Search the Community

It has been described as a game of poker but the battle for Rangers has become something of a hand of three-card brag. The most crucial aspect of this game of claim and counter-claim is when the King is played. There are three parties to the Rangers story and each has reached a time of decision. The Union of Fans, the representatives of six fan groups, met last night to discuss the latest developments in a narrative that stretched over two years. The most crucial aspect of their discussions will be the future of the Ibrox 1972 initiative which sought to place season-ticket money in trust under the directorship of Richard Gough, the former Rangers captain, and Dave King, the South African-based businessman who is seeking to alter the power base at the club. The statement by the board on Saturday night that legal guarantees over Ibrox and Murray park would not be offered to fans has left little room for manoeuvre. First, the supporters believe that this was not their understanding of what occurred at the meeting; second, they said it was impossible to deal with the board in good faith and, third, it makes the ploy of Ibrox 1972 almost redundant. The move over season tickets was designed to bring pressure on the board and it did. But the incumbents have so far ridden this out. Indeed, Rangers sources were last night "bullish" about the future, predicting burgeoning season-ticket sales, declaring that precise figures would be given to the markets in due course as they represent market sensitive information. There was one glitch. Under agreed terms, once Rangers have reached £1.5m in season-ticket sales George Letham and Sandy Easdale must be repaid their loans. It is understood, however, that Letham is still awaiting repayment. There was, though, the unmistakeable message yesterday of Rangers "getting down to business", with sources citing appointments to be made, playing plans to be drawn up, the challenges of next season to be met. The delicate point of where all the money will come from has been, ahem, disputed. Rangers hope that the season-ticket tally will approach 20,000, hospitality packages can be sold and that a much-needed income stream will run quickly and profitably. There is also the matter of the £5m of equity funding from existing investors that could be accessed at the press of a button, according to sources close to the talks between supporters and board members this week. A share issue, too, could be brought forward to the end of summer. Even those inimical to the existing board suggest the club "could stagger on" into next season. However, savings must be made and investment found. This may make it an uncomfortable summer for Graham Wallace, the chief executive. He has been assailed by fans over the 120-day review and statements made at the annual general meeting. He also suffers the fate of all chief executives of being an instrument of the board and there was a wounding assertion from the Union of Fans that Wallace is "less powerful" than Sandy Easdale, who is not a member of the plc board but sits on the football equivalent. Wallace has set out his plans and has embarked on a recruitment campaign, in particular for a marketing manager, but has to do this while fighting fires. He will need support but, being Rangers, he should not expect it. The most intriguing player in the card game is, of course, King. If he sits on his hands, Rangers may limp towards some sort of stability - with a much-reduced cost base and a viable challenge to Celtic postponed - or they may slowly but inexorably slip towards financial perdition. His intervention, though, would be a game-changer. However, there is increasing concern among his supporters that King has hesitated too long. One City source, who has control over a tranche of Rangers shares, last night said: "Time is running out for a decisive intervention. King has had talks in the City about proxy votes and these have been amicable, and might even be productive. But there is a sense that something must be done quickly." King must convince the City that the turmoil at Ibrox is such that it is better to give him proxy than to rely on the board to raise the share price to anything like the launch level. The share price has risen of late to just more than 28p from a low of 22p in May. King, however, has stated bluntly he does not want to buy shares from the incumbent board. There are considerable amounts of shares on the margins with some corporate holders open to selling. "There is a feeling," said the City source, " that some of the original investors would take the hit and write it all off to experience and to tax." The most recent soundings from King make clear that he does not want to pursue the buying of shares as this will dilute the money available for a significant investment to make Rangers competitive with Celtic quickly. Any dramatic and immediate development in the Rangers story would thus have to come from King. There is no doubt that the maverick businessman knows how to hold 'em. His supporters trust that his hesitation may not involve accepting he has to fold 'em. Rangers are still in play but the match has moved into extra time for King. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/can-rangers-trump-king-or-does-he-still-hold-the-ace-card.24273947

Alasdair Lamont ‏@BBCAlLamont 33m Rangers chief exec Graham Wallace on £320k pa + 100% bonus. Plus £25k salary increase as Rangers move up leagues. More to follow.

The Union - an umbrella group comprising six supporters' organisations - had been urging Gers followers to withhold season ticket cash. A company, Ibrox 1972 Ltd, has been set up with South Africa-based businessman Dave King and legendary captain Richard Gough as directors. The Union wanted the club to grant them security over both Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park training ground in return for the money. Wallace admitted last Friday that season ticket renewals had been slow and fears have also been expressed by some about the future of the club. But representatives from the organisation met with Wallace, non-executive director Norman Crighton and major shareholder Sandy Easdale. And Wallace, who has stated in the past that security will not be granted, told them the club could be prepared to give them a legally binding guarantee over Ibrox. However, the Union asked for an identical agreement over the club training ground at Murray Park and the club officials agreed to look into that possibility. But the talks were a huge step towards the bitter stand-off between fans and the club being brought to an end. A Union of Fans statement released on Wednesday night read: "Following a number of attempts for several weeks to arrange a meeting with chief executive Graham Wallace to discuss our proposals for security over Ibrox and Murray Park, the Union of Fans were invited by Mr Wallace to discuss this and other issues at a meeting at Ibrox. "Representatives of the Union of Fans met with Mr Wallace, non-executive director Norman Crighton and Sandy Easdale. "A proposal was made by Mr Wallace that, whilst the board would not grant a security, they could consider giving a legally binding undertaking which would protect Ibrox from sale, sale and leaseback or as any form of security for a loan or other finance. "We made it clear to Mr Wallace that we felt it was also appropriate that they provide the same undertaking for Murray Park. "Mr Wallace and Mr Crighton agreed to discuss this with the rest of the PLC board as a matter or urgency and further discussions between the PLC board and the Union of Fans will continue once this board meeting has taken place. "We believe we accurately conveyed the fears of supporters that either or both of these club assets could be lost to the club in a scenario where they were used for any sale and leaseback or other loan security. "Any proposal by the board will be evaluated by our lawyers and a decision will then be taken on how to move forward. We will keep fans full informed as discussions continue." Rangers did not comment on the meeting. GET RANGERS NEWS ALERTS BY EMAIL

“If you’re prepared to accept mediocrity because our owners are greedy fair enough. Me, I intend to do everything I can to root them out.” A quote from Gunslinger. So what are we doing as a support to root out the directors? I believe the answer is “Not a lot”. Let’s look at the two lots of people a majority of the fans want rid of – the Shareholders and the Directors. 1. The Shareholders There are 2 main ways that the shareholders can get to go or to lose control: a) Someone buys their shares – there is currently nobody who wants to buy their shares. Dave King has said he won’t do it. There are 2 fans’ vehicles for purchasing shares, both of whom are a long way away from getting enough cash to make a meaningful investment. They also both have the dilemma of raising cash and then deciding whether to use the cash to pay existing shareholders and therefore not a penny goes to the club, as happened recently with BuyRangers, or wait until there’s a share issue at some future point. They also run the risk of their shareholding being diluted. Let’s say they get 1% of the shares and then there’s a rights issue. They could find that their 1% has been reduced to 0.5% or even lower. Perhaps it needs yet another calamity like an administration to change the mindsets of the fans to fan ownership as they have consistently shown that a vast majority are not there yet. b) There’s a share issue of some sort, which dilutes their control in the way mentioned above. However what happens if they are the ones to put in the cash? They could increase their shareholding percentage. Dave King has said that he would be willing to invest, but only under certain circumstances. Are the current shareholders likely to structure an issue that sees them losing control to King? Very unlikely. Is King willing to invest that level of cash and not have a level of control? Very Unlikely. All of King’s actions seem to be aimed towards trying to force the existing shareholders and directors out without him having to spend any cash in doing so. He has built up a degree of animosity between him and the board and as such he has made it less likely that the board will turn round and make it easy for him to get control. The existing shareholders generally want an exit strategy and nobody is offering them one and they aren’t going to effectively have their shareholding become worthless. 2. The Directors Most Rangers fans are not impressed by the current Board, but nobody has offered any alternative since the Paul Murray faction got voted down at the AGM. Nobody has set out any level of vision for the future and King suffers from this criticism more than most. He has not set out detailed plans or any level of alternative. King set up his Ibrox 1972 Ltd company, asking for the club to give it security over its biggest assets. Does anyone seriously expect a quoted PLC to give security of its main assets to a third party company that apparently doesn’t have a season ticket holder or Rangers shareholder on its board or as a shareholder? There is no connection between this company and the club. As it stands, there’s no connection between the ownership and control of Ibrox 1972 Ltd and the support either. It’s almost as if King has come up with a vehicle that makes it impossible for the club to grant security, not that they would do it anyway. Perhaps that’s what King is hoping for? Many fans are not buying season tickets, partly due their opposition to the board and partly due to the fare on the park. For the fans who fall into the former category, is them withholding season ticket cash really going to chase out the directors? I really don’t think so. Why should it? Are the really just going to resign and walk away or are they going to carry on running the company in whatever financial situation it Is in? I would argue that it is the latter and they will continue run the club as best they can, with the lower income and therefore lower quality on the park. Many are there to do a job (presumably to the best of their ability) and less season tickets makes it more challenging but it is not a reason for them to resign from their job. Are the shareholders going to insist on a change of board due to lower season tickets? Unlikely, given that the gave the directors a vote of confidence at the AGM even after the club had spent the £22m from the share issue in 9 months. If they still retain the shareholders’ support after that then season ticket holder revolt isn’t going to make much difference. There is also the situation where Sandy Easdale controls the votes of over 26% of the shares and it means that he only needs 24% of other shares to get his way in most matters. The fans who are not renewing their season tickets have my admiration for the sacrifice that they are making and I understand their frustration as they want to do something and not renewing is something. However it doesn’t mean that what they are doing will result in a change or will make any difference to the positions of the directors. Even if the season ticket boycott did force a change in directors, would it change the overall way that the club is being run? Again, very unlikely. So what is the best hope for a change? We can only hope that Dave King has a change in heart and does decide to buy out the existing shareholders because otherwise I just don’t see a way out of this mess as we fans appear to be powerless against shareholders and directors who have no interest in engaging with the support and taking actions to keep them onside.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/u/rangers-supporters-trust-claim-8-in-10-fans-will-not-renew-season-tickets.1400067566

Some comparisons with Ann Budge's Hearts and our Rangers from yours truly on TRS: http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/323-rangers-own-budgement-day-is-coming

Lorenzo Amoruso urges Rangers supporters to put their trust in Dave King to oust Ibrox board Sunday 11 May 2014, by Stewart Fisher LORENZO Amoruso last night became the latest former Rangers player to call for supporters to back Dave King and Richard Gough's plan to boycott season tickets and place the money in a trust instead as a means of forcing major boardroom change. The Italian has emerged as a fierce critic of the current hierarchy and feels that placing funds in Ibrox 1972 Ltd, the vehicle introduced by King and already being used by supporters groups' the Union Bears and the Blue Order for pooling their funds, is the only mechanism for bringing about change. "Too many people have been touching the heart of the club who don't deserve to be so close," said Amoruso. "They have ripped out the soul of the club. It's so frustrating for people like me who were running, chasing after every ball, spitting blood sometimes and going through so many operations. " I didn't do all that to see this situation develop. We want to see better people control the club, people who really care about Rangers. "I didn't really encounter Dave King much when I was a player because he was in South Africa a lot, but I met him," said Amoruso, who was in Glasgow this week. "He was a director but not involved in the way David Murray was. But he is a Rangers man and he is putting himself out there and he deserves credit and support. He has been there before for the benefit of the club. "This is a crucial period because season ticket holders have a week left before deciding whether to renew and from those I've spoken to I don't think there is a feeling that supporters want to renew and I think that is the best solution. "It's hard to believe I am asking for the stadium to be empty. But if that is what it is going to take to get this board out then that's the way it has to be. There are easier ways to solve this problem but some people don't want to listen. That's why we must take a hardline approach. I'm sorry, this board just has to go." http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/lorenzo-amoruso-urges-rangers-supporters-to-put-their-trust-in-dave-king-to-oust-ibro.24190175

By Richard Wilson BBC Scotland John Brown is the latest former Rangers player to declare his support for the Ibrox 1972 Season Ticket fund. Brown, a fierce critic of former chief executive Charles Green, urged fans of the League One champions to withhold season ticket money two years ago. He has now joined Richard Gough and Lorenzo Amoruso in backing the fund, which has been set up by supporters' group coalition Union of Fans. "Rangers supporters must not give this board a lump sum of money," said Brown. The deadline for renewals is on Friday, and it is thought that the number of tickets sold is still in the very low thousands. During a question and answer session on Twitter last week, chief executive Graham Wallace admitted that sales were "slow". In their interim accounts, published in March, and in Wallace's business review, details of which were released last month, Rangers acknowledged that if season ticket sales dip below last year's uptake - which was around 34,000 - then the business's ability to trade as a going concern will be under threat. The UoF want fans to pay their renewal money into a fund instigated by former club director Dave King. The group will then seek security over Ibrox Stadium in return for handing over the gathered money in a single payment. This would prevent the property being used as security against future borrowing. Amoruso, the former Rangers captain, backed the campaign last week, while former Rangers manager Alex McLeish offered his support to King's intention to invest directly into Rangers International Football Club plc, by means of a new share issue. "I am not saying to my fellow Bluenoses, 'don't support your team'," said Brown, who left his job as Dundee manager last February. "Far from it. Buy your ticket on a match-to-match basis if this lot are still there next season." Brown, who left his job as a scout at Ibrox when Green's consortium took charge two years ago, pointed out that former player and manager John Greig refuses to currently attend games at Ibrox. He also said that he expects other former players to declare their support for the UoF initiative, although Mark Hateley urged fans to buy season tickets in an interview on the club website.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/6956-hateley-early-deals-key

........No it's time for Dave King to step up and pay. KEITH believes it's time for Ibrox investor King to put his money where his mouth is with the club's Murray Park training ground under threat. IF Dave King is serious about rescuing Rangers then he had better get a move on. In fact, come to think of it, he may have procrastinated too long 
already because this basket case 
of a business is staring its next disaster dead in the eye. Very soon someone will have to blink and before you know it this club could find itself minus a training ground if it’s not careful. In five days from now the curtain will come down on season ticket renewals and when it does,
bedraggled chief executive Graham Wallace might as well sound the emergency klaxon because unless there is a late stampede between now and Friday, Rangers will be right back on the brink. Raising money against Murray Park might then become almost inevitable, assuming insolvency is to be avoided as Wallace so bullishly insists it will be. It was interesting to note that the current board made no comment at all about the security of their Auchenhowie HQ when categorising Ibrox as ‘sacrosanct’ the other day. The truth is Wallace was busy discussing the merits or otherwise of raising funds against Murray Park with former financial director Brian Stockbridge at the turn of the year. Stockbridge wanted to push the button back then but Wallace at least had enough sense to resist. However, Wallace also made it clear that such a scenario might need to be revisited at a later date and if the season ticket revenue really is about to be obliterated then that date might well be now. Also, given the enormous scale of Rangers financial requirements, there would seem little point in simply raising a couple of million quid in the form a secured loan – like the deal Wallace brokered with those nice hedge fund folk from Laxey Partners just to keep the floodlights on till the end of winter. A full-blown sale and leaseback would certainly bring in significantly more money but at what price to a club which continues to be robbed of its soul from the inside? Which brings us back to the man who would be King and his plotting in South Africa. King has lent his name to the Union of Fans’ plan to starve the club of its biggest single source of revenue but he’s done so from a distance, almost half-heartedly, while this club’s supporters have been busy whipping themselves up into a state of high doh. That King did not attend the launch of this scheme in person, nor even make sure that his recently- recruited wingman Richard Gough was there to deputise, sent out more muddled messages to these fans who want nothing more than a leader in whom they can place their trust along with their cash. But then this is the Rangers civil war we are talking about. If there is a way to mishandle public relations then you can bet your last blue pound someone in this abomination will find it – even though you can barely move for gurus spinning furiously for one camp or the other. King says his attempted coup is not in any way reliant on public opinion, which is probably just as well because he hasn’t done enough to win over the rump of the fans. The vast majority want to believe in him but need to see tangible proof of his intentions. If Friday’s final tally of sold season tickets is as low as many are predicting then this will be an
indication of how little these fans trust the characters inside their own boardroom rather than a show of faith in the man who wishes to topple them. It would also leave the board with a couple of options – selling off the family silver or engage immediately with King, who is ready to talk. So far, King has done nothing much more than kick up a stink by issuing sporadic flurries of statements, most of which have told us nothing we did not already know. He has been heavy on promises – talking boldly of blowing £30million worth of his children’s inheritance – but feathery light on substance. So if he is serious about acting – and for the record I’m sure he is – then right about now would seem like an appropriate moment for him to start digging deep. King has made clear his reluctance to line the pockets of the very
shareholders he blames for making such a mess of the club. While this is an admirable position, the more time passes, the less realistic it appears. And all the while, Rangers fans are wrestling with their own consciences and fretting over whether or not to hold their club to ransom. King could remove all that
confusion and guilt from their
shoulders at a stroke by ploughing some of his own millions into the very account that has been set up for their season ticket cash. If those who run the club will not accept his money then why would any individual feel the least bit bad about hanging on to their own £400? Better still though, King should rethink his strategy and find out exactly how much it would cost to make those shadowy investors lurking behind the likes of Margarita Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita disappear once and for all. Ultimately, this is what will be required if Rangers are ever to be properly ‘cleansed’ and now Friday’s iceberg is approaching, maybe those lucky enough to have stuffed their pockets with penny shares might realise it’s time to abandon ship. Even if they sold now for as little as 20p a share they’d still make mind-boggling returns on their investments. The thought of making them rich might make King’s skin crawl but, even so, this would seem like a price worth paying. He could always ask Fergus McCann who had to perform a similar U-turn when bringing down the Kelly and White dynasty across the city. A deal could even be structured that would allow King to be given some of the money back, much like the £2.5m Ann Budge has just had to pony up to make sure Hearts are a 
Lithuanian-free zone. King could do any of the above and instantly cement his status as a genuine hero among the club’s rank and file. The longer he waits though the more time is running out for his club.

The first two years of the American Civil War saw the Confederates win most of the battles, but continue to slowly lose the war. They benefitted from consistency of selection in General Officers, Robert E Lee was the very man to command the Army of Nothern Virginia. The Union had utilised several GOCs in the same period. Despite the Army of the Potomac being almost twice the size of Lee's command, McDowell, McClellan, Meade, Hooker, .... et al could not bring superiority to bear. President Lincoln was asked why he appointed and subsequently dismissed so many GOCs? Old Abe outlined an objective appreciation of the situation, the Union possessed four times as many men in the field, similar dominance in armaments, a massive superiority in production, and several times capacity in railways and logistics. He concluded by saying, "I am searching for a General that can do the arithmetic". He found him in Ulysses S Grant and the end game was inevitable. The wisdom of Abe ie 'doing the arithmetic' is something all parties in the on going Rangers crisis, could benefit from. If we accept the club sold 38,000 season tickets last season, what will the break down of this coming season's briefs be? Let's say the submission date is extended again, beyond this Friday. Would 15,000 renewals be a reasonable assumption? Given the UoF, Blue Order, Union Bears, ... etc have subscribed to the Dave King Trust, can we expect 5,000 to sign up to that perception of progression? The residual is 18,000, the biggest grouping and their decision might be based on style of football, prefer the option of game by game attendance, have had enough, ..... etc. I know other Gersnetters will have differing views on the numbers allocated to each grouping but I think we should recognise the three groupings. Weighting the random variables in the equation will be coloured by preferred prejudice, but we should attempt to be objective. Can either the Board or Dave King do the arithmetic?

Hi there, first post, great site. I read lots of blogs etc and this is the best one in Scotland by a distance. If Rangers FC cannot continue as a going concern, in the event of the Dave King faction starving the board out, what happens? How does Rangers International deal with this?

THOSE Rangers supporters who have so far not renewed their season tickets for next season are currently facing some stark choices. Do they pledge their cash to Ibrox 1972 Ltd, the company launched by the Union of Fans group this week, and hope security will be granted over the stadium? Or do they give their money direct to the club as usual and book their seats for home games in the SPFL Championship in the 2014/15 campaign? Alternatively, they can sit back and see how the stand-off develops during the summer months before deciding how to proceed. What the Light Blues fans do, and in what sort of numbers, will determine the short-term future of the troubled Glasgow club. There is certainly backing for the scheme to withhold cash in the company that has former director Dave King and club legend Richard Gough as trustees. That is despite the fact the Rangers board stated once again this week that it "has no intention of granting security over Ibrox to anybody". Many fans were alarmed when it emerged that both Edmiston House and the Albion car parking facilities had been used as security for two loans of £1.5million earlier this year. And there are serious fears that institutional investors, who have seen the share price tumble since the IPO in 2012, may seek to maximise the club's assets in future. George Thomson, a law student from Paisley who has been a season ticket holder for 10 years, is one of those who will be putting his money into Ibrox 1972 Ltd. He said: "I think there comes a point where you have to say: 'Enough is enough.' "And this, for me, is that point. I will be withholding my season ticket money from the club. "I am unhappy at how the club is being run and have no faith in this board. I think we need change at the top in order to move on as a club and I would like to see Dave King involved. "He is a Rangers fan and has money that he is prepared to invest that could make a real difference to us. How many of the current directors or investors can say that?" Yet, there are also many supporters who are unsettled by the path being taken by King and the Union of Fans and the implications it may have for Rangers. David Somers, the club chairman, has stated there would be a serious doubt over the Govan club's ability to continue as a going concern if fans withheld their cash. James Clark-Dick, a retired quantity surveyor from Uddingston who has been a season ticket holder at Ibrox for nearly 30 years, is against the plan. He will be renewing the three season tickets he has in the Copland Road Stand - he attends every home game with his wife and daughter - and believes he is in a "silent majority". He feels that withholding money from Rangers in the coming weeks could actually help to bring about the eventuality that King and the Union of Fans are hoping to avoid. "Withholding season ticket money from the club this summer until security is granted over Ibrox seems like a ludicrous idea to me," he said. "I don't think it is the right way to go. "My worry is that if you push the shareholders enough then that (utilising the club assets) is just exactly what they might do. It might be what they have to do." The 63-year-old feels there are many Rangers fans like him whose views are not being represented by the supporters' organisations which comprise the Union of Fans. "I have met and spoken to Chris Graham (the Union of Fans spokesman) on a few occasions in the past and he came across well," he said. "But Chris and others like him are described as fans' representatives. Well, I am a fan and I don't have a representative." Given the gross mismanagement of previous regimes at Rangers, Mr Clark-Dick admitted he was "cautious" about the current custodians of the club. However, he also has serious misgivings about South Africa-based businessman King getting involved and the company that he has set up. He said: "I'm not pro-board and I'm not anti-board. I'm neither. I'm pro-Rangers. And I don't think this idea to withhold season ticket money is a great idea. "If it hadn't been for this campaign then I think we would have been all right. And apart from this season ticket fund, I don't know what plan Dave King has for the club. "Everybody has criticised the Rangers review. But what more did people expect? You are only ever going to get the bare bones of a business plan in a review. "I have been a shareholder for 30 years. The last batch of shares I bought were the fourth lot I have acquired. And the review is the most information I have had out of Rangers during that time. "They detailed exactly where the £67million went. They showed that £26m was used up in one-off costs. "That is the most clarity we have had." What the future holds for Rangers, though, will remain shrouded in uncertainty until it emerges how many supporters have renewed season tickets and how many have withheld. At the moment, it is too close to call. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/rangers-fans-divided-by-loyalties-162650n.24161559

For your information... Blowing a raspberry at Dave King perhaps?

Backed by Dave King, Richard Gough and the Union Of Fans https://www.ibrox1972.co.uk/

“We note the latest attempt by this board to mislead and hold Rangers fans to ransom. Their latest “give us your money or the seat gets it” ultimatum is just another in a long line of misjudgements this board has made about the mood amongst the support in general. The fact that those now in the crosshairs of this board are a lifelong Rangers fan who has ploughed millions of his own money into the club with no return, an iconic captain from one of the club’s most successful ever periods and a group of Rangers fans attempting to secure the home of our football club, says more about this board than we ever could. There is no attempt to deprive the club of funds. This is made very clear in the security proposal and the board’s ham fisted attempt to misrepresent this is one of the few transparent things they have done since coming to power. No money will be taken from fans unless security is granted and we are of the opinion that the board’s reluctance to discuss granting security may well rapidly change. Our public comments about Mr Wallace are not personal but have been based on his binding pronouncements on matters of huge importance which have been at best misleading, broken promises for engagement with fans, attempts to blame fans for the current precarious position of the club and a complete lack of any progress in bringing much needed investment into the club. We welcome the fact that the entire board have now publicly taken responsibility for all of these actions. Once again we see meaningless sound bites with absolutely no substance to back them up. The result, no doubt, of the expensive PR man hired by this board with more urgency than a Chief Scout. What “significant progress” has been made? How will this “bright future” we are promised come about when the investment committee have failed to secure a single pound of investment? Rangers is certainly “dear to all of us”, the Rangers support. We have no idea why this board would attempt to claim the same when there is not a single fan amongst them. We do not believe that Rangers fans will fall for this again. We’ve seen it far too many times in the past two years. “ - See more at: https://www.ibrox1972.co.uk/statements/#sthash.5zQnzija.oJfk0OFG.dpuf

http://vanguardbears.co.uk/ Evidence-Based Mathematics Written by: Ulster Loyal Wednesday, 7th May 2014 Much has been said and written about the finances of Britain's most successful sporting institution, Rangers Football Club. Speculation over the possibility of a second administration or likely direction of the share price has dominated Rangers based conversations in many a pub and many an internet forum. Not all of these conversations are helpful when they are presented in public, through various media, with no factual substance. They can subsequently cause unnecessary, widespread alarm and subject the club to destabilising influences, such as supporter boycotts and police investigations. The preferred way forward for all supporters should be to thoughtfully and objectively use the available information in Rangers' financial accounts to present a factual representation of our club's current business operations and forecast it's likely success going forward. Mathematics can help us to analyse the prospect of a company entering bankruptcy. On 25th December 2013, the following report was prepared, and posted on the Vanguard Bears forum, regarding the likelihood of Rangers going bankrupt: --- START OF ANALYISIS --- Rangers International Football Club (RIFC) has an Altman Z2-Score of 2.25; a statistical bankruptcy meter generated from a set of balance sheet ratios. Q – Are liquid assets a significant proportion of the assets? A – RISK •Testing: Working Capital/Total Assets > 0.2375 •RIFC Details: Working Capital/Total Assets = 0.018 Q – Do reinvested earnings make up a significant portion of the assets? A – SAFE •Testing: Retained Earnings/Total Assets > -0.1355 •RIFC Details: Retained Earnings/Total Assets = 0.34 Q – Are the assets relatively productive in terms of earnings? A – SAFE •Testing: Earnings Before Interest and Taxes/Total Assets > -0.082 •RIFC Details: Earnings Before Interest and Taxes/Total Assets = 0.019 Q – Does firm value compare favourably to its liabilities? A – RISK •Testing: Market Value of Equity/Book Value of Total Liabilities > 1.439 •RIFC Details: Market Value of Equity/Book Value of Total Liabilities = 0.89 Regarding the Altman Z2-Score: •Greater than 3.00 = good financial health. •Less than 1.80 = a company is in the distress zone and is in serious financial trouble; the distress zone is 80-90% accurate in predicting bankruptcy. •Rangers' score of 2.25 indicates it is not entirely safe from financial distress and investors should be cautious. --- END OF ANALYSIS --- The problem with supporters warning of the imminent arrival of another financial collapse at Rangers is that they have no statistical analysis to give credibility to their claims. When the share price was at around 33p, it was my opinion, reached using mathematical evidence, that the likely intrinsic value of Rangers was closer to 25.67p. I made similar comments in October 2013 when the share price was around 43p. The following analysis regarding an estimate of the true share price valuation of RIFC was also carried out in December: --- START OF ANALYSIS --- a) Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Method (forward looking growth model): 0p per share; 100% overvalued (due to negative cash flows that are not forecast to increase in the next 8 years). This is based on the following inputs: •The company's sustainable cash flow is -£12.61m (taken as the average between latest free cash flow (-£18.9m) and 3 year average free cash flow (which includes 2 years of £0 due to not having data for those years, making this valuation input more unreliable)) •Expected growth rate of cash flow of 0% for the next 8 years (3 year average cash flow growth, 5 year average cash flow growth, year 1 forecast earnings per share growth and year 2 forecast earnings per share growth are normally added as an input here but that data is not available for Rangers at this stage, making this valuation input more unreliable) •The company should settle into a long term growth rate of 3% (if we don't have reliable forecasts, we default to normal inflation levels and that is what we've done here) •Investors require a return of 15% for the risk they are taking (due to being a small cap company, 9% would be applicable to large cap companies) b) Earnings Power Value Valuation Method (zero growth model based on current earnings): 25.67p per share; 23.4% overvalued. This is based on the following inputs: •Sustainable level of revenue is £19.11m (latest revenue; 3 year average revenue and 12 month rolling forecast revenue is normally included but we don't have these inputs for RIFC, making this valuation input more unreliable) •Across the economic cycle, the operating margin in 7.8% (we normally take an average of a 5-10 year operating margin and a trailing 12 month operating margin but we don't have that data for RIFC, making this valuation input more unreliable) •On average the company see £0m of 'exceptionals' (we normally deduct the long term average of non-recurring charges but we don't have this data for RIFC, making this valuation input more unreliable) •15% of historic selling, general and administrative expense has funded growth (typically 15% to 50% of this is added back to a company's Earnings Power Value to make up for the fact some of that expenditure went towards funding growth as opposed to maintaining the existing asset base; Earnings Power Value only takes into account current earnings and is a zero growth model; we don't have enough data for RIFC on this value so we assume the minimum standard of 15%) •Each year, the company spends -£2.48m on maintenance capital expenditure (capex) (maintenance capex can be calculated by subtracting growth capex from total capex; again, we don't have long term forecasts for this based on historical figures so we are largely estimating these on limited results from the previous earnings report) •Investors require a return of 15% for the risk they are taking (due to being a small cap company, 9% would be applicable to large cap companies) c) "Relative to Sector" Valuation Method: 92.51p per share; 176.2% undervalued Based on the following inputs: When we compare RIFC to the Hotels and Entertainment services sector, we have the following valuation ratios for RIFC: •Price To Book Value: 0.39 • Price To Tangible Book Value: 0.57 • Enterprise Value To Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation: 3.14 • Enterprise Value To Operating Profit: 8.38 • Enterprise Value To Sales: 0.66 By comparison, we have the following corresponding valuation ratios for companies in the Hotels and Entertainment Services sector: •Price To Book Value: 1.95 • Price To Tangible Book Value: 2.19 • Enterprise Value To Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation: 12.7 • Enterprise Value To Operating Profit: 18.3 • Enterprise Value To Sales: 2.10 The Relative To Sector Valuation Method compares RIFC's valuation against the median multiples of the company's sector peer group. d) Net Current Asset Value Valuation Method: 0p per share; 100% overvalued Based on the following inputs: The company's current assets (long term assets are not included) are £16.5m • Cash And Short Term Investments (trailing 12 months) £11.2m •Total Receivables, Net £5.23m •Total Inventory £0.085m •Other Current Assets £0.000m The company's total liabilities are £24.7m • Total Current Liabilities £15.1m •Minority Interests £0.25m •Deferred Tax £7.82m •Total Long Term Debt £0.96m •Total Other Liabilities £0.52m The shares outstanding are 65,095,856m e) Net Working Capital Valuation Method: 0p per share; 100% overvalued Based on the following inputs: •The company's Cash and Short Term Investments are £11.2m • The company's Inventory is £0.085m • The company's Receivables are £5.23m • The company's Total Liabilities are £24.7m • The Shares Outstanding are 65,095,856m f) Tangible Book Value Valuation Method: 59.1p; 76.4% undervalued •The company's Book Value (total assets minus liabilities) is £56.9m • The company's Intangible Assets are £18.4m • The company's Goodwill is £0.000m • The Shares Outstanding are 65,095,856m --- END OF ANALYSIS --- The following commentary from the 10th of January 2014 further explained the information provided on the 25th of December 2013. --- START OF COMMENTARY --- "As you can see there are only three valuation methods that assign a value greater than 0p to Rangers; Earnings Power Value, Tangible Book Value and Relative To Sector. There are only two valuation methods that assign a share price that is higher than the current level of 28.5p. However, investors likely won't use these methods to value Rangers, and inform their investing decisions, for the following reasons, thus eliminating any mathematical reason to think that the current share price is cheap, based on an objective analysis of the company's financial results: Relative To Sector is an unreliable valuation because it compares Rangers to the Hotels and Entertainment Services sector, based on how the stock is classified by the stock market. It would be better to only compare Rangers to other football clubs but there is a shortage of listed football clubs and the sample size would be too small to draw any conclusions. The Tangible Book Value method is good at valuing the club's assets. However, value of assets is very different to the value of the business. If the assets are not generating sufficient income to make a profit, then investors lose confidence in the ability of those assets to generate future growth and profitable cash flows. As a result, the business is worth less to those that may seek to invest in it. If the company is liquidated due to large debts, the investors likely won't see the value of the assets they invested in because shareholders are below creditors in the capital structure of a business. Therefore, an investor does not invest on the basis of the book value of the assets of a company but rather the ability of those assets to generate a return on investment. Now, the only method left that assigns a value to Rangers, and would be a realistic evaluation of the club's true worth as a business, in the opinion of investors (which is largely what dictates the share price), is the Earnings Power Value method. This valuation metric values the club based on current earnings and assumes no growth in the company (which can't be measured anyway due to negative cash flows). It is a realistic valuation because it makes no assumptions about future growth, which can be inaccurate, and is only an analysis of the present situation. According to the Earnings Power Value method, Rangers is valued at 25.67p. Therefore, the current share price of 28.5p is close to being a fair valuation of Rangers. Rather than speculating on boardroom battles and their subsequent effect on the share price, I have simply looked at the value of the business from an objective, mathematical view. In the long term, a company's share price will converge with its Intrinsic Value. It's just mathematics and market forces. The downwards movement in the share price of Rangers comes as no surprise to me." ---END OF COMMENTARY--- The best way to comment on the financial situation at Rangers is by working with the facts, not by letting unfounded allegations cloud your judgement. History will show us which commentary - evidence based mathematics here on Vanguard Bears or the agenda-driven, emotional rhetoric from power-seeking, self-proclaimed fans' representatives - proved to be an accurate account of the financial picture at Rangers. It is now the 7th of May 2014 - Rangers is still operating and the share price is 23.00p.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/6929-club-statement

In favour of UOF.

http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2014/05/dave-king-time-to-step-up-and-pay.html?spref=tw

On Twitter that Dave King's ST Trust goes live tomorrow. Also Gough gave interview to Sun stating this. Anyone confirm this?

From today's Sunday Mail. Rangers in crisis: Entire Ibrox board reported to police in storm over statements made by CEO Graham Wallace May 04, 2014 07:07 By Norman Silvester 63 Comments INVESTMENT banker Phil Maher claims Wallace misled fans over the club's finances and he has asked police to examine whether the board committed an offence by failing to stop the chief executive. RANGERS' entire board of directors have been reported to police investigating statements made by chief executive Graham Wallace. Investment banker Phil Maher made two new allegations to detectives who travelled to London on Wednesday. He earlier claimed that Wallace misled Rangers fans over the club’s finances. In a three-hour interview, he alleged Wallace has made other misleading statements. Maher – a shareholder and lifelong Rangers fan – also asked police to examine whether the board committed an offence by failing to stop Wallace. Last week, we revealed Maher had complained about comments made by Wallace at the club’s annual general meeting in December. He claims Wallace misled shareholders when he said the club had enough funds to operate until May before the board took out a £1.5million emergency loan two months later. Craig Williamson/SNS GroupGraham Wallace However, a new complaint relates to comments made by Wallace about season ticket sales on Friday, April 25. Fans have been told they must pay by cash after payment providers First Data Solutions insisted on full security in return for their services. Wallace claimed the firm had made the demand after Dave King, who wants to take over the club, called for a season ticket boycott. Maher, who declined to comment yesterday, told police that is misleading because the credit issue was first raised with Rangers in January, a month before King’s boycott plea. A Rangers spokesman said yesterday: “The club has no knowledge of any erroneous complaints of this nature which, if they are ever put to the football club, will be defended rigorously as they have absolutely no grounds. “As these complaints appear to be vexatious, we will consider our legal position with regards to defamation.” Some disgruntled Rangers supporters held a red card protest against the board during their League One clash with Dunfermline at East End Park yesterday.

Yet another good article with the questions a lot of fans have been asking plus some that have never been brought up before. Wednesday, 30th April 2014 In a week that saw the board of Rangers conclude their 120 day review into the business, Season Ticket renewals across the country are in various stages of action, with Dave King and the "Union of Fans" encouraging Season Ticket holders to pay their season ticket monies in to an Escrow account that is intended to hold and release funds when Rangers sign over securities for the Albion Car Park and Edmiston House to Season Ticket holders. With many of our members expressing concern that the "Season Ticket Trust" hasn't been made clear to them, we believe it is appropriate to seek clarity by asking the following questions of Dave King, and the "Union of Fans". It should be noted that we also have concerns about the 120 Day Review, and how the club plan to bridge an apparent cash flow shortfall, with the club £1.5M down before next season has even started Q - Has an Escrow account been set up yet? Q - If so, who is hosting that Escrow account facility, i.e. which bank? Q - Who are the Trustees of the account, other than Richard Gough? Q - How do I pay in to it? Q - If I pay in to it, what guarantees do I have over what seat I will be paying for, and that the seat will be in my name? Q - What written assurances do I get that the money will be returned, in the event that the assurances the Trust are requesting from Rangers are not granted? Q - What assurances, other than guarantees over Rangers owned assets have the Trust requested? Q - 66.6% of the loan value, not including interest, is due to Rangers Supporters Trust board member George Letham. Don't the Trust feel that withholding funds to Rangers runs the risk of Rangers defaulting on the loan to Mr Letham, and thereby Mr Letham theoretically stands to gain £1.075M worth of shares in Rangers International Football Club? Q - Can George Letham confirm what his plans are regarding his holdings if that share value is transferred to him, namely, will he retain ownership and voting rights, or will he proxy votes to the Rangers Supporters Trust (RST)? Q - For those who sign up for Away Tickets, how will they get tickets in future? Q - Do current Travel Club members stand to lose travel club points by using this Trust? Q - How will Richard Gough act as Guarantor as a resident of the USA? Q - What are the Administration costs of the Escrow account, and how will they be funded? Q - In the event that Rangers are willing to compromise over loan securities, with the agreement of Sandy Easdale and George Letham, who will become the signatory for these assets on behalf of Season Ticket holders Q - Do shareholders that live abroad with a shareholding in value higher than the price of a season ticket get any security? Q - Why was there no mention of the Season Ticket Trust, or any information about it in the UoF leaflet handed out last week? Q - Will the Trust facilitate split payments like those offered by the club to pay for Season Tickets (through Zebra finance over 4 or 10 months)? Q - Will Season Ticket Holders who have sat in their seat for a number of years be able to secure "their" seat at Ibrox, or will they stand to lose "their" seat? Q - Will money deposited accrue any interest? If so, what will be done with that money? Q - Where will the interest payments be shown? Q - Who decides exactly when the money will be released to the club and in what form? Q - Will the custodians of the account be separate and distinct from the organisations who wish only for the board's removal? Q - Will every member have a say in when the money should be released? Q - What exactly does the board need to do (beyond what they have) to make the monies available? Q - What lines of communication have been opened with the club to urgently discuss the aims of this project? Q - Who exactly has the authority to negotiate with the club? Q - How often will fans putting money into this scheme be updated of progress and by what medium? Q - What other transparency is guaranteed by way of communicating to those who pay in to the scheme? Q - Are other Rangers supporters' organisations involved in this scheme? Q - Are the Rangers supporters trust or any of their senior or high profile members involved at the core of this? Q - Will there be a board of Trustees in the scheme, and if so, how will they be elected? Q - How can supporters and contributors become involved to influence the decisions being made? Q - Are any previous board members of any of Rangers corporate entities, other than Dave King, involved? If so, at what level? Q - Are there any conditions attached to the Trust that require a nominee of the Trust to join the PLC board or the football club board of Rangers? Q - If so, how will that nominee be chosen? Q - Will the Trust be VAT Registered? Q - If the board acquiesce to UOF demands who will then hold first charge/security on the stadium rights to our club? Q - What IT problems could possibly delay implementation of the Trust? We trust that the relevant people involved in the Trust will both answer these questions and make themselves known to Rangers supporters, who are understandably cautious about contributing their hard earned money to a scheme that appears to carry a high element of risk. We feel that supporters should seek clarity both from the PLC board of the club, over their plans for the future, and from those promoting the Season Ticket Trust.

Long article and rambling open letter on DR website RE: investor Alan MacKenzie and Dave King http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-investor-urges-dave-king-3482599?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter