Sky News’ City Editor Refers to “Re-Constituted Rangers” and “Cut Price” Asset Acquisition

I was directed to the piece below earlier today. The wider point of the flotation and exactly what investors would be buying is the subject of a post which is presently being drafted for me by Mr Lawwell personally, and I will post it when he gets it to me.  🙂

For now, I want to “fisk” the piece. My comments are in bold.

Sky News’ City Editor reported the following today:-

The new owner of Rangers Football Club is close to appointing advisers to kick off a swift return to the London stock market. I understand that the consortium led by Charles Green, which took control of the Scottish outfit in a cut-price £5.5m deal to acquire its assets in June, is poised to hire Cenkos Securities, the broking firm, to handle the flotation.

Mr Kleinman, the City Editor, is presumably a wise man in the affairs of business. You will note his reference to the “cut-price” deal to buy Rangers assets. I wonder what he thinks a fair price would have been? Maybe the £50 million that Mr Ahmad, one of the Rangers directors, claims is the value of the Rangers Football Club, “on a bad day”?

Mr Kleinman was spot on with his naming of Cenkos, as was confirmed by Mr Green later today.


Cenkos is one of a number of brokers which have held talks with Mr Green’s consortium in recent weeks, and it remains possible that another firm will be appointed if an agreement cannot be reached, according to insiders.

The listing is likely to see the newly-reconstituted Rangers, which began the season in the bottom tier of Scottish professional football, listed on the junior AIM market before the end of the year.

Here is where he might offend Rangers fans. The “newly re-constituted” Rangers?

Does he not know that it is Rangers Then, Rangers Now, Rangers Forever? (I cannot hear that phrase without adding, sotto voce “Rangers without end. Amen” which is not the reaction they were going for, I assume.)

People close to the situation said that it could seek to raise as much as £20m, part of which is likely to be used to fund the acquisitions of new players.

If the share issue is as imminent as has been hinted, then, as Rangers cannot acquire new players until January 2014, if some of the flotation proceeds are to be used for that purpose, the cash will be sitting in the bank for some time! Will investors be happy to hand over cash so that Rangers can keep it in the bank, or even withdraw some of it, as they would be entitled to do if duly authorised by the board, by way of dividends? I come back to the question about why “insiders” are suggesting the cash is for player acquisitions.

Details of how supporters and investors will be able to acquire shares in the company, called The Rangers Football Club, will not be available for several weeks, insiders say.

The company is actually “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”.

Rangers’ takeover and subsequent demotion to the Scottish Third Division capped an astonishing fall from grace for one of the biggest names in British sport. The club’s liquidation following the fiasco of the ownership of Craig Whyte culminated in a series of bitter contract disputes with star players, and the tax man.

The club has not, as we hear repeatedly, been liquidated. The former “corporate entity” which owned the club, so we are told, is soon to be liquidated. The club proceeds on and on and on and on…

The tax man dispute was there long before Mr Whyte, and the “bitter contract disputes”? They are as to whether there was a contract at all!

Since the deal Mr Green, a former chief executive of Sheffield United, has struck a merchandising joint venture with Mike Ashley, the tycoon who owns Newcastle United and who may acquire a stake in Rangers as part of a stock market listing.

What about the £1 million Mr Ashley was going to put in for 10% of the shares? Is he now waiting on the floatation, where £1 million would get 5% of the shares being issued, which would be a long way short of giving him 5% of the whole company? Was that story as much rubbish as the “Newcastle United will lend nine (thanks for the heads up TBK) players to Rangers” story?

Mr Ashley’s tenure at Newcastle has not made him universally popular amongst his team’s fans

Mr Green believes that despite its recent travails, Rangers has considerable international potential as a sporting and leisure brand.

So did Mr Whyte…

Why do football teams obsess about tapping into the overseas markets?

Does anyone remember the unfortunate Misha Sher? He was picked as Global Partnership Director for Rangers in January 2012.

THE man who was yesterday appointed Rangers’ global partnership director plans to take the Old Firm derby on a money-spinning world tour – including a stop-off in the Middle East.

The SPL champs announced that development expert Misha Sher will front the club’s new London office in a bid to “expand the brand in overseas markets”.

Sher said: “Taking the Old Firm fixture abroad would be near the top of my agenda. I have to look at where the biggest value is. If there is an opportunity to do something with the Old Firm the appeal would be massive. It’s one of the world’s biggest rivalries.

“I wouldn’t be a proponent of having the teams play regular season games in other parts of the world but there is a chance to play in tournaments or take these teams to the Middle East, North America or other places. It should be looked at.”

He believes Rangers could be sitting on an international goldmine. He said: “We have to better leverage our traditions and history to engage with Rangers fans worldwide. We’ve seen it happen with other clubs like Manchester United and Liverpool. The goal is to explore the opportunities that are there. There are certain ties to India and North America, particularly Canada.”

How did that work for Mr Sher? He ended up being one of a handful of employees who was made redundant by the administrators.

The last man tasked with bringing Rangers to a worldwide marketplace


If Rangers successfully floats with a valuation of around £30m, that could augur well for the prospective valuation of the club’s ‘Old Firm’ rivals, Celtic, which is also listed on AIM.

And back to gratuitous alienations. Mr Green’s team bought a company which owned an SPL football team. They paid £5.5 million for all of the assets of an SPL club.

Since then the club has been permitted to play in SFL3, rather than the SPL, and a number of players have left without transfer fees being paid, despite Mr Green thinking he was due substantial payments. In addition the football team has far less in revenue open to it, as the prize money for the SFL3 champion is rather less than for anyone in the SPL.

Yet despite all of this, the estimate is that the valuation would be around £30 million! And that was a sale at a fair price?

I think that no attention at all will be paid to the “value” of Celtic arising from this flotation. Almost every football team in which shares are traded has the shares of the common fan effectively worthless. It is an emotional stake people buy, not an investment.

There have been few new stock market flotations of major British football clubs in recent years, with Manchester United’s recent listing in New York being a rare example.

As Forbes magazine reported:-

If you are planning to buy Manchester United stock, you may want to think again. Publicly traded professional sports teams rarely outperform the market, and they don’t even pay a dividend or grant shareholders any level of control over company decisions. Shares in Manchester United might be a nice piece of merchandise for lifelong fans of the Red Devils, but history suggests that there is little reason to believe that it is actually a good investment.

The Man U stock now trades at $12.60, down from $15.27 at the recent flotation.

The club declined to comment.

Although it did later on.


As is often the case, information about Rangers raises more questions than answers.

Why is there a need to raise money now for player acquisitions, which is the explanation from “insiders”?

Why does the Sky City Editor think the sale was “cut-price”? Is he an obsessed fan of a rival team?

What are these untapped global markets Mr Green is looking at which were not exploited by Sir David Murray or Mr Whyte? We might have to wait for the recent Des Spiegel article to be translated into English before we find that out definitively.

Bearing in mind the result of the Manchester United float, how will Mr Green persuade the faithful to subscribe to his plan?

Is there a rush to do so before the liquidators appear and seek to strike down the sale, or demands a “fair” price?

Posted by Paul McConville



Filed under Administration, Charles Green, Rangers

50 responses to “Sky News’ City Editor Refers to “Re-Constituted Rangers” and “Cut Price” Asset Acquisition

  1. Soairse

    you say the club was “demoted”. Wrong!

  2. TheBlackKnightTBK

    lol Paul, superb as always!

    PS?? is this subliminal or Freudian?

    “Newcastle United will lend NONE players to Rangers”


  3. TheBlackKnight

    lol Paul, superb as always!

    PS?? is this subliminal or Freudian?

    “Newcastle United will lend NONE players to Rangers”

    • Ian403

      Ha, Ha! the misprint proved accurate. More than I can say about the original article. There has been some real mince by jabba & co who know it’s all bull, but the outsiders really crack me up when they write because they are serious .

  4. mick

    great read paul gratuitous alienations a word a hope when bdo comes makes famous

    @soairse what paul ment was a team that phenioxed and was given entry as a new club without 3 years accounts or right to history

  5. Haha

    The person saying rangers weren’t demoted is right. They weren’t. Their a new club so had to start in the turd division. Also if everyone remembers mr “for a Celtic fiver there will be a taxmans tenner” Murry floated them twice. As with the first float he bore the cost of it. Sorry royal bank of scotland did!

  6. TheBlackKnight TBK

    “Almost every football team in which shares are traded has the shares of the common fan effectively worthless. It is an emotional stake people buy, not an investment”

    Shirley you mean emotional attachment to separate holding company entity thingy 🙂

  7. TheBlackKnight TBK

    Right! What’s going on with the avatars!!!

  8. Back to the meat Paul (thank god! ;0)) – great post.

    I really don’t see quite what any smart businessman (and most with the funding of the level Green is seeking would no doubt qualify as smart) would be attracted by. Quite apart what Forbes says about investing in sports teams, just where is the promise of good return on an investment?

    While I am by no means a financial analyst, I really think Celtic and Aresenal – very well-run, settled organisations with almost guaranteed levels of revenue – would have big problems attracting the sort of investment Green is hopeful of attracting.

    Added to this, of course, is what may well happen when BDO walk into Ibrox (and just WHEN is that going to happen – anyone know?) – the ‘gratuitous alienation’ that has been raised here. Of course, this is all conjecture, as it must be at this stage, but surely such considerations affect those money men just by them being conjecture?

    This leads me to another strand of the story – if Green also bought ‘good will’ along with the assets, surely this must also be adversely affected by whole saga of RFC, which as we know still continues with next week’s first meeting of the SPL’s official EBT investigations? And that’s before we even mention ‘proper’ legal issues (HMRC, police investigations, ticketus etc) and the accompanying publicity – no matter how they affect the current Ibrox-based organisation financially.

    And, as another part of ‘good will’ what about reputation? No doubt the exploits of the fans abroad in recent years, did as much as anything else to undermine Misha Sher’s aim of enhancing the ‘global brand’ (which I notice, he didn’t really see them being able to do on their own anyway – Old Firm games abroad etc).

    In all, it would seem that only high-risk investors would go for what Green seems to be offering (itself a movable feast, as the move to Div3 football on its own scuppered a lot of his original impressive PowerPoint presentation). And high risk investors would, I expect, want high rewards for that risk-taking – where are these rewards going to come from? I just cannot see this working – nor happening at all, frankly

  9. Greg72

    Being a retired insolvency practitioner, I dealt with companies at the end of their lives, rather than when they were ‘going’. However – and this is one for the lawyers or practising accountants on here – would the ‘current’ Rangers company (‘Limited’) not have to metamorphise to a PLC before there could be any question of a flotation/sale of shares to the public at large?

    Whilst I’m on – what about the creditors – remember them?

    Further – does anyone have any idea when:-
    a) D&P are actually going to make their Report to the Court of Session, and
    b) when the Liquidators are to be appointed?

    • ecojon


      You are quite right the Flotation will require to be done using the’vehicle’ of a PLC as the shares are being traded publicly as opposed to the present ‘Ltd’ company which cannot trade its shares publicly but only privately.

    • Robert D Bruce


      As a retired insolvency practitioner can you please give me your thought on the Enterprise act 2002 and how it applies in the case of RFC (in any of it’s forms)

      My limited understanding is this.

      The Enterprise Act 2002 and the Insolvency Act 1986 act hand in hand. The 1986 Act is the over riding mover in Insolvency cases but the Enterprise Act 2002 has inserted clauses into the 1986 Act which are supposed to keep businesses afloat if possible (my interpretation)

      The Enterprise Act 2002 has done away with the Crown Preference. This means that where as before the Act, the HMRC were one of the first in the queue, they now have to stand alongside everyone else with their begging bowl as an unsecured creditor.

      Secured creditors in the case of RFC were players and staff who had outstanding wage claims and other football creditors.

      Why one would ask do football creditors have preference over HMRC and Jock Tamsin who has fixed the leaking ceiling in the Ibrox boardroom?
      The simple answer is that because the Law says so.
      The 2002 Act now prohibits HMRC from being a preferential creditor and they have recently lost a court battle against having “footballing creditors” being given the status of preferential creditors, declared unlawful.
      HMRC having recognised the unfairness in this distribution of assets took the case of “footballing creditors” to the High court late last year and lost the case. They have recently decided not to appeal.

      The 2002 Act is supposed to be on the side of Enterprise and is supposed to try to make sure that businesses stay afloat rather that crash. To this end, the Act requires that a pool of assets be set aside to meet the claims of unsecured creditors. The idea is that if an unsecured creditor gets something from the pool they may well be able to stay afloat themselves. The alternative being that a cascade effect ensues and many businesses go under on the back of one failure.
      This seems fine in theory and is a laudable aim until you apply it to the RFC case.

      The enterprise Act 2002 provides for the following.

      When the company net property exceeds £10,000 the pool available to unsecured creditors is calculated on a sliding scale. This allows for 50% of the first £10,000 and 20% of all sums in excess of £10,000 up to a maximum of £600,000.
      The net property value is calculated after, in RFC’s case, Duff & Phelps expenses have been paid, any holders of fixed securities have been paid and of course “footballing creditors” have been paid.

      Rangers were valued by D&P at £5.5 million. How much do you think unsecured creditors like Jock Tamsin, the wee lassie face painter and dare I say HMRC are likely to get?

      Is it any wonder that HMRC did not approve the CVA of £8.5 million when they knew there is little or no chance of them ever recovering anything for the national purse.

      When I do my sums – and I admit that arithmetic is not a strong point – it looks remarkably like D& P made the price (ie £5.5 million) fit the equation to produce a zero value for everyone bar themselves.

      I’d appreciate your thoughts Greg72 and those of anyone else who may have an interest in seeing justice being done.

      If anyone from BDO is reading, it would be nice if you could give us a wee heads up on your thoughts too.

      • p groom

        robert d bruce. in england there is a football creditors rule which has caused much gnashing of teeth. I believe I am correct in saying that there is no such rule in scotland. I have not heard or seen any sign of one being officially promulgated and implemented. the first time this phrase was heard in this case was when sfa made it one of their conditions ( plucked out of the air presumably?) for issuance of a licence to sevco. it seems it has now become de facto as a result. on the wider issue of a company just having its debts written off while it then goes trading on, ( give or take a few oldco/newco issues) I can understand not hearing one word of complaint or even comment from the pro-rangers camp. however I would like to see someone in the insolvency field give me a reasoned explanation of how this process which seems to be against all natural justice is allowed to exist.

        • Robert D Bruce

          P groom,

          The rule is now part of the UEFA financial fair play rules.
          Football clubs are obliged as members of their national association affiliated to UEFA to settle any footballing debts. The SFA, far from plucking it out of the air were under an obligation to ensure RFC paid their debts, especially in the context of “saving the history” and in so doing allowing RFC to remain within the league structure as an “ongoing club”
          As I stated already, HMRC fought and lost the case against footballing creditors being classed as preferential creditors when it comes to an administration event. I believe the government have been waiting in the wings, awaiting the court judgement and are now considering changes to the law to prevent footballing creditors taking precedence over others including HMRC. Quite where this will leave football clubs, who will have obligations to under the law that will be in direct conflict with their obligations to UEFA, is anyone’s guess.

          I can’t agree with you enough about the injustice of a company – any company – being allowed to rise like a phoenix, debt free (and bragging about the fact) and carrying on in business exactly as it had only weeks before.

          It would seem that the Enterprise Act 2002 assist this process as I have detailed above but I, like you, would appreciate someone who is better versed in these things to explain more clearly WHY this is allowed.

    • p groom

      greg72. d and p last report said report asked for by c o s had gone to them.

  10. TheBlackKnight TBK

    Penultimate attempt!

  11. John Burns

    Quite frankly, Paul, I do not believe anything that is written about the Sevco/Rangers brand.

    Would any of us have thought in January, that they would be where they are today WITHOUT any ‘interference’ from the EBT issue?

    Just who in their right mind would be investing in Sevco/Rangers at this juncture, and why would they be investing?

    Rangers fans refused to put their hands in their pockets when the club was ‘flying high’ in the top-tier with regular access to Europe; so why on earth is there any confidence that they will invest now?

    I have said before that I do not believe that Sevco/Rangers will last out this season, I am still of that belief.

    • cam

      The mighty Gers will not only last out this season,they will outlast you and yours.A business that attracts 50,000 paying customers every two weeks,millions in merchandise and is cherished by many will always be a good investment.
      Its a joy to be in the 3rd Division and for the first time ever both sets of fans will be giving it “championees”.Another trophy to be added to the cabinet,the referees getting a few years of peace from Mr rage virus,a whole new generation of Gers fans attending the games,,,yes everything is looking bright.
      Wee Craigie will soon be packing his jimjams for an extended stay in one of Her Majesty’s hotels.
      The tax case irrelevance will be over and the EBT nonsense put to bed.
      The jiggery pokery at the SFA and SPL will be exposed and Mr Lawell will soon be seeking out new allies.
      What doesn’t kill you,,,,,,,

      • Lovin your avitor Cam its almost as amusing as your fantasy………….

      • By the way in this narrative you don t say whether you would be willing to invest in your beloved TRFC (plc assuming there’s £10k to fund the public paid up capital) and if so at what level………….if you won’t invest why would savvy professiona linvestors?

        It ain’t never gonna happen unless of course they are blagged again like the previous times RFC tried to raise £.

        I have raised arguement this countless times with EcoJohn …………can’t wait for your take Eco, as these brokers are serious players, have look behind some on the personell, they are all newly appointed in the main………….I wonder where they have been recently and who they have been dealing with……..Hmmmmmmmm!!!!

        • ecojon


          I don’t think we have enough information at this stage to really figure out what is going on and I reckon the only ones who know the plan are Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge.

          There is no doubt that Green is operating at warp speed on this which could signal a pressure on cash-flow (not immediate but at some stage down the line) or pressure from existing ‘investors’. The main problem is that it is difficult to actually identify who is an investor and how much they have invested. There is a web of seemingly contradictory statements on this from Green.

          One thing that is clear is that none of these ‘investors’ are listed as shareholders in the newly created ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’ at Companies House. The only shareholder listed is Charles Green who bought two shares when the company was first incorporated under its initial name of: Sevco Scotland Ltd.

          It would appear that one of Green’s shares was transferred to Imran Ahmad prior to 31 July but no paperwork appertaining to this has been lodged with Companies House. However as it appears that Blue Pitch Holdings could be an investment vehicle for Zeus Capital clients (where Imran Ahmad and Brian Stockbridge work when not being Rangers directors) it would give security for the Zeus clients as the not inconsiderable assets of Rangers are help by: ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’.

          But what about all the other investors who have been named in a carousel of names apparently pledge to a million here and two million there. If they have invested or loaned this kind of money what security do they have for it especially as they do not appear to hold any shareholding in: ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’ and was their money invested in the Ltd Company or Rangers as a Club. Either these investors were prepared just to accept Charlie’s word and shook hands on the deal or they took advice from their own professional advisors.

          If the latter, they would undoubtedly have been advised of the need to obtain security and as they didn’t get a shareholding then the other normal method would be to have a debenture against their loan and with a brand-new company with very uncertain financial prospects then that debenture would be secured against the assets of the company.

          The debenture details would set things like the interest to be paid for the loan and the date for its redemption by the company to the investor. Capital raised via debentures isn’t share capital for the company and they rank above the shareholders should a company fail. The interest paid to debenture holders is charged against a company’s profit. I haven’t actually checked yet what requirements exist on the disclosures of debentures in the accounts of a company.

          So Michael we really don’t know a lot except that Charlie Green is moving according to his original plan which was to get in quick and float the company on the AIM Market and leave with his dosh ASAP.

          All investment IMHO opinion is like playing roulette in a casino – it’s basically for mugs and the AIM scenario which is self-regulated mainly through the NOMADS is certainly more Wild West than its big brother.

          Professional investors are well aware how the markets work and the opportunities that present which skews the odds in their favour and they are ain’t waiting for the ball to drop on the roulette wheel – they are playing Blakjack or Poker.

          So if Green and his management team are only in it for a short-term return why should savvy professional advisors be looking to the medium-long terrm prospects with an unknown management structure. That’s why I think the big investors, if there are any, will be follow the in and out quick strategy with maximum profit.

          If there actually are any investors who have put a million or couple of million in I reckon the media coverage that has enveloped Rangers creates an air of uncertainty which investors don’t like so I reckon they could be looking for as quick and exit as possible with their loot intact and a bonus for their trouble.

          There is always the offer that was made to founder investors to be considered. The first £10 million investment capital raised carried a promise for original major investors (not fans) to be able to purchase a pro rata amount of shares for £1. So if they invested £1 million originally they had an option to purchase 1 million shares for a further £1 million payment. Of course I doubt if they would be too happy if the shares dropped in value once they were traded publicly but hey that’s the investment game for you.

          One thing for sure is that any money raised through share purchases by fans will be piddling and give them no real say in the running of the club beyond a possible token placeperson on the board. Green has already made clear that he wants 85% large investors and 15% fans which was the same split used by Whyte.

          The role of NOMADS is explained here for the anoraks like myself 🙂

      • Ernesider


        I see the alarm clock hasn’t wakened you yet.

      • charliedon


        I agree the has been “jiggery pokery” at the SFA and SPL but do you seriously and honestly believe it was directed AGAINST Rangers?
        From my perpective, the SFA and SPL bent, broke and ignored almost rule in their own book to get Rangers back playing, and at the highest possible level.
        First they attempted to lever the new Rangers straight back into the SPL but that ploy was scuppered by fan power. Then they tried for SFL, supported by all sorts of sinister threats to the member clubs, but the clubs refused to be bullied. Then more rules were manipulated to allow the “transfer” of the old club’s licence to ensure the new Rangers were able to play at the only senior level left as an option – SFL3.
        So why oh why do you think any “jiggery pokery” was directed against Rangers when the evidence clearly shows it was a for the purpose of ensuring Rangers survival at the highest level. And aided and abetted by a scaremongering media campaign, also in Rangers’ favour.

        • cam

          As the largest best supported club in Scotland no confusion should arise as to why the mighty Glasgow Rangers must be assisted in global domination.It has been explained to ‘O’ Regan and ‘O’Doncaster that if the “people” dont have their club then we may start to look a little too closely for comfort at the infiltration by the minority,henceforth known as the “haters” of this great country.
          We are in a symbiotic relationship,the parasites clean the coat of the great lion and in return are given giro’s but if the balance is disturbed then the lion must be de-loused.
          Obviously being given the GCC to play with isn’t enough and wee Paddy is coming to the table asking,nae,demanding more!
          It is heartening to know that we have amongst us so many internet forum financial “experts”? and that every possible death of the mighty Gers has been studied and hoped for but the equation is built on a false premise,,,it assumes that C, being the constant of Gers apathy will never change,but as every Celt should know, the universes laws don’t apply to Rangers as we are the matter to your anti matter.
          It is my understanding that the CERN Bluenose fratenity had a wild party and used the Large Hadron Collider to prove the existence of the “people” particle.This particle is eternal,godlike and must only be used for good.
          I must go now as the voices are calling and i don’t know how to get to Annan.

          • charliedon


            Well, I suppose when your opinion has been defeated by logic the only recourse is to resort to gibberish, and if you are going to resort to gibberish you might as well go the whole hog. Which you have done in fine style.

            • cam

              As a direct descendant of Mr Spock i cannot be undone by your childish attempt at logic application.The cabal of O Regan,O Doncaster,Lawell,Petrie,Thomson,Lunney,Fullerton, the hearts and minds campaign waged by internet bampots,Thommo,RTC,PMG,Greenslade,McNally,English and other minor players in the press rat pack has been unveiled amidst the frenzied attacks against the impegnable walls of Ibrox.
              When the SFA can apply penalties outside of Scots law then the jiggery has been well and truly poked!
              100% of Gods warriors are delighted to be amongst our friends in the 3rd Div. and i for one wish to stay there ad infinitum allowing the 2nd placed team to gain promotion.Our cash cow support can spread their largesse amongst the lesser teams and we can stay well away from the saliva spraying antics of Mr rage virus.
              We the mighty Gers do not need the lesser children of the same God anywhere near us.
              If you can in words of less than 10,000 explain the SPL ‘s logic in the Rangers prize money debacle whereby oldco/newco can be transposed to suit this mickey mouse organisation, then please forward it to my friends at CERN where it shall be inserted into afore mentioned LHC and examined for evidence of the bullshit particle.
              I must leave you now i’m off to help install the old Celtic turnstiles at Ibrox for the upcoming game against Motherwell and then off for a pint and a chinwag with a chum at HMRC to see if they comply with tax avoidance regulations.

          • ecojon


            What a brilliant wind-up 🙂 although I do worry that your accelerator complex involving the Gers might not catch-on as they are placing their faith in Cenkos rather than CERN.

            You should check-out:

            The headings are brilliant and might form the Index of Phil’s book:

            The accelerator complex
            The true story of antimatter
            Enigma of the muon
            The road to unification
            Protons head on
            The Z factory
            Testing the Standard Model
            A tiny preference for matter
            The primordial soup
            A Nobel discovery

      • ecojon


        Hey great laugh Cam – satire seems to be catching on 🙂

      • Den


        Glad you are so happy in the Third. The Third division title will be one up on Celtic who have to settle for the Champions league and SPL.

        “A business that attracts 50,000 paying customers every two weeks,millions in merchandise and is cherished by many will always be a good investment.”
        End of Quote.

        I seem to remember that Rangers had the same advantages and are going to liquidated after running up debts of £134M.

  12. dan

    Cam? Should that ‘C’ not be a ‘B’?

  13. Jimothy

    If I were a Rangers fan (shudder) I would be very conflicted if a flotation goes ahead. Lots more of them I think would want to invest this time around than the last time, because they would be desperate to ensure that TRFC survives so they can keep claiming that ‘Rangers’ never died. (just the company blah, blah…). On the other hand, the flotation could itself bring the current honeymoon period to a shuddering halt, as would-be investors return to the position of overwhelming skepticism about CG’s intentions that we saw when he first descended. Fans will accept little or no dividend if the money is being spent on players, but not if it looks like disappearing into a black hole, or God forbid, the company is liquidated, and their stock holdings rendered worthless (although I can’t think for the life of me why anyone investing in Rangers would worry about that…)

    • ecojon


      What worries me about an AIM Flotation is that we have a high power management team currently at Rangers – Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge – but after the AIM Flotation and the money has been raised why would they hang about.

      So if I was a potential investor I would be thinking: ‘Who exactly will be left to look after my interests as a shareholder and make sure that my shares increase in value and also my dividends’.

      If I couldn’t answer that with 100% guaranteed certainty then I wouldn’t invest. In any case I wouldn’t invest in a football club anyway as the returns are rotten and you would be better putting your money in an ISA.

      With respect it doesn’t really may matter whether fans invest or not for emotional reasons as the total amount will be negligible in the grand scheme of things. There is also the fact that the capital raised by an AIM Flotation is a one-off basically. You don’t get it every year. Football Clubs are high-risk investments which return low yields and that is why there are only two UK clubs now listed to sell shares publicly – Celtic and Arsenal with Arsenal shares held almost exclusively by a small group of individuals trading them privately and minimal public sales. Man Utd has of course recently listed in New York and I think it’s fair to say that the issue hasn’t set the heather on fire.

      So why does Green and his advisors think it’s a good idea to float on the AIM market. I don’t know the nswer to that but I do know that a successful flotation would raise an anticipated £30 million according to Green.

      So what happens to that cash? Let’s accept for sake of argument that the original investors get their supposed £10 million investment back. Still leaves £20 mill minus Green’s commission of £3 mill leaving £17 mill.

      Even if it was all spent on players then because of the signing-embargo then it would be a minimum 12 months before it could be spent and in reality it would be a minimum of 2/3 years before you would spend it although the fulcrum would be entry back into the SPL and then Europe.

      What would £17 mill buy – well that depends on the quality of the players and their wages and in reality it won’t buy a lot. Whaty we don’t know is how Rangers will do financially as a club and we won’t have any real evidence until the annual accounts are published and that, quite handily, won’t be until after the AIM Flotation although I predict a glowing prospectus if the previous shareholder marketing presentation given by Green in May is anything to go by.

      • Jimothy

        I appreciate the analysis and I agree with you, I wouldn’t put my ‘investment’ money anywhere near a football club, no matter how strong my emotional attachment. CG is effectively exploiting the promise of Rangers’ fans lifelong spending commitment (as opposed to several thousand of them each sinking a few hundred pounds in on a one-off). From a commercial point of view, that is probably a justified strategy to make it look like a worthwhile investment, because no matter how uncertain the current financial picture, or even how the team performs, there will remain at least a hard-core of supporters with nothing better to spend their money on. It presumably also lies behind Chuck’s oh-so-quick conversion to the ‘hidden-agenda’ paranoia so fashionable down Ibrox-way these recent months – he’ll basically do whatever it takes to drum up the punters until he can hop the stage out of Dodge.

      • carl31

        I simply think they hope to get money out of Gers loving Gers fans that fear for the future existence of their club if they dont buy shares, and some money from investors willing to take a speculative punt on the club being more valuable in future than now – a club that has a big enough support to be at least a division higher (but, puzzlingly, they have to get a grip of costs – which they show no sign of doing).
        With the latter being indirectly dependent on the support … its all about the fans and how much money they will pay to continue the existence of their club.
        Since they show no sign of getting a real grip of costs, IMO they wont last a season, possibly not even til Santa comes.

        The other clubs mentioned IMO are likely to be worth less in future so its no surprise they dont issue a flotation, or in ManU’s case they do and it disappoints.

  14. Gobsmacked

    No great surprise that the “victims” are forgotten.
    Your question of when will the Liquidators be appointed seems simple enough. So why can it not be answered?
    Surely as the largest Creditor the HMRC should be driving this ? But then it must be difficult when everyone involved seems to be sitting on their hands.

    • Robert D Bruce


      Please see my question to Greg and my assertion about the creditor status of HMRC. Would be pleased if you will enter the debate.

  15. Robert D Bruce

    This comment is a wee bit off topic – about horse racing – but I’m sure most will see the spurious link.

    At Haydock Park today take advantage, if you like a wee punt.

    RFC have two runners in the 2.15 race both in with a chance.

    ZERO MONEY – currently 5/1

    TAX FREE – currently 6/1

    Those awaiting the introduction of BDO have a runner in the 3.25 race

    BATED BREATH – currently 3/1

    Make your choices and fill your boots. Easy money.

  16. Antonious F

    Same badge – Yes
    Same colours- Yes
    Same ground- Yes
    Same name- Sort of
    Same supporters- Unfortunately
    Same debts- Dont be silly, they belong to another company!!

  17. geddy Lee.

    LOL, i must say, the guy who did the interview with Green for “DER SPIEGEL” (The Mirror) certainly has a rye sense of humor. He says when Green starts talking about “Visions” one is reminded of Helmut Schmitt’s famous saying……..

    “Any one having visions should see a doctor” LOL. The author talks of “In Green’s world….” as he detects the delusion
    surrounding the man.

    He also reveals Green has a picture of the Queen in a Rangers top behind his desk. The picture apparently says “Thank you for saving MY club”. “But somehow ” (States the author) It also doesn’t seem real. LOL.

    Will try to put the whole article up in the next couple of days. No Google translator software was used in the production of this comment by the way. LOL

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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