Munch Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I think it all comes down to how much they might raise in the transfer market for the likes of Wallace and how much they can raise with a leaseback of the stadium. Are they able to issue more shares? after the penny share issue no one/mug would be daft enough to invest/waste money on anymore Sevco shares Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I think it all comes down to how much they might raise in the transfer market for the likes of Wallace and how much they can raise with a leaseback of the stadium. Are they able to issue more shares? yes they can issue more shares but the one item that failed at the AGM was they needed a few more votes to do this without approval, in other words they wanted to be able to sell new shares that would dilute the worth of the existing ones, they now need the approval of the fans for that now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Much as we want to believe admin will happen once more it is just not going to. There are now enough people with money interested in the club to keep it running though cuts will have to be made.............the many spivs have run off with their pockets full having left the club with a large wage bill for playing in the lower leagues. They could have been promoted to division one on a fifth of the budget but chose to keep the big club image alive by signings which were not required until at least division one or the premier league. Once more many ignored the spending until it was too late and those who did question were sidetracked whilst others did the deals in the background with shareholders whose interest was money not the club. Even now it is not public knowledge who owns the shares and that says it all about the intentions of some with 'influence' as it has been stated so many times. Are there really people intrested in running and investing in the club? Watching the daily tumble of the RFC.L share price leads me to believe no fresh investment or bids are coming any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazzas right boot Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Some daftie will throw money at them and keep them ok at least until they are back in the top league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 They will try to follow Hearts lead with FOH and fan ownership, and if it works they'll be praised as trailblazers and our part will be written out of history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niblick1874 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 (edited) They will try to follow Hearts lead with FOH and fan ownership, and if it works they'll be praised as trailblazers and our part will be written out of history. They are the people, as long as they can turn and point at someone behind them and say, ask them, they know that we are the people, so we are the people, and if them bunch say so, then that is a fact, end of. We are the people. Edited January 9, 2014 by niblick1874 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 They will try to follow Hearts lead with FOH and fan ownership, and if it works they'll be praised as trailblazers and our part will be written out of history. There is already a campaign among Rangers fans doing this and even raising money for a fan bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 The spivs will love any moves to "invest" in Sevco. The spivs will end up with more cash in their pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 The spivs will love any moves to "invest" in Sevco. The spivs will end up with more cash in their pockets. Being in charge of the BIG HOOSE seems to be rather lucrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 What did he say? If it's the bit I'm thinking of it was that growing up in any part of the west of Scotland regardless of what team you said you supported you still had to choose between either of the uglies as well. You were always one or the other in other words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 http://www.dailymail...s_campaign=1490 poor McCoist, having to win the Champioship with only a budget of ?5m. Been led to believe that The Easdales (following a meeting with their finance men) have made things pretty clear on the finance front given they are losing ?1.4M per month.... ?2k per week maximum basic wage Sally ?150k per year or tata (so it will be tata as his salary has still not halved as per widely reported) Wallace out for as big a fee as possible this transfer window and will be followed by others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Everyone talking about them selling Wallace... He's spent over two years in Scottish football's basement. When he was competing in Europe for us, we didn't get a particularly large fee for him, how much do they expect a team to pay for him? Especially considering any potential buyer will know Sevco are desperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWJ Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 If it's the bit I'm thinking of it was that growing up in any part of the west of Scotland regardless of what team you said you supported you still had to choose between either of the uglies as well. You were always one or the other in other words. Having grown up in the west of Scotland I can vouch for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowmans_Boot Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 There is already a campaign among Rangers fans doing this and even raising money for a fan bid. You would have to think that there is massive potential in this, more so than us, lets be honest. The model would have to be adjusted but if their fan base got on board?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Swanson Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Everyone talking about them selling Wallace... He's spent over two years in Scottish football's basement. When he was competing in Europe for us, we didn't get a particularly large fee for him, how much do they expect a team to pay for him? Especially considering any potential buyer will know Sevco are desperate. This is where we need Billy Davies and his miserly bids... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 This is where we need Billy Davies and his miserly bids... The creepy wee Hun prick would probably offer twice as much money to them cor the exact same player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john brownlee Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 the GFA are already pavin' the way for leniency see forthcomming monday meeting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 The latest alleged incarnation of Charlotte Fakes posted this last night in respect of an SPFL Board proposal for the handling of Newcos Basically it comes down to an automatic relegation for anyone using a Newco option. It does come across as a Doncaster type proposal, but I'm sceptical about the provenance of the twitter source. Surely it can't be bryce9a, or could it. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rvj95a ]?NewCo? in the Context of an Insolvency Event[/b] Introduction The SPFL Articles and Rules both contain a definition of Insolvency Event. The definition is identical. The possibility of an insolvent owner and operator of a Club applying to effectively exit insolvency by means of a share transfer of the SPFL share from the insolvent owner and operator to a new solvent owner and operator of a Club is not expressly referenced as an Insolvency Event. A CVA is referenced as an Insolvency Event but would not typically of itself attract a 15 point deduction in accordance with section E of the SPFL Rules because, except in exceptional cases, a CVA would be part of an Insolvency Process and each stage of one Insolvency Process does not attract individual 15 point penalties. The traditional exit route of an owner and operator of a Club from insolvency is by means of a CVA and it has been tacitly accepted by Clubs, both in the SPL and SFL, that a single sporting sanction of a one off deduction in points is appropriate for a single Insolvency Process where a CVA is used as an exit method providing that the whole Insolvency Process is completed within the same Season and the immediately succeeding close Season. In effect, the SPFL Rules provide that if the Insolvency Process as a whole is not completed for the start of the following Season then a further 15 point penalty results. There are instances in England where, for whatever reason, a CVA route has not been possible to implement in order to exit an Insolvency Process and in Scotland, to date, we have the one example of Rangers FC where a CVA could not achieve the requisite 75% vote of creditors in favour of the CVA proposal. In such circumstances, if "a Club" is to be "saved" and not to suffer the fate of Third Lanark and Clydebank then the only solution is what has become known as the NewCo solution. In contradistinction to football the NewCo means of exiting an insolvency situation with the business continuing, albeit with new owners, is the norm. Often this is accomplished by a "pre-pack". Whilst CVAs have become slightly more popular in general business in the course of the last few years, the great majority of Insolvency Processes which involve the "saving" of the business are implemented by means of a NewCo typically as a component of a pre-pack. For whatever reasons a NewCo solution to an Insolvency Process is regarded negatively in football and the widely held view is that additional sporting sanctions, over and above any sporting sanctions that might have been imposed at the time of administration (15 or 25 point penalty and registration restrictions in the case of the SPFL) ought to result from a NewCo solution being adopted to secure an exit from insolvency. SPFL Articles The possibility of the transfer of the business assets and undertaking of a Club between one owner and operator and a new owner and operator has always been envisaged in the Articles of Association of the SPL. The relevant current SPFL Articles are 31 to 43 (inclusive). These Articles apply whether the context of the proposed NewCo is one which involves an Insolvency Event or otherwise. So far as SPFL Limited is concerned the critical component of a NewCo Transaction is the transfer of the one SPFL Limited share held by the existing owner and operator of the Club ("OldCo") to the proposed new owner and operator of the Club ("NewCo"). Subject to a series of mandatory requirements where to consent to the registration of the transfer of the SPFL Limited share must be refused, the Board of the SPFL Limited has absolute discretion, unfettered by any express criteria, to approve or otherwise the registration of the transfer of an SPL share between owners except in the context of relegation and promotion. The discretion is not limited by any express criteria because the discretion must be exercised in the best interests of SPFL Limited and the members of SPFL Limited. In short, the members of the Board cannot either refuse to approve the registration or decline to approve the registration for reasons which are not reasons having regard to the interests of SPFL Limited and its shareholders. Rangers FC It is important to bear in mind that whilst Rangers FC spent Season 2011/2012 playing in the SPL and Season 2012/2013 playing in Division 3 of the SFL, that was not as a consequence of any sanction or penalty imposed either by the SPL, SFL or, for that matter SFA. Rather, what some argue effectively amounted to a relegation of three divisions was the result of the then shareholders in SPL Limited not agreeing to register the transfer of the Rangers OldCo share in SPL Limited from Rangers OldCo to Rangers NewCo and then Rangers NewCo only being able to secure associate membership of the SFL on the basis that Rangers FC, owned and operated by NewCo, would enter the SFL in Division 3. There are many, and to some extent, conflicting analysis and rationales as to why the result was as it came to be of that process and, in the present context, there is unlikely to be any benefit in further examination of the events which led to it. NewCo Arrangements in Insolvency Contexts ? for