Guest vicksburg Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Well, you can't accelerate time and see how things set in motion now (or a months ago) will turn out eventually. One can obviously project oblivion into anything, based on Whyte, Ahmad, Green et al. We'll have to wait and see though whether Wallace and Co. belong to that ilk as well ... and while we are at it, feel free to try to change things. We have to live with the status quo unless someone can change it. People can look at it from various angles and that does not necessarily mean that they embrace that angle. Looking at it solely from one angle will eventually blind objective opinion though and lead to factionalism. And the latter is sadly enough rife amongst our support. Contrary to popular opinion (see my remark above), I'm no fan of the current board and how they go about their business, but I'll give them time to set their plan into motion. If only they would share their Financial Plan ????? who will invest in a buisiness that has been losing money for years - since David Murray - we have alraedy spent £1.5m of this years season ticket money ( not paid back yet) - and Credit Card companies have black listed us !!!! "we are in a better place" says Wallace , then why have CC companies refused season ticket sales ???? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 A new share issue was always inevitable - high renewals or not. IMHO, it's just a matter of who subscribes to it and whether or not they use their consolidated holding to improve their bargaining position for a sale. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted June 11, 2014 Author Share Posted June 11, 2014 A new share issue was always inevitable - high renewals or not. IMHO, it's just a matter of who subscribes to it and whether or not they use their consolidated holding to improve their bargaining position for a sale. Can you explain a bit further Frankie? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,720 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Rangers board set to launch new share issue in bid to raise £8m shortfall caused by season ticket boycott. JAMES and Sandy Easdale are in urgent need of a cash injection after failing to win over thousands of hostile fans, who have refused to renew their season tickets. RANGERS top brass were locked in a marathon eight-hour emergency summit in London yesterday to discuss how to escape from another looming financial crisis. And Record Sport understands the troubled regime could now launch a new share issue in the hope of raising up to £8m. We revealed yesterday how brothers James and Sandy Easdale had flown to the English capital on Monday ahead of an official board meeting at the offices of the club’s financial advisers Daniel Stewart yesterday. That board meeting began at 10.30am and broke up just before 7pm. The Ibrox club’s beleaguered directors are in urgent need of a cash injection after failing to win over thousands of hostile fans, who have refused to renew season tickets. The short-fall means Rangers must raise funds immediately to avoid being sucked back into a perilous financial position, just two years after the insolvency nightmare that ended in the liquidation of the oldco. And it’s believed their preferred option is to activate a placement of up to 40m new shares, selling them to hand picked investors from the club’s current shareholders. It’s understood Sandy Easdale spent Monday holed up in crunch talks with mysterious shareholders Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita Holdings, both of whom may now be gearing up to increase their holding in the club. Hedge fund group Laxey Partners may be invited to buy up the new shares in exchange for a greater percentage of the Rangers power base. But Record Sport understands the majority of the club’s blue chip institutional shareholders are unlikely to be tempted to pour more cash into a club that has suffered horrendous losses since raising £22m of investment at an IPO 18 months ago. The share price has also crashed over that time, wiping millions off the club’s value. If the Rangers board does press ahead with issuing fresh shares those investors could see their holdings diluted further. A source said: “A lot of serious decisions will have to be taken so it’s little wonder the meeting lasted such a long time. “The board may see the release of shares as the easiest way to raise substantial sums of money but it remains to be seen which shareholders, if any, will be willing to pump millions into a business that’s performed so badly over the last year and half.” Meanwhile, Rangers moved a step closer to signing St Mirren’s out of contract Darren McGregor after contract talks yesterday. But the Light Blues could be priced out of a move for Cardiff City’s Don Cowie with the Welsh club set to offer him a new deal. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-board-set-launch-new-3672935 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Can you explain a bit further Frankie? It's my belief that this share issue (and perhaps a further one which wouldn't surprise me down the line) will be used by a group like Laxey to consolidate/increase their holding to a percentage which they may then sell to an interested party in the medium term. A quicker and easier return for them than a sale and leaseback... Of course with European football possible over the next 2-3 years then they may prefer to stick it out until the share price recovers but I feel they'd rather go asap. However, even then, that may be 12-24 months down the line than a quick fix per se. Just an opinion.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,185 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 It'll be in the interests of the mysterious shareholders, friends and associates to keep the show rolling as they will be earning from 'onerous contracts' and the like. However if they want to do that they will have to reduce the costbase or you keep throwing money down a blackhole and the same solvency problem keeps returning. To reduce the costbase you need to spend money paying people off or settling contracts. Now if the sp.ivs are forced to look at settling 'onerous contracts' of their own, friends or associates then I wonder if a fair portion of the money that would come into the coffers and then go straight back to them ? If they reduce the costbase, they may call an EGM to try and enable them to carry out an equity fundraising share issue (different from the share issue to existing shareholders as per DR story/8M headline/ see below). Here they would probably dangle carrots. They can't have it all ways and this was always going to be the problem. ie. Rangers don't generate enough revenue to service 2 gravytrains and function as a club. The 'sp.iv process' will hope the fans will drift back and finance their ongoing, legal and slowburn robbery. Meanwhile the assets will be lined up and sooner or later, it'll be their turn to keep the show rolling. The corporate vultures continue the process of sucking what they can out of a distressed company. They don't have a happy ending. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Business Review (April 2014) Re. Share issues At the current time the Company is not in a position to carry out a significant equity fundraising as the required shareholder authority that was requested at the AGM to enable the Board to allot shares on a non pre-emptive basis was not granted. Although this authority is routine for AIM traded companies, it was understandable at the time that it was not granted given the position of the business and the lack of apparent strategic direction. It does however mean that the Company is currently prevented from issuing small amounts of equity to third parties and new shareholders. The authority given to the Board at the AGM in December 2013 to enable the Company to allot up to 43,400,000 new ordinary shares of 1p each in the capital of the Company on a pre-emptive basis to existing shareholders has not been exercised to date. In the event that season ticket sales over the forthcoming weeks are materially less than anticipated then the Company may seek to use this pre-emptive authority which can offer a cost effective and efficient method of raising capital. http://www.rangers.co.uk/images/staticcontent/documents/RangersBusinessReview.pdf I think the 8M headline (DR) refers to the 43.4M shares in 3rd paragraph. Approx.........43.4M @ 18.5p = 8M 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 It'll be in the interests of the mysterious shareholders, friends and associates to keep the show rolling as they will be earning from 'onerous contracts' and the like. However if they want to do that they will have to reduce the costbase or you keep throwing money down a blackhole and the same solvency problem keeps returning. To reduce the costbase you need to spend money paying people off or settling contracts. Now if the sp.ivs are forced to look at settling 'onerous contracts' of their own, friends or associates then I wonder if a fair portion of the money that would come into the coffers and then go straight back to them ? If they reduce the costbase, they may call an EGM to try and enable them to carry out an equity fundraising share issue. Here they would probably dangle carrots. They can't have it all ways and this was always going to be the problem. ie. Rangers don't generate enough revenue to service 2 gravytrains and function as a club. The 'sp.iv process' will hope the fans will drift back and finance their ongoing, legal and slowburn robbery. Meanwhile the assets will be lined up and sooner or later, it'll be their turn to keep the show rolling. The corporate vultures continue the process of sucking what they can out of a distressed company. They don't have a happy ending. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Business Review (April 2014) Re. Share issues I think the 8M headline (DR) refers to the 43.4M shares in 3rd paragraph. Approx.........43.4M @ 18.5p = 8M Jackson is suggesting on Twitter that the new issue will be placed which would go against the review contents - not a surprise but I doubt they'd need to go that far as I can't see it being that well subscribed. As for alleged gravy trains, if we buy that theory, then the first 2-3 years were always going to be comfortable in terms of bringing in enough money to finance success in the lower leagues alongside onerous contracts, bonuses and pay-offs. However, with a tough Championship and 'slow' renewals the main beneficial institutions will now have to consider buying a new ticket themselves or, hopefully for us, getting off at this juncture. I guess that will depend on just how stoic King (and others) are in terms of refusing to pay off these people. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted June 11, 2014 Author Share Posted June 11, 2014 Thanks lads, interesting for someone with scant knowledge of share issues etc. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Jackson is suggesting on Twitter that the new issue will be placed which would go against the review contents - not a surprise but I doubt they'd need to go that far as I can't see it being that well subscribed. As for alleged gravy trains, if we buy that theory, then the first 2-3 years were always going to be comfortable in terms of bringing in enough money to finance success in the lower leagues alongside onerous contracts, bonuses and pay-offs. However, with a tough Championship and 'slow' renewals the main beneficial institutions will now have to consider buying a new ticket themselves or, hopefully for us, getting off at this juncture. I guess that will depend on just how stoic King (and others) are in terms of refusing to pay off these people. They will be hoping to inject just enough to get through this year with a promotion at the end of it. Season tickets will fly out the door for a return to the top league, so if they are not forced out before then, they will have the club in the grip of their iron fist. If promotion is not gained....a scorched earth policy? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,185 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Jackson is suggesting on Twitter that the new issue will be placed which would go against the review contents - not a surprise but I doubt they'd need to go that far as I can't see it being that well subscribed. As for alleged gravy trains, if we buy that theory, then the first 2-3 years were always going to be comfortable in terms of bringing in enough money to finance success in the lower leagues alongside onerous contracts, bonuses and pay-offs. However, with a tough Championship and 'slow' renewals the main beneficial institutions will now have to consider buying a new ticket themselves or, hopefully for us, getting off at this juncture. I guess that will depend on just how stoic King (and others) are in terms of refusing to pay off these people. Frankie, I'm no financial expert but it looks to me as the 8M headline refers to the 43.4M shares, as per solution to ST shortfall in the business review. Perhaps Forlan or Bluedell could tell us. The sp.iv process of taking advantage of a distressed company was always going to have different stages, people involved and MO's. As for theories going forward, look for the way that makes the sp.ivs the most money and could be termed as doable, all things considered. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.