Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Iain G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Let me be a Newcastle United supporter and answer your questions ..
He does whatever the **** he wants.
He doesn't give a ****.

But in the case of the The THE Rangers, its bleeding hilarious

[Bostonhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wrong way round. It's like Santander asking for it all back now. Would you be up for that?

Appreciate the point, but Ashley could reasonably say that he was lending to a company that was at least AIM listed ,and public in that sense at least - a lot of less stable moves have been made since and if he was really worried about his cash and the loan terms allowed then why shouldn't he ask for it back? The rangers international have certainly moved the goalposts since then ,notably by lying about / or not ending up with having the confidence of a Nomad when King said they had one, then delisting.

At best they have gone from being a dodgy risk for repaying a loan as a quoted company to a truly unknown risk by delisting - the only loan related development since delisting is refusing to pay back when asked then wanting to renegotiate a few months after taking and spending the money!

They don't strike me as a business with cash available or the confidence of traditional lenders otherwise why not pay Ashley off straight away before he gets really serious as suggested by magpie1982 above?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes but instead of just taking security over these assets until it is repaid as normally happens, sports direct have actually taken ownership of them. If they go into admin then I would think this puts Ashley in the driving seat for a CVA ?

Still not sure what you mean by being "in the driving seat for a CVA."

If a CVA happens, MASH get their £5m back as secured creditor. At that point, RFC get their badges and stuff back. He has his money back, the security falls, and he has no further involvement in the CVA.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Still not sure what you mean by being "in the driving seat for a CVA."

If a CVA happens, MASH get their £5m back as secured creditor. At that point, RFC get their badges and stuff back. He has his money back, the security falls, and he has no further involvement in the CVA.

So what is the advantage in SD taking ownership rather just a security over the assets?

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

why not pay Ashley off straight away before he gets really serious as suggested by magpie1982 above?

I guess the obvious answer to this question is because they don't have the money.

Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Charles Green & Co.
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Super Ally
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Kenny McDowell
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for the directorial salaries of Llambias and Leach (great name, in this context!)
Money for the upkeep of hunbrox is steadily increasing
Money from retail has hit the floor - TRFC clear 75p per replica shirt sold

...and so on.

King is either skint or won't put his hand in his pocket. It's more likely the former.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So what is the advantage in SD taking ownership rather just a security over the assets?

Squeezing their balls ever tighter?

It is that, though, belt and braces. They have an asset that is worth (arguably) much more than the loan. That said, it's security in all but name, but one step further.

[Bostonhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I guess the obvious answer to this question is because they don't have the money.

Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Charles Green & Co.
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Super Ally
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Kenny McDowell
Money is still leaving Ibrox for the directorial salaries of Llambias and Leach (great name, in this context!)
Money for the upkeep of hunbrox is steadily increasing
Money from retail has hit the floor - TRFC clear 75p per replica shirt sold

...and so on.

King is either skint or won't put his hand in his pocket. It's more likely the former.

Oh my sides

But they are the peepul so nothing to worry about.

[jacomo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I guess the obvious answer to this question is because they don't have the money.

Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Charles Green & Co.
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Super Ally
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for Kenny McDowell
Money is still leaving Ibrox monthly for the directorial salaries of Llambias and Leach (great name, in this context!)
Money for the upkeep of hunbrox is steadily increasing
Money from retail has hit the floor - TRFC clear 75p per replica shirt sold

...and so on.

King is either skint or won't put his hand in his pocket. It's more likely the former.

How is Chuckie Green still getting cash from them? Pretty impressive, in a way.

[Hibs Class]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wrong way round. It's like Santander asking for it all back now. Would you be up for that?

There are circumstances in which Santander could ask for it all back now, regardless of whether or not the borrower is up for it. And if the borrower cannot/will not make full repayment then Santander could take possession of the security and realise it, again no matter how unhappy that might make the borrower. If the rangers haven't fulfilled the terms of the loan then Ashley may well be entitled to call for full repayment, in which case whatever they vote for at their GMs is irrelevant.

[Bostonhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Squeezing their balls ever tighter?

It is that, though, belt and braces. They have an asset that is worth (arguably) much more than the loan. That said, it's security in all but name, but one step further.

Just thinking out loud, how about King takes them into admin for his own ends but its a non fiddled entirely above the board admin for the benefit of the creditors / victims (yes, I know ) and Ashley or a nominee or someone who isn't a "the rangers man" offers the best value to the administrator? What then?

[Spike Mandela]

What are the repayment terms in the initial loan? Surely there must be a repayment date.

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How is Chuckie Green still getting cash from them? Pretty impressive, in a way.

Really interesting question, and I wish I had a 'forensic' answer for you, but when he was atop the marble staircase (now more like a staircase with marbles on it) with his patsy Whyte, he had all sorts of sneaky wee contracts built into his tenure, to continue while he was there, and for a certain length of time after his departure. I understand (sorry, terrible 'journo' word!) that we're talking c.£3m a year...

It's very impressive - you couldn't give Green a red neck with a blowtorch.

Overall, what does disappoint me as a journalist, is how the Scottish MSM have utterly failed to explain where the money is (or, indeed, isn't), where it's going, what Warburton can expect in terms of £ to rebuild a gash squad, etc.

It's not the 90s any more. The sun no longer perennially shines on hunbox. Serious investigative journalism is required - but the red tops won't step up to the plate. Forget The Scotsman and The Herald, of course - these are both basically finished as serious newspapers.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just thinking out loud, how about King takes them into admin for his own ends but its a non fiddled entirely above the board admin for the benefit of the creditors / victims (yes, I know ) and Ashley or a nominee or someone who isn't a "the rangers man" offers the best value to the administrator? What then?

He who dares wins.

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh my sides

But they are the peepul so nothing to worry about.

As they reminded us in the 2nd leg of the play-off semi, they are indeed the people. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a 45%/SNP/Taig, etc.

[Geo_1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What are the repayment terms in the initial loan? Surely there must be a repayment date.

We don't know the detail but any commercial loan I've ever seen can be called in at the whim of the lender.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We don't know the detail but any commercial loan I've ever seen can be called in at the whim of the lender.

I could be wrong on this but I think mortgages can as well. They never are of course but I'm sure it's in the small print.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Really interesting question, and I wish I had a 'forensic' answer for you, but when he was atop the marble staircase (now more like a staircase with marbles on it) with his patsy Whyte, he had all sorts of sneaky wee contracts built into his tenure, to continue while he was there, and for a certain length of time after his departure. I understand (sorry, terrible 'journo' word!) that we're talking c.£3m a year...

It's very impressive - you couldn't give Green a red neck with a blowtorch.

Overall, what does disappoint me as a journalist, is how the Scottish MSM have utterly failed to explain where the money is (or, indeed, isn't), where it's going, what Warburton can expect in terms of £ to rebuild a gash squad, etc.

It's not the 90s any more. The sun no longer perennially shines on hunbox. Serious investigative journalism is required - but the red tops won't step up to the plate. Forget The Scotsman and The Herald, of course - these are both basically finished as serious newspapers.

Whilst that is regrettable it is also understandable. They have to sell papers and digging to deep has too often been portrayed as being "anti-Rangers" and has led to a drop-off in sales. They are in decline anyway and can't afford to alienate many more of their customers.

Interesting because the opposite is probably true. If a newspaper were to unveil the true extent of where the money is going then it would surely be in the best interests of the fans. They could then turn their ire on who is actually siphoning off their money.

To be honest I think it is the price they pay for their very existence. The shareholders who stepped in when the new club launched are absolutely rinsing them (directly and indirectly) and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

I would have some sympathy if it were any other club.

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Whilst that is regrettable it is also understandable. They have to sell papers and digging to deep has too often been portrayed as being "anti-Rangers" and has led to a drop-off in sales. They are in decline anyway and can't afford to alienate many more of their customers.

Interesting because the opposite is probably true. If a newspaper were to unveil the true extent of where the money is going then it would surely be in the best interests of the fans. They could then turn their ire on who is actually siphoning off their money.

To be honest I think it is the price they pay for their very existence. The shareholders who stepped in when the new club launched are absolutely rinsing them (directly and indirectly) and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

I would have some sympathy if it were any other club.

Great post, perfect analysis.

Bottom line, what would The Sun or The Record gain from a back-page splash of: THE RANGERS: WE'RE SKINT

Rhetorical question, of course, just ill-will from the blinkered peepul and no doubt No.287 in a never-ending series of 'boycotts'.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There are circumstances in which Santander could ask for it all back now, regardless of whether or not the borrower is up for it. And if the borrower cannot/will not make full repayment then Santander could take possession of the security and realise it, again no matter how unhappy that might make the borrower. If the rangers haven't fulfilled the terms of the loan then Ashley may well be entitled to call for full repayment, in which case whatever they vote for at their GMs is irrelevant.

That's right but there doesn't seem to be a suggestion that any of the terms have been breached or it is otherwise now able to be called back in.

Why would he call a GM to ask shareholders to pay it back if he was legally entitled to payment? Why isn't he just using the terms of the agreement?

Seems to me that until something shows otherwise Rangers are entitled to stick to the agreed term of the loan.

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's right but there doesn't seem to be a suggestion that any of the terms have been breached or it is otherwise now able to be called back in.

Why would he call a GM to ask shareholders to pay it back if he was legally entitled to payment? Why isn't he just using the terms of the agreement?

Seems to me that until something shows otherwise Rangers are entitled to stick to the agreed term of the loan.

No terms have been breached.

Ashley's just coming the c***, and he's not even getting warmed up.

All good news for HFC...

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No terms have been breached.

was it not previously stated that one of the terms of the loan was that Ashley had two seats on the Board? Now that Llambias and Leach have been removed, doesn't that imply the terms have been breached?

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Whilst that is regrettable it is also understandable. They have to sell papers and digging to deep has too often been portrayed as being "anti-Rangers" and has led to a drop-off in sales. They are in decline anyway and can't afford to alienate many more of their customers.

Interesting because the opposite is probably true. If a newspaper were to unveil the true extent of where the money is going then it would surely be in the best interests of the fans. They could then turn their ire on who is actually siphoning off their money.

To be honest I think it is the price they pay for their very existence. The shareholders who stepped in when the new club launched are absolutely rinsing them (directly and indirectly) and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

I would have some sympathy if it were any other club.

Except the Old Huns.

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

was it not previously stated that one of the terms of the loan was that Ashley had two seats on the Board? Now that Llambias and Leach have been removed, doesn't that imply the terms have been breached?

I guess that's why L & L are still getting paid - and why Ashley is on the attack. But I'm not 100% sure that seats on the board were assured - I've not seen the loan agreement.

I do wonder how many people are actually privy to the exact terms of the loan? I'd say it's single digits, and that number certainly doesn't include any members of the media.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I guess that's why L & L are still getting paid - and why Ashley is on the attack. But I'm not 100% sure that seats on the board were assured - I've not seen the loan agreement.

I do wonder how many people are actually privy to the exact terms of the loan? I'd say it's single digits, and that number certainly doesn't include any members of the media.

This is clearly not the detail of the loan, but it is the Stock Exchange notice, which does mention "the right to nominate two directors to the board of Rangers for the duration of the Facility". No mention of repayment terms, and does actually speak about it as long term funding.

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/e.../12227853.html

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is clearly not the detail of the loan, but it is the Stock Exchange notice, which does mention "the right to nominate two directors to the board of Rangers for the duration of the Facility". No mention of repayment terms, and does actually speak about it as long term funding.

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/e.../12227853.html

The pedant in me sees that as a "right to nominate " 2 directors. It doesn't actually entitle them to 2 seats on the Board.

[brog]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The pedant in me sees that as a "right to nominate " 2 directors. It doesn't actually entitle them to 2 seats on the Board.

I agree but isn't it the real point that now The The Rangers are delisted they would not need to make this kind of statement to the Stock Exchange in future? That's really the nub of Ashley's complaint, ( & I can see his point ) that he made a formal loan to a company listed on a regulated exchange & the status of that company has altered significantly ( for the worse ) since he made that loan.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I agree but isn't it the real point that now The The Rangers are delisted they would not need to make this kind of statement to the Stock Exchange in future? That's really the nub of Ashley's complaint, ( & I can see his point ) that he made a formal loan to a company listed on a regulated exchange & the status of that company has altered significantly ( for the worse ) since he made that loan.

There has been a fundamental change in the nature of the transaction,that's for sure.
In normal circumstances, he would be entitled to go for immediate repayment. However, as we all know, these ain't normal circumstances. While the loan remains unpaid, he's coining in the merchandising, in the knowledge that the loan is secured.

It's easy money for him.

[emerald green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would those who think they are going to be better and stronger please say where sevco and the glib and shameless liar are going to get the money from to achieve this?

Not getting promotion shot a bolt through what masqueraded as a business plan the Lying King had, if those nameless backers ever existed.

They're in hock to the previous management teams; there's still players on their books milking them of 10s of thousands a week between them; ibrox is falling down. And then there's the Ashley with more aces up his sleeve than there are cards in a deck.

They've no 'normal' income from any of the 'normal' channels a football club could expect from catering to advertising to merchandising (this could actually cost them), and virtually every other avenue.

The half support that backed their club last season look like boycotting this season!

Their backers, led by the fraudster, have shelled out pennies to pervious shareholders and none of the rest has been given, just loaned to the club to keep it afloat, it's gone now. None of it would bolster the playing staff.

None of this is a secret. So where do you guys think they are going to get the money from?

They have basically been struck off the stock market for being untrustworthy. No bank is going to give them a penny credit, none of their Championship backers have the cash to throw around and the others have fled, as I said previously, if they ever existed. The South African judge, at the same time as the glib and shameless, said nothing the Lying King said should be taken at face value unless backed up with documentary evidence.

The SPFL should be demanding a public statement guaranteeing that they can see out the season and privately documentary evidence to support that statement.

I'll start with the bit in bold as that presumably includes me.

I personally don't know where The Rangers will get their income from, how much that will be, and neither do you or anyone else on this forum I would respectfully suggest, unless you have sat in on Board meetings at Ibrox.

Where, for example would the money have come from to offer their new management team three year contracts? I don't think Warburton, a former City trader, would have allowed them to pull the wool over his eyes too easily, would he? I know King is a "glib and shameless liar", but that's stretching it a bit far.

You have set out a number of statements about the financial situation at the Ibrox club, much of it coming from press reports I presume. How accurate these statements/reports are, who knows, but it's clear they don't have financial problems to seek, I agree.

The fact that Ibrox is "falling down" - that's maybe a wee exaggeration I think. The fact that Tynecastle is in a much worse state than Ibrox didn't cause HMFC too many problems in strolling the Championship last season. Yes, they will have to address this issue sometime (as will HMFC) but it won't be in the foreseeable future IMO. It's what happens on the pitch next season that matters.

I doubt if the Huns will boycott Ibrox next season if their new management team can get results on the pitch. If (a big if) they do get good results, they will be back in droves along with all the associated gate receipts. Same as most clubs, just that they they have the advantage of a much larger fanbase compared to every club in Scotland, except Celtic.

That takes me on to my next point. You focus almost entirely on the money - the financial side of things. But it's not purely about money. It's about getting decent players in, getting them organised and motivated. The don't need to spend hundreds of thousands on transfer fees. They don't have that kind of money anyway you say. Neither do Hibs.

There are decent players out of contract, and players can be brought in on loan. Better players than the deadwood they are getting rid off, which will free up wages. That's one reason, the main reason, why I think they will be better and stronger next season.

A lot will depend on who they bring in and how quickly they gell as a team, as I said in my previous post (I hope they don't!). They are not going to get rid of at least a dozen players (maybe more) and not bring anyone else in, at all, to replace them surely?

Whatever mess the Huns are in financially, I feel certain it will be between Hibs and The Rangers as to who will be first at the end of the season. It will become much clearer once everyone knows what sort of squad each club has by the time the season gets started.

I'm not in any way trying to defend the disgrace that is newco/Sevco - whatever they are called. I'd love to see them go to the wall, but I just don't think it's going to happen, no matter how much wishful thinking there is.

All of the above IMHO. Happy to be proven wrong later on down the line. Time will tell.

[brog]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There has been a fundamental change in the nature of the transaction,that's for sure.
In normal circumstances, he would be entitled to go for immediate repayment. However, as we all know, these ain't normal circumstances. While the loan remains unpaid, he's coining in the merchandising, in the knowledge that the loan is secured.

It's easy money for him.

Yep, easy money for him & lots of entertainment for us!

[greenginger]

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/d...*4IgvoKBrAU%3D

Copy of Standard Security on Edmonston House and the Albion car Park.

Clause 2 - Covenant to Pay

" ..... to pay and discharge on demand the secured obligation to the lender . "

I think Mike's £5 mil. is due now.


Sorry , not copying, but available free on Companies House trial service.