More greed and corruption exposed

[SteveC 150]

"One of the joys of being in London is that folks come to see me from the Square Mile bearing documents of great interest. I shall not name my City Source. But I have obtained documents showing why the £10 million claim by Law Financial against Rangers (RFC) is utterly bogus, that Worthington (WRN) knows it is bogus and how Worthington boss Doug Ware tried to line his own pockets in an obscene fashion at the expense of Worthington going behind the back of poor Aiden Earley and Craig Whyte.

 

The documents I now possess are from 7 June 2013. On that day Worthington CEO Doug Ware contacted the then Nomad to Rangers FC, Cenkos, offering to settle the outstanding Law Financial litigation which you will remember that Worthington values at £10 million. Ware stresses that Whyte and Earley know nothing of his approach and asks the Cenkos chappy (Jim Durking) not to reveal what is proposed.

 

Ware admits that Worthington is on the “point of an insolvent liquidation”. That rather contrasts with what Ware was telling investors via RNS statements. And on that basis he offers to sell Law Financial to Rangers for just £475,000 in cash to make the problem go away.

 

Actually that would not be £475,000 because Rangers would have been given – as part of this deal - £345,000 of convertible loan notes which came with a first charge on the one assets Worthington then owned that had any value – its old factory in Keighley Yorkshire which was worth c£500,000. And so the net cost to Rangers to get rid of this litigation would have been just £130,000 – for that it would have owned all of Law Financial.

 

There are however a few other conditions. Ware suggests that an independent tribunal look at the claim and if it is worth any more the difference be paid inRrangers shares at a later date.

 

Ware also asks for a few other minor matters. Notably that he be appointed as a Non-Executive Deputy Chairman of Rangers (RFC) on a salary of £120,000 per annum plus expenses plus a golden handshake payment in cash up to the non-taxable limit plus a share option deal on a par with the executive directors of Rangers. Oh and that Doug’s pal from Worthington Richard Spurway should also get a £150,000 one off payment in the most tax efficient way or be employed at £40,000 per year until retirement and that Spurway get 500,000 share options in Rangers as well.

 

My source confirms that Cenkos was not greatly taken with this proposal.

 

So what does this tell us?

 

1. Doug Ware is a greedy bastard who wished to line his own pockets at the expense of shareholders in Worthington. Those shareholders – including poor Aiden Earley and Craig Whyte – should sack him at once.

 

2. Worthington was insolvent but neglected to tell its shareholders this as it should have done under LSE Rules

 

3. Worthington was happy to sell its claim for just £130,000 in cash plus perhaps a few Rangers shares at a later date. Yet it has repeatedly insisted that its claim is worth £10 million. Of course it is not. The claims are groundless as we all know"

 

 

http://www.shareprophets.com/views/15443/explosive-exclusive-why-the-10-million-claim-by-worthington-on-rangers-is-bogus-and-how-doug-ware-tried-to-line-his-pockets-with-rangers-cash

Edited October 1, 2015 by SteveC

[forlanssister 3,114]

Long said the claim is one of mere nuisance value.

[calscot 0]

I think that needs a lot more explanation for your average, but reasonably smart bear to get the gist...

[forlanssister 3,114]

I think that needs a lot more explanation for your average, but reasonably smart bear to get the gist...

 

I credit the overwhelming majority of posters on here (yourself included) to read that and have the wit to fathom what it means, A Brief History Of Time it ain't.

 

I suspect you're trolling hoping to hook someone so you can indulge in your favourite sport of pontification.

[RANGERRAB 3,884]

I thought LFL were getting struck off at companies house?

[Frankie 8,687]

I think that needs a lot more explanation for your average, but reasonably smart bear to get the gist...

 

I'm no expert but the original post seems easy enough to follow.

 

Essentially if Winnifrith is correct then Law's legal case against Rangers is nothing more than vexatious.

 

In saying that, given Winnifrith's behaviour on Twitter of late, I tend to trust him about as much as the Scots/Irish pondlife he's been associating himself with.

[der Berliner 3,890]

I credit the overwhelming majority of posters on here (yourself included) to read that and have the wit to fathom what it means, A Brief History Of Time it ain't.

 

I suspect you're trolling hoping to hook someone so you can indulge in your favourite sport of pontification.

 

You are such a loveable chap at times. All your post is doing is inciting an unnecessary mud slinging contest.

 

BTW, I do suspect that calscot full well understood what the article says, but was asking about the bigger implications.

Edited October 2, 2015 by der Berliner