The Elephant in the Room

Posted on by

A Guest blog by @heavidor:       

Given The Takeover Panel’s success in procuring a Court of Session order to compel Dave King to make an offer for all Rangers International Football Club Plc shares not owned by the Concert Party it would be impossible for King to remain a director unless he complies with that Order.

The co-option of Barry Scott to the board and the elevation of Alistair Johnston as a person with significant control could be construed as repositioning, however it will be whether King makes an offer of 20 pence per share to all the shareholders not included in the Concert Party or not that will determine what happens next and we shall know later this month.

(King resigning) is the correct thing to do and should have already occurred. Instead, Rangers financial reputation has been dragged through the mud by association.

Irrespective of whether King complies with the Court Order or not this story is far from over, and it will continue to hamper Rangers’ prospects until it is conclusively resolved. A King resignation as a director of RIFC would reduce the prospect of contaminating the club, its directors and advisors from the full effect of cold shouldering should he decline to make an offer.

That would mean that King, as distinct from RIFC, had financial pariah status and not the club. That is the correct thing to do and should have already occurred but, instead, Rangers’ financial reputation has been dragged through the mud by association with King.

What should not be underestimated is the reality of cold-shouldering, not for just the offending party, but for those involved in business with the offending party. The consequences are dire for the individual or organisation who falls foul of the rules, making it impossible to carry out normal business activities within the sphere of influence of The Panel, and the same consequences face those who shelter the cold shouldered.

It should be appreciated that there are members of the RIFC that are members of regulated financial professions who would be further prejudiced through association with a cold shouldered non-resident King.

Perhaps unfortunately for a large slug of the mainstream media and football authorities, financial pariah status pursuant to cold shouldering in the UK coming on top of criminal convictions in SA would be impossible to spin in any positive way or to maintain continued fit and proper status. I mean, we could have the SFA cold shouldered, couldn’t we? All said though, the cognitively dissonant will carry on regardless.

If King does the right thing by resigning from the board, it is still important to appreciate that the ‘4 Bear’ Concert Party as determined by The Panel will continue to exist irrespective of how Kings deals with the instruction to make an offer for the shares. This is the elephant in the room that remains.

The Concert Party via their shares and loans will retain the same level of control they currently have, and therefore remain compelled to abide by The Panel’s rules.

King’s resignation would not remove that impediment.

It doesn’t end there. By challenging the authority and insulting the intelligence of The Panel and the Court, King has ensured all large share transactions in RIFC will be scrutinised and questioned and could additionally determine, for example, that the Concert Party is increased to include Club 1872 and Barry Scott on the basis they are working in concert with King and/or other concert party members.

There are some who think that The Panel has been slow to respond and impose sanctions and that they are all bark and no bite. It would be wrong to think so. The reality is that King has moved the whole dispute into uncharted territory. There has been no precedent for such continued brazen and naïve flouting of Panel rules. Accordingly, The Panel has chosen to move at its own pace, dotting the ‘i’s and crossing the ‘t’s and I suggest they’re being methodical rather than indecisive in dealing with the estimable Mr King.

The true value of RIFC shares was a key point in the recent court case with all kinds of claims being made. Some think that the lack of significant arm’s-length trades makes it impossible to arrive at a correct price, and others say that the price paid to Mike Ashley in recent trades is the benchmark. In my opinion, neither is correct. Current and prospective shareholders have the financial figures in the accounts to work with, and can determine the real worth from there. On that basis it is clear to me the shares are not worth anything like the last alleged trading price on Jenkins. Rather it seems that the shares only have nominal value given the business has never declared a profit, continues to lose money and is reliant upon ongoing shareholder loans to stay in business.

Any subsequent share issue – even with King gone – could muddy the waters further; The Concert Party members may expose themselves to another Panel instruction to make another offer should any of its members acquire more shares without coming to an arrangement with The Panel beforehand.

To illustrate such an arrangement, Dermot Desmond got Panel permission to increase his shareholding above 29.9% the last time Celtic had a share issue. This is preferable to trying to hoodwink the financial authorities with tall tales.

It should be clear to all followers of RIFC’s financial travails that the status quo is unsustainable. So, the question is ‘what’s next’? The chairman’s statement that accompanied the annual accounts once more talked about loan to equity conversion without reference to the impact of the existence of a Concert Party amongst the RIFC Board of directors and providers of loans. This is remarkable any such conversion cannot take place without the permission of The Panel and/or without dragging the other directors and lenders in the quagmire with another possible offer for the shares not owned by the Concert Party.

.. the shares only have nominal value given the business has never declared a profit, continues to lose money and is reliant upon ongoing shareholder loans to stay in business

So, what should happen and what is required for RIFC to rid itself of this terrible yoke? The answers are pretty obvious; King should make an offer of 20 pence per share to all those shareholders not included in the Concert Party. He has said the shares are worth more than that and that no one would accept. If he’s correct he has nothing to worry about and he would create a clear path forward for Rangers. He would also resolve the dispute with The Panel, creating the conditions for a debt to equity conversion.

So, why might that not happen? Because if the shares are worth 27 pence as the directors have suggested that means the loan to equity conversion would have to be at the same price and, of course, if the shares not worth anything like that there would be a rush to accept 27 pence and the ball would be on the slates, so to speak.

It appears to me the board is stuck between a rock and a hard place, that King will resign, and that there will be no offer.

If this happens the position would be precarious. The current board doesn’t have the credibility, money or experience to take Rangers forward. Being a true blue should not be the defining characteristic of what’s required to make Rangers competitive but it appears to be the preferred qualification of most of their customers.

I believe Rangers need a need owner with a controlling shareholding and deep pockets to sort out this mess, and I have reason to believe this view is shared by some of those with influence.

That is not to say that a solution is imminent, but the reality check is at least a start.

1,315 thoughts on “The Elephant in the Room”


  1. Looks like Carlos Pena has no intention of ever turning out for TRFC again, unless publicly wiping his nose on a pair of TRFC shorts is considered an act of respect in his Mexican homeland.

    For those not on twitter, there’s a video of him doing that very thing on his way into his medical for his loan move to Cruz Azul.

    No doubt Dave King will be checking with his friends at Hampden if it provides grounds for dismissal without compensation and outstanding fees and payments. 