discussion It is understood that there is a view held by a number of SPFL Clubs that explicit provision should be made for a specific sporting sanction to be imposed in the event of "a Club" seeking to emerge from an Insolvency Process by use of a NewCo procedure. Whilst SPFL Article 33 entitles the Board to attach whatever conditions that it thinks fit to the approval of the transfer of an SPFL Limited share between an Oldco and a Newco, it is considered by some not to be appropriate to leave decision making on such conditions to the unfettered discretion of the Board. The proposal that has been articulated is that whatever other conditions may be attached to the approval of the registration of the transfer of an SPFL Limited share in an insolvency context, the conditions should, as a minimum, require that the Club concerned be relegated by one division if a NewCo solution is implemented ("Sanction Relegation"). If the Club concerned were to be liable to be relegated in any event, by reason of its position in the relevant division at the end of the Season or by virtue of the result of a Play-Off Competition then the Sanction Relegation should be applied on top of the "Sporting Relegation". The proposal is best explained by example. Assume during a Season that the owner and operator of a Club suffers an Insolvency Event, most likely an administration, the result would be that the Club owned by that owner and operator would immediately suffer the fixed 15 points deduction. Assume that the Club is playing in the Premiership and that at the end of the relevant Season the Club concerned holds tenth place in the Premiership, taking account of the points deduction for the administration. Assume also that the Club is unable to exit its Insolvency Process by any means other than a NewCo solution. In such circumstances the Club concerned would, as part of the conditions attached to the SPFL share transfer, be relegated to play in the Championship in the immediately succeeding Season i.e. a ?Sanction Relegation? would automatically be applied. If the same Club were to finish in twelfth place in the Premiership at the end of the Season in question, taking into account the 15 points sporting sanction, then the Club would be relegated initially to the Championship, being a Sporting Relegation, and would then be subject to the Sanction Regulation taking the Club down to play in Division 1 in the immediately succeeding Season. Precisely identical principles would be applied in the case of Clubs in the Divisions below the Premiership in the relevant Season. One anomaly could arise where the Club using the NewCo solution finished in a play-off place at the end of a Season. The proposal in that situation is that the Club in last place in the Division shall participate in the play-off competition and the Club using the NewCo solution would be automatically relegated. Further detailed provision would need to be made in the Rules for situations in which more than one Club in any one Season in any one Division uses a NewCo solution and/or are in the Divisional play-offs or are compelled to take part in the Pyramid Play-Off Competition from League 2 in which case some kind of pre-play-off competition(s) would need to be included in the Rules. Detailed provision would also require to be made for which Club(s) would be promoted as a consequence of a Sanction Relegation. Steps Required for Implementation The above approach to Sanction Relegation by essentially one Division has unanimous support from the Board. The next step is to identify the extent of support for the proposal amongst the Clubs. Any change in the existing arrangements would require amendment of the Articles which would require (i) 11 Premiership Clubs to vote in favour (i.e. 11 Clubs); (ii) 75% of the Clubs comprised in both The Premiership and The Championship; and (iii) 75% of all the Clubs in membership of the SPFL. The required changes are to Articles which are not included in SPFL Article 194 and therefore the three year moratorium and the 100% vote in favour do not apply. ? One option would be to take the proposal as a discussion matter to Clubs at an All Club Meeting in order to identify the level of support. If the support was at a sufficient level and was sufficiently broad based to indicate likely adoption by the required majorities, then detailed drafting could be undertaken with a view to bringing proposed amendments to the Articles to the General Meeting proposed for 13 January. SPFL Board 16 September 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 The latest alleged incarnation of Charlotte Fakes posted this last night in respect of an SPFL Board proposal for the handling of Newcos Basically it comes down to an automatic relegation for anyone using a Newco option. It does come across as a Doncaster type proposal, but I'm sceptical about the provenance of the twitter source. Surely it can't be bryce9a, or could it. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rvj95a Interesting, although the one point I take from that is the one which relates to us. If the text is true, it means we have this season and the whole of the summer break to come out of admin before we're deducted points for next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Isn't Bryce9a the Sevco fan that as on here? Why is he mentioned above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Isn't Bryce9a the Sevco fan that as on here? Why is he mentioned above? It all relates to his same club / new club argument, i.e. the "club" never dies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Interesting, although the one point I take from that is the one which relates to us. If the text is true, it means we have this season and the whole of the summer break to come out of admin before we're deducted points for next season. That is correct. We will not be penalised again if we are out of admin before the first game of next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 So could a team go into admin in the summer break and come out before the season starts with no sanctions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 So could a team go into admin in the summer break and come out before the season starts with no sanctions? No, Its still a 15pt penalty applied in the new season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statts1976uk Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Has anyone got change of an Irn-Bru bottle? A Sevco share is now 28p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 10-Jan-14 11:38:17 28.00 100,000 Sell* 30.00 32.00 28.00k SELL SELL SELL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Jose Carricondo Perez Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Looks like the institutional holders can't dump this quick enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Has anyone got change of an Irn-Bru bottle? A Sevco share is now 28p. Value of the club has dropped ?16million in 4 months and that's based on a share price of 31p. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-value-drops-by-16-million-in-4-months-1-3263785 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie749 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Value of the club has dropped ?16million in 4 months and that's based on a share price of 31p. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-value-drops-by-16-million-in-4-months-1-3263785 What's ?5.5m minus ?16m I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/9109728/rangers-free-to-sign-players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Mid price ended on 28.5p, down 8% on the day. Squeaky bum time with a few investors suffering a dose of the runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Corners Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Are there really people intrested in running and investing in the club? Watching the daily tumble of the RFC.L share price leads me to believe no fresh investment or bids are coming any time soon. As I posted yesterday. The markets seem it have little confidence in the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 As I posted yesterday. The markets seem it have little confidence in the club. No surprise there then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Today's shares http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/shares/3/174336/twelve_month.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Today's shares http://www.bbc.co.uk...welve_month.stm The trend is pretty spectacular Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Getting a wee bit giddy, just been told that Rangers Financial system is far worse than they are letting on, and before anybody starts this leak was from inside the club and also some people they owe money too. Better start stockpiling the popcorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Does this have any impact on the warchest for the champions league assault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGuy Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Getting a wee bit giddy, just been told that Rangers Financial system is far worse than they are letting on, and before anybody starts this leak was from inside the club and also some people they owe money too. Better start stockpiling the popcorn I heard the same yesterday. Their situation is (according to my contact) bad enough that certain people are nervous any rapid administration will be "career damaging" as they are supposed to be at Sevco to stop this happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horatio Caine Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Does this have any impact on the warchest for the champions league assault? Naw - they should be safe enough (going by previous experience...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 It's okay Campbell / Bryce will ensure they are the old club for trophies and honours but a new club for legalities, debts and ahem "punishments"...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) One trade of 1M shares sold at 24p this morning. Could be Super (half) Salary bailing out. Edited January 14, 2014 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardiac Rucksack Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 I think there might be a fire sale..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 One trade of 1M shares sold at 24p this morning. Who would be buying them? The Easdales? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardiac Rucksack Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 If someone wants to sell a large number of sevco shares, but there is no buyer for them what happens then? Is the seller screwed or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) Latest updates. More largish sales/purchases going through 14-Jan-14 11:51:35 24.00 250,000 Sell* 24.00 25.50 60.00k 14-Jan-14 11:50:49 24.00 1,000,000 Sell* 24.00 25.50 240.00k 14-Jan-14 11:51:12 24.00 250,000 Sell* 24.00 25.50 60.00k 14-Jan-14 11:48:49 25.00 250,000 Buy* 23.50 25.00 62.50k 14-Jan-14 11:47:45 24.00 1,000,000 Sell* 23.50 25.00 240.00k Edited January 14, 2014 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Who would be buying them? The Easdales? If the buyer or seller of the shares either holds or no longer holds 3% of the company, then it has to be disclosed to the market by close of business tomorrow. Also if the dealing is by a director, then there must be a disclosure to AIM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 For every seller there must be a buyer, who would be buying into a tumbling share price in a near bankrupt again football club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Somebody is panic sell which also equates to somebody else either strengthening their position or some eejit is just about to urinate his largesse up a wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) McCoist told to cut the wage bill..which is between ?6m and ?7m pa according to this. Ridiculous amount for the level they're playing at. http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/25736543 Edited January 14, 2014 by Arnold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25736543 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts