Rangers Banter Archive February 05 2014

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


05 Feb 2014 14:23:26
If there is no foundation to the latest rumours that CEO Wallace is about to hand in his resignation, then surely Rangers board need to address this with a swift denial immediately.
Failure to do so will give the story some credence and send the share price through the floor as shareholders try to cut their losses, as they would see his exit as the beginning of the end.
bluebeard.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

OP I have no idea if any of these rumours have any substance or not but my tuppence worth would be it would surely be totally out of character with a man well used to boardroom brawls who walks after a few weeks. That would not look good in his CV.
On balance therefore I am saying b@llocks- probably wishful thinking by some non Rangers minded media people or someone putting two and two together and getting 9.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - Nbear, I edited your post, I do not post anything remotely concerned to do with that man, sorry)

Denying rumours is giving them too much credence, more important matters to deal with.

Agree0 Disagree0

Absolutely fair comment ED I didn't name him as the name and the person leaves me sick to the pit of my stomach but no one would have doubted who it was. Not worthy of further comment and best ignored by all- Agreed!

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - No problems NB)

Whyte confirmed as director of SEVCO 5088 by companies house this morning.

So whyte is now director of subsidiary of TRIFC - and we breach 5-way agreement and are open to SFA punishments.

He is NOT ALLOWED TO BE PART of newco. so being director of sub-company OWNED by RiFC and TRiFc is no on.


Also means his claim against ibrox even stronger. JG. question just how did GREEN con whyte. because whyte has all the cards at the moment.

BDO may give him keys to ibrox for nothing, court may give him it, Companies house may give him it, HRMC may win and give him it.

then what. I see fans asked to pay£20/mth to save rangers has started. we already gave £5m in the IPO. which just covered IPO costs.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - This is my understanding of this and if I am correct then your post is very wrong, Sevco 5088 was a company which was started by Charles Green in which he proposed to buy the assets, however he then started another company Sevco Scotland Ltd (now Rangers International Football Club) and used this company to purchase the assets of Rangers. Craig Whyte claims that this was wrong and he did not give Charles Green permission to do this as a director of Sevco 5088, this is the basis of his "legal challenge" and this is how Green claims he "shafted" Whyte. The basis of his challenge was that D&P had an agreement to sell the assets to Sevco 5088 but instead they were sold to Sevco Scotland Ltd (or illegally transferred from one to the other as Whyte alleges). Therefore Sevco 5088 is a stand alone company and is not a subsidiary company of Rangers International Football Club, its original intentions was to be the vehichle to buy Rangers assets but was never used ...... does that make sense??)

Ed you are right, sevco 5088 never owned any assets of rangers and is not associated in anyway with RIFC

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

If the board had to come out and issue statements in defence of all the rumours put out there by some anti rangers minded bloggers and journos, then statements would need to be issued almost every day

Any bears who use these people as their main source of information really should know better

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

@3 please tell Sammy that as he uses this as his reliable source on a regular basis

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Steerpike- what could possibly be more important, than reassuring possible investors that all`s well in the boardroom.
instead of letting this rumour grow arms and legs, you think Murray the boardroom brawler (Nbear2)
would be going for the jugular given his reputation is on the line.
A short statement rubbishing story would be suffice.
instead the silence is deafening.
bluebeard.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - Remember and log in bluebeard)

Bluebeard,

There are many ways to skin a cat, trade libel needs a bit more rope to hang him, but it will be soon.

I read somewhere in the accounts that Sevco 5088 was a subsidiary of RIFC plc, thankfully the registration is with TRFC.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039-sorry I do log in but for some reason not tagging.
any suggestions? bluebeard techno phobic.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - None mate, I will ask the tech guys)

Ed039

if Sevco 5088 was an unconnected standalone company with NO part of the purchase of assets. THEN

it would not be part of TRiFC/RiFc - but IT IS a wholey owned sub-siduary

if "Sevco Scotland" bought assets from D&P - then £200,000 exclusive payment would NOT have been needed - but IT WAS.

We KNOW Green conned Whyte (Green admits this) - but how - it seems most likely that Green was director of Sevco 5088 when it bought assets from D&P (and though he was SOLE director ) - the Conn.