  2. ALLYJAMBO
    JANUARY 8, 2018 at 16:57
    Looks like Carlos Pena has no intention of ever turning out for TRFC again, unless publicly wiping his nose on a pair of TRFC shorts is considered an act of respect in his Mexican homeland…
    ================================

    Shirley, that is grounds for the Blue Room ‘to resign him’?

    …and has Pena actually signed anything with the Mexican club yet ?  14


  5. StevieBCJanuary 8, 2018 at 17:43
    ” ..That was according to L’Équipe editor Gabriel Hanot, who decreed that a club’s past achievements and appeal to spectators were key to entry, rather than simply winning domestic titles.’
    ______
    Monsieur Hanot was clearly a money-grubber, whose interests began and ended with ‘profit’ not ‘sport’ as the mainspring of ‘sporting competition’
    He would no doubt have had no hesitation disregarding any sporting regulation governing the ‘rules’of entitlement in relation to participation. Would have got a job on the 6th Floor any day!
    It makes one wonder at the mentality of those who urged that the ‘European Cup’ competition should be re-titled ‘the Champions League’. 
    At least Hanot was honest about the basis on which clubs would qualify!


  7. Giovanni
    January 8, 2018 at 14:11
     
    ——————————————————————————————-
    With HTML   allows you to create multiple spaces that are visible on a web page and not only in the source .
     
    When editing some of my posts I discovered that “spaces” I had inserted were  too close to the URL and    was being added at the end.
     


  9. I would imagine the betting suspension is most likely to be as a result of jelly and ice cream munchers (can you munch ice cream?) sticking lots of bets on rather than the bookies suspecting that admin is just around the corner.

    ‘What’s for tea, tonight, dear?’

    ‘We’ve got pizza tonight, Allyjambo, followed by Jelly and…’15


  10. HOMUNCULUSJANUARY 8, 2018 at 18:44

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

    Absolutely. Bookies suspending betting are only protecting themselves. As far as I can see the Rangers insolvency event rumours are coming from social media by people claiming to be ‘close to the board’. Alleged date is one week today, with the purpose being to rid themselves of King. 15 points to be deducted when it happens.

    We’ll see!


  11. STEVIEBCJANUARY 8, 2018 at 17:31
    ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 16:57Looks like Carlos Pena has no intention of ever turning out for TRFC again, unless publicly wiping his nose on a pair of TRFC shorts is considered an act of respect in his Mexican homeland…================================
    Shirley, that is grounds for the Blue Room ‘to resign him’?
    …and has Pena actually signed anything with the Mexican club yet ?  
    _____________

    It does seem somewhat premature, to burn his bridges in this way, but he’s probably happy to think he might get a payoff rather than a recall if his deal with Cruz Azul falls through. Probably believes TRFC have loadsamoney! Probably believes they are ‘Rangers’ too21


  13. ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 18:55

    Problem is that suppliers/investors could be spooked by reading a headline stating that fact . It must be statement o’clock,shirley .
    On the Carlos Pena situation , I looked on transfermarkt.co.uk (only one “e”)to check his pedigree . There is a really strange transaction in there. )n January 1, 2016 , he was transferred from Leon to Guadalajara for a fee of £6.57 m (his market value at the time was £2.70m). One year later, on January 1, 2017 , he was loaned back to Leon and stayed there until June 30, 2017, when he returned to Guadalajara . The following day he was transferred to TRFC for a fee of £2.70 m. Something not kosher there, in my opinion .
    17/18Jul 1, 2017 Guadalajara Rangers£2.25m£2.70m 16/17Jun 30, 2017 León Guadalajara£2.25mEnd of loan 16/17Jan 1, 2017 Guadalajara León£3.15mLoan 15/16Jan 1, 2016 León Guadalajara£2.70m£6.57m 13/14Jul 1, 2013 CF Pachuca León£1.35m? 12/13Jun 30, 2013 León CF Pachuca£1.35mEnd of loan 11/12Jul 1, 2011 CF Pachuca León£765kLoan 10/11Jul 1, 2010 CF Pachuca U20 CF Pachuca– Total transfer proceeds:£9.27m


  14. UPTHEHOOPSJANUARY 8, 2018 at 18:57
    HOMUNCULUSJANUARY 8, 2018 at 18:44
    =======================
    Absolutely. Bookies suspending betting are only protecting themselves. As far as I can see the Rangers insolvency event rumours are coming from social media by people claiming to be ‘close to the board’. Alleged date is one week today, with the purpose being to rid themselves of King. 15 points to be deducted when it happens.
    We’ll see!
    ____________

    Rumours have sounded the death of companies in the past, and not just football clubs. Once the rumours start, creditors tend to get a bit twitchy, and then to get a bit more forceful in their requests for payments, especially if the rumours are not denied by the directors of the company. 

    I still, though, can’t see how administration, on it’s own, can rid TRFC of King. The administrators may be able to force him off the board, but I doubt they can force him to sell his shares, even if there was a buyer. There’s also the problem of ensuring that any purchaser of his shares doesn’t create a new concert party. And, of course, there’s the 23% of the debt that is believed to be in his name. If what they plan doesn’t suit King, he’s in a pretty good position to block a CVA, and, perhaps, even a pre-pack if he gets wind of it in time.


  15. EASYJAMBOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 18:23
    Bookies suspend betting on Rangers administration.https://www.oddschecker.com/insight/football/20180108-bookies-suspend-rangers-relegation-betting-amidst-administration-rumours
    =========================================

    I did notice that the odds of a Bottom 6 finish for TRFC had dropped from 150/1 to 100/1 in the last few days.  The analysis provided was that the TRFC bet was by far the most popular.

    Agreed, suspension of bets it’s no guarantee that Admin. is imminent, but the bookies have probably taken a fair few bets ?

    Almost 2 weeks ago I tried to put GBP50 on via a UK based friend, [can’t bet online here – even via a VPN], but the bet was restricted to a GBP20 maximum.

    Wonder what the diddies in the Hampden bunker think about this betting behaviour though ?
    …assuming they have any thoughts today…  15


  16. STEVIEBCJANUARY 8, 2018 at 19:25     Bookies suspend betting on Rangers.
    I did notice that the odds of a Bottom 6 finish for TRFC had dropped from 150/1 to 100/1 in the last few days.  The analysis provided was that the TRFC bet was by far the most popular.
    ————-
    I Told Mr king small bets at a time,small bets at a time.Spread them over a couple of days, don’t raise suspicion.
    what does he do. Puts the lot on Admin at 150/1. the price gets slashed and the bookies get twitchy and suspend betting.Told him not to get greedy and try and get some money for the share issue, he told me not to worry. why did i believe him21190602


  17. I wonder if Albert Kinloch has placed a “relegation” bet again. 21


  19. I see Jim Delahunt agrees with me that there club should scotch the rumours, if they aren’t true, of course! Though he, of course, thinks it’s all ‘pap’, which it may well be. 

    He wrote:

    ‘The Oddschecker stuff about odds being cut on Rangers being relegated this season is utter pap but their logic is reasoned on league rules on points deductions. It would be best for all connected to club for someone to come out and deny any probs. What would be wrong with that?’


  20. Jambos,  What’s your opinion of Jamie Walker move to Wigan?  A mere £300k.  Thought TRFC were desperate for him?

    Good luck to him anyhow.  Not sure how much you will miss him.


  21. Annual pay-out to clubs rewards growth in 2017. The Scottish FA rounded off 2017 with an eight-figure pay-out for clubs, with £10.3 million distributed to member clubs across the nation.
    The payments support the growth of the game at all levels and are intended to reward member clubs for their dedication to core components of the Scottish FA’s strategy, including:
    Development of home-grown elite players for club first teams and Scotland national teams;Good governance;Improvement of standards through club licensing;Contributing to the achievement of “Strong Quality Growth” outlined within the Scottish FA’s strategic plan, Scotland United: A 2020 Vision.
    https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/scottish-clubs-benefit-from-10-million-scottish-fa-investment/?rid=13929
    ——————-
    Good governance;?


  22. ALLYJAMBO
    JANUARY 8, 2018 at 20:35
    ===========================

    Or, and he may not have thought about this, it’s true they are skint and surviving on loan after loan.

    That’s not conjecture by the way, it’s something we actually know to be true. 

    The club have admitted it and their auditor have confirmed it. 


  23. Bookies rarely get it wrong. It’s essentially the “wisdom of crowds” after all. In saying that there are some “crowds” where rational judgment is discounted. I’m referring, of course, to those who may have voted for President Trump and not anything parochial or peculiarly Scottish.


  24. HomunculusJanuary 8, 2018 at 20:53 
    ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 20:35===========================Or, and he may not have thought about this, it’s true they are skint and surviving on loan after loan.That’s not conjecture by the way, it’s something we actually know to be true. The club have admitted it and their auditor have confirmed it.
    _______________

    He may not even know it, you know what these media types are like!21


  25. jimbo January 8, 2018 at 20:44
    Jambos,  What’s your opinion of Jamie Walker move to Wigan?  A mere £300k.  Thought TRFC were desperate for him?
    Good luck to him anyhow.  Not sure how much you will miss him.
    =======================
    I’ve been watching Jamie with Hearts academy sides since he was 14 or 15.  He’s a lovely lad but he’d probably admit to not being the sharpest tool in the box.  I haven’t spoken to him for some time, but he still acknowledges me if I see him in the passing.

    He has always had the ability to do something exceptional but in games he can be his own biggest critic and if something doesn’t work for him he can be easily demotivated and can look disinterested.

    The reason for him moving is simply money. At Wigan, he will probably be on at least double what he could earn at Hearts. He has a partner and a young kid to think about, so it’s a no brainer in that regard.  He turned down an offer to make him the highest paid player at Tynecastle, but he probably felt that he deserved greater reward, particularly seeing former team mates Jason Holt at Rangers and Callum Paterson at Cardiff doing exactly that.  In my opinion he is a better player than either of them.

    Why Wigan and not Rangers? Well, Rangers bid in the summer was very much in the same vein as Jamie Murhpy’s proposed transfer, instalments and add-ons subject to future team achievements, so was rejected.  Hearts probably took a bit of a gamble in letting his contract run down, knowing that he could have signed a pre-contract with Rangers now, but Wigan came in with an acceptable bid so he has been allowed to go now, with no alternative offer on the table.

    Will Hearts miss him? “Yes”, as he can score and create goals, but also “no”, given that his form this season has been up and down and he does have a history blighted by knee problems. I hope he does well down there. He was on the verge of a Scotland call-up before his recent injury problems, so if he can stay fit and establish himself in the Wigan side then he may still get his cap.


  26. Ex LudoJanuary 8, 2018 at 20:59 
    Bookies rarely get it wrong. It’s essentially the “wisdom of crowds” after all. In saying that there are some “crowds” where rational judgment is discounted. I’m referring, of course, to those who may have voted for President Trump and not anything parochial or peculiarly Scottish.
    ____________________

    I don’t think we should discount, though, the Kinloch case, as the bookies might just be wanting to save themselves from, or to reduce the chance of, potential litigation.

    I’m sure bookies learn from their mistakes, and though they ‘won’ the case, they tend not to like negative publicity. Although the ‘precedent’ has been set should TRFC be liquidated, another myth could be put in their place, and, for all we, or the bookies, know, the goalposts could be moved and TTRFC allowed to start (as though they were never away) in the Championship, with, possibly, TRFC having actually finished bottom! So, the question would then be, were they relegated, or were they a new start up, invited into the league at Championship level.

    I’m not suggesting this is the kind of scenario the bookies might fear, just that they are aware of the shenanigans that would surround another Ibrox insolvency event! Remember, the SPFL legal mouthpiece was not prepared to define relegation!

    My point being, that, as well as just covering the increased betting, they might well just be covering themselves from this new threat to their screwing of the punter!


