Companies have a statutory duty to produce financial reports in line with commitments made to shareholders. The failure of Rangers to fulfil those commitments was put down to a lack of clarity over the future outcome of the on-going tribunal with HM Revenue and Customs. As a consequence of this failure, trading in Rangers shares have been suspended by the Plus Stock Exchange.
The Plus Stock Exchange also told Rangers broadcast partner, STV, they were “currently conducting an investigation into the circumstances under which Craig Whyte’s seven year disqualification from acting as a director in 2000 were not disclosed at the time of his appointment to the board of Rangers FC on May 6, 2011”.
Rangers today suggested there was “little, if any, tangible benefit for the club to be a listed company”. This may be true but the benefit of a listing is heavily weighted towards shareholders and creditors, who should have received structured financial information in a timely manner. Shareholders have also been denied the opportunity to attend an Annual General Meeting, which, in line with stock exchange rules, should have been held before 31 December 2011.
Many of you have watched Rangers speculate wildly for over two decades with the feeling that they would crash and burn. This has been a painful period for those who follow clubs who stick to budget, unprepared to take a seat at the roulette table. The day of reckoning draws closer.
You can order a hard copy of CQN Magazine, issue 5, with credit/debit card or Paypal and buy direct from the UK for only £3.50 + £1.50 postage and packing. Shipping costs £2 to ROI, £3 to Europe and £4 to elsewhere. Click on the link below to order.
Click here to view the new issue of CQN Magazine online for free. You can support the online edition by making a discretionary donation here.
858 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 23
- »
James Forrest is Lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:19
I have this visual image of the christmas advert where the wee boy is waiting patiently for months weeks days hours and finally hands over the gift to his parents on christmas morning, the wee smiling face as he hands over the box,
imagine that wee bhoy handing over the envelope from hmrc to craigy whytey telling him his clubs went down the pan….
Mort
doh – I stand both humiliated and corrected.
Rougeleader 13.00
Am naw
The SFA timetable states audited accounts have to be with them by 8th April.
However, and you will maybe want to check, I think given that more than six months has passed since 30 June, the year end for the current accounts not signed off yet, they will need to submit audited Interim Accountsi for the six months from end of June 2011.
And as you point out RL the words “going concern” in either wil make it impossible for the SFA not to apply the licensing rules that apply to that situation – Article 52 or thereafter.
The conditions under this article make it most unlikely a UEFA licence will be granted,especially with UEFA not wanting a club to go belly up during theit competition.
I think the impact of qualified accounts and its impact on licensing botgers Rangers more than Plus Market rules.
Remember the value to Rangers of UEFA money.
THM /Celtic Mac
Antony Worrall Thompson and Richard Madeley together on Come dine with me
The rangers PR Machine is full swing and the Laptop Loyal Lapdogs doing as much as they can to give the ‘Move Along, Nothing To See Here’ message…
Aunt Sally got his Sandaza money yet? :))))
James Forrest is Lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:22
the long wait is over says:
At the RSA meeting with Whyte, he told them he is changing the way the season ticket payment plan works. No more paying an installment and then 3 or 4 or 10 other payments during the season. He has announced that forms will go out earlier and that all monies must be paid BEFORE the season starts.
Who, in their right mind, would actually purchase one under these circumstances?
——————————————————————————
True but then who ,in their right mind ,would actually purchase a season ticket at Ibrox under ANY circumstances?
Auldheid:
Are you telling me I have to change my countdown clock man???
Haha. What’s another week when we’ve waited years?
Here’s a question: if Rangers don’t fulfil the criteria, are there knock-on effects in terms of sponsorship payments etc? I mean, this won’t start and stop with simply denial of UEFA money, right?
UEFA money is only the tip of the sword. I would assume sponsorship, adversiters etc all have “sliding scale” contracts covering the eventuality of no European football, right?
James
I can think of 50,000 who would but only to witness 5 in a row
Hail Hail
JF – I saw that thing about the season books in those minutes and nearly wet myself laughing. How transparent is that?
In fact you could go further, if Whyte knows there is little chance of the company surviving to fulfill that contract, and he wants the money up front for providing a service he knows he will be unlikely to provide, I believe there is a term for those sort of shenanigans and you usually end up having to explain your actions to a Sheriff.
Hell mend them if they sign up to that.
Half Time Tombola @ 15:20,
Aye, correct.
Thought I might have caught one or two out, or st least got a few more humorous replies.
Che says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:10
Let him get on with it,he ‘ll run out of steam shortly and need his nap.
RogueLeader says:9 January, 2012 at 15:08
l don’t know if this helps or hinders your post mate but the guy who runs the RTC site says:
“Even if this is as much of an open and shut case, it would take a month to six weeks to even just write up their findings. Given the amount of evidence presented and discussed, this could drag on until the end of the season. Most likely a result would be in March or April.”
We all might have to wait a little longer.
Celticbhoy – Time. That is the one thing they don’t have, well that and money.
I don’t know why they are going on about ICT, fully expect Dunfermline to beat them in replay.
rangers at home to Utd, considering how their bottle has crashed recently in front of their own fans, I expect at least a replay for Utd.
Any fellow Timfiltrators having problems getting on Follow Follow? Have they been taken off the stock exchange aswell?
Mr Whyte said: “Given the structure of the shareholding in the club, there is very little, if any, tangible benefit for the club to be a listed company…
… except possibly transparency. And what use is transparency nowadays? And that was rhetorical. Be warned, if you reply – sued!!!!!’
Craig ‘Ahm a pure brammer by the way’ Whyte
FF must be in meltdown …went to have a wee peek at the peeepulllls reaction
looks like its crashed for now lol
RogueLeader 9 January, 2012 at 15:38:
They are also lacking dignity, integrity, honesty and Naismith.
Interesting regarding the Rangers draw at home.
Pretty sure they wouldn’t have wanted that. A live TV match possibly on terrestrial TV will ensure a low crowd. They will still have to pay stewards and costs.
Dundee Utd will get half the money for gate receipts and TV monies for effectively just turning up and playing the game.
Dundee Utd have lost a kid that only played a handful of games but will give their manager a boost to the tune of £300k.
Rangers will lose key players before this match kicks off.
Most of Rangers new signing targets will have already played in the Scottish cup.
I’m with a poster earlier. It’s the cup and we should fear nobody.
Celtic will be in the hat for the next round. If Rangers lose then the pressure is on Swally for the league and they may be quite a few points behind by the time they crash out the Scotish Cup to Dundee United!
LB
The odds for Celtic drawing away in the Cup, nine consecutive times is 512/1.
via @Barry_Bhoy
The Financial Problems they are having are current, they are the day to day basic finance requirements to run a business.
The “Big Tax” Bill is not the reason for the unaudited accounts or a non agm, but the simplistic matter of not having enough money to pay the day today requirements of running a business, they ARE insolvent right now!…por cierto
The club also announced that “last year’s postponed AGM will be held as soon as possible after the accounts are finalised”.
The development could make it more difficult for minor shareholders to sell their stock.
The annual financial figures showed the club’s net debt was almost halved to £14million but “net current liabilities” rose from about £21million to £34.3million.
Anyone know what “net current liabilities” refers to?
HH
RougeLeader
Woody Allen in one of his movies said he was to be excecuted at 5am but he hired a good lawyer who got it moved to 6am.
Time they have the question is how much.
79caps
the odds are always 50/50… no joke.
I can’t see any short term impact on Rangers re the Plus market thing. Plus is a low level market with relatively low standards as it is. If a FTSE company (or AIM) was suspended and it wasn’t a takeover event or exceptional market volatility then that would be an alarm bells moment, but on PLUS there are a lot of ‘dodgy’ investments to be had. For evey one that could make you a million there are a thousand you can lose your shirt on. Rangers, with Whyte at the helm, are just a shady company you’d be wise to avoid. However, I don’t imagine there was any real liquidity in their shares, so no market effects.
Their shares have traded 6 times since the start of November, around 3000 shares in total traded at 14.8p most recently.
They have dropped by more than half since June.
For comparison, Celtic trade on AIM, the second tier of market in the UK and the main launchpad for any company looking to attract serious investment or move on to a full listing. Celtic are also relatively illiquid, but trade most days and it wouldn’t be unsual to see as many shares traded in a day for Celtic as Rangers trade in a 60 day period. Our most recent trade is 33.49p and we are down around 7p since June. By the way if you are a Celtic Shareholder you can expect the value of your own shares to reflect the Rangers news.
An investors view of Celtic would be negative based upon the condition of our market.
Truthfully the plus market is just a device companies use to achieve certain kinds of things, without the fuss, expense or exposure of a proper market listing. Whether another Ranger share trades again on PLUS is clearly of no concern to Whyte. I honestly would think the biggest headache this creates is the PR one.
However, for me, this is the nub. This obvious and egregious thumbing of the nose that Whyte does. It’s reckless, and short sighted, and says to me that he has some very short term goals of his own. Clearly any view of Rangers, as an entity, is that all of their goals are long term. They are not a short term business they are a permanent fixture (sadly, and in theory only), so it doesn’t make sense to destroy relaionships with lawyers, stock exchanges, auditors, journalists, contractors and ultimately the other SPL clubs. It screams short term, and a big GTF to anyone who doesn’t like it.
Meanwhile there is literally nothing to give your average hun any comfort. No reasons given not to freak out completely. The great socio-anthropological question of our age may just turn out to be why are the Rangers fans not reacting to so many red lights and alarm bells. Leave aside your understanding of markets or business, think only of the accumulation of events, or the underlying theme of Whyte thumbing his nose at such pointless no-marks like lawyers, taxmen, and auditors, any human should have an instinctive feeling of unease creep over them.
Indeed in Glasgow the city of greatest council tax avoidance in the UK, I can well imagine a lot of Rangers fans are familiar with the excuse’s.
I think a lot of them are stupid. Really stupid. How could you not be a little daft to care about a club with there history… However, they’re not all morons, some of them just lack morals, so those bright immoral types, what are they doing/saying. How are they not reacting to this.
bournesouprecipe,
To be pedantic, it’s 1 in 512 in probability terms or 511/1 in betting odds,
Bourne
That’s a three sigma level of certainty. Has anyone told the CernCSC?
It’s bordering on formal discovery.
The question is: Discovery of what?
James Forrest is Lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:27
Auldheid:
Are you telling me I have to change my countdown clock man???
——————————
Yup James, I smiled after I posted and on reading back saw your clock, just a small reset. For those interested in the UEFA Licensing issues (as opposed to the Plus Market embarrasing ones) here is an update of my take on the situation. (I’l answer your other question separately).
Rangers could be refused a licence on any of the grounds under the following articles.
A 47
Audited Accounts and
A 47
Audited Accounts and Minimum Disclosures (If they have no audited accounts of any description ready by 8th April)
A 48
Reviewed Interim Financial Statements (the ones at A47 are the unaudited accounts currently overdue. The ones at A48 are those that will be required (audited) for licensing purposes in the coming round and so are dependent on getting the current full set audited and themselves (the Interims) being audited by 8th April.
A 50
No Payables Overdue Towards Employees and Social/ Tax Authorities.
This is the one that covers unpaid tax. The wee tax bill appears to have been paid so no problems for next licensing round on that one, however RTC seems pretty confident that VAT and NI due monthly has not been paid and is bankrolling the payroll. HMRC would do well to raise a bill before 31 March if the back tax on these items is still not paid by then. So the orginal wee tax bill might be replaced by a wee brother.
The big EBT bill might not crystallise until after the 31 March when the FTT gives its ruling, so it is likely to be viewed as exempt from being treated as unpaid tax under Article 50 and so will not be a reason of itself to refuse a licence.
If it crystallises before 31 March but Rangers appeal, the SFA still have the discretion under the A50 rules to ignore the appeal if they think it is only a procrastination device and is vexatious. This gives them leverage to get answers from Rangers on other questions.
If it crystallises before 31 March it is unpaid on 1st April and Art 50 needs to be honestly negotiated as opposed to last year.
HOWEVER
A 51 Written Representations Prior to the Licensing Decision
requires that written representation be provided of information to the Licensing Committee on any events or conditions of major economic importance that have occurred and that may have an adverse impact on the licence applicant’s financial position since the balance sheet date of the preceding audited annual financial statements or reviewed interim financial statements (if applicable )
AND
A 52 Future Financial Information
Refers to information in respect of the financial performance and position of the club in the reporting periods ending in the years following commencement of the UEFA club competitions, i.e in this case up to the end of season 2012/13.
The last two are to protect UEFA from a club going belly up in the middle of a CL or EL tournament next season and the UEFA by now are very much aware of Rangers situation and what a risk they represent.
If the term “going concern” appears in either full or Interim Accounts this is a RECOGNISED AND FORMAL Indicator defined by UEFA that means Article 52 has to be observed. (The term actually gets 14 mentions in the UEFA FFP rules that the latest SFA rules incorporate.)
I do not fancy Rangers chances of getting a licence for any UEFA competition in the circumstances they find themselves. I’m not even sure the have the administrative dexterity/experience to even supply or adhere to the rules which the SFA will have to apply with rigour to satisfy UEFA.
That degree of rigour on the part of the licensor or licensee has never been the case before.
Celticbhoy:
That’s the point though. As long as the “uncertainty” persists, Rangers will simply not be able to submit financial accounts which are “clean” and fulfil UEFA’s criteria. If they can’t do that by the deadline date – whether 31 March as some have suggested or 8 April as Auldheid has reported – they will not be in Europe regardless, with all the catastrophic knock-on effects that go with that.
I was pleased to read a brilliant post from The Battered Bunnet yesterday which pointed out yet another mammoth hurdle Rangers have to overcome … the SFA “going concern” deadline for a license to play domestic football.
Part of the SPL/SFA criteria is that a license has to be granted annually. If there are concerns about a club’s ability to fulfil its fixtures in the coming season they cannot be granted a license by the league or the national association.
The Battered Bunnet’s post put forward a scenario where Rangers OldCo still lingers on, in the midst of administration proceedings leading towards liquidation, a “middle ground” between OldCo and NewCo Rangers … the very process of administration could take months, not weeks, certainly not days.
It is by no means certain that a NewCo Rangers would even come into being following a liquidation proceeding. By no means certain. The SFA and the SPL would need to consider the possibility that there will be NO entity called Rangers able to fulfil their fixtures. And that means a serious issue over whether Rangers in its present form should even qualify for a license to play at all.
Of course, the SFA will overlook that requirement … but I would be willing to bet that if OldCo Rangers go into administration during the season there will be a period of weeks when there WILL be chaos as no club playing under that name will exist to play matches … and at that point anything can happen.
This is bigger than a shambles. It is the single biggest issue which has ever faced Scottish football. Any other club, ourselves included, would already have been put on notice that they are perilously close to not being allowed to compete in the league. The SFA would already have consulted clubs outwith the SFL about the possibility of one of them taking up a league place. The media would be engaged in fevered speculation as to the consequences …
The Hearts situation just makes them more incredible still. With them teetering on the brink, there is a real chance that they will go first. If that happens, the quandry the SFA and the SPL are in is enormous … how could they demand of Hearts that any NewCo version start in the Third Division and then save Rangers from the same fate? How could they help Hearts, knowing it will invite Rangers to go next?
Further, how can the press comment on the massive crisis at Hearts, focussing on the fall range of consequences, whilst ignoring Rangers? There are good reasons for the lack of proper scrutiny at Hearts … because shining a light on that club means inevitable comparisons with what’s going on at HMRC FC.
I think it more than likely both clubs will fall. The SPL/SFA have a very short window in which to decide what to do. Changing the rules to suit Rangers is an open invitation for Hearts to fold the hand in the same way. Changing the rules to suit Hearts means Rangers to go shortly thereafter … you can’t have one without the other. Punishing one means punishing both, or risking legal battles without end, and all the while the integrity of the game will suffer.
No supporter, of any club, buying a season ticket for the 2012 – 2013 season knows for sure what exactly it is they are buying. No TV deal is worth a damn. No commercial agreement can be said to be iron clad. The whole of the Scottish game is poised to collapse … and the media silence is deafening.
If one of the two clubs was not Rangers you better believe a full and frank public debate would be going on as to what to do, and that, as I’ve already said, one or two clubs from outwith the SFL would already be poised to take places in the league structure at the start of the new season. It would already be in planning.
But because one of the two clubs in trouble is Rangers we will certainly go into next season not knowing for sure whether two of our clubs will be able to fulfil their fixtures. It is more than a shambles. It is an outrage.
bournesouprecipe at 15:46
It can happen: in my yoof, as a frequenter of the odd casino or 2, I once saw a run of 13 consecutive red numbers.
Betting all the while on black, I ran out of cash at about the 9th turn of the wheel (and my so-called mates refused to advance me anymore money!).
FF
The Battered Bunnet 9 January, 2012 at 15:52 :
That’s a three sigma level of certainty. Has anyone told the CernCSC?
It’s bordering on formal discovery.
The question is: Discovery of what?
A new elementary particle the fix boshun. It has no truth, beauty or charm. It is strange and on the way down to the bottom.
Afternoon bhoys, sun is out and as ever hun free.
More embarresment for the hun, it just keeps on coming.
Not that it will affect them in any adverse way, but as they say every picture tells a story.
James Forrest is Lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:55
The SFA/SPL will be praying for Hearts to go under then, because it’s a lot easier to tout the “we need immediate reconstruction for the good of the game” that will allow NewRangers and maybe NewHearts (if such a team exists) into the top tier by the back door when it’s not just benefiting one team.
James Forrest is Lennon says:
9 January, 2012 at 15:27
Auldheid:
Here’s a question: if Rangers don’t fulfil the criteria, are there knock-on effects in terms of sponsorship payments etc? I mean, this won’t start and stop with simply denial of UEFA money, right?
UEFA money is only the tip of the sword. I would assume sponsorship, adversiters etc all have “sliding scale” contracts covering the eventuality of no European football, right?
——————————————————–
It all depends if RangersOldco continue or collapse and Newco emerges.
If Oldco are able to continue but do not get a UEFA license, chances are their sponsors will want to review the contracts they have with them, but if they have not built a renegotiation clause into them RangersOldco would insist on the contracts being honoured.
If a Newco emerges then it is all up for grabs and much would depend on where Newco played football and in what division. Marketing men could actually turn Rangers playing their way up into a positive for their opponents and the game, but the new contracts would be unlikely to have the same value as the old.
Bourne – is it not 256/1 to be drawn away 9 times in a row?
Kilbowie Kelt says:
9 January, 2012 at 14:22
You’re showing an inordinate interest in the Krankies. I hope you didn’t have Hanky Panky with a Krankie :-))
Now this could be purely coincidental but theres not been one hunterloper about today…
strange that
wonder what theyre all doing
well actually I dont give an eartha kitt what theyre doing
was just being polite
strange that
One of Rankers top targets signs today…………………………………… for WBA! :oD
Scott Allan decided that cash was his preferred method of pay rather than a bunch of gingers bottle (some without caps!!)
HH
/Bishop B
So, I got a little sidetracked looking up trading histories for Celtic and Rangers (exceedingly boring at the best of times) and forgot that I wanted to ask a question.
On the assumption that the Plus thingy isn’t worth getting uptight about, what is? So they don’t want audited accounts to be published and they couldn’t give a damn about Plus, so they delay etc. However, who does care? I’m not entirely sure the SFA know what to do with company accounts, and I’m sure I read that they simply require that they company have not begun a winding up process or have outstanding taxes (that is to say, remaining outstanding at the conclusion of any appeals process) in order to issue a license.
Does the HMRC not require an audit? Companies house? Can you get a VAT reg no without one, and can you continue to trade? My assumption is yes, yes, no and no, but if anyone could enlighten?
All in all it does point to a very imminent insolvency event.