Twitter icon Email alerts icon Latest News RSS icon Magazine icon Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/article/a646985

Giles Hargreave firm snaps up £3.5 million Rangers stake

by Dylan Lobo on Dec 20, 2012 at 08:08

Green, who paid around £5.5 million to buy Rangers in June through his consortium, is the biggest shareholder with his stake worth around £23 million. Other significant shareholders include the fans, which own 12% and Newcastle FC owner Mike Ashley and the club's boss Ally McCoist, who own 4.6% and 2% respectively.

Meanwhile on the pitch the team celebrated the successful float by thumping Annan Athletic 3-0 in front of 42,135 fans at Ibrox, stretching its winning run to seven games and its lead at the top of table to six points.  

McCoist was cautiously optimistic on the club's future in an interview following the game. 'We need to use the money raised by everyone – fans and investors alike – wisely. I would hope to do just that,' he said.

Sign in / register to view full article on one page

58 comments so far. Why not have your say?

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 09:53

Yet another publication regurgitating the PR b*llsh*t without checking the facts. This is not the return of Rangers to the aim. This is a brand new 1 month old company, who intend to buy a 6 month old club.

"Rangers, which was formed in 1872 and won 54 top flight titles, has gone through the most difficult period in its history after falling into administration on 13 February" add and are now in the process of liquidation.

"In the summer members of the Scottish Premier league voted against Rangers’ membership, resulting in the club being demoted to the Scottish third division" Wrong again! The club were not demoted! They became insolvent and had to forfeit their SPL share. The new club applied for membership to the SPL and were quite correctly refused. They then applied for membership of the Scottish Football League and were admitted to the lowest tier (3rd Division) having been given special treatment despite not fullfilling membership criteria.

"It said it hoped to raise up to £20 million to strengthen the squad". The new club has a transfer ban in place until after next August transfer window.

'rebirth' of the football club. Wrong again, read birth of a new football club.

'Never in Rangers' history did it sit there with no debt, no borrowings, with cash in the bank". The purchase of the assets and business from the administrator, (Duff & Phelps) was made in the form of a loan so the club does have debt internally. It is also believed that there are still footballing debts outstanding.

Anyone who bought into this company on the basis of the prospectus needs their heads examined. "Property Plant and Equipment £45,436,000" was purchased from the administrator for £1,500,000, leaving the purchase subject to a potential gratuitous alienation claim from HMRC liquidators BDO.

The club was a financial basket case when in the SPL and regularly qualifying for the Champions League. It is expected that they will not have 3 years of audited accounts, (a UEFA requirement) until November 2015 at the earliest, hence they will not have access to european competition until season 2016-2017 at the earliest.

If only there were a way of short selling this stock!

report this

Empire

Dec 20, 2012 at 10:04

Quite breathtaking that Mr Bryson cannot tell the difference between a company and a football club. The company that is in liquidation was formed in 1899 and OPERATED Rangers Football Club, formed in 1872. By your logic, Rangers FC did not exist before 1899! The new company that has been floated OPERATES Rangers Football Club. It is mischief to suggest otherwise. Perhaps Mr. Bryson can tell us why Rangers Football Club have the same membership number of the SFA it is a "new club." I would also point out that Football's governing bodies all agree that Rangers are the same club they always have been.

Is Mr. Bryson really telling us that FIFA, UEFA, The European Club Association, The Scottish Football Association and the Scottish Football League are all WRONG? Each one of these organisations have endorsed the fact that Rangers are over 140 years old.

Facts are facts!

report this

Calum MacArthur

Dec 20, 2012 at 10:06

An investment manager decides to buy a large stake in a new listing, he clearly believes that he will see a return on the investment, that is his job and if is right he'll reap the rewards. That should be the story, yet still the bile towards Rangers persists. So, so, sad David, its the season of goodwill to all men, so let it go. Merry Christmas

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 10:21

Calum, not so much "bile against Rangers", rather stating the facts, followed by my thoughts on the prospects for this share. I have nothing against Rangers International Football Club PLC, as they have done me no harm. The Rangers Football Club playing in the 3rd Division equally have done me no harm and I wish them well. My comments were aimed at the lies and propaganda that has been reported on the impending liquidation of RFC2012, (previously Rangers Football Club PLC, Rangers Football Club Ltd and Rangers Football Club) and the birth of this new entity. "Them's the facts" as they say.

The "Rangers" supporters deserve great credit for they way they have backed this project and for their sake I hope I am wrong and the people running the club will run it prudently with a long term strategy. However this is not the normal MO for venture capitalists.

Time will tell.

report this

basty

Dec 20, 2012 at 10:43

David,

You are a sad obsessed little man. So in keeping with the supporters of your club!!

Get a life. We are happy in the third division away from the sectarian bile of that other horrible club from OUR city. Get on with your own lives and leave us in peace.

Keep up the good work Mr Green!!

Merry Christmas to all at Rangers

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 11:16

Basty, bit of a stab in the dark there. Are you a clairvoyant?

"Keep up the good work Mr Green!!"

A man buys some "assets and a business" for approximately £5.5 million. Then sets up a holding company to purchase the "assets and business" using the capital from a floatation. This generous man sells approx 10% of this holding company to the loyal fans, for guess how much. That's right approx £5.5 million.

Mr Green, Scrooge or Santa? You decide.

report this

David Jay

Dec 20, 2012 at 12:19

Nice little spat from a couple of well-informed readers, keep it up boys, it is Christmas!

report this

Bob Mac

Dec 20, 2012 at 12:25

This article is full of errors.

"Rangers, which was formed in 1872 and won 54 top flight titles, has gone through the most difficult period in its history after falling into administration on 13 February. "

Rangers FC no longer exist. The old club has nothing whatsoever to do with this new club. To refer to the old club in anyway is misleading at best. the club playing in the 3rd division have never won any titles and have 6 months of history.

"In the summer members of the Scottish Premier league voted against Rangers’ membership, resulting in the club being demoted to the Scottish third division."

The new club were not demoted. They were a new club and like all new clubs they start at the bottom. How can a club be demoted from a league to which they were never involved in?

Good luck to the new club, I honestly wish them all the best. But Citywire, if you are going to report then please do report facts, not some guff copied straight from the Sevco press release.

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 12:49

David Jay, you're right it's Christmas.

I've just had a wonderful idea. The great man Mr Green as a gesture of goodwill, (after all he did allegedly buy the Rangers goodwill for £1), could make a donation, say of £5m from his impressive share floatation.

This donation could be given to the 250+ creditors of Rangers Football Club PLC, who are owed tens of millions of pounds, a result of which might be a less than happy xmas for them. Now that would be an excellent gesture and the timing would be sublime.

report this

Stuarty

Dec 20, 2012 at 13:03

David Bryson - outside of Octopus (Ticketus) who else is owed tens of millions of pounds? or even £1m? 250+?

report this

Bob Mac

Dec 20, 2012 at 13:22

I wonder what these investors think about Charles Green refusing to take tickets for Scottish cup matches against Dundee Utd and instead giving any proceeds from the game to charity. Shouldn't Charlie boy be concentrating on maximising revenue as opposed to taking cheap shots at greater clubs who have been around for decades?

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 13:23

Stuarty, HMRC for a start. They were owed £14m+ for last season alone. This was tax and NI contributions deducted from staff, but not passed on to HMRC, instead being used to run the club/pay players wages until the end of the season.

The term for this is trading while insolvent, a serious no-no for directors, let alone Administrators. Duff and Phelps took the club to the end of the season from appointment in February. During this period they ran up losses of approx £4m, excluding their fees. Their administration is now being "investigated" by BDO the HMRC appointed liquidator.

report this

Kevin Sweeney

Dec 20, 2012 at 13:33

Some interesting comments here "basty" maybe people who live in glass house's should not throw stones regarding the sectarian issue. Also if it's the same club fine by me but then you would look to repay the debt's as that would be the moral thing to do would it not ?

report this

Stuarty

Dec 20, 2012 at 13:36

'HMRC for a start'...and then? Thanks for explaning the term and i do understand the background to the case.

ps Bob Mac - greater clubs? (chortle) around for decades? what like 14 decades.

report this

John McKnight

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:02

HMRC are owed nothing from the company that formerly operated Rangers.

HMRC threw away any chance of recovering tax due, when they denied that company a CVA. HMRC forced that company into liquidation, and lost any chance of recovering taxpayers money.

The company now running Rangers are not liable for a penny of that money.

HMRC's reason for denying the CVA - to go after Craig Whyte. Whyte has been running rings round the HMRC for years. They won't get a penny from him either.

HMRC are not owed a penny from the company that formerly ran Rangers.

report this

Gary King

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:08

Let's distinguish between the company (that was badly run, ran up debts and was forced into administration and liquidation) and the football club that that company owned (which continues, still has a SFA share and plies its trade in the SFL. The company assets (including the football club, stadium, training ground, etc) were sold to a new business, who still wish to run the club on the previous basis, except more financially sound.

In any event, GIles Hargreaves obviously believes that he will make money on his investment over the coming months and years, and that will be all he is interested in.

report this

James Allison

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:26

I see the celtic obsession is still rife. Why don't you lot go and fill your own stadium and see how it feels to be successful.

Didn't think so.

Maybe should have bought shares in Obsession as I would be well rich by now.

report this

Allan Elder

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:28

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/205975-european-clubs-body-downgrades-rangers-status-but-recognises-history/

Looks like 'Rebirth' was the factually correct term. Ah ... facts ... who doesn't like them?

report this

Ikip Loyal

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:34

@David Bryson,

maybe you could inform the wide public why the Celtic 'Knewco's' Pacific Shelf 595 or HMS 402 were not required to apply to the discredited SPL/SFA for licences, or why they were not investigated for non payment of VAT or why they were not investigated for peppercorn fee land sales by GGC in breach of EEC rules or why they were not investigated for the elephant in the room that you know, I know and even big Jock knew.

report this

Allan Elder

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:34

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/205975-european-clubs-body-downgrades-rangers-status-but-recognises-history/

The important section:

"Taking into account that the 'new entity' also acquired the goodwill of the 'old entity', it was held by the ECA executive board that the goodwill, taking into account legal and practical arguments, also included the history of the 'old company'."

Facts. Who doesn't like them?

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 14:48

Empire,you are another one following the myth.

.......................................................................................................................

"Quite breathtaking that Mr Bryson cannot tell the difference between a company and a football club. The company that is in liquidation was formed in 1899 and OPERATED Rangers Football Club, formed in 1872. By your logic, Rangers FC did not exist before 1899! "

......................................................................................................................

RFC became a limited company in 1899 as you say. This was done to protect the directors from personal liability arising from running the club. Later became a PLC when shares were offered to the public. The club were not bought by RFC Ltd. They BECAME RFC Ltd and then BECAME RFC PLC. The club and changing methods of ownership remained one entity with one company number at companies house. This single company is now in the process of liquidation.

........................................................................................................................

"The new company that has been floated OPERATES Rangers Football Club. It is mischief to suggest otherwise".

........................................................................................................................

The new company at the time of floatation did not OPERATE any football club. As part of the floatation they had an undertaking to aquire "The Rangers Football Club Ltd, a six month old company.

.......................................................................................................................

"Perhaps Mr. Bryson can tell us why Rangers Football Club have the same membership number of the SFA it is a "new club."

........................................................................................................................

That is an easy answer. The SFA agreed to transfer the membership of the old club RFC PLC to the new club The Rangers Football Club Ltd, on condition of the secret 5-way agreement.

Perhaps Empire can explain why the SFA had to TRANSFER the membership. Surely if it's the same club there would have been no need to transfer membership.

Perhaps Empire can tell me why The Rangers started in the first round of the Scottish Cup, when clubs relegated from the SPL are entitled to start in the fourth round.

..........................................................................................................................

"I would also point out that Football's governing bodies all agree that Rangers are the same club they always have been.

Is Mr. Bryson really telling us that FIFA, UEFA, The European Club Association, The Scottish Football Association and the Scottish Football League are all WRONG? Each one of these organisations have endorsed the fact that Rangers are over 140 years old"

........................................................................................................................

Now who's being mischievous and herein lies the problem. Show me one official statement from any of the official bodies, (FIFA, UEFA, and SFA). I don't mean a newspaper report or link to a webpage, an OFFICIAL statement stating that The Rangers Football Club Ltd. is the same club as Rangers Football Club PLC. It is this void of information which has allowed Mr Green to make claims he knows only too well are false. In fact Mr Green himself whilst attempting to finesse a CVA said that if the CVA is not agreed, it will mean liquidation which will bring about the end of 140 years of history, (not an exact quote, but I can get you it word for word if you wish).

Facts are facts!

I can fully understand "Rangers" fans wanting to believe their club still exists and in their hearts and minds it does. They still have a tem plaing in blue at Ibroxand are free to call it whatever they want, however company law is clear Rangers Football Club PLC, the old club is about to be liquidated and will be no more.

report this

David Jay

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:01

I am glad, David, that you are not cross-examining me in front of M'Lud, I might feel a little uncomfortable-well, there is always half-time, of course.

report this

James Allison

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:04

David, where's your facts?

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:11

Gary King,

"Let's distinguish between the company (that was badly run, ran up debts and was forced into administration and liquidation) and the football club that that company owned (which continues, still has a SFA share and plies its trade in the SFL".

............................................................................................................................

Gary, let's not, there is no distinction. The club and the company are one. It was the operation of Rangers football team that caused massive debts to be racked up and the eventual liquidation of the business. When Craig Whyte bought the company/club, he did so via a holding company called Wavetower, (later became RFC Group), so in effect Rangers did have a holding company when they went into administration. However it was not the RFC Group who went into administration, it was RFC PLC the original club/company.

..........................................................................................................................

"The company assets (including the football club, stadium, training ground, etc) were sold to a new business, who still wish to run the club on the previous basis, except more financially sound."

..........................................................................................................................

This bit is part correct they bought some of the assets, (crucially not the club) and let's hope they do just that. If they had bought the club/business entirely they would be liable for the debt as well.

..........................................................................................................................

In any event, GIles Hargreaves obviously believes that he will make money on his investment over the coming months and years, and that will be all he is interested in.

.........................................................................................................................

I'm sure he bought the shares to make money, however whther or not he plans to hold them for years only time will tell.

report this

John McKnight

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:11

The SFL is an official body. Here's a statement from its CE:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On behalf of everyone at the Scottish Football League I would like to add my sincere congratulations to Rangers on Achieving this magnificant milestone in the club's history.

Rangers have brought great honour and distinction to Scottish football throughout these 140 years and the club has risen to every challenge it has faced. ... There is something rather poignant that after 140 years the club is once again a member of the organisation it helped found in 1890 and we are honoured and proud to have Rangers in the league.

To everyone involved in the club and its remarkable and loyal fans Happy Anniversary.

David Longmuir

Chief Executive

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SFA haven't contradicted this. UEFA hasn't contradicted this. The ECA has contradicted this.

Facts are facts.

report this

John McKnight

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:24

Erratum

My last post should have read:

The ECA has NOT contradicted this.

report this

Kevin Sweeney

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:25

"ikip loyal"

Seriously you should report all of this to the police.

" why they were not investigated for the elephant in the room that you know, I know and even big Jock knew." Not sure what this part is about but perhaps again you should also raise this matter with the police as well. As you state "you know" and let us know how you get on ?

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:30

James Allison,

"David, where's your facts?"

......................................................................................................................

James the facts are out there if you want to look. Try companies house for a start.

There seems to be a lot of anti-Celtic statements in some of these comments. I don't know why. I have not metioned Celtic, I am not a Celtic fan, I am Aberdeen born and bred and have foolowed the Dons for over 50 years.

As I said, I was merely posting on what I believed a factually incorrect report/comment by Dylan Lobo and my personal belief as to the real value of these shares. I've been bombarded with abuse and more propaganda but so far no one has challenged the facts.

PS the ECA is not a governing body and has no juridisction over the competitions of europe.In my opinion it is an institution representing a group of wealthy clubs with a self-serving agenda.

report this

John McKnight

Dec 20, 2012 at 15:41

ECA represents wealthy clubs? Yet Rangers remained members even though they were skint.

PS. I never stated that the ECA was a governing body, it must have been someone else.

report this

James Allison

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:01

Aberdeen. Just as well being celtic minded then. Come on then, where is the facts that show Rangers are not 140 years old?

Show us all with your facts.

report this

James Allison

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:04

Sheep, Obsessed. Same thing Dave.

So, where are the facts exactly that we are 140 years old?

Show us all your facts?

And, why don't you lot fill your stadium either?

report this

James wilson via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:13

Instead of fans concentrating on their own teams they are obssessed with Rangers. To the Aberdeen fan you mention the ticket boycott, fans of SPL clubs have been boycotting their games by the look of things when you see the attendances. Maybe, just maybe, you should all start supporting your own clubs instead of being obssessed with Rangers. Then Now Forever

report this

v guard

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:19

mr bryson. the only aberdeen you were interested in was Aberdeen Asset Management. ;) the one thing about the obsessed is they are too obsessed with the one real football club that EUFA have given 5 stars to and still have them being a founding member. you and your obsessees should try and fill your own stadium before trying to preach to the rest of us.

maybe the obsessed should be more worried about savco fc having the elephant in the room investigated a little bit more than has been done, conveniently. Savco fc boys club had the boys take showers before as well as after the games. even jimmy savile would have thought that one odd!

report this

John McKnight

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:21

@ David Bryson

What are your views on Aberdeen's finances? I believe they have been bailed out to the tune of £5M, by Mr Milne and Aberdeen Asset Mamagement.

Is the company that is running Aberdeen FC a financial basket case, or have they still to reach that stage?

report this

Scott Young

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:35

Mr Bryson

I'm not generally moved to make comments on news articles but I felt it important to correct you on a couple of points.

"RFC became a limited company in 1899 as you say. This was done to protect the directors from personal liability arising from running the club. Later became a PLC when shares were offered to the public. The club were not bought by RFC Ltd. They BECAME RFC Ltd and then BECAME RFC PLC. The club and changing methods of ownership remained one entity with one company number at companies house. This single company is now in the process of liquidation."

You are correct that by creating a limited company the directors are effectively "ring-fencing" themselves from claims by creditors in the event that the company becomes insolvent. However this also works in reverse, in as much as the assets, whilst owned are held separate from the company. Assets are "used" to generate a profit for the company. If these assets are mismanaged then they do not generate a sufficient profit and the company becomes in solvent. However in this case the assets remain for the benefit of creditors or whosoever takes over the management of these assets. In the case of Rangers the assets are the stadium, the players, the brand and the goodwill which would include Rangers history, as without this there is no goodwill. You can't argue therefore that the Rangers "BECAME" anything as a result of the change in the company. The assets have always been the same. In other words, the Stadium, the players, the brand and the loyalty of the support are the assets that are "used" to generate a profit and cash flow for the company. These never die.

The "assets" as you know do not have a number at Companies house because they are not a Company.

"Perhaps Empire can explain why the SFA had to TRANSFER the membership. Surely if it's the same club there would have been no need to transfer membership."

I'm not sure how this is an argument for a loss of history. If the SFA had to "ISSUE" a new membership to Rangers then you might have a point. A transfer, e.g. Home Ownership, Share Holding, etc. implies the continuation of the underlying asset, not the creation of a new one.

I think the struggle here is the conflation of ownership with existence. Clearly Rangers like any club has had many owners over its 140 year history. However these people move on (they die, they become insolvent) however the Club (not the company) remains in perpetuity, i.e. exists, for as long as it fulfils its purpose which is the provision of sports entertainment.

report this

Bill McKay via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 16:51

Scott young I doff my hat sir,if that doesn't shut Bryson up I'm afraid it's the loony bin for him.

report this

markem via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 17:02

Fellow Rangers fans you are waisting your time. There is no reasoning with 'them' - 'Rangers are dead' is filling the void of 'the Refs favour Rangers'. Even the most intelligent amongst them cannot apply any logic or reason when discussing Rangers, which is a result of a deep rooted inferiority complex. If only as many of them that comment could turn up to a home game.....don't think so!

report this

Calum MacArthur

Dec 20, 2012 at 17:19

Chaps,

I'm a Rangers fan, but this is a finance forum, I posted early on that I thought David Bryson should let it go, David, I think you probably regret your original post but you should put the spade down now and stop digging.

I happen to think Gile Hargreaves has made an astute purchase, whether its a long-term one or not isn't really the issue, (for me anyway), he's paid to make money for clients and I happen to think he will, as a result of the strength of the Rangers fan-base. What I do find refreshing is a fund manager prepared to do something other than simply follow the herd and run a quasi-tracker. We'll see, but for now lets park the bad-feeling and enjoy a bit of the festive spirit. Merry Christmas to you all, including those from the 'dark side'!

Calum

report this

debra fergus

Dec 20, 2012 at 17:29

I see the obsessed still have nothing better to do. Rangers are still the same club,this is confirmed by the European Club Assoc.

. http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/205975-european-clubs-bdy-downgrades-rangers-status-but-recognises-history/

Uefa where the club has it's ranking for the 2012/13 season(88th)

http://uk.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/teams/club=50121/profile/index.html

The govrning body the SFL

http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/rangers/

and the SFA who transferred membership.

"We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club." Note..new owners of Rangers FC...and again "“There were a number of complex and challenging issues involved but, primarily, the Scottish FA had to be satisfied that the new owners of Rangers would operate in the best interests of the club, its fans and Scottish football in general." New owners.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1957&newsCategoryID=3&newsID=10252

Time to move on obsessed..i believe you drew Juve today,concentrate on that,never mind Rangers this country's most successful club,as confirmed by well,everyone.

report this

David Bryson

Dec 20, 2012 at 17:52

Chaps,

I'm a Rangers fan, but this is a finance forum, I posted early on that I thought David Bryson should let it go, David, I think you probably regret your original post but you should put the spade down now and stop digging.

I happen to think Gile Hargreaves has made an astute purchase, whether its a long-term one or not isn't really the issue, (for me anyway), he's paid to make money for clients and I happen to think he will, as a result of the strength of the Rangers fan-base. What I do find refreshing is a fund manager prepared to do something other than simply follow the herd and run a quasi-tracker. We'll see, but for now lets park the bad-feeling and enjoy a bit of the festive spirit. Merry Christmas to you all, including those from the 'dark side'!

Calum

.......................................................................................................................

You are right Calum. I give up, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Regarding the merits of the investment, time will tell. If I am proved to be wrong then that's fine. It means the new club are alive and well. I have many friends who are Rangers supporters and am aware of the anguish caused by the last period in the old clubs history. I will look forward to The Rangers climbing through the leagues, to a time when we can re-engage in the friendly banter on Aberdeen v The Rangers match days.

If on the other hand the share price bombs, then I trust you will be able to say you were right!

report this

debra fergus

Dec 20, 2012 at 18:02

David Bryson seems rather obsessed by Rangers. And of course he is talking nonsense. UEFA have just updated Rangers ranking on their website to 88th,above the likes of Rosenberg and Newcastle,not bad for a "new" club,the SFA announced when they transferred membership it's the same club. "We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club." And again "“There were a number of complex and challenging issues involved but, primarily, the Scottish FA had to be satisfied that the new owners of Rangers would operate in the best interests of the club, its fans and Scottish football in general." Note the phrase new owners of Rangers FC.

The SFL have confirmed it where Rangers are listed as founded in 1872 together with all honours,and the European Club Assoc. confirmed it when they granted Rangers assoc. membership for being one of the founding clubs in 2008. Again confirming it as the same club..but those such as Mr Bryson,blinded by jealousy or bitterness,ignore all facts and instead attempt to peddle the new club myth,which 'm happy to see has now been well and truly debunked ..Rangers then Rangers now Rangers forever 1872.

report this

Dave via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 18:19

@ David Bryson

Im a hibs fan and i see where you are coming from but i have to disagree.

"The Rangers Football Club LTD"

Which as we know is the company Running "Rangers FC"

Now correct me if im wrong but you dont seem to know the difference?

"Rangers Fc" the football club was sold as an asset if that asset had been stripped it would no longer exist. Instead Sevco bought the brand "Rangers FC" and continued to run it as a football club. Then sevco changed its name to "The Rangers Football club LTD"

At no point the club "Rangers FC" run by any company change its name because the company and the club are 2 completley different things. If they were the same "Rangers FC" the football club would have been forced to change its Branding.

This didnt happen because it was sold as an asset.

report this

Dave via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 18:36

I meant to add that if no buyer had bought "Rangers FC" football club brand then yes it would be officially dead but it was sold!

Plus i for one cant stand either Glasgow team but for fuck sake get a grip all the celtic fans i know are more obsessed with trying to prove the non existence so much so that they are making sure its never going to die

Sick of hearing both sides but they still wear the same badge what does that tell you?

report this

David Jay

Dec 20, 2012 at 19:11

One thing is certain here, and that is Citywire is a lot more wiser and better-informed than when they wrote the article. I have enjoyed the thread, but leave the sectarian aspect alone, this is a financial column.

report this

chris via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 19:24

Youve got to love the sick, jealous individuals on this, trying everything and anything to show the world Rangers are dead. Absolute nonsense. Rangers Football Club, by court admission, are a football club capable of being owned by a business. Rangers Football Club's SPL membership was withdrawn, and thats fine, but the SFA membership, the biggie, that continued. And dont get me started on the Scottish co-effiecient...or our FIFA ranking.

Best of all, same strip, stadium, trophies and trophy room, players (remember we're still bringing in comp for the players that thought the could walk away) and lastly, the hatred you all have, every one of you. Is it cold in our shadow?

We Welcome The Chase *****

report this

Jimmy via mobile

Dec 20, 2012 at 21:09

this thread has only confirmed what we all knew anyway , that there exists a section of society who are obsessed with RFC.

The destruction of RFC is crucial if they are to achieve their goal.

Bears , let your watchword be courage because this campaign will never cease

report this

andy 1957

Dec 20, 2012 at 21:45

if they are the same club then why did the sfa make them play in the 3rd of the Scottish cup

Scottish cup rules

Round Three The clubs which, in the previous season, were members of The Scottish Premier League and those clubs finishing in The Scottish Football League First division league positions one to four, shall be exempt from playing in Round Three of the Competition.

report this

Kevin Sweeney

Dec 20, 2012 at 23:30

Seems to me the more a lie is stated as fact the more chance it will be accepted as the truth ! However Im positive Mr Green himself stated failure to agree a cva meant something ........

report this

Ally McCoist

Dec 20, 2012 at 23:50

It looks like David has been trying to analyse and question the rationale behind such an investment rather than taking a dig at Rangers (FC,PLC or whatever incarnation it has had over the past 140 years). Until asked he didn't mention, and why should he, which football team he supports. At least it has started a debate of some sorts. Investments in football teams rarely make sense and generally fans of all hues will let their hearts rule their heads.

report this

GHK

Dec 21, 2012 at 08:48

"If only there was some way of short selling the stock".....well as you know there is.

On this investment point I would ask why dont you put your money where you mouth is. Go and short the stock.

Just to prove your investment prowess you should probably go along to Ibrox on Boxing day and buy a ticket for the game jsut to confirm what a sham the prospectus is. Honestly there are loads of tickets available. I mean its boxing day and its a third divison game. Its like a scene from an old western. Place is empty. Streets and stadium deserted. Paint falling from the walls, cobwebs everywhere. Straw blowing across the park. Honestly its like a scene from an apocalyptic nightmare Empty. Nobody interested. You will make a fortune.

"Why are you so UTTERLY OBSESSED with Rangers?" (C) Daryl King 2012

report this

Bob Mac

Dec 21, 2012 at 09:51

Debra

"“There were a number of complex and challenging issues involved but, primarily, the Scottish FA had to be satisfied that the new owners of Rangers would operate in the best interests of the club, its fans and Scottish football in general."

Hmmm, Scottish football in general? Boycotting clubs, blaming the SFA/SPL for their woes, lambasting the SPL/SFA at every opportunity, threatening to bring down the SPL....it never stops. The best thing for Scottish football would be for both Old Fi....oops, there is no old firm now.... Glasgow clubs to die a quick death.

Only then can the west coast begin to rid itself of it's sectarian violence, bigotry and hatred.

report this

Whyte Italy

Dec 21, 2012 at 13:19

Hi. David Bryson is right in everything he has said. I happen to believe that Charles Green is working on behalf of Octopus who owned Ticketus the company that were left £26m/£27m out of pocket when Oldco Rangers went into Administration soon to be Liquidated. Lets face facts The Newco Rangers who are now playing in the 3rd tier of Scottish football were originally called Sevco Scotland now called the Rangers International football club Plc formed by Field Fisher Waterhouse, the lawyers of Octopus, coincidence?? Yous should check out thedemiseofrangersinpicture . blogspot . com

report this

james duff

Dec 21, 2012 at 13:44

This time last year who owned Ibrox,Murray park etc.. Club or company,,

If company when in clubs history did company buy these assets from club...

If club why did it have to buy them....

report this

v guard

Dec 22, 2012 at 12:57

Kevin Sweeney

Dec 20, 2012 at 23:30

Seems to me the more a lie is stated as fact the more chance it will be accepted as the truth ! However Im positive Mr Green himself stated failure to agree a cva meant something ........

surely peter did get you to put that up? should you not be busy dealing with they naughty boys and girls. cora?

report this

Kevin Sweeney

Dec 23, 2012 at 20:04

"surely peter did get you to put that up? should you not be busy dealing with they naughty boys and girls. cora?"

v guard What are you talking about ??? Or was the "wit out" when you typed it and have no idea what you meant to say ??

report this

GHK

Dec 24, 2012 at 10:15

Rangers 82p. David Bryson how is that short trade working out for ya?

report this

A C Wiltshire

Dec 31, 2012 at 15:31

They must know something I don't because I wouldn't touch these shares with a barge pole.

report this

GHK

Jan 02, 2013 at 09:15

You wouldnt touch them after the 32% post IPO rise on valuations grounds / downside risk following such a rise or you wouldnt touch them at all?

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Long time coming: is the recovery here to stay?


Ian McVeigh and Steve Davies, managers of Jupiter's UK Growth fund, talk about their predictions for the UK equity space. Click here to watch a series of sponsored interviews with Jupiter's fund managers on the UK equity market.

Today's top headlines

More about this:

Look up the fund managers

  • Giles Hargreave
    Register or Sign in to receive email alerts for items in your favourites whenever we write about them

What others are saying

Archive

On the road

Click here to find out more from the Audience Development team.



Read more...

Co-op files £2.5bn loss after 'disastrous' 2013

by David Campbell on Apr 17, 2014 at 09:20

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet