Still a Battle for Survival

Apologies for the lack of activity this past few days. I had been expecting a guest blog, but it has failed to materialise thus far. I will endeavour to get that together over the next few days. In the meantine, the moderators would like to thank everyone for their cooperation in keeping some sanity in the face of the recent trolling activity. The self-policing aspect has been admirable over the last few days – as has the level of scrutiny applied to the information which has been coming in.

There have been, understandably, some comments on the blog and elsewhere about a perceived obsesssion here with Rangers and their offspring. Whilst I agree that the focus of this community should have a wider perspective, I don’t think it is obsessional to engage with the big story of the day – in fact it is neccessary that we do so.

Ultimately though TSFM’s longevity will depend on our ability to look at the wider issues, and that is at the top of our minds. We have recently been approached by some people about the possibility of our creating and publicising our own Scottish Football Financial Secrecy League in line with that created a while back for Christian Aid. That may give us some credibility as a watchdog, and utilise the expertise that many contributors have offered so freely in the past.

Right now though the new Rangers show is still headlining, and it is of interest, in the light of the impending share issue, whether the economics of running the new Rangers is really as precariously balanced as has been claimed by some of our number.

If our supsicions of Charles Green’s motives are correct, then we are bound to demonstrate why we think the share issue could be a device to either pay off Ticketus, or Green’s investors to the detriment of the fans.

If the new club’s finances are as precarious as has been stated, then it would point to the share issue being used as a cut and run exercise; but I am not at all convinced of that precariousness.

For example, I don’t accept that The Rangers are paying players an average weekly wage of even as much as Β£2500. I suspect that the actual figure is considerably less than that, and I hear that basic salaries for the higher quality new players is nearer the Β£1500 a week mark, with considerably less being offered to the younger guys. Of course performance bonuses would be added to that, but if my figure is correct, Green has a considerable amount of headroom to pay those bonuses.

On the other hand, Green will not have the sponsorship bucks, the media cash, or the prize money that old Rangers would have taken for granted, so there is a defecit there. It may also be of interest to see whether the reported figures for ST sales can be verified. I don’t think it would be churlish for Rangers fans to demand proof of that success before stumping up for a share or two, but one would have to say that reported high figures may well influence an investment decision – and in spite of those impressive numbers (35,000 STs sold) private investors still remain in hiding. It is at times like these that Adam would be an invaluable asset, bringing as he did an alternative and forensic accounting perspective to the somewhat wishful thinking of our non-Rangers tendency πŸ™‚

If the success of Charles Green’s project is determined solely by how much money he makes, then it is in the interest of Rangers fans that any plans to line his own pockets via a share issue (if that is really his intention) are exposed. If Green’s accusers are correct (and let’s not forget that Rangers diehards like John Brown are among their number), then we would have to assume that his biggest success yet has been to get the bears onside, buying imprssively high numbers of STs, after the initial hostility he faced.

Rangers fans who have involved themsleves in critical thinking over the matter will know that some serious damage to the new club will be the result if Green is allowed to pull off any such scam, but they will also know that if he is genuinely invested in the well-being of the club, he is probably their best hope.

That is the dilemma they face.

All talk of stripping titles and history is a red-herring. The real problem for new Rangers is not lost titles or trophy notches on an Ibrox crossbar. It is, as it has been all summer long for old Rangers, survival.

About SFM
The Scottish Football Monitor is following the lead of RangersTaxCase in an attempt to hold the Scottish mainstream media to account and to question. If they do not ask the difficult questions, we will.

455 Responses to Still a Battle for Survival

  1. smallteaser says:

    easyJambo says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:15

    The Consortium have always stressed and continue to stress that they will do their utmost to make sure that it is the right people who buy their shares in SMFC.
    ======================================================
    I am sure I have read this somewhere before, concerning another team, wonder how that went!!

  2. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    The Crossbar challenge

    can I just say – I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA!

    Why not combine it with the usual “half time” draw?

    Every home game, a fan buys a ticket, if they win, they get the half time draw prize, plus they get to take the crossbar challenge.

    They could take it themselves and have the chance of winning Β£1m (or what ever silly number) or they could nominate one of the youth team players to take it for them – and the prize is split 50/50 with raffle winner and youth team development funds.

    Would make for a lot more “entertainment” than the usual tombola and wee cheque handed over.

    And isn’t football all about entertainment?

  3. tomtom says:

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:36

    The Crossbar challenge

    can I just say – I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA!

    Why not combine it with the usual β€œhalf time” draw?

    Every home game, a fan buys a ticket, if they win, they get the half time draw prize, plus they get to take the crossbar challenge.

    They could take it themselves and have the chance of winning Β£1m (or what ever silly number) or they could nominate one of the youth team players to take it for them – and the prize is split 50/50 with raffle winner and youth team development funds.

    Would make for a lot more β€œentertainment” than the usual tombola and wee cheque handed over.

    And isn’t football all about entertainment?

    ———————————————————-

    So everyone who buys a ticket has to bring their boots with them if they want to have a go? πŸ˜€

  4. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    tomtom says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:43
    0 0 Rate This
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:36

    The Crossbar challenge

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    So everyone who buys a ticket has to bring their boots with them if they want to have a go?

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    well, just those that are serious about giving it a go and winning! πŸ™‚

    but pretty sure most clubs have a few pairs of boots kicking around that could be used in an emergency.

  5. Fritz Agrandoldteam says:

    Doon the slope says:
    September 10, 2012 at 13:57

    Undoubtedly, an awful lot of the blame for the demise of Scottish football can be laid at the door of Messers (no typo), Murray & Souness, and their minders in the SFA, but, at about the same time, our civic fathers pushed motorways through football pitches without replacing them, and at the same time, the Scottish (Labour) secretary of state scunnered the teachers with their draconian changes of conditions of service, hours in school, and workload. As a result, many teachers, who gave their free time to run school football teams, with only travelling expenses grudgingly awarded, (if you were lucky), decided there was something to be said for a lie-in on a cold saturday winter’s morning – especially if you had a ton of homework to correct that weekend.

  6. Fritz Agrandoldteam says:

    Geez! Where did that face come from – I don’t look like that!

  7. Roland Brown says:

    If this is old ground then my apoligies,

    RFC INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LIMITED

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC132472

    According to the accounts of this company,they sold it’s entire equity shareholding in the rangers football club plc to it’s parent company,murray sports limited in consideration for murray sports limited waiving the inter-company loan due by the company,this happened on 31st january 2011,which begs the questions,

    Where RFC(IA) sold to MSL before they were moved on to craig whyte?

    Does anyone know of this TRFC PLC?,i can’t seem to find anything on it.

    I have the accounts but don’t know how to get them online(suggestions welcome).This company is still active and DM is still a director,which given he’s meant to have sold up,i thought was a littie weird.

  8. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:49

    tomtom says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:43
    0 0 Rate This
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:36

    The Crossbar challenge

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    So everyone who buys a ticket has to bring their boots with them if they want to have a go?

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    well, just those that are serious about giving it a go and winning! πŸ™‚

    but pretty sure most clubs have a few pairs of boots kicking around that could be used in an emergency.
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    Sure you’ll be able to pick up a pair at “Rangers Retail”,a subsidiary of The Rangers Football Club(according to CG) and all funds will be going there,even though it’s a wholly owned subsidiary of sportsdirect.com πŸ˜†

  9. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    I assume the SFA/SFL/SPL are all private ltd companies – i.e. it is not possible for anyone to buy a share in them and attend the agm to ask the awkward questions that they can easily ignore from emails and won’t be asked by a lazy media?

  10. sheep on gullane hill says:

    I was at a wedding on Saturday where i was speaking to a contemporary of Mr. Clarke of Duff + Phelps fame. Apparently Clarke is preparing himself for being shat on from above. Questions regarding conflict of interest were not answered truthfully.

  11. tomtom says:

    Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:
    September 10, 2012 at 15:11

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:49

    tomtom says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:43
    0 0 Rate This
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 14:36

    The Crossbar challenge

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    So everyone who buys a ticket has to bring their boots with them if they want to have a go?

    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”-

    well, just those that are serious about giving it a go and winning! πŸ™‚

    but pretty sure most clubs have a few pairs of boots kicking around that could be used in an emergency.
    β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”
    Sure you’ll be able to pick up a pair at β€œRangers Retail”,a subsidiary of The Rangers Football Club(according to CG) and all funds will be going there,even though it’s a wholly owned subsidiary of sportsdirect.com
    ————————————————-

    Β£1.50 for a ticket and Β£20 for the hire of boots. Bet you they only have the Stanley Mathews Goliath’s available (soak for two days before wearing, and then hammer in the studs) πŸ˜€

  12. jammy dodger says:

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 15:19

    I assume the SFA/SFL/SPL are all private ltd companies – i.e. it is not possible for anyone to buy a share in them and attend the agm to ask the awkward questions that they can easily ignore from emails and won’t be asked by a lazy media?
    =========
    You are correct- these are private companies, the shares are held by the clubs. Which is why there is absolutely no point wringing our hands about Regan, Doncaster and Longmuir, and saying what bad things they have done, how incompetent they are, etc, etc.

    Everything that has been done by them over the summer has been done with the agreement of (and more likely at the instigation of) a majority of the clubs. The clubs could kick these people out any time they feel like it. They are all still in position (as is Oglilvie). So what can we conclude from that?

    The club you support has a share in 2 of these organisations- ask the club what’s going on. And if by any miracle you find out, please let us all know. Because I, for one, am completely in the dark.

  13. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    jammy dodger says:
    September 10, 2012 at 15:41
    3 0 Rate This
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 10, 2012 at 15:19

    I assume the SFA/SFL/SPL are all private ltd companies – i.e. it is not possible for anyone to buy a share in them and attend the agm to ask the awkward questions that they can easily ignore from emails and won’t be asked by a lazy media?
    =========
    You are correct- these are private companies, the shares are held by the clubs. Which is why there is absolutely no point wringing our hands about Regan, Doncaster and Longmuir, and saying what bad things they have done, how incompetent they are, etc, etc.

    Everything that has been done by them over the summer has been done with the agreement of (and more likely at the instigation of) a majority of the clubs. The clubs could kick these people out any time they feel like it. They are all still in position (as is Oglilvie). So what can we conclude from that?

    The club you support has a share in 2 of these organisations- ask the club what’s going on. And if by any miracle you find out, please let us all know. Because I, for one, am completely in the dark.

    =====================

    thanks Jammy, that is what I thought

    I posted a couple of days ago that there was no point in us targetting the SFA/SFL/SPL directly – they don’t give a flying feck about what we, the paying customer, has to say

    We MUST target our own clubs

    threaten the revenue streams of our own clubs – organised protest days/boycotts to show the potential of what COULD happen next season if they don’t take action

    Contact the clubs main sponsors

    boycott the national team game and SFA sponsors – but remember to contact them and tell them WHY you are doing it

    We must raise our voices directly and through supporters organisations, we must demand that answers are provided about the rule bending that has happened and that could well be ongoing should it ever be needed

    They need to know the supporters goodwill (and wallets) are not bottomless wells of cash that will be forthcoming no matter how they abuse their own rules and neglect fair play.

    It’s pretty clear it’s a self preservation society and they view doing nothing as the best way to keep us all on side.

    We must make them act – otherwise, what is the point in watching the game? writing on this blog? encouraging our kids to play/watch a bent game?

  14. WOTTPI says:

    Like others I think the Crossbar Challenge is a fine idea.
    Other sports have been doing things like that for years.
    Not seen prize money like that mentioned before in this country but hats off for giving it a try.

    The key of course is to hope that no-one hits the bar and that an insurance policy has been taken out especially for the end of season Β£1m

    Even if Ibrox is full then only so many people are going to be physically able and in with a shout.
    Therefore no young kids. A good number of oldies with dodgy knees and hips will be out. Sorry to be sexist but some girlies cannae kick for toffee. Therefore that leaves a hardcore of young lads and middle aged hasbeens or wannabeas with the beer belly hinging out from under the replica top.

    So from a crowd of 45k how many can you discount as not being interested. Maybe 15k? Then you have to see how much it actually costs to enter. Lets say they keep you on for a couple of minutes to get Β£3.00.
    First time it will raise cash because of the novelty.
    Then when people see some guys fail miserably over a couple of weeks they will be less inclined to call.
    The entry rate will drop pretty quickly,especially if the cost is more that Β£3;00.
    Then you have to pay the company running the telephones etc.

    All that being said if they get circa 10k fans calling at Β£3:00 a pop every home game it is not to be sniffed at when cash is tight.

  15. tomtom says:

    WOTTPI,

    You enter by text and if your lucky you get selected to take part. They’ll be lucky to get 500 mugs entering. As for winning, if you’ve ever seen the crossbar challenge on Soccer AM you’ll know how difficult it is for pro’s let alone some wannabee’s. Most amateur players struggle to take a corner let alone hit a ball 50 odd yards. First time out might be a success, but after that it’ll dwindle.

    Still, as you say, it is a good idea if it gets some revenue in (no matter who the team is).

  16. smallteaser says:

    WOTTPI says:
    September 10, 2012 at 16:12

    The entry rate will drop pretty quickly,especially if the cost is more that Β£3;00.
    =============================================================
    Match entry cost Β£12, chance to enter a draw to take a chance at hitting a crossbar Β£3 + no chance 10,000 would enter. Remember more than half the stadium is empty until 10 minutes before kickoff. Someone also said more than half the 30,000 seasontickets sold are for under 16’s, are they able to enter? This will be paid for by insurance only and the take up will be low.
    Better selling pontoons tickets at the coffee shop, bigger return, less overheads.

  17. WOTTPI says:

    smallteaser says:
    September 10, 2012 at 16:25

    Do they still do pontoon tickets? Ah that takes me back and probably explains many a gambling habit amongst men who played boys club footy in the 70’s

  18. ”If you don't need to know, you don't get to hear.” says:

    I can assure everyone now..there will be only “Bar” that will be rattled that day, unfortunately that’l be the one in the louden tavern….

    Time gentlemen…puuleeeeez..ahh

  19. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    WOTTPI

    of course, doesn’t need to be the crossbar challenge every week, could be 1:1 with the keeper, running in from half way line, Beat the ex-pro at keepie ups, penalty shoot out etc

    you could have a more “do’able” challenge that lets 1 fan onto the park in front of a full house to kick a ball – how many would pay Β£1.50 a text to go 1:1 against the likes of Alan Rough, Packie Bonnar, Jim Leighton, Andy goram, Ian Andrews (hahahahahaha) or even for the chance to beat Danny McGrain at Keepy ups

    OK, you don’t make the prize Β£1M for that kinda challenge, but it’ll be on every week – and it will be free to enter for whoever wins the half time draw. I bet you’d get more people buying raffle tickets for the draw if there was the chance of a wee kick about with a club “hero”

    then an end of season “Β£1M Golden ball” you could have entries running all season, with a winner picked monthly (ensuring everyone enters again the following months) then on last home game of the season, you have 9 monthly winners on the pitch to kick for Β£1M (money split if more than one actually does it on the day)

    see me, see marketing ideas – they should give me a job!!!

  20. Andy says:

    Charles Green, Chief Executive of Rangers, issued the following statement today.

    β€œThe Rangers Football Club Limited will not attend tomorrow’s hearing (Tuesday, September 11) of the SPL-appointed Commission investigating the circumstances surrounding the use of Employee Benefit Trusts by previous owners of the Club. The Club cannot continue to participate in an SPL process that we believe is fundamentally misconceived.

    β€œNeither the SPL, nor its Commission, has any legal power or authority over the Club because it is not in the SPL. For that reason it has no legal basis on which to appoint its Commission. The Club ceased to be subject to the SPL’s rules when it was ejected from its league. Our lawyers have made that point repeatedly to the SPL in correspondence and yet our requests for an explanation from the SPL have been completely ignored. The SPL’s silence on these issues is deafening. The outcome of the SPL’s process will have no legal effect.

    β€œFirst and foremost, I would like to explain this decision to our supporters across the world whose loyalty and commitment to the Club in very difficult times has been unwavering and heart-warming for all those involved at the Club.

    β€œSince the decision was taken by HMRC on June 14 to reject administrators’ proposals for a Company Voluntary Arrangement, the fate of Rangers FC lay firmly and clearly in the ability of the consortium I led to form a new company and corporate entity that would ensure that Rangers had a future as a football club.

    β€œAt all times we were fully transparent in our dealings with the football authorities, be they the SFA, SPL or the SFL. There was no ambiguity whatsoever regarding the status of the company when it made an application to join the SPL. As we all know, 10 SPL clubs decided against the admission of the new company to the league and The Rangers Football Club Limited subsequently applied to the SFL for membership and we are grateful for their acceptance.

    β€œIn short, what was decided by the SPL membership is that Rangers was finished as a member of the SPL. Despite this, the SPL now see the new owners of the company, and the new company itself, which owns all the assets of Rangers FC – including SPL championship titles – as fair game for punishment for matters that have nothing to do with us at all. And let’s be very clear about what this Commission is. Although the SPL goes to great lengths to emphasise the independence of its Commission, the Commission is not independent of the SPL. It has been appointed by the SPL. It follows SPL rules and its process is managed by SPL staff. I don’t question the impartiality of the individual panel members but whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL.

    β€œTo make it crystal clear, the new owners purchased all the business and assets of Rangers, including titles and trophies. Any attempt to undermine or diminish the value of those assets will be met with the stiffest resistance, including legal recourse.

    β€œFurthermore, we ask the question genuinely. Why did the football authorities do nothing to address an issue that was public knowledge for at least two years, and was reported in the Club’s accounts for several years, before the Club went into administration and was subsequently taken over by new owners? HMRC contacted the SPL regarding EBT matters in October 2010, they met to discuss what documentation the Club had lodged with the SPL. Did the SPL launch an investigation? Did they appoint a Commission? Did they ask to see EBT correspondence? Did they ask any questions at all? No. They did absolutely nothing.

    β€œWhat compounds the breathtaking hypocrisy of the SPL in this whole saga, is that the SFA, the SPL and us – as the new owners – took part in numerous discussions regarding the new company’s league status during which it was made clear that a deal was there to be done where β€˜the EBT issue’ would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership of the SFA and a place in the either the SPL or Division One. We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would.

    β€œIn our view, it beggars belief that an authority which can be heavily involved in these discussions to the point that the Chief Executive Neil Doncaster repeatedly stated he was not interested in stripping titles from Rangers can lurch from that position to setting up its own Commission under the chairmanship of Lord Nimmo Smith. I must make clear that we are not questioning for a moment the integrity of Lord Nimmo Smith and his colleagues but we believe the SPL have been hypocritical in their approach to this matter. Quite apart from their negotiations with our consortium, I know the SPL were well advanced in their discussions with Mr Bill Miller and his representatives where EBT issues were raised and there was again an understanding that the EBT issue could be dealt with informally if new owners were to take over at Ibrox.

    β€œWhy is the SPL rushing to judgement now when it has been sitting on the matter for 2 years? Their haste is particularly difficult to understand when the tax tribunal judgement is imminent. The factual issues in both cases are identical. We have to ask why is the SPL so anxious to issue a judgement in this matter before the tax tribunal’s findings are made public. The position is even harder to understand when one of the reasons the SFA did not pursue any form of disciplinary charge on EBT matters following Lord Nimmo Smith’s April report was because it was felt unwise for the SFA to pursue the matter when the tax tribunal judgement had not been made public. Nothing has changed as the judgment still has not been made public. Why is the SPL rushing ahead when in April the SFA felt it unwise to do so?

    β€œRangers was not the only Club in Scotland to use EBTs yet nothing was done and little has been heard about it. Also, Rangers stands accused of achieving sporting advantage unfairly – yet there is little debate over the fact in all the years EBTs were in existence at Ibrox, the Club often failed to win either the league title, or the main cup competitions. Furthermore, the period concerned saw a significant downsizing of the playing squad both in money spent on transfers and players wages.

    β€œThe decision we have taken has not been taken lightly. There are powerful representatives from Clubs within the SPL – not all of them by any means – who appear hell bent on inflicting as much damage on Rangers as possible. It is lamentable that the Board and executive of the organisation have not been able to deal with this appropriately. We do not hold every SPL club in the same regard. Several clubs were placed in an invidious position and we believe their interests were not best served by those in more powerful positions.

    β€œFurthermore, as a Club we are not satisfied that the issue of conflict of interest relating to advisers to the SPL has been satisfactorily dealt with.

    β€œOnce again I would thank our supporters for their patience and tolerance. They have been asked to take it on the chin time and again and we stand united in saying: No more. As far as I am concerned, Rangers Football Club has won a world record 54 league titles, and, whatever the decision of the SPL Commission, these titles cannot and will not be taken away from us.”

  21. Andy says:

    β€œWhat compounds the breathtaking hypocrisy of the SPL in this whole saga, is that the SFA, the SPL and us – as the new owners – took part in numerous discussions regarding the new company’s league status during which it was made clear that a deal was there to be done where β€˜the EBT issue’ would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership of the SFA and a place in the either the SPL or Division One. We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would.
    __________

  22. Andy says:

    playing to the hordes again
    __________
    anyone would think he had shares to sell

  23. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    β€œNeither the SPL, nor its Commission, has any legal power or authority over the Club because it is not in the SPL. ”

    so, the club no longer claims to have won any SPL titles as it is no longer in the SPL?

    lets face it chuckie, you are not attending tomorrow because YOU WERE NOT INVITED

    this has nothing to do with you and your new club.

  24. The Invisible Line says:

    So Chuck spills the beans on the deals ND and SR were prepared to do with him and Bill Millar – as well as asking same question as I have been – why has SPL never done anything for 2 years?

    The rest is playing to the galley – let’s hope it stirs some sort of comeback from ND……

    Getting the popcorn ready for a cat fight – CG or ND…..

  25. twopanda bears says:

    Monday`s Hullaballoo as promised

  26. WOTTPI says:

    Good stuff from Mr Charles
    He is on our side, he is asking the same questions we have been asking.
    Mainly why has it taken so long to get where we are today?
    Surely now is the time the MSM must side with their new darling and start to ask serious questions of the SFA/SPL and Regan, Doncaster & Ogilvie on why these investiagtions & hearings were not undertaking a few years back?

  27. Roland Brown says:

    Administrators Statement
    WRITTEN BY RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB

    PAUL CLARK, of Duff and Phelps, joint administrators of RFC 2012 PLC (formerly The Rangers Football Club plc), issued the following statement today:

    β€œI can confirm that the business and certain assets of RFC 2012 PLC – including the honours won by the Club – were acquired by Mr Charles Green’s consortium as part of the sale and purchase agreement.
    β€œThe SPL have been in contact with RFC 2012 PLC with regard to the SPL’s Commission which is examining Rangers’ historic use of EBTs. However, having taken legal advice, it is the Joint Administrators’ opinion that the SPL is not able to pursue RFC 2012 PLC in this matter.
    β€œThe SPL have stated that the Commission is empowered to review the use of EBTs under the contract between the SPL and its member club. RFC 2012 PLC no longer has a contract with the SPL and therefore the SPL has no jurisdiction over it.
    β€œThis has been communicated to the SPL and considering that further involvement in this matter is not in the interests of its creditors, RFC 2012 PLC will have no further involvement with the Commission.
    β€œOur primary role as Administrators was to rescue the business which has been achieved by Charles Green and his consortium and whilst any sanctions the Commission may levy will not affect RFC 2012 PLC this process would not appear to us to be helpful to the ongoing revival of Rangers.”
    Tagged under Duff and Phelps Administration

  28. Jimbo milligan says:

    PAUL CLARK, of Duff and Phelps, joint administrators of RFC 2012 PLC (formerly The Rangers Football Club plc), issued the following statement today:

    β€œI can confirm that the business and certain assets of RFC 2012 PLC – including the honours won by the Club – were acquired by Mr Charles Green’s consortium as part of the sale and purchase agreement.
    β€œThe SPL have been in contact with RFC 2012 PLC with regard to the SPL’s Commission which is examining Rangers’ historic use of EBTs. However, having taken legal advice, it is the Joint Administrators’ opinion that the SPL is not able to pursue RFC 2012 PLC in this matter.
    β€œThe SPL have stated that the Commission is empowered to review the use of EBTs under the contract between the SPL and its member club. RFC 2012 PLC no longer has a contract with the SPL and therefore the SPL has no jurisdiction over it.
    β€œThis has been communicated to the SPL and considering that further involvement in this matter is not in the interests of its creditors, RFC 2012 PLC will have no further involvement with the Commission.
    β€œOur primary role as Administrators was to rescue the business which has been achieved by Charles Green and his consortium and whilst any sanctions the Commission may levy will not affect RFC 2012 PLC this process would not appear to us to be helpful to the ongoing revival of Rangers

  29. TheBlackKnight says:

    seen the administrator’s statement? Who would have thought the ‘big con’ just got bigger

    “can’t touch us, we’re no playing anymore”

  30. WOTTPI says:

    The Invisible Line says:
    September 10, 2012 at 17:07
    1 0 i
    Rate This
    So Chuck spills the beans on the deals ND and SR were prepared to do with him and Bill Millar – as well as asking same question as I have been – why has SPL never done anything for 2 years?

    The rest is playing to the galley – let’s hope it stirs some sort of comeback from ND……

    Getting the popcorn ready for a cat fight – CG or ND…..

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    Yes noticed that one as well re a claim that Mr Charles was given information (regardless of when) about another consortiums bid and negotiations.

    So Mr Charles was sniffing around long before breaking cover?

    If not then why was he given this information as it surely had no bearing on his bid?

    The stink is higher than Grimsby Harbour.

  31. The Invisible Line says:

    So CG says T’Rangers are not liable as he only bought the history and the titles but is not responsible for them – Duff and Duffer (copyright acknowledged) say well we have RFC-NIL but we sold the titles and we no long are liable

    Let’s hope ND has not let them out flank him here in his desperation to get them into the SFL.

    Interesting though that Duff and Duffer say their primary role as administrators was to rescue the business – so now they admit the creditors were never in their thoughts…….

    Can we get CG for receiving stolen goods? πŸ™‚

  32. stmiley says:

    Chuckles has obviously taken legal advice and it hasn’t been good. Indefensible even.

    His statement has went down well on RM, how they can’t see through this is beyond me. It’s not even in the slightest bit clever. They pony up Β£10M in season book sales and he won’t spend a penny defending that which they hold most dear, the title of – Most Successful Club In The World (Linfield are No.2, in-case anyone was wondering). Has he over-reached?

  33. Donsfan says:

    β€œOur primary role as Administrators was to rescue the business which has been achieved by Charles Green and his consortium and whilst any sanctions the Commission may levy will not affect RFC 2012 PLC this process would not appear to us to be helpful to the ongoing revival of Rangers

    _____________________________________________________________

    erm no you didn’t rescue the business. That business was liquidated and a NEW company was formed!

  34. campsiejoe says:

    Well who would have thought it
    The monster they created is now turning on them
    Hell mend all of them, because this is going to get dirty, very dirty

  35. WOTTPI says:

    Great stuff from Duff & Duffer as well

    This strategy alone shows that the two parties have been working together from day one to the disbenefit of the creditors.

    Once again it is all coming down to clever legal manoeuvering.

    Is it not the case that Doncaster is /was a lawyer?

    Did I not read that Regan was one too?

    Now it is surely time for a certain Campbell Ogilvie to step up to the plate and deliver a a fast ball on behalf of the SFA? Or perhaps not…………….

  36. spanner says:

    Looks like game on, some thinking green has laid the perfect ambush, we will soon find out.

  37. obonfanti88 says:

    On you go Charlie boy, keep digging that hole.

    Have you ever had anything more ridiculous in your life? “We bought Rangers history and trophies”. Guess he forgot to say “with money we stole from taxpayers”.

  38. The Invisible Line says:

    Anyone here so disillusioned with the bodies rulling Scottish football that they are liek me expecting a statement from ND or SR along the lines of….

    We are cancelling the EBT commission because as CG and D&D say, there is no entity we can find guilty – sorry folks – we did our best – move on now………….

    Let’s not look into how they got away with it for 10 years

    Let’s not look into how Sevco’s conditional membership meant a game against Brechin that was populated by 11 or more illegally registered players – including trialists.

    Let’s not look into anything

    Well – sorry – if I hear that answer, I will be straight onto my club to demand they ask for ND and SR’s removal

  39. ”If you don't need to know, you don't get to hear.” says:

    As was stated previously many months ago on RTC
    Thats it started now…They will begin to devour themselves & each other…

    & In the wise words of my late mother…When thieves fall out..

  40. Blindsummit says:

    That statement. Wow. Just….wow…..

  41. Senior says:

    ‘Once again I would thank our supporters for their patience and tolerance. They have been asked to take it on the chin time and again and we stand united in saying: No more. As far as I am concerned, Rangers Football Club has won a world record 54 league titles, and, whatever the decision of the SPL Commission, these titles cannot and will not be taken away from us’

    Keep an eye on the ball here, The titles issue is a red herring as far Greene is concerned, but a potent and dangerous one when used to marshal the troops.
    It is beyond belief that anyone would use this argument to stir up the hoards to line his own pocket, and the MSM in Scotland stands back and allows an outsider to literally destroy our game and potentially our society.

  42. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    Great manouvre by the sevconians and RFC

    I notice duff and duffers (copyright ack) statement was from Rangers football CLUB (interesting!)

    I bet they are feeling very pleased with themselves right now. However, they have only bought some time – until the BTC comes out

    once that comes out, the SPL can use the evidence released in that to make a ruling against the entity that was RFC and remove titles.

    If Charlie doesn’t have to so-operate with the SPL as he isn’t a member, i’m pretty sure the SPL can tell them to GTF as “they aren’t a member”

    Also, if the SPL can’t act, it will have to go to the SFA – they will need to decide

    but overall, the SPL/SFL/SFA have played an absolute BLINDER here – in so much as they have made a total mess of it all, RFC are going to haunt them until they are all removed from office.

    if they don’t sort this out in 2 days by simply removing sevcos SFA license (failing to meet the agreements to pay football debts and co-operate with dual contract investigation) then they are about to end professional football in scotland

    congratualtions

  43. obonfanti88 says:

    You’d almost think Charlie boy knows that what’s coming isn’t good. Well, for Sevco and Rangers (RIP). πŸ˜€

    Something in the wind?

  44. iamacant says:

    How can Chuck boycott a meeting he wasn’t invited to? According to the beeb (i know) they state “There will be a procedural hearing on Tuesday and Wednesday involving members of the independent commission and lawyers from Rangers”

    Note “lawyers from Rangers” and not directors, board members or a fat pie muncher masquerading as a manager.

  45. There's Only One Willie Miller says:

    Why would Sevco even be invited to the SPL commission? It’s not Sevco that are being investigated for years of cheating.

  46. Tommy says:

    What did Doncaster say about “without fear or favour”? Now is his opportunity to show the nation he means business.

  47. TheBlackKnight says:

    few very quick points:

    1. Still no one able to confirm if *The Rangers were even invited.

    2. Still no one able to confirm if Rangers FC were even invited.

    3. Remember D&P recent report….. No mention of any agreement to take any punishment.

    4. Are *The Rangers currently on a ‘temporary’ membership?

    5. It is CG position that once the club moves on from a league structure in which they won (or bought in this case as *The RFC didn’t win any of those titles) league honours, those honours cannot be removed as they are no longer members…..

    Seems they may not have been joking about wanting to stay in the SFL and claim their titles…. πŸ™‚

  48. johnnym says:

    I know UEFA have been appearing to steer clear of this mess but shirley they can’t allow titles to be ‘bought’ ….well not in that sense anyway….otherwise anyone fancy being the first scottish club to win the FA cup? just make Portsmouth an offer.

  49. Lord Wobbly says:

    Roland Brown says:
    September 10, 2012 at 17:17
    0 0 Rate This
    Administrators Statement
    WRITTEN BY RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB
    PAUL CLARK, of Duff and Phelps, joint administrators of RFC 2012
    PLC (formerly The Rangers Football Club plc), issued the following statement today:
    β€œI can confirm that the business and certain assets of RFC 2012 PLC – including the honours won by the Club – were acquired by Mr Charles Green’s consortium as part of the sale and purchase agreement.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Exactly. Club and company were one and the same and the administrators flogged the bits Charlie wanted to the new club.

    If the two clubs were the same, no sale would have been required.

    You’d think they might have chanced their arm with a cheeky bid for Celtic’s European Cup or Aberdeen’s Cup Winners Cup and/or Super Cup.

  50. StevieBC says:

    And let the bun fight begin…! πŸ˜‰

    Many indiscretions / confidential information might now start to be ‘leaked’ – and even reported in the MSM.

    As for Sevco Rangers: Expulsion is the only adequate punishment.

  51. mirrenman says:

    Right Paul McConville, A report on my desk for 9.00am tomorrow πŸ˜‰

  52. campsiejoe says:

    Just a couple of points

    The SPL investigation is not into the use of EBTs, it is the use of payments made outwith registered contracts
    Sevco and the Double Ds deliberately muddy the waters by referring to EBTs and neither have ever mentioned dual contracts

    Secondly, the alleged offences took place while RFC (IA) were in membership of the SPL, therefore the case can be heard and judged
    As far as I am aware there is no statute of limitations, so his refusal to have anything to do with the investigation is spurious

    Charlie is now openly taunting the Stooges, and now they know what kind of animal they are dealing with, they had better grow a set and deal with it
    As Chamberlain found out to his cost, appeasement never works

  53. The Invisible Line says:

    Can someone tell the owners of Man City that instead of spenning millions to win the European Cup, it would be cheaper to buy Notts Forest and claim to have won it twice……..thus equalling Man Utd;s haul

    Or is that just stupid…………..

  54. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    I think there’s a good business opportunity here.
    Why don’t we act as agents for anyone wanting to be European Cup Winners.Steau Bucharest might sell their history.
    Anyone fancy a La Liga Title?.
    Real Madrid have plenty and Ronaldo is demanding more money.I’m sure they’ed listen to offers.
    Liverpool have never won the premiership.Why spend tens of millions on players when you could just go to cash strapped Blackburn Rovers and offer to buy theirs.
    Bet I’d raise more money than the Crossbar Challenge. πŸ˜†

  55. The Invisible Line says:

    ignore the equalling Man Utd’s haul πŸ™‚ but its still stupid

  56. ”If you don't need to know, you don't get to hear.” says:

    mirrenman says:
    September 10, 2012 at 18:16

    Right Paul McConville, A report on my desk for 9.00am tomorrow πŸ˜‰

    Was just thinkin that maself..!! πŸ˜‰

  57. StevieBC says:

    So is Sevco Rangers implementing an effective – and topical – defence to allegations of cheating?

    The ‘Lance Armstrong defence’?

    He chose not to co-operate and thus defeated the allegations.

    …what do you mean he lost 7 Tour de France titles? He was punished enough!

    πŸ™„

  58. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    mirrenman says:
    September 10, 2012 at 18:16

    Right Paul McConville, A report on my desk for 9.00am tomorrow
    ————————————————————————————————–
    Just for you,Mirrenman:

    Paul McConville ‏@Paulmcc12

    Mr Green’s RFC statement is …rather confrontational! It appears at first glance to be inaccurate on a number of points. A blog post maybe?
    Collapse

    .@AlasdairMackie As Mr Green kindly waited for me to get home, it would be rude to pass up the implied invitation!

  59. jimthetim says:

    A key phrase from D&P states “certain assets were bought”. The key word is “certain”.
    I recall Green stating during the Brown campaign that ownership of assets would be made clear next week. That was two or 3 months ago.
    I recall the debates on RTC that the two main assets, Ibrox and Murray, were owned by Craig Whyte. He transferred them to a company in BVI, and in turn they were transferred to another BVI company. That company has only one director, Craig Whyte’s father.

  60. Blindsummit says:

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    September 10, 2012 at 17:52

    but overall, the SPL/SFL/SFA have played an absolute BLINDER here – in so much as they have made a total mess of it all, RFC are going to haunt them until they are all removed from office.

    if they don’t sort this out in 2 days by simply removing sevcos SFA license (failing to meet the agreements to pay football debts and co-operate with dual contract investigation) then they are about to end professional football in scotland

    congratualtions
    _______________________________________________________________
    I believe that you have nailed it sir.
    The only credible response to the statement is to withdraw the SFA membership and licence to play football. Any other response or lack of one, confirms that sevco now run Scottish football and are untouchable.

    SR and ND, and your handlers. Total amateurs. You created a monster and it’s now on the rampage. Well done. You’ve killed Scottish football and significantly damaged it’s civil society as part of the fallout.

  61. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    StevieBC says:
    September 10, 2012 at 18:27

    So is Sevco Rangers implementing an effective – and topical – defence to allegations of cheating?

    The β€˜Lance Armstrong defence’?

    He chose not to co-operate and thus defeated the allegations.

    …what do you mean he lost 7 Tour de France titles? He was punished enough!
    ————————————————————————————————————————
    Maybe he didn’t lose them.Maybe he sold them!.
    It’s all the rage,you know πŸ˜‰

  62. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Couldn’t the SPL just say,
    “No,you’re not a member of the SPL,and you never will be”.

    Just a thought.

  63. campsiejoe says:

    Right Donkey, are you a man or a mouse ?
    It’s time for a response from you, and it had better no be along the line of “Cheese please”
    All of the bampots told you what was going to happen, but you ignored us, and look at what has happened
    Don’t ignore us this time

  64. paul martin says:

    hey stewart, thank goodness he got censured recently.
    you’ll need to get the big guns out and go straight to a suspended sentence this time.

  65. Jimbo milligan says:

    Regan and doncaster will do nothing – we know this from past experience .

  66. Galling fiver says:

    Titles allocated by the SPL, being removed by the SPL. Makes sense to me.

    More dog whistling.

    This guy needs his wings well and truely clipped. I remember Yugoslavia, a football game, soldiers, Boban and the rest is history. Why is this guy being allowed to continue with his continual attempts to have unrest on the streets in his persuit of money.

    Phone the Polis somebody.

  67. Mr Bunny says:

    tomtom says:
    September 10, 2012 at 15:41 Β£1.50 for a ticket and Β£20 for the hire of boots. Bet you they only have the Stanley Mathews Goliath’s available (soak for two days before wearing, and then hammer in the studs)
    ———————————————————————–
    Actually Matthews was the first British footballer to take on the idea of lighter football boots (which he’d noticed other teams use while on international duty) and even contributed to the design of new British boots.
    See http://www.footy-boots.com/sir-stanley-matthews-football-boots-go-to-auction-8859/

  68. campsiejoe says:

    If Sevco’s membership is conditional, perhaps it is time to review it
    This is now going to be a battle over who runs Scottish football, and whatever the result, our game is damaged beyond repair

    I hope the MSM are proud of their part in this, but listening to SSB tonight, it’s obvious they don’t have a clue as to what is going on

    Charlie has effectively called Celtic out as well in that statement, and silence is now no longer golden

  69. Blindsummit says:

    johnnym says:

    September 10, 2012 at 18:08

    I know UEFA have been appearing to steer clear of this mess but shirley they can’t allow titles to be β€˜bought’ ….well not in that sense anyway….otherwise anyone fancy being the first scottish club to win the FA cup? just make Portsmouth an offer.
    ________________________________________________________

    OT I know, but didn’t Queens Park win it? Just wondering.

  70. Senior says:

    I apologise for repeating myself.

    Anyone who attempts to analyse Green’s utterances is wasting valuable time. Smokescreen, smokescreen, smokescreen. He wants to just collapse the whole edifice and grab what he can and run. The irony of it all is, he thought with all the hyperbole he has engaged in, the edifice would have collapsed long before now, and, funnily enough, it would have in any other organisation that had a scintilla of integrity or pride. His one mistake was he never factored in the SFA and the low lifes that operate there.
    If his latest rant does not bring down the sky watch out for even greater recklessness to achieve his aim.