Search the Community

via @Rangers_Official Now that the season is over, this is a good time for me to speak to you directly as part of our ongoing Ready To Listen fan engagement programme. In order to do so I will be answering questions from supporters today in a Twitter Q&A on our official club account. You can tweet your questions directly to me on @RFC_Official using the hashtag #ReadyToListen between 1pm and 2pm. I will answer as many questions from supporters within the hour and look forward to speaking with as many fans as I can. Graham Wallace, Chief Executive Officer.

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.

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

how many have actually pledged to dave kings scheme and how may season books have actually been sold?

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

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

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.

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.

A truly wonderful eulogy written by Andy Steel for the site on the day of Sandy's funeral in Edinburgh. http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/241-sandy-jardine-a-tribute

@Martin1Williams: Sons of Struth to hand out red cards to allow #Rangers fans to protest against the board & their business review at Dunfermline

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

Wallace about to come under greater scrutiny re assets. Also, his man Tyrrell speaking to BBC behind McCoist's back. Today's Sun back page a deliberate attempt by sports editor Ian king - been called by Wallace - to discredit McCoist. Hardly subtle Ian. Put on twitter by someone who has been very insightful recently.

Given all the talk about share issues , proxies , who own what , who has proxies for whom , here is an up to date position , ( stands back to be shot down ) , this is from the Rangers International Football club site on shares , http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/share-information. Sandy Easdale - owns 2,942,957 , proxies of 14,387,003 . This Includes all of BPH (4,000,000) and Margaritta 's 2,600,000 share holdings . Laxley owns -8,292,957 Artemis -5,749,000 River & Mercantile -4,795,500 Hargreave Hale - 4,601,888 BPH - Proxied to Sandy Easdale -4,000,000 Miton Capital -3,143,857 Mike Ashley_3,000,000 Margaritta ,Proxied to Sandy Easdale ,2,600,000 Cazanoza Capital - No longer shown as having a reportableholding Legal & General -No longer shown as having a reportable holding Dont know what this means exactly Currently, 16.24%+ of the Company’s Ordinary Shares are not in public hands. The Ordinary Shares are freely transferable and no Ordinary Shares are held in treasury. + Does not include the 14,387,003 Ordinary Share (representing 22.1% of the issued share capital of the Company) which Alexander Easdale has voting rights over pursuant to the terms of proxy agreements entered into with other shareholders. Should also point out this was last updated on the official site at the end of Jan 2014

DAVE KING has savaged Rangers’ 120-day review and branded it good news for CELTIC fans. The former Ibrox director dismissed chief executive Graham Wallace’s findings — claiming an office junior could have produced the same in a day.

Monday, 28 April 2014 10:30 Past Win Can Help Us Written by Andrew Dickson DAVID BROWNLIE hopes the fact Rangers have so many past winners in their team can help them retain the City of Glasgow Cup against Celtic tonight. The Light Blues will face their biggest rivals for the prestigious old trophy at Parkhead (7pm) as they look to build on four final successes in the last five years. Tickets are still available to season ticket holders only and they can purchase them from the Rangers Ticket Centre up until close of business at 4pm. Defender Brownlie turned out in the most recent final 12 months ago as Gers edged a cracking game 3-2 at Firhill. Played out in a raucous atmosphere in front of 6,500 fans, a Ryan Hardie goal and Junior Ogen’s double won the game for the Murray Park outfit. Both forwards will be involved again this evening along with under-17 skipper Brownlie and a number of other Auchenhowie starlets. There has been nothing between the two teams this season, with each having a 2-1 home win in the Glasgow Cup and also sharing a draw in the league. But where Billy Kirkwood’s team perhaps has an edge is in terms of the fact there are a number in his side who know what it takes to come out on top in the decider. Brownlie said: “In the first game we had a man sent off in the first 10 or 15 minutes when we were 1-0 up and they got a penalty then went on to win 2-1 in the last couple of minutes. “That was a bad one but we had to get on with it but we won the more recent match between us 2-1. “The victory helped us get out of the group stage of the competition plus it gave us a boost as a team ahead of this final. “On the night, it is 11 players against 11 and anything can happen and the fact we’ve got a lot of boys who experienced the final last year in our side can help. “We’ve the likes of Ryan and Junior who scored the goals in the last final plus people such as Michael Mossie and Adam Wilson as well as me. “There are a few in there who know what it takes and what it feels like to play in front of a passionate crowd and to have the composure required to win the game.” Supporters attending tonight's game should note there are car parking facilities in Dalriada St, off Janefield Street, for no charge. Rangers fans should approach Celtic Park from Kinloch Street. http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/academy-news/item/6886-past-win-can-help-us

... from Ibrox Noise. I know quite a few will jump in here and there, but maybe it would do good to read the article twice before go haring after specific things. Posted by Ibrox Noise at 10:26 It will come of no surprise that I agree with a lot IN has to say, including that I don't view the current status quo as ideal.

Another day, another story in the anti-Rangers media designed to damage the club. And yet another collaboration between the Union of Fantasists and a notoriously Rangers-hating outlet. It is obvious that the rebel faction in the Ibrox support is prepared to fight as dirty as it gets after a so-called Rangers fan reported Graham Wallace for statements made at the AGM last December. It is clear that this is just mischief-making and a sordid attempt to tarnish Mr Wallace’s reputation and the board in general. I genuinely think that some of these people will not stop till they have destroyed The Rangers, so all-consuming is their hatred. It has been an open secret for a while that Graham Wallace was their next target. To be fair, I think Wallace himself has been naive about the extent to which the rebels will go. He is certainly under no illusions now. There are many fans who feel this has gone beyond whether or not you are pro or anti the board. The issue now is one of survival. The brutal reality is that Dave King and his supporters are playing a game of brinkmanship, hoping that the pressure of mob rule will force the board to hand over control of the club to them. But Dave King is more aware than anybody that the board have no power to do that. Any suggestion they would take that course of action would trigger the shareholders to junk the board and appoint a new one. In short, King knows he can only win if he is prepared to go all the way and force a second administration, from which the club may not recover. That would be a Pyrrhic victory. In other words, nobody would win except those who hate Rangers so much that they would be prepared to destroy the club. Many fans are anxious that there are those in the King camp prepared to do just that. For me, it’s always been as simple as this – seeing the lengths these people are prepared to go, I oppose them on principle. The board Rangers presently has was appointed by the democratic votes of shareholders. That is the normal and lawful way things are done in this country. To use mob rule to usurp power is indefensible and doomed to failure. The question is not can the rebels win? It is can the club survive their constant attempts to undermine progress? It is not about whether people support the board or not anymore. It is about the survival of Rangers Football Club. This attempt to grab control of Rangers by Bolshevist tactics has split families, destroyed friendships, turned bear upon bear and cheered the enemies of Rangers no end. Rangers fans are being threatened at games and people are being sickened to the point of threatening to stop going to watch the team. Anything this divisive and destructive cannot be a good thing. Behind it all are tycoons who won’t buy shares and blazer chasers who fawn upon them. Rangers fans need to unite and show support, not to the men who sit in the Directors Box or those who want to – but to the club itself. Propagandists have tried to tell us there is a difference between the tean amd the regime. But Rangers supporters need to look beyond that superficial division and understand that supporting The Rangers means you support Rangers Football CLUB. We have learned that the company running Rangers is not the club itself. Therefore, do not let anyone con you into thinking that supporting RFC is backing the board. It’s not the board that need the support, it is Rangers Football Club. If opposing the board results in destroying the club, how does that help anybody except those who hate Rangers? Rangers Football Club was formed in 1872/3. That is the club I support. Noit Dave King and the Union of Fantasists formed a few months ago.

I’m going to start this blog with a warning – We must ensure, for the future of our club, that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past. I say that because it is important we focus on the facts and not the personalities involved. There is a considerable amount of information circulating at the moment and it’s vital we scrutinise it in a totally objective manner. Not only because it is the right thing to do – but because the future of our club may depend on our ability to sort the wheat from the chaff. The Union of Fans only have themselves to blame to an extent, that their anti-board message has not been widely accepted by all. Their insistence on being so deliberately confrontational with our current board, as well as their sometimes puerile rhetoric, may go down well with those already in their camp but it doesn’t necessarily resonate with all the support. As I’ve written previously, when the man you are openly supporting suggests some are “looking for a fight” it’s surely worthy of re-assessing how you are coming across to people. It’s a real pity the debate has become so polarised. There is almost a sense that you are either pro or anti-board. I’m aware of a supporter yesterday who was threatened for refusing to chant “sack the board”. – a sad indication of the state of play. The reality of course is that for every pro or anti board supporter there are probably many more of us who are utterly confused, worried and trying to get to grips with facts amongst a deluge of propaganda. It’s important that those in our support who are against Dave King, for whatever reason, still realise they have a responsibility in holding the current board to account, and reticence of the possible alternative does not mean we ignore unacceptable standards from those currently in power. And just why should our current board be viewed with suspicion and be subject to challenge ? Well for starters we have employed a new PR Guru. Such an appointment baffled many within our support, particularly with the crying need for a chief scout. One is left to ponder what our board’s priorities are for our club. We have a non-executive director, Sandy Easdale giving interviews to the BBC where he suggests intimate knowledge of financial matters pertaining to the club. This should raise serious questions about the level of governance at boardroom level. From the CEO’s review we have learned that contracts were signed off by the previous board without any legal representation on behalf of the club. Quite simply that is nothing short of scandalous. Do the current board intend to investigate these matters and retrospectively pursue those responsible ? As many us are learning to our angst, the ability to renew season tickets by Credit or Debit Card is no longer available due to the merchant, 1st Data, requiring what is viewed as an unreasonable level of security for such a privilege. The CEO’s review states : “The Board believes that one of the major factors influencing the merchant acquirer to change its terms was the extensive negative coverage of calls in some quarters for supporters to refrain or delay purchasing season tickets. “ The Union of Fans have denied this and their denials have been supported by a National newspaper which claims it has viewed correspondence which suggests this is not the reason for the increased levels of guarantee. The ball is now in the board’s court. The integrity and veracity of both the board and the review has been challenged by a national newspaper – it is up to the board to instruct 1st Data to clarify the reasons behind the additional security requests. Quite simply if the board fail to take action over such a critical point then they have failed both themselves and the Rangers supporters who were patient enough to wait for the 120 day review. We must not let personal feelings or personal dislikes affect our ability to exercise vigilance or judgement. It’s a luxury not only we cannot afford, but more importantly, our club cannot afford.

IN THE standard media take on Rangers’ affairs, Graham Wallace is the big, bad bouncer barring entry to the club to Dave King, a man whose deep pockets would ensure everything went with a swing for those inside. Yet, Ibrox chief executive Wallace has tried to create the impression that King will be welcome to join the party. Just not take it over. “We have quantified a range [of investment, the figure being £30 million] where we think the club needs to be looking at in order to be competitive,” said Wallace, as the club published a damning 120-day business review which showed £70m had been haemorrhaged over 18 months. “Right now we don’t have the authority to issue a fresh batch of shares and say to Dave King ‘Here you are… £20m? In you come...’ “What we’ve said is we will go to the shareholders for authority in the autumn and the timing of that is important because it gives us time to demonstrate stability in how we’re running the business from an investor’s perspective. When we do that, the equity offering will be open to existing shareholders, it should probably also be open to fresh investors, including Dave King, and potentially others. There’s no one stopping Dave King or anyone else putting money into the club today other than the regulatory authority the board needs to have. “Dave has said before, there may be 15 per cent of the existing shareholders who may not want to participate further, in which case there’s a significant block of stock that would be available.” Wallace denies the current directors fear their power being diluted by King’s involvement. “When we met with him, when you look at his ambitions and his vision for what he would like the club to be, they’re not dissimilar to what we’re trying to do,” insisted the chief executive. “We want to be competitive, we want to be punching at the top of the Premiership and in order to do that we know the club needs investment.” Rangers supporters find themselves in an horribly invidious position. They are understandably contemptuous of the current board for the cash burn and calamitous contracts that Wallace excoriated in his review. However, through a gushing press for King, the only alternative being presented is a man who mismanaged his own financial affairs so profoundly he had to repay more than £40m to the South African tax authorities and lodge certain payments to 
prevent his convictions landing him in prison. “A wide cross-section of the fan base is looking for some form of guidance, some form of reassurance as to how their club has been run,” Wallace said. “I hope as they look at this review that they get a sense of where it’s been, where it is now, and more importantly where it can go. “People are worried about putting their money into the club and three months later it not to be there and they’ve lost their £400. I completely understand that, and I’ve been repeatedly asked if the club is under threat of another administration and I’ve said the same thing every time – no, it’s not. “The point about the fans is, yes, there’s a desire on behalf of a segment of the fanbase to support someone like Dave King, who’s offering up – on paper, at least – a potentially significant amount of money to invest in the club. I understand that. “We’re giving the assurance that if the fans continue to back the club in the way they have, then there is no threat to the financial stability of this business. That’s the single most important thing. If fans are really concerned about the financial health of their club, if they give us the support by behaving as they have done and renewing their [season] tickets, then we’re in a very very strong position.” That is tantamount to the emotional blackmail the supporters’ coalition the Union of Fans has railed against. Wallace might not be so tainted in the eyes of the wider support, and might have been perceived more as a figure to trust by them, were it not for the £1.5m loan at exorbitant rates the club required only months after he stated such an injection would not be needed to keep the club afloat. The chief executive now accepts his credibility was damaged. “It was an issue, yes. I responded to a question at the AGM about [whether there] ‘is sufficient cash to continue to trade in the near term’ and I said there was. That was an honest answer made on the assessment of what was available at the time. As we’ve gone through the review, there were certain assumptions made in the business plan which, when we went to push the button on them, we found they didn’t exist. So yes, we got to a position where we had to look at an alternative strategy for a very short, defined period of time. So yes, our credibility was questioned. “Subsequent to putting the deal in place there were offers of similar amounts at vastly reduced monies. I think we’re in a better place now.” A huge measure of sensible husbandry is required at Rangers, but with Wallace stating manager Ally McCoist’s playing budget for the Championship will be “comparable” to the indefensible £6m with which the club have bulldozed their way through two part-time lower divisions, questions can be asked about lessons learned. Perhaps in one sense they have been. Rangers announced in their review that they will appoint a chief football operations officer, essentially a director of football, who will “concentrate initially on developing player talent identification, scouting and recruitment capability”. In the past two years, Rangers have certainly been guilty of having a flawed recruitment strategy that has been the largest consistent drain on their revenue and resources. “In terms of building this club to be competitive back at the top level, the level of infrastructure is not there,” said Wallace. “So scouting, recruitment, talent identification, managing and driving value from sourcing players [needs to be addressed]. Bringing players in here, if they’re good enough to play for us great but if they’re not then they might do a season and move along and get some value. “We’ve no one looking at that. That’s what I see this particular role focusing on. It’s very much a support role for me, for the manager, at an overall level. The hunt for this person begins now and it’s about getting the right person, with the right skill set and the right experience. I’d hope over the course of the coming months to have someone.” Wallace maintains this new appointment did not reflect on McCoist’s job security. “I have never even had a thought about the manager’s future. We speak every day and meet two or three times a week. “He’s obviously interested in the financial budget. We’ve talked about it. He knows we’re going to make funds available for the summer. He doesn’t know the magnitude, the number. We will sit down and agree that.” http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-open-the-door-to-dave-king-1-3390262

