Today is one of the most significant days for the future of Rangers as Duff and Phelps legal challenge to Ticketus ownership of around £40m of tickets over the next three seasons plays out. Should Ticketus retain ownership of the tickets it considerably inhibits the phoenix scenarios Duff and Phelps are able to profile as they look to sell the club.
BBC Scotland’s business and economy editor, Douglas Fraser, Tweeted this afternoon that Duff and Phelps asked the court for permission to breach the agreement with Ticketus as it acts as an inhibitor to attracting potential bids for the club. Fraser also notes that there is little precedent for such a breach and that the Blue Knights consortium have been able to construct a deal recognising Ticketus’ rights.
I heard earlier today that Craig Whyte is particularly distressed at some of the derogatory comments fired his way this week, a few of which he feels are unjustified. The media are already speculating on what could happen to Mr Whyte in the event that police inquiries lead to a report being made to the crown office.
I understand supporters of Mr Whyte, who has maintained a dignified silence on many aspects of the deal, are curious as to why the person who led him to Ticketus has not revealed his involvement. I hear that early last year when Whyte privately revealed he was unable to pull enough funds together to complete the takeover, he was told:
“Why don’t you speak to a company called Ticketus? They are very helpful for this kind of thing.”
Having never worked in the football business, Whyte had never heard of Ticketus. When I heard who this was I laughed and laughed and laughed. I’m still laughing. This is the story that just keeps on giving. My source is not for going on the record, so discretion is the better part of valour on this one, but if Mr Whyte ever gets to the witness box, get yourself a front row seat.
The Daily Record today suggested Mr Whyte could end up in jail over this business. I wonder if he’ll be the only one.
384 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- »
If you want to know who recommended it, scroll back to last year on the RTC blog. It has been there for quite a while.
I also wonder when ‘Close Brothers’ will make their move, as rangers gave a fixed charge security over their assets for an undiscosed loan in November.
Mort/Dirtymac, cheers. Sitting in work here. Brain melting! 45 mins til I escape!
SffS
Be ace if it was Keith Jackson.
That’d be better than the ending to The Usual Suspects.
Come on Paul67…….give us clue, how many letters in their name?
I’ll have a vowel please Paul.
This should pass the day/night till the football starts.
Paul67:
Just about to board a fast Train to ML5. It just gets better and better. Getting strangelooks as I’m standing here laughing.
Keep the Faith!
Hail Hail!
weeron on 15 March, 2012 at 16:02 said:
Gordon J and others…..
Sorry. For as long as Sky money is around , inconvenient kick off times will be the order of the day.
Laughed and Laughed and Laughed
Mr and Mrs Custard ? hmmmmmmmmm
Nuclear Bovril and a Half Munched Pie
Sounds good apart from the fact that Carling are not the huns sponsors anymore.
Mort
But didn’t Murray (D) say to the assorted hacks the other day that he knew nothing about the Ticketus deal?
Neil Lennon tweet from earlier:
“Gone small eway on Hectors Choice in next”
Paul67 – was is Ken Dodd or Lester Piggot?
Diddy men or horse has bolted?
SDM denied knowing about the Ticketus deal until December last year. He said so in yesterday’s interviews in papers. So there – it must be true
Paul67
Was that a nod?
Paul67
Was it Murray Davidson or a variation of that name, possibly???
Anyone know at what time tomorrow D&P will extend the time limit for bids until next week?
Going for my tea and possibly a lie down in dark room. Although I expect no better from him, still cannot get over Michael Kelly’s exhibition in today’s Scotsman.
It’s a shame Louis Theroux concentrates on more serious stuff these days.
He could do a cracking Weird Weekend special following all the colourful characters at Rangers. (thumbsup)
Mort
Good point. And I thought is was just Scottish journos that were slap dash at fact checking.
‘ When I heard who this was I laughed and laughed and laughed’
Frank Carson!
it’s not Minty, is it? It’s Grier.
Sorry Paul, if I’m right and this has to be deleted I undertand.
See that Kevin Bridges he’s such a card!
My money is on C.O. Not the co. – just C.O
Nuclear Bovril
Do you know that company specialise in helping married people cheat on their partners. They would be a match made in heaven for RFC.
Mort
Paul67
I would guess it was Paul Murray..nice and convenient, eh?
Hail Hail
Think sparkle girl might be on the “money”!
Would be hilarious if Duff & Phelps were responsible and now have to get them out of it.
BTW if their argument in court today is as reported, they’ve got no chance. On bright side, advocates don’t come cheap.
I’d say David Murray is the obvious choice, and therefore if it was him Paul67 might have responded with a curt “thought as much” rather than the hysteria recounted above.
I’d therefore plump for a slightly more leftfield name, Paul Murray. Makes perfect sense when you think about it…
I’m still slightly confused by the anger of the Rangers fans regarding the Ticketus deal, notwithstanding the apparent concealment by the club. The idea of using club assets (season tickets) to pay club debts (Lloyds) surely shouldn’t be met with the degree of disgust we have seen. Or is it just anathema to the Rangers mindset that they could not have settled this debt with someone else’s money like all the other ones?
philvisreturns 16:24
lol!
Go on Paul give us a clue !
Did the chap in question explain the phrase ‘Surrender No’ ?
I hope leafy Stewartfield is exempt to the slagging EK got on the last thread.:}
Nuclear:
Could only imagine the reaction of hirsuted buckie swilling knuckle dragging uber macho hun asked to buy a rankers jersey with that oan it: Grunt! Grrrrrrr! Grunt! Translated: am no wearin’ a strip wae Ashley oan it! Nae chance!
Hiro Nakamura on 15 March, 2012 at 16:34 said:
Think sparkle girl might be on the “money”!
Nothing else is staggeringly ridiculously twisted enough to fit with this story.
How stoopid could The Orange Tainted SFA be in calling Alex Thomson a liar? Someone with the kinda profile he has now says he’s comin’ with a film crew to get to the bottom of it all. He’ll need a wetsuit to get to the depths The Ordure has plumbed.
I see him rippin’ The SFA a new one…in the parlance of our friends in L.A!
Ah’m laughin’ masel sick with every twist & turn!
Paul67 –
“When I heard who this was I laughed and laughed and laughed. I’m still laughing. This is the story that just keeps on giving.”
And the funniest thing is you don’t even have to say his name – we all know who you are talking about.
Lauging out loud (or lol as the kids might say) as I type this.
‘And if I hear the phrase “succulent lamb” once more, I’ll go vegan. The notorious story written by a Glasgow journalist praising David Murray’s taste in fine wine and succulent lamb dinners. It’s become a Glasgow by-word for a local media who bought unquestioningly into the lavish claims being made by the likes of Mr Murray at Ibrox’…
gents give me a mail with your phone numbers lost my Phone.
You know who you are.
cheers Paul
Paul67 was it Chelsea fans?
Maybe a stupid question but why has the ticketus deal gone to court. Can’t just be they can’t sell the club if deal stands must be more to it than that.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9101242/Rangers-in-administration-Donald-Rumsfeld-had-it-right-all-along-about-the-unknown-unknowns.html
You can see The Token Tim on the blower irritating our hero on this pic
Rangers in administration: Donald Rumsfeld had it right all along about the unknown unknowns
Rangers are in such a crisis that for all the unanswered questions there are, there is much more we don’t know.
By Roddy Forsyth11:00PM GMT 23 Feb 2012
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” – Donald Rumsfeld
When the former US Secretary of Defense made the above statement in 2002 he was mocked by the Plain English Campaign for what looked like impenetrable jargon. But fast forward to the shambles at Ibrox and ask yourself – could anybody have expressed the situation more cogently than Rumsfeld?
Certainly, there are innumerable sources of confusion in the saga of Craig Whyte’s nine months as the man in control of Rangers. For example, how many times has it been said or written that the HMRC case against Rangers in respect of Employee Benefit Trusts brought about the crisis?
The impending judgment – and the possibility that it might go against Rangers – was never going to be make it easy to attract fresh long-term revenue streams but, again, the question can be answered with another question: does anybody entertain for one moment the notion that the club would now be in the hands of the administrators if Sir David Murray had still be in charge?
Yes, it is true that the club could have tipped over what the bean counters like to call an insolvency situation in Murray’s time. The first time, I can reveal here, was back in 1999 after the Bahamas-based Joe Lewis had bought 25 per cent of Rangers for £40 million.
Lewis thought he would get fat returns if he bought shares in several European football clubs and they prospered from shares in lucrative TV deals. The broadcast bonanza, however, did not materialise and Lewis watched in horror as Murray siphoned cash straight into Dick Advocaat’s transfer account and Rangers went from £20 million in credit with the bank to an overdraft of almost £21 million – a transformation that took care of Lewis’s input through his investment vehicle, ENIC.
Lewis had not grasped that Murray meant what he said about trophies being more important than profit. Howard Stanton, ENIC’s man on the Ibrox board, told Murray to stop spending on players.
When Murray took not a blind bit of notice, Stanton resigned. Lewis threatened to put Rangers into administration but decided instead to sell his ENIC stock while it still had some value and the crisis passed. The next talk of administration was heard when the global recession overtook Rangers and the Lloyds Bank Group inherited the club’s £30 million debt from HBOS.
Lloyds, though, denied reports that they had threatened administration. Instead, a rigorous debt reduction programme was implemented at Ibrox which saw Rangers’ overdraft drop to £18 million, which is where Craig Whyte came in. And it is also where the Rumsfeld approach might offer a little clarity:
THE KNOWN KNOWNS
This time last year Rangers were solvent and trading within the club’s limitations. The half-year figures for June-December 2010 showed a reduction of turnover of £4 million to £33.7 million but there had also been three fewer home games. Pre-tax profits were down from £13.1 million to £9 million as the recession bit; £2.7 million had been set aside to cover an HMRC action – the “small tax case” – and the amount of debt to be repaid over the next year rose from £25.5 million to £28.9 million, but the club had increased cash in hand from £600,000 to £5.2 million and money owed to Rangers increased from £7.8 million to £10.7 million.
The overdraft of £18 million at the time of Whyte’s takeover was described by the previous Ibrox chairman, Alastair Johnston, as “good business” on the grounds that Rangers had a credit line with a bank when many businesses could not get similar facilities and that the debt was easily serviceable at a time of unusually low interest rates.
Johnston told me that if the Whyte takeover did not go through then Rangers would probably pay the debt down by £1-£1.5 million a year to allow for the squad to be refreshed while reducing liabilities. At the time of the takeover, the value of Rangers’ principal playing assets – Allan McGregor, Nikica Jelavic, Steven Naismith, Kyle Lafferty and Steven Davis – was about equivalent to the money owed to Lloyds and HMRC for the small tax case.
We also know that, despite his frequent and outright denials, Whyte used the £24.4 million advanced by Ticketus against season ticket sales to pay off the bank debt. We know that he also mortgaged catering revenues in similar fashion.
We know that – going into the takeover – there was no reason to suppose that a reputable buyer with the resources displayed by Whyte to Murray should have brought the club to their current plight. We know that police have requested information from the administrators – which should be handed over today.
THE KNOWN UNKNOWNS
How could Murray have overlooked the fact that Whyte had previously been banned from acting as a company director?
I understand that it was actually Murray who suggested that Whyte could approach Ticketus for an advance against season tickets. Fair enough – Rangers had sometimes used the facility to smooth cash flow late in the season.
But why did nobody ask how much he had got from Ticketus – and when he had got it? Why did Ticketus advance money to man who did not yet own the resources they bought? If Ticketus hold no security with Rangers, what resources did Whyte use as collateral?
If they were his own resources, why did he not deploy them to keep the club out of administration? If they were not his resources, whose were they?
Why did he say that the gap between Rangers’ income and expenditure was partly exposed by failure to qualify for the Champions League group stage? The previous regime never budgeted for more than one home leg in Europe unless they qualified automatically for the Champions League group stage.
Who is Whyte? Companies House records have him as White as well as Whyte and with two birthdays, two years’ apart.
Where is he? Last night none of his four PR spokesmen or administrators had heard from him since Tuesday.
THE UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS
If we knew these, they would fall into the previous category. Perhaps they are best summed up by another Rumsfeld utterance which could be applied to Rangers at this time: “Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”