DETTY29 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I doubt that Rangers will repay these loans. Someone will have to. Ashley doesn't do free or giveaways. Not unless he gets a series dose of Rane-jurs-itis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/an-end-to-hostilities/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/an-end-to-hostilities/ Absolutely woefull bluster from McTurdo. CANNAE HAE TINKS IT IBROX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 http://billmcmurdo.w...to-hostilities/ And an alternative view from James Forrest http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/spoils-of-war/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Meldrew Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Absolutely woefull bluster from McTurdo. CANNAE HAE TINKS IT IBROX I love the way he tells Ashley to dress more smartly because "this is Ibrox, not Newcastle" FFS - it's Govan he's talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allowayjambo1874 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 And an alternative view from James Forrest http://www.onfieldso.../spoils-of-war/ Thought this was an excellant read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 "Physical assets" was the description; suggesting that he's secured the loan on intangible assets such as naming rights. If there was no security, they'd be no need for the weasel wording and they'd say "unsecured loan". That would be the image rights in the bag then most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 From the Sun ?Andy Devlin ?@AndyDev28 16m16 minutes ago Graham Wallace to leave Rangers tomorrow (Monday). Read shock name being mentioned as possible successor in @scotsunsport tomorrow.? And from the Record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stirlingshirejambo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Graham Wallace gone as Rangers CEO and the Mike Ashley loan of ?2m announced. Interest free secured on Edmiston House & Albion Car Park. mmhh loan secured ....not quite as the media bandwagon reported yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Ashley is no daft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Oh and Roger Hannah in today's Sun urging Ashley to speculate to accumulate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Oh and Roger Hannah in today's Sun urging Ashley to speculate to accumulate. WAR CHEZTZ!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Green Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The loan was also to TFRC rather than RIFC this time. Surely that breaks the sfa rules about influence on the board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Ashley is no daft. Certainly not. Without taking a controlling interest in Rangers, he now has control of ?1brox. By the letter of their own conditions, the SFA should be preventing what's just happened (Wallace and Nash leaving in Ashley's say-so) but we know they won't. Wonderful slight of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Green Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The Sfa specialise in double standards remember, & the word "Discretionary" allows them to drive a bus through the rule book if it helps one club to survive. That magic word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Surely that breaks the sfa rules about influence on the board? That's an easy one to dismiss. In theory, Ashley's placemen could be outvoted by the the other three directors (Somers, Crighton & J Easdale), although there is negligible chance of that happening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That's an easy one to dismiss. In theory, Ashley's placemen could be outvoted by the the other three directors (Somers, Crighton & J Easdale), although there is negligible chance of that happening You are talking about a controlling influence I am not sure thats what the rules say - it just references "influence" Ashley has just influenced the board of a member club - Sevco are in breach of the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) You are talking about a controlling influence I am not sure thats what the rules say - it just references "influence" Ashley has just influenced the board of a member club - Sevco are in breach of the rules. There is no rule. It was an informal arrangement between Ashley and the SFA. There is no chance of the SFA interfering. Edited October 27, 2014 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosscoC Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 @AndyDev28: Hearts CEO Scot Gardiner, a former Ibrox employee, being heavily touted as next Rangers chief executive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 @AndyDev28: Hearts CEO Scot Gardiner, a former Ibrox employee, being heavily touted as next Rangers chief executive. So that is the surprise name that he alluded to last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Andy Devlin ?@AndyDev28 4m4 minutes ago BREAKING: Sandy Easdale due at Ibrox shortly for crunch talks with Ally McCoist. The Rangers boss could be hours from the sack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 **** SAKE, the last thing we need is competency from Rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Andy Devlin ?@AndyDev28 4m4 minutes ago BREAKING: Sandy Easdale due at Ibrox shortly for crunch talks with Ally McCoist. The Rangers boss could be hours from the sack Please no, we need him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Green Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Dont sack ally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo 4 Ever Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 @AndyDev28: Hearts CEO Scot Gardiner, a former Ibrox employee, being heavily touted as next Rangers chief executive. Any truth is this do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That's an easy one to dismiss. In theory, Ashley's placemen could be outvoted by the the other three directors (Somers, Crighton & J Easdale), although there is negligible chance of that happening In your opinion FF do you think that Ashley will use this influence on the board to strengthen his contracts to the point that they are still secured in the event of administration? And in doing so mean that it isn't even in Ashley's interests to keep them running, or certainly won't be in a couple of months when he's achieved this? Basically the way I see it is that MA has given ?2m in the knowledge that it won't be repaid but it gives him breathing space to get his contracts beefed up before admin comes along. Then in January when they are needing another lot of funding MA can refuse, leading to a pre-packed admin and he has everything he needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Dont sack ally! exactly, but Ashleys record with managers it could make little difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 If they sack Ally, wouldn't that mean that a large part of the ?2m would go to him in compensation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort Vallance Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Any truth is this do you think? He knocked it back before. Doesn't seem any more attractive a proposition now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo 4 Ever Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 If they sack Ally, wouldn't that mean that a large part of the ?2m would go to him in compensation? Maybe that was his plan all along? Sack Ally, go into admin... then he can take over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Oh no, we need Fat Sally to stay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo 4 Ever Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 He knocked it back before. Doesn't seem any more attractive a proposition now. Fair enough. IF he does leave, who would take his place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altyjambo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Maybe that was his plan all along? Sack Ally, go into admin... then he can take over? The other way round would be much cheaper - go into admin, the administrators sack Ally, then he can take over.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Chris McLaughlin ?@BBCchrismclaug 2m2 minutes ago Sandy Easdale says no plans to change manager also says Mike Ashley should bring stability to #Rangers. Doesn't know about long term plans. Grant Russell ?@STVGrant 2m2 minutes ago Easdale: Ally McCoist is the manager and we have no ideas of changing the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeno Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Chris McLaughlin ?@BBCchrismclaug 2m2 minutes ago Sandy Easdale says no plans to change manager also says Mike Ashley should bring stability to #Rangers. Doesn't know about long term plans. Grant Russell ?@STVGrant 2m2 minutes ago Easdale: Ally McCoist is the manager and we have no ideas of changing the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Phew! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor jambo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 ?2million is a small price to pay for six months for MA, For that "loan" he now has removed two company directors- the more idependant minded ones it would seem. (at least in Wallace the most competent one) Ashley has sacked them- there is no two ways about it. Radio also reporting that Rangers had already been speaking to an administrator too Honestly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Chris McLaughlin ?@BBCchrismclaug 2m2 minutes ago Sandy Easdale says no plans to chanoge manager also says Mike Ashley should bring stability to #Rangers. Doesn't know about long term plans. Grant Russell ?@STVGrant 2m2 minutes ago Easdale: Ally McCoist is the manager and we have no ideas of changing the manager. Thank goodness for that. I was about to head down to my local Sports Direct with a 'Hands off Ally' placard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieholt Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That 6 month interest free loan will be repaid from the proceeds of a share issue too. A share issue which he will underwrite. No doubt he will be left with a sizeable chunk of the issue so the loan is, in reality, a deferred equity investment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zico Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Phew. I'll put the breaks on my #prayforally Twitter campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sky Sports News reporting That MA effectively has control of The Rangers which surely must trigger a reaction from the SPFL. There is no point in writing to The Rangers and asking a question(s), let's see some punitive action taken and not some blue wash, swept under the rug crap that will no doubt be trotted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sky Sports News reporting That MA effectively has control of The Rangers which surely must trigger a reaction from the SPFL. There is no point in writing to The Rangers and asking a question(s), let's see some punitive action taken and not some blue wash, swept under the rug crap that will no doubt be trotted out. You'll be waiting a long time bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 SPFL ? maybe a tad early yet, But lets see what pans out in coming weeks first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) You'll be waiting a long time bud. Aye, it will confirm beyond doubt exactly what the SPFL are about and it's nothing to do with Scottish football. Edited October 27, 2014 by Dannie Boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sky Sports News reporting That MA effectively has control of The Rangers which surely must trigger a reaction from the SPFL. There is no point in writing to The Rangers and asking a question(s), let's see some punitive action taken and not some blue wash, swept under the rug crap that will no doubt be trotted out. They won't take any action.. They want them back where they are perceived to "belong" and will do anything to avoid another insolvency including ignoring MA involvement. Rules don't matter when it comes to sevco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 In your opinion FF do you think that Ashley will use this influence on the board to strengthen his contracts to the point that they are still secured in the event of administration? And in doing so mean that it isn't even in Ashley's interests to keep them running, or certainly won't be in a couple of months when he's achieved this? Basically the way I see it is that MA has given ?2m in the knowledge that it won't be repaid but it gives him breathing space to get his contracts beefed up before admin comes along. Then in January when they are needing another lot of funding MA can refuse, leading to a pre-packed admin and he has everything he needs. The honest answer is that I haven't worked out what Ashley's long term plan is as yet. What you describe is certainly a possibility, but at the moment no more of a possibility of Ashley taking and slash and burn approach to get the cost side of Rangers under control, then underwriting a share issue. Looking at the numbers, Ashley appears to have spent ?1M on his initial share purchase in TRFC. He then bought shares from Hargreave Hale for ?850K. Now he is providing a further ?2M in loans, for a total of ?3.85M. Rangers Retail reported income in the first half of 2013/14 of ?4.8M together with costs of ?3M, for a profit of ?1.8M (note that the accounts also showed a Retail cash figure of ?1.669M not available as working capital ? Ashley?s cut perhaps). Even allowing for a much reduced income figure in the second half of the financial year, the profit should be at least ?2M. That is ?2M per annum as an absolute minimum, which would see Ashley get his money back within two years. Looking at what might be achievable in a best case scenario, it is probably appropriate to look at Celtic?s merchandising, which in 2013/14 showed full year income of ?13.52M and costs of ?8.667M for a profit of ?4.853M. I wouldn?t expect Rangers to match Celtic but I would have thought that Ashley could easily net ?3M annually in clear profit if he gets the Retail side fully under his control. That I think will be his first priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The honest answer is that I haven't worked out what Ashley's long term plan is as yet. What you describe is certainly a possibility, but at the moment no more of a possibility of Ashley taking and slash and burn approach to get the cost side of Rangers under control, then underwriting a share issue. Looking at the numbers, Ashley appears to have spent ?1M on his initial share purchase in TRFC. He then bought shares from Hargreave Hale for ?850K. Now he is providing a further ?2M in loans, for a total of ?3.85M. Rangers Retail reported income in the first half of 2013/14 of ?4.8M together with costs of ?3M, for a profit of ?1.8M (note that the accounts also showed a Retail cash figure of ?1.669M not available as working capital ? Ashley?s cut perhaps). Even allowing for a much reduced income figure in the second half of the financial year, the profit should be at least ?2M. That is ?2M per annum as an absolute minimum, which would see Ashley get his money back within two years. Looking at what might be achievable in a best case scenario, it is probably appropriate to look at Celtic?s merchandising, which in 2013/14 showed full year income of ?13.52M and costs of ?8.667M for a profit of ?4.853M. I wouldn?t expect Rangers to match Celtic but I would have thought that Ashley could easily net ?3M annually in clear profit if he gets the Retail side fully under his control. That I think will be his first priority. Yes, I agree that we won't know what MA's full intentions are for several months I suspect. The hurdle that still needs to be negotiated is this potential share issue. If there is a share issue at the end of the year and MA underwrites it, then he is absolutely certain to break through the 10% threshold that the SFA have agreed to. There will need to be open dialogue about how he's going to get round this. I'm sure Ashley will see dealing with the SFA as little more than a nuisance as opposed to a stumbling block but he still cannot ignore them. My view is that there are four steps before it will be a little clearer as to where Ashley is going with this: - The depth of the cutback measures being put in place by Sandy Easdale - The publishing of the accounts - The AGM - Potential share issue and his underwriting of the issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboz Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Yes, I agree that we won't know what MA's full intentions are for several months I suspect. The hurdle that still needs to be negotiated is this potential share issue. If there is a share issue at the end of the year and MA underwrites it, then he is absolutely certain to break through the 10% threshold that the SFA have agreed to. There will need to be open dialogue about how he's going to get round this. I'm sure Ashley will see dealing with the SFA as little more than a nuisance as opposed to a stumbling block but he still cannot ignore them. My view is that there are four steps before it will be a little clearer as to where Ashley is going with this: - The depth of the cutback measures being put in place by Sandy Easdale - The publishing of the accounts - The AGM - Potential share issue and his underwriting of the issue I am pretty sure that a business man of Mike Ashleys acumen will have already had the dialogue with the SFA that you mention and will have already got the answers he wants. Before commencing this little venture I reckon he will have had all his ducks lined up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The cutbacks that are mentioned is an interesting one. What is available to cut at this present moment? As I see it they have the playing staff of which nothing can be cut until the end of the season, or sell in January but I can't see them raising any sort of cash from player sales. Same with sally and the management team, can't get rid of them without a payoff, then you have to replace them resulting in adding more cost to the current year. On the non playing side they have onerous contracts which the spivs certainly won't be cutting as they stand to benefit from them. So, back to the original question, where do they make cuts to the current cost base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The cash investment will surely be eaten into by the golden handshakes to Wallace and Nash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts