The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[kingdannyb]

Will the Stock Exchange let them do another share issue ?

[graygo]

What percentage of share capital would Laxey have if they converted their 1M loan into shares at 1p each?

 

If I'm reading this right then they are not getting the shares at 1p each, they are getting the 1p shares at the current market price of 26.5p or lower if it drops in the meantime.

 

"The number of ordinary shares of 1p each which may be issued will be calculated using the lower of either 26.5 pence, being the mid-market closing price of the Company's shares on 21 February 2014, or the lowest price at which any equity fundraising is carried out prior to the first"

[Zico]

 

 

If I'm reading this right then they are not getting the shares at 1p each, they are getting the 1p shares at the current market price of 26.5p or lower if it drops in the meantime.

 

"The number of ordinary shares of 1p each which may be issued will be calculated using the lower of either 26.5 pence, being the mid-market closing price of the Company's shares on 21 February 2014, or the lowest price at which any equity fundraising is carried out prior to the first"

You're right, so approximately 4 million shares based on Fridays price. Don't know how many shares they've issued though.

[graygo]

Anyone able to clarify if this Easdale loan is without a fee or interest as it could be read, or if it's with a fee but interest free?

 

"Alexander Easdale will make available to the Company up to ?500,000 on a fee and interest free basis"

[Hagar the Horrible]

So they will be guaranteed their money back by September 1st, So by reading that they either make 15% profit, which is reasonable, they are businessmen after all, but if the Newco dies in the mean time, they retain ownership of the Albion Road car park and Edminston house, this is buy and leaseback by another name, they have navigated the murkily waters of the failed agm resolution 9 and 10. so pretty much the first 3500 season tickets sold are theirs. If Newco gets their act together they can also have the option of increasing their share holding at low cost which must be new shares thus diluting the existing shareholding of those in the IPO, again bypassing the failed article 10 from the AGM. OK don't get me wrong this is their money and they are entitled not to just chuck it away, which makes you wonder how come Ticketus handed ?25m over without holding onto the title deeds of Ibrox until they got their investment back?????? You can actually learn from this, my little Spivowan apprentices, you just need to abandon all morality.

[The Gasman]

15%???? 6 month LIBOR is 0.61% - some "windfall" that is.

 

Payday loan level APR, which says a lot about how bad a risk they're seen as by the money markets.

[adayinmay]

So they will be guaranteed their money back by September 1st, So by reading that they either make 15% profit, which is reasonable, they are businessmen after all, but if the Newco dies in the mean time, they retain ownership of the Albion Road car park and Edminston house, this is buy and leaseback by another name, they have navigated the murkily waters of the failed agm resolution 9 and 10. so pretty much the first 3500 season tickets sold are theirs. If Newco gets their act together they can also have the option of increasing their share holding at low cost which must be new shares thus diluting the existing shareholding of those in the IPO, again bypassing the failed article 10 from the AGM. OK don't get me wrong this is their money and they are entitled not to just chuck it away, which makes you wonder how come Ticketus handed ?25m over without holding onto the title deeds of Ibrox until they got their investment back?????? You can actually learn from this, my little Spivowan apprentices, you just need to abandon all morality.

Is Edminston House Inrox Staddium?

Do they have right of ownership to these assets to use them as collateral?

In there last accounts it was acknowledged that there was "an issue of matter" (sic) relating to this point?

[Mysterion]

Is Edminston House Inrox Staddium?

 

No - it's a building next to Ibrox. Chuck Green purchased it and had plans for a new Rangers shop and other stuff.

The plans have never materialised.

[269miles]

Anyone able to clarify if this Easdale loan is without a fee or interest as it could be read, or if it's with a fee but interest free?

 

"Alexander Easdale will make available to the Company up to ?500,000 on a fee and interest free basis"

Loan arrangement fee plus interest , I'd say.

[jamboinglasgow]

Seems a quick money making scheme from the Easdales, give Rangers money on high interest, it gets paid back six months later, they get the money from season ticket sales. Not good for Rangers but great for the spivs.

[269miles]

Pardon my ignorance, but if you're losing around a million a month, surely .....

You'd expect Wallace to complete his financial review in a lot shorter period than "120 days". Has Sevco actually announced ANY meaningful cost cutting so far ?

[jamboinglasgow]

You'd expect Wallace to complete his financial review in a lot shorter period than "120 days". Has Sevco actually announced ANY meaningful cost cutting so far ?

 

From what I could see, so far under his leadership they have taken 1 player off their books, who was a young player already out on loan.

[Munch]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/feb/24/rangers-borrow-sandy-easdale-laxey-partners so all they have done is kick the can further down the road and added more debt on to the debt if the orcs wake up and smell the coffee and dont renew the spivs will run out of options

[DETTY29]

Edit. Delete. Misread something.

 

Edited February 24, 2014 by DETTY29

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

 

 

From what I could see, so far under his leadership they have taken 1 player off their books, who was a young player already out on loan.

 

He asked the players to take a wage cut? Told to do one! good job well worth the money they are paying him, He might have asked the spivs to stop fleecing the club, but I think we all know the answer to that one. So why should the players take a cut when the spivs wont, and why has he not made public if he has even asked the spivs to errr hmmm well; stop being spivs? Also nobody knows at Ibrox when this 120 days is up as there is major dispute as to when the clock started ticking? and nobody knows what is going to be deliverable after the 120 days? Its like the time when they threatened a deadline with another deadline. This was billed as we will have an idea of where they are going (A good news story) from the man with the plan! So far the sleazedales and the laxley spivs have secured Ed House and the Car park, the next loan will secure Ibrox and MP, well that's my prediction.

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

Laxey will make 150k on the deal & have "securities" on it too, apr 30% on a 6 month loan. Spivtastic. An asset stripper loaning you cash is never a good thing, but Newco are so toxic that's the only route open to them now.

 

That 15% pay cut they refused to take forcing this move shows just how close they are to be coming insolvent. It's car crash tv at its finest really.

 

 

Hmfc the team for me ...

 

This also blackmails the supports to either buy season tickets or lose Edminston House and the Car park, doing the same with Ibrox would make it too emotional and too obvious, this way they get themselves into a strategic position of being in a strong position post admin, they can sell the club and end up owning it again by some means later without having to pay a penny.

[Deevers]

I just hope that they can stagger on financially till the end of the season. The insolvency event can happen any time after that for me. Starting them next season -25 points would be just fine as far as we are concerned.

[CJGJ]

I just hope that they can stagger on financially till the end of the season. The insolvency event can happen any time after that for me. Starting them next season -25 points would be just fine as far as we are concerned.

It will not happen as season ticket sales will ensure their survival over the summer and the hope is that is what will allow them to restucture the finances and reduce the wage bill with some players leaving or being 'paid off' in some manner.

 

If however the difficult decisions are not taken re cuts or the fans do not renew in the same numbers then trouble could be brewing.

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

 

It will not happen as season ticket sales will ensure their survival over the summer and the hope is that is what will allow them to restucture the finances and reduce the wage bill with some players leaving or being 'paid off' in some manner.

 

If however the difficult decisions are not taken re cuts or the fans do not renew in the same numbers then trouble could be brewing.

 

The Time to restructure the finances was 12 month ago, They are merrily plodding along with the same business plan that is steering them headlong into oblivion.

[Deevers]

 

 

 

 

The Time to restructure the finances was 12 month ago, They are merrily plodding along with the same business plan that is steering them headlong into oblivion.

Certainly how I see it. The latest "windfall" will only last. Them a couple of months given their present money burn rate. Even if the season tickets are sold early, the are going to be in exactly the same position by end of the year. All the big earners are on long contracts and after the carry on in the last window with Lee Wallace it's pretty obvious that Rangers valuations of players do not match the real worlds.

[Boof]

 

Meanwhile the extra cash pays off whatever VAT/NI Contributions they may have outstanding.

 

 

Well, one would like to think so...

[Central Belt 1874]

Certainly how I see it. The latest "windfall" will only last. Them a couple of months given their present money burn rate. Even if the season tickets are sold early, the are going to be in exactly the same position by end of the year. All the big earners are on long contracts and after the carry on in the last window with Lee Wallace it's pretty obvious that Rangers valuations of players do not match the real worlds.

 

Not just that but if they were to "pay off" the high earners in the summer..... they are still going to have to buy players in for the championship. Wheres the money going to come from for that? This all looks and sounds great for us next season whatever happens or is there something/one i'm missing?

[tartofmidlothian]

I just hope that they can stagger on financially till the end of the season. The insolvency event can happen any time after that for me. Starting them next season -25 points would be just fine as far as we are concerned.

 

This would be my main hope, although I think it might be midway through the season if it's going to happen. The ST money will give them a boost.

[The Gasman]

Laxey will make 150k on the deal & have "securities" on it too, apr 30% on a 6 month loan. Spivtastic. An asset stripper loaning you cash is never a good thing, but Newco are so toxic that's the only route open to them now.

 

I'm not sure how to calculate the APR from the six month figure, but as it's compound, I'm sure it's more than just double....

 

[doctor jambo]

I don't doubt they are in a lot of trouble.

I think it onteresting also that they have sought to secure loans against the lesser value portfolio of Edminston House and the Car park.

Could this be because they cannot secure against Murray Park ( outstanding Sports Fund monies owed) or Ibrox because they cannot claim ownership?

What a mess.

[Footballfirst]

I've had a look over on Rangers Media and they still seem to be clinging on to the hope of Dave King stepping in.

 

None of them appear to have grasped the fact that the players turned down the opportunity to take a 15% cut in wages, while asking if similar cuts were being implemented within the board and the shareholders. Now we see that rather than cutting the cost base, the Spivs are continuing to rip the remaining few pounds of flesh from the carcass in fees and interest.

 

The eagerly awaited ST cash will come in at a diminished rate (prices up / uncertainty re the future), then have the top skimmed off to repay the loans by the end of August. The club remains on a downward spiral. The current question is how much more can the Spivs bleed out the fans.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Footballfirst

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

 

 

This would be my main hope, although I think it might be midway through the season if it's going to happen. The ST money will give them a boost.

 

The LOAN will also help them with their current tax liabilities, taking HMRC out of the equation as a major creditor makes obtaining a CVA more realistic. They were running out of money but had no debt, now they are in ?1.5m debt to one of their so called own, They wont be able to run up massive debt as there needs to be somebody (Bank) willing to take on that liability. However the next set of caretakers need to know that are buying a club that now wont own the Car Park and their Admin block, plus a club that need not only considerable cash flow, but major re-investment in the infrastructure (Stadium etc) and that is before they even look at the playing side. This is a basket case with a gapping hole in the bottom if it.

[Cheile]

Apologies if this has been mooted already but surely some the the economic geniuses from Easter Road could solve Der Hun's financial problems at a stroke. They might even find some "frozun shayurs".

[Footballfirst]

I'm not sure how to calculate the APR from the six month figure, but as it's compound, I'm sure it's more than just double....

 

 

If it is only charged at 15% every six months, then a second lot of 15% would be applied to ?1.15M giving a total debt by year end of ?1.3225M. Thus the APR would be 32.25%

[djf]

Not really been following this but could somebody explain what is the best case/worst case/most likely The Rangers FC team we will be competing for promotion with?

[adayinmay]

No - it's a building next to Ibrox. Chuck Green purchased it and had plans for a new Rangers shop and other stuff.

The plans have never materialised.

 

Ah. Thanks.

Makes sense that Ibrox or Murray Park couldn't be used.

[doctor jambo]

I would state that it is not a basket case for abuyer out of administration- it is a goldmine- as already proven.

The previous buyers made millions for no effort- literally millions.

NOw, whilst the current RIFC is pretty knackered- if it re-entered admin it would certainly be worth buying -either as a fically tight long term project , or a short term exploitation fest.

The business itself is viable , bur has been criminally mis managed

[Mysterion]

I've had a look over on Rangers Media and they still seem to be clinging on to the hope of Dave King stepping in.

 

Rangersmedia is two things - an example of a forum with no standard and a collection of the stupid.

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

I don't doubt they are in a lot of trouble.

I think it onteresting also that they have sought to secure loans against the lesser value portfolio of Edminston House and the Car park.

Could this be because they cannot secure against Murray Park ( outstanding Sports Fund monies owed) or Ibrox because they cannot claim ownership?

What a mess.

Even if they could claim ownership over Ibrox which taking them at their word they do, then there is less emotional attachment to these securities than the stadium itself. Although this has set alarm bells of and running, nobody yet can see smoke bellowing from the building or wondering why its getting a little bit hot. Using Ibrox at this juncture would cause a massive super nova of backlash. But that will happen when its all too late! Right now their fans are waking up and smelling the chloroform and wondering why they walk with a limp.

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

 

 

I'm not sure how to calculate the APR from the six month figure, but as it's compound, I'm sure it's more than just double....

 

 

I don't think its about APR, its pretty much here is ?1.5m give us it all back plus 15% (?1725000.00p)by the end of August or we now own these two properties, the question should be will that be achievable?

[davieholt]

I don't think its about APR, its pretty much here is ?1.5m give us it all back plus 15% (?1725000.00p)by the end of August or we now own these two properties, the question should be will that be achievable?

 

Not sure it means that exactly. Rather the loans are secured against these properties so in a default the properties are sold with the spivs getting first dibs on the proceeds. I think .......

[Boof]

Large Salary just been on SSN stating that he's been assured they won't be going into administration again.

 

Presumably the key word there is 'again'

 

[Deevers]

 

Large Salary just been on SSN stating that he's been assured they won't be going into administration again.

 

Presumably the key word there is 'again'

Undoubtedly the "mushroom treatment " being fed to Ally!

[Footballfirst]

Grant Russell ?@STVGrant 2m

Lunch break at Rangers upper tier tax tribunal. No witnesses will be called. HMRC have spent morning picking apart initial majority decision

[Hagar the Horrible]

 

 

 

Not sure it means that exactly. Rather the loans are secured against these properties so in a default the properties are sold with the spivs getting first dibs on the proceeds. I think .......

 

 

I am pretty sure that's the T&C's of the loan, if they don't get all their money back they can either take ownership of those properties or convert the loan into equity. in both cases it circumvents the failed resolutions 9 and 10 of their AGM, and the later would give the spivs enough voting rights to get to the 80.4% to pass those through the next time. Thus at any time dilute any shares in existence.

[7628mm]

Large Salary just been on SSN stating that he's been assured they won't be going into administration again.

 

Presumably the key word there is 'again'

 

You know fat salary may well be right here. Sevco or whatever they call themselves would enter administration for the "first" time. Dependant on what the question is gives rise to the following:

 

1 We are a brand new company.

 

2 We are the Ranghers and therefore the peeeeppppuuull and always have been.

 

oops sorry forgot about option 3 which applies to 1 and 2 above

 

3 We have been punished enough

[CJGJ]

I don't think that would have worked. Rangers were already running a deficit of ?10M a year without CL football. Given that they were emptied out in the qualifying round in 2011, the same ?10M funding gap would have hit Murray as it did Whyte plus the "wee tax case" would have had to be paid. LBG weren't prepared to fund additional loans/overdrafts so I think Administration would have hit them anyway. The Murray group wouldn't have been able to bail them out either as they too were in deep poo with LBG

Yes that would be why the debt position was being lowered year by year then.

 

The bank were running the club, the debt was reducing......those are the facts.

 

The bank wanted out and saw their chance, took the deal and did not worry too much where the money came from but to tell us the club whilst being run by them was losing ?10 million or had a ?10 million funding gap per year is just not true.

[Drainfish]

As I understood rangers were only repaying debt in their final flourishes due to CL cash. If they had rationalised staff appropriately, the CL cash would also most likely be gone due to reduced competitiveness. Employing Fat Salary made the CL an impossibility (but blamed by newco fans on CW).

 

The water is slightly muddy, but the facts remain that they didn't achieve the CL in their final year and were not repaying debt at the end. They would also not be in a position to regain the CL cash so it would be a downward spiral...

[redm]

I can't pretend I've been (follow)following this in any great detail but was struck me today was the bizarre reaction from Rangers fans. Why aren't they going completely off their heads about the fact that they've failed to survive in the third tier of Scottish football with a massive 22 million quid? They're all bickering about blimmin' Dave King. When will they get their heads around the idea that nobody - not even King - are the dafties they're looking for with millions but who expect nothing in return?

 

As for this emergency loan, the one they announced 'with pleasure' (surely trolling), what's the story with the building and the car park held as security? Are either of these properties of any real value or potential interest to Laxey partners or to the Easdales? As in, are they likely to be of any value if things go belly up? It would be too easy to assume that a transport guy would be interested in a large open area of land used as a car park presumably....

Edited February 24, 2014 by redm

[milky_26]

Large Salary just been on SSN stating that he's been assured they won't be going into administration again.

 

Presumably the key word there is 'again'

straight to liquidation again?

[kingdannyb]

 

Alex Thomson's View

• Visit Alex Thomson's page
  
• All Channel 4 News blogs
  

Monday 24 Feb 2014

Rangers court battle: what next for Ibrox?

 

And so the lawyers have gathered in Edinburgh and the so-called Rangers big tax case begins another round.

Like everything to do with Glasgow football the mere mention of this excites a certain degree of comment shall we say?

So in the spirit of setting out for us all what is actually going on, here goes. This is largely from HMRC and the Courts and Tribunals Service.

The current appeal was lodged by HMRC against the previous majority tribunal verdict.

It runs from 24 February until 21 March in Edinburgh, or at least that is the time set aside. It is an appeal on points of law so at present it appears no witnesses will be called.

Should either party wish to appeal after this to the high court on points of law and only on points of law, that may be granted to the high court.

So whatever happens this is not necessarily the end of it should either party wish to appeal.

Read more: Red, Whyte and blue: the Rangers saga continues

In brief HMRC say the Employment Benefit Trusts (EBTs) used by Rangers under former owner Sir David Murray were a way of avoiding income tax.

Sir David Murray contends they were lawful and he won by majority which is now under appeal on points of law.

The case matters greatly to HMRC because of the precedent at stake.

HMRC contends that EBTs were used by more than 5000 companies across these islands including not a few large football clubs in England.

So for HMRC there is a great deal more to it than Rangers. RFC simply happens to be the test case. Football and football fans would do well to see this reality for what it is.

So the implications for that across companies in UK PLC are obvious and wide. It. Is. Not. About. Rangers. Or at least insofar as trying to reframe UK tax law is concerned.

Read more: Rangers FC: the taxman ain?t walking away

However in footballing terms it very much is of course, about Rangers. At stake the very governance of the game in Scotland.

The eventual issue of whether or not what used to be one of the biggest clubs in football cheated its way to silverware year after year, remains an open question.

This is a major problem stretching far beyond the gates of Ibrox. The implications for the Scottish Football Association (SFA) should not be lost on anyone.

Equally ? Sir David Murray and Paul Baxendale-Walker (the stuck-off solicitor and pornographer who brought the EBT concept to the club) could very well turn out to be the greatest financial wizards of modern Scottish football. Right now, in law, they most certainly are. We know why they did it because they said so.

Read more: Craig Whyte?s lawyers send Letter Before Action

Here?s Andrew Thornhill, the lawyer representing the Murray Group, on the final day of the previous tribunal hearing: ?Because the whole point of the remuneration trust was it enabled the club to take on players that it otherwise couldn?t afforded (sic) to pay if it had to pay the grossed up wage.

?This was Sir David Murray?s way of putting it. It was a way of getting hold of players you otherwise couldn?t afford.

?So the last thing the club would do is say to a player: now, if you don?t like having remuneration trust we will pay you gross instead. It just couldn?t afford to do it. It wasn?t an option.?

They recruited players they otherwise couldn?t afford.

Yet, in a ruling which raised many an eyebrow, an Independent Commission in Glasgow said that buying players you cannot otherwise afford who then go on to win you silverware year after year, is not buying sporting advantage.

Read more: You couldn?t make it up: Rangers ban the BBC

But what if buying those players was unlawful? Is tax law one thing and football law something other? If HMRC win, this is where the questions will pile up.

And what of dear old Campbell Ogilvie, the key Rangers finance official whilst all this was happening and recipient of an EBT himself. He remains SFA President even though that organisation describes him as ?heavily conflicted?.

Yet still no hint of standing aside or gardening leave until this matter is settled. It?s not the way things happen round Hampden way. And again ? what if it does turn out to have been unlawful?

So that is why it all matters. That is why it is not over. That is why there has never been a final verdict.

And that is why Rangers ? rightly ? made that clear to their fans when the previous tribunal reported.

Follow @AlexTomo on Twitter

- See more at: http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/rangers-court-battle/7273#more-7273

[Footballfirst]

Yes that would be why the debt position was being lowered year by year then.

 

The bank were running the club, the debt was reducing......those are the facts.

 

The bank wanted out and saw their chance, took the deal and did not worry too much where the money came from but to tell us the club whilst being run by them was losing ?10 million or had a ?10 million funding gap per year is just not true.

 

You clearly didn't pick up on the point I made about running a deficit without CL money.

 

In their last season in the CL Group stages (2010-11) they received ?18,526,000 and additionally received a further ?724,972 when they dropped into the EL. Those sums do not include the gates and hospitality income that they earned from 3 x CL group and 2 x EL knock out ties.

 

Yes their net debt was coming down in those seasons they qualified for the group stages, but their UEFA income went up by over ?20M in each of those seasons.

 

In their last (non admin) season without CL group stages in 2008/09 their turnover ?39.7M but their net debt went up by ?9.6M to ?31.1M

Their next two season with CL group stages in 2009/10 and 2010/11, their turnover was up to ?56.3M and ?57.2M respectively but their debt only fell to ?27.1M and ?14.1M.

 

So their net debt only fell by ?17M over two seasons while they received over ?40M in additional income from their CL exploits. So I stand by my assertion that they were running a deficit of around ?10M a year without CL football. That was the scenario they faced in 2011/12, but there was no longer the facility to be bailed out by LBG, hence they ended up in administration, then liquidation.

[FarmerTweedy]

Nope. Detest them both equally

 

At any given time, I usually hate one of them more than the other one, but which one I hate more varies from time to time.

[Footballfirst]

Summary of the first day of the UTTT from STV

 

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/265261-hmrc-argue-error-of-law-made-as-rangers-oldco-tax-appeal-begins/

 

A tax tribunal ruling that payments made to some Rangers players and staff were loans contained "errors in law", an appeal hearing has heard.

The claim by HM Revenue and Customs came as it opened its appeal against the decision in the so-called "Big Tax Case" on Monday.

The case was one of the key developments which led to the financial collapse of Rangers oldco.

Facing a potential bill of ?36.6m from the HMRC over its use of employee benefit trusts (EBTs), RFC 2012 plc failed to reach a deal with its creditors and went into administration and then into liquidation.

However, a tribunal eventually ruled in November 2012 that the payments to the trusts could be treated as loans and the tax bill should be "significantly reduced".

On Monday, HMRC's counsel, Roderick Thomson QC, argued that several determinations made by the majority in the initial ruling failed to consider all points of evidence and their cumulative effect.

He stated amounts of evidence had been written off as irrelevant by the majority decision, which found in favour of Rangers oldco by two to one.

Mr Thomson also argued that, in certain parts, the majority decision failed to show the "slightest hint" of understanding HMRC's initial case.

The beneficiaries of EBTs, including high-profile players and management staff, were not named in the original tribunal hearings.

However, this will change for the majority as the appeal case is being held in public. No witnesses will be called during the appeal hearing.

It emerged at Monday's hearing that in addition to receiving cash via an EBT from Rangers, former manager Alex McLeish - referred to as Mr Violet in the initial determination - also had a flat bought for him by the trust.

Four weeks have been set aside for the case at the upper tax tribunal, which unlike the first tribunal is being held in public. No date has been set for the final outcome to be delivered.

HMRC had sought ?36.6m from the Rangers oldco for PAYE and national insurance for its use of EBTs from 2001 and 2010.

It also alleged that four companies related to Sir David - Murray Group Holdings Ltd, Murray Group Management Ltd, the Premier Property Group Ltd and GM Mining Ltd ? owed a further ?10m in unpaid taxes on the EBT payments.

The companies had successfully argued that the loans paid via EBTs were recoverable and, as such, did not amount to remuneration for employment.

The Rangers oldco is currently in liquidation, having failed to secure a company voluntary arrangement with its creditors in June 2012.

The company's assets were subsequently sold to a new company, allowing the club to continue as a functioning member of the Scottish Football Association after the governing body approved a transfer of membership between the two.

[Toxteth O'Grady]

You only have to ask how many of these so called loans have ever been repaid to know that they were not loans at all but just a tax fiddle payment.

 

Case closed