Angry Chelsea Pitch Owners demand share trading inquiry

Gray Smith, a corporate lawyer who was elected on Friday on to the CPO board, will now lead an inquiry to establish the circumstances behind the additional share sales and the identities of those new shareholders. It was also agreed to hold another EGM so that shareholders could put forward their own proposals.

New chairman Steve Frankham devoted around two hours of yesterday’s AGM to questions and comments from the floor, with impassioned calls for the meeting to be adjourned until the identity of the new shareholders had been established. “While those shares are active, everything else becomes a farce because they could sway the meeting disproportionately,” said David Spring, a CPO shareholder.

The board refused to adjourn the meeting and said that it was not legally possible to annul the sale of those shares but, prior to voting on their 11 resolutions, did guarantee that no more shares would be sold until a new EGM was held.

Frankham then unexpectedly used his proxies to oppose the further sale of shares to people who are not existing shareholders. “I did it because the room asked me to,” he said.

Sewell, who has been CPO secretary since 1993, explained how CPO came to sell too many shares prior to the vote on whether Chelsea could buy back the freehold to Stamford Bridge.

“The number of shares that we were used to selling was 150, 200, 250 a year,” he said. “The authorisation more than covered every year it was required to. During that three-week period, I received approximately 1,800 emails; the phone was ringing every 15 minutes. We were just processing the shares. It was simple human error. It was a mistake.”

Rick Glanvill, another board member, also responded to criticism from shareholders. “It is a serious accusation that he deliberately exceeded his authorities,” he said.

Glanvill added that he had been unaware of the limit to the shares CPO could sell, admitting that the “huge mistake” caused him sleepless nights.

Around 150 people attended Friday’s meeting, with many shareholders expressing the view that they were not opposed to moving grounds, but on condition that CPO retained the freehold of a new stadium.

Blow for Rangers as share trading suspended

Whyte claimed that he was considering removing Rangers’ listing with PLUS on the first anniversary of the takeover, a move which would place the club’s activities under less scrutiny.

“Given the structure of the shareholding in the club, there is very little, if any, tangible benefit for the club to be a listed company,” he said. “The fact that the club has a majority shareholder controlling more than 80 per cent means there is very little trading in shares. In reality, a public listing means more bureaucracy.

“Rangers does not need to remain a listed company in order for people to buy and sell their individual shares and since becoming chairman I have always questioned what is really being achieved with a public listing.

“Whether or not we are a listed company, accounts will still be published and there will still be a shareholders’ AGM. All shareholders would be able to hold the directors to account.”

Due to the club’s unwillingness to hold their AGM, however, shareholders have been unable to do that since the takeover. Rangers, under the ownership of venture capitalist Whyte, have made a habit of missing deadlines. However, the forthcoming Top Tier Tribunal in Edinburgh, due to sit from Jan 16-18, remains the biggest potential threat for a club whose failures in domestic and European cup competitions have not helped their cash-flow problems.

In order to be granted a licence by the Scottish Football Association to compete in Europe next season, clubs must confirm to the ruling body by March 31 that they do not owe monies to their employees or the tax authorities as a result of contractual and legal obligations that arose before Dec 31.

Since the verdict in the tax case may not be made public until March or early April, this would pose problems for both the club and the administrators of the national game.

Former striker Mark Hateley, who still represents for the club in a promotional capacity, believes that Whyte still deserves the benefit of the doubt from fans in spite of the latest ignominy which, incidentally, does not prevent them from selling or signing players during January’s transfer window.

“It’s not been the easiest of take-overs because of all the ongoing debts and uncertainties of the debts,” he said. “You have to dig in there as a supporter and just try to see this storm out.

“It seems to be one storm after the other but we have to believe in the chairman and the way he is taking the club and, at the end of that, that’s where he will be judged. There have been a few eyebrows raised since he’s been at the club with the way he has done things and the way he has upset a few people, shall we say.

“But it’s his club and it’s his club to be run the way he wants it to be run.”