The 6.7m Smoking Gun

[gogzy 31,195]

You sure the £8m non-IPO share money didn't pay for it?

What does this mean, seen you post it a couple of times mate.

does it mean that some investors have put in an extra 8m to keep the club running, on top of the share issue?

And why did we not know about it until now? has it been the "ace up the sleeve" of the board?

[AMcK 92]

You sure the £8m non-IPO share money didn't pay for it?

Don't think the issue should be where the money came from, instead it should simply be the fact that the company paid for its own acquisition at a time when it is haemorrhaging cash.

[woodvale1690 43]

Mini must be raging he missed that opportunity

A smoking fart

[DelightfulDennis 123]

Even more horrifying than the bonuses these shysters have been taking.

[woodvale1690 43]

Even more horrifying than the bonuses these shysters have been taking.

thought you were at erskin bridge the day, any comment on the accounts?

[DelightfulDennis 123]

thought you were at erskin bridge the day, any comment on the accounts?

As I have stated on another thread, I have only just found out they've been released and have yet to read them.

Struggling to make sense of it all having quickly read through the forum. Seems to be conflicting reports.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Oh, we have a smoking gun now, do we?

That's not at all what page 36 says. And the author hasn't noticed that in addition to the IPO money we had £8m more in share capital. He needs to try harder.

Might I make a different suggestion Boss - that admin stop or delete threads which contain, inaccurate, erroneous or misleading facts or innuendo pertaining to financial matters - otherwise you Boss will have a busy time on your hands interpreting all this financial jargon for plebs like myself who dont have a scooby about it !

[Allanger 625]

There is no smoking gun, only sly innuendo from the discredited murray camp

[bawsburst 1,381]

For anyone who doubted the assertion that Charles Green was working in the best interests of the club.

Page 36 of the Accounts, relating to the acquisition of the club and RFC2012 assets from D+P states the following

Valuation of assets at the time of purchase £27.215m

Valuation of assets now: £20.465m

The £6.75m difference has been released as cash to cover Green's acqusition costs

£5.5m cash to D+P

£1.25m cash in "preacquisition costs".

Reading the CVA/purchase proposal dated 29th May, the only "preacquisition costs" referred to is the £200k exclusivity payment to D+P. That still leaves £1m + change unexplained. Legal fees and due diligence surely could not amount to that high a figure.

Put simply, the £6.7m cash used by Green to purchase the club is straight from the proceeds of the IPO.

The IPO prospectus (page 31) stated the funds raised would be used as follows

6. Use of proceeds and effects of the proceeds

#The Company plans to use the money raised from the Placing to improve the infrastructure of the Club.

In particular, the Directors have identified:

•upgrades to Ibrox Stadium (approximately £5.5 million);

•acquisition and development of land assets adjacent to the stadium (approximately £4.5 million);

•other identified projects which could result in additional revenue generating activities (approximately £3.0 million); and

•general working capital purposes.

In addition, should the Company receive funds from the Offer, the Directors have identified other potential investments that would go beyond the scope of the Group's strategy in the next 12 months, but which could further enhance revenue opportunities.

In particular, the Directors have identified:

• further upgrades to Ibrox Stadium (approximately £3.5 million); and

• other identified projects which could result in additional review generating activities (approximately £2.0 million).

Additionally, cash could also be used to provide the Directors with additional flexibility to opportunistically consider appropriate investment opportunities as and when they arise.

No mention anywhere in that prospectus of using a single penny of IPO cash to fund the purchase of the club.

I think we all knew that the club would be purchased by Green and the money used to do so repaid as a loan. But I don't think any of us could reasonably have expected this loan to be paid back in one lump sum and certainly not with IPO cash.

If Admin II, God forbid, becomes a reality there must be serious questions asked of why the board (still almost entirely Green's cronies) have allowed £6.7m of our cash has taken out of the business so quickly.

There is not much that can be done just now. But in the mean time I would call on all the supporters groups to recognise these anomalies and demand that the board itemise and evidence the "preacquisition costs" by the time the AGM is held, so that we can end any speculation of corruption (ie backhanders to D&P).

http://www.gersforum...-7m-Smoking-Gun

Pyyoooor rid beelin', you might have added that gersnet lifted it from ££ and said so.

[boss 1,941]

What does this mean, seen you post it a couple of times mate.

does it mean that some investors have put in an extra 8m to keep the club running, on top of the share issue?

And why did we not know about it until now? has it been the "ace up the sleeve" of the board?

Exactly that. £7.7m of share capital was paid in by 31 August 2012, months before the IPO. That's what funded the club in the early days, not the IPO money.

And those of us that know where to look knew about it.

(Actually, it was freely available and not hidden.)

So you can either say that this money paid for buying the club or paid for the initial trading losses. Either way, certain investors did not get the free ride that McCollco would have you believe (although Charlie did all right for himself).

[boss 1,941]

Don't think the issue should be where the money came from, instead it should simply be the fact that the company paid for its own acquisition at a time when it is haemorrhaging cash.

Did it though? Paul Murray CA and others seem to have missed the relevance of merger accounting.

[boss 1,941]

Even more horrifying than the bonuses these shysters have been taking.

If only it was true you could be delighted rather than delightful.

[gogzy 31,195]

Thanks Boss.

[boss 1,941]

Might I make a different suggestion Boss - that admin stop or delete threads which contain, inaccurate, erroneous or misleading facts or innuendo pertaining to financial matters - otherwise you Boss will have a busy time on your hands interpreting all this financial jargon for plebs like myself who dont have a scooby about it !

I've got work to do

[sergio 1,199]

I wish people would stop using words like, mortified, horrified, sickening etc. You would think our board kept quiet whilst staff molested children in the changing room ffs.