Note: there is minutes of a Rangers board meeting which shows that Sevco 5088 had assets - and transferred then for no consideration to Sevco Scotland (which then renamed itself TRFC), and then this is the basis it could IPO with assets as part of this.

JG. claims Green conned whyte but another route (for which there seems no configuration) that instead Green purchased assets from D&P using Sevco Scotland (but this would not be possible without binding agreement? ) - where is the proof that a binding agreement with Secvo Scotland exists.

so far no sign of it.

I don't know truth, as there is lot of smoke and mirrors. but if we seek facts, then clarity follows.

Note: Why does RiFC own Sevco 5088? if not part of process.

A con is a lie, that's fabricated to look real. All lies have a flaw, and con artists are like magicians and distract you from the lie ( ie buy this car from me, lie is I don't own it, but its got nice alloys. and its cheap. )

The truth has has no flaws. But can seem unbelievable.

Whyte is a known fabricator.
Green is a known liar, given he lied to Whyte.

But our club in the middle of this, and seems one has hold over other, just when we need a loan.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - This is an extract from the final report from D&P - Joint Administrators:

7.1 A detailed outline of the marketing process undertaken by the Joint Administrators which preceded the sale of the business, history and certain assets of the Club to Newco on 14 June 2012, was provided in the previous report to creditors dated 10 July 2012."

"Newco" is defined in this report as "The Rangers Football Club Limited (Formerly Sevco Scotland Limited) of Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow G51 2XD (Company number SC425159)

Is everyone lying Sammy? Can you show me some documentation that shows the assets transferred to Sevco 5088, I am not saying it wasnt, I have googled it and this is the best piece I can give you)

Sammy,

Sevco 5088 was brought into the RIFC group by CG after the CW revelations a year ago, this does not mean the assets had to go through this company, CG had his reasons.

If the assets had gone through Sevco 5088, CW would have sprinted up the court steps long ago and the auditors would have given Rangers a pervasive warning.

Agree0 Disagree0

@ed 39, I seem to remember that charles green and sevco 5088 was the preferred bidder. if that was the case, then why was the business conducted with sevco scotland, who did not have preferred bidder status, and not opened up to other bidders, eg, mr mccoll or the blue knights?

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - It was Charles Green consortium that was named preferred bidder, the formation of Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland were ultimately formed just afterwards by way of finalising the purchase)

Step 1:

google :

rangers minutes sevco 5088

scotslaw post will go step by step thru the stages, shows greens mistakes and mis-steps where he fails to declare interests in companies on IPO (companies whose assets he moves without consideration - the con)

RFCL board minutes from OCt2012 was released they CharlotteFakes which details the xfer from 5088 to scotland. this deleted from scrib so I will look for a cache version of this.

i don't think everyone is lying, think most fans on here genuine

(i have doubts about JG. - as he believes every word green says, thinks IPO was great investment before it finished, thinks IPO is still great investment, thinks fans could buy shares to save club? - which all helps green - and IAMRANGERS turned out to be Imran )

as said earlier - if Sevco 5088 had no part to play, it would not be owned by RiFC, it would not be mentioned in the IPO, and it would not be mentioned in the account.

All 3 are - so it did have some assets - which were moved into Sevco Scotland - question is which assets - and did the Rangers CEO at time have the right to move £50m of assets for NO CONSIDERATION - why not pay £5m for them - then whyte got paid what green paid and no issue.

IF green HAD paid whyte just £5m - green could have kept the £22-£5m (£17m) - was green just toooooo greedy.

It could be D&P created two binding agreements, one blind with Secvo 5088 and one with Sevco Scotland - but this would then mean D&P owe whyte for being duplicitous - and a binding agreement needed £200,000 is BINDING on all parties - you can't breach this contract witout major penalties (and D&P worth billions ).

good debate - can move it to finance page if you want.

JG. just states greens position all the time - without backing it up with his proof.

Agree0 Disagree0

Steerpike - Deloitte recent accounts have credible liability on assets noted - which could not be quantified - as they don't know how to account for this.

Rumour is Green did not want this note in accounts (as its stops loans in future in the assets) - yet Deloitte MAJOR account firm and if they false account - they can go BUST like leiman brothers.

Green is conning whyte - we know this - but how where is the con - and did it work - or is there flaw in it.

Companies house struck Green off as being director of Sevco 5088, and returned Whyte/Eadey - so on the day Green moved assets HE DID NOT HAVE RIGHT TO DO THIS.

Companies house revoked the forms which dismissed Whyte/Easey as directors. as they not valid. so seems Green tried to remove then, be sole director and then stuff them.

IPO says there are claims on assets, it has to. So RiFC may NOT own ibrox - even if it has deeds. can't own something stolen from someone.

Agree0 Disagree0

Sammy1974 - you have plenty question, so I have one for you. Can you direct me to the section of whatever document that states SEVCO 5088 is part of the group of companies owned by RIFC

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Sammy,

It has been confirmed numerous times the assets never touched Sevco 5088 and went straight to Sevco ( Scotland).
I am not suggesting CW has no claim at all, only that Sevco 5088 being part of the group does not mean the assets passed through it.

Agree0 Disagree0

Steerpike. confirmed numerous times. by who?

I only know of Green saying this, and BBC announcement on purchase of assets - which let cat out of bag saying Sevco Scotland bought assets.

So whyte would have know on 15June that he was conned, yet 1 month later there is tape of Green talking to whyte about UEFA visit. ?

why are they talking if one has conned the other. and all the world knows its happened?

whyte always knew he personally on hook for ticketus £18m. so even a sniff that green stuffed him and he would not be talking politely to green - but would be demanding his money.

tape did not show this. odd that.


what proof have you that assets moved from D&P to Secvo Scotland directly without going via 5088

IPO says novated from 5088 to Sevco Scotland (which then renamed).

"novated"!!

Agree0 Disagree0

17) Green could not confirm this to Deloittes for the accounts - so they did not accept it as fact - and stated whytes claim as potentially liable.

if its fact, green would have proved it - he could not. because there is a lie in it somewhere.

Green can not make up claims, Delloitte won't accept porkie pies.

Agree0 Disagree0

ED.

Ranger themselves claimed 'sevco 5088 was a subsidury'

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/222380-rangers-claim-control-of-craig-whytes-firm-sevco-5088-ltd/

Something very bad is about to happen -if CW is now a director.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - It does not say anywhere on the article that it is a subsidiary company of RIFC. It is very cleverly worded saying "related", probably another part of shafting wee craigie shyte, but nowhere does it say a subsidiary company. Sevco 5088 actaully had notice of intent to be struck off but wee craigie diagreed and its the only reason it still exists today)

@ed 39. ok, cheers ed.

Agree0 Disagree0

Sammy - now your quoting other blog sites which I won't even name again! really? that's your basis of your opinion?

i am still waiting for the answer to my question
where does it clearly state that 5088 is a wholly owned susidary company of RIFC or even TRFC as you keep referring to?

FYI, novate = The word 'novate' means to replace with something new, especially an old obligation by a new one. It also means to substitute

CG novated the obligation to buy the assets of rangers from 5088 (a company which he started and which he was the sole director at that time) to Sevco Scotland

My personal take on it is this:

Green was looking for investors with money to buy the assets, he wasnt really particular who invested as this was purely business and was to be a short term investment with big returns and a sell up and get out quick policy

He said all along he needed whyte to agree to sell out, think it was for 2 quid if I remember and made no attempt to hide the fact that he was meeting whyte

He may well have led whyte to believe that he would be an investor in the consortium but later realised that to have whyte as part of the consortium buying assets from a company he had just driven to liquidation was a no go and would drive the fans away, so he novated the obligation from his company 5088 to Sevco Scotland, and the rest as they say is history
Green even admited he had done him over

Sammy Just to clarify, I am too long in the tooth to believe everything that is said by Green or anyone else, but I do take offical documents such as admission docs, accounts, respectable law firm enquiry findings and company regulatory announcements at face value,

it is from their I take my opinion, not from the bloggers or journos who may have other agendas

Thats the last I will say on the subject of 5088

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Sammy,

Most of what has been said on here is old rumours, don't know why you are still considering it.

This announcement to AIM was made by CENKOS the broker and Nomad for RIFC.


"Sevco 5088 was not the acquisition vehicle which purchased the assets of Rangers Football Club. ’

Hope that answers your question.

Agree0 Disagree0

JG. there is statement to AIM by RiFC stating that Sevco 5088 is not an ACTIVE subsidiary.

It then says Sevco 5088 is defunct, (statement on LSE site) etc etc

Since that statement share price plummeted, as no one believe is, and companies house has unpicked it piece by piece. Director termination forms removed, Whyte restated as a director - Green removed as director etc etc.

So Rangers HAD to make statement to AIM about this issue (why, no connection to ManU or Liverpool etc so no need to state this) - so AIM needed statement on Sevco 5088. why if not connected.

Also there are tape recordings of D&P, Whyte and Green about the sale of whyte shares. which covers all this. you don't mention it - when it is covering the exact act of whyte handing over debentures - which are worth millions.

Agree0 Disagree0

JG.

"CG novated the obligation to buy the assets of rangers from 5088 (a company which he started and which he was the sole director at that time) to Sevco Scotland
"

How he was NEVER sole director (as stated by Companies House) and therefore HE CAN NOT DO THIS LEGALLY without permission of the MAJORITY of shareholders.

If Rifc then sells shares in a IPO on this basis - they in real trouble - because they don't own the ASSETS!

this why they can't GET LOAN on them when worth $50m on bad day, deeds is a red herring.

If you hold the deeds to stolen property YOU don't OWN IT - you can SELL IT - but the buyers buy a pup. You can show the deeds - but they meaningless and no-one will trust them. not even lenders of last resort (Wonga style interest rates even. )

Agree0 Disagree0

Sammy,

You have now moved away from Sevco 5088 transferring the assets as the biggest threat onto a dispute between the directors of Sevco 5088 as the biggest threat. No one is denying there is a threat, but I suggest if the case was strong enough to affect ownership of the assets, CW would have been in court long ago, he wants a pay off for nuisance value.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - Craig Whyte will never see the inside of a courtroom on this issue, like you said he was hoping to make a quick buck on the back of the mess he made, now he is just making a noise for making a noise sake. If he had proof there is no doubt he would have seen his day in the courts)

Sammy - I am still waiting for you to answer my question!

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree Ed, the investor shareholdings in both Sevco 5088 and Sevco ( Scotland) were supposed to be identical, except in Sevco ( Scotland) CG got extra shares, wonder whose shares they were, certainly not out of the money men's pockets.

Agree0 Disagree0

JG - was answered but not allowed. ?

"the company wishes to clarify that Sevco 5088 is not an active subsidiary of the Rangers International Football Club plc" is the announcement on AIM.

Can I point out this only says "not an active subsidiary".

IT DOES NOT SAY

"not a subsidiary". odd that.

Same statement also said things about company forms - which is now wrong and not corrected.

odd that.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - You could not have submitted properly Sammy because none of your posts have been deleted)

Steerpike (@ 26)

Its same issue, what was "novated" was payments, but Sevco 5088 directors made claim before court proceeding - and IPO and accounts reference this

cos its outstanding - and may have cost, if it goes to court - then we have to fight it (like Imran case today which will take 4 days of court costs - and may see £500k sequestered by the court - in case Imran wins).

whyte claim is multi-millions - its a cloud we trapped under unless we pay him off.

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Feb 2014 15:42:51
i was talking to a pal at lunch time and he still blames david murray for letting whyte in the door to me the blame for all that's happened after this should be layed totally at the door of the bank of sotlands door up to that the debt had been brought down £18 million rangers were trading sucessfully winning leagues etc then bank tells murray to sell or they would chop overdraft (a normal bank tactic ) leave club high and dry to be honest I can't beleive the amount of people that still think that way

Believable0 Unbelievable0

05 Feb 2014 17:06:59
OP you're only thinking about the 18 mill we owed to the bank. Not the 50 odd mil extra we also owed to other creditors (not including hmrc, leaving that to one side as we're still awaiting final ruling on that). Maybe your pal was thinking of that when he said he blames SDM?

Agree0 Disagree0

OP Mr Murray's overdraft to the bank was allegedly a few pounds south of £1 Billion. Rangers were a fraction of that but by far the highest profile company in this amber gambler's portfolio.
So yes 100% the root of our troubles lay with this man who was economic with the truth on many occasions ("I put £100million of my own money into Rangers" well actually no Sir D you borrowed that money. "I was duped by Craig Shyte"- no the bank forced you to sell after the independent board advised you against it- did you not read their findings or was it as we suspect taken out of your hands by the bank because of the imperative to lessen the debt and the possible impending liability of the EBT tax?

Who set up these EBTs? oh yes it was you David Murray. No one else not even that snivelling lying erse wipe Walter Mitty Shyte.

Shyte fired the final pathetic treacherous cretinous shots but Murray supplied the guns and the ammunition.

His reputation should be in the gutter with any Bear who has a brain IMO.

And for all the knockers of the RST they told us there was problems with David Murray's governance years before we all became aware of them.

And one final time from me to all bears with some spare cash and no shares- until this club is owned by the support we will never be sure it is in safe hands.

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Feb 2014 18:36:02
maybe murray did borrow most of the money he put in but it would be him and only him that would to payn the money back there is nothing for nothing in this day and age and if there was rangers would not get it

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - He wouldnt have to pay it back personally, the company he borrowed it against would be paying it back, or wouldnt be paying it back as it would happen)

I have no intention of defending SDM, but he owned the companies he borrowed against and if he borrowed 100 million then it was his debt and his money.

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed039's Note - Thats the basis of borrowing it though, it is the company that owes the money and its assets, not the person and their personal assets. I am not defending, just explaining how it works, if SDM was personally responsible then he would have been made bankrupt, not Rangers, and that isnt the way it went down)

Ed039 - very sensible as ever, But David Murray took a brand (Glasgow Rangers) which was 130 yrds old and worth north of £80m (in terms of reputation and assets).

And he left it worth £1. (or -£18m).

That's damning in any way, in 10 and 20 years what will gers fans think of him, golden years, or the start of the dark ages.

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Feb 2014 13:05:55
ED,
don't know if it has been covered but any info on the UTT hearing, beginning on Feb 24? Also the procedural hearing for Ahmad's claim for £500k beginning tomorrow?

Believable0 Unbelievable0

{Ed039's Note - no, they havent started yet)

05 Feb 2014 10:57:02
Are alarm bells not ringing loudly at the moment. The new CE cannot raise any finance from the city to fund the club which as everyone knows is losing money at an alarming rate. There is still 4 months of the season left and the likelihood of the club making it to the end of the season is becoming very faint. People talk about a 25 point deduction if it is administration but Livingston were put into the bottom tier of Scottish Football for going into Admin twice in a short period. One other thing that has been highlighted from the AGM and seems to have been missed in the accounts is the entry for Contingent Liabilities. Now no one knows if this is for £1 or £20 million so this will explain why the club cannot raise any money. VERY WORRYING TIMES INDEED. If Ally and his staff worked for free for the rest of the season then that would save the club in the region of £1million+, surely a legend who has already been paid half a million this year would do this for the club he loves. or would he! The players aren't taking a cut so where are the savings coming from, especially the level of savings that are required NOW, need big money earners off the books but cannot afford redundancy payments, very vicious circle. VERY WORRYING TIMES INDEED.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Either club overspent thinking they would be fast tracked into prem, or forcing the club into admin on purpose to gain ownership. There seems to be a reason. Were they hoping to enter spfl with no debt,
What's your opinion ed?

Agree0 Disagree0

The contingent liability was mentioned in the accounts but the amount unspecified. There is no evidence the fund raising has anything to do with this season, if there were a shortfall next year this would be a good time to find out what is available. If the contingent liability is affecting any loan then it is up to the shareholders to agree to a dilution or agree to pay CW compensation.
I do not accept gossip as proof Rangers have no money and are nearing administration.

Agree0 Disagree0

N3. This is not gossip it is listed in the club accounts. There can be no contingency built in for this as the level of claim against the club has not yet been detailed hence the reason that this is a black mark against any potential investment. Why would the fund raising not have anything to do with this season, is it not this season that the players are being asked to take a wage cut, is it not this season that the CE has said that the club is living way beyond its means. again not gossip. Your comments are very flawed and your reluctance to accept how bad things are just strikes me as the same way everyone ignored all the previous warnings. In terms of a shortfall for next year, I would be more concerned about actually getting to next year, the club doesn't have enough money and if you are too daft to understand that then more fool you.

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent