Rangers Mission Impossible – Administrators To Do Deal by Tomorrow


In this piece, I point out that I am mildly sceptical of D&P’s plans to choose a bidder by lunchtime today and conclude a deal by the end of the season. And also can you guess which football team the UK end of D&P reminds me of?



The saga continues. Yesterday D&P gave us more detail about the new bidders for Rangers. I have taken their two statements, and have commented, as usual, in bold.

The pieces below are from Rangers.co.uk, so the parts of the articles which are not quotes can still be taken as official Rangers comment. Both of the main articles were posted on the website on Wednesday 9th May.


DUFF and Phelps have confirmed that all three parties bidding for Rangers have the financial resource to a complete a deal – and they have reiterated that they want to get it done by this weekend.

The remarkable Rangers takeover story took a stunning new twist yesterday when firstly Bill Miller withdrew his offer to shock supporters and then it was revealed there were new players at the table.

The administrators are now in major discussions with all three and insist they want business to be concluded before the end of campaign on Sunday.

As I said yesterday, I have no doubt that D&P want a sale now. However, how credible is it that any sale can be achieved?

And I see that D&P want the deal concluded by the end of the season (this Sunday). How?

If it is a newco deal, as per Mr Miller, then there needs to approval of an SPL share transfer and also the players need to agree to change over to a new employer. There are reasons why a deal prior to the end of the season would be advantageous to Rangers. I thought it was impossible to achieve with a week to go. It is even more impossible (if something can be “more impossible”) with two days to go.


Sarah Bell from Duff and Phelps told rangers.co.uk: “We have three previously undeclared bidders, one of which is seeking a stand-alone CVA and the other two following the same plan as Bill Miller, ie an asset sale to a newco with the old company exiting through CVA.

“Of course if it is a stand-alone CVA then that will take several weeks to do and one of the aspects of that will be funding over that longer period but if a party was willing to fund that period then we could extend the deadline.

For the first time ever, I think, a named person from Duff & Phelps is neither Mr Whitehouse nor Mr Clark. Ms Bell however is an equal heavyweight in Insolvency terms, being Managing Director of D&P’s Manchester office. Maybe Messrs Whitehouse and Clark have taken a temporary break, shell shocked. (Just joking)

However, and with all due respect to the lady, she seems to be as flexible in her pronouncements as her colleagues have been! Please note, I am NOT accusing her or her colleagues of lying, nor should that be taken as implied.

As I mentioned last night, the preferred bidder status being conferred on Mr Miller caused D&P to look for someone to gazump him. The plan seems to have succeeded, as three NEW bidders are in place now. Two want to follow the Miller plan (incubator, side route etc) whilst one wants to use a “stand-alone” CVA. Ms Bell comments that this will take several weeks to do.

But, as long ago as 3rd May, D&P said:-

In recent weeks there has been much debate about Rangers exiting from administration through a stand-alone CVA. However, the barriers to a proposed stand-alone CVA are now too high.

“These barriers include, in particular, the absence of any bidder proposing unconditionally sufficient funds to enable a stand-alone CVA to take place.

“Crucially a stand-alone CVA would take so long now to effect, the Club could not survive in administration.”

The bidder looking to do the CVA however has not put its money where its mouth is. As Ms Bell says, ”…If a party was willing to fund that period then we could extend the deadline.”

That suggests that the stand-alone CVA bidder is not putting up that money. Therefore, in the words of Dragons’ Den, “He’s out.”


“The three main deciding factors for selection of the best bid are deliverability of the deal, quantum of a CVA and timing.

Can the deal be done, how much for, and when. These are the main factors in almost any business deal.


“In terms of expediency then going down an asset sale or newco route would be quicker.

This is recognition of the obvious, although there is no distinction between an “asset sale” and a newco. The newco does not need to be a new company. Instead it is simply a different one from that which holds the assets to be sold.


“We are, of course, very conscious that the season ends this weekend and we hope to be running with one of the parties in the next few days.

The next few days? This is Wednesday. The season ends on Sunday…


“The three bidders have been doing very sophisticated research into the situation so they are well aware of what is involved. That was encouraging for us.

According to D&P these bidders only came on the scene on Thursday, after Miller was declared preferred bidder. They have had enough time to do “very sophisticated research into the situation”. Have they found a time machine? Presumably none of them have initiated due diligence? It took Craig Whyte 6 months to carry out his due diligence. Mr Miller felt that the info he was getting prior to due diligence was optimistic, and on seeing the books he withdrew.

Have any of the three bidders seen the details that so frightened Bill Miller?


“Some fans may wonder why three bidders have suddenly emerged when Bill Miller was in preferred bidder status and then withdrew but they had been studying the situation.

Maybe it is a normal bid strategy. Wait, whilst studying the situation, until a preferred bidder is chosen, and then commit to a bid, with all the associated costs etc. Ms Bell should realise that it is rather more than “some fans” who are wondering about this!


“What we can say is that without going into exact figures we are satisfied that all three parties have the financial wherewithal to complete a deal.

So D&P have been able to do their “due diligence” on the prospective purchasers and their bids, since Thursday, with a holiday weekend in between, and when D&P were working full tilt with Mr Miller? Why not go into figures? Surely the creditors (remember them) might be interested in hearing what offer is on the table to replace Mr Miller’s?


“We have also taken the decision not to send out renewals for season tickets so that any party coming in to take over the club would have that funding.

Very good of them. Nothing to do with having no idea if there will be a Rangers at all, or if there is, what division it will be in? No – it’s so that the new owner has the money.

D&P could sell season tickets and ring-fence the money for the new owner, and if there is no Rangers, return the sums paid. Maybe D&P are afraid that many Rangers fans might not want to part with the costs of an SPL season ticket, only to end up with Division 3 football? Maybe D&P feel that selling only 5,000 season tickets might be demoralising for a new owner or prospects of survival?

In any event, as I understand it, D&P could not start spending the season ticket cash on running the club anyway. It is payment in advance, and if D&P spent it, and then Rangers did not fulfil its fixtures as contracted, the buyers would be due money back. As a post administration debt, D&P would be liable for that refund.


“I can say that HMRC are interested to see the merits of each one of the offers and they are open to further discussion with us.

I am sure this is true. It is however a long way from saying that HMRC is in agreement with any bid – or with any CVA proposal. No one has told HMRC the details and therefore it is of course interested. If one bidder, for example, wants to put £1000 million into the pot for a CVA, I am sure HMRC would be keenly interested!

Equally HMRC is open to further discussion, but that is a million miles from saying that it is in agreement.


“We want to try to reassure supporters that while our duty as administrators is to secure the best deal for creditors this is not just about the survival of the club but giving it the ability to thrive.

Hooray! Someone mentions the creditors, but only in the context of the club surviving and thriving. However, that can only be in the context of the company continuing as a going concern, IN THE INTEREST OF THE CREDITORS. If Rangers can thrive but the deal for creditors is worse than liquidation, then Rangers will not thrive.


“As I said we hope to be in running with one party by the end of this week.”

And I hope to win the next Euro Millions draw, although I suspect my chances would be greater if I bought a ticket!


And as an extra, here is the earlier statement from D&P yesterday too.



ADMINISTRATORS Duff and Phelps say it is still possible to get a takeover deal done for Rangers before the end of the season.

Supporters were stunned yesterday when American tow truck tycoon Bill Miller withdrew his bid having been given preferred bidder status last Thursday.

He cited financial concerns and opposition from some supporters as the main reasons for his decision.

Many fans are now panicking that time will run out to save the future of the club but three bidders are now at the table – two of them new – and the administrators believe they can work a deal with one of them.

David Whitehouse told the BBC: “It’s certainly possible to get a deal done. I think whether we can say that is likely, we will be in a better position to say that tomorrow lunchtime.

Lunchtime today (Thursday) is the new deadline. So Mr Whitehouse believes he could choose a “preferred bidder” Mark II, and conclude a deal, and obtain all of the necessary regulatory approvals, between Thursday lunchtime and close of business Friday? The best conveyancers I know would struggle to process a simple house purchase from scratch in 36 hours. D&P suggest that they can effect the sales of millions of pounds worth of assets, fixed and moveable, to a newco, with all of the TUPE implications for all staff, not just the players, and obtain SPL and SFA approval – in such a short time? Brilliant if they can, and I would be reluctant to declare it to be impossible…

Perhaps D&P have found the Infinite Improbability Drive from the Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy?


“The structures of deals that are being discussed vary but all are working to a timetable that they have to be completed by the end of the season.”

This debacle is good for the finances of the legal profession though! That means that there are at least four Scots law firms, and probably associated English ones too, poised to work through the night to make the deal happen. As well as the legal profession, late night pizza delivery companies will thrive as supplies are ordered in to the solicitors’ offices.

Or maybe Mr Whitehouse is talking rubbish…


It’s understood two of the three bidders have already held discussions with Ally McCoist. One is local and two are from overseas.

Why speak to the manager? Is he a key player? If Ally leaves, would a prospective buyer pull out? What, with the greatest of respect, is a purchase of the assets of Rangers Football Club PLC (In administration) to do with Mr McCoist? In view of the short time left, why would a buyer waste his or her time talking to him?

Or is the fear that, even at this terminal moment for Rangers, a wrong word from Mr McCoist would rule a bidder out, even if the consequence was that no one buys the assets?

And what is “local”? Is one bidder from Govan, from Glasgow, from Scotland, or the UK? Where are the overseas bidders from? I am not suggesting D&P have invented the “offers”. But when it was thought this process could not get more bizarre, even more bizarre stuff happens!


It is also being reported that one of the bids is a stand-alone CVA.

David Whitehouse has also indicated to the BBC that the UK consortium have concluded a deal whereby Craig Whyte will hand over his shares.

Ah. Local means UK. Odd word to use. Who is in this UK consortium? And to be fair, what is the point of acquiring Mr Whyte’s shares?

As I see it there are 2 choices.

Firstly, someone puts enough cash into RFC (IA) to fund a CVA and to keep the existing company alive. In that context, there needs to be a deal with Mr Whyte as he owns 85% of the shares. If someone is buying his shares however, they must, under City rules, offer to buy out all the other shareholders unless the Takeover Panel agree that it is unnecessary (as happened with Mr Whyte’s own purchase). But why pay money to Mr Whyte when the cash can be saved and used for option 2?

Second option – buy the assets for a newco. Mr Whyte’s shares are irrelevant. The asset purchase price is the pot for the CVA (after payment of D&P, Close Leasing and possibly Mr Whyte under the security) but that is of no concern to the new owner. He has all the assets.

Why take money that could fund that purchase, or even ongoing costs of the club and pay it to Mr Whyte? Would Rangers fans accept that?

By the way, guess who don’t get a mention in this release – THE CREDITORS!


And on a final note, on 3rd May Duff and Phelps said the following.

Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: “After many weeks of negotiation and deliberation we believe that the structure of the bid from Mr Miller provides not only the most deliverable outcome but preserves the history of the Club. Rangers Football Club will continue as the football club it has been for 140 years.”

So it took many weeks to decide that Mr Miller’s bid was best, and they now will assess all three new bids by lunchtime, with a view to having the deal done by the end of the season!



It might be that D&P have been doing sterling work which will produce an acceptable deal completed by Friday. However, how will the issues of legacy contracts and restrictions on income etc which put off Mr Miller be addressed, even ignoring potential protests from “purported Rangers fans”?

Duff & Phelps is a major worldwide Insolvency Practitioner.

Its ambitions are to be as prominent in its field as Real Madrid or Manchester United in the football market.

 So far, and the final whistle has not blown yet, they are coming across as being as successful as Bon Accord in the famous Scottish Cup match of many years ago – Arbroath 36 – Bon Accord 0.



Posted by Paul McConville


Filed under Administration, Football, Rangers

94 responses to “Rangers Mission Impossible – Administrators To Do Deal by Tomorrow

  1. Well done, Paul.
    On the face of it, it’s a crock, isn’t it?
    Two of the bids are “following the same plan as Bill Miller, ie an asset sale to a newco with the old company exiting through CVA.”
    Is that supposed to be good news? They’re going with the plan which Miller immediately jettisoned as soon as he saw the extent of the carnage in the accounts? This is all a tactical distraction.

    If we assume that there really are x number of new bidders, I have a sneaky feeling that they’ve been involved in this all along and that the bidders who have been in the public view are merely collecting information on their behalf (as well as acting as lightning conductors.)
    Paul Murray, for a start – his prospects of sitting of the board of a new football club must surely be compromised by his association with the current corporate catastrophe that Rangers* has become, partly on his watch. So So what could his real angle be, other than to be a facilitator for other, serious parties?
    Similarly, who was really behind Bill Miller’s comedy cameo?

    Another possibility is that the end is approaching and the scavengers are circling to see what value there might be in the post-liquidation, everything-must-go sale. It’s nearly time to start picking at the carcass. Vultures don’t even necessarily wait until the prey has conked out before they start their grisly work.

    Either way, there are creatures lurking unseen in the deeper waters, I feel.

    I give in. Is she an Airdrie Utd supporter?

    • George Morrison

      Lazy journalists ,the Sun headlines CW to sell his shares , so what ,his shares are not even worth a pound ,the real question they should be asking is he going to release his security on all non-movable & moveable assets , with Ticketus away to sue him for £27m I don’t think so , watch out for Ticketus owning Ibrox and leasing back to RFC.

  2. It’s understood two of the three bidders have already held discussions with Ally McCoist. One is local and two are from overseas.
    Why speak to the manager?

    Ah! That’s an easy one. I can help with that.
    Obviously, McCoist demanded transparency and shouted, “Who are these people? I don’t know who these people even are!”
    In Scots Law, the manager of The Rangers (in administration) is entitled to know the identity of anyone he wants, whether or not the other parties wish to remain anonymous. This is known as the Brown Brogues Privilege.
    (For precedent, see: Cheeky Chappy vs SFA Tribunal)

    Thought you’d have known that yourself! 😉

  3. Greg72

    I’m beginning to wonder whether we’re getting news from a parallel universe! However – do we yet know the result of the creditors’ ‘correspondence’ meeting, and whether a Committee of Creditors has been established by the Administrators and, if so, who are its members?

  4. Albert

    I’ve just had lunch with a legal colleague cancelled due to “needing a clear head on Friday”. He’s not, as far as I know, inolved in any type of football work so I bet that he’s right in the middle of this one. My moneys on a guy called Bill Miller.

  5. jinky67

    Deadline no; 4,607 in the big brother house….will anyone buy the toxic club?

    It’s intriguing to see the terminology and viewpoint shift….
    1-nothing amiss, couldn’t happen
    2- no way will there b administration
    3- ok administration if its the way forward but never liquidation
    4- well maybe a newco wld b okay but that’s not liquidation
    5- maybe better liquidating but we could keep our history
    6- as long as there is a Rangers

    Wonder what next?

  6. Littlerabbits

    I’m beginning to think Mr Whitehouse is losing the plot altogether! I see this morning we are up to 4 bids and his quote in the Daily Records says
    “Three of the four bidders are in the hands of lawyers. They are at a very advanced stage. But so are two of the others. Brian Kennedy is what I would describe as the fourth bid.”
    Surely 3 + 2 makes 5? No?

    • Drew Adamson

      Soory, didn’t read your post before I pu mine in, but I get seven minimum, not five see my post below for my wonderful calculations, based on the same universe as D&P’s where our laws of physics, and therefore maths, don’t apply.

  7. Littlerabbits

    …..and it gets worse….(more from the Record’s interview with D&P)
    “Are you sticking with the line that players CANNOT leave a newco for nothing despite the SFA now saying they can leave on a free transfer?
    Whitehouse: “The advice we have had is that their employment contracts would TUPE over to the new company. If they resisted that and said, ‘We don’t want to transfer’ there would then be agreement between club and SFA as to whether their registration could transfer to the new club.
    “With the co-operation of the SFA our understanding is that they would work to secure a scenario where the players would have to transfer abroad, because they would not be registered in England or in Scotland.”
    No legal training here, but having been TUPE’d twice myself I’m pretty certain that if the SFA tried to enforce this they may end up in a lot of hot water.

  8. SouthernExile

    Little rabbits

    I was just about to post the same quotes and make the same comment.

    “if they resisted” we are confident that the sfa would collude to deprive them of their livelihood….ffs!

    But why not Scotland only? If the can override EU legislation, why only in England and not the rest of the continent?

    Or is it a waste of time even trying to make sense of what these idiots are saying?

  9. Richboy

    Paraphrasing the D&P argument in the Record interview, they claim that Bill Miller did not agree with their revenue projections because he never got the fans onside and could not envisage selling the required number of season tickets. Their point continues that the new bidders are “Rangers Minded” and will get the fans behind them and sell the number of tickets in D&Ps projected outcomes.

    I agree that the stand alone CVA is the least likely due to the time frame and funding of the club when the money runs out. The other bids, as far as I can understand, are very similar to Millers bid which thousands of Rangers fans opposed with “vitriol and expletives” (not to mention banners).

    Do D&P believe that by simply getting the fans on board that all will be well? Surely they should be more interested in getting the creditors (remember them) on board, particulary HMRC.

    As I have posted before I have absolutely no expertise in these matters and could end up with egg on my face for these comments.From reading the analyses on this blog, by what appear to be sound legal minds, I don’t think the facial eggwash is about to happen just yet.

    • Niall Walker


      In poker the best hand wins unless you fold, I never fold the best hand and a CVA is the best hand by some distance.

      We will soon see.

    • Drew Adamson

      Mibbe he’s lucky it was only “vitriol and expletives”, given the Gers’ fans recent behaviour it could have been “vitriol and explosives”.

  10. TonyD

    This is pure farce. I hope Mr Miller or representatives of his company actually watched the footage I sent to a prominent TV/radio outlet in Tennessee of the trash in the CFC toilets and of course the Manchester riots….compulsive (or is that repulsive) viewing! I hope they did in a Spike Milliganesque , ‘my part in Hitler’s downfall’ kind of way.

    But more seriously, this is a foolish and irresponsible article which is far too accurate and consequentially completely misleading to the desperate masses of rfc(ia) fans clinging on to any fragments of hope thrown their way by the wholly ambiguous language of Dumb & Duffer.

    Indeed, the only morsel of truth in it Mr McConville is your reference to the Ibrox Time Machine. That does exist and was constructed post haste when Dumb & Duffer announced the preservation of their esteemed history. Come on Sir, how else would a team formed in 2012 lay claim to the Scottish Cup in 1894?

    Yours in Omnipotent Fantasy
    W Mitty

    • D.Mitchell

      You of course also remembered to send footage of the “blooodstained poppy” banner seen recently at Celtic Park to give a balanced view of life in planet “old firm”. …………………………….. thought not.
      People ought to concentrate in cleaning up their own clubs undesirable elements before taking the moral high ground and casting the first stone at others.

      • duggie73

        Away and fling a jobby at the moon.

      • John Pollock

        Are you seriously suggesting that a legitimate protest is akin to the sins of your fathers? The poppy debate rages the length and breadth of the UK every year. Prominent figures such as Jon Snow (C4N) refuse to bow to the poppy fascist brigade you clearly align yourself to. There can be no doubt that every other club in the UK would be entitled to the moral high ground over your club. Lets start with Manchester (was thinking Barcelona in 72 but thought there have been so many other events I thought why bother?) an event that officially saw your club named as the sick man of british football. I have said many times that what rangers and their fans had to do was build bridges and try to make friends and what do they do? Rangers and their fans at every opportunity sought to remind us mere mortals of their unique position within society as Gods chosen people. The fans can point to CW D&P DM, with justification, but in the final analysis the fans will have been judged to have played their very own unique role in their own spectacular downfall. Like apartheid and the Berlin wall you wont be missed. Its time you lot trucked off as the world has moved on without you as it always does! No one likes you..but you really should care!

  11. degough

    Morning all, enjoyed the read.
    Is it not possible that a deal will be done before the weekend that is conditional. Would this not fulfill the end of season deadline conditions?

  12. martin m

    paul, how can admin say they are working for creditors when a bid was knocked back for naismith, never mind the no redundancies etc… come on how can this be in interests of creditors, 1m plus at least to go into creditors pot, they are pushing the newco route and every single player could choose to walk for nowt i dont get it ?

  13. I have just visited the future in the D*P Time Machine. The year is 2015 and the dust has almost settled over what used to be Ibrox Park which is now a sports museum and fitness club for locals. Rangers 2012 F.C are still trying to get out of the Second Division which seems to be their level these days and are still having financial troubles with the ground sharing of St Mirren F.C which has been their home for the past two years. Their part time manager, Mr Chick Young who negotiated the deal between the ‘Buddies’ and the ‘Toxic Bears’ (the new unofficial name for the Rangers FC) has gone on ‘Record’ to say that results will pick up when, as he expects, the supporters return to support his new team. He claimed that there was reasons for optimism with his teams latest draw with Alloa which saw a bumper ‘home’ support of almost four hundred supporters paying in to watch the game; a fifty pre cent increase on the previous season when they came second to champions East Stirling. Vandalism has gone down in Scotland by fifty per cent but sectarian behaviour and singing has increased by a ‘Hun’ dred per cent at other football grounds namely at Hearts F.C, Kilmarnock F.C and Motherwell F.C where it has been reported that many of the disaffected old Rangers support now take their custom. Celtic F.C are favourites to lift the Treble again this season as other teams including the above try hard to match their skill in the home grown market for football and financial expediency. Other than that Govan a dn Glasgow in general is fairly quiet!

  14. Bhoywonder

    No Niall response?….strange.

    Well, I can’t add anything to all that either…absolutely brilliant.

    Anyone got a crate of very large padlocks and a couple of miles of heavy duty chains?

  15. Niall Walker

    Good morning Paul,

    If a consortium has agreed a deal with CW for his shares then they have taken over the Ticketus guarantee of 26.7 million in some form, this figure alone is worth more to the creditors than any newco offer. There is no need to offer as much as 11 million to the ordinary creditors, and I predict 8 million.

    Total return to all creditors ( inc debenture guarantees) @ 42-43 million, compare this against liquidation ( 10 million) or newco ( 20 million) and its a no brainer.
    Whoever is putting bids in for a newco have had informal chats with the SPL and SFA, they must know roughly the extent of future sanctions and it has not detered them, indispensability is a powerful negotiating weapon.

    As posted previously Rangers may be salvageable as a newco but only with the assistance of the SPL and the SFA. Their sanctions must not affect crowd attendances, they can ban Rangers from Europe or deduct points, but they cannot do both. I actually believe they wil do neither, it will be long term financial penalties into the coffers of the SPL and SFA.

    Rangers are too big to fail, financial pragmatism wins over sporting integrity on this occasion.

  16. Drew Adamson

    Paul, I follow this with no expertise in law, nor any Green/Blue axe to grind, but as an interested supporter of a “diddy team”. As you quote D&P’s hope to be in the Champions League of Financial Firms, I am a wee bit concerned that their numeracy skill don’t seem to extend beyond “1 + 1 = 2”.
    To quote the Daily Ranger quoting Whitehouse: “Three of the four bidders are in the hands of lawyers. They are at a very advanced stage. But so are two of the others.”
    Now, to me that means if there are “two of the others” then “the others” must be more than two, for the sake of argument let’s say three. And if “two of the others” mean another three, then there must be at least seven bidders, if we add in the “four” of the “three of the four”. Is the queu to buy RFC(IA) getting bigger by the day? Is this creative accounting at its best ??? Or can DR journos just not correctly transcribe a simple statement? ????

    And now D&P are following Mr. McCoist’s line that Rangers are a “SPECIAL CASE” in relation to European employment law as below.
    Are you sticking with the line that players CANNOT leave a newco for nothing despite the SFA now saying they can leave on a free transfer?
    Whitehouse: “The advice we have had is that their employment contracts would TUPE over to the new company.
    “If they resisted that and said, ‘We don’t want to transfer’ there would then be agreement between club and SFA as to whether their registration could transfer to the new club.
    “With the co-operation of the SFA our understanding is that they would work to secure a scenario where the players would have to transfer abroad, because they would not be registered in England or in Scotland.
    “So, to cut to the chase, we think the risk there is low.”
    So, Rangers are going to have a different TUPE Law just for them, to ensure players have to move to a different part of the EU to be guaranteed the benefits of EU law, with the connivance of the SFA? I think we’ve had enough SFA connivance with the Gers over the years, thanks. I wonder what Fraser Wishart’s or Tonny Higgings’s views on this statement are. Even the statement “if they resisted” carries echoes of feudalism, or are they taking their lead here from S. Jardine, Esq.?

  17. Niall Walker


    Just to cheer up Bhoywonder, I also believe the transfer embargo will be revoked, Rangers need to dump high wage earners fast and they need cheap replacements, nowhere cheaper than Scotland for players, more money for the trading association members.

    • Niall

      Wow! You certainly have a lot belief!

      Do you believe in Father Christmas as well?

      • Niall Walker


        I believe financial pragmatism and business logic will win the day, it has been obvious to me from the get go that a liquidated Rangers is worthless to the creditors and the best return was through a CVA.

        We will soon find out, seemingly CW has sold his shares, the endgame approaches.

        • Niall

          I love you optimism.

          CW cannot sell his shares (pesky suspensions) bet MSM forgot about that one. They are worthless anyway but I assume CW has not parted with the floating charge.

          D&P have already admitted previously that a CVA at this point was remote and in any event if someone did go down that route they had better have plenty of cash to keep afloat for the couple of months that it will take to even get one in place.However after the rubbish they have spouted even this morning who can take anything they sat as serious.

          Only one Bidder going down that road which I am assume is Ng. He is only ‘back in’ after he woke up to 20 messages left by D&P after the Miller deal collapsed offering him a deal at half of what he was offering previously. I think he will be ‘out’ fairly soon. The others are proposing ‘newcos’ as they know there is no change of a CVA.

          D&P are desperate to have anything that looks like a ‘bid’ on the table. I would suggest that these three bidders are at best notes of interest hyped up.

          This may be the endgame but as you mentioned before Ticketus would be key player at that time and they are not part of it any of these ‘bids’. Mmmm.. wonder why?

          All academic i fear as D&P just need to keep deflecting attention from themselves for a few days longer. Then it’s just a matter of time.

    • Melv

      Where is this money to buy spl players suddenly coming from? Bossmans are all they can afford so why would the SFA overturn the transfer embargo so rangers can offer out of contract players inflated salaries which the other clubs can’t match?

    • Bhoywonder

      ha ha…cheered up already. RFC (ia) need a miracle, not cheap players.

      And, don’t the players have contracts? They would need to be compensated for a breach of contract, which is what you are implying by dumping them (nice choice of words). Duffers would then need to repay the players their deferred payments, on top of compensation…it all gets complicated, but nonetheless more expensive to “dump” them now with only three days until the end of the season….get your thinking bonnet on and your blue tammy off.

      The game’s up and the writing is on the wall…the best thing RFC (ia) can do before the end of the season is APOLOGISE to all the creditors….especially the smaller businesses, some of whom could go to the wall…and their own players who will become unsecured creditors who will probably see zippo of their deferred payments..

      • Bhoywonder

        ….and turn that light out when you leave

      • Niall Walker

        Excuse my choice of words, I meant sell them for something or nothing, and my tammy is black and gold( East Fife).

        Shares are out of Craig Whytes hands and the CVA is now odds on favourite.

  18. seeujimmy

    Personally i just cannot wait to see tomorrow’s headlines, could be anything really. Pretty much open season for garbage-mongers. D&P rock!! The scottish Meja shares are soaring, I almost bought a daily record yesterday, i ended up just reading it and putting it back though..!!!!

  19. Garibaldi

    Paul, as usual your ability to examine & take apart the statments of Duff & Phelps is excellent. What I find amazingly is how 3 new bidders & plus Brian Kennedy (yet again !) can put together a ‘financial rescue plan’ for RFC(IA) in such a short time when access to the Clubs books have apparently been limited. Something doesn’t add up and I’m not talking about the debt.

  20. 678

    There is no transfer embargo. Only the registration of new players. Existing players can be sold.
    Info directly from SPL

  21. Seems to me that Desperate Dan & Phelps look to have been panicking around the place offering anyone with a quid or two to make a bid as a face saver before the final curtain. The process alone rules out a CVA as the sands of time are almost up! On another note…
    Are there still people out there that read such degenerate rags as the Daily Ranger,(Record), The Sun, The Daily Mail, red tops in general – FOR NEWS??? Wow!…surly no! In the absence of any other information this kind of toxic ”news” forms part of your sub-conscience and you end up thinking like THEM. Log on the Celtic News and become more informed every day!

  22. Marching on Together

    “The best conveyancers I know would struggle to process a simple house purchase from scratch in 36 hours” Seen that done. However, unless the new bidders had done a pile of due diligence prior to their existence being disclosed, or D&P’s data room is the most comprehensive and complete ever constructed, or the new bidders are willing to accept no material conditions in their offer, and any old rubbish and liabilities coming out in the wash post-completion, with minimally detailed disclosures, and no warranties i.e. no comeback, then the prospects of actually completing the paperwork for a binding deal by the end of the season are nil.

    I suspect what we might get is agreement in principle with another preferred bidder by the weekend, but that is all.

  23. Antonious F

    If Sir Murray Mint could time travel he could go back to the beginning of his grand plan and buy a replica European cup, feed the MSM and SFA on endless succelent lamb and the best red until they were delirious. then get them to go out and convince the footballing world that they had indeed won the Big cup (not the loving one). then the internet bampots would have nothing to speculate on, except the price of facebook shares.

  24. Niall Walker

    Due diligence is a vital part of buying a company, however its importance is somewhat reduced under a CVA, it mainly consists of examining the P&L accounts to formulate a viable buiness plan and cash flow projection. In the case of Rangers its not rocket science, cut the wage bill. The beauty of buying a company under a CVA is there is no hidden skeletons in the closet, in fact you get a list of them.

    Craig Whyte is selling his shares to the consortium who have taken over his 26.7 million Ticketus guarantee and this removes any floating charge.This suggests a level of investment that will not be shaken by 4-6 weeks of CVA costs.
    HMRC will be shown the alternative newco bids and the CVA will dwarf them in terms of a return to the creditors, they will agree.

    First on the agenda will be to reimburse all players for loss of wages, get their contracts back and sell the unaffordables or loan them out.

    Then the real fun begins, 11 SPL teams against Celtic, their statement issued today leaves me in no doubt they want Rangers hammered for the EBTs and the rest want them commercially viable.

    A compromise will be built around one premise, it must not affect Rangers attendances ( home and away), Celtic will disagree and be out-voted.

    Sporting integrity is only a bhoys game.

    • Marching on Together

      “there is no hidden skeletons in the closet, in fact you get a list of them” Except that in some cases there are known unknowns e.g. did Rangers really run dual contracts for their players since 1998, and if so will there be any investigation, and if so what will the penalties be? Very relevant if it is still oldco post-CVA. No-one is suggesting that D&P have carried out a full investigation to ascertain this.

    • KG

      I may be wrong here, but there is no confirmation that Whyte has sold his shares, other than what we are told by Duff & Phelps. I take everything they say with a pinch of salt, and until this is independently verified by Whyte and the bidder(s) I don’t think this can be relied upon.

      Even if Whyte does sell his shares for the nominal sum of £1 don’t for a minute think that is the end of Whyte. He will want payment in another form, it is the very nature of what he does.

      And even with Whyte out of the way as a shareholder, the obstacles to overcome are huge. I don’t think removing Whyte as a shareholder is particularly significant anyway.

      We do not know how Ticketus will play out the situation, and although they are intimating sueing Whyte, they may very well go after Rangers as well. This potential threat to revenue streams and lengthy court cases will be off putting to any potential purchaser.

      There are risks in entering a CVA that are at present unknown. The result of the Big Tax Case, Whyte’s floating charge and of course severe penalties which will come if it is shown Rangers players had dual contracts. It would certainly look as though they had.

      If it was all as plain sailing as you are trying to make out, there are many wealthy Rangers supporters who would be trying to take over the club.

      And who will fund the club until a CVA is agreed, which at best will be around the end of July. Some circa £6m. No bidder will take this risk.

      We then have the the current penalties in terms of player signings which you think will be overturned. They may well be overturned, but at this time they have not been, this is a significant risk to a bidder in making a decision to commit to Rangers.

      There is also the serious risk of no European football for 3 years under a CVA. I know you dispute this by Alex Thomson, but at least he is speaking to UEFA and asking this question. I am unaware if Duff & Phelps have spoken to UEFA but I would imagine they have done. Not to speak to them would be complete incompitence. If they have spoken then it is certainly not good news for Rangers, because if it was good news, these guys would have told us so, they’d be singing it from the rooftops. Their silence is deafening in this instance. This will result in reduced league attendances and income as well as the loss of European revenue.

      I do tend to agree with you that the asset value of the various properties are worthless other than to a football club. However, that doesn’t then follow that a CVA is an easier route.

      There are just too many obstacles to overcome. There is a serious risk that there will no no Rangers playing football next season.

      • Niall Walker

        Evening KG

        I believe we can deduce that CW is not offering his shares unless Ticketus has been removed as a creditor, this renders his floating charge null and void, and removes both CW and Ticketus from the endless list of obstacles.
        There are no penalties from UEFA for leaving administration by a CVA, the potential 3 year ban relates to a newco.
        The result and the amount of the BTC case is irrelevant to Rangers exiting administration, it has been incorporated in the CVA.
        I have demonstrated why short term funding is not an unsurmountable problem and I anticpate selling high wage earners would recover 1 or 2 months overheads. I think your end of July is pessimistic, end of June seems more realistic. HMRC will give their decision on all CVAs within 7 days.

        Nobody is saying any of this will be easy but it is do-able.

  25. Naill

    I was warming to you then you come away with this farcical nonsense.

    Dream on!

  26. martin m

    Naill, since you think a CVA will be done i’d like to know why your so optomistic. can you please tell me FOOTBALL CLUBS in UK that HMRC have agreed a CVA with to date ? infact i’ll tell you NOT 1 they opposed every single CVA and in this case they have over 25% and can single handledly stop this and force liquidation

    • Niall Walker

      Good evening Martin,

      HMRC cannot agree to a CVA involving any football club in England and Wales due to the football creditors rule, so involving them in our discussion seems pointless.
      Although the football creditors rule does not exist in Scotland as a policy, Dundee gave preferential creditor status to former players to avoid SFA sanctions which caused HMRC to vote against their CVA.

      HMRC are quite clear about their reasons for refusing a CVA, none of them are relevant to RFC in my opinion, they also state each case will be considered on its individual merits, contrary to common belief HMRC do not have an absolute position against CVAs involving football clubs in Scotland.

      A leading QC recently commented that it would be perverse for HMRC to object to a CVA ( without good cause) that delivered more to the creditors than liquidation. Craig Whyte could have ben considered good cause but he has been removed from the equation.

  27. Den

    Was that another deadline whizzing by or have D&P decided on a bidder and not informed Brian Kennedy. according to the BBC News site they will get back to him tomorrow.

    Is there some behind the scenes plot that will suddenly be unveiled or is it as shambolic as it looks. Either way it does not look good for Rangers long term survival.

    Is there some significance that someone else from D&P acted as spokesperson. Maybe nothing, but could be an indication that the firm is concerned about the performance of the joint administrators , but could be nothing as I say,

  28. And, according to Sky Sports News they ‘understand’ (whatever that means) that Craig Whyte has agreed in principle to sell his majority share in Rangers to a London-based consortium.


    I read the BBC report, and was quite confident of nothing because it was clear as mud, then I read the Sky report, and gave up.

    Can everything be done by the deadline?

  29. Jim Drever

    Not sure about this, but will UEFA impose a transfer ban if Rangers do not pay the full amounts due for players outwith Scotland?

  30. WeeAndyBhoy

    Your earlier comment was very profound & “sporting integrity is only a bhoy’s game”…great comment, but with one HUUUGGGEEE flaw.

    What about all the other teams & their supporters in the SPL outwith of Celtic? What about all the other teams in the SFL & their supporters?

    A huge percentage of said clubs & supporters are as equally disgusted of rangers & their shenanigans over the past 10-20 years as Celtic fans are & want to see justice. Plain & simple.

    One of the main problems the SPL directors have is if they let rangers off lightly or with no punishment at all, they might have rangers supporters turning up to their respective grounds, but will find their own stands virtually empty as their own support boycotts Scottish football.

    This would have been one of the main topics of discussion at last Monday’s meeting, had D&P had the decency & common courtesy to turn up. SPL clubs now fear there could be as big a backlash from their own supporters than that of the rangers support (incidently, a rangers boycott?? thought they didn’t do walking away???!!!)

    Don’t presume this is all down to an issue with Celtic & their supporters. Have some respect for the other clubs in Scotland. Then again, why change old habits eh!!!!!

    • Niall Walker

      The rest of the SPL and their fans want Rangers punished in a way that does not punish themselves, there is no point in cutting off your nose to spite your face. There is a section of Celtic fans who do.not care if the rest of the SPL suffers, Celtic does not need the Sky money nor the away attendances. Some Celtic fans want Rangers crucified into extinction or Division 3 not out of sporting integrity but bitter rivalry, plus the footballing benefits of having no real opposition corrupts any sense of perspective.

      Don’t get me wrong, Rangers fans would be no different but its wrong, the kind of sanctions people are hoping onto Rangers is a death sentence.

      You be the judge, which of these penalties for the administration and EBTs should apply to a Rangers exiting from administration through a CVA and which should apply for a newco.

      1 year transfer embargo, 3 year European ban, 3 year 10 point deductions, 3 years 75% deduction of SPL prize money, and stripped of all titles won under EBTs.

      Here is my neutral opinion, it is based on SPL interests and Rangers attendances( home and away).

      CVA: and Newco:

      3 year European ban, stipped of all domestic titles involving EBTs, 3 years 75% deduction from SPL prize money commencing when the European ban has expired.

      Everybody wins and nobody loses.

      • Marching on Together

        “the kind of sanctions people are hoping onto Rangers is a death sentence” This is just not true. A death sentence for the club as currently constituted, perhaps. But a death sentence for a football entity called Rangers playing at Ibrox? Certainly not. All the problems that football clubs across the UK have had financially over the past 30 years, including administrations, liquidations, re-organisations, newcos, fighting funds, and winding up petitions have resulted in the actual disappearance of just 3 senior clubs that I can think of: ES Clydebank, Gretna and Scarborough. Even Accrington Stanley, Bradford Park Avenue and Aldershot Town came back to life.

        No matter what penalties are imposed on Rangers, whether oldco or newco, Rangers as a club will survive.

      • Marching on Together

        As for what penalties should be applied, if Rangers broke the rules, then the rules as they stood at the time should be applied. If that means that every game in which a player on a double contract played is re-scored at 0-3 against Rangers, and that all the prize money that Rangers and its players obtained as a result should be returned and redistributed to its rightful owners. If this is the case and a newco wishes entry into the SPL, then the SPL should impose the penalties on the newco which the oldco should have faced. The only point of negotiation should be the time period over which financial recompense is made. This would also mean a 3 year European ban due to their breach of UEFA rules.

  31. AliM

    Can we get some balance about the real threat from a Rangers fan boycott? I support one of the diddy teams (Dunfermline) and the fact is that Rangers (and Celtic) no longer fill their end of the stadium, or buy the home fan’s ticket allocation, like they used to. Indeed, my team got bigger attendances against Raith and Falkirk in the First division last year than we got against Rangers at East End Park in February.

    So, sure, if Rangers disappear from the SPL, TV money might be impacted (does anyone actually know if Sky has a clause to pay less if Rangers are not in the SPL?), and they do bring more supporters than other teams, but lets not kid ourselves that other teams are being kept alive by their fans visiting away grounds.

    My premise is that most club outside of the Old Firm have much large potential fan-base, the fair-weather fan that only goes to the game when the team is doing well (as shown by our crowds in the First Division). If Rangers were not part of the league, then the teams challenging for second place would see an increase in their attendances that would, at least to some extent, make up for any shortfall from Rangers fans.

    Unfortunately, the rumblings from certain SPL managers/boards leads me to believe that they’ll put short term commercial fears ahead of integrity.

    Scottish football is dying. Its limping along, with poor quality football on show and is as boring as I can ever remember it. Something needs to change and if Rangers troubles are the catalyst for that, then that’s a good thing in my view.

    At a minimum, if the eventual analysis of Rangers actions shows wrong-doing, then the SPL/SFA need to be seen to do something to ensure it cannot happen again.

  32. Hugh Jarse

    Niall, you obviously have swallowed the media spin of the impact of Rangers demise on the diddy clubs. The reality is we’d be better off. Outside the OF the other clubs get scraps from the TV deal but have a compensating negative impact on gate receipts on their televised games – giving a net sweet fa. Most SPL Clubs would be better off with a TV deal worth half as much – if only they got a 1/12th share of it!

    Notwithstanding that, most clubs would also benefit from an increase in crowds from playing in a more competitive league as well as the positive impact of no longer operating in a Club that is run for the benefit of only two of its members. I wager this would more than compensate for the lost revenue of one or two visits from Rangers each season.

    No one outside their fanbase will shed a tear for Rangers, they along with Celtic have been strangling the life out of the Scottish game. The rest of the SPL will not only survive without them, they will thrive without them.

    • Niall Walker

      Good morning Hugh,

      There would be no TV deal without Rangers, 1/12 th of nothing is nothing, to be perfectly frank there is only one thing preventing Scottish football becoming the Irish League, and that is two huge rivals who generate enormous internal revenue. There is only one club who would survive and prosper if Rangers and the rest of the SPL were banished to mediocrity, and that is Celtic. They would benefit enormously from automatic 1st place qualification and winning trebles every year, and they would not have to spend as much to achieve these goals. Sometimes financial pragmatism can be disguised as sporting integrity.

      An SPL without a commercially viable Rangers or wthout a Rangers would result in Celtic playing against first division quality teams, after a few years even Celtic fans would begin to drift away. How many people would pay to watch Phil Taylor play 11 pub dart players year in and year out.

      I see no point in recalling halcyon days of large crowds in the provinces, society has changed and football changed to accomodate this new paradigm.

      • AliM

        “here is only one thing preventing Scottish football becoming the Irish League, and that is two huge rivals who generate enormous internal revenue. ”

        But to those outside of the Old Firm, its already the Irish league. The football is poor – even quality on show by the Old Firm today is probably on par with what the SPL 3rd/4th place teams would play 10 years ago – there is nothing to lose so long as the clubs transition to the new revenue. Players can’t get much worse – we’re already at the bottom. To me, and through no fault of their own (they have to look after their own interests), the Old Firm are parasites on Scottish Football, sucking it dry whilst trying to escape to more lucrative pastures. But, they’re stuck in Scotland so as a country, we need to make the best of what we have to offer.

        “I see no point in recalling halcyon days of large crowds in the provinces, society has changed and football changed to accomodate this new paradigm.”

        The provinces can get large crowds. All clubs have fair-weather fans, and probably moreso with the diddy teams – when the team is doing well, when they are winning, or challenging for something, thousands come out of the woodwork to the games. If Scottish football could set up a more competetive environment, I truly believe crowds for the diddy teams would rise to a level where a respectable level of income could be achieved, but not with the Old Firm in place.

        I’ve said for a number of years that the best thing that could have happened to Scottish football was if the Old Firm have been welcomed into the English league – yes, there’d be lean years, but we’d have a competitive league.

      • Hugh Jarse

        You just keep drinking the Kool Aid Niall 😉

        You can believe all of hat if you want but it doesn’t make it true. You would have to be blind not to see how sick the Scottish game is, becoming less and less competitive year after year, the Old Firm failing in Europe due to a lack of competition at home – THAT THEY CAUSED, the national team turning into (even more of) a joke.

        You might be able to kid yourself that Rangers have been doing everyone else a big favour with their presence over the years but you won’t convince the rest of us.

        The Scottish game needs to be more competitive and have more integrity and if that doesn’t involve Rangers so be it.

  33. Who’d a thunk it? The beautiful game that our grandfathers and great grandfathers so diligently built up with their passions, heart and souls could have gotten to the position of being hijacked by an endless cabal of Scottish charlatans and scoundrels, double dealing despots and crooks masquerading as trustees and honest officials only to sink OUR beautiful game into their world of financial poison and disease that they choose to call Scottish business. Moral integrity and fair play so easily sacrificed and dispelled for the sake of some money and the political ideology of a power and privilege society manifested into one football club in Govan.
    Why football? Because football has developed over the decades to become the theatre of hate and propaganda for all things ”Scottish” and all things anti-Irish in ways that appear on the surface to be nothing more than mere deranged paranoia but are in fact the activities of a highly planned and sophisticated campaign of cultural and political hegemony that ensure those who follow the Celtic are left in no doubt that they are not and never will be the voice of Scotland. This endless campaign of injustice must for the most part be subtle in its hegemonic development but must from time to time be manifest in ways that leave those who are on the outside in no doubt who are running the country and in who’s interests it is being run. This my friends is what WE who simply want to watch a good football match on a level playing field with sporting integrity are up against and it is for these reasons that we ALL must protest in thee most strongest of ways.

  34. sumproduct

    Remember a few months back Andrew Ellis said he was launching a legal case on a claim he was promised 20% of the Rangers shares from Whyte for putting the buyout deal together? I wonder if that has any relevance in this latest deal charade? He also said he had been introduced to Whyte by a member of the Cadbury family, and if memory serves me, introduced Whyte to Sir David Murray, for which he was truly sorry. Surely not the same Mr Cadbury who works at Merchant House Group? He certainly must love their buttons! ‘Duped’ I believe was the line peddled out by the injured parties. Curious term for both to come away with. No room for ad-libbing in this script. See Duff & Phelps for many, many examples of what happens when you forget your lines. Why only yesterday they had us believe the mighty Gers could even arrange to bypass EU TUPE laws. Blimey! Talk about method acting.

    Buttons is roughly the value of MHG since Whyte bought a majority shareholding. Of course, issuing 65 million new shares and forgetting to tell the stock market was just another unfortunate turn of events. I’m sure the MHG chairman, a Tory councillor no less, is a big fan of the Whyte knight these days. He is being quite the B’stard after all.

    Are any creditors out there even slighty concerned at the fact Whyte appears to have never left a company without having also left a large hole in the creditors pot? Its not like there’s not enough of them for at least one to ask the court if there’s a chance they may just have been forgotten in the fog.

  35. Richboy

    Niall, you state that Craig Whyte is offloading his shares in a deal that would see the new preferred bidder sort out his issues with Ticketus. As this would remove 27 million from the creditors pot (to be paid at a later date by Rangers fans) it would certainly make a CVA more of a possibility.

    My question is, does that make the new preferred bidder a secured creditor if the deal subsequently falls through. In the event a CVA cannot be achieved, this becomes a very risky strategy indeed.

    Just asking.

    • Littlerabbits

      I too am rather confused by this. AFAIK CW has sold his shares (he can in a private sale even though trading on the markets is barred for now), but I read somewhere that he cannot transfer the Ticketus guarantee as it is a ‘personal’ guarantee. Also – if Ticketus are taking him to court over this does that mean they are no longer expecting a cut of the season tickets, even if the company exit from admin? Surely if they come out via CVA they’d be better holding on for their original deal? I’m sure Alex Thomson confirmed yesterday that he was indeed selling for £1, but that he still held the floating charge, which was another matter altogether.

    • Niall Walker

      Morning Richboy,
      Once the CVA is accepted by the creditors, there would be a simultaneous signing of contracts between CW, Ticketus and the consortium.involving shares, guarantees and floating charges. In effect a transfer of everything with no money changing hands. The 26.7 million is a short term mortgage for the assets and shares, the rest of the offer consists of the debenture holders guarantee ( 7 million) and 8 million in cash for the ordinary creditors, total package at approx 42 million.

      Craig Whyte is doing much the same as SDM, he is selling his shares for a pound but his shares include a liability, in SDMs case it was 18 million and now it is 26.7 million.

      • Richboy

        Thanks Niall, that almost clears it up for me. I can see the part where CW gets his pound coin, offloads his debt and is gone forever. I presume Ticketus are then paid from subsequent seasons ticket sales. I can then see only two scenarios for the survival of the club;

        1) TBK, as you have previously suggested, have a lot more money than they are putting up front and can afford to finance a competitive Rangers throughout the years of the Ticketus deal and European and domestic sanctions, or

        2) They intend to run the club on a shoestring having initially offloaded all of the valuable players and non essential assets to give them sufficient working capital.

        For their sakes I hope it is scenario one as they will not survive too long with scenario two.

        Thank you for your patience.

  36. Niall Walker


    Rangers can only be downsized so far, it has structural limitations, the penalties you suggest are not a million miles away from mine, they still give Rangers fans an incentive to fill Ibrox, which provides Rangers the income to pay the bills and remain competitive.

  37. Littlerabbits

    From Alex Thomson (again) this morning….
    UEFA confirm again they will treat CVAs like NEWCOs ie 3 year bann

  38. Kevin

    “SPL will become like the Irish League”

    Rubbish. Division One in Scotland is better supported than the Irish league. And for “no TV deal” read “a reduced (likely BBC/Alba) TV deal”.

    The SPL can (and, probably will have to) survive without Rangers.

    • AliM

      The Real Radio phone-in tonight suggested that the new Sky deal would halve from £80M to £40M if Rangers were not in the league. With Rangers in the 3rd division (or not existing at all), I’d like to think the other 11 could get a better deal from Celtic. Cut a bit of cloth here and there, recognise that there will be a better competition, with 2nd place up for grabs, more chances of a cup run etc, then the loss of revenue from the (decreasing) number of Rangers fans visiting other grounds might not be that much of an issue.

      I like to see the positives in all this mess, but still suspect the SPL (both at the board level and amongst the individual clubs) will bottle it and let Rangers back in with little more than a slap on the wrist. In that situation, it remains to be seen whether the fans of the diddy teams would boycott their own clubs.

  39. AliM

    So the Blue Knights bid has been rejected (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18028910) and, unless I’m wrong, that was the only bid proposing the CVA route.

    The words D&P is using to describe the time-frame they’re working to seem to be changing too. Until now its been “by the end of the season”. Not its “…every effort is being made to conclude the sale of the club as quickly as possible.”

    • Niall Walker

      I was under the impression the bid from Levy-Lewis was a CVA bid, but who knows. Since both a CVA and a Newco seem to involve a 3 year European ban, then its down to the SPL and SFA what other punishments they wish to dish out to the Newco, and I believe it will be lengthy fines and not point deductions. It may be politically expedient to strip them of their dodgy titles, it will appease a lot of unhappy Celtic fans.

      • AliM

        I might be mistaken then – its pretty hard to keep up with what’s going on, particularly when D&P’s choice of words often obfuscate things.

  40. Niall Walker

    Afternoon richboy,

    Any consortium must consider the Ticketus money as the price of the assets( inc players) and this expense would exist even in a healthy company. The potential 3 year ban is actually irrelevant to any new business plan, Rangers must run a budget that is NOT based on a CL gamble as their predecessors. Like Celtic they must balance the books on their domestic income and any European rewards are a bonus instead of a necessity.
    A threat to their domestic income ( 3 year point deductions) on top of the European ban would put Rangers into a debt spiral. Any new business plan would go out of the window if the fans became demotivated watching their team playing without any domestic or European incentives for 3 years.
    You can only downsize a structure such as Rangers to a certain level, beyond that the overheads and general running costs( not players high wages) become crippling debts.

    The SPL and SFA must find the right balance and its never going to please everyone.

  41. Bhoywonder

    Niall, if you were born about 2012 years ago, there is no question your name would be Thomas.

    The 3 year European ban IS relevant, as it is dictated by UEFA

    Titanic has set adrift, the iceberg is looming, the ship is at full tilt, Can it miss that iceberg?….or will history be re-written and the population expanded by thousands?….watch this space

    • Niall Walker


      It believe Rangers will be banned from Europe for 3 years, whether its because of a CVA, Newco or EBTs, it is one of the few punishments that rewards the other SPL teams without damaging Rangers terminally.

      What happened 2012 year ago and who is Thomas ?

      p.s. I am a practising atheist.

      • Hugh Jarse

        Niall. Rangers are already damaged terminally.

      • Marching on Together

        “I am a practising atheist.” Clearly you are, as while you believe in death for football clubs, you have no belief in resurrection and life after death for them.

  42. Hugh Jarse

    Charles Green led consortium now front runners. LMFAO.

    If you know any Sheffield Utd fans ask them what they think of Green!

    Frying pan and fire are words that come to mind.

  43. Niall Walker

    Afternoon Hugh,

    I agree it is getting down to the wire but these things tend to operate on a last man standing basis. Administrators are just glorified auctioneers, there is a lot of salesmanship, posturing, dummy bids, going going deadlines,all intended to drive up bidders to the reserved price and beyond.

  44. Niall Walker

    Rangers need an iron fist to quell the inflated expectations of their fan base.

  45. AliM

    The STV report on the SFA judicial findings report is very interesting, showing how CW allowed the Ranger’s finance officer to only write cheques up to the value of £100, insinuations that invoices from Rangers to Ticketus bypassed normal procedures are were made from “ClipArt”, and that VAT as well as employees National Insurance was held back by Rangers and not paid to the taxman.

    However, the summary is that those within Rangers could not be absolved of their responsibilities, despite CW seemingly make it difficult for them to have visibility on the workins on the business.

    Its all very messy, but unless the SFA bottle it, I can’t see any reason for Rangers’ appeal to succeed.


    • The document is here for those of you who like reading such things:

    • Marching on Together

      Interesting snippet from p18 of the report, to the effect that since 2009 Rangers had an arrangement with Ticketus, involving getting an advance on season tickets each year, in the region of some £5m. Apologies if that is not news to anyone.

      • Marching on Together –
        I think it’s reasonably well known that Rangers – and many other clubs – habitually used Ticketus to plug short-term cash-flow gaps, especially towards the end of a season if income hasn’t been topped up with extra cash from good cup runs or if there have been unusually low revenues because of unfortunate factors such as postponements of matches during periods of bad weather. It’s not an unreasonable thing to do if the cash advance is kept in proportion. It’s the equivalent of borrow a few tenners from your mate because your wages have been held up for a couple of days.
        The difference between that and what Whyte did is that his deal was out of all proportion and went far beyond what several pay days could have handled. The reasons for Ticketus agreeing to it remain an unsolved mystery

  46. Niall Walker

    The mist begins to clear, the preferred bidder is a man called Green who, is in cahoots with a man called Whyte.

    Green and Whyte ?

    The plot thickens,

    • Richboy

      Breaking News; former Ibrox man Lex Gold has signed onto the consortium. Green Whyte and Gold, you couldn’t make it up.

  47. deekbhoy

    The reason for Ticketus signing such a deal was because they thought they were going to make a few bucks out of it. That’s how most scams work.

    Wee craigieboy is obviously made a good pitch.

  48. Greg72

    Just thought I’d say it again – what about the creditors? – you know, the unfortunates who are owed money! And it seems that the results of the creditors’ meeting have still not been announced.

  49. peter groom

    deekbhoy, details of ticketus agreement are published somewhere on these forums. they paid in advance and negotiated a discount, then appointed rangers as their selling agent to dispose of tkts at face (full) value. rangers were then required to pass on the full proceeds to ticketus probably minus a small percentage to cover their selling costs. rangers have had the money ( and used it) so surely cannot avoid having to repay, you would think.

    • deekbhoy


      I accept all the points you make.

      What I was questioning is why Ticketus parted with all that money up front without some security. Surely someone in Ticketus must have done some sort of risk assessment prior to signing off this deal. Rangers even then were not in the rudest of financial health so someone somewhere I would have thought would have said how do we get our money back if this goes belly up.

      It appears that they accepted Craigieboy’s personal guarantee without securing it. That’s what I mean about them being scammed. (if that us the case and they are not linked to the floating charge).

      If that is the case that they have no secure creditor status and CW has then they have been foolish or been had.

      If he has scammed them then his wealth may not be off the radar but his skullduggery skills certainly are. He is so bad that he is good!

      • Niall Walker

        If Ticketus secured a personal guarantee then they will sue CW for the money, I assume they did a credit check on CW to make sure he had assets of 26.7 million ( excluding Rangers).

  50. deekbhoy


    I believe they are and I wish them luck as they will need it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s