Who Is Conning Whom?


I don’t have a problem with Rangers fans or other …

Comment on Who Is Conning Whom? by easyJambo.

I don’t have a problem with Rangers fans or other clubs’ fans recognising the current club as a successor of the old club. If it looks like a duck …. etc.

However, I do have a couple of issues with it though.  The first is that there needs to be an acknowledgement of a break in the continuity by Rangers fans, i.e. they need to accept that the old club went bust and was liquidated.

The second point relates to the SFA/SPFL rules / discretion. Again, I don’t have a problem with principle of “sporting continuity” (inheriting the history of a predecessor club), BUT, the process of how that is achieved needs to be set out within the rules, e.g. The criteria required for a new club to be deemed a successor club may include:-  a requirement to to accept the debts or other liabilities of the old club, be a member of the association for a specified time, be demonstrably solvent throughout, or have an unblemished record of adhering to the rules for a period of time.   I believe that the Italian FA have such a rule.

We cannot have such things left to the “discretion” of the Board of the SFA. Let’s say, for arguments sake, Roy MacGregor, chairman of Ross County, has been found to have been cheating the taxman for years across his business interest, and has been presented with a massive bill that he can’t pay.  All his businesses, including Ross County, are destined to be liquidated.  If there is someone interested in keeping Ross County alive, then how do they achieve that.

Nothing in the SFA’s or SPFL’s rules has changed since the RFC debacle to inform us how such situations will be managed in the future.  As far as I can see, it remains down to the discretion of the members of the SFA Board at that specific time to decide, 1) whether or not a new club can be recogised as a successor to the old club, and 2) the conditions placed on 1) happening.

That situation does not provide open and transparent governance, which is all we ask. There has to be a documented process of how an RFC/TRFC type transition is achieved, so that all clubs faced with similar circumstances, can either be revived or left with a DNR notice attached.

easyJambo Also Commented

Who Is Conning Whom?
I’m afraid I’m away on holiday while next Friday’s hearings are on. I’m unsure if JC is similarly unavailable.

Who Is Conning Whom?
Court business for next Friday morning:
LORD TYRE – C Munn, Clerk
Friday 15th December
By Order
Between 9.00 and 10.00am
P115/17 Note: RFC 2012 Plc for orders under para75  –  Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP  –  Wright Johnston & Mackenzie LLP

This is the BDO action against the administrators

… also

LORD DOHERTY – E Hunter, Clerk
Friday 15th December

P997/17 Note: RFC 2012 Plc for orders under4.16 –
Dentons – Brodies LLP

Who Is Conning Whom?
Statement O’Clock


THERE has been a great deal of media speculation regarding the appointment of a new manager. We assure all supporters that they will be the first to know when we are certain we have someone with the correct qualities required by our club.

The Chairman made it clear at the AGM that the club did not consider there to be an outstanding candidate among those who had applied for the position and the club was therefore considering managers currently under contract. This requires permission from their present clubs.

The position of Rangers manager requires an ability to win football matches and the mentality to cope with the demanding off-pitch environment that goes with being the Rangers manager. This is a critical aspect of our assessment of any candidate during the interview process.

After the two games against Aberdeen, we requested permission to engage with their manager to assess his readiness and willingness to consider the Rangers position. This was declined. We were subsequently made aware by Aberdeen’s statement that, at this stage in his career, it would be best for him to remain in his current post. We endorse that position because moving to a massive club like Rangers is a big step with concomitant risk. We continue to consider candidates but will only appoint someone in whom we have full confidence and who feels he is ready for the job.

In the meantime, we have great confidence in Graeme Murty, who will continue as interim manager at least until the end of the year. The manner in which he has approached this task is a credit to himself and the club.

Recent Comments by easyJambo

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo January 2, 2018 at 14:38
My one overriding memory of the Ibrox disaster was that of the five schoolkids aged between 13 and 15, all from the village of Markinch in Fife, who lost their lives.  I lived just a few miles away and was only 15 myself, at the time.

I remember those losses having a huge impact on the local Fife schools and communities.   

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
HOMUNCULUS DECEMBER 28, 2017 at 15:38
It doesn’t matter if it is paid to a trust or your aunt Agatha, you still have to pay the tax. I have no idea why they use the name Agatha, but they do. 
“Aunt Agatha” was used by the RFC QC Andrew Thornhill during the appeals process when discussing the redirection of earnings to a third party.

On a separate point about the share price.  The sale of Ashley’s shares to Club 1872 and Julian Wolhardt was used by King’s QC at the CoS, as an example of shares trading above the 20p price.

The TOP’s QC, however, countered that by claiming that Ashley wasn’t interested in the share price, but was insistent that he received £2m for his shares. To that end, it was pointed out that the price per share paid wasn’t 27p, 27.5p or 28p, but something to the second or third decimal place that ensured that the sum received was not £1,999,999 but a fraction over the £2m figure.  I can’t recall the exact fraction used, but the counter argument put forward seemed entirely plausible.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 22:39
EASYJAMBO DECEMBER 27, 2017 at 22:32
Is there a way of calculating how the issue of new shares reduces the value of the existing ones, or is it not as simple as that. I don’t imagine for a second it is. 
I cannot believe that the sale of new shares does not effect the value of those held by existing shareholders. That would surely be market capitalisation gone mad. 
It’s not as simple as the share price being reduced inversely proportionate to the number of additional shares issued.

The capital value (no of shares x share price) of the club is presently around £16m at 20p a share (80m x 20p), but given that the club also has £16m of debts, you could argue that a debt free club would be worth £32m (or 40p a share).

The value of the shares going forward would depend of the amount of debt written off and the number of shares issued in order to achieve that. e.g. if they double the number of shares to 160m in exchange for writing off half the debt.  The capital value of the club might go up to £24m, as it only has £8m debt, but the value of each shares would probably fall to 15p. (160m x 15p = £24m)

If however, they manage to double the share numbers, write off half the debt, but also raise £4m in new money, then the capital value of the club should go up by £4m (the new money). So you could see the capital value rise to £28m, but still with £8m debt. The share price might then be 17.5p (160m x 17.5p = £28m)

I hope that makes sense. It does to me, but the nuances of share numbers, to debt, to capital raised can easily be lost, if you don’t have an appreciation of where they are at just now, and where they might end up.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
shug December 27, 2017 at 22:05
Great hard fought match tonight.
Sadly, that was two hours of my life I won’t get back.  There was nothing great about it and it was more of a borefest akin to many derbies of yesteryear.  Tom English described it perfectly as “Thud and Blunder”

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 18:21
I take it all that has happened is that they passed the resolution allowing them to issue new shares. Those new shares have now been created.
This is them simply notifying Companies House that they have done that, Companies House records show how many shares have been issued.
That has to be done before they can actually sell them to anyone.
Purely a procedural matter I would have though. 
It’s not got as far as creating the shares. It’s merely confirmation that the Board has the authority to issue shares up to the specified limit.  That authority expires on the date of the next AGM.

The allotment of up to a nominal value of £1,086,376.01, means that new shares equivalent to 1.333 times those currently available can now be issued.  I’m sure that there will be a good reason for the number of new shares being set at that specific level, but I can’t think of one. 

About the author