The Death of Rangers: Basket of Assets – Did Charles Green Purchase Those Titles as he Claimed?

Listed below are the assets of Rangers FC Plc bought by Charles Green (from Duff & Phelps) after the proposed CVA was rejected by creditors at Ibrox in June 2012....

Assets Price
Goodwill £1
SPL Share £1
SFA Membership £1
Leasehold Interests £1
Player Contracts & Registrations £2,749,990
Stock £1
Plant & Machinery £1,250,000

Contrary to what Green claimed, nowhere is Rangers FC listed as an asset. Nowhere is the history of Rangers FC listed as an asset. Yet, a thesis has been postulated that a company’s history can be sold as a separate item in a company asset sale. This is manifestly absurd. In the case of Rangers, the bizarre logic of that position is:

a) Craig Whyte had the option not to purchase the history of Rangers when the club was sold to him, or parts of the history that he did not like, thus wiping out any potential tax liability or creditor debt.

b) After Craig Whyte, someone could have purchased the stadium while another party could have submitted a successful bid to own its history.

c) If a club’s history was a saleable asset then it would also mean that a club, even as a going concern, could sell off its history to another club in an effort to raise money.

Quotes from Edinburgh based QC – Alan Dewar

All of this, of course, is unheard of, and for good reason: a club’s historical events are tied irrevocably to that club and a club separated from its history loses its identity and meaning. Crucially, when insolvency law kicked in and consigned Rangers FC Plc and its football activities to the past, the club and its history thereafter ceased to continue, except as an historical footnote.

There has been an attempt to conflate a company’s goodwill with ownership of its historical timeline. HMRC define goodwill as “the value of the attraction to the customers which the name and reputation possesses”. The value of purchasing Ibrox stadium and playing in the same colours as the old club, given the record of achievement of the old Rangers FC, was obvious to Charles Green, but equating goodwill to ownership of Rangers FC and its historical timeline is an incredulous sleight of hand that flies against both the common sense definition of goodwill and the concrete clarity of insolvency law.

READ THIS…The Death of Rangers in 55 Quotes including: “We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune,” Walter Smith

To then argue that insolvency does not breach that timeline is to employ Alice in Wonderland logic. The effect of which would be to ensure that no football club could ever be compulsorily dissolved. By extension, companies about to be liquidated could adopt the same law-defying approach: sell off the core of the business under the asset “goodwill” and resurface under a new company name but with the same core business activities as before, claiming an unbroken historical timeline. Of course, this is nonsense because it is unlawful.

Lord Nimmo Smith has been used in evidence in support of the notion that old Rangers FC survived liquidation. He said that a football club can exist separate from its holding company. Now we have the bizarre position where not only can a football club be separated from its history and its history be sold on (even if the club is subsequently liquidated along with its holding company), but a club can also exist without an owner.

If the Manchester United Board decided voluntarily to liquidate Manchester Utd Plc then Manchester Utd FC would no longer exist, except in the minds of its supporters. To argue that Manchester’s history could be auctioned either pre or post liquidation defies interpretation in the real world of insolvency.

READ THIS…Timeline to the Death of Rangers and the Emergence of Charles Green’s new club in 2012

Lord Nimmo Smith was also wrong when he said that Rangers FC still exists. He was reflecting the view of the SFA who, we know, know Sweet FA, not least their own arcane humpty-dumpty rules. Dr Gregory Ioannidis, a leading authority on Sports Law, agrees that “the history of a club cannot pass from one company [into liquidation]to another”. The import of LNS’ claim was that the new Rangers FC could be punished for the sins of the old Rangers FC, if they were one and the same club. If he had maintained that claim and punished the Rangers by that time plying their trade in the SFL then a court challenge would have immediately nullified that punishment on several grounds:

1) such a punishment would harm newco and newco had nothing to do with oldco.
2) The Rangers in the lower leagues is a new club (insolvency law saw to that) and, like newco, had nothing to do with the sins of old Rangers.

In the end, LNS stayed clear of punishing newco in any shape or form and, instead, levied a futile fine on oldco. HMRC, like Dr Gregory Ioannidis, and consistent with insolvency law, also recognise that newco has no connection whatsoever with oldco. Unlike insolvency law, LNS’ philosophical musings are not legally binding; nor do they set a legal precedent.

When Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers FC Plc he also purchased the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Prior to liquidation, Rangers had full membership status within Scottish professional football. After liquidation, the club playing in SFL Division 3 was allocated associate membership status. The reason for that was very simple: the Rangers playing in the SFL was a different club than the one which previously played in the SPL.

READ THIS…The Curious Case of the Cancelled Kelty Hearts Testimonial & why it Blows Open theRangers Continuity Myth

Importantly, the new Rangers applied to join the SPL but their application was rejected, despite a mysterious 5-way agreement. If Rangers was the same club pre and post liquidation then an application would have been completely unnecessary, particularly since they claimed to purchase the old club’s SFA membership and SPL share. Of course, Rangers was legally dissolved after liquidation – hence the need for a fresh application from the new club.

Similarly, the new Rangers then applied to join the SFL and this time their application was successful. Remember, if an existing SPL club changes ownership or its holding company changes from a Ltd to a Plc, it has no bearing on the club’s membership status and therefore there is no requirement to re-apply for SFA or SPL membership – it is liquidation that forces that event.

Furthermore, because Rangers post-liquidation is a new club, it was unable to compete in European competition for three years. It is a stipulation of UEFA that a licence to play in Europe can only be given to a club that has been a member of a national association for three consecutive years. The old Rangers did have a UEFA licence but the new Rangers do not. When Rangers FC expired, so did their UEFA licence.

The fact that the SFA has allowed The Rangers FC to pretend that their history is continuous, contrary to insolvency law, has no bearing on the facts of the case and will forever remain a stain on the SFA’s reputation.

WHO DID LIVINGSTON PLAY IN THE 3RD ROUND OF THE SCOTTISH CUP 2012/13?

The credit for this further piece of evidence on why Rangers FC is a new club belongs to Gordon Johnston:

The third round of the Scottish Cup 2012/13 consisted of 16 ties between Scotland’s smaller clubs, after which, in the fourth round, the 16 top clubs from the previous season – 2011/12 – then joined the fray. The 16 top clubs included the 10 clubs in the SPL from season 2011/12 and the top four from last season’s SFL First Division: Ross County, Dundee, Falkirk and Hamilton Academicals. Looking at the SFL First Division from 2011/12 it is clear that Livingstone finished 5th and therefore should not be considered to be among the “16 top clubs”:

Position Team Points: 1 Ross County 79, 2 Dundee 55, 
3 Falkirk 52,
4 Hamilton Academicals 49
 and 5 Livingstone 48.

Yet, Livingston got a bye into round four when they should have been playing in round three! Why? The regulations for last year’s third round were quite clear and ought to have excluded Livingston:

“The clubs which, in the previous season, were members of The Scottish Premier League and those clubs finishing in The Scottish Football League First Division league positions one to four, shall be exempt from playing in Round Three of the Competition.”

The reason that Livingston got a bye was because one of the clubs in the SPL – Rangers FC – no longer existed.

If they existed, irrespective of their current league or position in 2012/13, they would have been entitled to enter the competition in round four courtesy of the previous season’s placings. The SFA considered The Rangers FC to be a new club. Hence the creation of a spare slot, duly allocated to the team finishing 5th in the SFL First Division, i.e. Livingston.

The club formerly known as Rangers FC is as dead as a dodo. The new club masquerading as the old Rangers FC is just that: a new club masquerading as the old club. Unfortunately, when conclusive proof of the demise of Rangers FC is brought to the attention of Rangers fans, there is an apoplectic response: one is either deluded or a Rangers Hater, or both. Fortunately, insolvency law usurps personal insult.

JohnBhoy

The Statement from Celtic Supporters that appeared in the Sunday Herald Newspaper on 25 January 2015 outlined the legal position in detail. The Celtic support was accused of being obsessed but no counter argument or evidence that the contents of this advertisement were ever put forward from anyone arguing that for the Continuity Myth, which is of course now the 55 Lie.