Good Afternoon.
Announcing outstanding financial successes for Rangers PLC the then Chairman of the club opened his Chairman’s report in the annual financial statements with the following words:
“Last summer I explained that the Club, after many years of significant investment in our playing squad
and more recently in our state of the art facility at Murray Park, had embarked on a three year business
plan to stabilise and improve the Club’s finances. The plan also recognised the need to react to the
challenging economic conditions facing football clubs around the world.
Following a trend over a number of years of increasing year on year losses, I am pleased to report that
in the first year of this plan we have made important progress by reversing this trend. Our trading loss
for last year of £11.2m reflects a £7.9m improvement versus the £19.1m loss for the previous year and
although it will take more time to completely reach our goals, this is a key milestone. We also intend to
make significant further progress by the end of the current financial year. This improvement is the
consequence of having a solid strategy and the commitment and energy to implement the changes it requires”
Later on in the same statement the chairman would add:
“Another key part of our plan is associated with the Rangers brand and our Retail Division goes from strength to strength. Our financial results this year have been significantly enhanced by an outstanding performance in merchandising Rangers products, in particular replica kit, which makes our Retail Division one of the most successful in Europe.”
In the same set of financial reports, the CEO would report:
“To further strengthen Rangers hospitality portfolio, a new dedicated sponsor’s lounge was unveiled this season. The Carling Lounge is a first for the Club and was developed in conjunction with our new sponsor, Carling. ”
and
“Our innovative events programme continues to grow and this year saw a record number of official events including the highly successful annual Hall of Fame Awards Ceremony, Player of the Year and 50 Championships Gala Dinner, all of which catered for up to 1000 guests.
At Rangers, we continually develop our portfolio of products and as a key area of income for the Club, we evaluate the market for new revenue opportunities on an ongoing basis in order to exceed our existing and potential customer expectations and needs.
Demand for season tickets reached an all time high last season with a record 42,508 season ticket holders in comparison with the previous season`s figure of 40,320. Over 36,000 of these season ticket holders renewed for this season – a record number.
For the new season, we are delighted to welcome brewing giant, Carling on board as our Official Club sponsor. Carling is one of the UK’s leading consumer brands with a proven track record in football sponsorship.
The Club also continues to work with a number of multinational blue chip brands such as National Car Rental, Sony Playstation 2, Bank of Scotland and Coca-Cola. This year, we will also experience the evolution of the Honda deal via Hyndland Honda and welcome the mobile communications giant T-Mobile to our ranks.”.
The year was 2003 and in the previous 24 months Rangers Football Club, owned and operated as a private fiefdom by Sir David Murray, had made operational losses of some £30 million.
Yes – 30 MILLION POUNDS.
Of course the chairman’s report for 2003 was written by John F Mclelland CBE and the CEO was one Martin Bain Esq.
As Mr Mclelland clearly stated, by 2003 the club already had a trend of increasing year on year losses covering a number of years and was losing annual sums which stretched into millions, if not tens of millions, of pounds.
However, the acquisition of Rangers Football Club was absolutely vital to David Murray’s personal business growth, and his complete control of the club as his own private business key was more important than any other business decision he had made before buying Rangers or since.
When he persuaded Gavin Masterton to finance 100% of the purchase price of the club, Murray had his finest business moment.
By getting control of Rangers, Murray was able to offer entertainment, hospitality, seeming privilege and bestow favour on others in a way that was hitherto undreamed of, and he bestowed that largesse on any number of “existing and potential clients” and contacts – be they the clients and contacts related to Rangers Football Club or the existing and potential clients of David Murray, his businesses, his banks, or anyone in any field that he chose to court for the purposes of potential business.
His business.
It wasn’t only journalists who benefited from the succulent lamb treatment.
Accountants,lawyers, surveyors, broadcasters, football officials, people in industry and construction, utilities, financiers and other areas of business were all invited inside the sacred House of Murray and given access to the great man of business “and owner of Rangers” while attending the “record number of official (hospitality) events”.
Twelve months on from when John McLelland made those statements in the 2003 accounts, David Murray was back in the chair at Ibrox and he presented the 2004 financials.
In the intervening 12 months Rangers had gained an additional £10 million from Champions League income and had received £8.6 million in transfer fees from the sale of Messrs Ferguson, Amoruso and McCann. Not only that, the Rangers board had managed to reduce the club’s wage bill by £5 million. Taking all three figures together comes to some £23.6 million in extra income or savings.
Yet, the accounts for 2004 showed that the club made an operational loss of almost £6 million and overall debt had risen by an additional £7 million to £97.4 million.
However, the 2004 accounts were also interesting for another reason.
Rangers PLC had introduced payments “to employees trusts” into their accounts for the first time in 2001 and in that year they had paid £1million into those trusts. Just three years later, the trust payments recorded in the accounts had risen to £7.3 million per annum — or to put it another way to 25% of the annual wage bill though no one in Scottish Football asked any questions about that!
By the following year, the chairman announced that the 2004 operational loss had in fact been £10.4million but that the good news was that the 2005 operational loss was only £7.8 million. However Rangers were able to post a profit before taxation if they included the money obtained from transfers (£8.4 million) and the inclusion of an extraordinary profit of £14,999,999 made on buying back the shares of a subsidiary company for £1 which they had previously sold for £15 million.
All of which added up to a whopping great profit of ……… £12.4 million!
I will leave you to do the maths on 2005.
Oh and of course these accounts included the detail that 3000 Rangers fans had joined David Murray in participating in the November ’94 share issue where the club managed to raise £51,430,995 in fresh capital most of which was provided by Mr Murray… sorry I mean MIH ….. sorry that should read Bank of Scotland …… or their shareholders……. or should that be the public purse?
The notable items in the 2006 accounts included the announcement of a ten year deal with JJB Sports to take over the merchandising operation of the club and increased revenue from an extended run in the Champion’s League. However, the profit before tax was declared at only£0.1 million in comparison to the £12.4 million of the year before but then again that £12.4 million had included player sales of £8.4 million and the £15 million sweety bonus from the repurchase of ones own former subsidiary shares for £1.
Jumping to 2008 Rangers saw a record year in terms of turnover which had risen to £64.5 million which enabled the company to record a profit on ordinary activities before taxation of £6.57 million although it should be pointed out that wages and bonuses were up at 77% of turnover and that a big factor in the Rangers income stream was corporate hospitality and the top line of income was shown as “gate receipts and hospitality”.
However, 2009 saw a calamitous set of figures. Whilst Alastair Johnston tried to put a brave chairman’s face on it, the year saw an operating loss of £17.325 million which was softened only by player disposals leading to a loss before taxation of a mere £14.085 million.
Fortunately Sir David did not have to report these figures as he chose to stand down as chairman in August and so Johnston stepped in and announced that he was deeply honoured to do so.
In 2010, the income stream jumped from £39.7 million to over £56 million with the result that the club showed a profit before taxation of £4.209 million.
However, by that time the corporate hospitality ticket that was Rangers Football Club was done for as a result of matters that had nothing to do with events on the football field in the main.
First, the emergence of the Fergus McCann run Celtic had brought a real business and sporting challenge. This was something that Murray had not previously faced in the football business.
Second,the Bank of Scotland had gone bust and Lloyds could not and would not allow Murray to continually borrow vast sums of money on the basis of revalued assets and outrageous hospitality.
Third, the UEFA fair play rules came into being and demanded that clubs at least act on a semblance of proper corporate governance and fiscal propriety.
Lastly,Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs tightened up the law on the use of EBT’s which meant that Rangers could no longer afford to buy in the players that brought almost guaranteed success against domestic opposition.
On average, since 2002 Rangers PLC had lost between £7 million – £8 million per year – or roughly £650,000 per month if you like – yet for the better part of a decade David Murray had been able to persuade the Bank of Scotland that this was a business that was worthy of ever greater financial support or that he himself and his MIH business was of such value that the Banks should support him in supporting the Ibrox club whilst operating in this fashion.
Of course, had Murray’s Rangers paid tax on all player remunerations then the losses would have been far larger.
Meanwhile, all the other clubs in Scottish football who banked with the Bank of Scotland faced funding cuts and demands for repayment with the bank publicly proclaiming that it was overexposed to the football market in Scotland.
But no one asked any questions about why the bank should act one way with Murray’s club but another way with all others. No one in football, no one in the media and no one from the world of business.
Looking back,it is hard to imagine a business which has been run on such a consistent loss making basis being allowed to continue by either its owners or by its bankers. However, a successful and funded Rangers was so important to the Murray group that David Murray was clearly willing to lose millions year after year to keep the Gala dinners and corporate hospitality going.
Rangers were Murray’s big PR vehicle and the club was essentially used by him to open the doors which would allow him to make more money elsewhere on a personal basis and if it meant Rangers cutting every corner and accumulating massive losses, unsustainable losses, then so be it.
Today, the new regime at Ibrox run the current business in a way which clocks up the same colossal annual losses whilst the club competes outwith Scotland’s top division. Each day we hear that the wage bill is unsustainable, that the playing staff are overpaid, that the stadium needs massive investment and that the fans are opposed to the stadium itself being mortgaged and the club being in hawk to lenders.
Yet, in the Murray era the Stadium was revalued time and time again and its revaluation was used as the justification for ever greater borrowing on the Rangers accounts. The playing staff were massively overpaid and financially assisted by the EBT’s and most years the Chairman’s annual statement announced huge losses despite regular claims of record season ticket sales, record hospitality income, European income, shirt sponsorship and the outsourcing of all merchandising to JJB sports instead of Sports Direct.
The comparison between the old business and the current one is clear for all to see.
It should be noted, that since the days of Murray, no major banking institution has agreed to provide the Ibrox business with any banking facilities. Not under Whyte, not under Green, not under anyone.
Yet few ask why that should be.
The destruction of the old Rangers business led those in charge of Scottish football to announce that Armageddon was on the horizon if it had not actually arrived, yet today virtually all Scottish clubs are in a better financial and business state than back in the bad old days of the Bank of Scotland financed SPL. Some have succumbed to insolvency, and others have simply cut their cloth, changed their structure, sought, and in some cases attracted, new owners and moved on in terms of business.
In general, Scottish Football has cleaned house at club level.
Now, David Murray has “cleaned house” in that MIH has bitten the dust and walked down insolvency road.
What is interesting is that the Murray brand still has that capacity to get out a good PR message when it needs to. Despite the MIH pension fund being short of money for some inexplicable reason, last week it was announced that the family controlled Murray Estates had approached those in charge of MIH and had agreed to buy some key MIH assets for something in the region of £13.9 million.
The assets concerned are land banks which at some point will be zoned for planning and which will undoubtedly bring the Murray family considerable profit in the future, with some of those assets already looking as if they will produce a return sooner rather than later.
However, what is not commented upon in the mainstream press is the fact that Murray Estates had the ability to pay £13.9 Million for anything at all and that having that amount of money to spend the Murray camp has chosen not to buy any football club down Govan way.
Perhaps, it has been realised that a football club which loses millions of pounds each year is not such a shrewd investment and that the Murray family money would be better spent elsewhere?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the culture of wining, dining, partying and entertaining to the most lavish and extravagant extent will not result in the banks opening their vaults any more?
Perhaps, it has been realised that the Rangers brand has been so badly damaged over the years that it is no longer the key to the golden door in terms of business, finance and banking and that running a football club in 2015 involves a discipline and a set of skills that David Murray and his team do not have experience of?
What is clear, is that the Murray years at Ibrox were not good for the average Rangers fan in the long term and that when you have a football club – any football club – being run for the private benefit of one rich individual, or group of individuals, then the feelings and passions of the ordinary fan will as often as not be forgotten when that individual or his group choose to move on once they have decided that they no longer wish to play with their toy football club.
David Murray did not make money directly out of Rangers Football Club. He used it as a key to open other doors for him and to get him a seat at other tables and into a different type of “club” altogether. He did not run the club in a day to day fashion that was designed to bring stability and prolonged financial, or playing, success to the club. its investors and its fans. He did not preside over Ibrox during a period of sustained financial gain.
Mike Ashley will not subsidise 2015 version of Rangers to anything like the same extent that the Bank of Scotland did in the 90’s and naughties.
However, Ashley, like Murray, will use his control of the Rangers brand to open doors for him elsewhere in the sports retail market, and he will use the Rangers contract with Sports Direct to make a handsome profit. He will also control all the advertising revenue just as he does at Newcastle. In short, Mr Ashley is only interested in The Rangers with a view to using it as a stepping stone to achieve other things elsewhere.
However, don’t take my word for any of this, take the opinion of someone who knows.
Mr Dave King is quoted today as saying the following about the current board of Directors who are in charge of the current Ibrox holding company.
“History will judge this board as one of the worst the club has ever had. There is not one individual who puts the club above personal interest.”
That is an interesting observation from a man who became a non executive director of the old Rangers holding company in 2000 and who had a front row pew for every set of accounts and all the financial statements referred to above.
Whether or not Mr King is a glib and shameless liar is a matter of South African judicial opinion. Whether or not he can spot someone who puts their own self interest ahead of the interests of Rangers Football Club and the supporters of the club is a matter that should be discussed over some fine wine, some succulent lamb and whatever postprandial entertainment you care to imagine.
I wonder if he has ever read the accounts of Rangers PLC and compared them to the corresponding accounts of MIH for the same period?
A free bag for every fan on entry, well maybe not everyone; cheap advertising for SD.
Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont · 15 mins 15 minutes ago
I asked how they do that if constantly having to repay loans to MA but sadly that was the end of the interview.
Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont · 16 mins 16 minutes ago
DS [David Somers]: “Third goal was all about the football. We’ve got to get club into Premiership and Champions League and this sort of money will help.”
In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 11:41 am
18 0 Rate This
Jungle Jim says:
January 27, 2015 at 11:09 am
Please forgive me, I should stick to lurking in the background.
So Ashley originally loaned them £3m against Edmiston House and the car park. Now for an additional £2m he retains those securities and adds Murray Park as well. Jesus he’s good.
——————————————————-
Even better than good! For his £2 million extra he also gets a floating charge over all Rangers assets excluding the stadium.
*****
Does the floating charge specifically exclude the stadium? I thought it was over ALL assets.
If the charge crystallises (I dunno, say, in an insolvency event) the stadium would surely be included at market value which would mean it’s most recent purchase price by chuckles (otherwise could we be looking at gratuitous alienation).
Looks like Mike is close to performing the classic asset strip. Buy under market price, separate the good from the bad, dump the bad (loaded with all possible debt), keep the good as a nice little earner or sell on quickly.
Of course he only needed to buy 9% of shares and make risk-free, secured loans that no-one else would risk.
Asset Stripping for Dummies, Mike Ashley
briggsbhoy says
On another point I was at a dinner last night and was speaking with a Rangers man. Everybody is guilty apart from SDM which amazed me, he argued that he never broke the law and only took money that was given to him by the bankers as everyone did at that time. He did not accept that he was the foundation for Rangers downfall. EBT’s wasn’t breaking the law, that was legal and he insisted the man had never broke the law and therefore could not be described as a Spiv, like Green & Whyte. In some ways SDM hasn’t been charged with anything (that I’m aware of)so in some ways he’s correct. He eventually walked away from me, he wasn’t for hearing anything more.
_____________________________________________
I rarely engage with RFC fans on the issue as they just don’t want to know and it’s more hassle and raised blood pressure than it’s worth. I However once had a conversation along the following lines:
RFC fan: Rangers were fine until Craig Whyte bought the club
Me: So why did SDM not sell to someone else?
RFC: Because HMRC’s hounding of the club over EBTs was making the club unsellable, if it wasn’t for that then Rangers would have been sold to some RRM off the radar billionaires (who still haven’t materialised post-Tax case but I digress)
Me: If the club/company/etheral entity was in such great shape with SDM doing such a marvellous job, why then the urgent need for SDM to sell the club/company/ethereal entity in the first place?
RFC: eh… eh..EBTs…HMRC..EBTs… Lloyds… Lawwell…SFA.. they all kicked us when we were down.
Me: But apparently you weren’t down, apparently it was all great till Craig Whyte got involved.
And if SDM was “only doing what everyone else was doing by taking the bank’s money” why were Rangers and Gretna the only clubs that went into admin and liquidation when the banks turned the credit taps off?
On the contrary I remember the Bank of Scotland poised to put Celtic out of existence over their overdraft and then asking for punitive terms to provide credit to the new management team at the club under McCann who told them to GTF (How did that work out for the Bank of Scotland?).
I’m sure many other Scottish clubs had similar experiences. There was a brief time in the mid to late 90s when SPL clubs were spending outwith their means but the correction came fairly swiftly and abruptly, only one club appeared to have a bank throwing money at it like confetti
Given the catch-all nature of the essentially fascistic Offensive Behaviour Act, is it conceivable that Celtic fans on Sunday could face arrest if they employ dastardly chants about SEVCO or tell the truth about their opponents actual status as a club?
From my reading of the act, should any particular Focus bluenose copper (they all are, in case you were wondering) take offence then the chanting fans can indeed be deemed to be committing an offence.
I believe that arguing that what caused offence was simply the telling of truth is , under the terms of the act, no defence.
I could go off topic and remind all on here of the political party that brought it in and the underlying ideology that allowed them so to do before they vote in 100 days but that would be very naughty indeed! 👿 👿 😀
alzipratu says:
January 27, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Does the floating charge specifically exclude the stadium? I thought it was over ALL assets.
========================================================================
I read it as the charges against the buildings that need to be lodged more formally (eg with Land Registry) are inflexible day to day – not floating, changing with the normal needs of the busienss. So the floating charge is over all day-to-day assets except big fixed assets. So a separate fixed charge is placed on MP, EH, ACP but not Ibrox. So Ibrox is not floating and not included in fixed charges. So Ibrox is safe from this particular onerous contract.
Ibrox as a floating asset does add some context to the hover pitch concept though 🙂
Pamela Anderson is better at spotting and keeping away from bad guys than this Sevco lot
I suspect Fergus McCanns classic observation re . Celtics sojourn at Hampden during Celtc Parks reconstruction probably applied just as aptly to the experience Celtic (and likely other clubs ) had with Mastertons Bank of Murray/Scotland ..
FERGUS : “We were not among friends . “
So which ever way you look at it the RRM will need to find.
£2m to pay off the first tranche of the SD Loan
£5m to pay of Mike or step in with hard cash to make it towards the end of the season.
£10m to automatically fill the gap that will go into Celtics bank account based on Peter Lawwell’s assertion that Celtic are down that amount by T’Rangers not being in the top Div.
£23m to £30m (allowing for current squad budget) to immediately assemble a squad comparable to Celtic so that CL progression can be achieved.
£10m to £14m in annual non footballing operations costs
Not much change out of £50m as far as I can see. Even taking into account season ticket cash it is still going to need £25m or more to get where they want to be.
IMHO it ain’t going to happen anytime soon.
Yet again in this incredible saga the criminals are the SFA etc.
Yet again they have let Scottish football (and the Rangers fans) down by completely failing to stand up for their own rules and processes. They have shirked the tackle . Bullies will do what bullies do if someone doesn’t stand up to them
However this all turns out they have allowed MA to completely emasculate that football club .
They will never get to Ashley the very very best the authorities will get IF it ever happens which I doubt is a conference call where ,if he takes it instead of one of his deputies, then he stays / sits in the background probably doing emails or quietly discussing other more important stuff whilst letting his legal players run rings round Regan etc .
So…That horse has absolutely bolted
They only had and now have one weapon and one weapon only and that is license withdrawal …Ashley has done a complete number on them and he and they know it ..They are now so scared of him and the Rangers fans ..they just haven’t the balls to pull the trigger on the license ..(He would sue them to hell and back and the fans for their part would go mental….) I think it was the Celtic lawyer McBride (since deceased ) that tellingly observed that anyone could drive a coach thru their rules so they are probably completely stuffed now.
What a disgraceful situation to get yourself and our game into ..completely in the hands of and beholden to a Corporate bully ..Who knows what he will do next!
Unless they have a mega rabbit to pull out of the hat or suddenly grow a set then as we all know For the umpteenth time they really do have to go ..I for one have lost count of the crime count .
wottpi says:
January 27, 2015 at 2:16 pm
=========================================================
You forgot restoring Ibrox – runoured to be £10mil – £20mil
And a few mil go-away-money for the contingent liability holders
Let’s call it £75mil to be on the safe side – don’t want to fall into the hands of any parasitic lenders for the sake of a few £mil.
Ashleys behaviour over TRFC is way beyond a simple asset strip
It has all the hallmark of a smarting bully who feels TRFC deserve to be ruined
Which got me thinking
What could motivate such behavior?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In 2006 Minty did a deal with JJ Sports which gave RFC £18m upfront and a guaranteed £3m p.a. for 10yrs. It beggars belief that Minty wasn`t playing off JJB and Ashley during these negotiations
So
Are we witnessing some kind of ego driven revenge?
Did Ashley join up with Green precisely to stick it to RFC?
If he comes out of this with £20m up front and £4m pa for 20 yrs he will have got his own back on Minty
Its the only explanation that would justify this sort of behaviour when you are already a mega billionaire
And if its revenge he is after:
Liquidation with a preferred Liquidator is inevitable
Followed by a deal that sells the assets to himself(via Sarver),transfers the onerous contracts to himself and leavesTRFC Newco festering indefinitely under absentee ownership
iceman63 says:
January 27, 2015 at 12:57 pm
31
1
Rate This
So, have I got this right?
Ashley has given over three loans, two of which were used to repay what he already loaned them.
Hence his total net contribution is the two million that is being spent on Thursday.
For this, they now owe him 5 million, that they can’t pay back and when they default he has ownership of all concrete assets of the club except Ibrox, and no-one seems to have a clue who owns Ibrox in any case. He also has control of all retail sales and the future shirt sponsor money.
Is that the situation?
PMSL here.
And the SFA and SPFL facilitated entire rule book changes to let this happen for the greater good of the game.
You could not make this up.
_______________________________________________________
Or to Summarise things in a convenient and chantable way:
Rangers Then. Sevco Now. Sports Direct Forever.
My understanding of loans and security is: the better the quality of the security, the better the terms the borrower can expect to obtain. The terms RIFC/TRF have negotiated are, I’d suggest, quite onerous. If I was a director of a company with a valuable piece of property that could be used as security for a loan I desperately needed, and didn’t have the income to facilitate onerous terms, regardless of my love for the building, I’d use it to negotiate the best terms possible.
Either Ashley has decided to abandon his plans to take security over Ibrox because he realised he could get a better deal for himself without it, or he’s discovered that it’s not as good a security, for whatever reason, than, say, a floating charge. Very unusual for any lender to prefer a floating charge, which by it’s nature is not great security, than a Standard Security over heritable property. I do not believe, for one moment, that Ashley has been influenced, if he indeed noticed, the demonstration a week past Friday!
Besides, the time’s going to come when he will have to give them another pay day loan, and he can take the stadium as security then, if he wants!
I think the reference to a share issue to enhance the squad is a subtle way of Ashley saying he’s not going to fund any squad building – and that becomes critical with so many contracts running out in the summer. I suspect by ‘enhancing’ he means improving the squad that’s left after the summer exodus!
To finance decent players, the fans have to buy season tickets. To encourage the fans to buy season tickets, they have to see a decent squad being built (Green knew that). Unless TRFC have a much improved end to the season, and win promotion, then there will have to be evidence of quality players arriving before the fans will buy the STs. I can’t imagine MA doesn’t realise this. So, unless we see him providing money to improve their chances of promotion, before the window closes, I reckon his plans don’t require promotion, or even high season ticket sales!
Undue Diligence
What does “due diligence” mean in relation to a secured loan? Mike’s men have had plenty of time to analyse the business, warts and all, so it is not the usual “check in detail that everything is as it appears to be” associated with pre-purchase checks. In this case due diligence should be read as “the money is available when you have detailed how it will be spent in advance, and we agree.” So, a secured loan with day to day influence over spending. That’s a pretty solid defence against future unsympathetic directors, boards, consortia, suitors, saviours etc
And if an intractable disagreement arises, MA can always fall back on “reversible” to pull the rug and get his money back: “The terms negotiated with SD (which are reversible in respect of the Facility) represent the optimum combination of quantum and duration of funding,”
If that isn’t an onerous contract then what is? No doubt Mr Bryce is busy re-defining “undue influence” to create his second paradox.
GoosyGoosy says:
January 27, 2015 at 2:47 pm
And if its revenge he is after:
======================================================================
Interesting, that would explain Mike spending time on this tawdry little mess – but of course Minty is long gone (isn’t he 🙂 ) so maybe it is King, Murray P and others Mike is tormenting.
mcfc says:
January 27, 2015 at 2:56 pm
While I fully believe this ‘due diligence’ clause is there as a get out clause for SD, I think it might also be there to distance SD from Ashley’s men on the board. It wouldn’t look good, at all, if it was left to the ‘Ashley men on the inside’ to decide if a lender lends, or not!
alzipratu says:
January 27, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Does the floating charge specifically exclude the stadium? I thought it was over ALL assets.
If the charge crystallises (I dunno, say, in an insolvency event) the stadium would surely be included at market value which would mean it’s most recent purchase price by [..] (otherwise could we be looking at gratuitous alienation).
—————————————————————–
According to the Regulatory Notice the terms of the floating charge would appear to exclude the stadium. Once the charge is registered with Companies House that should put the matter beyond doubt.
I am certain the stadium is excluded because either ‘good’ security can’t be obtained on it for ownership issues and allied to this if Rangers go into liquidation it’s the only thing of value not captured by the existing fixed and floating charges.
So it’s on the face of it the only thing creditors could go for although if it is owned by someone else they would need to come forward and prove it. So Ashley might, at the end of the day, be the man who saves the stadium.
And I say that because what value is the stadium or even the ground it stands on by itself. Actual value at the end of the day is only what someone is prepared to pay for it and without all the other things that make up a football club how much is it really worth?
I’m assuming the floating charge btw will include the players’ contracts which I don’t think anyone has yet mentioned.
Allyjambo says:
January 27, 2015 at 3:12 pm
It wouldn’t look good, at all, if it was left to the ‘Ashley men on the inside’ to decide if a lender lends, or not!
======================================================================
Good point. The switcheroo from MASH to “SportsDirect.com Retail Limited and associated companies” also adds complexity to keep the SFA blood hounds off the “undue influence” trail for a while.
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 3:13 pm
‘free from any security.’
_____________________________
I certainly don’t know for sure, but I’d suggest ‘free from any security’ is not the same as ‘free from any encumbrances’.
Why did Sevco get a license to play football this season when they clearly did not have the funds required?
IMHO that’s more important than Mike Ashley’s dreams n schemes.
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 3:13 pm
if Rangers go into liquidation it’s the only thing of value not captured by the existing fixed and floating charges.
====================================================================
Maybe Celtic fans should stop splashing cash with MSM adverts and start saving up to buy Ibrox. It can’t be worth peanuts if it really needs £10mil – £20mil of repair work and there’s no team to play there.
I’m sure the administrators/liquidators wouldn’t bat an eye lid at an offer from CQN – after all it’s already been sold to Green & Whyte and effectively to Mick O’Ashley.
But what will they do with it? When the roundheads captured Winchester cathedral in 1645 they used the stained glass windows and Arthur’s round table for target practice and stabled their horses in the nave.
In Mike we trust.
Allyjambo says:
January 27, 2015 at 2:55 pm
Very unusual for any lender to prefer a floating charge, which by it’s nature is not great security, than a Standard Security over heritable property.
—————————————————
I would agree with that wrt most companies whether public or private. However if you believe that the Board of the company won’t do anything detrimental to your interests then that resolves the issue.
It’s also the case that fixed charges apply to Murray Park, The world-famous Albion Car Park and Edmiston House and the registered trade marks.
And then all of the merchandising and future shirt sponsorship is tied-up in Rangers Retail Ltd – a joint venture company which Ashley has always controlled from incorporation and on which his grip has now been tightened.
If there’s anything Ashley hasn’t got nailed down then there’s a good reason for it like the stadium. He’s forgotten nothing although he might have left a few unimportant breadcrumbs just to observe how clever the opposition are at finding them 😆
Allyjambo says:
January 27, 2015 at 3:20 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 3:13 pm
‘free from any security.’
_____________________________
I certainly don’t know for sure, but I’d suggest ‘free from any security’ is not the same as ‘free from any encumbrances’.
—————————————————
I would totally agree with you although I might add ‘known or unknown’ to ‘free from any encumbrances’ 🙄
Apologies if off topic
From STV site
. . . A former chairman of Rangers football club has been appointed to lead an investigation into the cost of the V&A in Dundee.
John McClelland CBE will lead an independent review into why the cost of building the museum has risen from an estimated £45m to more than £80m.
………………………………………
The very man to investigate any companies finances ???
😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆
Good Afternon
It is clear that the Directors of TRIFC are over trading. They have insufficient income to meet normal trading terms and are reliant on loans.
Clear that Ashley is holding all the aces except the license which is within the gift of the SFA.
Will the SFA use their powers and kill their golden child or will they bow before Ashley and keep the club on life support?
Will the three Bears launch an attack knowing that if they win it will cost them money they do not have?
Either way I can only foresee Administration and possibly Liquidation with Saint Mike taking all the prizes.
As has often been said here be careful what you wish for.
They wanted a billionaire!
Right now the SFA are running scared of both Ashley and the Loonies
The only option left for decent Bears is to march on Hampden and demand that TRFC has its licence withdrawn to force a liquidation
That way the SFA has a say in who gets the assets
Jungle Jim says:
January 27, 2015 at 10:41 am
Robbyp says:
January 27, 2015 at 10:28 am
SD no longer has security over Edmiston House or the car park. The £3m loan that was secured against those assets will be repaid from the new £5m loan. It’s all very confusing.
——————————————————————–
Fixed charges remain over Edmiston House and the car park wrt the new loan facility. The previous charges over these properties were given to Mash Holdings and the new ones relate to SportsDirect who are providing the new loan facility.
From CQN the same source of the advert, their view on Mr Ashley, sorry if been posted earlier.
This morning’s stock market announcement that Rangers International received a £5m emergency loan from our pal Mike Ashley, with terms agreed (pending diligence) on a further £5m available if needed, will see the club through the next week.
£3m of that £5m will go straight back to Ashley, to repay the loans he issued the club last year, leaving £2m, which will cover this week’s wages, with little left over (last year’s average monthly expenses was £2.75m).
The club can sell players this week, but as that is unlikely to generate significant funds, it looks like additional funding will be needed before next month’s wages – and significantly – before the proposed EGM.
In return for what is little more than an additional three week’s money, Ashley gets a floating charge over ALL the club’s assets. Despite how many headlines portray this story, that includes Ibrox Stadium.
Issuing a floating charge over assets is a normal piece of business for a football club, but this is not a normal football club. Floating charges are usually issued to banks, not predatory retailers, and they are seldom issued when the club is weeks away from running out of money.
A fixed charge has been granted over Murray Park, Edmiston House, Albion Car Park and, crucially, the club’s trademarks. In the event of a default, all these assets become the property of Sports Direct.
For reasons which are hard to fathom, Ibrox became some totem not to be tampered with, allowing Ashley to grab hold of enormous assets with relatively little concern. Should they default, consider this:
You want to sell tickets with ‘your’ crest or badge, pay me. You want to sell programmes, own a web site, do a shirt deal with someone else in the future, display the crest on the stadium wall, pay me.
The fact that Ibrox is subject to a floating, not fixed, charge, means that in theory the board could grant someone else a fixed charge over that asset, if they act before the floating charge becomes actionable. However, with Ashley now able to load the board with another two appointments, that possibility is not credible. If you have the floating charge, and you have the board, you don’t need a fixed charge.
There are other kicks to the nether regions. The club has given Sports Direct another 26% of Rangers Retail, bringing their total holding to 76%, for the duration of the initial loan. This is not hugely significant, but it could be in lieu of fees and interest, which are not being charged.
More interestingly for a club completing short-term funding requirements, they have agreed to pass their shirt sponsorship proceeds to Rangers Retail from 2017, until all these borrowings are repaid. With all the other rights Ashley is likely to assume in the coming months, this seems unnecessary. He has the board, has inserted the conditions he wants in these loans and has the fixed and floating charges required to do pretty much anything. Apart from rubbing people’s faces in the faeces, this additional ‘benefit’ appears superfluous.
What’s the takeaway message in all of this?
Despite the press briefings which were slavishly reported as news earlier this month, Ashley is not about to roll over, no matter how ample his frame. He doesn’t care about anything you care about. He cannot be bribed, blackmailed or coerced. He will react badly to people trying to manipulate him. Very badly.
He has control of the boardroom and Rangers International will need him before he needs it, and before any EGM is held. This is his new baseline, the next round of ‘assistance’ will tighten his grip on the all-important income streams.
It’s an impossible situation for the fans. Learn to live with the guy you’ve failed to box into a corner, while he exacts compensation for the trouble he’s been put to, or continue to resent him.
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 11:45 am
29 0 Rate This
Tincks says:
January 27, 2015 at 11:35 am
An evil, wicked thought went through my head just now.
What would happen if every Celtic fan going to the semi popped into sports direct and bought a pair of socks. Picture the scene, a sea of SD carrier bags at Hampden 🙂
——————————————————
Why buy a pair of sox – just buy a bag for 5p. We pay all our taxes including landfill 😆
……………………………..
For the occasion, fans could always get SD’s new shirt carrying the new Aye-broke logo ‘SD & L’ (Sliced, Diced & Liquidated)
valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2015 at 4:03 pm
From CQN the same source of the advert, their view on Mr Ashley, sorry if been posted earlier.
In return for what is little more than an additional three week’s money, Ashley gets a floating charge over ALL the club’s assets. Despite how many headlines portray this story, that includes Ibrox Stadium.
————————————————————————
The Regulatory Notice on AIM specifically states that SportsDirect has no security over Ibrox Stadium whither fixed or floating.
Wording is:
Sons of Struth have issued a call to arms and a countrywide mobilisation:
Nacho Novo was allegedly banned from training, because he was a member of Rangers 1st. If true, that’s a really petty, as well as stupid, way to behave, a totally self inflicted PR amateur hour feck up
Pete Lambie says:
January 27, 2015 at 4:33 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 4:28 pm
The Regulatory Notice on AIM specifically states that SportsDirect has no security over Ibrox Stadium whither fixed or floating.
Does granting floating charge over the car park, not put a section of the stadium at operational risk if that was called in? no club deck access etc…
—————————————————-
The car park has a fixed charge on it not a floating one.
IIRC the club deck extension way back required extra parking to get planning permission on ground capacity. Whether that would still be required if the planning permission were to be reviewed today – who knows?
I think there are probably more immediate dangers facing Ibrox than that one 😀
Eco, Pete
If any one was seriously looking at the operational risks associated with RIFC, they would be smart enough, to be running away as quickly as they possibly could, before Charles could get his pit boots laced up.
For one side its about money, for the other emotion, Emotionally Rangers, doesn’t stand a chance.
Regards this Sunday’s LCSF I am getting the impression that this game could be CFC’s last chance to properly say goodbye to TRFC !
With respct to Mike Ashley, I wonder how many bears will be recalling this from The Terminator
“Listen, and understand. That terminator is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever”
highfibre,
Thanks for the clarification on the floating charge. I was pretty sure that you can’t just walk away with any securitised asset in the event of a default either, but from what you say it gives Ashley first dibs on some assets in the event of a failed administration.
Does that mean that if say Rangers were to run up another huge tax and NI bill (doesn’t take long as CW showed us) that the holder of these securities would get priority over HMRC and other creditors?
If Big Mike was as clever as we think he is, he would have sold Celtic Semi Final tshirts as well with liquid 8 on the back, might have flogged a few.
Big Pink says:
January 27, 2015 at 5:32 pm
2 0 Rate This
highfibre,
Thanks for the clarification on the floating charge. I was pretty sure that you can’t just walk away with any securitised asset in the event of a default either…
———–
Yes, a really great (and concise) summary @highfibre. Reading it made me wonder about the Craig Whyte/Worthington claim.
As someone who had the er, privilege to work at Celtic Park whilst Kenny Dalglish was holding press conferences in Baird’s Bar, stewarded by guys in Buckfast-stained acrylic green white and gold jumpers, my first thought on seeing his “psychopath” comment was …”wibble!”
Next thought was to email him and politely explain the difference between pyschopathy and delusional disorder. Now if I can just find the words…
Andy Newport @AndyNewportPA · 2m2 minutes ago
Statement from the the Three Bears to be released on PA wires soon
I can’t wait 😈
Pete Lambie says:
January 27, 2015 at 4:33 pm
CQN do themselves no favours by being so wildly inaccurate on something like this, if they want credibility on the OCNC arguments.
============================================================
Agreed – they need to get themselves some friendly legal/business advisers before pronouncing on this stuff, which is usually more complex than it first appears. Individual posters can afford to get it wrong and have egg on their face, but CQN are seen to represent Celtic fans so need to operate to a much higher standard than SOS, UoF etc to maintain credibility.
The Three Bears statement
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8YAa8MCAAAOKsM.png:large
If I was a Rangers fan and connected in any way to an organised group such as Rangers First etc. I would be reaching for the stash earmarked for purchase of RIFC shares and diverting it to fund an extensive trip down south to talk to Luc Zentar and the boys that set up FC United of Manchester and also Kris Stewart of AFC Wimbledon (if he is still around).
The knowledge these pro-active, driven and clear headed individuals have with regard to setting up small but rival clubs to the corporate giants that had spawned them is invaluable given the current plight of Bears fans.
Rangers minded people (despite all their faults and blind spots) desperately need a ‘second front’ as the support of T3Bs and DCK via share holding has proven to be a shirt lived disaster.
They may even find support from Hampden if they focus their efforts in this way.
The journey of a thousand miles…. etc.
What a stramash We might have the shortest running series of ‘Derby’ games in history about to start and finish at 1 !
Judging by the consistent, positive opinions about the upcoming ‘Old Firm’ game from assorted ex-RFC/CFC players/managers and SMSM ‘journalists’…
If the game passes without significant, associated trouble the SMSM will proclaim loudly that the spectacle around this fixture is desperately needed for the health of Scottish football.
Alternatively, if the game passes with a significant number of related incidents of violence and disorder…IMO, these will be glossed over/ignored by the SMSM…and will still proclaim loudly that the spectacle around this fixture is desperately needed for the health of Scottish football.
As we saw last week with the deficient reporting around the Hearts game at Ibrox, there are valid and important reasons why the SMSM should accept its fundamental social responsibility to report the truth.
[I know, :slamb: ]
Bad wintry weather is on its way folks… really bad 😈
It might be March before we see another game of soccerball at The Loandome
It’s a ill wind that blows the administrators to your door as my Granny used to say
Rangers will never again spend the money that was lavished on players through the Murray years. They are still looking for someone who wants to burn money on Ibrox.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2378973/Rangers-balance-sheets-tip-fortunes-Celtics-way.html
They need to learn to live within their means and that will mean a top 4 or 5 club that on its day is capable of beating any team in the SFPL, but no more. The onerous contracts will never allow the club to thrive.
If there was a complete boycott, the fans could take back control but it may mean starting yet again, this time, forgetting Rangers minded managers and expensive aging players. Instead, create a youthful team that will reap rewards in 3 or 4 years time.
Of course this will not happen, Rangers will struggle along under the weight of onerous contracts no matter who appears to be in charge.
Jeez…
BBC reporter holds metaphorical gun to Ronnie Deila’s head with the words, “say they’re old club and didn’t die. You’re on the spot son, say it.”
At this point, the camera zooms in, all the better to see the quantum of his emotional leakage.
Dog whistling, BBC style.
Reprehensible.
To his credit, Deila’s response was simply, “it’s a big game. All that other stuff is nothing to do with me.”
(All of the above paraphrased, of course.)
Cracking joke or typo, either way, Cerdan!
With regard to Rangers Finances and Licensing.
National Club Licensing applies where TRFC have an Entry Level Licence under the Legal and Administration Heading (which on the spreadsheet is in blue, meaning it is an improvement on the previous year – yep)
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ClubLicensing/2015/2015%20Club%20Licensing%20Manual%20-%20Parts%201%20&%202.pdf
this is an extract from 8.11 of main document that suggests where the SFA have power.
” Where the auditors report in respect of the annual financial statements contains an adverse or disclaimer of opinion a club may meet the terms of Entry criterion provided that it meets certain conditions as set out by the Licensing Committee, at its discretion from time to time.”
full rules here
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ClubLicensing/2015/2015%20Club%20Licensing%20Manual%20-%20Parts%201%20&%202.pdf )
So if the auditors a club selects and pays for says “no problem” then no problem and if they do the LC can act or not.
The above probably borrowed from National Chocolate Teapot Licensing Rules.
I cannot remember if there was a disclaimer in the last accounts but if one appears the SFA do have the powers to act (but will not unless other clubs complain to them about non football money underpinning TRFC wage bill)
This discretion applies in slightly different words at Bronze, Silver and Gold level which a club in the top tier must achieve so no holding breath on no licence awarded.
It is unlikely conditions will ever be met but as well to know the relevant rule but a general observation is that they are no longer strong enough to cope with modern day football as a business.
Phil’s latest
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/slow-lingering-near-death/
I have to say
Theres no such thing as a bad advert
Only adverts you remember and adverts you don`t
There were people on Bear sites posting and talking about the advert who also claimed not to have read it.
There were newspapers attempting to belittle the advert despite having printed similar obituaries in 2012
So IMO
The advert achieved what it set out to do
It got widespread publicity in the rest of the Scottish media
And it got it for free
It galvanised the media to refute it using barefaced lies
Ssb at it’s best. Pundit stated that Mr Ashley may have handed rangers fans an olive branch by not taking security of the stadium. A couple of calls later a caller stated there is a court case coming up to find out who owns ibrox so no security can be taken over it. Olive branch pundit agreed that he knew about this court case. ffs.
Yet another twist in the Rangers Saga.
The 3B as rumoured were to be given if not the keys to the stadium at least access to the marble staircase as long as they voted against King and his egm motion. Nice to see they had the sense to resist that one which – I have no doubt – would have been used to beat them about the head at a later stage.
And Easdale had to be got rid of too. In some ways it might have been easier for the 3B to go with that one and they’ll have their reasons for not doing so.
Given that the Easdales don’t take director fees and have provided IIRC interest-free loans they must be feeling more than a little miffed at the exit planned for them. Perhaps they should think about getting some first-class PR on board to help with what appears to be an image problem.
It begs the question of course: Does Ashley want to reduce the Easdale proxy vote below 25% and cobble together 75% of the shareholding to pass a resolution disapplying share pre-emption rights.
Perhaps Ashley believes that if he can attract new investors based on his reputation then he won’t need to cough-up for revamping the squad. Might work but now the proxies realise he has them in his sights and any lucky enough to hold onerous contracts might be thinking about sauce and geese and even ducks and drakes 😆
STV had the story in full but BBC Scotland missed the later breaking story of the 3B statement and its implications.
Nacho Novo speaking out about his treatment at the hands of Rangers.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/nacho-novo-rips-rangers-board-5053717
I know that it would be easy to pick a lot of holes in Nacho Novo’s wish for RRM (including Dave King) to take over the running of Rangers and return things to the old days.
But I genuinely believe he was only speaking as a fan.
TBH, what a shcokingly ham fisted way for him to be treated by the club, just for joining a fans group. This might actually be a slip by the current regime. They may have created a rallying point for the disparate fans groups.
With MA parking his tanks, the 3B’s statement and now this I have a feeling that the mood amongst a section of the Rangers support will already be incendury. My fears for the weekend just grow and grow.
MaBaw says:
January 27, 2015 at 6:47 pm
2
0
Rate This
Rangers will never again spend the money that was lavished on players through the Murray years. They are still looking for someone who wants to burn money on Ibrox.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2378973/Rangers-balance-sheets-tip-fortunes-Celtics-way.html
They need to learn to live within their means and that will mean a top 4 or 5 club that on its day is capable of beating any team in the SFPL, but no more. The onerous contracts will never allow the club to thrive.
If there was a complete boycott, the fans could take back control but it may mean starting yet again, this time, forgetting Rangers minded managers and expensive aging players. Instead, create a youthful team that will reap rewards in 3 or 4 years time.
Of course this will not happen, Rangers will struggle along under the weight of onerous contracts no matter who appears to be in charge.
=======================
I got thinking about how a returning Rangers will make the top tier more competitive. Mark Guidi prompted it on SSB talking about “the edge” bringing the crowds back.
TRFC’s absence means Celtic do not face same risk of losing up to 12 points a season, but so too do other clubs. The difference is that Celtic on balance will not lose as many points to the other clubs as they will take off each other. That is what dulls “the edge”
The edge for Celtic fans came from the “strong” TRFC (pre 2012) result knowing that dropping a single point or even not scoring one more goal could cost the title.
However that strong TRFC is not going to be the same standard of opposition as before. Celtic might lose more than the 12 points not presently at risk, but are the other clubs going to lose the same number of points to TRFC as they did pre 2012?
So if it is “the edge” that brings the crowds in, the question is will the edge in fact return or will Celtic still benefit from the spread of points that the other clubs take from each other?
Always assuming Celtic’s healthier financial state allows them to afford more players of better quality than the rest.
Any mathematicians want to do the sums?
Tincks says:
January 27, 2015 at 7:36 pm
Nacho Novo speaking out about his treatment at the hands of Rangers.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/nacho-novo-rips-rangers-board-5053717
—————————————————————
Bears – across all the factions – hold a special place for Wee Nacho and you’re right @Tincks they’ve just shot both feet off with that move.
The Wee Man has fired back with both barrells and blasted them out of the water.
Between the 3B statement and Nacho hitting out I have to say it has disclosed a real hamfisted way of going about things and many Bears who might have been swithering over Ashley will have little problem IMO in turning against hime and his placemen.
Auldheid says:
January 27, 2015 at 7:39 pm
Your inbox is full and not accepting PMs
ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2015 at 7:30 pm
Given that the Easdales don’t take director fees and have provided IIRC interest-free loans they must be feeling more than a little miffed at the exit planned for them. Perhaps they should think about getting some first-class PR on board to help with what appears to be an image problem.
=========================================================
Your surely not suggesting that Jack’s just not cutting it any more….. 😮 😈
Tincks says: January 27, 2015 at 7:36 pm
Nacho Novo speaking out about his treatment at the hands of Rangers.
==========================
That will be the same Mr Novo, sorry Mr Inverness, who received an EBT and loans worth £1.2M from sub-trust 72, which was deemed illegal (one of the five identified as such by the original FTTT).
I wonder if his indemnity for tax payments from RFC was treated as a footballing debt by the Newco. Nah I thought not.
Tincks says:
January 27, 2015 at 7:21 pm
4 1 Rate This
Phil’s latest
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/slow-lingering-near-death/
———-
Phil putting some figures on the ‘rent’, well well. And mentioning a possible deal done with the off-shorers. Plus DK & the 3Bs having chucked away their dosh to no benefit. All makes sense.
Phil seems to offer two scenarios for fans, walk away or surrender. Don’t see the path ahead for MA if they walk away. Can you arrange SPFL matches at Murray Park with a few temporary SportsDirect stands, while moth-balling Ibrox — or creating those nice Ibrox flats and sport & shopping complex?
Tincks and eco,
From Novo’s words it appears the players have opinions they are afraid to express publicly. It might just be that Novo will now let it be known what they are saying – maybe not to the press, but to the bears at least, and from there it’ll move into cyberspace.
““Kenny is not the problem. The problem is the board. For me, there is a word for these kind of people – ‘s****bags’.”
Nacho has definitely taken Scottish culture to heart. Not “it”, but “ite”
GoosyGoosy says:
January 27, 2015 at 2:47 pm
34 0 Rate This
Ashleys behaviour over TRFC is way beyond a simple asset strip
It has all the hallmark of a smarting bully who feels TRFC deserve to be ruined
Which got me thinking
What could motivate such behavior?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In 2006 Minty did a deal with JJ Sports which gave RFC £18m upfront and a guaranteed £3m p.a. for 10yrs. It beggars belief that Minty wasn`t playing off JJB and Ashley during these negotiations
So
Are we witnessing some kind of ego driven revenge?
Did Ashley join up with Green precisely to stick it to RFC?
========================================
That gave me a stauner.
If The Big Man is motivated by revenge instead of some pilot scheme in asset stripping then we’re in a some amazingly funny times ahead!
I’ve just noticed Graham Spiers on Twitter exasperatingly asking a Celtic fan how much punishment for Rangers will make him happy. They just don’t get it. Firstly there was no punishment, as Rangers were simply liquidated as required by law. We know how the current Rangers arrived in the bottom league and again it was not by way of a punishment.
We can never move on at this rate.
Edit: Only two weeks ago another ‘quality’ journalist, Richard Wilson, stated Ashley didn’t realise Rangers ‘position in Scottish society’. Whatever Wilson perceives that position to be, Ashley clearly doesn’t give a toss about it!
@ModgePKR says:
January 27, 2015 at 8:10 pm
1 1 Rate This
…If The Big Man is motivated by revenge instead of some pilot scheme in asset stripping then we’re in a some amazingly funny times ahead!
———-
Wasn’t there a link to a newspaper piece analyzing Ashley’s Newcastle behaviour? Sure I read some kind of thing that suggested he was paying them back with a state of permanent mediocrity because of their hostility towards him. Don’t buy it myself, but stranger things have happened. Strange the way NU and Ashley all quickly turned sour. Would luv to hear Kevin Keegen’s current thoughts on Sports Direct Rangers.
Danish Pastry says:
January 27, 2015 at 8:44 pm
Would luv to hear Kevin Keegen’s current thoughts on Sports Direct Rangers.
______________________________
He’d be too busy answering the question about the famous advert, using his well known footballer’s knowledge of company and insolvency law, to spend time talking about someone, or a company, he has had dealings with and might actually know something about!
Tincks says:
January 27, 2015 at 7:36 pm
6
0
Rate This
Nacho Novo speaking out about his treatment at the hands of Rangers.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/nacho-novo-rips-rangers-board-5053717
I know that it would be easy to pick a lot of holes in Nacho Novo’s wish for RRM (including Dave King) to take over the running of Rangers and return things to the old days.
But I genuinely believe he was only speaking as a fan.
TBH, what a shcokingly ham fisted way for him to be treated by the club, just for joining a fans group. This might actually be a slip by the current regime. They may have created a rallying point for the disparate fans groups.
With MA parking his tanks, the 3B’s statement and now this I have a feeling that the mood amongst a section of the Rangers support will already be incendury. My fears for the weekend just grow and grow.
________________________________________________________
I don’t think it was hamfisted at all.
Rangers First are attempting to undermine their interests.
Nacho supports Rangers First.
The boards actions are entirely rational and logical.
Moreover I think it was calculated. They knew it would be reported.
Because I susepct the message wasn’t intended as a signal for the TRFC fans – who are fickle and irrelevent in such matters – or for Nacho himself.
This simple “Get orf moy laand!” is a message to ALL of the legends, lamb mucnhers :slamb: and hangers on in hospitality that they are dispensable, and can assume no special privelege off the back of their past glories.
No point harping back!
“Here are my tanks!”, indeed.
The deference to such types that got the Ibrox outfit up the swanney can take a hike, it seems.
Mike will know where the bodies are buried by now, I have no doubts.
First of all after a day of self imposed media blackout, or as it is more conventionally referred to, “working” could I just say the last hour reading today’s posts has been a privilege.
Secondly, if I am reading MA’s loan offer right then if TRFC repay MA’s loan then the RRL rights return to as they were and the security is released. So obvious question, why don’t the RRM fund a loan repayment now? Yes they’d have the operational funding to the end of the season but in terms of buying MA out (he’d still have his shareholding of course, but they’d have the assets) this is the lowest figure, prior to the drawdown if tranche two that it’s ever going to be, or should I return to my fancy dress confectionary?
Thirdly, somers statement today has laid bare what Armageddon really meant. A struggling rAngers with poor crowds does not work (no sh!t Mr Holmes) but they are relying, THEY NEED the SPL to fire their imaginations. Turning up to fire their misfiring heroes back to the top, as opposed to not turning up to shout at their team that they’re not as good as they ought to rightfully be based on nothing but faded memories of Laudrups past.
Since the start of the season TRFC have had £13 million in loans from mike Ashley. They raised around £4 million with a share issue and started with around £7 million of SB money. That’s £24 million and its not even the end of January. The likelihood is more funds needed before the end of the season. So at the start of the season TRFC did not have the funds to complete their fixtures. Is there not a law against that sort of thing?
Smugas says:
January 27, 2015 at 9:07 pm
1
0
Rate This
First of all after a day of self imposed media blackout, or as it is more conventionally referred to, “working” could I just say the last hour reading today’s posts has been a privilege.
Secondly, if I am reading MA’s loan offer right then if TRFC repay MA’s loan then the RRL rights return to as they were and the security is released. So obvious question, why don’t the RRM fund a loan repayment now?
____________________________________________________________
I know this one.
No more OPM.
and I hereby file my application to have “Real Rangers Men” formally entered into ‘The Official Lexicon of Oxymorons’ (All English language editions)