Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
Green is fronting this for someone who is as shady a ****: really hope he pulls it off, because it is the most cynical asset-strip ever.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
Green is fronting this for someone who is as shady a ****: really hope he pulls it off, because it is the most cynical asset-strip ever.
Sunday 3 June 2012
Show us the money
Richard Wilson
Since holding his first press conference 21 days ago, Charles Green has only become a more elusive figure. His plans for Rangers remain vague, he has yet to provide any funds, and he cannot declare with any certainty which backers, if any, are committed to his loose consortium.
Only Duff & Phelps, the administrators, appear to have any faith that Green will be able to complete his £8.5 million deal to buy the club.
In 11 days a creditors' meeting will be held at Ibrox to determine if Rangers exit administration through a Company Voluntary Arrangement. Should that vote fail, Duff & Phelps claim they already have a binding agreement in place for Green's consortium to buy the assets for £5.5m in a newco scenario.
Yet it is not even clear if they have received the authority from the creditors to sell those assets without allowing bids from an open market.
The Sunday Herald also understands that Green's consortium has not committed any funds beyond the £200,000 exclusivity fee, despite the fact that the CVA proposal being sent out was due to trigger a seven-figure payment.
Green has contradicted himself throughout the past three weeks, talking of 20 investors, then five or six; talking about playing a long-term game then admitting he will try to turn around a share issue in the short-term; talking about having £20m in place but seeking significant investment from local Rangers-supporting businessmen; and talking about the club never being in debt again, then trying to buy it with a loan that carries 8% interest.
The only certainty is that Green has seen an opportunity to exploit the club's circumstances.
"He is playing an immaculate hand as an acquirer from distress," an insolvency expert told The Sunday Herald. "He came in late; he came in apparently high; he came in at the point where the leverage had switched in favour of the acquirer from the administrators.
"He has not, of course, backed his words with cash. Weeding out tyre-kickers is an essential skill of insolvency practice: finding the buyer with the passion and the willingness to complete often outweighs the top-dollar hold-out; failure to go with the most willing buyer at best prolongs the deal and at worst creates a Dutch auction."
Rangers fans were initially cautious about Green. As the buyer Duff & Phelps had chosen, he represented the club's best hope of finding a way out of adminis-tration. Yet that tacit acceptance is beginning to erode; Green has so far failed to convince.
The CVA proposal published last Wednesday was the final proof for many supporters that it was time to make a stand for their club.
The proposal is worth demonstrably less to creditors than other offers Duff & Phelps received. All four bidders were told they must provide funding from June 1 – last Friday – yet Green has not.
Instead, £3.6m is being deducted from the creditors' pool to cover the Administration Trading Shortfall. Rangers are also due £3.7m in transfer fees, but this has been written down in the proposal to £2m.
Duff & Phelps claim that funds are in place to pay running costs until mid-July, when Green would be expected to finally pay some money, so where has that come from?
A number of players can leave for set fees when the transfer window opens, yet at least a percentage of any transfer income should have been offered to creditors as part of a more viable CVA proposal.
Supporters have also grown alarmed that season ticket money would be used to cover running costs and are now demanding that Green meets them to provide credible proof of funds, or they will not back the season ticket campaign, which is due to begin before the CVA vote.
Sales would normally bring in £16m – with 75% of the income normally received by now – but fans do not want their money to be used to buy the club, which was effectively what Craig Whyte did.
"If he can prove that the wherewithal is in place to see us through then take us forward, we'll be encouraging people to buy season tickets," says Andy Kerr, president of the Rangers Supporters Assembly.
"If people are being asked for the season ticket money based on the circumstances we have right now, I would imagine that the vast majority would say, 'you ain't getting a penny until I know that you are holding up your part of the bargain'.
"That might make us appear dogmatic and challenging, but it's our club and we're the biggest investors in it. I read the CVA proposal and it just seems as though we will be paying for it. But if this guy drops the ball, there is somebody waiting to pick it up."
The administrators know two other bidders are ready and able to step in right away should Green's deal collapse. A third is also prepared to move.
All three believe Green does not have the funds and want to save the club, with at least one confident the CVA proposal can be picked up and altered to make it more attractive to creditors without delaying the process.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/...money.17769614
well done the Herald....they have taken the best points about Greene from this thread :wink: and put them together in a good article...
So they are going to launch ST's before CVA outcome...well we will see just how stupid their fans really are.......they have now spotted they are being asked by an asset stripper to buy heir own club out of Admin...for him to make a fortune out of re-selling at a future date....
If this was a honest deal then every ST holder would at least be being offered shares to the value of this years ST cost to at least show what the reality is about who is putting the money in...He will make Murray and Whyte look like amatures if he gets away with this
At last we get some press comment to counter the SPL can't survive without Rangers propaganda
By ANDREW SMITH
Published on Sunday 3 June 2012 00:00
While some say the SPL would collapse without the Ibrox club, our analysis suggests the financial implications might not be so dire
THE cost of Rangers being lost from the Scottish Premier League could average out at only £375,000 to the non-Old Firm clubs next season. Detailed analysis conducted by Scotland on Sunday demonstrates that top-flight sides need not be facing catastrophe if five of them were to vote against admitting a newco Rangers into the set-up – the sporting integrity dilemma that will be faced if prospective Ibrox owner Charles Green cannot obtain a company voluntary arrangement (CVA).
Under our calculations, a total of £5.76 million would be wiped from revenues if the Rangers brand and their support were removed from the SPL financial equation. Celtic, though, would take the hit for almost half of this loss. That is because it is inconceivable the other clubs would not take the opportunity to change the voting structure if Rangers were out of the picture. Currently, the big two effectively have a veto. If that disappeared, so too could the present distribution model. In our projections, the top two SPL places would claim just over 20 per cent of centralised broadcast and sponsorship deals. At present that figure is 32 per cent.
It is possible that revenue reductions for clubs in an SPL without Rangers may be even be lower than our projections. Essentially, we have presented worst-case scenarios for the squeezes on television deals and attendances.
The SPL claim that the Old Firm account for 85 per cent of their earnings. We have therefore hacked 42 per cent off all centralised revenues in calculating what the loss of Rangers might mean to other clubs. Yet, no one knows if Sky and ESPN, or indeed other sponsors, would, or could, demand such heftily renegotiated terms. Especially since a Deloitte report last week put the worth of the Old Firm to Scottish football at 67 per cent. Moreover, we have arrived at our attendance totals by replacing clubs’ gates for Rangers games with their lowest crowd of last season. We have not factored in the fact that increases would follow greater competition among clubs for higher league placings and European slots. Indeed, aside from Celtic, some followers of SPL clubs might be more likely to buy season tickets because they weren’t going to be treated to visits by Rangers.
The picture that forms from this research is of a Scottish top flight that need not be entirely dependent on Rangers, or Celtic for that matter. Certainly, the loss of any revenue would bring serious challenges for clubs whose lack of liquidity has some commentators claiming any downturn in revenue could send them over the edge. However, the same thing was said when Setanta went bust four years ago. Then the doom-mongers said three clubs would be driven into administration as a result of £250,000 holes in their budgets. Only one club has since suffered an insolvency event... and in 2009 Rangers weren’t one of the sides being tipped for financial Armageddon.
It is insulting to maintain, as the more melodramatic do, that the SPL would be turned into the League of Ireland without the Old Firm brand. The sell-out, vibrant occasion the all-Edinburgh Scottish Cup final delivered surely obliterated that notion.
Of course, SPL club owners and chairmen are going to be nervous about how the Rangers saga could resolve itself. With our projections suggesting Motherwell would lose more than £700,000, Dundee United almost £600,00 and Hearts £500,000, serious cuts would be required at these clubs. But that reflects the fact these clubs were the big winners in terms of centralised prize money earned by their high league placings this season. Individual factors come into play. United would wipe out any reductions in gate receipts at a stroke were Dundee to replace Rangers, for instance. St Johnstone, too, would also benefit from a visit from the Dark Blues.
The flip side is that some clubs would suffer little financial impact were they to reject a newco Rangers in the SPL. Hibernian chairman Rod Petrie said recently that sporting integrity cannot be obtained for any price. Easy for him to take such a principled stand, perhaps, when the cost to his club would be little over £100,000. Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston has voiced the opposing view, yet, with Rangers’ value to the Ayrshire club being around £200,000, it must come within the club’s budget parameters.
Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson has spoken of his anguish over a “lose-lose” situation if the SPL clubs are forced to decide on how to treat a newco Rangers. No wonder. United fans, as with those of Celtic, Aberdeen and Motherwell principally, have threatened to turn their backs on the game if a new Rangers takes up where the old one left off. They will not countenance the Ibrox club being allowed simply to walk away from a debt to the public purse of up to £70m and walk into the SPL as opposed to applying to the Scottish Football League and working their way back up. Strong factions within the fan bases of every club feel the same.
As a result, any projected losses for top-flight clubs without a newco Rangers may not be a whole heap different from possible losses with a newco Rangers in the SPL. Instead of reduced television revenue, clubs could suffer reduced season ticket sales. And instead of being denied bumper gates from hosting Rangers, disgruntled Celtic supporterscould deny them bumper gates by not attending when they entertain their club. The Scottish game could be torn apart by the Rangers newco issue on levels far beyond the financial.
It has to be hoped that is avoided and Rangers exit administration through a CVA.
If they don’t, though, then the SPL clubs might want to heed the warning issued by former president John McBeth this week. “If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you’ll kill the sport,” he said. When it comes to the SPL, our analysis would appear to bear him out.
:aok:good article...hope some SPL chairmen read itQuote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
He's on of their best players but was he nout out injured for about 3 months at the time!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
There's retaining value in the squad and business and they're taking the piss. They said they were running at a loss of one million per month.
Selling him wouldn't have been that detrimental to the club and could have plugged a big gap.
Cheap shot at Petrie IMO. At least he had the balls to come out and say what his position was. Otherwise an OK article which could have benefited from a stronger editor.Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
Thanks Andrew - what took you so long?
I suppose the analysis needed the season to conclude and nice to be able to cite the All-Edinburgh final.
Anyway hopefully a tipping point...
[QUOTE=down-the-slope;3253190]At last we get some press comment to counter the SPL can survive without Rangers propaganda
By ANDREW SMITH
Published on Sunday 3 June 2012 00:00
While some say the SPL would collapse without the Ibrox club, our analysis suggests the financial implications might not be so dire
THE cost of Rangers being lost from the Scottish Premier League could average out at only £375,000 to the non-Old Firm clubs next season. Detailed analysis conducted by Scotland on Sunday demonstrates that top-flight sides need not be facing catastrophe if five of them were to vote against admitting a newco Rangers into the set-up – the sporting integrity dilemma that will be faced if prospective Ibrox owner Charles Green cannot obtain a company voluntary arrangement (CVA).
Under our calculations, a total of £5.76 million would be wiped from revenues if the Rangers brand and their support were removed from the SPL financial equation. Celtic, though, would take the hit for almost half of this loss. That is because it is inconceivable the other clubs would not take the opportunity to change the voting structure if Rangers were out of the picture. Currently, the big two effectively have a veto. If that disappeared, so too could the present distribution model. In our projections, the top two SPL places would claim just over 20 per cent of centralised broadcast and sponsorship deals. At present that figure is 32 per cent.
It is possible that revenue reductions for clubs in an SPL without Rangers may be even be lower than our projections. Essentially, we have presented worst-case scenarios for the squeezes on television deals and attendances.
The SPL claim that the Old Firm account for 85 per cent of their earnings. We have therefore hacked 42 per cent off all centralised revenues in calculating what the loss of Rangers might mean to other clubs. Yet, no one knows if Sky and ESPN, or indeed other sponsors, would, or could, demand such heftily renegotiated terms. Especially since a Deloitte report last week put the worth of the Old Firm to Scottish football at 67 per cent. Moreover, we have arrived at our attendance totals by replacing clubs’ gates for Rangers games with their lowest crowd of last season. We have not factored in the fact that increases would follow greater competition among clubs for higher league placings and European slots. Indeed, aside from Celtic, some followers of SPL clubs might be more likely to buy season tickets because they weren’t going to be treated to visits by Rangers.
The picture that forms from this research is of a Scottish top flight that need not be entirely dependent on Rangers, or Celtic for that matter. Certainly, the loss of any revenue would bring serious challenges for clubs whose lack of liquidity has some commentators claiming any downturn in revenue could send them over the edge. However, the same thing was said when Setanta went bust four years ago. Then the doom-mongers said three clubs would be driven into administration as a result of £250,000 holes in their budgets. Only one club has since suffered an insolvency event... and in 2009 Rangers weren’t one of the sides being tipped for financial Armageddon.
It is insulting to maintain, as the more melodramatic do, that the SPL would be turned into the League of Ireland without the Old Firm brand. The sell-out, vibrant occasion the all-Edinburgh Scottish Cup final delivered surely obliterated that notion.
Of course, SPL club owners and chairmen are going to be nervous about how the Rangers saga could resolve itself. With our projections suggesting Motherwell would lose more than £700,000, Dundee United almost £600,00 and Hearts £500,000, serious cuts would be required at these clubs. But that reflects the fact these clubs were the big winners in terms of centralised prize money earned by their high league placings this season. Individual factors come into play. United would wipe out any reductions in gate receipts at a stroke were Dundee to replace Rangers, for instance. St Johnstone, too, would also benefit from a visit from the Dark Blues.
The flip side is that some clubs would suffer little financial impact were they to reject a newco Rangers in the SPL. Hibernian chairman Rod Petrie said recently that sporting integrity cannot be obtained for any price. Easy for him to take such a principled stand, perhaps, when the cost to his club would be little over £100,000. Kilmarnock chairman Michael Johnston has voiced the opposing view, yet, with Rangers’ value to the Ayrshire club being around £200,000, it must come within the club’s budget parameters.
Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson has spoken of his anguish over a “lose-lose” situation if the SPL clubs are forced to decide on how to treat a newco Rangers. No wonder. United fans, as with those of Celtic, Aberdeen and Motherwell principally, have threatened to turn their backs on the game if a new Rangers takes up where the old one left off. They will not countenance the Ibrox club being allowed simply to walk away from a debt to the public purse of up to £70m and walk into the SPL as opposed to applying to the Scottish Football League and working their way back up. Strong factions within the fan bases of every club feel the same.
As a result, any projected losses for top-flight clubs without a newco Rangers may not be a whole heap different from possible losses with a newco Rangers in the SPL. Instead of reduced television revenue, clubs could suffer reduced season ticket sales. And instead of being denied bumper gates from hosting Rangers, disgruntled Celtic supporterscould deny them bumper gates by not attending when they entertain their club. The Scottish game could be torn apart by the Rangers newco issue on levels far beyond the financial.
It has to be hoped that is avoided and Rangers exit administration through a CVA.
If they don’t, though, then the SPL clubs might want to heed the warning issued by former president John McBeth this week. “If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you’ll kill the sport,” he said. When it comes to the SPL, our analysis would appear to bear him out.[/QUO
I'm not nit picking but should the title here not read 'can not'. As it stands it gives the impression that the article supports the theory that the SPL can't survive without Rangers
.
In the online edition the title is better, "Will the SPL survive without Rangers?" :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...gers-1-2335890
The Herald article is a good one. Every one of those points has been covered on this thread.
Pity Doncaster and the other monkeys don't care about the fans, with the exception of rangers of course.
More here;-Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/...money.17769614
What are you buying a season ticket for? This Rangers another new Rangers. SPL or Third Division? Who would buy a season ticket for Rangers? It could utrn out to be worthlessQuote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
Yeah, nice to see some of the media coming round to the fact that there are 10 other clubs in the SPL outside of the Old Firm and that without Rangers that there would be increased competition for the league, and hopefully increased attendances for those other clubs.
Also nice to see them questioning the financial backing and integrity of anyone willing to try and save the basket case that is RFC. I don't understand why anyone would want to buy such a toxic company from a purely financial standpoint. If I wanted to make money out of the situation, I'd let them liquidate, buy Ibrox and start again from scratch. We all know the knuckle draggers would still be daft enough to pay to watch a team in blue and white playing there, even if it was a proper new company and team. Money for old rope!
If Rangers aren't in the SPL next season I'd make more of an effort to go to as many games as possible, unfortunately that still won't be many but still i'd be looking to support Scottish football for ridding the league of this poisonous institutionQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack
:agree: indeed ...Gives us your money, you can trust us :aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Stating in the Daily Star on Sunday Hearts are only looking at getting only £63k for Lee Wallace....laywers on the case
I didn't read it that way. It was just a way of reinforcing the writer's view that clubs don't have to be taking as big a hit as the harbingers of doom are making out. Excellent article.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Presumably that £63k is best case scenario. Could end up being closer to zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brando7
Have become an " avid reader" of this thread , but have refrained from contributing to the debate as my knowledge of accountancy etc is minimal.
I would however ask two questions of the " netters" .
1. In your opinions is Green for real or is he just a mouthpiece for a bigger player ?
2. Is it legal for the administrators to sell off Ibrox , in the event of liquidation , for a knock down price of around £5m ?
:confused:
Maybe you're right, I don't know. It IS good to see the media tide possibly turning, but oh so late in the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamig
:agree: In two ways. If the running costs between now and the pay-out exceed the estimate in the CVA - and I'd be surprised if they don't tbh - or if HMRC get a judgement on the BTC, which would increase their slice of the pie and reduce enveryone else's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
Sort of in relation to jdships question re bigger player involved.
Where have these suggestions come from? It seems to me that this type of speculation has arisen from some Tic whose watched too many films with drug lords pulling the strings.
Whilst Green has a consortium, of sorts, what would someone in the background achieve? Make a few million, if they're lucky, by using a patsy to do the talking.
This bigger player in the background seems a bit fantasy like to me.
Whilst its funny cos it's Hearts the whole thing is a joke. Wallace has probably earned about 3 times that amount since they've been I'm admin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
If this had happened with Thomson or Whittaker we'd be going nuts.
Anyone know the yam feeling on this? Are they. 'sympathetic'' given their off field similarities? Financial and other.
Green is the front of a consortium of 20, or 10, or 7 or 6 investors. He stands to make a serious amount of money from his own remuneration though. Included in that indefinite number of investors is Freddy Shepherd. The same Freddy Shepherd that was chairman at Newcastle when their then manager Graeme Souness bought Jean-Alain Boumsong from Rangers for £8m. Nothing dodgy there, I'm sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdships
Regarding the sale of Ibrox (and all the other assets belonging to Rangers) the administrators must get the best price possible for them. The idea that Ibrox, Murray Park, all the office and training equipment, vehicles etc are only worht £5.5m in total is absurd IMO.
so, if 50000 hibees put in £2 each it would have no impact at all. now That is good value.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
There's an idea! They could put a voluntary £2 donation on ticket prices / £20 on seasons.......a sort of 'doing away with the Huns fighting fund' :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Quote:
Originally Posted by VickMackie
Quote:
Its a no brainer for me... Chase those cheating ****bags for every penny they have.
Quote:
It's a ballsy move, but we should get back every penny owed by those cheating ********s.
Quote:
Vlad go for it "release the hounds!!", tell them to ram their CVA
Quote:
They bought (arguably) our best player and had the benefit of him all season, including in matches against us. This, despite them knowing perfectly well that they couldn't afford him. And it's our fault?
They can go **** themselves. Chase them for every penny Hearts.
Quote:
If we end up being responsible for the death of Rangers I would be keen for it to be listed alongside league titles, Scottish cups and league cups on our roll of honour.
F---- them.
And f--- every single one of their mutant fans
There's an entire thread which shares the same sentiment on Kickback and it's quite clear that most level-headed Hearts fans feel the same way about Rangers as the rest of us!Quote:
Chase the orcs for everything they owe... cheating ****bags!
Despise that club.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
I'm in for that!
Best bargain ever.
It would appear to me that Green and co have set this CVA up to fail. There is noway on earth that Hearts will accept £63k and I would have to assume most other creditors will tell them to shove it! Hence the tiny pence in the pound offer and the ambiguity over recompense, which would, therefore, fail at the outset and allude to the notion that this is nothing more than asset stripping!
HMRC must be sitting in the background awaiting this, give em enough rope scenario, so they can clear the decks of D&P and Green and; then get best return for public purse/creditors. Ibrox and Murray Park have got to be worth way more than £5.5million.