bigots and show them up for what they really are.
Of course, there is no certainty any of this will end up a homeless TRFC, but in the event of such a scenario, why not Celtic Park?
neepheid says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:35 am
All of these tax avoidance schemes use similar trust arrangements, and they all have the hallmarks of gifts, but in 50 years of tackling such schemes, the Revenue has never to my knowledge challenged the legal validity of the trust arrangements, so long as the trusts had been properly set up.
From memory, at the FTT hearing Counsel for HMRC explicitly accepted the legal validity of the trusts. There was certainly no attempt to argue that the trust was ineffective, presumably because all the paperwork was properly done, resulting in a valid settlement.
Since BDO are currently being funded by HMRC, I don’t see them pursuing the Jersey trustees for the return of the trust money. Any attempt to do so would probably provoke a diplomatic incident, given the importance of such trust work to the Jersey economy!
Even ignoring all that, to show gratuitous alienation, wouldn’t it have to be demonstrated that there was inadequate consideration? Surely RFC obtained consideration in the form of the services on the pitch of various footballers, not to mention whatever Mr Ogilvie has done in return for his £90k “loan”. Money well spent, some would argue.
—————————————————————-
ecobhoy says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:55 am
=====================================
It should be remembered that HMRC specifically stated at the FTTT that it did not regard the EBTs as ‘sham trusts’ so they won’t pursue that avenue.
—————————————————————-
I express no view as the political implications of chasing Jersey people, nor HMRC policy decisions. For insolvency law, the question of whether a trust is a sham or not is irrelevant. Look at my example about a trust for my kids – it is a real trust – not a sham – what is important is that the payment is made into the trust by me and the trust gives me nothing back – that is the “inadequate consideration” point. What matters is whether, immediately after the transaction, my creditors are worse off in my insolvency as a result. To be counted in this analysis, the consideration has to have been received from the recipient of the payment.
Again I express no view as to whether or not BDO will go down this route, I simply meant to raise the prospect that I can see no necessary legal bar to them doing so.
Danish Pastry says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:20 am
=====================
Nae sure if you’re tongue in cheek but, in a real world, ground sharing by two mega teams in Glasgow would make huge financial sense as per Milan/Inter. Same with Utd/Dee and Hibs/Hearts but little minds seem incapable of dealing with such strategies in the UK never mind Scotland. Very strange. I’d be delighted if we (afc) could half our costs with a groundshare in Aberdeen. Can’t think of any fitba reasons why not.
ecobhoy says:
May 9, 2014 at 9:55 am
=====================================
It should be remembered that HMRC specifically stated at the FTTT that it did not regard the EBTs as ‘sham trusts’ so they won’t pursue that avenue.
—————————————————————-
I express no view as the political implications of chasing Jersey people, nor HMRC policy decisions. For insolvency law, the question of whether a trust is a sham or not is irrelevant. Look at my example about a trust for my kids – it is a real trust – not a sham – what is important is that the payment is made into the trust by me and the trust gives me nothing back – that is the “inadequate consideration” point. What matters is whether, immediately after the transaction, my creditors are worse off in my insolvency as a result. To be counted in this analysis, the consideration has to have been received from the recipient of the payment.
Again I express no view as to whether or not BDO will go down this route, I simply meant to raise the prospect that I can see no necessary legal bar to them doing so.
==================================================
I don’t have the legal expertise to know whether BDO could legally pursue the route mentioned.
However the trust example for your kids doesn’t really apply IMO because I doubt if there’s sufficient connection between Rangers’ liquidation and the EBT payments and, in any case, Rangers had also been sold to another legal entity before admin and that entity hadn’t made any EBT payments.
There’s obviously a clear motive and gain in setting-up a trust to syphon money away from a parent’s impending financial collapse and it could be legally open to challenge. But again when it’s payments to non-related employees in a tax reduction scheme – widely used by a number of UK companies – which wasn’t illegal at the time I just don’t feel your example assists.
In any case whether there is a legal way for BDO to take action I don’t think they will because it would be an expensive process with IMO a poor chance of success. I think they will be concentrating on more easily winnable prizes like possible repayment of the ‘loans’.
Very pleased to see that Jackie McNamara appears not to have had his head turned by Blackpool’s approach. We have seen a number of promising Scottish managers head south after a modicum of success up here (Derek McInnes springs to mind) only to suffer a few reversals and be binned. While no doubt it is tempting to get into the English leagues and the opportunities and cash that they appear to offer, Jackie McNamara is still very young (and I would say relatively untested). Better for all that he stays here for a while yet and learns his trade. If he is good enough, the chances will come again.
I expect in any case that this story was planted by a St Johnstone-biased press to unsettle him in advance of the Cup Final.
VB
Evidence-Based Mathematics
Business Insider
“Watch Out for:-
The Z Score is not intended to predict when a firm will actually file for legal bankruptcy. It is instead a measure of how closely a firm resembles other firms that have filed for bankruptcy, i.e. it tries to assess the likelihood of economic bankruptcy. The model has also drawn several statistical objections over the years. The model uses unadjusted accounting data; it uses data from relatively small firms; and it uses data that is around 60 years old. Nevertheless, despite these flaws, the original Z Score model is still the most widely used measure of corporate financial distress”
It is a pity that Ulster Loyal did not have the Altman Z2-Score report available prior to February 2012.
@campbellsmoney
I tried to add but edit closed on me 🙁
woodstein says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:44 am
essexbeanconter has already mentioned this morning I blew my brains and his last night on this one.
As to the Altman Z2-Score report available prior to February 2012 I think I would rather see the one that DM had before he sold to CW 😆
It must have been very promising to get a quid for the company 🙄
King could be playing a very dangerous game here.
What do you all think would happen if the main shareholders told all the King’s men that they will not part with the business but that they will rent them Ibrox.That threat of not being able to buy the The Rangers name would focus the mind.
They would then have to start at the very bottom (junior ?) what would the SFA do then ?
Just a thought. and what could they call themselves. Suggestions on the back of an envelope.
ecobhoy says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:50 am
“As to the Altman Z2-Score report available prior to February 2012 I think I would rather see the one that DM had before he sold to CW 😆
It must have been very promising to get a quid for the company 🙄
—————————————————————————————————————————————
😀 😀 😀 luverly jubbly
ernie says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:37 am
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:20 am
=====================
Nae sure if you’re tongue in cheek but, in a real world, ground sharing by two mega teams in Glasgow would make huge financial sense as per Milan/Inter. Same with Utd/Dee and Hibs/Hearts but little minds seem incapable of dealing with such strategies in the UK never mind Scotland. Very strange. I’d be delighted if we (afc) could half our costs with a groundshare in Aberdeen. Can’t think of any fitba reasons why not.
———–
No, not tongue in cheek. If Ibrox became unavailable for whatever reason, a temporary arrangement until, say, Hampden became available. Not advocating permanent ground-share. No.
Of course, it’s not Celtic’s headache, and after the years of cheating to gain sporting advantage by oldco, there is probably very little appetite among Celtic fans for making such an offer. Still, it would be a grand and extraordinary gesture.
ernie says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:37 am
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
May 9, 2014 at 10:20 am
=====================
Nae sure if you’re tongue in cheek but, in a real world, ground sharing by two mega teams in Glasgow would make huge financial sense as per Milan/Inter. Same with Utd/Dee and Hibs/Hearts but little minds seem incapable of dealing with such strategies in the UK never mind Scotland. Very strange. I’d be delighted if we (afc) could half our costs with a groundshare in Aberdeen. Can’t think of any fitba reasons why not.
=====================
Groundsharing makes economic sense but there are issues beyond a “little mind” attitude.
The Italian example isn’t a relevant model as Italian clubs generally don’t own their grounds but lease them (often these are municipal stadia) and the groundsharing goes back many years so less emotional “ownership” of stadia.
There are practical issues in Scotland – using Utd/Dundee example – I’m not sure fans would be totally opposed to groundsharing but opposed to sharing the others ground and there’s insufficient value in any land sale of both grounds to fund a new stadium.