Mike Ashley's Rangers swoop overshadows Craig Whyte dawn raids...

[ian1964 10,390]

...in yet another dramatic day for the club.

 

Sports Direct owner seems certain to strengthen his grip on Rangers as club lurch from one crisis to another...on and off the field.

 

By Roddy Forsyth

 

If an hour passes without some new development in the Rangers story — the most lurid saga to emerge from any British football club, ever — it counts as a quiet day. Scarcely had Telegraph Sport spread the overnight news that disgraced former owner, Craig Whyte, had been detained after being on the run in Mexico than we revealed that Uefa will not permit Rangers and Newcastle United to play together in Europe next season or for as long as Mike Ashley is in a position of power in both boardrooms.

 

Of Ashley’s position and ambitions, more later. Neither the Champions League nor Europa League is foremost in Rangers fans’ minds. Last weekend’s 2-0 defeat by Hearts not only saw Ally McCoist’s players trail by nine points in the chase for automatic promotion to the Scottish Premiership, but it also emphasised the contrast in form with their main divisional rivals.

 

Hearts’ total of 38 points from their opening 14 games is their best start to a league campaign. Hibs, meanwhile, have run up five successive away league victories for the first time since September 1980.

 

To say McCoist is under pressure is to say what? Unless he walks away — that loaded phrase in the context of Ibrox — there is not sufficient cash to pay him off. As matters stand, the club will have to rely on another bailout from Ashley just to keep them going beyond New Year.

 

There is increasing talk around the Scottish game that Rangers are heading into administration again. Some discount the notion on the grounds that the consequent automatic points deduction would condemn Rangers to a fourth successive season of lower league football which, they believe, would run contrary to Ashley’s aim of increasing club merchandise sales though his Sports Direct retail chain.

Related Articles

 

A more arcane theory has it that Ashley would accept administration as a short-term hit because it would shake out other contracts and allow him, as a major creditor, to bid for the club on the cheap.

 

There is a third, more plausible option. Ashley’s lawyers are engaged in a low-key, but crucial positional battle with the Scottish Football Association. Ashley’s people want to find a way for him to increase his shareholding at Ibrox and Telegraph readers will remember that the idea of him taking his stake up to almost 27 per cent was floated in September.

 

The SFA signed a binding agreement with Ashley, anchored in their Articles of Association, designed to keep him at 10 per cent or below. However, as money repeatedly runs out at Ibrox, Ashley either gets to increase his grip through security on the assets, with the SFA watching impotently, or he holds back, knowing that Scottish football’s governing body could be put in the invidious position of taking the blame for another insolvency event.

 

And all of this is played out against a background of dawn swoops by police in southern England, as they arrest the former Rangers company secretary and three managing directors of Duff & Phelps, the company that oversaw Rangers’ administration in 2012.

 

How tempting it is to conjure the fantasy that a posse of gun-toting Federales bore down on Whyte at the Mexican airport, to be greeted with a demand to show their ID, only for them to yell the immortal misquote from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre: “We don’t need no’ stinking badges!”

 

Remember Ashley’s condition for advancing the soft loan that was rebuffed by the Rangers plc board in September? The club crest and trademark?

 

Somebody does need the badges – and it looks unlikely that anybody can or will stop him now.

 

Meanwhile, Rangers have confirmed Telegraph Sport's disclosure last month that the club would post losses of over £8 million in the accounts for the year to June 30, 2014. The figure given when the accounts were posted on the club’s website was £8.3 million.

 

David Somers, the Rangers chairman, commented "…challenges still remain and despite additional financing having been secured over the year, further funding is necessary to ensure the club's ability to move forward successfully to achieve the goals we all seek and expect of Rangers Football Club.

 

"To this end the board will be seeking shareholder approval at the forthcoming AGM to issue additional shares to ensure maximum flexibility for the company to raise equity finance and provide the financial capability required to develop the club in the longer term.”

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11259511/Mike-Ashleys-Rangers-swoop-overshadows-Craig-Whyte-dawn-raids-in-yet-another-dramatic-day-for-the-club.html

[der Berliner 3,219]

A more arcane theory has it that Ashley would accept administration as a short-term hit because it would shake out other contracts and allow him, as a major creditor, to bid for the club on the cheap.

 

... Roddy, it would most certainly mean a massive point-deduction and we may wave good-bye to the Premiership for another season. You may think that Ashley thinks in such ways, others will argue that he's neither daft nor not shrewd enough to see the potential meltdown. Furthermore, it is very much open whether these old contracts (including his own) would actually be affected by another admin event.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

how would the sfa be to blame if the board are turning down kings money

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

... Roddy, it would most certainly mean a massive point-deduction and we may wave good-bye to the Premiership for another season. You may think that Ashley thinks in such ways, others will argue that he's neither daft nor not shrewd enough to see the potential meltdown. Furthermore, it is very much open whether these old contracts (including his own) would actually be affected by another admin event.

You have just repeated what he said.

[quattro 0]

Club Statement: Daily Telegraph

 

St. James' Park

 

Caught lying again (The Telegraph)

Newcastle United feels it has been left with no alternative but to respond to a report published by The Telegraph yesterday, headlined 'Newcastle and Rangers will not be able to play in Europe together next season because of Mike Ashley. Exclusive: Mike Ashley's seizure of power at Ibrox means Newcastle may never play in Europe again while he remains club owner.'

The article stated that 'Uefa have confirmed Newcastle United and Rangers will not be allowed to play in Europe together, even if they qualify for different competitions, because of Mike Ashley's involvement in the running of both clubs.'

When contacted by the Club today, UEFA confirmed in writing as follows:

 

"UEFA has not made any statement on specific clubs.

"With regard to your query, we kindly refer you to Article 3 of our competition regulations (Integrity of the competition) related among other to multi-ownership.

"We do not have any further comment to make on this."

The Club issued a statement on 12th September, 2014, confirming it had banned Luke Edwards and all reporters working for, or on behalf of, the Daily Telegraph with immediate effect following reports published in its paper which were wholly inaccurate and written with the intention of unsettling the Club, players and its supporters.

Yesterday's article is another example of the same journalist and title printing factually inaccurate reports that are potentially disruptive and are damaging to the Club.

The Club will make no further comment on this issue.

 

http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20141129/club-statement-daily-telegraph_2281670_4335737

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Club Statement: Daily Telegraph

 

St. James' Park

 

Caught lying again (The Telegraph)

Newcastle United feels it has been left with no alternative but to respond to a report published by The Telegraph yesterday, headlined 'Newcastle and Rangers will not be able to play in Europe together next season because of Mike Ashley. Exclusive: Mike Ashley's seizure of power at Ibrox means Newcastle may never play in Europe again while he remains club owner.'

The article stated that 'Uefa have confirmed Newcastle United and Rangers will not be allowed to play in Europe together, even if they qualify for different competitions, because of Mike Ashley's involvement in the running of both clubs.'

When contacted by the Club today, UEFA confirmed in writing as follows:

 

"UEFA has not made any statement on specific clubs.

"With regard to your query, we kindly refer you to Article 3 of our competition regulations (Integrity of the competition) related among other to multi-ownership.

"We do not have any further comment to make on this."

The Club issued a statement on 12th September, 2014, confirming it had banned Luke Edwards and all reporters working for, or on behalf of, the Daily Telegraph with immediate effect following reports published in its paper which were wholly inaccurate and written with the intention of unsettling the Club, players and its supporters.

Yesterday's article is another example of the same journalist and title printing factually inaccurate reports that are potentially disruptive and are damaging to the Club.

The Club will make no further comment on this issue.

 

http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20141129/club-statement-daily-telegraph_2281670_4335737

Gunslinger made a good point earlier that we need to explain Ashley's influence in layman's terms to some of our support.

 

I'll give you some facts you might want to look at with regard to Newcastle. Prior to Ashley's purchase Newcastle competed in Europe in 11 out of their previous 13 seasons.

 

Since his purchase 7 years ago they have competed in Europe once, even getting relegated despite having one of the highest revenues in the Premiership. What do you make of that ?

[der Berliner 3,219]

Club Statement: Daily Telegraph

 

St. James' Park

 

Caught lying again (The Telegraph)

Newcastle United feels it has been left with no alternative but to respond to a report published by The Telegraph yesterday, headlined 'Newcastle and Rangers will not be able to play in Europe together next season because of Mike Ashley. Exclusive: Mike Ashley's seizure of power at Ibrox means Newcastle may never play in Europe again while he remains club owner.'

The article stated that 'Uefa have confirmed Newcastle United and Rangers will not be allowed to play in Europe together, even if they qualify for different competitions, because of Mike Ashley's involvement in the running of both clubs.'

When contacted by the Club today, UEFA confirmed in writing as follows:

 

"UEFA has not made any statement on specific clubs.

"With regard to your query, we kindly refer you to Article 3 of our competition regulations (Integrity of the competition) related among other to multi-ownership.

"We do not have any further comment to make on this."

The Club issued a statement on 12th September, 2014, confirming it had banned Luke Edwards and all reporters working for, or on behalf of, the Daily Telegraph with immediate effect following reports published in its paper which were wholly inaccurate and written with the intention of unsettling the Club, players and its supporters.

Yesterday's article is another example of the same journalist and title printing factually inaccurate reports that are potentially disruptive and are damaging to the Club.

The Club will make no further comment on this issue.

 

http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20141129/club-statement-daily-telegraph_2281670_4335737

 

So essentially a vendetta job by the Telegraph. If they'd do in Germany, the Press Council would look at it once and remove the Press/Media Licence from said reporter and send a few appropriate words to the newspaper in question.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

So essentially a vendetta job by the Telegraph. If they'd do in Germany, the Press Council would look at it once and remove the Press/Media Licence from said reporter and send a few appropriate words to the newspaper in question.

 

two words: Bild. Zeitung.

[chilledbear 16]

Taken from Follow Follow

 

The Rangers story rumbles on, the gaudy prospect of financial meltdown distracting observers from even a backward glance in the rear-view mirror. The news that £8m is needed to keep the lights on keeps minds focused on the present.

 

The question of how it all came to this may have to have its answer in court. Recent history, though, can be assessed with some accuracy.

 

The failure of Dave King's attempt to take over Rangers is crucial not only to the future direction of the club but also has a further, significant impact. It is this: King gathered expert advisors and galvanised a section of the support. The legacy of King's failure to gain any power at Ibrox is that some are now not only disillusioned but highly reluctant to attach themselves to any renewed moves by the South African businessman.

 

However, the idea that King may have no further role in the Rangers story may not stand up to scrutiny.

 

A chronicle of his interest in Rangers proves an instructive history of what has gone on at the club over the past nine months leading up to Thursday's announcement of the £8.3m loss to June this year. Auditors have included an emphasis of matter paragraph, highlighting that there is "material uncertainty on the group's ability to continue as a going concern".

 

This has always been King's contention and it has informed the choices he has made when addressing the task of changing the power base at Ibrox.

 

At an early stage in his attempt to force regime change, King told an advisor: "I will just sit here until they run out of money and they will have no place to go. They will have to come to me." He was consistently told this would not happen. It did not happen. But can it now?

 

The King involvement must be examined as it charts the course to where Rangers stand now and what options are available to the club in what can now be soberly described as a battle for survival.

 

King, of course, was always on the periphery of the Rangers story but he took centre stage in March when he came to Glasgow to meet the Ibrox board and canvassed for both financial and popular support.

 

A series of meetings was held and he headed back to South Africa. However, he left behind a time bomb for the Ibrox board. His move to set up a trust fund for season ticket money could be seen as highly unsuccessful as it was never formed, instead a website gathered support from disaffected fans.

 

But it had an effect that it was part of a climate that reduced season ticket sales. Shortly after King flew out, David Somers, the Rangers chairman, criticised the move on season tickets as the club released interim financial results for the last six months of 2013, showing a £3.5m pre-tax loss.

 

King ramped up his offensive in a series of interviews, pledging that he could underwrite a share issue personally to the sum of £30m, perhaps even £50m.

 

Rangers, meanwhile, were looking at an unsustainable future, despite the protestations of directors. Briefly, season ticket revenue was down and costs were outstripping income. As the figures released on Thursday show, this basic business problem has not been addressed with any success.

 

It was then that instead of a King putsch there was a Mike Ashley manoeuvre. The sportswear billionaire had, of course, bought shares at the initial public offering. He had a merchandising contract in place. He has the crest.

 

At the beginning of August, there were leaks that Rangers needed money and that Ashley was prepared to provide it in loans. The Newcastle United owner, routinely and accurately described as a billionaire, was ready to flex his muscles.

 

In early August, there was a meeting to step up the King move to bring change to Rangers. George Letham, who had given Rangers a £1m crisis loan, Paul Murray, a former board member who was now allied to King, were present, as were others.

 

The Herald understands it was agreed to try to raise money to make a public, formal offer for the 26% Beaufort stake in Rangers, controlled by the Easdale brothers. The next step was to approach the Park family who own the coach company and car dealerships.

 

A source close to this development said this meeting took "the best part of a month" to set up. It is not known what occurred at that meeting but the buying of the Beaufort shares was never pursued in any meaningful sense.

 

The next move was for King to have talks with Graham Wallace, chief executive of Rangers, Philip Nash, director, and Norman Crighton, non-executive director. Paul Murray and Letham were present at these discussions.

 

The plan was to persuade the board to recommend a share issue whereby King would put in £8m and what could be called the Murray-Letham consortium put in a further £8m.

 

Rangers, meanwhile, were desperately seeking a saviour but King consistently refused to see Ashley as a threat to his ambitions.

 

Instead, the English businessman was presented with an open goal. As Somers subsequently explained, the Ashley loan could be taken because the rival Brian Kennedy bid carried a higher level of interest and demanded more security. There are mutterings about both these claims but Somers has issued a statement reinforcing them.

 

The King-Murray-Letham consortium was dismissed over what was described as a failure to provide proof of funds.

 

There has been much shouting since in terms of statements and counter statements.

 

Three interesting elements have emerged. First, that Paul Murray was prepared to sit on the board as part of the Kennedy deal. Second, that King has revealed he did not want to oust Sandy Easdale, the football board chairman, from Ibrox.

 

The third is that King and his allies believe they never had a chance. On October 23, they believed they had an agreement in principle with Easdale to have some power in exchange for investment. They needed Easdale on board because the brothers have control over 26% of shares and 75% is needed to approve a shares issue. The half-back line of Easdales, Ashley and Laxey hold 51%.

 

But as King headed to watch Liverpool play Real Madrid, he believed he had a deal in his grasp. Within 24 hours he was disabused of this, with telephone calls informing him that Rangers would take a loan from Ashley.

 

This series of events has led to Ashley gaining an extraordinary influence at Ibrox, particularly for someone owning about 9% of shares. They are also history.

 

So why does it matter now?

 

It is clear King failed in this approach. He also contributed to a significant level of disillusionment among fans who can be best described as activists in attempting to change the structure at the club. This could impact on any renewed attempt by him to gain power at Ibrox.

 

But the developments also give an insight into the motives of Ashley. He has not, nor will not, make his intentions clear but he has to safeguard the merchandising deal that he has with club. The drip of loans means the clubs survives, strips can sold.

 

But it is not a long-term strategy. Ashley has to find a coherent plan that does not just involve cutting costs but includes ushering in a period of stability. Does he have the will to dedicate a significant chunk of time to something that is relatively modest in terms of income to a man worth £4bn?

 

So what will he do next?" Whatever he wants," was the brisk reply from a City source last night who has rued his investment in Rangers.

 

The City source suggested that Ashley may decide that he is willing to share some of the burden of restructuring a club, forming a scouting network, refurbishing the stadium and building a team to compete at the top level of Scottish sport. This was the view, too, of a major financial player close to the Rangers story.

 

There may be some conjecture of what precisely is Ashley's vision for the club. There can be no doubt that he does not like what he sees, though. History tells us that Ashley is always prepared to make a deal. Does that include returning to suitors to see what they have to offer?

 

King has been dismissed as a "tyre kicker" whose reluctance to buy shares was fatal to any successful strategy. There may be truth in some of this but it would be foolish to rule out a return to the table by the former Rangers director.

 

The jostling for power has not stopped.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/the-king-bid-is-dead-but-for-how-long-we-cannot-say.25998604?

[jhunter 0]

Taken from Follow Follow

 

 

So what will he do next?" Whatever he wants," was the brisk reply from a City source last night who has rued his investment in Rangers.

 

The City source suggested that Ashley may decide that he is willing to share some of the burden of restructuring a club, forming a scouting network, refurbishing the stadium and building a team to compete at the top level of Scottish sport. This was the view, too, of a major financial player close to the Rangers story.

 

King has been dismissed as a "tyre kicker" whose reluctance to buy shares was fatal to any successful strategy.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/the-king-bid-is-dead-but-for-how-long-we-cannot-say.25998604?

 

that's all just mediahouse bullshit isn't it.