Indebted Control at Ibrox

The elevation of Barry Scott to a position of significant control – on the holding company board of which the member club is a 100% subsidiary – seems to have passed unnoticed at the SFA. When Mike Ashley bought 8.92% of RIFC’s issued capital, he knew he was capped at 10% due to his majority holding in Newcastle United. Barry Scott, with his partner in crime David Ross – who is as bent as one would expect from a Real Rangers Man – invested in Workington Reds. Scott’s transition on the 15th November has not raised an eyebrow at the SFA rest home for the unemployable and infirm. Maybe they have been sleeping off a hangover having donned sombreros and raided Regan’s drinks cabinet when the SFA supremo was engaged in some Greyfriars Bobby business in his executive water closet.

Is it not high time Regan dropped by Dickson’s desk and asked him how he should handle it? Given that Regan has so much time on his hands in his £300,000 per annum sinecure he might go the extra mile and take an unprecedented second meeting of the day with his old chum in compliance, Tony McGlennan, who replaced Vincent ‘No Lunettes‘ Lunny on Friday 8th August in 2014.

McGlennan  joined the SFA from the criminal law firm, Penmans, with whom he had been a Partner since 1998, having joined the company in 1996. He was a solicitor advocate who had conducted criminal litigation at all levels of the court structure, including the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court.

Given McGlennan’s background it won’t have escaped his notice that The Blue Bounders at Ibrox had a penchant for paying players off the books and picking the pockets of the Exchequer. Brown Brogues are preferred to cat slippers by the Ibrox Cat Burglars.

When it comes to resetting hacked information and leaking proprietary information in pursuit of a lie and a manipulated share price, Shifty King and Hump a Barber’s Floor Murray have few equals.

Is McGlennan fully up to speed with the concomitant criminal activity of the rogue board? HMRC accused the board of Rangers (in liquidation) of fraud. A board that was prepared to lie to hide the side letters. When HMRC presented Sir Bribe & Lie’s team with prima facie evidence of two side letters, the Real Rangers Men were sitting on another twenty-nine. How quintessentially mendacious of them.

McGlennan cannot throw the SFA under a bus, so he must be labouring over finding a way to exonerate the SFA’s eleven of dishonesty. He must be consistent with the findings of the LNS Whitewash.

A compromise would be to throw McGill under a bus, but he might sue. Another whitewash will indubitably be the order of the day. We expect no less.

Should Regan mention the Scott elevation to Tony! Toni! Toné (It never rains in southern Mount Florida) will the latter offer some soothing counsel? Not that we expect McGlennan to be the brightest and the best. Criminal Law rarely pays well, hence McGlennan jumping at the chance to quaff Tequila with the corrupt cabal.

I’m indebted (but not as much as the rogue board) to Benjamin who wrote:


Mr John James,

I took the liberty of reviewing the relevant documents relating to ‘Persons With Significant Control’ at the Companies House.

Mr. Scott’s position is clear cut based on publicly available evidence detailed below.

Mr. Johnston’s position is less clear.

I believe both of these gentlemen are excercising ‘significant influence or control’ by virtue of their position on the RIFC board and their status as creditors of the company. They can unilaterally extend the term of their loans, or alternatively refuse to extend the term and force a default event. Mr Scott, as an existing creditor of the company as specified in the annual report, became a person with significant influence or control the minute he took a board seat on Nov 15th which was disclosed on Dec 11. His buying Gilligan’s shares was a coincidence and not really relevant.

Mr Johnston, as an existing board member, fell under the same category because of something that hasn’t been publicly revealed yet, but I believe it to be a shareholder loan to cover Pedro’s buyout. His shareholding alone isn’t enough to trigger the 25% threshold, so there has to be some other event that occurred on Nov 15th whereby he gained significant influence irrespective of the shares he bought from Gilligan.

Something happened on/about Nov 15th with respect to Johnston and the rest of the board. Was he told to basically put up or shut up with regards to shareholder loans? Looking back, Gilligan resigned (or was forced out?) from the Board on May 22, just days before the £3M payment to Sports Direct. Was he given an ultimatum to pony up some cash and did he step aside or was he forced out when he refused? And after seeing this back in May, did Johnston succumb to a similar demand in November to retain his board seat? There’s no proof one way or the other, but the circumstantial evidence is persuasive.

If I am right about Johnston becoming a creditor, that means that all Directors except Graeme Park are now creditors of RIFC and can individually force a default event if they so choose. And I think we need to look past Graeme Park’s status as he is likely nothing more than a proxy for his father who is a creditor.”

This is a point well made. My deepest of deep throats will have a look at this and attempt to add some meat to Benjamin’s bone. With debt and invoice financing preventing insolvency by a thread, where is our glib and shameless chum with his £7.2m cavalry? Surely he was not lying again? With the SFA turning a blind eye the best one can hope for is that the oh so pompous Johnston suggests a spell on the marble naughty step for the arch criminal.



Published by



19 thoughts on “Indebted Control at Ibrox”

  1. In response to viking’s comment on the previous blog putting an asterisk against the cheated trophies won’t cut it for me.
    Rangers have been caught cheating and when you cheat in sports you get disqalified.
    Can anyone think of an example of an individual or a team caught cheating and the relevant sporting body accept they cheated yet still allowed them to keep their trophies?

    1. Interim measure, as the issue progresses.

      Asterisks should have immediately gone on those years concomitantly with the Supreme Court decision.

  2. Not relevant to this thread but any news on the results of the two court case a couple of weeks ago? The debt to Orlit and the BDO one. Thanks

    1. Picked this out of the accounts which I didn’t notice previously. On page 9, strategic report. “Rangers football club, formed in Scotland in 1872, is one of the words most successful clubs …..”
      Can they claim this in the accounts basically ignoring the fact that Rangers football club only exist in a file on BDOs desk currently waiting on completion of liquidation?

    2. Hand in Glove,

      Good spot! It does appear that they have completed, or are in the process of completing the share allocation authorized under proposal 11 at the recent AGM. I’m curious to see how much new cash they have brought in as opposed to simply converting existing debt into equity, and at what price. We know cash is tight right now and they need to bring in a significant sum of hard dollars; and we also know that the whole point of proposal 11 (as opposed to proposal 10) was to cherry pick who would get shares – this is an important concept and necessary for loans to be converted into equity without a broader share issue, but it will also allow the current board complete control over whose voting rights are diluted vs whose rights are enhanced by this process.

      Also, as a follow-up, perhaps Mr Johnston’s ‘loan’ that I speculated about in the main article today was only ever a loan for a period of a few days until this whole process was complete and his loan was repaid with the proceeds? More speculation on my part, but it’s interesting that until Nov 15th he hadn’t lent the club anything, yet he does so just days before a share issue whose purpose is to bring in fresh cash into the club. I think it may be fair to conclude that he simply fronted some of the anticipated proceeds and never really intended his loan to be a long term personal investment. That will be an obvious conclusion if he is removed as a person with significant influence or control in the coming weeks.

      Lastly, it appears that RIFC have found their NOMAD in the name of JP Jenkins. At the very least JP Jenkins has signed up to be a market maker for RIFC shares. I’m not at all familiar with NOMAD’s or their role in U.K. securities markets, but I’m assuming it is similar to the role of a market maker. Regardless, their shares are officially listed again with no fanfare whatsoever.

      1. As a follow up, maybe I have it wrong with respect to JP Jenkins being their NOMAD. The ‘About Us’ section on their website says that they’re ‘a trading platform for unlisted companies.’

        They’re basically an electronic over-the-counter (OTC) market for shares that have not yet been listed on a regulated exchange or for shares that have been delisted from a regulated exchange.

        I have not done a lot of research on the listing status of their shares, primarily because I simply don’t care one way or their other, but my guess is that this relationship with JP Jenkins is not new and goes back to when RIFC were delisted. But the upshot for those interested is that anyone can register with JP Jenkins and see the price and size of the most recent transactions.

      2. You’re on the money with the second comment Benjamin. Jenkins aren’t a recognised exchange but just allow access to fund raising for unlisted companies… or companies that are incapable of being listed. Its not a fly-by-night operation though, they are on the level and a lot of private investment (smaller stakes in private equity, etc) go through it.

      3. Sorry for the double commenting but thought it was worth adding that this isn’t a new thing. Rangers shares have been available on this platform for a while. Anyone that wants to match the price that sellers are willing to part with them on JP Jenkins can buy through it. The lack of liquidity means its not a true barometer of value though.

  3. Kenny Misser out with serious ruptured hamstring for expected long period.

    Old legs cold weather. Told you so.

    That should assist the concomitant club that followed Rangers’ death. He was holding them back.

  4. As is normal with all things Sevco newco, we have to sniff out their stealth corporate releases. It is normally then 24 hours before we think about it, tumble dry the what ifs, and conclude the real goings on at Mount Crumble.

    Player sales in January mandatory for survival whilst the shameless SMSM hogs commingle Celtic targets in January with Sevco dream on fiction.

  5. Hi JJ

    Sorry to raise this here but I know of no other way to contact you. I made a donation of £20 in November and have since set up a recurring donation of £15 per month as your content is second to none. Then as instructed I paid a penny by card on Sunday 17th leaving my email address and a comment on paypal.I still haven’t received the premium content and it is definitely not in my spam folder. Have I done everything rightand if so how do I go about getting the copy. Cheers.

  6. Peace of mind ? Perhaps , perhaps not. Pieces of your mind? Perhaps. Only ever read yours. Bit sad it’s all changed and gone £ driven. Totally understand though. Methinks plan is to make / made you laugh and charge you for it. No cash just the stuff will do. Love your pitch. Narrow subject wide audience. Q clever. Pandering to schadenfreude must irk at times? Bit like carrion feeding on elephant roadkill. Not criticism. Q the other. I’ve enjoyed your free stuff thoroughly. Thanks for sharing and allowing me to share also. I wish you all the very best for the future. Boomshanka!

  7. JJ – I was going to drop you a note under separate cover on the the premium articles and my own experience…it was far too “clunky” and subjective.
    What do I mean by subjective ? Well it’s basically how you decide what articles are chargeable vs main thoroughfare?
    I’m of the opinion that it’s not really tangible.
    What if there is a barren spell of donations which (in the true sods law stylie) coincides with some slim pickings on content?
    Point being you need to free yourself from potential conflict
    I like your style generally think that the overwhelming majority are good but I feel that you’ve maybe lost focus slightly with the additional dimension.
    Just being honest bud…I’ll continue to support but as I’ve stated (ad naseum) set a paywall but make it low (£5 ish) the sort of some that most can easily venture AND equally important make it monthly recurring to avoid the hassle. This will then let you simply get on with the blog writing with whatever material comes your way organically rather than having a subliminal focus on selling.
    As they say…chase two hares, catch neither !
    Stay safe amigo !
    PS – still keen to read that other article from today

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s