Niall’s Thoughts On Why Duff & Phelps Did Not Try To Sell Rangers Players

To All concerned regarding D&P’s decision not to sell players while in administration.

I stated D&P could not sell outwith the transfer window, and this may strictly not be true, and incredible as it may seem I may be wrong.

They may have sought special permission from the SPL. I am only saying ” may ” because I cannot confirm if the SPL has the same rules as the EPL, the same conditions applied or they had asked and it was refused. However if I have made an error then you will all forgive me.

Professional bodies tend to make decisions in the full public glare for a reason, so why did they not ask for special permission, and here are some of the reasons.

Guess Which Major Player in the Rangers Saga Has Been Sold For Over £400 Million?

I missed this report at the time, and am grateful to one of my readers for pointing it out to me.

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Apr. 23, 2013– Duff & Phelps Corporation today announced the completion of its acquisition by a consortium comprising The Carlyle Group, Stone Point Capital LLC, Pictet & Cie, on behalf of certain of its clients, and funds managed by Edmond de Rothschild Group in an all-cash transaction valued at approximately $665.5 million.

As previously disclosed, the transaction was approved by the Company’s stockholders at a special meeting of stockholders held April 22, 2013. Pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement, the Company’s Class A stockholders are entitled to receive $15.55 per share of Class A common stock in cash without interest. As a result of the merger, the Company’s Class A common stock will no longer be listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Stockholders of record will receive a letter of transmittal and instructions on how to surrender their shares of the Company’s Class A common stock in exchange for the merger consideration. Stockholders of record should wait to receive the letter of transmittal before surrendering their shares.

The deal involves the whole of Duff & Phelps’ global business, including its British arm.

The three men closely involved with the Rangers administration, Paul Clark, David Grier and David Whitehouse, remain listed as “Managing Directors” of the UK arm.

Rangers’ Imran Ahmad Lets Slip 2007 Link to Craig Whyte

The storm around Charles Green shows no signs of abating. I have a post coming later today about the Ibrox reaction to all this.

As well as his SFA complaint about his comment regarding Imran Ahmad, it appears that the main sponsors are making a complaint about him too for that remark.

There are rumours he is to face an additional disrepute charge for saying “no surrender” in an interview given last year, and only now aired. (Frankly that seems a ridiculous charge, if indeed it is being made, both in terms of the allegation itself, and of the fact that it is prompted by a broadcast. It is not as if it was said last week. Surely the bringing the game into disrepute comes from the organisation which has now, months later, decided there is some reason to broadcast it? If it was seen as an earth-shattering remark, then presumably the media company involved might have released it then?)

Mr Whyte, Mr Green, Sevco 5088, Sevco Scotland and Prospectus Risk Factors

In which I comment on:-

• the return to the fray of Craig Whyte,
• the confusing issue of whether Sevco Scotland Ltd (which was not a party to the sale agreement) or Sevco 5088 Ltd (which was) acquired the assets directly from Duff and Phelps,
• whether Mr Whyte’s challenge ought to have been mentioned as a “risk factor” in the Prospectus,
• whether Mr Whyte’s allegations might provoke BDO into further and more immediate action and
• whether his involvement, if established, bolsters or weakens any case of alleged “gratuitous alienation”.

Gratuitous Alienation and RFC 2012 PLC – Some Clarification for Clarkeng

In response to my post re Gratuitous Alienation earlier this week, I noticed that Clarkeng made a few comments disagreeing with my thesis. I think that there may be crossed wires on our parts so I thought I would clarify my argument.

Some of Clarkeng’s comments are indented below, with my responses in bold beneath.

As far as BDO challenging D&P about the value achieved for the sale of the business and the assets I do not think you will hear anything further despite Paul’s suggestion.

To be exact BDO would NOT be challenging Duff & Phelps. Instead they would be “challenging” the purchaser, Sevco Scotland Ltd (now Rangers Football Club Ltd). An administrator acts as an agent for a company in administration, and the actions of the administrator are the actions, legally, of the company.

This is unlike liquidation where the actions are those of the liquidator, as the company is in no state to take any action itself.

As for time scales, if there is to be action by BDO regarding an apparent gratuitous alienation, then I would not expect it until near the end of this year, at the earliest. Liquidations take time, especially where there are as many complications as seem to exist in the case of RFC 2012 PLC.