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/27165564 Graham Wallace's 120-day business review provides a snapshot of Rangers' potential future. The challenge for the chief executive and his fellow directors is guiding the club to that point. There is detail in the document , certainly, and some commitments to act in the months ahead. How supporters react will determine the extent of the difficulties that Wallace will face, though, which means that trust is as much of a critical commodity as finance. Both have been in short supply in recent months. The review is a mixture of regret and hope. The amount of money that was squandered after the launch of Rangers International Football Club on the Alternative Investment Market is startling, and blame is placed firmly on previous executives, and by extension the directors who oversaw them. That analysis is accurate, but does not also take into account the fact that the appointments of previous and current directors were all sanctioned by the same group of aligned shareholders. Rangers' power structure is ultimately gathered around those shareholders who granted their voting proxies to Sandy Easdale, himself the holder of a smaller shareholding, ahead of the annual general meeting last December. It is only change at shareholder level that will alter the power structure. Wallace arrived as an independent figure, but he is now inextricably linked with events at Ibrox. His credibility as chief executive relied, to some extent at least, on the contents of the review, but also now on his ability to deliver it, the accuracy of its contents and his judgement in recent months. Easdale has expressed concern about Rangers' finances The latter is already in question following revelations that the club were informed last January, several weeks before any talk was raised of a season ticket boycott, that accepting credit card payments would require security being granted. This was because of the accounts, and Wallace's suggestion that the playing staff might accept a pay cut, rather than any fan initiative, yet the review - which was delivered to the stock exchange - states otherwise. With season ticket renewals "slow" according to Easdale - and believed to be significantly less than they were at this stage in the process last year - it would seem that Rangers fans were waiting to be convinced by Wallace. It did not help, for instance, that he said at the AGM that there was enough cash in the bank to sustain the business until the end of the season, only for the board to then seek a £1.5m loan from Easdale and George Letham (who offered better terms than those initially offered by the single largest shareholder, Laxey Partners) in February. It was also a crass juxtaposition for Wallace, following the release of the review, to fail to deny the bonus arrangements in his contract while at the same time revealing that there would be a "small number" of redundancies amongst the non-playing staff. This also followed the appointment of Paul Tyrrell, the former director of communications at Manchester City, Liverpool and Everton, in a consultancy role in the immediate run-up to the publication of the review. Wallace has, at times, seemed unable to negotiate the political intricacies of his position. It would have exasperated him, for instance, that the day before the review launch, Easdale gave an interview in which he described the club as being in a "fragile " position and suggested that it would not survive an insolvency event. He was revealing information sensitive to the RIFC share price, but isn't a plc director, in contravention of stock market rules. Wallace insisted that administration was not discussed during the 120-day review, but the message in the review is clear that if season ticket sales fall substantially, then the business will be unable to trade. It seems inconceivable that if insolvency is a possibility then it hasn't been discussed. The same message is contained in the revelation that Rangers cannot accept credit or debit card transactions for season ticket sales because the merchant provider was seeking security, which is likely to reflect a threat of insolvency should season ticket sales fall. This is a consequence of past recklessness, since supporters have lost faith in those running the club. It will only irk them further to read assessments in the review that £2m was spent on stadium wifi, LED displays and jumbo screens which were "non-essential"; that players were signed last summer that executives should have known the club could not afford. There were promises of optimism, in assertions that Ally McCoist will be given funds to spend over future transfer windows in a "more structured and planned" signing policy and that a three-year plan has been drawn up to deliver the Scottish Premiership title. Former Rangers director Dave King Fans will also like the notion of a chief football operations officer, an academy fund and commercial developments. Wallace's position as chief executive will rest on his ability to deliver these, though, as well as persuading the fans to renew their season tickets to such an extent that there is an overall uplift in sales. So what does the future hold? In part, that is dependent on how much money is left, and whether or not immediate costs can be met in the meantime. For now, there remain a number of scenarios. Should there be a shortfall in renewals, the intention is to hold a pre-emptive share offer, of up to 43,400,000 shares, to existing stakeholders. This would likely be at a discounted market price - and the share price fell by 15% to 22p following the review - and so would only raise up to around £9.5m. There is a further intention to seek the approval of shareholders in autumn 2014 for a new rights issue, to raise equity for investment. This would, again, be a pre-emptive offer, allowing current shareholders first refusal on a pro-rata basis to protect the size of their stake, but unsold shares, commonly known as the rump, are normally then offered to non-shareholders. This is where Dave King, the former Ibrox director, could make a move. There are other options for King, and he could in theory potentially acquire the right from existing shareholders to take up their allocation from a share issue. As with the Union of Fans, King chose to keep his counsel following the publication of the review, out of respect to the family of the late Sandy Jardine, the former Rangers defender who died on Thursday. South African-based businessman King now at least has options, as he looks to implement his strategy to invest in the club. King has publicly asserted that he wants to invest up to £30m in the club, if needs be, but that would be on the basis that he also gains control of how that investment is utilised. In the end, it came down to several thousand words, some reflection back and some casting forward. The review emphasises that Rangers are in a potentially dire financial position, and signalled what attempts might be made to address this. Can Wallace deliver? Will supporters buy into it? And what will King do now? The following days will be more revealing than the review itself.

RANGERS chief executive Graham Wallace has insisted that major shareholder Sandy Easdale was not speaking for the Ibrox club when he cast serious doubt on their financial position and repeated his own assertion there is “no threat” of a second administration. Easdale, who controls more than 26 per cent of the shares in Rangers, described the club’s situation as “fragile” in a BBC Scotland interview ahead of Wallace’s publication yesterday of his business review and strategic plan for the League 1 champions. The long-awaited document painted a damning picture of Rangers’ operations since its business and assets were *purchased by Charles Green’s consortium in May 2012 following the descent into administration and liquidation under Craig Whyte’s ruinous tenure. Despite raising £70.7 million through a share issue, season ticket sales and commercial income between that date and December 2013, only £3.5m was left at the end of last year. Wallace’s review admits the club “mismanaged almost all of its cash reserves following administration” and that a “perfect opportunity to rebuild Rangers has been completely missed”. Wallace has now set out a strategy which will require capital funding of up to £30m over the next three years and which he believes can culminate in Rangers winning the Premiership title in 2017 and qualifyingfor the Champions League. The club intend to have another share issue later this year to raise cash, but their immediate financial position is dependent on the sale of season tickets against the backdrop of former director Dave King’s call for supporters to instead place their renewal money in a trust fund. But, although Wallace *admitted poor season ticket sales would have an impact on the club’s financial operations, he distanced himself from Sandy Easdale’s bleak assessment and the possibility of a second *administration at Ibrox. “Sandy Easdale’s comments were made by him in his *capacity as a shareholder,” said Wallace. “He’s not a director of the PLC board, so they were not made in a capacity in respect of the PLC company. “I’ve gone on record before to say there would be no threat of administration and my position today is exactly the same. There is no change to my view based on the club’s current position and our future projections. “Sandy Easdale wasn’t put out to comment by the club. “He made them as a shareholder. You would have to speak to him directly to ask the context in which he made those comments. “If you are asking me if ‘administration II’ is a possibility, then I’m saying categorically ‘No’. There would need to be a significant reduction in season ticket renewals to present a major problem to the club.” Wallace denied that the current level of season ticket sales was as much as 9,000 down on the same period last year. But the situation has been further complicated by the withdrawal of credit and debit card services to pay for season tickets after the company who processed them for the club *demanded security over Ibrox Stadium to protect itself against any potential liabilities. Rangers turned down that *request and supporters will now only be able to purchase season tickets by bank transfer, cash or cheque payment. “We have extended the season ticket renewal window through to 16 May and we will monitor the progress of the fans renewing over the coming weeks and assess it,” added Wallace. “There is no sense of panic – no sense of panic at all. Season ticket sales have been slow and I don’t think that’s surprising. A lot of people have been waiting to see what we were going to see coming out of the review, a sense of comfort and security that if they put their money in, the company is still going to survive, but also a sense of ambition in terms of where we want to take the club. “We’ve never said that we would look to run this club on a limited cost basis. What we did say was that we would look at every pound we were spending and ask ourselves if we were spending it in the right areas. I think we’ve been true to that. “So what we’re setting out is a summary of the position as it was, an assessment of where we are today but, more importantly, a vision of where we want to take the club over the next three to five years. We’ve spent a *decent amount of time on a proper robust business plan. “I said at the time of the AGM that there was no point in going out and looking to raise funds if you haven’t got a robust plan that sits behind that. “So that’s what we’ve done and I very much hope that the Rangers fans will look at what we’ve said and support us with a sense of comfort that we’re running the club in the right way, that we have a sense of ambition and that their aspirations for a successful team on the field is equally matched by those of us in the boardroom who are *trying to grow and develop the club.” What Wallace described as a “small number” of staff will be made redundant as a result of the review findings. He also outlined plans for two new major roles at the club – a chief football operations officer, responsible for player talent identification, scouting and recruitment, and a chief commercial officer tasked with maximizing club revenues. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/wallace-at-odds-with-easdale-over-rangers-finance-1-3389705

Thread on FF saying Sandy has passed away! So so sad if true Been confirmed by Mark Dingwall on FF RIP Sandy, a true Rangers legend.