Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[number9dream]

Complete fantasy...

“I am also still dealing with the Takeover Panel (“TP”) following complaints by the old board and supporters of other clubs to hold me personally liable to make an offer for all the non-consortium shares of RIFC.”

He acted in concert with others to gain more than 30% and simply has to comply with the law and make an offer for the rest of the shares. It’s got nothing to do with the old board or other fans. The above assertion is just ludicrous!

[CropleyWasGod]

Complete fantasy...

“I am also still dealing with the Takeover Panel (“TP”) following complaints by the old board and supporters of other clubs to hold me personally liable to make an offer for all the non-consortium shares of RIFC.”

He acted in concert with others to gain more than 30% and simply has to comply with the law and make an offer for the rest of the shares. It’s got nothing to do with the old board or other fans. The above assertion is just ludicrous!

To be pedantic, he's no longer dealing with the TP. It's the Courts that are his problem now. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Complete fantasy...

“I am also still dealing with the Takeover Panel (“TP”) following complaints by the old board and supporters of other clubs to hold me personally liable to make an offer for all the non-consortium shares of RIFC.”

He acted in concert with others to gain more than 30% and simply has to comply with the law and make an offer for the rest of the shares. It’s got nothing to do with the old board or other fans. The above assertion is just ludicrous!

I think it was the outgoing chairman (Somers) that first raised the issue of King and the 3 Bears being in concert.

[number9dream]

I think it was the outgoing chairman (Somers) that first raised the issue of King and the 3 Bears being in concert.

It’s not about who grassed (Lee Wallace?). It’s about the laws governing financial takeovers. DK appears to think he shouldn’t be constrained by such mere inconveniences...

[Famous Fiver]

He mentions 'inevitable setbacks'

Is that Traynorspeak for us regularly skelping them?

[Ozyhibby]

It’s a very child like rant but there appears to be nothing of any substance in it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

It’s a very child like rant but there appears to be nothing of any substance in it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A description that we could file away and use for pretty much any of Der Huns propoganda statements from their bunkers

[ancient hibee]

He treats Rangers supporters(rightly?)as imbeciles .He talks about the expense in sacking managers as if he had nothing to do with hiring them.Yet again he claims the TP changed the rules about where funds had to be held.The Panel had a large part of its statement refuting this.He has no regard for the truth and they lap it up.

[Deansy]

He treats Rangers supporters(rightly?)as imbeciles .He talks about the expense in sacking managers as if he had nothing to do with hiring them.Yet again he claims the TP changed the rules about where funds had to be held.The Panel had a large part of its statement refuting this.He has no regard for the truth and they lap it up.

Can't fault the man for knowing his 'customers' - the fact that what they see/hear from him is complete and utter keech is of no consequence to King !

[brog]

Fantastic! Makes Trump look logical & articulate!

[Rumble de Thump]

A 2-0 will aggregate win over two legs, including a penalty in extra time is comfortable? Against a team that finished 40 points behind the winner of the Macedonian league? The Rangers may well get demolished by the SPFL's cannon fodder this season.

[Joe6-2]

A 2-0 will aggregate win over two legs, including a penalty in extra time is comfortable? Against a team that finished 40 points behind the winner of the Macedonian league? The Rangers may well get demolished by the SPFL's cannon fodder this season.

Can only hope so!

[Keith_M]

Fantastic! Makes Trump look logical & articulate!


That's funny, because I was thinking of Trump while reading his rant/statement.


TBF, King is nowhere near as inarticulate as Drumpf. Just as paranoid, though.

[jacomo]

Statement time again. Think that’s 2 already this season
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/dave-king-supporter-update/


Am I reading too much into this, or are the Rangers trying to distance themselves from the glib and shameless one.

Previously this might be a Club Statement but now it’s a Dave King Supporter Update.

EDIT: might also be the first time King has acknowledged ‘a minority of vociferous supporters’ who are against him. Seems like the stakes are getting higher.

[jacomo]

How has he still not got a UK bank account?

How can he claim £11m is available when his QC pleads poverty to the court?

He is indeed a Trump. Just assume everything he says is a lie and you won’t go too far wrong.

[PatHead]

Statement time again. Think that’s 2 already this season
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/dave-king-supporter-update/

Really sensible statement from a man facing a contempt of court hearing.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/football-governance/disciplinary/disciplinary-updates/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Case going to court of arbitration for sport. Hopefully that will be more transparent. Legal fees for everyone will rocket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billy Whizz]

Case going to court of arbitration for sport. Hopefully that will be more transparent. Legal fees for everyone will rocket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a bit gobbledygook for me, what have they done wrong this time

[Ozyhibby]

It’s a bit gobbledygook for me, what have they done wrong this time

Sevco have said under the terms of the 5 way agreement any notice of complaint has to go to CAS. Judicial panel have agreed.
Very expensive.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/sfa-must-go-to-cas-to-pursue-case-against-rangers-1-4771234/amp?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spike Mandela]

More kicking into the long grass by Rangers, no doubt advised from within the SFA.

Petrie up to his neck in this five way agreement as well, it stinks.

[greenginger]

Sevco have said under the terms of the 5 way agreement any notice of complaint has to go to CAS. Judicial panel have agreed.
Very expensive.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Where does the CAS meet and what powers do they have ?

[JeMeSouviens]

Where does the CAS meet and what powers do they have ?

Lausanne, and I imagine they won't hear a case unless both sides agree to be bound by their decision.

[Ozyhibby]

Where does the CAS meet and what powers do they have ?

Their powers are huge I think. They are in Switzerland. I’m a bit confused why Sevco would want to risk going there unless they just want to delay things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Their powers are huge I think. They are in Switzerland. I’m a bit confused why Sevco would want to risk going there unless they just want to delay things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That, and the need to be seen to be not surrendering. :cb

[Ozyhibby]

https://thecelticblog.com/2018/07/blogs/sevco-wants-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-to-issue-them-a-get-of-jail-free-card-for-a-decade-of-cheating/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Captain Trips]

5 way agreement now I know what the 5 stars on the Sevco top are for.

[Bostonhibby]

Their powers are huge I think. They are in Switzerland. I’m a bit confused why Sevco would want to risk going there unless they just want to delay things.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkAny idea how high grass grows in Switzerland, and if it's a particularly slow growing variety?

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Any idea how high grass grows in Switzerland, and if it's a particularly slow growing variety?

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

Does it really matter, hon?

:cb

[Spike Mandela]

That, and the need to be seen to be not surrendering. :cb

For me it’s the other way round. The SFA will now cite that the expense involved of going to CAS will be prohibitive and drop it like they did eith the SPFL requested inquiry into the handling of the EBT scandal.

Corrupt as **** and not a glove laid on Rangers bbeautifully choreographed by the SFA and it’s secretive 5 way agreement.

Depends now I would suggest on resolution 12 people and their influence.

[CropleyWasGod]

For me it’s the other way round. The SFA will now cite that the expense involved of going to CAS will be prohibitive and drop it like they did eith the SPFL requested inquiry into the handling of the EBT scandal.

Corrupt as **** and not a glove laid on Rangers bbeautifully choreographed by the SFA and it’s secretive 5 way agreement.

Depends now I would suggest on resolution 12 people and their influence.

It's RFC who are taking the SFA to the CAS, no?

[Spike Mandela]

It's RFC who are taking the SFA to the CAS, no?

Apparently so, yes and my previous post is what I think will happen.

[Spike Mandela]

Surprise surprise

Chris Jack

In response to the ruling, RFC said: 'Rangers has always been clear about the futility of this action and hopes the Scottish FA will now put the matter to bed and agree to move on and concentrate on the development of Scottish Football in the interests of all members of the SFA.’

[Bostonhibby]

Does it really matter, hon?

:cbI'm interested in grass

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Spike Mandela]

This will be interesting.....

STATEMENT
Hearts chief executive Ann Budge apologies for the fielding of an ineligible player in last night's League Cup group stage win over Cove Rangers, due to an administrator error.

An SPFL hearing has been arranged for Monday 23rd July. #SSN😱

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm interested in grass

Sent from my SM-J320FN using TapatalkThe hills are alive with them.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

The hills are alive with them.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk☺ it's a Lincolnshire thing. Nae hills down here.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180719/e46d2b5f76d32a190bb05ad54c3ba299.jpg
Their players aren’t the sharpest. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

☺ it's a Lincolnshire thing. Nae hills down here.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using TapatalkYou're no taking the bait here [emoji21]

I feel like I've a mountain to climb....

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

You're no taking the bait here [emoji21]

I feel like I've a mountain to climb....

Sent from my SM-A520F using TapatalkI can feel a song coming on,

Ford every stream, follow every bye way. .... etc



Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Captain Trips]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180719/e46d2b5f76d32a190bb05ad54c3ba299.jpg
Their players aren’t the sharpest. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Gerrard puts his latest signing through his paces:



http://www.thatsentertainmentproductions.co.uk/images/VarietyMagic/Jimmy%20Cricket.jpg

[PatHead]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16357965.dave-king-will-face-court-ordered-contempt-hearing-over-11m-rangers-shares-bid-failure/

Up in court on Friday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any updates anyone?

[Ozyhibby]

Any updates anyone?

Two day evidence hearing on 14th August. Say one thing for King, he is good at kicking the can down the road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

From the SFM site....


Today in Court( further to eJ’s posts)

Before Lord Bannatyne, Court 7, Parliament House.

Mr X ( I didn’t catch his name ) for the Takeover Panel,and one lawyer
Lord Davidson for the Respondent (Mr King), and two lawyers.

3 gentlemen of the Press, and eJ and I in the public gallery. No one else other than the Clerk,and the macer.

QC for the TOP: You will have seen, my Lord, the most recent ‘adjustments’ since 22nd June?
Lord B: (nods)
QC: I have three observations to make. First,The Respondent has not made an offer-nothing has been done since last April.

Secondly,the Court has already rejected the contention that there are no funds. The arguments are the same old arguments under a new guise. The Court is not about how the offer is to be made, but that it is made.

Third, on the Rangers FC website there is Dave King’s ‘supporters update’. I have a copy of it here, m’Lord , [ copy handed up]. The first page is about football, the second page is about off-field matters and the Takeover Panel. The second paragraph refers to South Africa, and funds……

Lord B: Yes, I saw it reported in the Times.

QC: ……. The delay has been caused by the Respondent.. there is the phrase ‘no end in sight’. And ‘no end in sight’? -it would be if there was compliance!

Lord B: I agree. I can’t personally deal but it could be by another judge in very short order: in a two-day hearing on 14 August.

I suggest I allow adjustment until August 7 , I imagine that there is nothing much more by way of ‘adjustment’. A proof. Whether discussion between Counsel could lead to an offer? Rather than King writing back and forth to the Takeover Panel?

QC: A two-day proof sounds about right. There might be a difficulty about dates ?

Lord B: Another judge has availability……Lord Davidson, have you anything to add?

Lord Davidson (QC for King): No, m’Lord.

Lord B: Can you agree that discussion with counsel could cut across the toing and froing? The Takeover Panel is interested only in compliance, not the ‘how’.

Lord Davidson: (smiling)My lord’s observations will be conveyed to Mr King. In his defence, the Takeover Panel contributed to delay by requiring him to move monies to the UK.

Lord B: I leave it to my Clerk to agree a date in August. I might have to impose a date, though.
Thank you.

Proceedings lasted no more than 20 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180720/5b0413cd80ba6159460326810b383e88.png
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180720/c39ea5ccc3c1f408c2d1c4ea1ed16318.png
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/44901139?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deansy]

From the SFM site....


Today in Court( further to eJ’s posts)

Before Lord Bannatyne, Court 7, Parliament House.

Mr X ( I didn’t catch his name ) for the Takeover Panel,and one lawyer
Lord Davidson for the Respondent (Mr King), and two lawyers.

3 gentlemen of the Press, and eJ and I in the public gallery. No one else other than the Clerk,and the macer.

QC for the TOP: You will have seen, my Lord, the most recent ‘adjustments’ since 22nd June?
Lord B: (nods)
QC: I have three observations to make. First,The Respondent has not made an offer-nothing has been done since last April.

Secondly,the Court has already rejected the contention that there are no funds. The arguments are the same old arguments under a new guise. The Court is not about how the offer is to be made, but that it is made.

Third, on the Rangers FC website there is Dave King’s ‘supporters update’. I have a copy of it here, m’Lord , [ copy handed up]. The first page is about football, the second page is about off-field matters and the Takeover Panel. The second paragraph refers to South Africa, and funds……

Lord B: Yes, I saw it reported in the Times.

QC: ……. The delay has been caused by the Respondent.. there is the phrase ‘no end in sight’. And ‘no end in sight’? -it would be if there was compliance!

Lord B: I agree. I can’t personally deal but it could be by another judge in very short order: in a two-day hearing on 14 August.

I suggest I allow adjustment until August 7 , I imagine that there is nothing much more by way of ‘adjustment’. A proof. Whether discussion between Counsel could lead to an offer? Rather than King writing back and forth to the Takeover Panel?

QC: A two-day proof sounds about right. There might be a difficulty about dates ?

Lord B: Another judge has availability……Lord Davidson, have you anything to add?

Lord Davidson (QC for King): No, m’Lord.

Lord B: Can you agree that discussion with counsel could cut across the toing and froing? The Takeover Panel is interested only in compliance, not the ‘how’.

Lord Davidson: (smiling)My lord’s observations will be conveyed to Mr King. In his defence, the Takeover Panel contributed to delay by requiring him to move monies to the UK.

Lord B: I leave it to my Clerk to agree a date in August. I might have to impose a date, though.
Thank you.

Proceedings lasted no more than 20 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Oooh that reads good - if I still smoked I'd be reaching for a cigarette right now .............................

[Billy Whizz]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44901139

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-scotland-scotland-business-44908488?__twitter_impression=true

SMSM may be turning against King at last.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PatHead]

Really sensible statement from a man facing a contempt of court hearing.

Looks like I was right about it not being sensible. Court didn’t like it one bit.

[Ozyhibby]

http://thenational.scot/news/16368845.court-orders-rangers-chairman-dave-king-to-make-11m-share-offer/

Still going with the nonsense that Sevco shares can be sold at 27p a share. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

I can't believe a section of the Media have finally had the guts to tell it like it is:


"He did so this week with his start-of-season message to fans. Published on the Rangers website, this was intended to fuel a sense of Ibrox grievance that Rangers' financial difficulties are down to vexatious complaints from other clubs and former directors.
It's almost as if the Companies Act 2006 was not crystal clear on him being in the wrong, or that the Takeover Panel was unable to make up its own mind without pressure from the terracing at Parkhead.


Not for the first time, a Rangers chairman in difficulties has appealed to the faithful to back him against the perceived injustices of the outside world. And not for the first time, many of the Rangers faithful have failed to distinguish between the interests of their club and those of its chairman. "


(From the BBC link posted earlier)

[Jack Hackett]

I can't believe a section of the Media have finally had the guts to tell it like it is:


"He did so this week with his start-of-season message to fans. Published on the Rangers website, this was intended to fuel a sense of Ibrox grievance that Rangers' financial difficulties are down to vexatious complaints from other clubs and former directors.
It's almost as if the Companies Act 2006 was not crystal clear on him being in the wrong, or that the Takeover Panel was unable to make up its own mind without pressure from the terracing at Parkhead.


Not for the first time, a Rangers chairman in difficulties has appealed to the faithful to back him against the perceived injustices of the outside world. And not for the first time, many of the Rangers faithful have failed to distinguish between the interests of their club and those of its chairman. "


(From the BBC link posted earlier)


That'll be the Business/Economy Editor of the BBC barred from Ipox then.

[Deansy]

I can't believe a section of the Media have finally had the guts to tell it like it is:


"He did so this week with his start-of-season message to fans. Published on the Rangers website, this was intended to fuel a sense of Ibrox grievance that Rangers' financial difficulties are down to vexatious complaints from other clubs and former directors.
It's almost as if the Companies Act 2006 was not crystal clear on him being in the wrong, or that the Takeover Panel was unable to make up its own mind without pressure from the terracing at Parkhead.


Not for the first time, a Rangers chairman in difficulties has appealed to the faithful to back him against the perceived injustices of the outside world. And not for the first time, many of the Rangers faithful have failed to distinguish between the interests of their club and those of its chairman. "


(From the BBC link posted earlier)

Basically King's just taking a leaf out of 'Stupor Ally's play-book as he did with his infamous demand for names of the SFA disciplinary-panel - it's an under-handed message to the hordes to 'Let the death-threats begin' !

[Keith_M]

Basically King's just taking a leaf out of 'Stupor Ally's play-book as he did with his infamous demand for names of the SFA disciplinary-panel - it's an under-handed message to the hordes to 'Let the death-threats begin' !


Or Chuckles Green and his claims that anybody that didn't agree with him was an anti-Rangers 'Bigot'.

Some of their knuckle dragging Fans still use the term as a defence mechanism.

[HoboHarry]

Or Chuckles Green and his claims that anybody that didn't agree with him was an anti-Rangers 'Bigot'.

Some of their knuckle dragging Fans still use the term as a defence mechanism.
I'm not sure that Charles Green believed that, more inclined to think he was playing them for the fools that they are.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm not sure that Charles Green believed that, more inclined to think he was playing them for the fools that they are.

As is King.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

As is King.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not a shadow of a doubt.

[ancient hibee]

That'll be the Business/Economy Editor of the BBC barred from Ipox then.

Think he was lucky that the really hard hitting stuff was only in the print version not in his Reporting Scotland report.

[Ozyhibby]

I took this from the bottom of this article but I think they are very important questions.


https://thecelticblog.com/2018/07/blogs/the-five-way-agreement-is-the-rotting-black-heart-of-scottish-football-corruption/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

—————————

Is every professional club in Scotland subject to the same disciplinary code?

We are going to find out very soon, but the existence of a document which essentially gives one of them a sort of blanket immunity from past sins is something no other football body in the world would permit. It is clear that Sevco has conducted itself in a truly appalling fashion throughout its short history, with everything from statements that bring the game into disrepute and for which nothing was done, to the behaviour of its fans about which nothing is ever done.

The club does seem to exist in a world where rules don’t apply … perhaps that’s because they have it in writing.

Does the SFA have a disciplinary process that applies to only one club and if so why, and how can they possibly justify that?

As an adjunct to the first question this is vital.

Because Sevco does not seem subject to the same processes and procedures as only clubs either. How can it be that this investigation took so long in the first place? What made this different from every other allegation that the Judicial Review Board has to consider? Politics, yes. But the way this was done still stinks. It took an age to report in the first place, and now the case has been handed off elsewhere?

Can all member clubs of the SFA refuse to have their rule breaking adjudicated by the National Association?

Vitally important.

Sevco is actually telling the SFA that is has no right to open this case, and the SFA has somehow, perversely, agreed to put that question to another body. Is this to be the norm for clubs which come up before the beaks? What makes Sevco so special?

That they’ve been allowed to do this suggests that the answer to question two is a yes … and if that’s the case, then surely that’s discriminatory against all the rest? Or are we wrong? Is the answer to question two a no … and the answer to this one a yes instead?

And where does that leave our game?

Are UEFA aware of, and comfortable with, a legal agreement between the SFA and Rangers which takes authority out of the hands of the SFA?

This might well be the most important question of all of them.

The SFA rulebook exists in the shadow of the UEFA one, and it is formed out of the FIFA statutes. Are we really expected to believe that an agreement which indemnified one club from sanctions, or let a non-national association body adjudicate them, when all other clubs are treated according to the regulations we all live by, would meet the approval of the European governing body?

It is almost inconceivable that UEFA would agree to that.

The Five Way Agreement itself is a violation of UEFA regulations, which clearly and concisely cut through the whole “club versus company” argument on which the Survival Lie depends.

Their definition of what “a club” is leaves no room for doubt; they make no distinction between the two which means that when Rangers died they were gone and Sevco is a different entity.

That they give the club the same coefficient points as the old one appears to be a flat contradiction of policy, but it flows from the SFA’s own position on the matter.

But that position is based on a document which does make clear distinctions between Sevco and Rangers, and sets them out clearly.

It is the basis of the Survival Lie, yes, but it also contradicts itself in the number of times it clearly separates the two entities … the Five Way Agreement is actually the enshrining of a lie which all involved freely admit is a lie.

It is a document that says “we know Rangers died but this document will commit to treating Sevco as if they were Rangers … except when that would be inconvenient for us.”

Which is to say that UEFA allows Sevco and the SFA to maintain this fiction on the clear understanding that the sins of Rangers will be paid for by the current Ibrox club. If the SFA has given Sevco immunity from those charges then, yes … I think UEFA would have a problem with that.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack Hackett]

... and yet the silence from UEFA almost drowns the cacophony of noise from Sevco

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/0b28ed715ed491aa62c85cd8b23651d5.png


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

The Clumpany making fun of Sevco now...... :greengrin

https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2018/07/27/sevcos-reply-to-celtics-statement/

[pacorosssco]

[QUOTE=Ozyhibby;5474624]I took this from the bottom of this article but I think they are very important questions.


https://thecelticblog.com/2018/07/blogs/the-five-way-agreement-is-the-rotting-black-heart-of-scottish-football-corruption/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

—————————

Is every professional club in Scotland subject to the same disciplinary code?

We are going to find out very soon, but the existence of a document which essentially gives one of them a sort of blanket immunity from past sins is something no other football body in the world would permit. It is clear that Sevco has conducted itself in a truly appalling fashion throughout its short history, with everything from statements that bring the game into disrepute and for which nothing was done, to the behaviour of its fans about which nothing is ever done.

The club does seem to exist in a world where rules don’t apply … perhaps that’s because they have it in writing.

Does the SFA have a disciplinary process that applies to only one club and if so why, and how can they possibly justify that?

As an adjunct to the first question this is vital.

Because Sevco does not seem subject to the same processes and procedures as only clubs either. How can it be that this investigation took so long in the first place? What made this different from every other allegation that the Judicial Review Board has to consider? Politics, yes. But the way this was done still stinks. It took an age to report in the first place, and now the case has been handed off elsewhere?

Can all member clubs of the SFA refuse to have their rule breaking adjudicated by the National Association?

Vitally important.

Sevco is actually telling the SFA that is has no right to open this case, and the SFA has somehow, perversely, agreed to put that question to another body. Is this to be the norm for clubs which come up before the beaks? What makes Sevco so special?

That they’ve been allowed to do this suggests that the answer to question two is a yes … and if that’s the case, then surely that’s discriminatory against all the rest? Or are we wrong? Is the answer to question two a no … and the answer to this one a yes instead?

And where does that leave our game?

Are UEFA aware of, and comfortable with, a legal agreement between the SFA and Rangers which takes authority out of the hands of the SFA?

This might well be the most important question of all of them.

The SFA rulebook exists in the shadow of the UEFA one, and it is formed out of the FIFA statutes. Are we really expected to believe that an agreement which indemnified one club from sanctions, or let a non-national association body adjudicate them, when all other clubs are treated according to the regulations we all live by, would meet the approval of the European governing body?

It is almost inconceivable that UEFA would agree to that.

The Five Way Agreement itself is a violation of UEFA regulations, which clearly and concisely cut through the whole “club versus company” argument on which the Survival Lie depends.

Their definition of what “a club” is leaves no room for doubt; they make no distinction between the two which means that when Rangers died they were gone and Sevco is a different entity.

That they give the club the same coefficient points as the old one appears to be a flat contradiction of policy, but it flows from the SFA’s own position on the matter.

But that position is based on a document which does make clear distinctions between Sevco and Rangers, and sets them out clearly.

It is the basis of the Survival Lie, yes, but it also contradicts itself in the number of times it clearly separates the two entities … the Five Way Agreement is actually the enshrining of a lie which all involved freely admit is a lie.

It is a document that says “we know Rangers died but this document will commit to treating Sevco as if they were Rangers … except when that would be inconvenient for us.”

Which is to say that UEFA allows Sevco and the SFA to maintain this fiction on the clear understanding that the sins of Rangers will be paid for by the current Ibrox club. If the SFA has given Sevco immunity from those charges then, yes … I think UEFA would have a problem with that.


All valid points but with Uefa/Fifa being exposed to breaking their own rules and guilty of mass corruptions you have the answer

[Billy Whizz]

The Clumpany making fun of Sevco now...... :greengrin

https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2018/07/27/sevcos-reply-to-celtics-statement/

Sorry what have Celtic said?

[HoboHarry]

Sorry what have Celtic said?
It's in relation to Sevco reducing Celtic's ticket allocation against them. Developed into a bit of a tit for tat but there is a link to the statement in the second line.....

[Billy Whizz]

It's in relation to Sevco reducing Celtic's ticket allocation against them. Developed into a bit of a tit for tat.....

Sorry, I saw that on STV news
Totally agree with Celtic on this one. Just chopping away tickets without some sort of dialogue is poor. But we’ve come to expect this sort of behaviour from the Rangers now

[Deansy]

I thought they (King/Hun) were in court for (whatever's their latest crime/offence ??) something yesterday or am I just getting lost in all their legal shenanigans ??

[Keith_M]

I thought they (King/Hun) were in court for (whatever's their latest crime/offence ??) something yesterday or am I just getting lost in all their legal shenanigans ??


King Hun?

Is that the new title for whoever's in charge of The Rangers?

[Eyrie]

Sorry, I saw that on STV news
Totally agree with Celtic on this one. Just chopping away tickets without some sort of dialogue is poor. But we’ve come to expect this sort of behaviour from the Rangers now

We reduced Sevco's allocation last season, and will hopefully do so to both cheeks this year.

Leaving aside the hyperbolic statement from Sevco, was there much dialogue between the clubs?

[HoboHarry]

We reduced Sevco's allocation last season, and will hopefully do so to both cheeks this year.

Leaving aside the hyperbolic statement from Sevco, was there much dialogue between the clubs?
Going by Celtic's statement then no and that's what pissed Celtic off. Seems this was a unilateral decision by Sir Glib and Shameless, probably to grab some extra season ticket money now......

[Eyrie]

Going by Celtic's statement then no and that's what pissed Celtic off. Seems this was a unilateral decision by Sir Glib and Shameless, probably to grab some extra season ticket money now......
I meant when we cut Sevco's allocation, but you're right that there should always be a dialogue first regardless of the clubs involved.

[HoboHarry]

I meant when we cut Sevco's allocation, but you're right that there should always be a dialogue first regardless of the clubs involved.
Sorry mate, misunderstood your question.....

[Eyrie]

Sorry mate, misunderstood your question.....
Poorly worded by me, but between us we've clarified what I was trying to say.

[HoboHarry]

Sevco getting bent over by the courts and Mike Ashley again :faf::faf:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/rangers-and-mike-ashley-should-try-to-make-peace-says-judge-1-4775813

[Famous Fiver]

Looks like Ashley used expensive silks and the the Rangers are coughing up to cover it.

Pleasing.

[Ozyhibby]

Sevco getting bent over by the courts and Mike Ashley again :faf::faf:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/rangers-and-mike-ashley-should-try-to-make-peace-says-judge-1-4775813

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billy Whizz]

Sevco getting bent over by the courts and Mike Ashley again :faf::faf:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/rangers-and-mike-ashley-should-try-to-make-peace-says-judge-1-4775813
That’s the Lafferty bid money now spent

[HoboHarry]

Follow Follow should be a hoot right now :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Love the last line....

"Mr Justice Phillips has been told the boycott is over."



... at which point His Lordship burst into song...... "The boycott's over, why don't you go home?"

[HoboHarry]

Love the last line....

"Mr Justice Phillips has been told the boycott is over."



... at which point His Lordship burst into song...... "The boycott's over, why don't you go home?"
Or "Hello hello we're no the boycott boys"......

[Is It On....]

Sevco getting bent over by the courts and Mike Ashley again :faf::faf:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/rangers-and-mike-ashley-should-try-to-make-peace-says-judge-1-4775813

£185k for their legal fees and being told to pick up the vast majority of Sports Direct £350k costs 😂😂

[JeMeSouviens]

Follow Follow should be a hoot right now :greengrin

Just checked ... it is. :lolrangers:

[ancient hibee]

So after paying Ashley £3M not to go away they have to pay his lawyers £500K and allow Ashley to keep selling Rangers strips.When is Park going to realise that King is an expensive liability.

[HoboHarry]

If Sevco settled last week I imagine that is the reason that the deal for the Man City defender fell through. They first said he failed a medical then SG stated they couldn't agree terms. Lol all the money just disappeared into Ashley's pocket, bwahahahahahaha............ Wonder how Sir Cumference Traynor will spin this one...... :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

What they need now is an *extremely* staunch STATEMENT! :faf:

[RyeSloan]

Brilliant so they paid £3m to be allowed to sell mugs n pens and then paid half a million more in lawyers fees to find out that they had paid £3m to be allowed to sell mugs n pens!

Half a mill is painful enough but the loss of the Hummel shirt deal must put a nice wee dent into their future revenue forecasts as well. Forecasts that already assumed an over spend and required a rights issue.

Of course the share issue can’t proceed either due to the unfinished business brought about by the pesky ToP.

So all in all it’s looking pretty encouraging over Ibrox way [emoji23]. And you do have to wonder just how long this pantomime can continue before it collapses on itself once more.

[HoboHarry]

Brilliant so they paid £3m to be allowed to sell mugs n pens and then paid half a million more in lawyers fees to find out that they had paid £3m to be allowed to sell mugs n pens!

Half a mill is painful enough but the loss of the Hummel shirt deal must put a nice wee dent into their future revenue forecasts as well. Forecasts that already assumed an over spend and required a rights issue.

Of course the share issue can’t proceed either due to the unfinished business brought about by the pesky ToP.

So all in all it’s looking pretty encouraging over Ibrox way [emoji23]. And you do have to wonder just how long this pantomime can continue before it collapses on itself once more.
Don't think they have lost the Hummel deal? It's about where the shirts are sold I thought? #toomuchinfotokeepup

[Smartie]

The European games will have given them a huge boost on several levels - on-pitch morale and big funds.

When they are knocked out of Europe there will be a lot of gnashing and wailing. When they have their first domestic bad results under Gerrard they will go to pieces and when it dawns on them that they won't be challenging Celtic they will implode.

[Springbank]

Don't think they have lost the Hummel deal? It's about where the shirts are sold I thought? #toomuchinfotokeepup

Yeah it's not so much the Hummel deal collapsing, as sales of Hummel shirts are likely to nosedive now as the Gers fans love nothing more than a Mike Ashley Boycott.

They'd rather buy hookie strips made in Turkey rather than buy genuine tops in Sports Direct.

Don't think Hummel will be too pleased tonight...sold a pup by the Glib/Shameless Liar.

[Dalianwanda]

Don't think they have lost the Hummel deal? It's about where the shirts are sold I thought? #toomuchinfotokeepup

Yeah but if its SD that will be selling them how many shirts will actually be sold?

[HoboHarry]

Yeah it's not so much the Hummel deal collapsing, as sales of Hummel shirts are likely to nosedive now as the Gers fans love nothing more than a Mike Ashley Boycott.

They'd rather buy hookie strips made in Turkey rather than buy genuine tops in Sports Direct.

Don't think Hummel will be too pleased tonight...sold a pup by the Glib/Shameless Liar.
Not sure I share your confidence but I certainly hope you are right....... :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

And there is no chance JD sports or anyone else will ever bid for the Sevco deal again. Mike now has them forever. Lovely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Don't think they have lost the Hummel deal? It's about where the shirts are sold I thought? #toomuchinfotokeepup

Ach yeah of course [emoji1303]

[Glesgahibby]

And there is no chance JD sports or anyone else will ever bid for the Sevco deal again. Mike now has them forever. Lovely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That’s the big one!!
After rousing the rangers fans into a frenzy of hate towards Mike Ashley,the rangers board now have to kiss his ass :greengrin
I wonder if the penny will drop with the fans regarding the £3mill fanfare pay off?
Do you think they will now work out,it was for costing SD money via club statements?
Cant wait for the next club statement :greengrin

[ehf]

That’s the big one!!
After rousing the rangers fans into a frenzy of hate towards Mike Ashley,the rangers board now have to kiss his ass :greengrin
I wonder if the penny will drop with the fans regarding the £3mill fanfare pay off?
Do you think they will now work out,it was for costing SD money via club statements?
Cant wait for the next club statement :greengrin

:greengrin Ashley has played a blinder here: Sevco/King will now have to tell the neanderthal bigots that SD are great ("a valued and trusted partner", "a high quality retail operation" etc) and encourage them to buy the official merchandise there.

[CropleyWasGod]

One wonders if Hummel and JD Sports might have a legal case here. [emoji7]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

One wonders if Hummel and JD Sports might have a legal case here. [emoji7]

Sent from my SM-A520F using TapatalkThey've got to have suffered some serious brand image and therefore reputational damage being associated with such a toxic brand as sevco, never mind the unsellable shirts?

Ashley himself could be seen in a bad light here.

Oh wait a minute.



Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Ronniekirk]

They've got to have suffered some serious brand image and therefore reputational damage being associated with such a toxic brand as sevco, never mind the unsellable shirts?

Ashley himself could be seen in a bad light here.

Oh wait a minute.



Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

In my eyes their image was tarnished the minute they agreed to produce an orange shirt for those mutants So they've made their Bed and now they can lie in it
More full them for not doing due diligence on Kings track record Or maybe they consulted the Authorities that be here that had already carried out thier due Diligence , and passed him as Fit and Proper or whatever the phrase is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

In my eyes their image was tarnished the minute they agreed to produce an orange shirt for those mutants So they've made their Bed and now they can lie in it
More full them for not doing due diligence on Kings track record Or maybe they consulted the Authorities that be here that had already carried out thier due Diligence , and passed him as Fit and Proper or whatever the phrase is


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI concur.

They're all in the same cesspit, just for slightly different reasons.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

One wonders if Hummel and JD Sports might have a legal case here. [emoji7]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Against Sevco? Not sure Hummel would go forward but JD must be spitting feathers at this point. I hope that have already advanced money to Sevco - good luck getting that back :greengrin:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Against Sevco? Not sure Hummel would go forward but JD must be spitting feathers at this point. I hope that have already advanced money to Sevco - good luck getting that back :greengrin:greengrinHummel might have a case if the boycott continues.

Just putting it out there in case Mr Hummel reads this board.[emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

Hummel might have a case if the boycott continues.

Just putting it out there in case Mr Hummel reads this board.[emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Indeed - he may have a sting in his tail....... :greengrin

[Sioux]

Indeed - he may have a sting in his tail....... :greengrin

It would seem that the GASL forgot to tell Hummel of the Sports Direct clause. That would be a way out for Hummel if they wanted it. Surely withholding vital information would be a breach of contract by Sevco. Maybe Hummel could get them into court. That would be funny.:greengrin

[Jack]

That’s the Lafferty bid money now spent

I don't think the courts will accept payment in instalments that includes juice bottles ... and for the aged among us, jeely jars!!!!

[CropleyWasGod]

Hummel strips to be sold out of Binns? (Pun intended)


House of Fraser offered cash injection by Mike Ashley - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45013977

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[ancient hibee]

Given his huge stake in Debenhams why would he want to help HOF? Maybe he collects lost causes because he’s now involved with three.

[Ronniekirk]

Hummel strips to be sold out of Binns? (Pun intended)


House of Fraser offered cash injection by Mike Ashley - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45013977

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Aye Oddbins


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Springbank]

Hummel strips to be sold out of Binns? (Pun intended)


House of Fraser offered cash injection by Mike Ashley - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45013977

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

stick them next to the lingerie section and call that floor Raunchy and Staunchy clothing

[AltheHibby]

stick them next to the lingerie section and call that floor Raunchy and Staunchy clothing

😂

[Keith_M]

stick them next to the lingerie section and call that floor Raunchy and Staunchy clothing


Oi!


:grr:




I like rude undies but that's just taking it too far!!!

[Bostonhibby]

stick them next to the lingerie section and call that floor Raunchy and Staunchy clothing[emoji23]

How about in the food Hall?

Somewhere between the fruit and cake departments.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

Latest from Phil Mac, it's worth reading for the last line alone.....:greengrin

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/02/an-unconditional-favourable-settlement/

[CropleyWasGod]

Latest from Phil Mac, it's worth reading for the last line alone.....:greengrin

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/02/an-unconditional-favourable-settlement/

:greengrin

I like the bit where JD are considering their legal options........:not worth

[NAE NOOKIE]

In my eyes their image was tarnished the minute they agreed to produce an orange shirt for those mutants So they've made their Bed and now they can lie in it
More full them for not doing due diligence on Kings track record Or maybe they consulted the Authorities that be here that had already carried out thier due Diligence , and passed him as Fit and Proper or whatever the phrase is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is an open door for the loyalist crew IMO. Nothing the club produces with the Rangers FC name or logo on it can be sold without Mike Ashley hoovering up a huge slice of the proceeds. If they had their wits about them and with the tacit approval of the club ( which they would surely have given the amount of pandering to the 'Billy boy' element their board have indulged in recently ) all the fans have to do is themselves produce the strip they have always wanted all along …… an orange top with King Billy proudly astride his white steed as the badge ….. find an alternative outlet to sell it and pass on any profit to the club as a gift.

If I was a rabid knuckle dragging currant bun I know that's what I would do and there wouldn't be a thing Mike Ashley could do about it :greengrin

[HoboHarry]

:greengrin

I like the bit where JD are considering their legal options........:not worth
Why yes indeedie and if Paul Murray and Sir Glibness were personally liable (since the legal action was against them personally was it not?) then they better start holding out the begging bowl :faf:

[Smartie]

Just when you thought this lowlife couldn't stoop any further.....

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/gers-fans-kicked-boys-sand-castle/

[Hibbyboy]

I see they've signed yet another player!

Some Croatian fella they played against last week! :confused:

Where's the money coming from?!

Hopefully just pushes them towards Admin2!

[Billy Whizz]

I see they've signed yet another player!

Some Croatian fella they played against last week! :confused:

Where's the money coming from?!

Hopefully just pushes them towards Admin2!

They got another £1m in gate receipts for qualifying for the 3rd round, plus the UEFA Europa prize money
I don’t believe for a minute they’ve paid £2m for him though

[CropleyWasGod]

I see they've signed yet another player!

Some Croatian fella they played against last week! :confused:

Where's the money coming from?!

Hopefully just pushes them towards Admin2!

In the short-term, the money is coming from the same sources as ours is. UEFA prize-money and big attendances at home. The latter is more than double ours.

The problem will arise if they don't get to the EL groups.

[JeMeSouviens]

Call me an old cynic but £2.2M? Really? It's funny how Sevco can afford all sorts of money when they're dealing with clubs local journos can't (or can't be arsed to) contact. Then when it's Hibs or Hearts they're suddenly struggling to get a few hundred grand together. :rolleyes:

[Rumble de Thump]

In the short-term, the money is coming from the same sources as ours is. UEFA prize-money and big attendances at home. The latter is more than double ours.

The problem will arise if they don't get to the EL groups.

The Scottish press have reporting all of The Rangers' signings as "deals worth" to give the illusion that they're spending big bucks to compete with Celtic. The reality is that the prices quoted cover any fees paid to clubs plus the players' salaries over a number of years (any may well just be made up up anyway :greengrin )

[Billy Whizz]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

[Iain G]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

Its kept in a tin that used to say "Honesty Box" on the outside of it until they rubbed some of the letters off...

[Ronniekirk]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

Have given up trying to keep up with what goes on there . It's clear they are trying to now go for second spot and seeing how close they can get to
Celtic this Season . Financial Transparency is never going to apply ,as they just shift money around via soft loans and goodness knows what else
They are trying to give Gerrard as much backing as possible to get to the Group Stages as that's why they need to achieve
But unlike a normal Honey Pot they don't seem to get stuck they just keep taking it seems to me

[oneone73]

Its kept in a tin that used to say "Honesty Box" on the outside of it until they rubbed some of the letters off...

That would be the missing ST money.

[Jim44]

That would be the missing ST money.

Clever.:greengrin

[ballengeich]

Their new player is Barisic. The club is boracic.

[Captain Trips]

I see the red card for Morelos has been rescinded.

[Oscar T Grouch]

I see the red card for Morelos has been recinded.

The good news is that you can now kick your opponents and just get a yellow card. Seems a strange decision which I am sure will come back and bite the authorities on the butt cheeks.

[Stevie Reid]

I think it's a bit of common sense tbh. The kick was petulant, not violent - it wasn't excessive force and he wasn't trying to hurt or injure McKenna; who used a great deal more force on Morelos.

No issue with it being downgraded to a yellow.

[Deansy]

I see the red card for Morelos has been rescinded.

No great surprise - it's the Hun, the hard-done-by club !

[Springbank]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

a hunny fund?

Stevie G was right - I cant believe talkSPORT let that kind of sectarian banter on the radio in the 21st Century

[GloryGlory]

The good news is that you can now kick your opponents and just get a yellow card. Seems a strange decision which I am sure will come back and bite the authorities on the butt cheeks.

I'd love to see the reaction if Scott Brown did something similar to one of The Rangers players in an Old Firm game.

[Smartie]

It's a first victory for Stevie G - his comments about the poor victimised Rangers nobbled the authorities into a corner where this was the only reasonable outcome.

The downside for them is that they will have Morelos available for next week.

[PatHead]

It's a first victory for Stevie G - his comments about the poor victimised Rangers nobbled the authorities into a corner where this was the only reasonable outcome.

The downside is that the have Morelos available for next week.

Don’t think reasonable is the right word but I know what you mean.

[Smartie]

Don’t think reasonable is the right word but I know what you mean.

I think inevitable was the word I was looking for rather than reasonable.

[Ralphy C]

[QUOTE=Stevie Reid;5503335]I think it's a bit of common sense tbh. The kick was petulant, not violent - it wasn't excessive force and he wasn't trying to hurt or injure McKenna; who used a great deal more force on Morelos.

I would be fuming if i was that linesman, Morelos kicked the defender off the ball, the fact that it wasnt a very good kick is here nor there, have the officials now got to figure out what his exact intent was with a violent conduct decision?

[ancient hibee]

[QUOTE=Stevie Reid;5503335]I think it's a bit of common sense tbh. The kick was petulant, not violent - it wasn't excessive force and he wasn't trying to hurt or injure McKenna; who used a great deal more force on Morelos.

I would be fuming if i was that linesman, Morelos kicked the defender off the ball, the fact that it wasnt a very good kick is here nor there, have the officials now got to figure out what his exact intent was with a violent conduct decision?
Of course they have to.How can you be sent off for violent conduct if you don’t establish if it was violent.I would have been enraged if one of our players had been sent off for that particularly when McKenna got off after having started it.

[GloryGlory]

[QUOTE=Stevie Reid;5503335]I think it's a bit of common sense tbh. The kick was petulant, not violent - it wasn't excessive force and he wasn't trying to hurt or injure McKenna; who used a great deal more force on Morelos.

I would be fuming if i was that linesman, Morelos kicked the defender off the ball, the fact that it wasnt a very good kick is here nor there, have the officials now got to figure out what his exact intent was with a violent conduct decision?

:agree: I was always under the impression that intent was the key issue - so even if it was a fresh air shot, aiming a kick at another player is violent conduct.

[Ralphy C]

[QUOTE=Ralphy C;5503438]
Of course they have to.How can you be sent off for violent conduct if you don’t establish if it was violent.I would have been enraged if one of our players had been sent off for that particularly when McKenna got off after having started it.

He kicked him off the ball, how could that possibly not be violent. I thought it was soft at the time but once its given and you decide to review it the only decision to make is did he kick out and clearly he did.

[CentreLine]

[QUOTE=Ralphy C;5503438]

:agree: I was always under the impression that intent was the key issue - so even if it was a fresh air shot, aiming a kick at another player is violent conduct.

Well remember John O’Neil sent off for exactly that. Fresh air shot. Hibs appealed as his lace was undone on his boot. Think we claimed he was trying to free his foot from the lace 😂
Maybe he was but appeal was rejected

But now clearly it’s okay to lash out at an opponent. Let’s see how they treat the other 11 clubs

[Moulin Yarns]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

I always knew Winnie The Pooh was a bear

[Springbank]

I always knew Winnie The Pooh was a bear

The Rangers Winnie the Pooh

The Hibs winnie The Cup

21st May Haiku

[Moulin Yarns]

The Rangers Winnie the Pooh

The Hibs winnie The Cup

21st May Haiku

:not worth

[Scorrie]

Just seen on Twitter that West Brom have put a bid in for Tavernier

[Hibernia&Alba]

Just seen on Twitter that West Brom have put a bid in for Tavernier

Aye, and Windass also, reportedly. £5 million for the two.

Correction, Ipswich have bid for Windass, allegedly. £2 million.

[Billy Whizz]

Aye, and Windass also, reportedly. £5 million for the two.

Correction, Ipswich have bid for Windass, allegedly. £2 million.

Rangers have knocked back the Tavernier bid

[Hibernia&Alba]

Rangers have knocked back the Tavernier bid

Thought they might. I think it's a decent offer, but would guess they are looking for around £5 million. It will be interesting to see if West Brom bid again.

[The Green Goblin]

Seemingly Simon Jordan said on Talk Sport this morning, that he knows that Rangers have access to a “Honey” fund
Wonder who’s backing them, if this is the case

The DUP?

[ancient hibee]

Aye, and Windass also, reportedly. £5 million for the two.

Correction, Ipswich have bid for Windass, allegedly. £2 million.

I've watched football for a long time but I've given up trying to understand why English clubs think that OF players must be worth big money.It's become worse of course because of the money available down there-but Windass £2M -jeez.

[PatHead]

I've watched football for a long time but I've given up trying to understand why English clubs think that OF players must be worth big money.It's become worse of course because of the money available down there-but Windass £2M -jeez.

And Tavernier is one of the most over-rated full backs ever. He cannot defend. How the hell they will get more for him than we get for SJM is baffling.

[Hibernia&Alba]

And Tavernier is one of the most over-rated full backs ever. He cannot defend. How the hell they will get more for him than we get for SJM is baffling.

Only because he's an Old Firm player, so gets a premium fee. If he were a Hibs player, we'd be lucky to get £1 million.

[Keith_M]

The Rangers have already denied any 'mystery benefactor' with 'significant funds'.

[CropleyWasGod]

The Rangers have already denied any 'mystery benefactor' with 'significant funds'.The mysterious benefactors are Ipswich et al [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

I've watched football for a long time but I've given up trying to understand why English clubs think that OF players must be worth big money.It's become worse of course because of the money available down there-but Windass £2M -jeez.

I think Windass is a pretty good player.

He's certainly Sevco's best attacking threat, and far more likely to be worth £2m than Morelos.

[blackpoolhibs]

I think Windass is a pretty good player.

He's certainly Sevco's best attacking threat, and far more likely to be worth £2m than Morelos.

I do, and Tavernier is a good player too, albeit as a wingback. He's asked to get forward like a winger, and obviously will leave gaps in behind him for players to exploit.

I'd take both at Hibs.

[Brunswickbill]

Good news for Sevco supporters. They can keep up their boycott of Sports Direct by buying their kit at House of Fraser.

[Springbank]

I do, and Tavernier is a good player too, albeit as a wingback. He's asked to get forward like a winger, and obviously will leave gaps in behind him for players to exploit.

I'd take both at Hibs.

JT was our 12th man on 21st may 2016

Loved watching him get rag-dolled by Stokesy all afternoon

We should give him a testimonial

[blackpoolhibs]

JT was our 12th man on 21st may 2016

Loved watching him get rag-dolled by Stokesy all afternoon

We should give him a testimonial


:greengrin

[Jim44]

Mike Ashley has upset the Sevco masses by buying House of Fraser. With Sports Direct, and shares in Tesco and Debenhams in his portfolio, they’re fast running out of stores to shop in. :greengrin

[Chorley Hibee]

Mike Ashley has upset the Sevco masses by buying House of Fraser. With Sports Direct, and shares in Tesco and Debenhams in his portfolio, they’re fast running out of stores to shop in. :greengrin

I wouldn't worry, your average hun is more likely to be seen in something a little less salubrious than House of Fraser etc.

[O'Rourke3]

I wouldn't worry, your average hun is more likely to be seen in something a little less salubrious than House of Fraser etc.
Not if they are in there robbing....

[Bostonhibby]

I wouldn't worry, your average hun is more likely to be seen in something a little less salubrious than House of Fraser etc.He's launching a bid for pound land, the Buckfast brand and the company that makes monster munch crisps. That should pretty much finish the huns off.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180814/e195e27869d829294f4ce153c94fd837.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

Does anyone else get a wee lift every time this thread jumps to the top of the board with a post from Ozyhibby?

(It's normally followed by CWG bursting the bubble, but it's normally good fun in between.)

[Keith_M]

Does anyone else get a wee lift every time this thread jumps to the top of the board with a post from Ozyhibby?

(It's normally followed by CWG bursting the bubble, but it's normally good fun in between.)



Time to ban that guy, he's a real party-pooper.

[Oscar T Grouch]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180814/e195e27869d829294f4ce153c94fd837.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally I don't think DK ever intends to make the offer so the Rand plummeting against the GBP is not relevant, but it is good to see another obstacle in place to stop the huns operating properly. Given the amount of money they seem to have magicked out nowhere I would imagine a new owner is in the pipeline and the lying king will exit Sevco completely.

[CropleyWasGod]

Does anyone else get a wee lift every time this thread jumps to the top of the board with a post from Ozyhibby?

(It's normally followed by CWG bursting the bubble, but it's normally good fun in between.)

Oi !!!

Actually, the £ is taking a battering too, so any deals they do in Euros will be costing them a good deal more as well.

That better? :greengrin

[Smartie]

Oi !!!

Actually, the £ is taking a battering too, so any deals they do in Euros will be costing them a good deal more as well.

That better? :greengrin

Lovely stuff.

Thank you.

[Pescarese]

Personally I don't think DK ever intends to make the offer so the Rand plummeting against the GBP is not relevant, but it is good to see another obstacle in place to stop the huns operating properly. Given the amount of money they seem to have magicked out nowhere I would imagine a new owner is in the pipeline and the lying king will exit Sevco completely.
I can’t see how DK can walk away easily. He’s been ordered to make the offer, personally, so a change in ownership makes no odds. What the courts can do if he stays abroad won’t amount to much, I suppose. And he must be running out of time to spin things out - the usual period for making an offer is one month. All very pleasing.

[Deansy]

Does anyone else get a wee lift every time this thread jumps to the top of the board with a post from Ozyhibby?

(It's normally followed by CWG bursting the bubble, but it's normally good fun in between.)

Yup - if you'd told me 10 years ago there was going to be a 'Bad news for the Hun' thread that ran continously, I'd have PMSL !. All the years spent wondering just how the xxxx the **** got away with murder and wondering if they'd ever be caught - these days they're as much laughed at as hated ! long may it continue !

[Oscar T Grouch]

I can’t see how DK can walk away easily. He’s been ordered to make the offer, personally, so a change in ownership makes no odds. What the courts can do if he stays abroad won’t amount to much, I suppose. And he must be running out of time to spin things out - the usual period for making an offer is one month. All very pleasing.

It is but unfortunately it looks like someone with deep pockets is funding them now. Hope not but they’ve been free and easy with the cash this closed season which makes me think they’ve got another sugar daddy.

[Smartie]

Their problems rarely come at this time of year, as they are normally flush with ST cash. This year they have the extra benefit of the European money (I suspect that a huge part of their meltdown post cup-final was due to the realisation that they'd have to do without this for another year).

Have they budgeted to last the season? With so many season tickets sold and problems with selling strips, what income streams do they have throughout the season? Can they deal with early cup exits? What if they don't reach the Europa League group stages? How do they handle going 3 or 4 games without a win? Where are they when they realise that this isn't the year that "55" is going to happen and that Celtic are a step closer to 10 in a row?

I haven't seen too much evidence of cash splashing that they didn't do before. Each manager has been backed to an extent, and they have had to seek emergency funding to see them through every season so far.

I'm happy to see them spending money, I'm not so happy seeing them "Progres" in Europe and earn money to pay for the signings.

[Ozyhibby]

https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/rifc-plc-general-meeting/

New share issue?

https://rangers.co.uk/club/investor-centre/shareholder-centre/circulars-admission-document/

Looks like Dave is going to comply with Tap?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

OK come on CWG, tell us what nonsense Sir Glibness is up to now - I want to see his sorry erchie in jail.......

[CropleyWasGod]

https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/rifc-plc-general-meeting/

New share issue?

https://rangers.co.uk/club/investor-centre/shareholder-centre/circulars-admission-document/

Looks like Dave is going to comply with Tap?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trying to get my head around this bit:-

Shareholders should note that, if this resolution were passed, it could affect Mr King’s mandatory offer
obligation and substantially increase the number of acceptances from existing shareholders needed for such
an offer to become unconditional. Because shareholders subscribing at 20p per share are unlikely to accept
an offer at the same price, the passing of the resolution may make Mr King’s offer less likely to succeed.

Is that a suggestion that King's offer shouldn't be accepted?

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm looking at the list of people to whom shares would be issued:-

7,645,000 Barry Scott
5,250,000 John Bennett
2,500,000 Andrew Ross
5,000,000 Club 1872 Shares CIC
7,500,000 Borita Investments Limited
7,500,000 New Trace Limited
2,500,000 Andrew Hawkyard
2,500,000 Neil Hosie
1,250,000 Paul Redbourn
9,199,089 New Oasis Asset Limited
3,875,094 Douglas Park
2,557,186 George Letham
5,870,768 George Taylor
Total number of shares to be issued 63,147,137

At 20p per share, that's £12.6m.

However, I'm guessing that about 75% of those are current "soft loans"which will be converted to shares. That will help the FFP situation, but isn't a very good fundraiser.

[HoboHarry]

I'm looking at the list of people to whom shares would be issued:-

7,645,000 Barry Scott
5,250,000 John Bennett
2,500,000 Andrew Ross
5,000,000 Club 1872 Shares CIC
7,500,000 Borita Investments Limited
7,500,000 New Trace Limited
2,500,000 Andrew Hawkyard
2,500,000 Neil Hosie
1,250,000 Paul Redbourn
9,199,089 New Oasis Asset Limited
3,875,094 Douglas Park
2,557,186 George Letham
5,870,768 George Taylor
Total number of shares to be issued 63,147,137

At 20p per share, that's £12.6m.

However, I'm guessing that about 75% of those are current "soft loans"which will be converted to shares. That will help the FFP situation, but isn't a very good fundraiser.
I thought the Easdales, fat Swally etc etc still had lots of shares between them?

[CropleyWasGod]

I thought the Easdales, fat Swally etc etc still had lots of shares between them?

They do.

I haven't read all of the papers (I know, I'm such an amateur), but I am guessing that they have said they are not interested in taking up their rights in this issue.

[Hibs4185]

Still no prospectus which he needs to comply with TOP. It’s only the ‘advertisement’ with the announcements so I don’t think he will have time to comply with TOP before share issue.

I noticed TOP have given permission to avoid some regulation. I wonder if he’s told them he’s using the cash raised to comply with the TOP.

All of it is very dodgy.

[HoboHarry]

They do.

I haven't read all of the papers (I know, I'm such an amateur), but I am guessing that they have said they are not interested in taking up their rights in this issue.
Ok I don't understand this stuff - whats the difference between a share issue and King making an offer to buy everyone's shares as the court mandated him to do?

[CropleyWasGod]

Ok I don't understand this stuff - whats the difference between a share issue and King making an offer to buy everyone's shares as the court mandated him to do?

Simply put, this share issue is to raise new money.

The court thing is to make King offer to buy existing shares. No new cash is raised, and the money goes to the existing shareholders.

[RyeSloan]

Still no prospectus which he needs to comply with TOP. It’s only the ‘advertisement’ with the announcements so I don’t think he will have time to comply with TOP before share issue.

I noticed TOP have given permission to avoid some regulation. I wonder if he’s told them he’s using the cash raised to comply with the TOP.

All of it is very dodgy.

Seems strange that the company can issue new shares prior to the offer from King....particularly when Rangers themselves note that the share issue may impact the ‘success’ of the offer.

I appreciate that they may not be in a formal offer period in the normal sense but surely as the ToP has ruled that an offer must be made they are in a de facto offer period and thus the dealings in an offer period rules would apply.

As ever it appears King is just doing what he wants regardless.

[CropleyWasGod]

Still no prospectus which he needs to comply with TOP. It’s only the ‘advertisement’ with the announcements so I don’t think he will have time to comply with TOP before share issue.

I noticed TOP have given permission to avoid some regulation. I wonder if he’s told them he’s using the cash raised to comply with the TOP.

All of it is very dodgy.

Can he do that?

This money being raised is for the company. The money for the TOP case should be his own.

[HoboHarry]

Simply put, this share issue is to raise new money.

The court thing is to make King offer to buy existing shares. No new cash is raised, and the money goes to the existing shareholders.
Right, that was what I thought. So new share money raised goes to the club to help fund expenses/transfers etc - then King is still going to be seriously out of pocket with any share offer he makes? When is that going to happen?

[RyeSloan]

Trying to get my head around this bit:-

Shareholders should note that, if this resolution were passed, it could affect Mr King’s mandatory offer
obligation and substantially increase the number of acceptances from existing shareholders needed for such
an offer to become unconditional. Because shareholders subscribing at 20p per share are unlikely to accept
an offer at the same price, the passing of the resolution may make Mr King’s offer less likely to succeed.

Is that a suggestion that King's offer shouldn't be accepted?

Reads to me that they are saying this a great wheeze to make sure Kings offer doesn’t go unconditional therefore please back the proposal?

[CropleyWasGod]

Right, that was what I thought. So new share money raised goes to the club to help fund expenses/transfers etc - then King is still going to be seriously out of pocket with any share offer he makes? When is that going to happen?

If I knew that........:greengrin

[Walter]

If I knew that........:greengrin

I don’t understand all this financial mumbo jumbo. All I want to know is are they nearly dead yet ?

[HoboHarry]

If I knew that........:greengrin
That's kind of what I was getting at - how can they offer new shares when the ruling hasn't been complied with? Is that legal?

[CropleyWasGod]

That's kind of what I was getting at - how can they offer new shares when the ruling hasn't been complied with? Is that legal?

I don't think it is.

I had always believed that the TOP offer has to be made before new shares can be issued. I am starting to doubt myself now ...... but then again that might be DK's plan, to make it all look legit so that nobody objects. :rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

I don’t understand all this financial mumbo jumbo. All I want to know is are they nearly dead yet ?

Whilst they remain in Europe, naw :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/45188583?__twitter_impression=true
I can’t see how he could be allowed to do this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jacomo]

I don’t understand all this financial mumbo jumbo. All I want to know is are they nearly dead yet ?


Finishing a zombie is difficult. I think you have to sever head and limbs from torso and bury them all separately, or something.

[Pescarese]

I don't think it is.

I had always believed that the TOP offer has to be made before new shares can be issued. I am starting to doubt myself now ...... but then again that might be DK's plan, to make it all look legit so that nobody objects. :rolleyes:
King's argument was that nobody would accept a 20p offer. Coz the shares were worth at least 27p. Now it seems they'll be worth 20p, and he'll offer for the whole lot, including the new ones. I'm guessing the hope is that none of the big shareholders getting new shares will accept, having just "paid" 20p. King reduces the risk of his offer going unconditional and him having to buy everyone out. Seems an odd approach though, as he'd surely end up paying more to underwrite his offer. Is the delay worth it?

[HoboHarry]

Will he even be in Scotland on the 31st? Will he not be in contempt of court on the 16th by not placing an offer for everyone's shares? Would be nice to see the coppers tap him on the shoulder right enough.......:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Will he even be in Scotland on the 31st? Will he not be in contempt of court on the 16th by not placing an offer for everyone's shares? Would be nice to see the coppers tap him on the shoulder right enough.......:greengrinHe doesn't need to be here. He'll instruct a proxy.

But we can live in hope [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Sprouleflyer]

I'm looking at the list of people to whom shares would be issued:-

7,645,000 Barry Scott
5,250,000 John Bennett
2,500,000 Andrew Ross
5,000,000 Club 1872 Shares CIC
7,500,000 Borita Investments Limited
7,500,000 New Trace Limited
2,500,000 Andrew Hawkyard
2,500,000 Neil Hosie
1,250,000 Paul Redbourn
9,199,089 New Oasis Asset Limited
3,875,094 Douglas Park
2,557,186 George Letham
5,870,768 George Taylor
Total number of shares to be issued 63,147,137

At 20p per share, that's £12.6m.

However, I'm guessing that about 75% of those are current "soft loans"which will be converted to shares. That will help the FFP situation, but isn't a very good fundraiser.


The Cillit Bang guy?

Bang and the cash is gone!

[HoboHarry]

He doesn't need to be here. He'll instruct a proxy.

But we can live in hope [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Oh I know he will - and the Sevco supporting bams still won't see anything wrong in their chairman being absent for such a major occasion. I still have my doubts as to whether it will go ahead or not though - is this some kind of diversion/deflection ahead of being in contempt on the 16th?

[Joe6-2]

The Cillit Bang guy?

Bang and the cash is gone!

Ha ha

[CropleyWasGod]

Oh I know he will - and the Sevco supporting bams still won't see anything wrong in their chairman being absent for such a major occasion. I still have my doubts as to whether it will go ahead or not though - is this some kind of diversion/deflection ahead of being in contempt on the 16th?

The more I think about it, the more I think that it is designed to minimise the take up of the TOP offer.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

The more I think about it, the more I think that it is designed to minimise the take up of the TOP offer.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Surely the TOP will block it then as it does not protect the small shareholder waiting on his 20p offer from Dave King?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pescarese]

Surely the TOP will block it then as it does not protect the small shareholder waiting on his 20p offer from Dave King?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the small sharehder it actually makes DK's offer more attractive. The new shares make their shares worth less (they're pretty much worthless anyway, who would buy them? ).It's a bit odd all shareholders aren't getting the chance to buy more shares at 20p, or am I missing something?

[Ozyhibby]

For the small sharehder it actually makes DK's offer more attractive. The new shares make their shares worth less (they're pretty much worthless anyway, who would buy them? ).It's a bit odd all shareholders aren't getting the chance to buy more shares at 20p, or am I missing something?

That’s why I think it will be stopped. It’s disadvantaging the small shareholder and that the very people the TOP are meant to be protecting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pescarese]

That’s why I think it will be stopped. It’s disadvantaging the small shareholder and that the very people the TOP are meant to be protecting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DK could argue that converting debt into shares is neutral for other shareholders. But it's like his failure to make the offer, it's denying them the choice. Does the TOP have an interest in that, or will it just want the offer at 20p made? No doubt we will find out soon.

[CropleyWasGod]

For the small sharehder it actually makes DK's offer more attractive. The new shares make their shares worth less (they're pretty much worthless anyway, who would buy them? ).It's a bit odd all shareholders aren't getting the chance to buy more shares at 20p, or am I missing something?I am wondering if this is not the full-scale rights issue that we were promised, but merely a Debt for Equity swap. I don't know the identity of all of the soft lenders, but that list includes some of them.

At the last count, they totalled 16m. So this would put a big dent in that, but would mean no money for SG.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[ancient hibee]

He’ll need to put up more dosh first I would have thought and even if he doesn’t he has shown no sign of providing the cash for the current offer.

[Ozyhibby]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I’ve no doubt that is the plan, it pretty much says it in the offer.
But why would the TOP allow it? If I was a small shareholder, I can’t take part in this offer and Dave King is diluting the value of my shares after failing to obey they law and offer to buy my shares?
If the TOP allow this then what’s to stop anyone who wants control of a company just buying enough to control boardroom and the issuing new shares for complete control rather than buy out existing shareholders?
I’m sure the TOP will be in court this week to stop this. Then again maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

I’ve no doubt that is the plan, it pretty much says it in the offer.
But why would the TOP allow it? If I was a small shareholder, I can’t take part in this offer and Dave King is diluting the value of my shares after failing to obey they law and offer to buy my shares?
If the TOP allow this then what’s to stop anyone who wants control of a company just buying enough to control boardroom and the issuing new shares for complete control rather than buy out existing shareholders?
I’m sure the TOP will be in court this week to stop this. Then again maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkIf that guy is right, I think it might be the Easdales who will be in Court. They stand to get shafted.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[ballengeich]

I am wondering if this is not the full-scale rights issue that we were promised, but merely a Debt for Equity swap. I don't know the identity of all of the soft lenders, but that list includes some of them.

At the last count, they totalled 16m. So this would put a big dent in that, but would mean no money for SG.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I think this is the share placement to chosen individuals that is now possible following the special resolution at the last agm. If it had been a rights issue there would have been public announcements, documents for public scrutiny and discussion on Rangers' fans' forums and in the media generally before now.

The new shares for Club1872 will be fresh money. How much of the remainder is that rather than debt for equity will be seen in due course.


Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

If he can get away with this then either the legislation has to be changed or the TOP can shut up shop.

[donno]

I wouldn't worry, your average hun is more likely to be seen in something a little less salubrious than House of Fraser etc.When he had shares in b&m, Poundland and home bargains, then they will be f****d!


Sent from my EML-L29 using Tapatalk

[Rocky]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I'm not so sure as diluting shareholdings in this scenario looks too dodgy for him to be able to get away with it.

I'm not sure of the arithmetic in terms of how many of those in this share issue are required to hit the 50% but how about this sequence of events:

- This announcement today lists existing shareholders who are either prepared to buy or 'debt for equity' an amount of new shares at 20p equal to their existing shareholding such that there is a commitment to 'invest' more than the equivalent of 50% of pre issue total shares at TOP ordered offer price.
- TOP blocks it and says he needs to make the offer they've ordered first
- Glib and shameless says aye but that offer has no chance of succeeding cos look I've got over 50% of shareholders who have just committed to 'buy' at 20p so they're not going to sell at 20p. So gonnae no make me spend a fortune on a prospectus that's never going to succeed
- TOP reluctantly accepts the logic and he's off the hook

[ehf]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

King won't be making a mandatory offer on 16 August.

[ancient hibee]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I think the theory is tosh.

1 to make the mandatory offer he has to put up the cash-he hasn't.

2 the mandatory offer is only made for those shares issued at the time of the offer

3 the 50% acceptance can only be of those shares for which the offer is made and not for shares subsequently issued and for which no offer has been made.

[CropleyWasGod]

I think the theory is tosh.

1 to make the mandatory offer he has to put up the cash-he hasn't.

2 the mandatory offer is only made for those shares issued at the time of the offer

3 the 50% acceptance can only be of those shares for which the offer is made and not for shares subsequently issued and for which no offer has been made.

On number 3, the guy has trawled the TP Rules, and seems to think that (according to Rule 9, m'lud), "any shares bought during the offer period count towards the 50% requirement"

I do hope he's wrong.

[RyeSloan]

On number 3, the guy has trawled the TP Rules, and seems to think that (according to Rule 9, m'lud), "any shares bought during the offer period count towards the 50% requirement"

I do hope he's wrong.

Bought would suggest the shares already exist...this move is creating new shares which are more likely to be ‘issued’ rather than ‘bought’

I do wonder if the rules actually address the concept of such a huge dilution happening prior to a takeover offer..it is after all a unique set of circumstance here!

[CropleyWasGod]

Bought would suggest the shares already exist...this move is creating new shares which are more likely to be ‘issued’ rather than ‘bought’

I do wonder if the rules actually address the concept of such a huge dilution happening prior to a takeover offer..it is after all a unique set of circumstance here!

In the Twitter guy's scenario, the shares can be issued and bought in that 6 day window. If the prospective purchasers are clued-up as to DK's intention, that would work.

On your second point, no scooby. It may be that DK has invested a lot of time and money in coming up with this plan... hence the constant delaying tactics.

[Ozyhibby]

Bought would suggest the shares already exist...this move is creating new shares which are more likely to be ‘issued’ rather than ‘bought’

I do wonder if the rules actually address the concept of such a huge dilution happening prior to a takeover offer..it is after all a unique set of circumstance here!

I’m sure the rules would have been designed to prevent exactly these set of circumstances. The rules are to allow existing shareholders to get out if they don’t like the new controlling interests plans for the company.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

In the Twitter guy's scenario, the shares can be issued and bought in that 6 day window. If the prospective purchasers are clued-up as to DK's intention, that would work.

On your second point, no scooby. It may be that DK has invested a lot of time and money in coming up with this plan... hence the constant delaying tactics.
Where does that leave those who have given loans which are due for repayment? Will those loans be written off in exchange for shares with no actual new money coming into the club? Sorry if I have missed something - this isn't my field of expertise......

[CropleyWasGod]

Where does that leave those who have given loans which are due for repayment? Will those loans be written off in exchange for shares with no actual new money coming into the club? Sorry if I have missed something - this isn't my field of expertise......

IMO, that's the point of this exercise (other than out-flanking the TP, if that is his game). Most of those who are intending to subscribe for these shares are lenders. Those loans will, as you say, be converted into shares.

Ballengeich reckons that the Club 1872 mob will be putting new money in, but there won't be much else.

[HoboHarry]

IMO, that's the point of this exercise. Most of those who are intending to subscribe for these shares are lenders. Those loans will, as you say, be converted into shares.

Ballengeich reckons that the Club 1872 mob will be putting new money in, but there won't be much else.
Sir Glib promised SG 6 million based on a new share issue did he not? Wonder where that's going to come from?

Heh heh heh.......

[HoboHarry]

Phil Mac has posted this - does this mean Sir Glib is being hounded?

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/14/a-busy-day-at-court-on-thursday/

[CropleyWasGod]

Sir Glib promised SG 6 million based on a new share issue did he not? Wonder where that's going to come from?

Heh heh heh.......

There are a few names in the list of new shares that I don't recognise. The new money might come from them.

The issue itself is worth £12.6m. So, if he's to raise £6m for SG, only half are debt-for-equity swaps.

At the last count, they had £16m of soft loans, so that DFE would reduce those to £10m. Still pretty high IMO.

[CropleyWasGod]

Phil Mac has posted this - does this mean Sir Glib is being hounded?

https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/14/a-busy-day-at-court-on-thursday/

It's probably to check whether the TP offer has been made by the due date, ie tomorrow. :greengrin

[HoboHarry]

It's probably to check whether the TP offer has been made by the due date, ie tomorrow. :greengrin
This has a Christmas Eve feeling about it .......:greengrin

[ballengeich]

In the Twitter guy's scenario, the shares can be issued and bought in that 6 day window. If the prospective purchasers are clued-up as to DK's intention, that would work.

On your second point, no scooby. It may be that DK has invested a lot of time and money in coming up with this plan... hence the constant delaying tactics.

To repeat my previous post, if he gets away with this the legislation has to be changed or the TOP can shut down.

It's the sort of loophole that a certain type of businessman employs a certain type of lawyer to discover.

[CropleyWasGod]

To repeat my previous post, if he gets away with this the legislation has to be changed or the TOP can shut down.

It's the sort of loophole that a certain type of businessman employs a certain type of lawyer to discover.

I asked Twitter guy this, but thus far he hasn't responded.

Leaving the TP aside, do the Easdales (indeed, anyone, but they seem to the most affected) have a case.... and, I don't mean morally, but legally, as in "what laws can be invoked...."?

[ancient hibee]

IMO, that's the point of this exercise (other than out-flanking the TP, if that is his game). Most of those who are intending to subscribe for these shares are lenders. Those loans will, as you say, be converted into shares.

Ballengeich reckons that the Club 1872 mob will be putting new money in, but there won't be much else.

Isn't Club 1872 run by The Rangers Company Secretary?

[CropleyWasGod]

Isn't Club 1872 run by The Rangers Company Secretary?You might be right. Its Registered Office is the same as the Club.



Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[greenginger]

Isn't Club 1872 run by The Rangers Company Secretary?


https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC525940


James Blair is one of five directors of Club 1872, and he is the holder of the one and only share in the Company.

[CropleyWasGod]

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC525940


James Blair is one of five directors of Club 1872, and he is the holder of the one and only share in the Company.That's strange.

That has their RO as Rutland Square. IIRC that is the address of BDO. The Club 1872 website has the RO at Ibrox.

I suspect a form hasn't been filled in [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[stantonhibby]

That's strange.

That has their RO as Rutland Square. IIRC that is the address of BDO. The Club 1872 website has the RO at Ibrox.

I suspect a form hasn't been filled in [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Rutland Square is the address of Anderson Strathern sols which is where Blair works.

[HoboHarry]

That's strange.

That has their RO as Rutland Square. IIRC that is the address of BDO. The Club 1872 website has the RO at Ibrox.

I suspect a form hasn't been filled in [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Imperfect but eligible...... :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Rutland Square is the address of Anderson Strathern sols which is where Blair works.Gotcha. Ta.

A lawyer not keeping the public records up to date? Deary me.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[ancient hibee]

I think the members of Club 1872 are mugs.

[Jack Hackett]

I think the members of Club 1872 are mugs.

The members of Club 2012 are just as bad... if not worse.

[Bostonhibby]

The members of Club 2012 are just as bad... if not worse.I nearly said at least they're in the right century, but that wouldn't be right either.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[jacomo]

Seems to me like the lying King is being allowed to run rings around the TOP here.

How on Earth is he allowed to proceed with a share issue while facing potential contempt of court proceedings?

Yet again, the wealthy and unscrupulous seem able to write their own rules.

[Is It On....]

Here's another take on it. Guy on Twitter who seems to know what he's talking about reckons it could be a master stroke by DK:-

16/8 = King will make mandatory offer. Must be open for 21 days to 6/9

31/8 = New shares all come into effect.

6/9 = 23m shares needed to accept mandatory offer compared to 13m previously

Easdale and non voting block have 14m.

Mandatory offer fails as 50% not hit.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I don't think you can make a mandatory offer "conditional" on achieving a certain % of the share count. And the the instruction to offer to buy shares that he doesn't already own at 20p and any placing / rights issue are independent events. I would assume further court action if he doesn't adhere to TOP legal requirements as the credibility of the TOP is in shreds if he doesn't.

[Tornadoes70]

To repeat my previous post, if he gets away with this the legislation has to be changed or the TOP can shut down.

It's the sort of loophole that a certain type of businessman employs a certain type of lawyer to discover.

The old saying's true - You get what you pay for. He's obviously paid top dollar for his legal team to crawl over the wording of TOP's rules and regulations if indeed it plays out in this way.

If it is the case then TOP will have to put forward an opposing argument that any proposed new share issuing would be contrary to Lord Bannatyne's original ruling unless they themselves are not opposed to it.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3076520/rangers-dave-king-court-hearing-postponed-club-shares-contempt/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3076520/rangers-dave-king-court-hearing-postponed-club-shares-contempt/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Has it dawned on the TOP that King has found a loophole? Maybe they will try for an injunction to prevent the share issue?

[CropleyWasGod]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3076520/rangers-dave-king-court-hearing-postponed-club-shares-contempt/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Postponed until October, ie after the proposed share issue.

[Smartie]

I smell corruption.

[HoboHarry]

Hopefully I will be proved entirely wrong, but it appears that King is running rings around the TOP.......

[jacomo]

Postponed until October, ie after the proposed share issue.


What a joke.

At the last hearing it was agreed that there was no reason why they couldn’t find a date in August. Now he has another two months. It suits King to keep this going forever.

[Billy Whizz]

I hope they get pumped out of Europe tonight, stuff the coefficient (sorry Ozy), but just a horrible vile club

[Ozyhibby]

I hope they get pumped out of Europe tonight, stuff the coefficient (sorry Ozy), but just a horrible vile club

Haha, no need to apologies. I hope they get pumped as well. [emoji23] Celtic going into Europa probably helps coefficient anyway and us qualifying will help as well.🤞


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billy Whizz]

Haha, no need to apologies. I hope they get pumped as well. [emoji23] Celtic going into Europa probably helps coefficient anyway and us qualifying will help as well.🤞


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They’ll get another £1m in home gate receipts if they get through as well!