Club 1872 Statement

[GersInCanada 7,775]

King always made it clear that once he had restored the club to normality he would sell his shares and recoup some of his investment. This move is not a shock.

He is doing the right thing by offering them to fans first. 13 million is a frightening number but it breaks down to a tad over 4 million a year which does not sound so bad.

It is our hands to achieve the magical 25% which means we can then veto any board proposal that we don't like. 2012 could never happen again.

If enough Bears feel like me then we will get this done.

[blaudrup 5,551]

  

20 minutes ago, WATP-FOREVER said:

Good point - and on another point, all the work, time and effort that our wealthy investors have put into the club over the years has been for free, as they have alternative income - a fan led board would not provide services for free - and this would be another source of frustration when claims or expenses is claimed........ (eg snp).

Just canny see it working............. And not many people have a good word to say for C1872.

DK should put his shares on the open markets for RFC supporters or investors at the correct market value (0.50p he said) to purchase.

And if he is only wanting to receive his actual costs of 0.20p then he can pay a dividend to RFC of 0.30p/share.

Win win for everyone................

I feel like the open market is more of the way too.

Could for example something like C1872 facilitate the public buying shares as a separate initiative, and help organise it being some kind of group effort.  I mean from DK's perspective, he gets the same money.

I think it's good that a block like this exists, but when it gets big I think it gets vulnerable to its own governance issues.  You don't have to look far in other organisations - SPFL, the actual government to see the potential for a shitshow.  C1872 'says' it's the fans (and obviously not questioning the good intentions of the folk running it now), but that won't always make it true in the future.  It's who can get elected to the board (presumably).  And those people might quite fancy the high life, ooh a free holiday don't mind if I do, yeah I'll vote with you at the board meeting Mr 6% shareholder, pass me another cocktail - they will have more influence than the people that actually put money in, etc.  It's too easily corruptible.  Some people are just status grabbing shits.  So how is that safeguarding anything?  It's only as honest as the person who can get themselves elected, and it'll attract narcissistic bullshit artists like a magnet.

I really feel like if you want to raise funds for something, give people equity back - because you'll raise the money far faster, and with deeper pockets.  How are they not fans doing that, or not have the best interests of the club in how they vote with their own equity?  It's literally the same fans.  Just organising it better would create a similar outcome I think.

[Smile 26,622]

7 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

Like King has done the past few years service out of the kindness of his heart? Only right he gets some of the money back he put into getting the club where it is right now. Would've rather went to another potential investor than the fan group but it is what it is.

Depends what the investor brings to the table? This will be a tough ask for Club1872 which seems to be in disarray now.

King after the deal with Ashley when he misled the support does not deserve to walk away with a big bag of cash. 

It does make you think if a fans group can raise 13 million why not just gift it too the club directly(this may not be possible due to rules) and let the club find other investors.

 

[Smile 26,622]

47 minutes ago, WATP-FOREVER said:

Good point - and on another point, all the work, time and effort that our wealthy investors have put into the club over the years has been for free, as they have alternative income - a fan led board would not provide services for free - and this would be another source of frustration when claims or expenses is claimed........ (eg snp).

Just canny see it working............. And not many people have a good word to say for C1872.

DK should put his shares on the open markets for RFC supporters or investors at the correct market value (0.50p he said) to purchase.

And if he is only wanting to receive his actual costs of 0.20p then he can pay a dividend to RFC of 0.30p/share.

Win win for everyone................

Much better idea.

[JCDBigBear 10,864]

1 hour ago, .Williamson. said:

I have to say I would be pretty concerned if our majority shareholder was a group that asked for handouts over the period of 3 years just to buy the majority shares.

Where does the money come from after that point? Do we all just keep wiring money into the group while also paying for ST’s etc?

If Club 1872 manage to get the funding to buy the shares, they will not be the majority shareholder they will be the largest single shareholder at just over 25%.  that percentage can be sufficient  a percentage to allow C1872 to prevent certain moves by the board in future should it prove necessary.  Frankly, I can't see C1872 managing to get anything remotely close to £13 million.  

[Smile 26,622]

3 minutes ago, JCDBigBear said:

If Club 1872 manage to get the funding to buy the shares, they will not be the majority shareholder they will be the largest single shareholder at just over 25%.  that percentage can be sufficient  a percentage to allow C1872 to prevent certain moves by the board in future should it prove necessary.  Frankly, I can't see C1872 managing to get anything remotely close to £13 million.  

It would be a tough ask even for a organisation that was well ran and the supporters trusted it.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

7 minutes ago, blaudrup said:

  

I feel like the open market is more of the way too.

Could for example something like C1872 facilitate the public buying shares as a separate initiative, and help organise it being some kind of group effort.  I mean from DK's perspective, he gets the same money.

I think it's good that a block like this exists, but when it gets big I think it gets vulnerable to its own governance issues.  You don't have to look far in other organisations - SPFL, the actual government to see the potential for a shitshow.  C1872 'says' it's the fans (and obviously not questioning the good intentions of the folk running it now), but that won't always make it true in the future.  It's who can get elected to the board (presumably).  And those people might quite fancy the high life, ooh a free holiday don't mind if I do, yeah I'll vote with you at the board meeting Mr 6% shareholder, pass me another cocktail - they will have more influence than the people that actually put money in, etc.  It's too easily corruptible.  Some people are just status grabbing shits.  So how is that safeguarding anything?  It's only as honest as the person who can get themselves elected, and it'll attract narcissistic bullshit artists like a magnet.

I really feel like if you want to raise funds for something, give people equity back - because you'll raise the money far faster, and with deeper pockets.  How are they not fans doing that, or not have the best interests of the club in how they vote with their own equity?  It's literally the same fans.  Just organising it better would create a similar outcome I think.

That is an excellent suggestion. If somebody puts a grand in the pot 1872 will give them a block of shares. Will make raising the cash much easier.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,978]

1 hour ago, eskbankloyal said:

They extended their RCF to mitigate against any unforeseen Covid impacts, it remains unused & I’d be surprised if they need to use it. If I was in their shoes I’d have done the same thing. The advice given to all businesses in March was to extend/draw down any debt facilities they could.

They opted not to sell somebody this year going ‘all in’ on the league but will recover this summer when numerous players leave. They’ve got a big squad restructure on their hands. 

If we reach a point where we need shareholders to cover shortfalls in the future, then we’ve got much bigger problems on our hands than Club 1872 owning 25% of the club. 

If their model was good they shouldn't need debt facilities, they were losing 430 grand a week without player sales last season, how thats a good model to follow i dunno 

[Flatcap 491]

A statement of intent from C1872 is required. As it stands, we know nothing other than the DK position. How would C1872 as the major shareholder oversee their influence?

[eskbankloyal 19,446]

18 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

If their model was good they shouldn't need debt facilities, they were losing 430 grand a week without player sales last season, how thats a good model to follow i dunno 

Well what’s your alternative? You just ignored my point about how to fill the gap.

[Monkey Butler 23,053]

40 minutes ago, blaudrup said:

  

I feel like the open market is more of the way too.

Could for example something like C1872 facilitate the public buying shares as a separate initiative, and help organise it being some kind of group effort.  I mean from DK's perspective, he gets the same money.

I think it's good that a block like this exists, but when it gets big I think it gets vulnerable to its own governance issues.  You don't have to look far in other organisations - SPFL, the actual government to see the potential for a shitshow.  C1872 'says' it's the fans (and obviously not questioning the good intentions of the folk running it now), but that won't always make it true in the future.  It's who can get elected to the board (presumably).  And those people might quite fancy the high life, ooh a free holiday don't mind if I do, yeah I'll vote with you at the board meeting Mr 6% shareholder, pass me another cocktail - they will have more influence than the people that actually put money in, etc.  It's too easily corruptible.  Some people are just status grabbing shits.  So how is that safeguarding anything?  It's only as honest as the person who can get themselves elected, and it'll attract narcissistic bullshit artists like a magnet.

I really feel like if you want to raise funds for something, give people equity back - because you'll raise the money far faster, and with deeper pockets.  How are they not fans doing that, or not have the best interests of the club in how they vote with their own equity?  It's literally the same fans.  Just organising it better would create a similar outcome I think.

I'd happily invest and then proxy the control/voting rights etc to C1872, but at the end of the day I want them to be my shares. Not just for financial reasons, but also so that if I don't believe that C1872 are doing a good job then I can take my shares back out.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,978]

11 minutes ago, eskbankloyal said:

Well what’s your alternative? You just ignored my point about how to fill the gap.

The alternative is surely somewhere in between, relying on player sales an euro income but having no backup plan is very shortsighted, infact its what murray did and look how that turned out

You say the tarriers have a good model, next years accounts they could be looking at anything upwards of a 30mill loss, barring massive players sales thats a shocker

Now what players do they have that they can afford to lose that would cover that shortfall, they arent a CL team so big teams won't pay big bucks for them 

And that's what worries me about us following this model, if morelos hadnt romped it in europe pre xmas last season we wouldn't have got close to a 16mill bid for him

All it takes is a shite year europe wise and not only is your euro income out the window, but player valuations have dropped as well

So with regards to kings shares, id rather they went to a single person or at least a group that have significant financial clout so that if we do suffer a disaster season, they can help out the club to save us having to maybe have a firesale

[eskbankloyal 19,446]

4 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

The alternative is surely somewhere in between, relying on player sales an euro income but having no backup plan is very shortsighted, infact its what murray did and look how that turned out

You say the tarriers have a good model, next years accounts they could be looking at anything upwards of a 30mill loss, barring massive players sales thats a shocker

Now what players do they have that they can afford to lose that would cover that shortfall, they arent a CL team so big teams won't pay big bucks for them 

And that's what worries me about us following this model, if morelos hadnt romped it in europe pre xmas last season we wouldn't have got close to a 16mill bid for him

All it takes is a shite year europe wise and not only is your euro income out the window, but player valuations have dropped as well

So with regards to kings shares, id rather they went to a single person or at least a group that have significant financial clout so that if we do suffer a disaster season, they can help out the club to save us having to maybe have a firesale

Yip, assuming they don’t sell anyone in January they will post a huge loss this year - £30m probably about right but is heavily impacted by Covid (£10-15m). 

Come the summer the following all need to be sold - Edouard, Ajer, Christie, Ntcham as their contracts expire in 2022 and no sign of signing another. That will devalue them, IMO but they’ll likely bring in somewhere between £60-70m gross (Edouard has a 40% sell on clause) which will make up for this seasons loss. 

you always want to minimise your operating loss, of course & I’m sure the club have revenue growth strategies in place, but as I say, in reality we would probably have to half our wage bill or double everyones ST to do it... neither are feasible. 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,978]

3 minutes ago, eskbankloyal said:

Yip, assuming they don’t sell anyone in January they will post a huge loss this year - £30m probably about right but is heavily impacted by Covid (£10-15m). 

Come the summer the following all need to be sold - Edouard, Ajer, Christie, Ntcham as their contracts expire in 2022 and no sign of signing another. That will devalue them, IMO but they’ll likely bring in somewhere between £60-70m gross (Edouard has a 40% sell on clause) which will make up for this seasons loss. 

you always want to minimise your operating loss, of course & I’m sure the club have revenue growth strategies in place, but as I say, in reality we would probably have to half our wage bill or double everyones ST to do it... neither are feasible. 

Unless they make a miraculous comeback in the league, you honestly think they'll make 60-70mill on they 4 guys that can talk to other clubs half a year later, i say 45mill before eduard sell on clause is paid

And therein lies the problem, that 40mill isn't spare money lying around, its debt payment, and it severely weakens them to the point that they'll be lucky to make europa league, which devalues the rest of them even more (a fucking delightful scenario tbh) 

But the fear is that could happen to us, and without a financial backer or 5 to at least cover a bad season so that you can try get player values back up, it could very well be an endless drop downwards

Even without covid hitting them, they'd likely have posted a loss of around 20 odd mill this season, id hate for us to do the same but have an absent majority owner or one who is made up of fans i.e both not putting money in to help

[blaudrup 5,551]

16 minutes ago, Monkey Butler said:

I'd happily invest and then proxy the control/voting rights etc to C1872, but at the end of the day I want them to be my shares. Not just for financial reasons, but also so that if I don't believe that C1872 are doing a good job then I can take my shares back out.

That's a great way of putting it.

Or how about this - why not give people a choice?  If they prefer to put int C1872's existing vehicle, cool, if not let us invest and have equity?  Have both options?  (I say this because the shares aren't on the market to buy, this is a closed arrangement between them).

I mean, Dave King could stand for election to the board of C1872 and effectively help control back his own old shareholding for free with this arrangement.

(I think TBH it would end up like university rector elections where whoever has notoriety ends up elected, presumably ex-footballers, but could be whatever Rangers fan was on Casualty for a bit, or put influence in the hands of podcasters, broadcasters, etc..)  Sometimes you have to make difficult decisions and having to be a populist that needs re-election might introduce new problems. 

I think C1872 will have to over-egg the pudding in selling this to people, because they can't assure that the 25% level will remain, so a lot of the pitch isn't quite the full story.  The same money in fans hands could do the same thing.

The existing method of shareholding has a very long Companies Act, with its pros and cons, but I'm not sure this 'donation' into another entity brings more fan certainty than actual fans owning equity and voting.

 

 

 

 

[blaudrup 5,551]

2 minutes ago, blaudrup said:

EDIT: I should add, we all know, if you could buy equity they'd sell far faster.

 

[The Beast 9,264]

Is Chris Graham still involved with C1872 in any way?

[eskbankloyal 19,446]

16 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Unless they make a miraculous comeback in the league, you honestly think they'll make 60-70mill on they 4 guys that can talk to other clubs half a year later, i say 45mill before eduard sell on clause is paid

And therein lies the problem, that 40mill isn't spare money lying around, its debt payment, and it severely weakens them to the point that they'll be lucky to make europa league, which devalues the rest of them even more (a fucking delightful scenario tbh) 

But the fear is that could happen to us, and without a financial backer or 5 to at least cover a bad season so that you can try get player values back up, it could very well be an endless drop downwards

Even without covid hitting them, they'd likely have posted a loss of around 20 odd mill this season, id hate for us to do the same but have an absent majority owner or one who is made up of fans i.e both not putting money in to help

I think they will, yes but of course hopefully not. 

Being reliant on external investment also isn’t a sustainable strategy to be fair.

Another point not spoken about, if C1872 manage to achieve 20k+ members (ambitious) who will all be paying a minimum of £10p/m that’s £2.5m each year. That capital would need to find a home...

[STEPPS BOY 75,059]

3 hours ago, folkestoneger said:

If if doesn’t happen we will get the board we deserve.

Fans of clubs far far smaller than ours have raised millions for their clubs 

The board just now are all Rangers fans too.

[Monkey Butler 23,053]

1 hour ago, blaudrup said:

That's a great way of putting it.

Or how about this - why not give people a choice?  If they prefer to put int C1872's existing vehicle, cool, if not let us invest and have equity?  Have both options?  (I say this because the shares aren't on the market to buy, this is a closed arrangement between them).

I mean, Dave King could stand for election to the board of C1872 and effectively help control back his own old shareholding for free with this arrangement.

(I think TBH it would end up like university rector elections where whoever has notoriety ends up elected, presumably ex-footballers, but could be whatever Rangers fan was on Casualty for a bit, or put influence in the hands of podcasters, broadcasters, etc..)  Sometimes you have to make difficult decisions and having to be a populist that needs re-election might introduce new problems. 

I think C1872 will have to over-egg the pudding in selling this to people, because they can't assure that the 25% level will remain, so a lot of the pitch isn't quite the full story.  The same money in fans hands could do the same thing.

The existing method of shareholding has a very long Companies Act, with its pros and cons, but I'm not sure this 'donation' into another entity brings more fan certainty than actual fans owning equity and voting.

I understand that C1872 won't want the uncertainty of people cashing in their shares unexpectedly and reducing their percentage, but I'd even be happy to sign up to a deal whereby C1872 get first refusal on my shares. 

[blaudrup 5,551]

7 minutes ago, Monkey Butler said:

I understand that C1872 won't want the uncertainty of people cashing in their shares unexpectedly and reducing their percentage, but I'd even be happy to sign up to a deal whereby C1872 get first refusal on my shares. 

Absolutely solid suggestion.

[Hadron Collider 31,342]

Business acumen will be seriously important here. 

[Land Rover 789]

How much are shares right now ? .

Also , could 1872 not veto further share releases with their new percentage ? 

If they went above 29 percent they would need to offer to buy everyone , so would this be paying into 1872 finished ?.

Great idea but fan groups seem to do nothing but bicker and fight , IMO of course .

[GWR1979 1,987]

15 hours ago, docspiderman said:

I think it is terrible news and a danger to the future of the club. We will need a lot of investment in the short term which current shareholders have promised to provide. However, we will certainly need investment in the future which may need outside investors and no wealthy businessmen would consider putting money into a club with a large fans shareholding never mind one with a majority shareholding by supporters. Monthly subscriptions will be a drop in the ocean compared to what will be needed to drive the club forward.

We have representation on the board, which compared to being at the whim of one owner is a better model, We are still going to need external investment going forward. I don't see that as a massive problem. Just need to wait and see how it pans out. 

[LookingForEric 133]

Great discussion and Hadron Collider is right about business acumen - in all areas. I think more clarification is required before fans can make a balanced decision. Apart from the Dave King announcement have Club 1872 come out on their own to address the issue and make it clear what their plans and methodology is for securing the funds or are they relying on folk going to their website. Equally, it would be good to hear from the Rangers Directors regarding this suggestion, do they support it as King says and are they willing to give C1872 a place on the Board.

C1872 is I believe a supporters trust who have 7000 members each having an equal vote in the business of C1872. Those members elect their Representative Board who then conduct business on behalf of those members, in accordance with their own rules. Presently they don't have a seat on the Football Club Board but could if they secure the King shares and agreement of the main Board and shareholders. 

I'm not 100% certain but think the King offer is a three year project. In year 1, shares can be bought for 20p, Year 2 23p and Year 3 26p. Hence why, C1872 are keen to get as much Legacy Donations done in Year 1 with the discount available. 

To have a large shareholding improves the supporters chance of a place on the main Board and a voice in the future running of the club. Worth noting that even with 25% holding the other 75% could out vote C1872 if it was warranted. Hence why some kind of comment from the football club would ge welcome. Whilst it would be a nice thing to have your £500 or £1000 individual investment in Rangers, your voice as a shareholder would be almost non existent in influential terms. That's why the C1872 exists and why has the support of King. He could if he wanted just sell the the highest bidder. Never Again.

Thats my interpretation of it. Think we could all benefit from Football Club and C1872 statements, although the Rangers may have their hands tied legally as far as investment information is concerned