Printable View
No, they can't turn them into shares without offering the same deal to all shareholders. They can write the loans off though but I doubt they will do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyboy
Ashley controlling retail probably only costs them about £4/5m a year. Not enough to make much of a dent in Celtics advantage.
They had revenue of £16m for the 6 months to Dec. Over the same 6 months Celtics revenue was £61m.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Debt (is it secured?) for equity swap when admin 2 happens?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
They managed last year after winning the cup. Did they not ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Aye that winning goal from Halliday made him a Sevco legend.......Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Well in his own heid anyway........
https://thecelticblog.com/2017/03/bl...ster-downside/
Bit about FFP in here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Which I believe Glib is attempting to do as we speak. I've heard 20p each share being mooted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
True, but if I were a zom I would prefer my own house is in order before comparing to other teams. They've dominated Scottish football on and off the park when sevco have been down. Champs league most seasons. £2 mill coming 1st each season. Its been pretty painful viewing, a one horse race in all terms. Shame the sheep couldn't hold their bottle the past few seasons.
European football will be sevcos aim. If they get into the EL groups they will get cash, it's all part of Glibs 3 year plan or however he spun it.
No King has been ordered to offer 20p a share because of a concert party arrangement at the takeover.
I would be careful reading blogs like this tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Dermot Desmond was named in the Panama Papers. He owns a Latvian bank that was recently found to be money laundering.
They are both as bad as each other. Scottish Football would be 10x better without them.
FFP is a minefield. It would seem you can sill compete in Europe despite not meeting the criteria. Seems you can just pay a fine and continue on. Uefa at its finest.
He's not attempting to do that, as far as we know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyboy
He has been ordered to make the offer of 20p per share, but he has made no noises about complying with it. Indeed:-
" I do not agree with TAB’s much delayed ruling nor follow its logic and I shall take the appropriate time to reflect upon it and consider the best course of action for myself, Rangers International Football Club and its shareholders. My view on one individual not being able to exert undue influence on Rangers is already well known."
It looks like you can still compete but only under strict financial supervision to break even. That means no more soft loans etc. That means cutting the wage bill to fit the revenue coming in. Will the Sevconians tolerate that? Will they still keep buying season tickets knowing their player budget will be about a quarter of Celtics? No more going for #55 sales pitch? And if sales drop the player budget would have to drop again to match. Qualifying for Europe could be a double edged sword.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyboy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Desmond's name has been found in the "Panama Papers" - I think linked to correspondence from HSBC - but, like the late Prime Minister's father, has not been found to have done anything illegal - unlike King.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyboy
He does not "own" a Latvian bank, he owns a share of said bank, but nevertheless may be caught up in a case being investigated by the French.
I agree with the two cheeks of the same @rse argument in many cases, but I don't think the Desmond can be compared to the glib and shameless one.
He only "own"s a third of the bank which by your logic would mean that he doesn't "own" Celtic?Quote:
Originally Posted by PeeKay
Supervision by UEFA might even suit the Ibrox board. "The warchest's there, honest, but UEFA won't let us spend it".Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Next season they'll be increasing ticket prices, they'll have increased central prize money from the SPFL and probably some European income. When the 15-16 accounts were issued in the autumn a figure of £3m in soft loans was quoted as being needed for this season. If that turns out to be correct then that additional income could allow them to break even in 17-18 while roughly keeping this season's level of spending.
I agree with your point about the possibility of season ticket sales falling away if the bears can't see anything better than a distant second in store.
In the closer future the big threat isn't the loss on normal trading, it's the court cases being raised by Warburton's management team and Ashley's companies. The amounts involved there could be bigger than the trading or accounting losses if they lose all the cases. We don't know how capable the directors are of covering these possible liabilities.
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenLake
So who owns Celtic or the Latvian Bank? Hawley Griffin? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by PeeKay
We do. If it wasn't for us they'd be huns.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLake
Liked that :top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr White
Any significance that the financial information is in respect of RIFC, not TRFC?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr White
Who can tell? 😉Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonewall
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
The rangers vs rangers retail case got underway today.
https://stv.tv/news/west-central/138...chandise-deal/
The rangers case seems to be based on the claim that " rangers fans don't like the deal ! "
Open and shut case normally, but this Court is in London. :greengrin
Don't know if it's just the way my mind works but I wonder which entity is granted the licence to compete in UEFA competitions with reference to FFP. Could they dump all the debt with say TRFC and RIFC apply for the FIFA licence.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
We certainly own the huns:cup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr White
Pretty sure it's TRFC which is the 'club' for the purposes of licensing. I'm not sure if it matters where the debt is for that? The trading losses have been incurred by the 'club'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonewall
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's my understanding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The FFP rules are not just about debt, but losses as well.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
...so getting pumped at Hampden last May counts against them as well? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sometimes. It's a Gray area...........Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
In that financial statement yesterday, where is the £2.9m loans they received in October? Does that show on there?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
According to the link there's a distinct lack of legal basis upon which to lodge a defense? The outcome can only be in MA's favor unless as you quietly imply the cards are already stacked in favor of a distinctly stone builders type club.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
In reality if unbiased it certainly appears the huns have no legal grounds and MA should win his case.
glory glory
Can't work out what is my favourite quote from this article:Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Statement A: "He said there was a widespread view that no "self-respecting" Rangers' supporter wore a replica shirt." - never met a self respecting the The Sevco fan in my life....
Statement B: "Whether rightly or wrongly, the supporters see Mike Ashley's primary goal as the making of money at the expense of on-field success." - yeah that's cos he runs a chain of retail stores and not a football club!
It was only a trading statement. There was no Balance Sheet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
In other words, kinda meaningless... like an Orange Club biscuit, without the Orange. (work that one up as you will, guys....:greengrin)
Or a club, well not the now defunct Glasgow rangers football club anyway.[emoji6]Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Not a very nice wrapper either.
http://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/...L07/Club12.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I have it from a source that Follow Follow was extremely provoked by Hibs.net earlier downtime and has now set fire to the internet.
Can anyone confirm?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacomo
Cough, cough, room here filling up with smoke...
:panic:
Club or club?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I seen what you did thereQuote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
GGTTH
See Phil Mac is giving Sevco a real kicking today......
http://philmacgiollabhain.ie/
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by southern hibby
This still makes me laugh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8x_59EjZOs
Why do all these blogs by Celtic fans have the same bizarre style of writing?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Personally I don't care, the content is far better than any of the tosh to be found in the Daily Record et al.......Quote:
Originally Posted by 660
Excellent, sure I've seen it before but worth another lookQuote:
Originally Posted by CyberSauzee
Me too - but the scary thing about it is, it's TRUE - I'd bet a large majority of us, since they died, has come across or knows a Hun who actually does respond in that way when talking about their 'situation' !Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberSauzee
They truly are worthy holders of 'Scottish Football's Thickest F*****s' cup - the ONLY cup they've won/earned without cheating in the last 2-3 decades !
https://daviesleftpeg.wordpress.com/...wn-any-shares/
Good article written by a Sevconian
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No doubt be pointed at as another "Republican Blogger" and not One Of Thee PeepelQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Good to see they are not all knuckle draggers..much better written than McGobbins gibberish as well ( I suppose it is "The Queens" english !)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Anyone who puts the text of an article on top of a photo should be banned from the Internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
This is interesting: https://rangers.co.uk/news/club/company-statement-3/
Effectively Paul Murray, the Parks, Bennett and Gilligan have been removed as directors of the Engine Room Subsidiary. Now why would Dave King want to do that?
Not sure that there is anything suspicious about it. On the face of it, it does make sense. Separation of governance and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ehf
That said, it is the Rangers. JJ and co will no doubt have their own conspiracy theories in place and will let us know them shortly.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Of course it would make sense in any normal, sane governance structure but this is Planet Sevco. And the timing is perhaps significant given reports of a developing rift between King and the others/the Parks refusing to ante up the money to fund the Takeover Panel-decreed share offer.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/par...medium=twitter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
....yet they're all still on the Board of the holding company.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The status is being a director of the football club. Its the football club that is a member of the SFA and SPFL so no chance advancement in that direction for those three.
They probably shouldn't get to wear the club blazer or even get director box seats.
Its like being a director of HFC Holdings or Mrs Budge's Bidco 1874.
My comment was about the Celtic blog claiming that they had "sensationally walked away".Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Thus far, they haven't. 😀
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Its all very strange. :confused:
The football club now has only 2 directors, Stewart Robertson and Andrew Dickson and James Blair as club secretary.
Maybe going to bring in fresh talent, Bomber Brown and the Rangers First Loyals.
The DOF appointment seems to be imminent.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
In honour of their hero Billy Fullerton started a chapter of the KKK in Scotland...truly awful people and history. Luckily Sevco got a chance to ditch decades of hatred in 2012 and start with a clean slate 🙄Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
It's not necessarily down to King. He's has the largest individual shareholding, but not a controlling interest. The other members of the concert party are still needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ehf
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
The three remaining are executive directors. The non-executives are now only on the holding company board.
Might be perfectly innocent.
It needed a serious edit IMO. Way too long and awful grammar.Quote:
Originally Posted by worcesterhibby
Shame cos he makes a good point. King is a liar.
I can't say too much on here but I was told of this likelihood, ie Murray et al, departing a couple of weeks ago at a major racing occasion. My friend is very close to 1 of the 3 Bears, aka the concert party & he described this as the scramble for the lifeboats! Apparently this person has adopted the old Ronald Reagan mantra, ie trust with verification, in his dealings with King. The ruling of the TAB has caused this guy to completely re-evaluate his opinion of DK & he's now looking at his insurance, namely he has retained every piece of correspondence, & possibly more, with King since the inception of their grandiose plan. That's his trust with verification. If the plan proceeds in the manner I was told then either King or the 3 Bears will be gone very shortly, certainly before the end of the season & probably earlier. At the moment the odds on it being DK who departs are about the same as Celtc winning the league. It's a shame in a way because if/when DK goes it actually increases the chances of The Rangers becoming a stable organisation, though thankfully the fall out will have a negative effect for some time to come.
Cheers for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
It's all very plausible, but it does beg one question..... who would buy them in their current state?
Agreed, that's the major fly in the ointment. I'll pm you.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I know a journalist who interviewed David Murray a while back - he got the feeling that Murray was biding his time before making a move to get involved again.
Remember, the hordes still (generally) seem to view him as the guy who brought the good times rather than the guy who killed their club.
I can see another bargain '£1' sale in their 'future' ................................. Ha-ha-ha just realised as I was typing - they've no money, just plenty of debt, their squad is sheer 'Jock White' and Septic just keep on winning - the Hun have NO FUTURE !
NO Cups/Titles = constant year-on-year reduction in the Hun-hordes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://thecelticblog.com/2017/03/bl...-big-going-on/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Happy to be proved wrong, but they're not giving any evidence about the "sensational" nature of things. Sure, it's the Huns, therefore nothing is rarely as it first appears, but I can't help thinking they're letting their prejudices get in the way here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Decent summary
http://www.thenational.scot/sport/15...e/?ref=mr&lp=1
Indeed! At least 1 or 2 decent journos still in Scotland then though of course Martin Hannan does not really start from a neutral Position!Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberSauzee
I agree although the point about Sandy Easdale does highlight that all is not what it seems with the Ibrox statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
More related Sevco "housekeeping" as it's being reported that GSL has just resigned from the board of his own company in SA. "The new Board structure provides the increasingly higher level of governance demanded by investors". Wonder how his consideration of the take-over panel decision in the UK is going and whether he will deem it necessary to improve the governance levels at RIFC 🤔
Sincerely hope this is true from Phil Mac
http://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2017/04...xic-take-over/
9 days until the offer must be made.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
This week could be very interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't understand what King's problem is. He still has 15M left in the war chest to pay for it right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Haw haw haw.......
Given the sums involved it shouldn't really be that difficult to raise the money. The problem probably comes from the security being offered (or not) for the bridging loan facility. Mike Ashley had the car park / offices as security for his loans and I would have thought first charge on these now rests with the Three Bears / GSL after they repaid MA with private loans. I don't doubt (unlike some) that GSL has money in SA but it's incredibly difficult to get money out of the country at present and Jacob Zuma's latest stunts (which including sacking his finance minister) will not have made this any easier. It all adds up to an interesting few days ahead and it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up going cap in hand to Mr Ashley to solve the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
King can't use any of RFC's assets for finance, if that's what you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Is It On....
https://daviesleftpeg.wordpress.com/...nce=be2e85abac
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I doubt his South African assets will be much use either. :greengrin
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-to-junk-chart
It matters little what King has in South Africa because the exchange rate is so bad. In 1968 it was 2 rand to the £ Sterling. Now it is something like 23 Rand to the £.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
In any event, it is next to impossible to get large sums of money out of South Africa.
Not that King has any intention of putting his own cash on the line.
Like David Murray before him he will attempt to persuade others to 'invest' and keep hold of his own cash.
That's not his immediate problem, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
He has to make an offer to the other shareholders within the next week or so.... with his own cash.
Part of King's settlement with SARS to avoid 82 years in jail was that he repatriate all his assets to SA.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Isn't that what Whyte got into trouble for?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Wow, I was just about to put this years Cash ISA allowance in my Banks miserable fund as usual but now I've seen this it sounds like this is the guy for me - what funds is he associated with?:crazy:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Nah, he got screwed cos he bet the ST money on the Gers against Malmo.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Or something like that.
Indeed (and sorry for the confusion). He has to find the money from his own pocket as the prev loans were for RIFC purposes to repay Mile Ashley.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
JJ's latest piece.
He has nailed a few of his colours to the mast with this one, both politically and morally. I stopped reading at the homophobic *****, but if anyone has read the full thing, does he say anything sensible?
https://johnjamessite.com/2017/04/06...h-for-rangers/
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
I read that though and its the ranting of a raving bigot. This guy is disgusting.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Stopped reading him a while back. Loser.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyM_1875
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He's getting slated on Twitter for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
It's symptomatic of bloggers that they seem to have this need to go further than what they're "good" at. By all means, he should tell us what he knows, but (and I've said this before) when he branches out into areas he knows ****-all about, he loses any credibility. And this latest ***** has just blown him out of the water for me.
I couldn't agree with you more CWG. JJ certainly seems to be a very strange character: thin skinned, self righteous, angry, insecure, paranoid, homophobic, in need of an editor and prone to gilding the Lilly.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Will keep reading his Rangers based stuff but I question it all, which is probably a healthy thing.
And folk questioned his credentials as a Rangers supporter....Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonewall
Which parts are you taking issue with CWG? For the most part he is simply repeating what other people have stated? Unless I am ending up at the wrong article....Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
He's changed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
There were a few paragraphs which laid bare his own political leanings, which is fair enough. He then went on to talk about the sexuality of some of our political leaders, in disparaging and offensive terms.
A few people on his site seem to have pulled him up on it, and that's probably made him remove the offending parts. That, and perhaps the threat of legal action.
Still doesn't excuse him, though.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Ok fair enough. I was surprised by your post as you rarely use that type of vocabulary.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
You should read the first drafts of some of my posts 😂Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Take issue with CWG? As a (relatively) new boy on here, I know better and have been (politely) corrected / been encouraged to clarify "once or twice" 😉Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Ah don't be fooled by CWG's fierce demeanor. He's just a big teddy bear 😀Quote:
Originally Posted by Is It On....
I have had easier investment pitches at work 🙄. And I am not sure about calling him a big "teddy bear" 🤔Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry