Cost of the UEFA problem


How hard will UEFA hit Rangers over the sectarianism issue at European games?

That is correct.  I do not know.  You do not know.  Martin Bain does not know.  Craig Whyte does not know.  David Murray does not know.  Even Chick Young does not know.  The members of the UEFA disciplinary committee probably do not know right now either.

Rangers were quick off the mark to try to set expectations by telling Chick Young that they expect a £100k fine and the rather novel punishment of Rangers’ fans not being given tickets for two away European fixtures.  We have come to expect no less from such a finely tuned PR machine.  (Rangers fans will dispute this assessment of their PR operation, but the club has faced up to the task of defending itself against the damage done by the KKK-style element in their support rather well).

What is puzzling about this is that we are lead to believe that a sale of Rangers could have happened this afternoon and will now likely be concluded tomorrow (if you believe the press).  If no one knows how bad things could be with UEFA, how can you place a value on a business that you plan to operate for the next few years?  The UEFA penalty could be anything from another slap on the wrist to a two-year ban from playing in all UEFA competitions.

The key point being that no one knows.  Students of this blog will already know that the value of any business is the “present value of all future free cash-flows”.  How can Craig Whyte judge the value of Rangers FC (and hence how much he should pay) if he does not know whether Rangers will be playing in European competition at all next season?  If Rangers are playing in Europe, will part or all of the stadium be closed to paying supporters?  Given that the club owes its survival at this point to the money generated in the UEFA Champions’ League from the last two years, how can Craig Whyte know how much to pay if he cannot even make a working assumptions about playing in the Europa League as a worst case scenario?

Which brings us back to a recurring theme in this blog: takeover or fakeover?  I am assured by some friends in the world of journalism and PR that Whyte really is serious and has a sizeable amount of financing already secured.  (No one has said that he has everything he needs at this time).  That these takeover stories appear with precision timing just ahead of potentially bad news for Rangers does feed the sceptical fire.

Perhaps Whyte is just waiting until UEFA announce their penalty and he will finalise his offer accordingly.  Or maybe it does not matter much to him one way or the other as he does not plan on running a football club?  The last two blog entries on here have expanded on the idea that the only way to really profit from owning Rangers is through a partial or full liquidation.  You protect your investment by converting it to debt (which will take priority in administration over HMRC) and would sell as many players as possible this summer and pocket the cash raised to reduce your exposure.  Then you either sell after a good result in the tax case (pocketing a respectable profit) or liquidate on a hefty loss to HMRC (making a smaller but still decent return).  In this scenario, the liquidation of current playing assets would cover all or most of your investment and your analysis might not be too badly affected by the cash needs for Rangers FC in 12 months’ time- for that would be a problem for some well-heeled real fan.

All speculation of course, but informed by experience and education that says that the idea of someone planning on making a legally binding committment to spend £52m over the next 5 years to own Rangers FC is just balderdash.  Applying a reasonable cost of capital of 10% to this investment, Whyte (or any future owner) would need to be able to extract over £5m per year every year to make these numbers make sense.  It is clear that Rangers’ owners (current and prospective) and the board of directors continue to lie to Rangers supporters about the takeover.  With the willing participation of the Scottish sports media, Rangers fans are being deceived yet again.

If a deal does go through, it will not be on the terms which have been “leaked” to the media.  Contrary to PR-placement stories, there is nothing stopping Craig Whyte from speaking publicly about his plans for Rangers.  The oft cited ‘stock-market rules’ require only that all shareholders hear what you have to say at the same time and that you tell them the truth.  So why does Whyte actually break these same much vaunted rules on a daily basis by leaking through his PR-lackies to the media?  Giving information to all shareholders at the same time is trivially easy in the Internet age.  So we are left with just one other restriction: the truth.  What is it that is being reported in the Scottish media that Craig Whyte is unwilling to say on-the-record?

I do not know whether Craig Whyte will buy Rangers or not, but I do know that Rangers fans are being misled.  Nothing about what has been proposed in the media makes financial sense.   So we are left to seek rational explanations elsewhere.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

246 Responses to Cost of the UEFA problem

  1. jusodae says:

    As a virtual financial illiterate can I say that this is a compelling blog. A genuine thank you to RTC and all your contributors. In this era making finance interesting to people like me is fundamentally empowering. Thank you again.

    My main point though is a bit off topic

    The rhetoric emanating from Rangers whether in relation to their debt, the tax case or UEFA, has a common theme of “dark forces” i.e. Celtic fans conspiring against them. This makes me think that Murray et al know fine that they are fucked so they are deflecting any backlash towards Celtic.

    If this is the case then it is appallingly cynical and will only feed sectarianism.

  2. There is a little sub-plot behind all of this involving Mr. Bain personally.
    His rhetoric is about building his defence of himself for when the walls come tumbling down. He has much to fear.

