Charles Green on How the Big Tax Case Harmed Rangers – and Why He is Wrong

Mr Green, who seemed unusually quiet for a couple of days, but was no doubt involved meeting fund managers and investors for his share issue and compiling the Share Prospectus which he told Rangers fans would be out by the middle of November, has spoken out on the official Rangers website about the Big Tax Case outcome.

You can find the whole piece here.

As the article is written on the official site by Lindsay Herron it is safe to assume, I suggest, that the commentary and narrative around Mr Green’s quotes can also be taken as the “Rangers position”.

My comments on parts of the piece are in bold below the relevant section. It is fair to say that I do not think Mr Green is correct in much of what he had to say (although I am sure that would not concern him one iota).

———————————————————

CHARLES GREEN has expressed his anger and dismay at the timing of the verdict of the First Tier Tax Tribunal as it has massively affected the current status of Rangers.

Despite a concerted campaign from certain quarters, which was often hateful, that decided that Rangers were guilty of “cheating” it has been proved that is not the case.

Advertisement

Duff & Phelps July Report re Rangers Football Club PLC – Review Part 1 – Incredible Shrinking Fixed Assets!

Duff & Phelps have produced their latest report regarding their handling of the administration of Rangers Football Club PLC (RFC PLC).

It can be found here Rangers FC PLC Interim Report by Duff & Phelps 10 July.

I will go through it in detail, but there is an initial point which seems, to me, to be odd.

Perhaps someone in the media can ask D&P, or Media House, whose bill for providing PR services to RFC PLC since February 14 is £124,000, to clarify the matter of the ever shrinking value of RFC PLC’s interests in land?

Why Rangers FC Continues, Even In Newco, and Why This is No Use to CEO Green

Charles Green, now CEO of “The Rangers Football Club” said on Thursday, “Today we are out of the SPL. Today we are not in the SFA. These are problems that we have to deal with to get this football club back playing football here.”

Is he right?

I do not think so. In a detailed analysis, considering the SPL Articles and Rules and the Articles of the SFA, I have concluded that Rangers FC does have a separate identity from that of Rangers Football Club PLC (In Administration). It is this separate entity that Charles Green has bought. However, Mr Green’s comments suggest that, despite having the opportunity to state unequivocally that Rangers FC remains in existence, he has declined this. Instead, he is setting up his new club, which will seek to parachute its way into a league that it is already entitled to take part in, subject to regulatory and disciplinary issues.

On one hand Mr Green talks of protecting the history. On the other his actions are consistent only with the football club he owns being a new creation. One hundred and forty years eliminated because Mr Green and his allies see that there are three separate risks factors for Rangers, any of which on its own could have destroyed the Sevco investment, and with the combination of all three present, Mr Green feels he has to stack the deck in his favour. He is playing for high stakes, and cannot afford to lose.

To Keep Rangers Afloat, Can Duff & Phelps Seek Judicial Review of HMRC’s Rejection of the CVA?

Mark Twain once said “Rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”

Today’s newspapers in Scotland have pronounced the last rites over Rangers Football Club. However, I suggest in this piece that the Death Certificate could have been signed prematurely, and that there remains an option, by taking on HMRC in court, which might give Duff & Phelps and Mr Green enough “oxygen” to keep Rangers alive into next season and potentially an increased offer to creditors.

The answer to the question at the top of the page is “yes”, in that an administrative decision, as this is, and carried out by a public authority, can generally be subject to consideration and review by the Court. In reality, there are various reasons why, even if it did not succeed, it could still work to the advantage of Rangers and of Mr Green.

I thought about it when reading Mr Green’s thoughts from yesterday as detailed on the official Rangers website. I have added emphases to the relevant parts of the edited article.

————————————-

CHARLES GREEN admits HMRC’s decision to reject his consortium’s CVA proposal left him speechless and has accused them of giving Rangers fans false hope it would go through.

Why Charles Green’s Financial Plan For Rangers Won’t Work – Guest Post by Niall

Niall has been one of the many welcome commenters on my blog, and was gung-ho about the prospects of a CVA being agreed when many thought otherwise. He stuck to his guns, putting forward a number of reasons why a CVA would be approved. Now of course he has turned out to have been incorrect.

Fair play to him – he has sent me the following as a comment, but I think it is worth putting up as a post, and I welcome comment on it and analysis of it as always.

I now leave the stage clear for Niall, with many thanks.

————————————-

 

It’s bust and I was wrong; it seems Mr Whyte’s governance breached the conditions for agreeing to a CVA.