ian1964 10,457 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 New crisis for Rangers over season ticket sales as questions asked about club's ability to repay short-term loans TERMS agreed by the Ibrox club in February state that it must repay shareholder George Lethan £1.5 million as soon as that total has been raised through season ticket sales - but the businessman is yet to receive a reply from chief executive Graham Wallace. RANGERS face a fresh crisis after it emerged they may not have raised enough money from season ticket sales to pay off the short-term loans they took out to keep the wolf from the door. The under-fire board borrowed £1.5million in February on the promise the cash would be paid back the instant ticket sales hit that figure. However, by close of business on Friday night, shareholder George Letham – who took over the £1m share of the debt from Laxey Partners in March – had not received a penny. MailSport understands the wealthy businessman has been waiting more than a week for a response from chief executive Graham Wallace to an email questioning how many tickets HAD been sold. Fans group the Sons of Struth kept up the pressure on the Ibrox regime with a postcard protest yesterday at the Ibrox ticket office. And it’s clear the organised boycott of season books by the Union of Fans, allied to a wider distrust of the board, is biting home. The club have been offering season tickets for six weeks, with renewals closing a week ago and the general public now being allowed to buy. But the terms of the Inter Creditor Agreement, signed in February binding Letham and club chairman Sandy Easdale together, state Rangers must settle the debt the minute they have enough cleared funds to do so. Letham took on the sum from Laxey Partners after outrage at the hedge fund’s terms that would have earned them a whopping £150,000 in interest or shares over six months. In an announcement to the Stock Exchange, the club claimed all other terms of the existing agreement with Laxey would remain. Which means that Section 6.1 stands. It states: “The borrower shall repay the Easdale debt and the Laxey debt on such Business Day as the Company has received cleared funds in an amount equal to or exceeding the aggregate principal amount of all then outstanding loans from: 6.1.1 the sale of season ticket monies for the 2014-15 football season or 6.1.2 a placing or rights issue or other form of debt or equity fundraising of the company or any member of the Rangers group, or whichever is first to occur and in any event no later than September 1 2015.” The club have been coy over how many tickets have been sold but estimates put the figure at about 14,000. However because credit company First Data withdrew their facility, the club had to give fans a chance to pay up their season books in four instalments. Therefore, they will only have taken in a quarter of the cash from the fans who have chosen that option. It’s believed they would need the full amount to have been paid for at least 5000 tickets to meet the terms. Either way, the number is less important than the actual income. Contractually, when the target of £1.5m is hit, the money MUST go straight to Letham and Easdale, leaving the club with the same liquidity problem they had when they took the loans in the first place. A Rangers spokesman said: “The loans will be repaid in accordance with the terms of the agreement in a timely and proper manner. We are in regular dialogue with Mr Letham and Mr Easdale.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/new-crisis-rangers-over-season-3604574 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Honestly folks if that was a celtic protest we would be pishing ourselves The celts for change protests started out much smaller than this and no one was laughing. Ultimately they saved their club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,302 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 People who genuinely care, of all sexes and ages. How any Bear could be so abusive towards them is ridiculous. Well done the Protesters. Keep looking for answers for the benefit of the club and people like myself who don't know what on earth is happening inside our club. Agree mostly with what you say but when these people are actively encouraging Rangers supporters to cause financial damage to the club that's another matter 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Agree mostly with what you say but when these people are actively encouraging Rangers supporters to cause financial damage to the club that's another matter Who's causing financial damage? The board? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWee BlueDevil 0 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Honestly folks if that was a celtic protest we would be pishing ourselves Well done to each and every Bear there yesterday. At least they got up off their backsides and did something instead of just sniping and deriding folk on the internet. More power to them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Agree mostly with what you say but when these people are actively encouraging Rangers supporters to cause financial damage to the club that's another matter But it's because they care so much, misguided as it probably is Rab. If this board had anything about them though or any feeling for the club they would invest the shortfall themselves and prove to fans we are all in this together. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,290 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Regarding the article pinned above, you'll have to read half-way through it to actually find a part in that didn't make for a good headline: Letham took on the sum from Laxey Partners after outrage at the hedge fund’s terms that would have earned them a whopping £150,000 in interest or shares over six months. AFAIK, both Easdale and Letham are due either money or shares, once it becomes relevant. It is rather interesting to note that the DR investigators* are so acutely aware of all the facts and figures and timeline and info between Letham and the board ... again. While one can obviously see that certain sections of the support would fall over one another for any scrap of info available, why would a shareholder like Letham run to the media and tell them about whether the club has repaid the loan, talked to him about it or not? Dragging its name (and not just that of the board) further into the gutter? Would the club deal with such respectable business-folk in the future? Would you? That said, who knows how much info of that article is actually made up ... *Whereas on the other hand, there is next to no word from these people about the Yahoos utterly suspicious land deals with the Glasgow City Council, Lennon and Co.s movie tax evasion stuff and the like. I await the day when we are told that our sad little bigot from the East End was forced out of Scottish football by the mean people wearing the blue, making life utterly impossible for him and his family and ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted May 25, 2014 Author Share Posted May 25, 2014 Regarding the article pinned above, you'll have to read half-way through it to actually find a part in that didn't make for a good headline: AFAIK, both Easdale and Letham are due either money or shares, once it becomes relevant. It is rather interesting to note that the DR investigators* are so acutely aware of all the facts and figures and timeline and info between Letham and the board ... again. While one can obviously see that certain sections of the support would fall over one another for any scrap of info available, why would a shareholder like Letham run to the media and tell them about whether the club has repaid the loan, talked to him about it or not? Dragging its name (and not just that of the board) further into the gutter? Would the club deal with such respectable business-folk in the future? Would you? That said, who knows how much info of that article is actually made up ... *Whereas on the other hand, there is next to no word from these people about the Yahoos utterly suspicious land deals with the Glasgow City Council, Lennon and Co.s movie tax evasion stuff and the like. I await the day when we are told that our sad little bigot from the East End was forced out of Scottish football by the mean people wearing the blue, making life utterly impossible for him and his family and ... MailSport understands the wealthy businessman has been waiting more than a week for a response from chief executive Graham Wallace to an email questioning how many tickets HAD been sold. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 MailSport understands the wealthy businessman has been waiting more than a week for a response from chief executive Graham Wallace to an email questioning how many tickets HAD been sold. Aim rule 11 A company must issue notification without delay of any new developments which are not public knowledge concerning a change in: its financial condition; its sphere of activity; the performance of its business; or its expectation of its performance. Business Review (25/04/14) Should the Club suffer a substantial decrease in season ticket income in the next two months, then it would be unable to trade in the short term without seeking additional external funding as previously disclosed in the RIFC December 2013 interim results. http://www.rangers.co.uk/images/staticcontent/documents/RangersBusinessReview.pdf I think they intend to avoid telling anyone until the back end of June although you'd have thought Mr.Lethem wasn't just anyone. Whether they'll be able to keep it under wraps for so long is another matter. I'd have thought that if numbers are currently significantly down on 12 months ago, that AIM rule 11 means they should be informing the market, 'without delay'. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Regarding the article pinned above, you'll have to read half-way through it to actually find a part in that didn't make for a good headline: AFAIK, both Easdale and Letham are due either money or shares, once it becomes relevant. It is rather interesting to note that the DR investigators* are so acutely aware of all the facts and figures and timeline and info between Letham and the board ... again. While one can obviously see that certain sections of the support would fall over one another for any scrap of info available, why would a shareholder like Letham run to the media and tell them about whether the club has repaid the loan, talked to him about it or not? Dragging its name (and not just that of the board) further into the gutter? Would the club deal with such respectable business-folk in the future? Would you? That said, who knows how much info of that article is actually made up ... *Whereas on the other hand, there is next to no word from these people about the Yahoos utterly suspicious land deals with the Glasgow City Council, Lennon and Co.s movie tax evasion stuff and the like. I await the day when we are told that our sad little bigot from the East End was forced out of Scottish football by the mean people wearing the blue, making life utterly impossible for him and his family and ... Irrelevant deflection post of the year 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.