  27. EX LUDOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 20:59
    2
    0 Rate This
    Bookies rarely get it wrong. It’s essentially the “wisdom of crowds” after all. In saying that there are some “crowds” where rational judgment is discounted. I’m referring, of course, to those who may have voted for President Trump and not anything parochial or peculiarly Scottish.
    —————
    An old saying.
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups


  28. ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 8, 2018 at 21:28
    I’m sure bookies learn from their mistakes, and though they ‘won’ the case, they tend not to like negative publicity. Although the ‘precedent’ has been set should TRFC be liquidated, another myth could be put in their place, and, for all we, or the bookies, know, the goalposts could be moved and TTRFC allowed to start (as though they were never away)
    ————-
     I believe he has this correct, but always happy to be corrected myself.
    TheTributeAct@TheTributeAct Replying to @therangersbus@jamesdoleman
    They won’t need one. The rules were changed to allow new clubs formed from the ashes of liquidated ones to take the league place of the old club as if nothing happened. Only needs a committee vote rather than every club in the league getting a say.


  29. easyJamboJanuary 8, 2018 at 21:21

    I completely agree with everything EJ says here, and I am very sad to see Jamie Walker leave Hearts. He was the most exciting, if not the most consistent, of the young blood that served Hearts so well during the administration year and then the amazing Championship season.

    Both from a supporters perspective, and Jamie’s, I am happier to ‘lose’ money on his transfer to Wigan, than to, maybe, get more from TRFC – which we still wouldn’t have got in full had he gone to them last summer.


  30. Thanks EJ for that interesting background on JW.

    Wish I had a penny for every Celtic player who sounds just like him over the years.  Make a mistake and the head goes down, get annoyed with themselves because they know on their day they can be so much better.

    You won’t believe this (yes you will) but my area of expertise is not football but music.  It’s the same thing there.  Make a howler at the start of a performance and your confidence and nerves can take a beating.

    Before you start laughing, I’m a great fan of ‘Take the Floor’ on a Saturday night hosted by Gary McInnes a fine accordionist who also played Shinty!!!  So you can marry the two disciplines. Although I was rubbish at football.  I did however go to school with my cousin Joe Jordan who was a potential great even then.  (Think he had a Hearts connection?).


  32. jimbo January 8, 2018 at 21:53
    I did however go to school with my cousin Joe Jordan who was a potential great even then. (Think he had a Hearts connection?).
    ====================
    Joe managed Hearts for three years from 1990-93.  He did reasonably well to start with, finishing second to Rangers in 91/92.  He was also in charge of one of Hearts worst defeats too, losing 6-0 to Falkirk, which led to his dismissal.


  33. Losing to Falkirk when they scored 6 goals!  That’s how Dundee Utd felt at the weekend!  21

    Joe and I share an aunt (It’s complicated) She’s about 92. Recd. a Christmas card from her once again. Lovely woman.


  34. The Florida cup thingy kind of annoys me.
    The fact that the Florida Cup LCC is prepared ( and, of course, was previously prepared, I think?) to accept blithely what TRFC Ltd say about themselves really pisses me off.

    Writing to the directors of Florida Cup LCC would be like expecting Kenny Mac or Chick Young to acknowledge that ‘their’ Rangers is no more: a waste of intellectual energy.

    So, I found this page 

    https://www.bizapedia.com/review.aspx?companyid=79E6CFCCC2AEE9A23DAE87

    which invites reviews of the Florida Cup LCC.

    So, I wrote a review. Just on principle, and not because I think that anyone in the soccer world of the USA might read it ( and I suspect that the Charles Green equivalents in the States  are not in the least interested in how their set-up-for the- moment’ companies are perceived!

    This is what I wrote:

    “This company seems to be willing to accept without question the fact that a soccer club founded in 2012 is the same club as a soccer club founded in 1872!

    Florida Cup LCC is running the (soccer) Florida Cup 2018 competition.

    One of the participating European teams is claimed to be Rangers Football Club, Glasgow, Scotland,founded 1872; a club with a record-breaking level of sporting achievement.

    This is actually untrue.The club that is participating is “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”, founded in 2012!! Which, of course, has only a five year history.

    Confused?

    Let me try to explain.

    The club that was founded in 1872, and which was a very successful soccer club over most of its life, actually died, went to the wall, went bust, was liquidated.

    It therefore lost any right to participate in Scottish professional soccer.It went the way of a number of famous-in-their-day soccer clubs. It ceased to exist, except in the memories and emotions of its supporters.

    Some of the assets were bought by a chap called Charles Green. These assets included some-but only some- of the members of the playing staff.
    Other players were free to walk away and find other clubs ,and chose to do so, because the club they had played for was no more, and they could not legally,or even under the rules of the Scottish Football Association, be made to honour contracts that had been broken by the fact that the club had been liquidated.

    Charles Green, with his reduced playing squad, had to apply , as a NEW club,to the then Scottish Premier league for his would-be new club to be granted a place in that League.

    This was refused.

    He then had to apply to the then Scottish Football League for admission to one of its divisions. The First Division refused his club entry, as did the Second division.

    It required a concerted ‘twisting of arms’ by the very governance body of Scottish Football( the Scottish Football Association[SFA]) before the applicant was accepted into membership of the third division.

    Only then was the new club allowed to be a member of the Scottish Football Association and allowed to participate in Scottish Professional football.

    So, in advertising this new, 5-year-old soccer club as being the very identical club as the Rangers Football Club of 1872-which is still legally in existence as a liquidated, bust, football club until the Liquidators finish their job and the club is legally dissolved, suggests to me the possibility that the directors of Florida Cup LLC are either exploiting the general unawareness of American soccer fans, whose ticket money they are keen to get hold of, or are themselves too trustingly ready to believe a load of hype from a less than honest participant club in their competition.

    Whichever? Doesn’t matter: no way would I put faith in such directors.

    I give you this as my educated opinion.”


  35. jimboJanuary 8, 2018 at 21:53
    ‘…I’m a great fan of ‘Take the Floor’ on a Saturday night hosted by Gary McInnes a fine accordionist who also played Shinty!!! ‘
    __________
    Jimbo, how coincidental the mention of Gary: just on Saturday afternoon Scranton time, I tuned in to Gary, who is a pretty good replacement for Robbie.

    And I looked him up, and his picture.

    never have I seen a radio presenter who looks so utterly unlike the  mental image I had from the voice and verbal expression, ( except maybe Brian Matthew of ‘Saturday Club’ of the late 1950s! My time, as a ‘teenager’. God rest his soul). 

    Gary looks absolutely nothing like his voice!




  36. Here he is John.  He has a very lyrical, ‘Highland’ voice which is the best on the radio.  I wouldn’t mess with him mind you!

    (That took me about twenty minutes how to post those pictures!)


  37. The DR’s take on the suspension of betting is linked below. Obviously no need to ‘spin’ it as the thrust of the article is what we all know, and, as usual, the Internet Bampots were all ahead of the media with, that bookies often suspend bets because of increased interest in the bet. They do forget to mention, though, the glaringly obvious financial problems of the club that are highlighted in the accounts and the fact that the man who promised to finance this season’s and next’s shortfall is now only a few days away from the cold shoulder.

    They do, again it’s true and not spin, make much of the fact that a 15 point deduction keeps them 8 points off the bottom (but if there’s no worries over admin, why mention it?), as if avoiding relegation is the only problem administration might bring to the club’s door.

    Of course, it could actually be classed as spin by the Record after all, to deflect from the true effects of administration, and why it might actually be that some people are so convinced that a football club is heading for an insolvency event!

    But what they have done with this article is to put the story into a medium that no business could, or should, ignore. In the business world (not just the football world) any company that doesn’t respond to such well publicised rumours would only have themselves to blame if creditors and suppliers started to get very twitchy (If they are not already) and demanded immediate repayments or cash upfront, for it would be seen as an indication that the company dare not respond, for to deny the rumours might leave them open to conspiracy charges if the company truly is insolvent, or on the verge of insolvency.

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-administration-odds-suspended-eager-11820151?utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral


  38. Impossible to read that Record article without pictures of Comical Ali/Goebbels in 45 springing to mind.  “Its all fireworks I tells ye!”

    Jimbo

    Oops it’s Gary Innes I meant! 

    Hence the recent statement on Robbie Shepherd’s website stipulating the change being down to Gary MCInnes clearly not being up to the massive role of filling Robbie’s shoes. 15

    Gary Innes having a right go at it though!


  39. John Clark. I think you have been very charitable to Sevco and the Florida Cup LLC people in not mentioning the lying and cheating perpetrated by the club which led to their demise. Then again,their country elected an inveterate liar to act as their President so maybe it’s no biggie.


  40. HELPMABOABJANUARY 9, 2018 at 10:14
    John Clark. I think you have been very charitable to Sevco and the Florida Cup LLC people in not mentioning the lying and cheating perpetrated by the club which led to their demise. Then again,their country elected an inveterate liar to act as their President so maybe it’s no biggie.
    ____________

    I could well imagine Trump and King immediately becoming best mates should they ever bump into each other on the golf course, then secretly competing with each other to see who could screw over the other first!


  41. “So while much of Scottish football is getting excited about the prospect of Rangers going into administration, Ibrox fans shouldn’t be too worried about the news.”
    (Daily Record yesterday.)

    Maybe it’s just me, but doesn’t this statement ever so subtly betray which side of the fence the Daily Record sits?

    ‘Much of Scottish football’ excited  or,  ‘Ibrox fans’ don’t worry?

    Who is their target audience?


  42. JIMBOJANUARY 9, 2018 at 12:30

    Does the ‘shouldn’t be too worried’ bit refer to the fact administration wouldn’t mean relegation, or that, to any club based at Ibrox, administration is merely an everyday tool to shed debt?

    Surely, in an article that mentions administration, the only reason anyone ‘shouldn’t be worried’  is if the writer is able to give an assurance that there is no chance that administration could become a reality! 

    I have memories of what it means when your club goes into administration, and how being relegated was more of a relief than it was something to worry about, for relegation meant the club had survived. 

    Administration is an extremely serious matter, and, even if the company directors think they’ve got it all under control, it can still go all so very wrong! It is, for a football club, forever a stain on the club’s history…if it does survive it with a CVA, that is!


  43. AJ,  Within the context of the piece they pointed out 2 things.
    1/ Bets being suspended is not a guarantee of something happening.
    2/ TRFC is so above the relegation zone that it would be unlikely to happen anyway.

    Both points have merit.  But it was the rush to reassurance of the Ibrox faithful that caught my eye.  There was no looking into the merits or demerits of the rumours going about social media.  I suppose in some ways we should be ‘grateful’ that the media have tipped a hat to the influence of internet bampots.  James Traynor will be raging.

    At the end of the day it’s actually quite simple for us.  We can do arithmetic!   They are skint and none of us can see this changing anytime soon.  Except for the worse.

    If I were a bear it would not be administration I would afraid of but the L word. As you alluded to above.


  44. JIMBOJANUARY 9, 2018 at 13:30

    Something they are all ignoring is that, while it’s true that the betting thing proves nothing, the fact that it proves nothing doesn’t make the suspicions of TRFC’s impending administration any less feasible. They still have huge, for a business they’re size, debt, continue to make a loss, and are relying on more loans, and so increased debt, to see them through to season ticket time, when the cycle repeats – if it gets that far.

    I think it’s pretty much an established fact that if they cannot secure another loan (or haven’t yet) probably by the end of the month, then it’s into administration they go.


  45. On the subject of media “news” and “sources” what’s the bet that not one or the Cummings, Naismith, Sturridge or Dembele transfer rumors will ever come to fruition?


  46. Unless I missed it before, but Phil’s latest piece asserts that TRFC actually failed to secure invoice financing, [factoring].

    That can’t be encouraging for the Blue Room – and I guess they must already be micro-managing the cash position on a daily basis ?

    If only they could find a stoopid, billionaire, sugar daddy/bear ?

    Getting the feeling of deja vu…again.  22
     


  47. While we’re on the subject of administration, I saw a post on here a week or so back (could read, but no time to post!) suggesting that it didn’t matter which of the two current Ibrox entities (RIFC/TRFC) went into admin ….if it were to happen. I didn’t understand this as I thought the whole point of CG setting the new thing up as 2 entities was so that the holding company could fold leaving the club intact so that ‘Rangers’ could continue (unlike the original set up).
    Surely that would have to happen to allow the big lie to be repeated (albeit with more truth this time round).
    I don’t have a great deal of knowledge on how this all works, but would that mean TRFC would then be debt free as it no longer owes anyone any money if RIFC folds? Does it also mean that all those who have provided loans etc to RIFC would lose out, however as RIFC owns a now debt-free TRFC the administrators would be able to sell TRFC for a decent amount to get them some/all their lost money back?
    I can’t see how putting TRFC into administration helps anything – am I misunderstanding?


  48. The main line of defence on Gersnet today is that they have no 3rd party bank debt or external credit facility to default on.  Which is true.  But I also read on another site that most firms who go into Admin. is because of cash flow problems.  For instance there was speculation last week that there were outstanding invoices to the tune of £800k waiting to be paid.

    I’m a bit out of my depth when to comes to CVAs etc.  This is when you miss someone like Essexbeancounter.


  49. Hello to everyone  
    Just heard (inside information?) administration on Monday. 25 points to be deducted to get rid of mr king. Then mike Ashley to return. Maybe you all can make sense of that unfo. We shall see.
     


  53. Clarabo, I don’t mean to doubt you or your sources but under the SPFL rules a first administration event, and more importantly for the NC/SC argument the first in 5 years results in a 15 point penalty. There is nothing in the current set of rules that allow a 25 point reduction. We would have had to go into admin before February 2017 for that to be the case. And (correct me if I’m wrong) post 2012 new rules were written in that allowed even a liquidated club to regain the membership of the previous club. 

    Dont get me wrong, i believe admin2 is a matter of weeks away, but it will be a 15 point deduction even under the big bad L word


  54. nawliteJanuary 9, 2018 at 15:04

    The subsidiaries of a holding company are no more freed from their debt to that company, than you or I would be freed from having to repay a loan to a bank that goes into administration. If what you describe was possible, then capitalism would have died out many years ago, for every company, whether they were failing, or not, would have set up a holding company to carry out the same wheeze15 

    Another thing to consider, regardless of what the directors of a holding company might want the outcome to be, an honest firm of administrators, called in to carry out the administration of the holding company, have a duty to save the holding company by calling on all the assets of that company, including those of it’s subsidiaries. 

    Now, it might be possible to carry out an administration of RIFC plc, without pushing TRFC Ltd into administration, itself, but the end result would be that TRFC still owe RIFC, if it survives administration, every penny they did before, for in your scenario, there would be no CVA involving TRFC and so its debt, to all its creditors, will not have been reduced.

    From memory, the SFA/SPFL have rules that state that should a holding company fall into administration, but for whatever reason (ie the holding company ran a pre-pack admin) the ‘club’ didn’t fall into admin, then the club still faces the appropriate points deduction.

    All that said, though, I cannot see what benefit your scenario would bring to the RIFC/TRFC set up, as the majority of RIFC’s debt is owed in directors’ loans, and they could achieve this outcome, by debt forgiveness, without the additional expense of administration. If they are not prepared to forgive their debt, then there is no way they are going to go through administration without involving the subsidiary, TRFC Ltd.


  55. This time last year, the directors of 802Works Ltd had to accept Sheriff Miller’s very willing readiness to believe  that TRFC Ltd  were good at any time to meet their debts, when he saw no justification for ring-fencing the £300,000 that 802 Works Ltd were fearful of being cheated out of.
    Unless they have since been paid (perhaps they have?) they are behaving very recklessly in not bringing a repeat action in light of the totally worse position TRFC Ltd are now in, in consequence of King’s position vis-à-vis the ‘offer’ requirement and Court of Session order.
    And the clumsy ‘help ‘ being offered by the DR is enormously unhelpful: unfounded assertions by a ‘red top’ that a business is NOT in danger of failing actually fuel  speculation that it may very well be failing, else why the need to deny the fact?
    If I were in control at 800 Works Ltd, I’d be seeking to persuade a Court that I should have what I am owed protected.
    And if I was even a face-painter owed £40, I’d be shouting for it, loud and clear.


  56. JC @ 16.15 9 Jan

    That would go for Orlit also (owed circa £300K if recent court case details are correct) 


  57. Thanks Allyjambo, like I said I’m not knowledgeable. Would any of what you say change if admin were to lead to liquidation for RIFC? I.e. in an admin of RIFC would the (hopefully honest!) administrators be able to force TRFC to repay the loans to RIFC? How could TRFC do that if it doesn’t have assets (as I understand it)? 
    If they can’t force repayment I surmise that may force RIFC into liquidation. At that point, there is no RIFC for TRFC to owe money to so TRFC as a club would be in a better place.
    Is it simply impossible for any administration of RIFC to work that way? I appreciate what you say re the world falling apart if business/administration was allowed to work this way, but I simply don’t know if there is anything that expressly prevents it. Although Clarabow is not real, I worry that my potential scenario leaves a door open for, say, DM to buy a debt free TRFC relatively cheaply with King and co getting their money back. This was, of course, the nightmare conspiracy theory posited right back at the outset!!
    Re points deduction, I know the Southampton argument puts the kybosh on them avoiding that (albeit under the English FA).
    Thanks again.


  58. You would think it must be Statement O’Clock by now ?

    In the absence of any denial, you would also think that any suppliers who are overdue significant payments will be getting rather twitchy.

    And any supplier-imposed ‘cash on delivery only’ to TRFC would simply exacerbate a cash flow crisis.  

    …unless you can’t deny the truth in an official, public statement?

    Or the SMSM is instructed to copy/paste a high Level of positive TRFC BS stories – to counter the speculation?


  59. Darkbeforedawn
    im afraid I only know what I learn from here  re the ins and outs of the rule book so I guess my ‘source’ is mistaken. Think I’ll stick to believing what I learn from this site. Mind you, it was from ‘the horses mouth’ ?


  60. Just a wee thought.

    If RIFC/TRFC do enter administration soon, is the SFA/SPFL just going to accept a situation where a member club, clearly aware they were heading for an insolvency event, signed new players, increasing a wage bill they couldn’t afford, and also tried to negotiate transfers they could not possibly afford? Will the rest of the Premiership, and others who may face them in cup competitions, just shrug their shoulders and say, ‘ah well, it’s ‘Rangers’, it’s just the way things go in Scottish football’?

    Will the SFA/SPFL insist that TRFC show this administration will stabilize the club’s finances, and that they are committed to a business model that doesn’t involve paying for players they do not have the resources to support, without outside loans, and without relying on European football?

    Most importantly, will the governors allow them to retain the players they have just signed, while using administration to dump those they do not want, giving them a clear advantage in the relegation battle they would otherwise face after a points deduction, and, possibly, a shot at qualifying for Europe*?

    If they have, indeed, gone out and signed players while knowing that they were heading into administration, or even just knew it was a possibility, then their actions were/are absolutely disgusting and another spit in the eye of sporting integrity!

    * Administration should put paid to Europe, of course, but who knows what they might get up to, but a top six finish would still be unfair on the rest if achieved by using these recent signings. Would administration also mean they fall foul of European FFP regulations, having qualified for Europe while on the road to insolvency?


  61. nawliteJanuary 9, 2018 at 16:27 
    Thanks Allyjambo, like I said I’m not knowledgeable. Would any of what you say change if admin were to lead to liquidation for RIFC? I.e. in an admin of RIFC would the (hopefully honest!) administrators be able to force TRFC to repay the loans to RIFC? How could TRFC do that if it doesn’t have assets (as I understand it)? If they can’t force repayment I surmise that may force RIFC into liquidation. At that point, there is no RIFC for TRFC to owe money to so TRFC as a club would be in a better place.Is it simply impossible for any administration of RIFC to work that way? I appreciate what you say re the world falling apart if business/administration was allowed to work this way, but I simply don’t know if there is anything that expressly prevents it. Although Clarabow is not real, I worry that my potential scenario leaves a door open for, say, DM to buy a debt free TRFC relatively cheaply with King and co getting their money back. This was, of course, the nightmare conspiracy theory posited right back at the outset!!Re points deduction, I know the Southampton argument puts the kybosh on them avoiding that (albeit under the English FA).Thanks again.
    _____________________

    In the event that RIFC fall into liquidation, the liquidators would call in the debt TRFC owe to its holding company – in exactly the same way they would with every debtor of the company. TRFC would then only survive if a buyer of the club could be found prepared to pay a price the liquidators consider fair.

    There was a similar scenario with Hearts when Ann Budge bought the club from the administrators, thus saving everything Rangers didn’t. I can’t remember, though, if Hearts were bought prior to the holding company, UBIG, going into liquidation (EJ might be able to help) so it’s unclear whether or not it would be too late for TRFC if a buyer isn’t found before, and if, RIFC fall into liquidation.

    TRFC would then, depending on how the purchase was designed, be debt free, but the purchaser, one assumes, would have had to fork out a substantial sum and, if not incredibly rich, and the bears’ demands remain the same, the new new club might well end up in the same old same old!


  62. For those who believe in the imminent admin rumours there is always the option to bet on Aberdeen at evens to win the league without Celtic. Even if the The Rangers continue to the seasons end, Aberdeen may very well prevail anyway.

    On the subject of admin, (pre-pack or otherwise). My understanding of the situation is the Clumpany TRFC own the major assets, (although maybe somewhat encumbered) Ibrox and Auchenhowie. However the Clumpany is in deep debt to the parent company RIFC, who are in turn deeply indebted to their “generous” directors.

    My questions centre around RIFC calling in their loans to TRFC, who obviously don’t have the proverbial pot 2p in. As part settlement of the debts owed to the Directors, TRFC could transfer ownership of the main assets to RIFC, prior to calling in an Administrator to cut costs and shaft the other creditors. So long as the remaining Director debt is 75%+ of the overall debt, then a CVA for TRFC should be achievable. The Clumpany then gets the 15 point penalty, but crucially gets the unwanted high earners off the payroll.

    TRFC then limp on until the end of the season at which point the troops rally to rebuild the new team. Not sure how they rid themselves of their pariah chairman, other than offering him a pay-off, possibly part-ownership of Ibrox, from which he could receive a healthy rent for the remainder of his ownership.

    All conjecture of course, but I have always felt the reason that TRFC was not “floated” back in 2012, was to create a set up for this or a similar eventuality.

    Time will tell…


  63. Thanks again, Allyjambo. Worryingly it seems to me from your reply that there is potential for the nightmare scenario – i.e. David Murray doing for Rangers what Ann Budge did for Hearts? And the current owners/directors of RIFC would be happy as long as he repaid them (at least) their directors loans?
    So, say, £20m for DM to own a debt-free ‘Rangers’? That’s better than when he had to get rid 6 years ago owing a bit more than that (!) and the possibility of the Big Tax Case crushing him.
    Please tell me that can’t happen!


  64. ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 9, 2018 at 16:46
    6
    3 Rate This
    Just a wee thought.
    If RIFC/TRFC do enter administration soon, is the SFA/SPFL just going to accept a situation where a member club, clearly aware they were heading for an insolvency event, signed new players, increasing a wage bill they couldn’t afford, and also tried to negotiate transfers they could not possibly afford? Will the rest of the Premiership, and others who may face them in cup competitions, just shrug their shoulders and say, ‘ah well, it’s ‘Rangers’, it’s just the way things go in Scottish football’?

    Yes.


  65. nawliteJanuary 9, 2018 at 17:17

    It is, I’m afraid, a possibility, but it would depend on what benefits he could see in it for himself, and he may very well feel, that after all that negative publicity involving tax cheating and court cases, he’d do best to keep as low a profile as possible, and as far away from football as possible too. But who knows?

    It would also depend on how any administration pans out, as the club could be left with a threadbare squad, and should the reports of the state of Ibrox be anywhere near accurate, the new owner(s) will need to have very deep pockets, and we know Murray prefers to spend other peoples’ money, which probably isn’t available to him now.

    Still, it’s one thing having a plan for administration, it can be another seeing it through, and when it might end up making an enemy of a man like Dave King, things could very easily get messy. Who wants to pick up a mess, especially a high profile one?


  66. justbecauseyoureparanoidJanuary 9, 2018 at 17:33 
    ALLYJAMBOJANUARY 9, 2018 at 16:4663 Rate ThisJust a wee thought.If RIFC/TRFC do enter administration soon, is the SFA/SPFL just going to accept a situation where a member club, clearly aware they were heading for an insolvency event, signed new players, increasing a wage bill they couldn’t afford, and also tried to negotiate transfers they could not possibly afford? Will the rest of the Premiership, and others who may face them in cup competitions, just shrug their shoulders and say, ‘ah well, it’s ‘Rangers’, it’s just the way things go in Scottish football’?Yes.
    ________________________

    I wish that was just because you’re paranoid14


  67. Allyjambo January 9, 2018 at 17:06
    There was a similar scenario with Hearts when Ann Budge bought the club from the administrators, thus saving everything Rangers didn’t. I can’t remember, though, if Hearts were bought prior to the holding company, UBIG, going into liquidation (EJ might be able to help) so it’s unclear whether or not it would be too late for TRFC if a buyer isn’t found before, and if, RIFC fall into liquidation.
    =============================
    Hearts situation was quite unusual.

    Ukio Bankas, Hearts’ largest creditor (secured), and holding a 29.9% stake in the club went into “bankruptcy proceedings” on 2nd May 2013.
    Hearts followed suit, entering administration on 19 June 2013.
    UBIG, Hearts largest shareholder with 46.4% and also the second largest creditor, also had its assets frozen in May 2013. It formally entered insolvency processes on 26 July 2013, but wasn’t actually declared insolvent until 11 November 2013.

    Bryan Jackson (administrator at Hearts) was therefore required to negotiate with the respective administrators of Ukio and UBIG. 

    Hearts creditors actually agreed a CVA on 29 November 2013, but it was conditional on the shareholdings of Ukio and UBIG being acquired.

    The process of obtaining the shares was prolonged, mainly as a result of the Lithuanian administrators having to hold creditors meetings (which were regularly postponed) to authorise the sale.  Approval for the sale of the shares was only achieved on 16 April 2014, with the deal going through on 9 May 2014.  Hearts formally exited administration on 11 Jun 2014, 51 weeks after going into administration.


  68. Terrific answers AJ.  Your knowledge of these things is admirable.  04


  69. John Clark you been upsetting folk again? Fit ye like eh.04

    John Clark and @TheSFMonitor at it again By ian1964, 5 hours ago in Rangers Chat
    ian1964Club Legend 28 33,576 posts
    Posted 5 hours agoJas Boyd · @Jas72Boyd9th Jan 2018 from TwitLonger
    Santa Clause and his dirty beard still writing letters to companies trying to sell his theory that Rangers are a new club. Thought i would write a reply which may look long and a waste of time but most of it was on a previous post.
    http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sqd2hg


  70. Rangers supporters received an email today inviting them to download a revamped “RFC Connect” App which allows supporters to download and share information about the club, video clips etc.

    There’s nothing unusual in that, however the developer of the App is  a company called “Vicast Limited”

    That name may ring a little bell with some people, being a company set up in October 2012 by Martin Bain, Paul Murray, John McClelland and couple of others with links to the Oldco.

    Indeed, the above named individuals are still shareholders in the company (as at the date of the last confirmation statement on 28 October 2017).  Furthermore, Paul Murray is still a director of the company and Martin Bain is a “Person with Significant Control”.

    I wonder what Rangers supporters will make of their current and former directors looking to make money from their connections with the club. 

    It’s not a new thing of course, despite a previous statement to the effect that no directors would be awarded contracts by the club. We know that Donald Park did get the bus contract back once he took up a place on the Board.


  71. It turns out that the Pena transfer deal is just a year long loan.

    RFC statement
    RANGERS can today confirm the departure of Carlos Peña to Mexican outfit Cruz Azul on an year-long loan deal.
    The 27 year-old departs until next January having netted five goals in 14 games for the Light Blues.
    Rangers would like to thank Carlos for his services to date and wish him the best at his new club.

    It will obviously help get the wage bill down, but it’s unlikely to result in a boost to the immediate cash flow, which might have occurred had he been sold.


  72. With the state of play as we presume it at the moment .With TGASL looking to be looking like a total liability now .I would assume that he would only be interested in going with his pockets as full as he could get them ,If this were to be the case .Any suggestions on how he could maximise his take .I am convinced he would not do walking away for the good of secvo 2012 ,that’s for sure


  73. BIGBOAB1916JANUARY 9, 2018 at 18:10
    WHAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAHAAAAA
    just read some of that link you provided .
    LNS,SFA ECA and the rest .
    must be true then 
    Cmon sevco 1872 
    JC will be bricking it when he sees the postman 


  74. EASYJAMBOJANUARY 9, 2018 at 18:25
    4
    0 Rate This
    It turns out that the Pena transfer deal is just a year long loan.
    RFC statementRANGERS can today confirm the departure of Carlos Peña to Mexican outfit Cruz Azul on an year-long loan deal.The 27 year-old departs until next January having netted five goals in 14 games for the Light Blues.Rangers would like to thank Carlos for his services to date and wish him the best at his new club.
    It will obviously help get the wage bill down, but it’s unlikely to result in a boost to the immediate cash flow, which might have occurred had he been sold.
    ===========================================================
    Think Pena may be treating it as anything but a loan deal ,if his antics with the shorts are anything to go by .
    On that note what do you make of it ,I must admit sevco 2012 are usually good for first’s but I cant recall any player anywhere wiping his beak on his clubs kit when going out on loan .
    It was obviously stage managed and he meant it as a slur on sevco but surely there must be more to this gesture than just being annoyed at being sent out on loan .
    Strange to say the least .


  75. NAWLITEJANUARY 9, 2018 at 17:17
    5
    0 Rate This
    Thanks again, Allyjambo. Worryingly it seems to me from your reply that there is potential for the nightmare scenario – i.e. David Murray doing for Rangers what Ann Budge did for Hearts? And the current owners/directors of RIFC would be happy as long as he repaid them (at least) their directors loans?So, say, £20m for DM to own a debt-free ‘Rangers’? That’s better than when he had to get rid 6 years ago owing a bit more than that (!) and the possibility of the Big Tax Case crushing him.Please tell me that can’t happen!
    ————–
    After the SC case that found rangers guilty and the hidden side letters. i believe murray would not be allowed anywhere near a scottish club again.But then again maybe he “Can’t Recall” what he did and neither can the SFA

Comments are closed.