Jump to content

The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.


Sergio Garcia

Recommended Posts

@rangerstaxcase: MSM reporting that Dave King has his restraint order preventing him buy assets lifted. After years of linking him to RFC takeovers...

@rangerstaxcase: The MSM finally admit that King could not legally buy a car in Glasgow let alone Rangers.

@rangerstaxcase: Media would not mention his restraint order when it mattered, but publicise its lifting? Proof of bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@rangerstaxcase: MSM reporting that Dave King has his restraint order preventing him buy assets lifted. After years of linking him to RFC takeovers...

@rangerstaxcase: The MSM finally admit that King could not legally buy a car in Glasgow let alone Rangers.

@rangerstaxcase: Media would not mention his restraint order when it mattered, but publicise its lifting? Proof of bias.

 

Haha - dear god.

 

What an awful country Scotland can be, and so much of it linked to those two dirty scummy wee glasgow "institutions"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife works next to someone who is married to a guy who works for a lawyer firm that represents Green. Word is that they have uncovered major details that will make Green cancel the deal and walk away. Just what I've heard......We shall see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tartofmidlothian

My wife works next to someone who is married to a guy who works for a lawyer firm that represents Green. Word is that they have uncovered major details that will make Green cancel the deal and walk away. Just what I've heard......We shall see

 

Would love it if true, but that sounds like one convoluted trail back to the rumour :lol:

Edited by tartofmidlothian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would love it if true, but that sounds like one convoluted trail back to the rumour :lol:

 

Absolutely no chance.

 

I am close friends with a snr lawyer who works for the company representing Green/Rangers2 on some aspects of their business. Given that person's response when I had a dig about Charles Green etc - they don't give away idle chit chat. Their whole reputation depends on it. I'd suggest this rumour has grown arms and legs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4menhadadream

how can Green state Rangers are debt free when they still owe us? Am i missing something here?

 

that doesn't constitute debt. it's a transaction with an agreed repayment plan. If you took a bank loan or overdraught for ?1000 you'd constitute that as being ?1000 in debt. But if you have a mobile phone contract for which you pay ?30 a month with 10 months left to run, you wouldn't really consider ?300 to your list of debts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that doesn't constitute debt. it's a transaction with an agreed repayment plan. If you took a bank loan or overdraught for ?1000 you'd constitute that as being ?1000 in debt. But if you have a mobile phone contract for which you pay ?30 a month with 10 months left to run, you wouldn't really consider ?300 to your list of debts.

Not correct. If you had an interest-only mortgage, where the capital was repayable at, say, age 65, are you saying you don't owe the building society anything until you reach that age? Rangers agreed fees for the transfers of Wallace's and Templeton's registrations which included payment terms, but the whole sum is still a debt - a creditor in the balance sheet. What I think Green means by "debt free" is that there is no net debt ie total cash in hand exceeds total debts due.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4menhadadream

Not correct. If you had an interest-only mortgage, where the capital was repayable at, say, age 65, are you saying you don't owe the building society anything until you reach that age? Rangers agreed fees for the transfers of Wallace's and Templeton's registrations which included payment terms, but the whole sum is still a debt - a creditor in the balance sheet. What I think Green means by "debt free" is that there is no net debt ie total cash in hand exceeds total debts due.

Not correct. If you had an interest-only mortgage, where the capital was repayable at, say, age 65, are you saying you don't owe the building society anything until you reach that age? Rangers agreed fees for the transfers of Wallace's and Templeton's registrations which included payment terms, but the whole sum is still a debt - a creditor in the balance sheet. What I think Green means by "debt free" is that there is no net debt ie total cash in hand exceeds total debts due.

 

i think it's simpler than that, i think he simply means there is no bank debt, loans, or over-draughts being used as funding. While what your saying technically is correct, then i reckon nearly every club in the world would be 'in debt' if outstanding invoices & repayment plans for transfer, infact, all money out, is viewed as 'debt'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not correct. If you had an interest-only mortgage, where the capital was repayable at, say, age 65, are you saying you don't owe the building society anything until you reach that age? Rangers agreed fees for the transfers of Wallace's and Templeton's registrations which included payment terms, but the whole sum is still a debt - a creditor in the balance sheet. What I think Green means by "debt free" is that there is no net debt ie total cash in hand exceeds total debts due.

 

Whilst I agree with you in principle - Green is shouting "debt free" and jeering up the natives making them think all is well.

 

What Green has failed to explain to Rangers fans is what happens if they start turning a profit. Suddenly there's a club with a "surplus" - how are the natives going to react when Green starts writing out cheques to the original backers using money they've put in.

 

They fail to acknowledge this... One wonders when the penny will drop. :devilish:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can Green state Rangers are debt free when they still owe us? Am i missing something here?

 

Green can state that Santa Claus exists, it doesn't make it true..! :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh

Green can state that Santa Claus exists, it doesn't make it true..! :whistling:

 

Santa does exist Gasman. Wash your mouth out with soap (and none of the bah-humbug stuff you come out with annually). :10900:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I agree with you in principle - Green is shouting "debt free" and jeering up the natives making them think all is well.

 

What Green has failed to explain to Rangers fans is what happens if they start turning a profit. Suddenly there's a club with a "surplus" - how are the natives going to react when Green starts writing out cheques to the original backers using money they've put in.

 

They fail to acknowledge this... One wonders when the penny will drop. :devilish:

 

Later rather than sooner M :cheesy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco

"Basturts. Lucky badword' basturts. Youse should huv been treetit the same as us. Badword' division 3 ya lucky basturts."

 

"But its an entirely different scenario."

 

"No its no. Lucky ****s."

 

Conversation not half an hour ago with my hun brother in law.

 

Dick.

 

:rofl:

Edited by ...a bit disco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit

"Basturts. Lucky badword' basturts. Youse should huv been treetit the same as us. Badword' division 3 ya lucky basturts."

 

"But its an entirely different scenario."

 

"No its no. Lucky ****s."

 

Conversation not half an hour ago with my hun brother in law.

 

Dick.

 

:rofl:

You poor poor sod,cant imagine having to put up with that through every family get together. Hats off to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh

"Basturts. Lucky badword' basturts. Youse should huv been treetit the same as us. Badword' division 3 ya lucky basturts."

 

"But its an entirely different scenario."

 

"No its no. Lucky ****s."

 

Conversation not half an hour ago with my hun brother in law.

 

Dick.

 

:rofl:

 

It's good that you take the time to visit him in Carstairs though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4menhadadream

Whilst I agree with you in principle - Green is shouting "debt free" and jeering up the natives making them think all is well.

 

What Green has failed to explain to Rangers fans is what happens if they start turning a profit. Suddenly there's a club with a "surplus" - how are the natives going to react when Green starts writing out cheques to the original backers using money they've put in.

 

They fail to acknowledge this... One wonders when the penny will drop. :devilish:

 

plenty gers fans understand how dividends work, and theres no issue there, especially fi the club is self-succient and turning a profit..... sure beats posting a ?2m + loss per year like Hearts & Aberdeen, Scotlands 3rd & 4th biggest clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that doesn't constitute debt. it's a transaction with an agreed repayment plan. If you took a bank loan or overdraught for ?1000 you'd constitute that as being ?1000 in debt. But if you have a mobile phone contract for which you pay ?30 a month with 10 months left to run, you wouldn't really consider ?300 to your list of debts.

 

Any form of credit is a debt. Hence the reason there's a credit check when getting a contract phone. Also, there would be charges for breaking said contract, so you can't get out of it scot free. i would also assume if you had to draw up a creditor list, say if you were about to declare yourself bankrupt, you'd have to include the mobile contract.

Edited by BlackJAC?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4menhadadream

Any form of credit is a debt. Hence the reason there's a credit check when getting a contract phone. Also, there would be charges for breaking said contract, so you can't get out of it scot free. i would also assume if you had to draw up a creditor list, say if you were about to declare yourself bankrupt, you'd have to include the mobile contract.

 

yes but the point i'm making is that on that basis, any individual or business with almost on sort of outgoings, from phone contracts to repayment plans would be "in debt". It almost completely neutralises the term 'in debt'. In general speaking or when casually discussing the financial health of a football club, wether or not they are in debt would depend upon wether or not the source of funding used to operate the club is borrowed or not. I presume at the moment Charles Green's funding is coming from the initial investment of his consortium in return for shares, 35kish season ticket sales & merchandising which probably makes for a healthy balance sheet with no borrowing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charlie-Brown

Where is the evidence Sevco are turning a profit? There seems to be a dire need for funding and perhaps some credibility problems hence attempts at getting Smith, Hart & possibly even Souness involved again.

 

Remind me of how frequently Rangers FC posted profits in the last 12 years, especially in seasons without Champions League income?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4menhadadream

Where is the evidence Sevco are turning a profit? There seems to be a dire need for funding and perhaps some credibility problems hence attempts at getting Smith, Hart & possibly even Souness involved again.

 

Remind me of how frequently Rangers FC posted profits in the last 12 years, especially in seasons without Champions League income?

 

Where is the evidence they aren't? For the next year and a half it will be guess work until accounts begin to be published. The initial investors put millions into the club, not as loan, but invested, in return for shares. Green was honest about the fact the price they paid for those shares is half of what the shares will be floated for to the fans - but thats standard business practice and the juice/attraction for initial investors for putting up money in excess of ?1m. Combine the 35k+ season ticket sales & regular attendances of 50k, combined with merchandise sales & commercial partenrship with the countries biggest sports retailer, theres no reason to believe Green has made anything close to a loss when the largest outgoings would be a wage bill a fraction of what we're used to. (dare i say, a wage bill smaller than yours from what i've read recently!).

 

As for the OldCo, no idea what relevance that is because the question i was replying to on this thread concerned only Charles Greens claim to being debt free despite owing Wallace money - but the financial performance of the club from the days of Alex McLiesh onwards was very good. The club regularly downsized every year yet still won league titles for fun & reached a european final. After advocaat, bank debt peaked at ?80m, when Whyte came in, that debt was reduced to ?18m - so the profits being posted in that era went towards paying off around 60m of the clubs debts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plenty gers fans understand how dividends work, and theres no issue there, especially fi the club is self-succient and turning a profit..... sure beats posting a ?2m + loss per year like Hearts & Aberdeen, Scotlands 3rd & 4th biggest clubs.

 

Alright there Zombie fan!

You make a fair point - many clubs are losing money. It needs addressed drastically - I can handle drastic cuts at my club provided we pay our debts to society (ie. HMRC). It's the right thing to do.

 

But lets turn back to the point I made and your response - you said "plenty" understand. Is that a scientific plenty or a majority... i think you need to ask yourself this - how militant will the Sevco followers be when the faceless investors have recouped their initial cash but then start taking 2/3/4/5 mill out of the business a year as a ROI.

 

When you guys are putting in your money and you get fed up that 20-30% of your season ticket money is being syphoned out of Ibrox - that's the point when people are going to go daft. Only a matter of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plenty gers fans understand how dividends work, and theres no issue there

 

out of interest can you answer this question -

 

If for every ?30 you spend at Ibrox (on tickets, merch etc) - how happy would you be that ?10 of your money never benefited the club and lined the pockets of chinless wonders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely if the left over ?20 is covering costs, then there's no real issue? I've not really been following the ins and outs of Rangers, but something i do recall is Green being upfront when it came to him stating he'd be creaming off some of the profits for himself and the other investors. I'd happily welcome an owner at Hearts that was here to make a profit and move on if it meant the club was left in a better state than it was before s/he came in.

 

I don't get why so many people slate Green when there's no real evidence to say he's screwing them over big time or why skimming some of the profits is a bad thing. That wee guy with the bonnet did something similar with Celtic.

Edited by BlackJAC?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charlie-Brown

Where is the evidence they aren't? For the next year and a half it will be guess work until accounts begin to be published. The initial investors put millions into the club, not as loan, but invested, in return for shares. Green was honest about the fact the price they paid for those shares is half of what the shares will be floated for to the fans - but thats standard business practice and the juice/attraction for initial investors for putting up money in excess of ?1m. Combine the 35k+ season ticket sales & regular attendances of 50k, combined with merchandise sales & commercial partenrship with the countries biggest sports retailer, theres no reason to believe Green has made anything close to a loss when the largest outgoings would be a wage bill a fraction of what we're used to. (dare i say, a wage bill smaller than yours from what i've read recently!).

 

As for the OldCo, no idea what relevance that is because the question i was replying to on this thread concerned only Charles Greens claim to being debt free despite owing Wallace money - but the financial performance of the club from the days of Alex McLiesh onwards was very good. The club regularly downsized every year yet still won league titles for fun & reached a european final. After advocaat, bank debt peaked at ?80m, when Whyte came in, that debt was reduced to ?18m - so the profits being posted in that era went towards paying off around 60m of the clubs debts.

 

That simply isn't true - Murray offloaded ?54M of Rangers debt onto MIH balance sheet after a failed share issue which the tax-payer via Lloyds-TSB has had to pick up the tab for. Rangers are the poster child of Scottish football for financial mismanagement for the last quarter century.

Edited by Charlie-Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the next year and a half it will be guess work until accounts begin to be published.

 

Whaaat?

 

You mean a club without 3 years' worth of audited accounts gained entry to the SFL?

 

How did that happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walter Bishop

Heard today Rangers have asked Alloa to be patient as they are still waiting for share of recent Scottish cup money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco

With the most respect: Your brother in law is a ******.

 

:D

 

Care In The Community.

 

A flawed concept from the get-go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bilel Mohsni

Heard today Rangers have asked Alloa to be patient as they are still waiting for share of recent Scottish cup money.

 

Like the patience Rangers showed to Airdrionians? Hope they tell them to bolt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Like the patience Rangers showed to Airdrionians? Hope they tell them to bolt.

 

TBF it was good old SDM and one of his companies that sunk Airdrie and not oldco Huns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Will love to see how the print press spin this one.

 

Will Chuck be hailed for his genius of low costs and financial wizardry or be branded a miser like Fergus McCann was at the hooped demons for his "one thin dime" quote in regards to Cadette, Van Hooijdonk & Di Canio??

 

One wonders. :rolleyes:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bilel Mohsni

 

 

TBF it was good old SDM and one of his companies that sunk Airdrie and not oldco Huns.

 

Fair dues... Chief crook then. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's a bit academic now, but when will the outcome of the big tax case be known?

 

(Or did I miss it?)

Apparently with those to allow their legal people to review. Don't be surprised if found against Rangers to tune og ?18 - ?20m under payment in taxes, similar figure again in interest and penalties.

 

With some horrific, possibly nepotism, findings.

 

Allegedly of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RTC follower suggesting FTTT published this Monday.

 

Apparently with those to allow their legal people to review. Don't be surprised if found against Rangers to tune og ?18 - ?20m under payment in taxes, similar figure again in interest and penalties.

 

With some horrific, possibly nepotism, findings.

 

Allegedly of course.

RTC follower suggesting FTTT will be published this Monday.

 

Expect MSM will spin that if FTTT had got their finger out earlier and announced figure, Rangers could have traded out this mess.

 

What is Hector's repayment terms - 6, 12, 18 months? Yeah sure they could.

Edited by DETTY29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco

Well done.

 

To be fair, HM wasn't far off the mark!

 

My brother in-law is a bit of a retarded hun knobjob.

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chuckles is at it again - same old spin, just a different owner. This time down in London trying to persuade investors of the untold riches Sevco will scoop when they move to the EPL. Yep, that's right folks, buy shares cos they're moving down south!

 

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2012/11/16/ap-interview-rangers-chief-executive-green-eyes-move-to-english-premier-league/

 



Scotland's most successful football club is trying to attract potential investors with an eye on someday playing in the English Premier League.

Rangers, a 54-time Scottish champion, feels less loyalty to its homeland after being forced to start again this season in the fourth tier as punishment for a financial meltdown. And now the Glasgow club's new ownership believes an exit route from the Scottish leagues is becoming possible as UEFA explores changing cross-border rules.

"The SPL told us face-to-face, 'We don't want you, you aren't welcome,'" Rangers chief executive Charles Green said in an interview with The Associated Press ahead of the club's planned flotation on a London Stock Exchange market.

And a planned revamp of the Scottish Premier League and three professional divisions below it could be Rangers' chance to escape. The overhaul was announced during the offseason just as Rangers was going into liquidation with tax debts exceeding $30 million.

"What we understand is that any restructuring will also revisit the taboo," Green said. "A bit like, 'Don't talk about the war to the Germans.' 'Don't mention Rangers and Celtic leaving Scotland.' It was always 'Shhh, don't mention that.'

"I think the taboo of that is going to be lifted ... Scottish football without Rangers and Celtic might actually become more competitive within the remaining clubs rather than having these two monsters sat above them."

Rangers is due to float on London's AIM small-market stock exchange by the end of the year, and Green hopes to raise close to $48 million there. He has been trying to persuade financial institutions this week that the club has a realistic chance of playing in the English Premier League.

Green bought Rangers' assets for $8.7 million, and four months later he is already hopeful of raising about $48 million on the AIM exchange. Fans are expected to invest 21 million pounds about $33 million in shares.

"As a football club, if Rangers were in the Premier League only Manchester United would be bigger," Green said. "Because Arsenal haven't got more fans than Rangers ... the fan base is so big."

But the barriers to joining the world's richest football league are also vast, with the English Premier League already resisting previous overtures from both Rangers and Glasgow rival Celtic.

"I don't believe the Premier League are hostile towards it because I think it's a generalization," Green said. "Speak to Manchester United. They are not hostile to Rangers joining."

But United disputed Green's claims.

"We are not in favor of it at all. We are against it," United spokesman Phil Townsend said. "Our view is it's the English Premier League and should remain that way."

Green, though, pointed to the financial advantages of United being able to play at the 50,000-capacity Ibrox.

"Why would Man United want to play Southampton? Why, when they could play Rangers? Sixty percent of the Premier League don't want Rangers. Of course they don't want Rangers," Green said. "Why would Southampton, Swansea, Wigan, Aston Villa? Why would any of them want Rangers or Celtic in their league. Why would they? It threatens their existence ... but if you asked the big clubs, 'Would you like Rangers?"

They would, according to Green. Even in Spain.

"Ask Barcelona and Real Madrid if they would like Rangers and Celtic in their league," Green said. "They definitely would. Why wouldn't Barcelona want to play Rangers home and away as opposed to playing Getafe? They would sell (those) games out."

In the presentation to potential investors, Green features a quote from Barcelona President Sandro Rosell highlighting the virtue of playing European rivals on weekends.

"What will change football over 5-to-10 years is this insatiable demand for the big clubs to play each other," Green said. "And this is not the insatiable demand from the west Midlands or from north London. This is the demand from the Middle East, Asia, the Far East."

Green is putting his faith in a UEFA experiment that could remove a key barrier to Rangers leaving the Scottish league. European football's governing body has allowed 16 women's teams in Belgium and the Netherlands to form a cross-border league in a three-year trial.

"The difficulty is that historically I don't think Celtic and Rangers would have been allowed to consider leaving Scotland," Green said. "What is now going to change things ... is now we've got this cross-border league for women."

Rangers' demotion removes from the calendar Scotland's only internationally attractive fixture ? the Old Firm derby against Celtic.

And at Celtic's annual general meeting on Friday, chief executive Peter Lawwell said he believed expanding leagues beyond borders could become a reality.

"We are committed to the SPL but nothing stays the same," Lawwell said. "There are initiatives in Europe. UEFA have opened their mind up to some form of regional leagues.

"I think they recognize the polarization between the top leagues and the smaller leagues in terms of media values. There are very early proposals that may look at regional leagues."

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2012/11/16/ap-interview-rangers-chief-executive-green-eyes-move-to-english-premier-league/#ixzz2CPJZUZIW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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