Search the Community

We are currently in the process of gathering together names of individuals and representatives of fans groups, RSCs, websites, etc who are willing to come along and help find a solution to the infighting amongst our fans. If you are interested in attending the meeting could you please email info@thelouden.co.uk (or you could dm/pm us) with your name and any group that you wish to represent or are a part of. To be clear, any individual who wishes to attend to try and help our support is more than welcome but we would appreciate an email so as to know the numbers. Regarding the format of the meeting, we are looking for suggestions on what specifically the meeting should cover. We are not discussing the politics at the club, we are only focusing on the way fans communicate with each other. This is not about which side is right or wrong. We do not need everyone to agree about everything but at all times we should be civil to one another. The meeting will be held in the lounge area of the pub and no alcohol will be served for the duration of the meeting. If anyone wants any other information, please ask. Thanks We Are The People God Bless The Rangers The Louden Tavern: Ibrox Stadium - More than a Pub Official Partner of The Rangers Football Club *We are responsible for The Louden Tavern: Ibrox Stadium, 111 Copland Road, Ibrox, G51 2SL solely and are not involved in the operation of any other premises

Approx 230 pages containing over 7,000 signatories and about 80 pages of comments Thanks to all who added to the numbers Craig SoS

Being said on FF and Twitter that VB met with the board the day after the UOF meeting. Somers and James Easdale also attended. Why would the board meet with such a small unrepresentative group? As is being said on Twitter most supporters clubs have more members.

IMO this question should come before the one about on-field exploits. There are many things to take into consideration and perhaps the Financial Bears could map out what they see as a probable/conditional route through the next 12 months. Some of the obvious questions that scream out are:- - Where is the money coming from to keep the lights-on? - Will there be an insolvency event? - What will be the final ST number? - Will game by game maintain it's attraction? - How long will it take to get a share issue up and running and will it be successful? - Is there money to carry out plans mapped out in business review? - How deep could austerity hit us? - How exactly will austerity hit ut? - How will severe austerity be paid for? (pay-offs) - When do the assets go? - Do you trust who is in control of the board (including the Easdale proxy block)? etc.

Would like to hear what fellow Bears expect next season. Obviously the journey back up the leagues was supposed to be a gimmie and we didn't foresee hearts and Hibs standing in the way. Hearts are on the rebuilding and Hibs are about to make changes.....An article on here a few weeks ago had Ally saying he fears Hibs, sorry but we should never be fearing them. We had a good Scottish cup run this year but id not worry about that this year and put all efforts into the league. Still cant believe we didt pick up the Ramsden's and I cant see there being big interest in that this year. I don't think Ally is the right manager, he should be at the club in some capacity but not on the training field and If im honest I don't think it will be easy next season.

Seems that the bros or one of them are suing for £200K. In tomorrow's Record.

We are looking to put together a meeting of all the different groups of the Rangers Support. All the fans groups, representatives, forums, magazines, podcasts, radio shows, fanzines and anyone who wants to come along We would like to make an attempt to bring civility back to the Rangers Support and thrash out a ‘code of conduct’ for how fans interact with each other online and in real life. It has been a hard time for the support as different views about what is best for the club are prevalent but this isn’t about protests, boycotts, supporting the board or anything else. It is purely about Rangers Supporters meeting and finding a way to give each other the respect a Rangers Supporter should have with one another. This is not about who is right and who is wrong – it is about the support moving forward and people with differing views being able to speak to each other. List of Groups we’d like to see there include: Sons of Struth Vanguard Bears Union Bears The Blue Order RST Rangers Media Follow Follow Gersnet Do The Bouncy No.1 Fanzine 72 Magazine WATP Magazine Rangers Supporters Assembly Rangers Supporters Association Copland Road Organisation Rangers Fans Fighting Fund Rangers Chat Heart & Hand Podcast We Welcome The Chase Podcast Aye Ready Podcast Any RSCs that are interested And apologies for anyone I have missed but everyone who has Rangers at heart is welcome. We would like to have this meeting at 1pm Saturday 31st May in The Louden Tavern: Ibrox Stadium, 111 Copland Road, G51 2SL. If you are willing to come along could you contact us here or email info@theloudentavern.co.uk There is no hidden agenda here, we are just trying to help the support. We have enough enemies out there. Check out http://www.rangersfirst.org – Do something positive to help the club and the support We Are The People God Bless The Rangers The Louden Tavern: Ibrox Stadium - More than a Pub Official Partner of The Rangers Football Club *We are responsible for The Louden Tavern: Ibrox Stadium, 111 Copland Road, Ibrox, G51 2SL solely and are not involved in the operation of any other premises

SATURDAY, 17 MAY 2014 19:30[h=2]Club Statement[/h]WRITTEN BY RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB RANGERS have issued the following statement today: “Representatives of Rangers have met with a number of supporter groups over the past few days and discussed a wide range of topics. We again made it clear during these meetings that the club will not grant security over Ibrox to any organisation and therefore the 'Ibrox 1972' scheme can never achieve its objectives. In addition the club will not accept season ticket applications from third parties such as 'Ibrox 1972' on behalf of supporters. “In some of our discussions with fans, it was indicated that there was a wish for the Board to confirm that our statement of intention not to grant security over Ibrox could become a commitment that would last for 12 months. This has subsequently been discussed by the Board and the Board confirms that it will not be seeking to effect a sale and leaseback or grant security over Ibrox during that period of time. “The Board is rebuilding the Club by ensuring its financial stability and the integrity of its assets. “Whilst the Board is reported to have offered legally binding undertakings during a fan group discussion in relation to Ibrox and Murray Park, this is not the case. The Board is committed to high standards of corporate governance and is comfortable that it has at all times been very clear in providing consistent and unequivocal public comments on this subject. "Season ticket sales have continued at a good pace over the last few days and we appreciate the continued support shown by our loyal fans. "We trust that any supporters who may have been in any doubt about the Board's previous statements regarding Ibrox now have an additional level of comfort and any who may have made, or were considering making, a pledge of their season ticket money to 'Ibrox 1972' are clear that there is no prospect of that group achieving its aims."

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

Another week, another court appearance, another gut wrenching series of unfortunate events. Welcome to our world, Oscar Pistorius. In poor taste, of course, since no-one that we know of has died because of this shambling wreckage currently impersonating our club. Even so, just as in the OJ Simpson case and just as with Oscar, sides are being taken and battle lines drawn up. As a completely uninformed and lonely outsider with no inside info at all, it's just plain depressing. Amazing what a difference a week makes - last Tuesday, I was sitting in the garden with sun cream on, this week the only use I'd have for the lotion is to hold the shiny orange bottle in front of me as a guide through the gloom. Last week, hopes were high Dave would ride to the rescue, this week, the Man Who Would Be King revealed his plan for increasing pressure on the board this week, a pledge scheme which is, presumably, intended more to demonstrate the level of power over the club's income streams that Camp King possess rather than actually force a result; posters have pointed out already the slim chance of the present lot actually handing over securities in exchange for ST cash. If this is a game of chicken, I think King will lose, because unlike the Kelly family when Timothy was at death's door, the people running our club couldn't give a toss whether their name is forever mud on the streets of Glasgow (or, in fairness to all, Fraserburgh or Berlin). They won't blink because they don't care if the outcome is catastrophe: that unpleasant fact, which incidentally ought to help us decide whether they are fit for purpose or not, gives them an advantage in any poker game. Speaking of Timothy...he's been invoked a few times during this saga, usually along the lines of 'if only Rangers had a Fergus McCann figure'. Last week saw a cacophony of media types berate King for not just spending his money and getting it over and done with; curious, really, considering that (a) he was apparently offered a controlling interest for approximately £6m, quite a saving on the 70p a share deal he was offered a year ago - it seems holding out for a good deal can be advantageous. It's also curious because (b) these same media types were only a few weeks ago lauding Fergus McCann to the skies on the anniversary of his bailout of the dying Timothy, berating fans who booed him at cetlc Park and castigating the journos who mocked him. And now, they do exactly the same to a similar figure across the city. Whether King is tyre kicking or driving a good deal I have no idea. Hopefully every penny he's saved as yet will go into Rangers because by heck, the club will need his money. While I can see that people are fed up with little detail and much bluster, the lesson history certainly suggests deciding the issue in advance can lead to subsequently looking daft. Telling someone else to spend their money is never a position which can be defended: we simply don't know enough facts. We don't know if Rangers, like the Stones sing, are 'gonna be mine', his or theirs; with King, all we can do is hope he either does or doesn't come through. depending on your personal preference. I suppose it indicates how far we've come (or gone?) socially that instead of a toff whacking a peasant on the head and loudly crawing 'you there! make my mark, you beast!' we now grab the rich person and yell 'Haw, you! Get yer waalet oot!' But really the main impression is of people just talking for the sake of making a noise: I'm uncomfortably aware how close to the bone this criticism is! As Mick says, it's just sad, sad, sad, coming on top of years of sadly depressing viewing all round in football. Other sports don't seem to be so institutionally useless as football is, here and elsewhere. The owner of the LA Clippers basketball team makes a racist comment and is immediately forced to sell by his fellow owners: just imagine that level of corporate accountability here! We can but pray the suspiciously Scottish-sounding Donald Sterling doesn't fancy investing his dollars in our club; there is a limit to the number of bad publicity one team can withstand. All I can hope is that , when the dust eventually settles, people aren't too bitter. While there are probably some people in your Rangers life you'd be glad never to talk to again, life is too short for grudges. Like the seemingly infinite number of ants who are apparently holding a month long sports day under my kitchen window, the highlight of which is the 'climb in Steely's windae and run aboot the worktops avoiding his crushing thumb' event, we'll need to show a level of patience and stoicism last seen when Seneca was penning his dramas. Tally-ho!

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

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

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.

Firstly allow me to clarify something – the content of this blog and the information shared is done so with the express permission of the Union of Fans – following a full and frank discussion between myself and Chris Graham. Those who are interested in the finer details and legal aspects of the Season Ticket Trust are probably going to be disappointed; any queries you have will have to wait until the ST Trust website is up and operational. What I did ask however was this: If the board acquiesce to UOF demands who will then hold first charge/security on the stadium rights to our club ? The answer, as many undoubtedly suspected, is Dave King and Richard Gough, under the auspice of Dave King’s new company, Ibrox 1972 Ltd. Quite simply as far as The UOF are concerned it all boils down to a question of trust, and they trust King more, far more, than they do the current board. It is all hypothetical of course, dependent on their scheme being successful, the Rangers board acquiescing to their demands and relinquishing the security for both stadium and Auchenhowie. Many will have realised by now this would mean handing over the security of our club’s 2 biggest assets to 2 men who currently are not even shareholders in our club. They will not be accountable to the board or to shareholders, which at least in theory, is the current status quo. I hope for the sake of our club, should this scenario ever come to fruition, that the UOF have exercised sound judgement in their assessment of Dave King, otherwise it will qualify as a blunder on a scale of magnitude with the ill-fated Men of Troy. As the current board and King, with their respective aide-de-camps, battle vigorously for not only our hearts and minds, but also our season ticket monies, the whole debate has become extremely polarised, the language and tone war like, with little opportunity for either constructive or conciliatory dialogue. The problem is however that the dominant voices in the debate do not necessarily reflect the feelings of our support. Keith Jackson touched on this last week in an article when he referred to the silent majority of the Rangers support – the ones who have no interest in off-field politics and whose sole interest is turning up each week to see the Rangers. Furthermore the polarisation of the situation and debate fails to take cognisance of fans who have no confidence in the current board but who are equally unenamoured by Dave King. Rather than choose between the two best prospective candidates it is more akin to choosing the lesser of 2 evils. A particularly sad indictment of where we currently are as a club. To date, the considerable failings of governance by our current board which I highlighted in a previous blog, remain unresolved. In particular the veracity of the 120 day review remains under question as a consequence of claims by the Daily Record regarding the withdrawal of credit and debit card provision. Before we file these claims as the ranting of a “Rangers hating rhag” perhaps we should check the filing cabinet – look under “BBC & Craig Whyte”. I can only re-iterate the warning of a previous blog – we cannot afford to make the same mistakes of the past. A few have commented on the madness of the situation facing us as a support. With trepidation, and a tinge of embarrassment, I quote from Dan Brown’s book Inferno, “Madness breeds madness” The Rangers support should bookmark this moment in time, with its paucity of choice, for a future date, when next we sit down with any conviction to consider the merits of fan ownership.

Due to a mass leaflet drop prior to Saturdays game we require volunteers to hand out 30,000 leaflets. We require lots of help due to numbers and this is the last chance to get info to fans at ibrox this season If your willing and able please put your name below or PM PLEASE MEET 11.15 at COPLAND RD STAIRS on Harrison Dr Thanks Craig.

APRIL 23, 2014 UNION OF FANS STATEMENT: 23/04/14 by Union of Fans in Statements Ahead of Graham Wallace’s long awaited, and much anticipated, review we felt it would be helpful to reiterate what we are expecting to see from the CEO. It has now been over four months since Mr Wallace’s AGM pledge and we do expect, given the length of time it has taken, that this business review will give a full and comprehensive picture of the way forward for the club. We expect to see a full breakdown of the how the club arrived at the point where it required to borrow funds simply to complete the current season. This should include a full breakdown of where the IPO money went. In particular, detail of the sky high placement costs, related fees and who those fees were paid to and why. We expect to see full detail of who will be providing the £30-£50M required to take Rangers back to the level we should be operating at, in the absence of this board accepting the offer of investment from Dave King. We also expect to be told exactly when this will be provided, on what terms and a clear plan of how it will be used to rebuild the club both on and off the park. We hope that this review will not simply be more, vague, corporate speak from Mr Wallace. We want to see tangible, measurable progress and firm commitments on the huge investment required. Anything less will be a damp squib, especially since we have already seen that we cannot even rely on public, binding statements from this board. For our own part, the UoF have been making steady progress on the setup required for the season ticket fund. We understand the frustration of fans who wish to contribute to this but we would ask them to understand that we must ensure it is setup properly, legally and with total transparency. We thank them for their patience and can assure them that an alternative to placing blind faith in this board will be in place shortly. A company is now in place with Dave King as a director and Richard Gough and others to follow shortly. This will be the vehicle to hold the security should the board see fit to grant it. We will have a website in place within the next 10 days, ahead of the May 6th deadline, where fans can register their details and securely place their season ticket money. This money will only be passed to the club in return for season tickets if security is granted over Ibrox and Auchenhowie. Those are our only conditions. If that security is not granted then fans will retain their money and can decide themselves how to proceed at the start of the new season. The payment mechanism we are using means that although fans enter into a binding commitment to have their season ticket money debited in the event of security being granted, no money will be removed from their account until that security is granted. We will provide full detail of this on the website when it launches. In the meantime, we would ask fans who are considering using their season ticket money to try to secure our vital club assets to hold off renewing. We understand the pressures being applied both emotionally and otherwise, in terms of payment mechanisms, but it is time for us to take a stand against two years of corporate pillaging of our club. We can secure our club’s home against a backdrop of further financial uncertainty, but only with the help of the supporters. We would like to make those on auto renewal, who paid over four months last year, aware that they have to cancel in writing to the ticket office prior to 28th April. The email address to do so is webmail@rangers.co.uk. Season ticket money is the main power the fans have and we would ask them to use it for positive change.

RANGERS are behaving as though their 120-day business review will have to be crowbarred out of their directors' hands. The more cynical of this club's supporters would not be surprised if the update was delivered in encrypted text this Friday, such has been the apparent reluctance to let the findings out into the public domain. Friday will be day 128, incidentally, and all that has been promised is "update" rather than any extensive illumination of the Ibrox strategy. This is what football has come to: thousands of fans desperately waiting for breaking news on what they would once have dismissed as bone-dry financial strategies. Maybe Graham Wallace, the chief executive, didn't realise he was creating such a hostage to fortune when he announced this business review at the annual general meeting in December, but its significance has mushroomed Directors and fans are in a Mexican stand-off over season tickets. If Wallace placates the masses, damage will be done to the Union of Fans/Dave King attempt to persuade thousands to break the traditional supply chain and instead put their money into a trust fund. But on all available evidence so far it's hard to see what Wallace can deliver which will remotely placate them. Wallace is probably shrewd enough to know what's coming his way when the information is released. In the four months since he bought himself time by announcing this review, Rangers have divested themselves of two figures most of the support considered to be toxic: finance director Brian Stockbridge and public relations adviser Jack Irvine. The club also secured a shirt sponsorship deal with 32Red. Hip, hip hurrays all round? Well, yes, for a moment. Each of those moves was significant, yet they have had no lasting effect on the swirl of negativity around Rangers or the hostility and suspicion shown towards the board. Wallace's own popularity and standing has steadily eroded. At the time of the annual meeting supporters were able to distinguish between him and the rest of the unpopular board. Now, much less so. What can he say in this review that will make the critics pause and say, "actually, yeah, that's not bad, this could win us round"? Three days ago it became personal towards Wallace when his salary and bonus was openly questioned by supporters group The Union of Fans. Maybe £315,000-per-annum really is the going rate for high end football club chief executives these days, although Rangers continue to seem like pushovers when it comes to doing deals with just about anyone. But if Wallace is on another of those 100% Ibrox bonus deals, as his critics clearly believe, fans will see him as being a continuation of the chain of ****s and opportunists when they had hoped he would come in and cleanse the club of them all. What seems likely now is that Wallace's update will exasperate and irritate those fans further, hardening their opposition to the board and deepening their resolve to starve out the incumbent regime by withholding season ticket money. The collapse of King's cordial working relationship with the directors is significant, given that he surely had some sort of insight into Wallace's intended strategy. Positions are entrenched. No fair-minded supporter will reject Wallace's findings on a stubborn point-of-principle. Perhaps he will surprise them and come up with a plan which seems imaginative, ambitious and realistic. But it's only two months since this Rangers board had to go cap in hand for £1.5m in emergency loans just to see the club over the line until the next season-ticket money. At the end of last year the board suggested the players take a 15% wage cut: that was rejected and, since then, nothing more has been heard of it and no other cuts have been publicly proposed. Wallace is on record as saying costs are too high. Money continues to haemorrhage from Rangers. If Wallace's update acknowledges that the club needs either severe cuts or substantial external investment then the latter will be embraced by those who champion King and find it unfathomable, and deeply suspicious, that his apparent willingness to invest has not been encouraged by the Rangers board. What freedom does Wallace have here? This review has been sanctioned by Sandy and James Easdale and the rest of the Rangers board. Would it ever see the light of day if it delivered findings they didn't like? When Rangers said the update would be announced on Friday April 25 (which will be day 127, incidentally), fans immediately clocked that they would have only the weekend to consider it before deciding whether or not to cancel the auto-renewal of their season-tickets (which may not be enough time if it that has to be done in writing). That was either a calculating move by the club or an unthinking one, but either way it looked sleekit and did nothing to build bridges with the support. Wallace and chairman David Somers have both spoken of the need to be more open and transparent with )supporters but done next to nothing to back it up. Wallace will be heard before the week is out, though. His job may pay well, but it's an unenviable one: this week he must calm and win over supporters implacably opposed to the regime he represents. http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/wallaces-strategy-update-may-be-too-late-to-win-over-rangers-fans.24005492?utm_source=headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Balert

Thought I would put some more into what I have posted, I have nothing to gain or lose I suppose by posting on this board and dont want to hassle people, if the admin of the forum would like me to stop posting then they can private mail me and let me know. What I am saying is that I know 100% Dave will make a move in the next 7 days which will be to try and seize control of the club, you as fans will ultimately vote with your feet so to speak but Dave had to and has given this current regime all the time and met all their request made to him and to us as fans. I know this because I know this, you can believe this or you can ignore this, either way, I thought it would do no harm by posting the fact that Dave will be making substantial moves next week in order to be in a place to be the new majority owner come the summer. No ego, no nothing. its all about Rangers and where we should be, either follow or dont.

Chaps, I'm not looking to troll or create tension here, but for the life of me I can't work out why any bear can trust or support the current board. I've seen nothing from the board that can help balance up my own feelings and each passing week sees more shit rolled at supporters. So, in the spirit of good debate, what are the good points of the board which gets them support, albeit a small minority, but support all the same from fellow Bears. What are the positives from board.