Jump to content

The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.


Sergio Garcia

Recommended Posts

Given that the club have raised concerns themselves over finances its hard for a judge to deny the Ahmed may have a point.

- that is the nub of this case , Underlying the request, he also has to privide sufficient evidence that he is indeed owed this sum,

or, as near as possible evidence.. now, he has failed so far. But the club may have provided circumstantial information to the public domain SINCE then.

Edited by Alva-Jambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst

Quick summary of what's happening at Rangers and the implications, anyone?

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

My best description would be that Graham Wallace started a 10 minute timer towards meltdown with last week's announcement of the share offer and the implications of it's failure.

The announcement of the naming rights being controlled by Mike Ashley moved the timer on a minute.

The transfer of staff from Rangers Retail to Sports Direct similarly moved it on a minute

If Imran Ahmad gets his ?620K ring-fenced then it will probably jump forward a couple more minutes.

The take up or otherwise of the share offer will be the determining factor of what happens next. Administration? Wonga rate loans secured on Ibrox/MP? Sale of Murray Park?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that the club have raised concerns themselves over finances its hard for a judge to deny the Ahmed may have a point.

 

They had raised concerns last time - however last time the freeze was avoided as the sharelholders agreed to an undertaking to cover any financial shortfalls

Its pretty feckin clear they wont now- as they have no underwriter for their share issue

 

so ?1.5 million loan repay + ?0.5 million on ice out of how much of a share issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charlie-Brown

 

I think the real question here is whether or not they're gonna die again.

 

How can you die again? Rangers already died who knows what will happen with Sevco Scotland->The Rangers Football Club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst

- that is the nub of this case , Underlying the request, he also has to privide sufficient evidence that he is indeed owed this sum,

or, as near as possible evidence.. now, he has failed so far. But the club may have provided circumstantial information to the public domain SINCE then.

 

He's already provided enough prima facie evidence for the case to be tested in court. He has a date already penciled in for November when the case will be heard.

 

He is just trying get his potential settlement figure protected in the event of Rangers going under before the case is settled.

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seriously doubt Mike Ashley is about to punt the EPL for our diddy league, Rangers or not. He is another spiv who has made a quick buck out of the shambles.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit

As someone suggested above, with Duncaster etc, any interpretation of the rules which would avoid Sevco from failing to reach the top flight next term, would be 'considered' positive for the game ( ie positive for their cash flow)

which is why I reiterate now, all the other clubs must be on our guard. He CAN'T railroad this.

He proved 2 years ago that he can do just about anything he wants. At least when it comes to suggestions.

CAN'T is way different that SHOULDN'T

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gavsy Van Gaverson

I seriously doubt Mike Ashley is about to punt the EPL for our diddy league, Rangers or not. He is another spiv who has made a quick buck out of the shambles.

 

Exactly, with the amount of money being pumped into the EPL it wouldn't be ridiculous to say that a number of the clubs will be worth a billion pounds or so in the next 5-10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toxteth O'Grady

 

I seriously doubt Mike Ashley is about to punt the EPL for our diddy league, Rangers or not. He is another spiv who has made a quick buck out of the shambles.

 

Yes he I think he just wanted the profit making rangers retail business and has acquired it for a good price.

 

Unless he can cream off any other assets I think that will be all he is interested in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Exactly, with the amount of money being pumped into the EPL it wouldn't be ridiculous to say that a number of the clubs will be worth a billion pounds or so in the next 5-10 years.

 

It's being dressed up like some sort of takeover scenario. I suppose it will shift some copies of the Record on various building sites around the country but the Hun masses will end up disappointed. Again.

 

He has just helped himself to a bit of the club and likely couldn't give two ****s about the rest.

 

:pleasing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly I don?t think Ahmad will win, Zombieco?s lawyers will argue whilst things are ?difficult? all is fine and dandy if left well alone (they have a share issue happening you know) but to allow the ring-fencing of Ahmad?s claim would create the insolvency event the ring-fencing is supposed to mitigate against. i.e. the Judge through his ruling would create an unnecessary (aye right) insolvency event.

The law is not about right or wrong, it?s about the technicalities of the law (which is an ass).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly I don?t think Ahmad will win, Zombieco?s lawyers will argue whilst things are ?difficult? all is fine and dandy if left well alone (they have a share issue happening you know) but to allow the ring-fencing of Ahmad?s claim would create the insolvency event the ring-fencing is supposed to mitigate against. i.e. the Judge through his ruling would create an unnecessary (aye right) insolvency event.

The law is not about right or wrong, it?s about the technicalities of the law (which is an ass).

 

By definition though if Sevco dont get the share issue they have said they might be unable to pay creditors such as Ahmed therefore by not protecting his claim he would have a case to say that his money has been deliberately put at risk by a judge who knew the company was on the brink.

 

A judge is there to make sure the interests of a future claim are protected if an admin event or no funds are available to pay the claim and thats why its ring fenced.

Edited by Jamboelite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar the Horrible

During the shares issue they needed good news stories instead they lit the box of fireworks while still inside the garage, with petrol cans everywhere?

 

McCoist why did you not buy in players you could afford...because the fans deserver better....Clown

?1box name sold for a pouwn

Badge sold off??????

Staff now work for Sports Direct

Letham allowing reluctantly to wait a bit longer for his cash

Imran back in court

Admin II happening regardless of successful share issue?

 

Yip its a great way to promote a share issue as a call to arms?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

During the shares issue they needed good news stories instead they lit the box of fireworks while still inside the garage, with petrol cans everywhere?

 

McCoist why did you not buy in players you could afford...because the fans deserver better....Clown

?1box name sold for a pouwn

Badge sold off??????

Staff now work for Sports Direct

Letham allowing reluctantly to wait a bit longer for his cash

Imran back in court

Admin II happening regardless of successful share issue?

 

Yip its a great way to promote a share issue as a call to arms?

 

And you wonder why?

 

The share issue is designed to fail before the administrator is called in. That way, scapegoats can be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The share issue is designed to fail before the administrator is called in

 

So who's driving the bus? Whose plan is this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's already provided enough prima facie evidence for the case to be tested in court. He has a date already penciled in for November when the case will be heard.

 

He is just trying get his potential settlement figure protected in the event of Rangers going under before the case is settled.

thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

So who's driving the bus? Whose plan is this?

 

I've honestly lost track of spiv versus spiv but I would say the Easdale/Green axis is still calling the shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've honestly lost track of spiv versus spiv but I would say the Easdale/Green axis is still calling the shots.

So is this to get control of the club again without having to buy shares from current shareholders at market price?

 

Actually, it's a bit unfair of me expecting you to know!

 

Interesting times though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hackney Hearts

"Plans for refinancing of Rangers have been in place for almost a year" says Rangers QC Alan Summers

 

Plans? You can have plans to be a billionaire film star - doesn't mean it's likely to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Plans for refinancing of Rangers have been in place for almost a year" says Rangers QC Alan Summers

 

No shit sherlock...

 

And nothing has been done about it and now they are on the brink of admin aye thanks for that Alan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

marshallschunkychicken

 

 

Twitter feed?

 

Its Brian McLauchlin - the link is on the previous page. On my phone so can't link it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BBCBMcLauchlin: Alan Summers QC says "floodlights are back on at Ibrox" and that "turbulent financial period will soon be in the past" #bbcsportscot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two recent loans totalling ?1.5million owed to shareholders have not been repaid but should be within " next few weeks" #bbcsportscot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loans were secured against Edmiston House and Albion Car Park. Alan Aummers QC claims Rangers will soon be "debt free" #bbcsportscot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BBCBMcLauchlin: Alan Summers QC says "floodlights are back on at Ibrox" and that "turbulent financial period will soon be in the past" #bbcsportscot

 

Based on what he surely has to give more detail than this blustering nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loans were secured against Edmiston House and Albion Car Park. Alan Aummers QC claims Rangers will soon be "debt free" #bbcsportscot

Rangers better hope the judge is in the masons if this is the best they can come up with!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Based on what he surely has to give more detail than this blustering nonsense.

I would have thought so, especially given they said, if the share issue is not fully subscribed to, they cannot pay their creditors, and if it is, it is only enough to see them through to the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar the Horrible

 

 

Rangers better hope the judge is in the masons if this is the best they can come up with!

If he fails this time, then even me (full time mason) will actually believe we have this kind of power
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he will fail again, they'll come out with nonsense about how they have already had x and y confirming they will take up shares and it'll be enough to keep them going, although we know that'll only be a few months

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeh they will be debt free he is not lying he just ommited that it would be after an insolvency event. Where is ahmeds laywer he should be holding the Judge accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glamorgan Jambo

Wee piece of info on the rangers retail/Sdi contract..

 

"On 31 July 2012 RFCL entered into a joint venture shareholders? agreement (the ?Rangers

Retail SHA?) with SDI Retail Services Limited (?SDI?) relating to terms under which the

joint venture vehicle Rangers Retail Limited (?Rangers Retail?) would operate with RFCL

holding 51 per cent. of Rangers Retail. Through Rangers Retail the parties agree to run jointly

the production, supply and sale of branded products and carry out retail activity at the Club?s

superstore at Ibrox and on the Club?s online webstore.

 

Under the Rangers Retail SHA, each of RFCL and SDI have the right to appoint

two directors, SDI is to be responsible for day to day management including the provision

of accounting and retail-related services and Sportsdirect.com Retail Limited (an affiliate

of SDI) agrees to provide a facility of ?1.5 million to Rangers Retail available for drawdown

for a period of 5 years at an interest rate of Barclays Bank?s pass through rate from time-totime

and interest is to be capitalised. Any sums drawn down under the facility would be

secured by a debenture to be given by Rangers Retail over all its freehold and leasehold

property. The loan facility and debenture have not yet been entered into.

 

The Rangers Retail SHA contains restrictions on share transfers, reserved matters and other

provisions common to joint venture agreements. The agreement contains deadlock provisions

which require deadlock matters to be referred to senior management of the shareholders and

then to mediation. If the deadlock matter has not been resolved then SDI has the right to

acquire RFCL?s shareholding at a set price (50 per cent. of the profits of Rangers Retail in

the previous twelve months). If this buyout takes place, SDI agrees to procure that a royalty

according to a formula is paid by Rangers Retail to RFCL in consideration for rights under

an intellectual property licence agreement relating to the grant of an exclusive worldwide

licence of certain intellectual property rights of RFCL to Rangers Retail in return for Rangers

Retail producing kit and branded products (at cost price plus 10 per cent.) (the ?IP Licence

Agreement?). Mandatory share transfer provisions apply at the same transfer price where a

shareholder undergoes a change of control or an event of default (including insolvency,

material breach or if the IP Licence Agreement is validly terminated). The Rangers Retail

SHA is governed by English law.

 

Under the IP Licence Agreement RFCL agrees to indemnify Rangers Retail against loss

arising out of a third-party intellectual property claims in respect of RFCL?s intellectual

property rights. In turn, Rangers Retail agrees to indemnify RFCL against loss arising out

of similar third-party claims in respect of intellectual property rights other than RFCL?s rights."

 

Interesting stuff. I have an Equifax sub so had a quick look at Rangers Retail Annual Return from July this year and last published accounts (up to 4/2013).

 

The main points were

 

1. While The Rangers FC owns 51 of the 100 issued shares these are B shares with one vote per share.

2. Sports Direct have 49 of the 100 issued shares but these are A shares and come with two votes per share on financial matters.

3. There are complex restrictions and conditions around share transfers that basically means Sports Direct can veto any change in shareholding of the B shares (and vice versa).

4. Total turnover for Rangers Retail in its first season was just over ?1.2 million, after tax profit was ?570K and RR bought ?590K's worth of 'goods' from Sports Direct.

 

So Ashley's minions can outvote Sevco on anything substantive. And according to the above info they can buy out Sevco for roughly ?300K.

 

Nothing published yet on recent changes in shareholders or directors (there are 4, 2 from SD and Wallace and Nash from The rangers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UnbelievableJeff

Its not even austerity they need. Just sensible budgeting.

40,000 ST holders generates about ?16 million

A squad of 24 players on ?5k a week average costs just over ?6million.

If they had done that from day 1 of The Rangers and stopped the leaks of stacks of cash in onerous other contracts they wouldnt be in this mess

Edited by UnbelievableJeff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco

Obfuscation seems to be the name of Summers game today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maple Leaf locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...