    So, by embracing Rangers’ fans and painting himself as their protector from the vast timmy conspiracy, he will try to paint himself as a victim of that same conspiracy. To the extent that variety of individuals are exposing embarrassing facts about their club, Rangers fans should be most concerned by the fact that it is true. I can speak to the tax case, and state with certainty, that Rangers executives were fully aware that what they were doing was illegal, but went ahead with it for years anyway.

    I am not fabricating anything on here. It is very clear when I am speculating on what might happen next and what I know to be a fact about what has already happened. Bain has good reason to want to lay down smoke to cover his withdrawal.

  3. PAULMAC says:

    I tend to agree, the asset value is at a generous best…£25-£30m based on selling players at at a decent figure.

    However, selling players at anywhere near their highest value would be difficult, under the situation rangers face. It’s a buyers dream negotiating a sale price for a player from a distressed club in rangers position.

    Moving onto other assets within the club, tangible and intangible.

    The club still appear to have the stadium as £112m. Clearly this a questionable value and we would assume a far lower figure would be closer to it’s real value, considering its poor condition etc.

    They also list their other property as leasehold property at £3m. Not knowing the amount of land involved, but its location functionality would have that valuation at the top end also.

    Fixtures and fittings are listed at £3.5m, maybe they have gold and platinum bathroom taps or a Picasso hanging in the boardroom, but I can not imagine F&F amount to £3.5m

    Cash in Bank, unknown at this point, but at the last set of accounts June 2010, it was showing £368k. Given that was June I would expect there to be a working capital higher than this during a season. I guess if you acquire the club immediatly after season book renewal they could be sitting with £15m in the bank. Who knows?

    Intangible assets, listed as £11m, this applies to such things as subsidiary Company’s and brand names etc. they have 5 Company’s listed under Rangers. I doubt very much they are worth any value to anyone else other than Rangers and therefore these values are very subjectiveand their actual value in reality could be very small.

    So on relflection I would think £20m is closer to the asset figure, but as I say the unknown is when the season book money hits, if its in the bank..then it could be double that figure.

    What chance BP finding oil under Ibrox?

    Other factors to consider where do FIFA/UEFA stand on outstanding payments owed to clubs and from clubs?

  4. PAULMAC says:

    In certain newspapers today we had a suggestion that Mr. Bain was CONSIDERING an appeal against the UEFA punishment…

    This gives the impression that rangers where unfairly dealt with and that he is fighting the good fight against those (no pointing fingers) who have an anti rangers agenda!

    Compare this to Walter who was relieved because the punishment wasn’t as bad as he thought it could have been? Or Ally stating we are in big big trouble!

    Both the above positions appear to be at different ends of the spectrum.

    Mr. Bain I’m sorry to say needs to brush up on his PR skills, it appears evident he is playing to the gallery, and not very well at that!

  5. manila says:

    At what point does “dawn” happen with the rangers support?

    I’ll have a stab at this, with advanced apologies for the use of any generalisations. I don’t think the “dawn” will happen, not in any meaningful or collective way. Throughout my travels across the electronic hunderworld I have yet to encounter more than a few solitary voices seriously questioning Mr. Whyte’s motives, finances or suitability. Any genuine concerns are either quickly washed away by the tsunami of anti-Murray bile or drowned out in regurgitated Red Top propoganda. Absurd.

    Any “Call to Arms” is only ever after the event. Then we get to witness the full blow hun rhetoric delivered in the time honoured Churchillian brogue, invoking empire, days gone by and traditions. It never fails. Central to any of these uprisings is not the resolve to address the root cause of the issue, but a determination to find fault in their prosecutors. They’ve being doing it their way for so long that any criticisms are viewed as insanity. We therefore get, Heavy handed Spanish Police / 95% of UEFA are Catholic / The head of FARE is married to a Taig / Lennon brings it on himself / The bombs were sent by Tarriers / The Mhedia. No-one likes them, but contrary to what they would have you believe, they do care. And another bluemail campaign is launched.

    One group, historically the most vocal, that you would have expected to be raising concerns or at least questions on behalf of the wider Rangers support, has been conspicuously absent in recent weeks. Is the RST adopting the famed Dignified Silence but working furiously behind the scenes on their fellow fans behalf ? Or, are they not rocking the rowing boat in the hope that if the takeover comes to pass they can then return grovellingly to the new masters table in the hope of more crumbs. They are doing their members a gross diservice as they idly hope and pray for the New Dawn, any New Dawn. Where’s Edgar David when you need him?

    If and when The Rangers are obliterated by the L-Bomb, it might coalesce the support around the club, a new way might be formed, the traditional baggae might be dropped … it might, but i doubt it. In summary I see no prospect of the “dawn” occurring.

    Oh, and finally. I have this recurring nightmare that they are wiped out and forced to reform in the lower reaches of Scottish football as Turd Lanark and then go on to win consecutive promotions back to the SPL … and then the triumphalism returns. Say it aint so.

  6. gorillainaroom says:

    Sorry RTC but I’m sure you are used to my bizarre behaviour by now!

    Hey there Tullamore ghirl!!!!

    My wee irish mammy is from tullamore, cappincur in fact….. Just thought i may wave a wee paw!!!

  7. Torquemada says:

    The £4m owed for Jelavic…? Where has this juicy snippet come from, RTC?

    If the huns still owe money on him, that will have to be repaid first regardless of any restructuring of administration debt priorities – if Rangers want a licence to play football, that is. Uefa rules are explicit that all football debt takes priority, a source of chagrin for all non-football debtors.

    £4m still owed for Jellyfish – that would just be TOO good! lol!

  8. Blindlemonchitlin says:

    Martin Bain has a history of publicly fuming about slurs against his good name.

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/2006/06/15/exclusive-rangers-fury-at-150k-bung-slur-86908-17233406/

  9. Weefatbhoy says:

    Totally agree rtc

  10. Weefatbhoy says:

    Yeah Boab,

    It is the front only – But I was getting at the surrounding area m8 not the stadia, There has been enquiries in the past by DM & Co as to the possability of a Casino etc (Ha Ha!)

    However there was a (Real) possible plan for a supermarket construction in the area (DM had agreed a price on the land) but it was vetoed early on, The only way would be if Ibrox through time became a derelict eyesore (Half way there already lol)………………

  11. Lord Wobbly says:

    Manila said “I have this recurring nightmare that they are
    wiped out and forced to reform in the lower reaches of
    Scottish football as Turd Lanark and then go on to win
    consecutive promotions back to the SPL… and then the
    triumphalism returns.”

    In an alternate dream/universe, the club goes out of existance and the support is divided along a ‘fault’ line of sectarianism, the rabid festering curs on one side and decent folks on the other. We are now able to identify the minority. Each faction sets up a rival club: tbe R(abid) F(estering) C(urs) – shirt incorporates a sash and a red hand; and the R(eal) F(riendly) C(harity) – shirt incorporates a dove holding an olive branch in its beak. Will RFC chew up and spit out RFC (the perpetual darkness scenario) or, will RFC mark its territory in the lower leagues until it loses interest as RFC flies up the leagues (the truely new dawn scenario)?

  12. Blankety Blank Whyte Cheque Book but where's the pen?'s the pen? says:

    The funding of the Jelavic deal seemed odd at the time considering how skint Walter & Co were when whinging to the media, as lets face it poor Walter has had simply no money to spend for years (maybe Wlter counts £3m+ players as not really spending money?)

    RTC who funded the Jelavic deal if not LTSB?

  13. PAULMAC says:

    From the last set of full accounts there was an outstanding amount of £894k in Euros to trade creditors, I guess Jelevic can be added to this, how much has already been paid, who knows?

  14. Tommy D says:

    I was amazed last night when my brother in law – a rangers fan – quoted chapter and verse what the mainstream media have been feeding about the fakeover! He doesn’t believe that all of the media would lie about such an important subject.

    This is typical of the majority of rangers fans and why t is important that sites like this exist and thrive.

    My belief is that season ticket money is the aim and nothing else.

    I just wonder what the reaction for the majority will be when the establishment club goes belly up! How will the MSM portray their role in this I.e. Not reporting or investigating to the level they should have?

    Only one week to go till the FTT completes and then the Murray PR machine will click into top gear preparing the ground for the end game. Just the way Bain is trying to make himself look good to the masses by painting the picture that he is in some way a hero by the unrealistic statements he is making.

    Remember one thing Murray and Bain……what goes around comes around!!

  15. Auldheid says:

    I watched the first half of Motherwel v Rangers today and switched off at the second goal. What I noticed right before it were huge swathes of open space in the midfield with no Motherwell players close to the ball.

    When the goal arriived right after I knew it was going to be a rout. The question for me is not so much how well did Rangers play but where exactly did the Motherwell players go?

    If I were a player in a league who thought his job depended on the opposition being around next season to stop further loss of income, I’m not sure I would be making sure the opposition were being closed down and harried as if my job depended on it.

    However if I were playing a team whom I thought might prevent the team I think my future livliehood depends on from being around next season, I would be working my socks off.

    And that is what Celtic are up against, not sectariansim but the future livliehood of those they play against and until such times as Rangers go under or are seen as safe, Celtic will never be playing on a level playing field and the game will continue to be corrupted to keep Rangers afloat.

    Unless something happens to change the situation at Rangers before next season starts it will be more of the same. Everyone says Scottish football is dying and it is. It is dying because it is sick, it is sick because it is corrupt.
    The cause of the corruption is the state of Ranger FC and they simply cannot be allowed a licence to continue playing in the SPL without setting out exactly how they are going to run their business under the following scenarios.

    1. HMRC fail and they get takenover – the best case scenario.
    2. HMRC fail but no takeover.
    3. HMRC win but there is a takeover.
    4. HMRC win and no takeover.

    Under scenario 2 is it to be more of the same with their dependence on CL money so great that it corrupts the SPL? We would be fools to let them keep picking our pockets.

    In the interests of the integrity of our game which is essential for selling it to supporters these questions have to be asked by Celtic on behalf of our support. Football is too interdependent a business by nature to act as if what is going on at Rangers FC is not Celtic’s business.

    Celtic supporters as much as any other football supporter in Scotland including of course the Ranger’s support have a right to know exactly on what basis will Rangers be in business next season.

  16. Regarding funding of the Jelavic deal, see the progression of Rangers’ balance sheet from 2010-Interim, 2009-Interim in the image below:
    Rangers' balance sheet

    The long term debt is relatively unchanged from 30 June 2010 (not on graphic above) and 31 Dec 2010. That makes it very unlikely that Jelavic (reported to have cost £4m) was paid for with long-term debt. As of 30 June 2010, Rangers had a £19m term loan repayable at £1m per year. So the conclusion from the analysis of the balance sheet is that the Jelavic liability (however much it was- and we cannot tell from the balance sheet) was taken on as a shortterm liability. I have read rumours on messageboards that Rangers got the money from a company called Ticketus services 65 Ltd. If so, someone- either Jelavic himself or someone else- will need to be sold to pay them back.

  17. I agree with you. Let’s just assume that the Rangers support is 50% decent guys whose worst flaw is that they tolerate the bigots around them and the other half are their hardcore “traditionalists”.

    The decent half would start supporting local clubs, English or European teams, etc. The ability of a “Glasgow Rangers FC” to attract them back in a few years could be limited. Even the hardcore could splinter between the other central belt clubs with “traditional” leanings: Kilmarnock, Motherwell, Falkirk, Hearts. If the new Rangers club has to battle past these outfits, it is possible that even their most loyal of Rangers fan could be splintered.

    However, we need a result in the tax case before such issues become matters to lose sleep over.

  18. Ask Darrell King about what happens to Scottish journalists, even ones with impeccable Rangers supporting credentials, when they dare tell the truth.

    He had the tax story details in newsprint first. Either his sources went sour on him (I doubt that) or he was put off by the savaging he received from Rangers fans who just did not want to hear any bad news. Demographics in Scotland dictate that there is a financial penalty to be paid by printing bad news about Rangers. So it is very possible that the whole Scottish media would lie about such an issue:
    1. They lie because that is what the Rangers staff who feed them “exclusives” want them to do
    2. They lie because there are huge financial risks in getting in front of this story; the newspaper could be blamed for causing takeovers to collapse etc
    3. They lie because they do not want to admit the truth to themselves out of tribal loyalty.

  19. Much like the money taken from the Rangers Supporters Trust’s credit card machine by Mark DIngwall, I suspect that Bain repaid the agent who “helped” him buy a house in France after questions started to be asked. A truly innocent Martin Bain would have produced evidence of the timeline.

    I wonder why anyone would allow a business contact to buy them a house any way? Even if someone provided help with identifying a nice house in a nice area, you would say “thanks mate” and call a solicitor of your own. Very odd. 😉

    Some questions were being raised over Mr. Bain’s integrity internally as well. He got quite irrate about it.

  20. Boab says:

    A result against them at tribunal would cause huge problems, possibly leading to administration etc as we have discussed.

    However failing to win the SPL / qualifying for the Champions League would also cause them big problems. They simply cannot operate at the level they are doing without good European money. They would have no option but to cut even further than they have been doing. Which could conceivably have a snowball effect i.e. making SPL success less likely etc.

  21. Mark,
    We could spend many hours fruitlessly searching for clear definitions of where sectarianism stops and banter begins. The problem is that context plays such a huge part in distinguishing one from the other, so a black and white definition is impossible. I think we all enjoy the special passions underpinning the Celtic v Rangers rivalry. While some have clearly taken matters far too far, the recent upswing in tension was welcome in many ways as in the years prior to Lennon’s return, the fixture was in danger of becoming routine. It is a tough one for those of us who love the intensity of the rivalry but wish to decry bigotry. There is an element of hypocracy in all of us in this regard, but that is a long discussion that will go nowhere.
    On the tax case, some good for thought in your post. The Tories to rescue Rangers to revive their political fortunes? For Rangers fans to understand how serious the crisis really is, the club would have to be in administration already. Your hypothesis is as good as any: the government nods to HMRC to not oppose a takeover that would see Rangers continue? A definite possibility. Would the Tories really do it? Will the government fear the effects of the signal that sends to business owners at a time of fiscal crisis? Time will tell.
    I agree that Lloyds will prefer to not be on the stage when the curtain goes down, but if the Whyte deal is a fakeover or does not go through, they will have no choice.

    It is actually possible that Rangers’ best hopes of coming through this unscathed is for Lloyds and HMRC to be the parties who have to conclude a deal. If they decide that they don’t want to be caught in the reaction to a Rangers liquidation, they may agree a deal to divide the poceeds of a sale in administration. A private financial investor seeking only a profit will be much more likely to aggressively defend his right to get made whole in liquidation before anyone else gets a penny. That could guarantee liquidation. So Whyte (if real- and I have serious doubts) could be Rangers’ Grim Reaper.

  22. Guinnessjohn says:

    If Ticketus have been involved in the Jelavic deal he hasn`t been paid for yet . His previous club will

    have been paid but the modus operandi of Ticketus is to lend against future season book sales , in

    this case the ones RFC are trying to punt at the moment . They appear to be the place where

    football clubs go when all other credit options are closed to them . The link below gives a pretty

    good insight into how the company operates :

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A83104300

  23. Mikey says:

    In my nightmares Auldheid i see our board fully aware, whilst playing their part in aiding their plight!

    This gorilla in this room’s been around well before the elephant showed up.

  24. Boab says:

    That would explain how they were able to get him then, if this is what they did. They basically would have been borrowing against future season ticket sales. I wouldn’t imagine this is a particularly cheap way to borrow money. Though maybe the only one available if your bank weren’t willing to let you spend more.

  25. gorillainaroom says:

    So what if davie weir got embroidery on his top to celebrate the last wedding he was at?

    29th April Congratulations Adolf & Eva

  26. Torquemada says:

    The game in Scotland has been corrupt since 1922, mhate.

    23 (honest titles) and counting.

  27. Auldheid says:

    Aye but untril 2008 it was in the pursuit of triumphalsim, since then it has been meeting the cost of that pursuit.

  28. JohnBhoy says:

    Borrowing against future earnings is what led Plymouth and Watford to their current predicaments, teetering on the brink of liquidation.
    Interestingly, Watford are now run by a holdings company which has absorbed all the football club’s debt.
    Hmmm . . .

  29. Guinnessjohn says:

    johnbhoy , if you followed the link you`ll have noticed Watford fans were among the most bemused

    re the Ticketus connection .The thing I don`t get is how LBG tolerated this , if it happened . Think

    Wonga x a lot and that`s what we`re looking at here . You don`t borrow in these markets without

    paying a premium . Did RFC actually sell a % of season book sales , was the transaction secured

    to the potential detriment of LBG ? I aint no accountant , I don`t know .

  30. The whole rangers thing about being conspired against is symptomatic of a fundamental level of corporate incompetence that will (thankfully) undermine their intellectual ability to deal with most complex problems.

    A few examples:

    Firstly, Rangers are not at fault because their fans sing sectarian songs. It is the fault of FARE, an independent “unaccountable” body, who happens to have a CEO married to someone who likes Celtic. And this is why they grassed us up to UEFA

    Seriously? They had time to write their PR response and this is the output.
    Credible no. Embarrassing yes, as it shows them to be rubbish.
    The fact most elements of the Scottish media bought this is not a surprise. I say most as I have found 1 exception – which was a surprise in itself

    Also for a body deemed unaccountable” … they do have surprisingly close links with UEFA & FIFA.
    Again, I do not believe “unaccountable” is strictly true, but such suggestions are in line with behaviours I believe are prevalent in the intellect of inadequate & incompetent Executives.

    But feel free to check out the FARE ‘About Us” page and draw your own conclusions:
    http://www.farenet.org/default.asp?intPageID=6.

    As a treat here is a rarity in Scottish journalism … I’m not a huge fan of Tom English by any means but this article did surprise me … Page 3 verifies the claims of FARE.
    http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/tom-english/Tom-English-39If-you39re-guilty.6753199.jp?articlepage=3.

    Here he states rangers fans sang sectarian songs during the PSV game. I am “surprised” how this was completely overlooked by every other scottish journalists. Maybe they have the same view of sectarian singing as William Campbell from the Northern Irish Football Association (he was the UEFA rep at the Rangers – PSV game).

    This ‘it wasnae us’ mindset appears to be at the forefront of all matters relating to tax too – which, with hindsight, I now view as a marvel

    Rangers are not at fault for utilising tax avoidance strategies for years.
    It is the fault of the HMRC for noticing this.

    I think the Rangers board would have been brilliant in Scooby Doo ….
    “If it wasn’t for them darn pesky kids”
    … or Anti Racism organisations
    … or Government Tax Authorities
    … etc etc etc

    Come to think of it .. Maybe Scooby Doo should apply for a job on the rangers board.

  31. JohnBhoy says:

    The Scottish Press in June 2006 publicised Bain’s furious denial of wrongdoing.
    They didn’t publicy the claim by Vitesse Arnhem’s MD Jan Streuer that cash given to him by Stojic after transfers was also a personal loan (generous guy, this Stojic).
    Neither did they cover a report in Le Parisien newspaper in December 2006 that revealed that the 148,115 Euros paid into the Rothschild bank in Monnaco was into an account named Mendricka opened on August 19, 2004, the day before Boumsong’s transfer was completed.
    Le Parisien stated: “The reason for the transfer of funds could not be clearer – ‘Commission for the president of Glasgow in the transfer of Boumsong from Auxerre to Rangers’ reads a document sent by the judicial authoritaries in Monaco. Prosecution investigators were able to obtain this information with the help of Patrice Sam, a specialist in international financial movements.”
    Hmmm . . .

  32. Paulsatim says:

    Found this on CM, thought it was apt and quite funny………

    It will be 24-48 hours after the Royal Wedding, if not it will be when the banks open. Failing that it will be 48 hours after the independent vetting committee agree for the takeover committee to tell Craig Whyte he has till Friday to say where all the money is coming from. Once Friday comes it might be next Tuesday before David Murray and Lloyds instruct the takeover committee to authorise the independent vetting committee to confirm to the source representing Craig Whyte that if he irons out the couple of wee problems then they will ask the two committees to discuss with Alastair Johnstone if it is okay for Craig Whyte to speak to the bank and tell them that he has all the money. There will then be a 24-48 hour delay for Alastair Jonhstone to jet in and confirm with Craig Whyte he has a warchest of £20m to spend before he recommends to the takeover committee that they should ask the independant vetting committee to seek assurances from Craig Whyte that he has spoken to Lloyds and assured them he’s not just kidding on about all this. Once Whyte, and Lioyds and Murray have agreed the sale there will then be a deadline of the middle of next week for both committees to seek assurances they have all spoken to each other…..AND BY THAT TIME ALL THE SEASON TICKET MONEY SHOULD BE IN!

  33. andycol says:

    Apparently this in tomorrow’s NOTW

    CRAIG WHYTE will walk away from his Rangers takeover if it doesn’t go through early this week.
    The tycoon is furious at the stalling tactics used by Ibrox board members against his bid.
    And the Motherwell-born investor has issued an ultimatum – either Gers accept his £55million buyout or he will pull the plug.
    An insider close to the tense negotiations said: “Whyte is so angry at the whole thing taking so long that he is going to walk away.
    “He has told parties involved if the deal isn’t done by close of play on Tuesday, it’s finished. Unless he sees real movement from Rangers when the stock market closes, he is pulling out.
    “The wheels better be in motion come Tuesday, or he’s killing the plan. It’s crunch time. He’s in deadline mode now.”The waiting game is over for him. Rangers need to get their fingers out now.”
    A faction inside Ibrox has been opposed to Whyte’s investment in the club from the get-go, our source confirmed. However, Whyte is reluctant to give up on his dream of owning the champions and breathing new life into the club.
    Even boss-in-waiting Ally McCoist, 48, has admitted Gers will be “in big trouble” if the Whyte take-over doesn’t go ahead.
    McCoist, who has only four games left as Walter Smith’s No 2, warned his players’ wages bill is being slashed and he will have no money to spend on strengthening the squad.
    He said: “If things stay the same I will have to cut quite severely.”
    Whyte and his co-bidder, London-based property developer Andrew Ellis, 42, have already set up the company which will take over the club.
    Wavetower Limited was formed in Bristol last September, then switched its address to a firm of solicitors in London a month later when Ellis joined the board.
    Whyte became a director in March along with a long-standing business partner, Philip Betts. With all the aspects of the deal in place, Whyte hopes to wrap up the deal when the London Stock Exchange reopens for business on Tuesday.
    Our source said: “Whyte has lost patience with factions opposed to his investment. This has cost him around £750,000 of his own money to get where we are now.”
    The venture capitalist has had to leave a lot of his other international business interests for the last six months. Our insider added: “More than anything he feels sorry for the fans, who have had to put up with this protracted saga. Craig deeply regrets the situation they find themselves in, but it hasn’t been from a lack of effort on his part.”
    Whyte met members of the board last Sunday for face-to-face talks at Murray Park after the Old Firm clash. He gave the board all the figures, went through the details of the deal, showed his investment plans and provided financial guarantees during a 5pm sit-down.
    Whyte only took the meeting to go through everything again after news of a rival offer emerged from inside the boardroom last week.
    It was claimed that director Paul Murray, 46, and South African-based Dave King, 55, were behind a last-ditch attempt to get Sir David Murray’s shares.
    However, no further details of this alleged bid have emerged. King is still mired in a decade-long court battle with the South African authorities over allegations of unpaid tax and his own five per cent stake in the club has been frozen by the courts.
    Our source said: “Whyte knows there are people at Ibrox who’d be happy for him to walk away. But he doesn’t want to let them win.
    “As far as he’s concerned there is no other bid on the table. Whatever else has been written or said, there is no other take-over deal at Ibrox.
    “He has satisfied everybody that matters. Lloyds, Sir David Murray, and all the working capital, and the investment capital is in place. All the assurances have been given.
    “But there are people who don’t want the deal done. They are involved in stalling tactics. Some members of the independent committee at Rangers should take a close look at themselves.”
    Present owner Murray, 59, is believed to have backed Whyte’s bid and wants an end to all the backroom infighting. He is desperate to help secure Rangers’ financial future and sees Whyte as the only viable option.
    A Murray insider said: “Sir David doesn’t want to leave Rangers in debt, or while the acrimony and boardroom bickering continues.
    “He wants to be able to say ‘I left Rangers with no debts, this is my legacy to the fans.’ He is worried anything tarnishes his reputation.”
    Last night Whyte refused to comment on his position regarding the Rangers take-over. A spokesman said: “Mr Whyte cannot comment on any aspect of the deal because of Stock Exchange rules.
    “Having said that, it is no secret that he is very frustrated by all the delays. He is the only party in this long, drawn-out process, who has never put a deadline on getting it over the line. But no one’s patience is limitless.”

  34. andycol says:

    Sorry I should have said that was liifted from The Huddleboard.

  35. tomtom says:

    Present owner Murray, 59, is believed to have backed Whyte’s bid and wants an end to all the backroom infighting. He is desperate to help secure Rangers’ financial future and sees Whyte as the only viable option.
    A Murray insider said: “Sir David doesn’t want to leave Rangers in debt, or while the acrimony and boardroom bickering continues.
    “He wants to be able to say ‘I left Rangers with no debts, this is my legacy to the fans.’ He is worried anything tarnishes his reputation.”

    Does this man live on a planet near us? If (very big if here) the deal goes ahead the debt is being transferred not cancelled. But maybe he has also convinced himself that he doesn’t owe £700m to the banks.

  36. droid says:

    Rhoamin, in the ghloamin, with a civic rit in my hand

    Rhoamin in the ghloamin with a QC by my side,

    And when their fundin stops, bless her and the financial cops

    Oh it’s good to be a TAX PAAYERRR

  37. Ian Ferguson says:

    If the TICKETUS story is true it would explain a lot!

    If the sad sacks don’t renew their season books then RFC maybes won’t be there to see the tax bill.

    I would fall over laughing if, after spending a FORTUNE to defer a tax bill THEY fell foul to their “strategy” of going for outside funding.

    The last time they tried that MINTY had to cobble up a £50m LOAN to cover the fact that the PEEPEL couldn’t get a crisis loan to buy shares.

  38. Ian Ferguson says:

    You and auldheid are both right.
    Celtic have been done dirty with decisions over the years.

    Over the last few years it has gone back to the darkest times.

    RFC critical financial position has dictated the results, SCOTTISH bias has ensured they have survived so far.

  39. Ian Ferguson says:

    IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN APOLOGY TO THE TAXMAN ON THEIR SHIRTS.

  40. Boumsong? Boumsong? Why does that name seem familiar? It is on the tip of my tongue. For some reason, I think that name is significant.

  41. Lord Wobbly says:

    Tom English is at it again.

    sport.scotsman.com/football/Tom-English-39Once-again-Bain.6760591.jp

    Now, if only he would apply a similar logic to other areas of Rangers ‘PR’ work. “…and stop with this embarrassing game of deflection.”

  42. ciarans Dad says:

    It’s strange that yet again the independent board set up to ratify any deal minty does, is good for der Hun has once again stalled the fakeover.
    Is it just me or does anyone else see Dave kings paws all over this as he longs to be master mason and lord of darkness.
    He was central to the other last minute bid and is stalling while trying to find a way round SARS block on his share movements. It would also make sense that he is the overall problem as alluded to by RTC that the ‘Whyte Knight’ needs his shares to not only make his dastardly plan work, but also to get the last of the funding he needs. Me thinks this has quite a way to go yet.

    On another matter it is again hunbelievable to read today’s chip wrappers and pore over their take on this never ending saga. You could be forgiven for thinking they had no problems. Did jabba not proclaim during the week that the imminently imminent deal wool take place thursday.
    If I was as piss poor at my job as these floundering hacks I would be joining the ranks of the unemployed alongside that festering sore David Leggat (leggoland)
    Do they never think they have to account for the made up pish they scribble on a day to day basis to salve the marauding hordes desires.
    Not one has made any attempts to speak with the main characters in this car crash soap opera. A bigger dereliction of duty I cannot think of!!!!

    Anyhows, off to join the good guys on our bus on way to what I hope will be a resounding thrashing of the Dundee Huns. Hail Hail

  43. ramsay smith says:

    Why would Whyte spend £750,000 OF HIS OWN MONEY on due diligence when his fellow bidder carried out due diligence just a few months ago?

    Unless, of course, it’s all just a great big charade.

    And as for the company being set up to carry out the dirty deed? Sounds like a bog standard off the shelf job. No mention either of RFC Holdings (Guernsey) Limited (Andrew Ellis), which, in spite of the fact it’s still shown on the takeover panel’s disclosure table, was wound up last month.

  44. Tommy D says:

    lol the funniest but most accurate account of the fakeover……well done Paul 😉

  45. AlDosser says:

    Auldheid

    Found most of your posts thought out & thought provoking but you’ve abandoned all logic here.

    Motherwell’s best interests are served by celtic winning the title and ‘Well getting into to Europe for a 4th consecutive season on the back of being runners up in the Cup. Of course as a season ticket holder at FP I want to see Claret & Amber ribbons on the trophy come 21st May, but realistically when we come up against teams who can pay 10 times our average first team salary to mere squad players we will always struggle. That is what happened yesterday and, unless celtic have an off day at the end of May, is the likely outcome in the final.

    Seriously which do you think the more likely
    a) A conspiracy by every professional in the game to lie down to rangers in the league run-in
    b) A team with a stronger squad beating an injury depleted side with players having half an eye on a the biggest game of their careers?

  46. The interesting aspect is why has Murray authorised English to go after Bain?

    English does not scratch his nose in relation to Rangers without getting Murray’s permission (often just writing articles at the specific request of Murray).

    So why is Murray releasing the hounds on Bain? Has Bain’s efforts to paint himself as defender of Rangers’ fans got Murray worried that will be left in the crosshairs when everything goes down?

  47. Mark Dickson says:

    some thoughts from recent days

    1. it’s not a ‘fakeover’ imo – a fakeover simply doesn’t make sense given how many people would now have to be in on in or duped into thinking it was real. Also if it was just a sham it wouldn’t solve any problems for LBG and Murray who need out asap, if it wasn’t real what is the point of pretending it was? Would just be wasting everybodies time including their own and confounding the thinking of even their own manager. Put it this way a few thousand ST’s is nowt compared to a massive tax bill. The takeover has to be real even if it was very, tenuous, speculative, contentious and touch n go from whyte for a long time and also with some opposition within RFC

  48. Mark Dickson says:

    the media are scared to report unfavourably on the current or would be owners of Rangers not because they don’t have dirt to dish it’ssimply not in their commercial interest to make enemies or alienate the current or future owners of ibrox until the takeover and taxcase is resolved one way or the other. If whyte fails expect a hatchet job but if he succeeds the truth about him will be put away on the shelf as their sports desks will seek his approval and patronage just as they court favour from murray, bain, desmond, lawwell etc. media access matters more than journalistic truth to them sadly.

  49. Mark Dickson says:

    this is the one thing that really gets my goat about rangers and celtic fans and their arguments and conspiracy about who is gettin the most favour or least favour from match officials or other teams etc. Both teams get more controversial decisions and non-decisions in their favour compared to the rest of the teams they play in the SPL but they close their eyes to that, all that matters is if it’s rangers or celtic that’s perceived as receiving the most favour or bias, the injustices their opponents suffer are never considered. Shocking hypocrisy imo!

  50. tomtom says:

    My thoughts:

    I agree that it is not a fakeover (at least not from the point of view of Lloyds and Murray). I have already made my views clear on the whole Whyte/Ellis tie up.

    I do believe however that Lloyds and Murray are so desperate to get rid of Rangers that they are prepared to sell it to any party that looks as if they can pay the purchase price. Unfortunately the only person at the moment appears to be Whyte and despite Murray’s stated desire to sell to “someone who has Rangers interests at heart” no such person has emerged. That the consortium that Whyte fronts (let’s get rid of the pretence that he is acting alone) does not have the funds is patently obvious but as they are the only show in town Lloyds and Murray have to go along with them until they run out of excuses. Hence the tolerance of the stalling tactics.

    However Lloyds desire to get rid of such a small debt in relation to the total debts of MIH is, for me, puzzling. Rangers appear to be trading in the black and are paying substantial interest on the debt. What are Lloyds going to do with the money they get for Rangers? Probably lend it to other businesses at a lower rate of interest. So that leads me to the conclusion that there are, with apologies to Donald Rumsfeld, know unknowns that are scaring the preverbial out of Lloyds with regards to Rangers. Maybe it is HMRC but if Lloyds are as covered with the guarantees as everyone seems to think they are then this would not be a problem. Generally as long as a bank has sufficient security over a loan, and they are comfortable with the way the company is being run, they will not cause you any grief (In the course of my business I borrow considerable sums from my bank so I can speak with experience on this) but any deviation from the norm will set alarm bells ringing. If the Ticketus speculation is correct, and this is the first time that Rangers have went down this route, then the bank would have been cacking themselves. Factoring, and that’s what this is, your debts to an external source is the nightmare scenario for any bank. Someone on here with a better grasp of accountancy law can let us know who has first call on the money in these circumstances. If Rangers are seen to be getting funding from other sources without the approval of Lloyds, and after all they have their own factoring arm, this would not have gone down well with the powers that be at Lloyds. I think it is probably safe to assume that Lloyds were not a party to this deal. When was the bank’s man appointed to the board? If it was shortly after this alleged deal happened you have your answer.

    So in a nutshell, and I stress it is only my humble opinion, there are problems at Ibrox that have yet to come into the public domain. Lloyds are running scared and are putting pressure on Murray to get this or any deal done. Interestingly enough it reminds me of a similar scenario in the early 90’s when RBS were Rangers bankers. They were terrified (FOR THE RECORD A SOURCE AT RBS’s WORDS NOT MINE) of what was happening at Ibrox and couldn’t get rid to the account quickly enough. It seems that some things never change. And also for the record if anyone from Ibrox and/or their legal team is reading this and wants to dispute the fact then I am quite happy for RTC to give them my contact details.

%d bloggers like this: