Bluedell
-
Posts
17,909 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
100
Everything posted by Bluedell
-
The leaflet failed to address any issues. It would have been loved by those who are already in favour of it but probably did more harm than good in respect of others.
-
Good post by Marty101 on FF: ========= I think it's important to set out the effect of a security in these circumstances. It doesn't hand ownership of Ibrox / Auchenhowie to the trust in the event of a default by the Board or an insolvency event. It simply secures up to the value of the debt against the assets. In the event of a default by the Board, the trust's remedy would be to call in the security to obtain possession of the assets (nb. legal possession, not ownership), and then to force their sale to realise sufficient funds to meet the outstanding debt (which would be that proportion of the season ticket payment which related to any games unplayed at the time of the default.) If on sale the assets realised more than the value of the debt, then the balance above that sum is payable back to the owners (i.e. TRFC Ltd.) The trust would be legally obliged to obtain the best price for the assets and to remit such balance to the company in the event there was one. The trust couldn't just decide to sell them to a favoured individual or group in the face of better offers. If the security is given and the company goes into admin or liquidation, then on one view, the position isn't that different. An administrator or liquidator can force a sale of the asset without the security holder's consent as part of the process, but the security holder has first call on the funds realised up to the value of the debt secured. There is perhaps one benefit in an administration scenario. If a CVA is agreed, the secured debt will not be taken into account in the CVA. That's to say the company would emerge from admin and the debt would remain intact and secured against the assets in favour of the trust - that would give the trust a better standing (and presumably would at least require season tickets to be honoured) in administration. Other than that last point, I think the Trust/security plan doesn't in reality give the sort of protection for Ibrox and Auchenhowie that seems to be assumed. Daven37 has set out the concerns about the practicalities of what is proposed. It's difficult to see that withholding ST payment does more than accelerate any sale/leaseback plan. As a mechanism to force the granting of a security it almost certainly won't work anyway. I had high hopes King would bite the bullet and obtain sufficient shareholding to effect change - ahead of the AGM he gave an interview suggesting that - but those hopes are fading. I genuinely believe that's the only way we can get out of this though. If I'm honest, the trust plan seems more like PR pressure on the Board than a real solution to our problems I'm afraid. ============
-
I agree that the Dave King/UoF proposals have been disappointing. The questions that you have raised are very valid and the fact that they have not been addressed is very disappointing. The thing is that the UoF are proposing that the cash goes to the club, but it's the timing that's the issue. they ignore the fact that some of the cashflow doesn't flow out evenly. There's capital expenditure, repayment of loans (whether we are happy or not, they do exist), signing on fees and even transfer fees. There seems to be no allowances being made for that. Many businessmen I have spoken to have said that the idea that a quoted PLC grants security over its biggest assets to an unnamed entity is a non-starter for many reasons, and perhaps King knows this already? I've also still to be convinced that the plan is in the best interests of the club. If the directors are planning to do something with the stadium and Auchenhowie then perhaps it is, but if they are not, then it may not be. As for the business plan, I can only see that being a massive disappointment and will not give anyone any additional reassurances. Yet again, we are left with both sides being a big let down.
-
The bit about him being asked to leave Ibrox was well publicised at the time. It's not a new story. A shameful way to have treated the great man. -
Glenn Gibbons: Rangers fans playing dangerous game
Bluedell replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
Forgetting about who wrote the article and much of its content but the title of the thread IS correct. We don't know the impact that a season ticket boycott will have. Many fans seem to think that they know how the directors will react and that the effect will be but we are moving into uncharted territory. I can see various scenarios and not all of them good. Some may be really bad. I'm not saying do or don't boycott as I also don't have a crystal ball but just be warned that your action may have unintended consequences. -
-
My understanding is that Boyd has agreed to sign for us,
-
If that is coming straight from the boardroom then that mentality is seriously worrying.
-
They say one should have been sent to me by email. I don't appear to have received it so they are sending me out a paper one. Thanks for the responses.
-
And would they issue a share to each of the season ticket holders? Starting to get a bit messy.
-
Thanks. Will give the ticket office a call.
-
Has the club posted out the renewal notices yet? If so, when were they received? I don't appear to have received mine.
-
To what legal entity are the club going to give the security to?
-
I was expecting something a bit more immediate. We need to get the club under control quickly and I have little interest in what is going to happen outside of the next 24 months maximum. Anything outside of that is irrelevant to our current crisis.
-
No, they won't have to dig into their own pockets. That doesn't really happen. They will just look at selling on our higher earners to bring the wages down. If that fails then administration beckons, but don't for a minute think that any actions the fans take will force the directors to spend their own cash.
-
Yeah, if they had been serious about it we would have started to hear much about it by now. Nobody would wait until the end of the 120 days before starting to implement some of their findings.
-
I'm not so sure that the board can be starved out. All they may do is just adjust their spending plans for the decreased income and point the finger at those boycotting. In a way they may feel that this can get them off the hook, Do the directors care if the club suffers? I doubt it and therefore they may be happy just to sit back and maintain control.
-
Bell has never had as bad a game as that for us, and that's possibly the worst goal-keeping performance for us in the last 20 years. Black had nothing to do with what then happened. As for blaming Black for the third goal, we were perfectly OK when Foster played the ball back. We had regained possession. and were in no real danger.
-
I presume you will be reasessing your views?
-
7 rows behind the directors box, right on the half way line.
-
It seems certain sites' members form their opinions by taking the opposite view from other forums.
-
The Rangers board and I issued separate public statements following our meeting last month. I made one correction to the RangersÂ’ statement but the Rangers board saw no cause to correct my statement. The board recommitted to issue the business review within the original 120 day deadline and, importantly, committed that the fans will have access to this review prior to advancing funds by way of season ticket renewals. Despite strong reservations from fan groups I asked the fans to give the board time to honour this commitment. Part of my motivation was that any public company board is bound to act in good faith and that breach of such a share price sensitive commitment would be an ethical, moral, and probably criminal breach. I followed up on this commitment with the board after the recent announcement on season ticket renewals. The Chairman has advised me that the board will now only issue the review at the end of the season ticket renewal period and it will consequently not be timeously made available to fans. Disturbingly, the Chairman has advised me that the true intention of the board had always been to delay issuing the review until funds had been largely collected. I apologise to all fans for wasting time by lending credibility to the board’s false representations. I was wrong to give them the benefit of the doubt. At least we now can no longer have any uncertainty about governance at the club. It is common cause that the club is not a going concern without access to the season ticket loan from the fans. It is also common cause that the season ticket money will only provide partial relief in advance of a more permanent recapitalisation. I have hitherto urged restraint in dealing with the board, however due to this extreme act of bad faith I believe that it is vital that fans now withhold season ticket money from this board and similarly refuse to support the club by way of the purchase of replica kit or any other retail product. An announcement will shortly be made providing details of a bank account that season ticket money can be paid into as an interim measure. The specific terms and conditions of this account will be made available to fans, including the basis on which funds will be advanced to the club and the basis on which funds will be returned to fans. As a minimum, the board must provide the club property as security against the season ticket money. I recognise that fans will have anxiety about “betraying” the club and the risk of loss of a cherished seat at Ibrox. However, the time has come when the trade-off is a potential loss of a seat against the loss of the club. That would be the real betrayal. This board has lost its right to be dealt with on a good faith basis. Richard Gough has agreed to join me as a custodian of the bank account that will be established and fan groups can nominate additional members.
-
I'm away at the moment so difficult to see much on my phone.
-
Oldco's status is "in liquidation"
-
I can think of a few possibilities as to why the accounts were late but they are all speculation based on my lack of trust in the board but uninformed speculation at this point won't be particularly helpful.