The “Lawwell Letter” is trending everywhere this week. To elucidate, it is email sent to (among others) Peter Lawwell and Eric Riley of Celtic on 26 July 2012 by SPL CEO Neil Doncaster.
The email came with an attached copy of the Five Way Agreement (hereafter “5WA”, the deal between Sevco, Rangers, the SFA, the SPL and the SFL). Now that it has been made public, it seems safe to speak openly about what it all means for us as folk who believe in sporting integrity.
I would preface my comments with a caveat though. On the face of it, the Celtic Chief Executive appears to have misled the gathering at the recent Celtic AGM. He was asked by a shareholder if Celtic were involved in the Five Way Agreement. Lawwell replied, “No”, and gave same “No” response to the follow up question, “have you seen it?”
Given that a copy of that email was in the possession of a few folk before that AGM, I have to admit to being surprised by that answer – although even more surprised at the apparent lack of due diligence implied by the lack of knowledge of its content.
We have attempted to contact Mr Lawwell to ask him if he would like to comment on the apparent discrepancy between the evidence and his answer (and I am sure we are not the only ones to have done so). To date, we have received no response. Given the complete lack of acknowledgement of the existence of this anomaly in the MSM, we should perhaps assume that none will be forthcoming.
Perhaps there is an explanation (yes I know), but Celtic should know, like Rangers old and new have come to realise, that silence on these matters breeds deep suspicion and distrust.
Assuming for the minute that Occam’s Razor applies here, there may be an uncomfortable truth emerging for Celtic fans – that Rangers (old and new) do not have a monopoly on dishonesty. There is also an uncomfortable truth that should emerge for Rangers fans too – that as we have said all along, this has never been about just Rangers, but about the governance of the game.
If the Celtic CEO did lie to the AGM a few weeks ago what are the consequences? He broke no laws as far as I can see. One insider I spoke to said simply this,
“So he lied. So what? What happens now? It’s irrelevant”
That is of course absolutely true. As long as controlling shareholders are happy that Resolution 12 is buried, and that no deep inquiry into governance is held into the workings of the game in Scotland, the lie is nonpunishable, though it would be a mistake to believe that accountability is confined only to the corporate rules governing Boards and shareholders; the corporate veil of “I was only following company policy” can be readily challenged in the court of public opinion, which has no statute of limitations.
What all this demonstrates of course is that Celtic have been saying one thing to their fans and shareholders, nodding agreement in private meetings about how appalling Rangers behaviour was, tut-tutting over how amateurish the authorities were, and wringing their hands in frustration at what a sham the LNS inquiry turned out to be.
At the same time, they have done nothing, allowed small shareholders to spend not inconsiderable suns progressing the matter, and quietly hoped that the “appetite” for justice would diminish so they could get back to whatever it is they and the rest do when subject to little or no scrutiny.
Whilst ten in a row is on the table of course, they can get away with it. To Celtic fans right now, understandably, nothing else matters. But what if TIAR is derailed? Not a stretch to imagine that the Parkhead kitchen could get uncontrollably hot in that circumstance. And when the TIAR squirrel finally ends its scurry, in either success or failure, where will the fans attention be diverted?
Perhaps the arrogance that permits making (allegedly) false statements to a general meeting, and (allegedly) misleading shareholders over Res 12 is borne of the knowledge that the parachutes are ready to be deployed when either of the above scenarios come to pass? If TIAR is achieved or goes south, are they already prepared for an emergency exit?
Celtic have two major shareholders whose combined holding is over 50% of the club’s shares. Dermot Desmond and Nick Train. Desmond is now in his eighth decade and Train is reportedly having some business difficulties. Both may well be moved to get out anyway, but fan unrest would make their decision a whole lot easier.
And Lawwell himself is – if you believe the MSM – on the wanted list of nearly as many top clubs as Alfredo Morelos.
The foregoing of course is extremely “Old Firm” centric, and as the two biggest clubs in the country they certainly have the biggest impact on the game, culturally, socially and financially. However there is no get-out clause here for others.
We KNOW there is evidence of fraud surrounding the licencing issue in 2012. We KNOW there is evidence of a cover up over that, and the EBT-related registration issues for Old Rangers. We KNOW that the Five Way Agreement was signed by football authorities in the knowledge that it would rob their own rules of judicial authority with regard to compliance by RFC prior to 2012.
We also know that NOT ONE club has taken a meaningful stand against any of it.
Clubs are saying one thing to supporters and doing their best to derail those supporters’ efforts on the other. We can also infer (not unreasonably) that the folk who run the clubs think that we as fans have no right to interfere in how they run their operations.
As I said earlier, Celtic can do what they like whilst TIAR is live, but afterwards, however it ends, the fans and shareholders involved in Res 12 will still be asking questions. Celtic in particular know how fatal it can be to alienate their own fan base – a fan base that has flexed its muscles with devastating effect for the boardroom in the past. And it is the wrath of the fans of all clubs that will eventually see the charlatans get their just desserts.
Our job as fans is to continue to hold those who care little for the honour and beauty of football to account, to continue to press them on their refusal to deal with arguably the biggest sporting scandal in Scottish history.
The bottom line (which is of course what the folk in boardrooms care about) is this. They need us far more than we need them. As fans of different clubs, the sensibility of those of us at SFM recognises that the real battle, the real war, is not between rival fans or rival clubs, but between the arrogant, self-entitled clique who run our game; who lie for fun, who cheat and belittle the sport; and the good folk who make it possible for the game to prosper.
Resolution 12 is not just about Rangers – nor is it just about Celtic. It deserves to be embraced by every true football fan in the country. The Res 12 franchise needs to widened
Sooner or later the fans will demonstrate their unhappiness with the money men. They did it in 2012, and they will inevitably do so again.
Higgy’s Shoes 8th March 2020 at 02:48
Thank God. Someone on here as old as me!
…………….
Watch it!………………….;-)
Steven Gerrard reveals Walter Smith’s ‘gold dust’ Rangers advice as he delivers telling Celtic confession
……………..
When walter is brought back into the mix, you just know it is at the desperation stage.
……
Also in todays headlines.
The Dave King Rangers power move that must happen to end Ibrox limbo.
A call for king to return and sort things out.
………………..
It is like a cry out for Help today coming from down ibrox way
easyJambo 7th March 2020 at 23:39:
Related to this post (it's on page 2) from last month?
'Big Pink 2nd February 2020 at 12:05
I was told on Friday that a particular player who is often in the news was the subject of an investigation into a spread-betting situation and that today’s papers would have details. Told this morning that publication was prevented by injunction. Was sceptical at first but is this perhaps a sideways allusion to that?'
easyJambo 7th March 2020 at 23:39
'..This story from tomorrow's Sunday Post might raise a few eyebrows..'
%%%%%%%%%%%%
I just love the SPFL's spokesperson's observation ;" It is essential the reputation for integrity in our game is preserved.”
Preserved?
I would have thought 'restored' would have been a more appropriate and truthful word to have used.
Just about to head out for a 12 o'clock kick off knowing that this may be the last chance for RC to get a win against Rangers (any version). If there are footballing gods surely they will make this happen!
https://twitter.com/mrgreen18881967/status/1236594329243856896?s=21
A tweet quoting Michael Gannon in the Sunday Mail.
Michael Gannon's piece in the Sunday Mail is dreadful – so dreadful it's unintentionally humourous.
However, it's not as funny as the Scotsman's story that Tottenham Hotspur are standing by to pay £22m (Twenty two million pounds!) for TRFC's Borna Barisic in the summer.
BTW, 'Brand Gerrard' seems to be pulling out all the stops to provide support for StevieG from his ex-Liverpool & England team-mates. I doubt that support is being mustered via TRFC/Level Sinko, but through his chums in the English media. I wonder why that is?
Ex Ludo 8th March 2020 at 11:10
"But you’d have a heart of stone if you didn’t feel a little bit sorry for Dave King."
It would take me pretty much the rest of the day to explain the reason' why I don't feel even a wee bit sorry for the lying fraudster.
Cluster One
A call for king to return and sort things out.
why?can he play centre half
tony 8th March 2020 at 12:59
He has done such a great job since seizing control.
The team has been winning everything and the club is financially very strong.
Homunculus
It's crazy that some of their fans still think he's a saviour, a fool and his money is very apt here
Raman Bhardwaj @STVRaman
Hamilton statement re Sunday Post story: On Thursday 27th Feb one of our senior youth coaches advised HAFC he had been contacted by the police to be questioned in relation to a yellow card incident that took place during season 2018/19.
The coach in question advised us he has since met with the police. HAFC have not been contacted directly and it is our understanding that no one has been charged with any offence.
As the Police enquiry is ongoing it would be inappropriate for the club to comment any further at this time.
Edit: the player/coach involved has been named as Dougie Imrie by the Sun.
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1236609861972082688
I think Heavidor may have some figures wrong , he states 15m was needed according to the accts to fund the shortfall , I'm sure it said 10m and 10 pts for an admin event when the discussion on here recently said 15 and then a subsequent 5 for the next season. The interesting point is the need to call it by the 31st of March or the point reduction will occur next season which in itself seems very strange. Theoretically a club could enter administration with 5-6 games to go , receive no point deduction and go on to win the league (if that is correct) . However by 31st March the picture will be much clearer regards whether they still have a chance in the league and are in or out of Europe. By then according to King's statement at the AGM the share issue will have been held and he will have gone .
I don't think that Tweet adds anything to the discussion, IMHO.
If the author possesses new information to underline an imminent insolvency event, but is not prepared to share that information – then it still doesn't add to the discussion.
Whist RIFC has consistently accumulated losses since it's inception, it has dumbfounded most Internet Bampots by consistently managing – somehow – to continue limping along and to continue kicking that battered, old can along the road.
Now, I'll only believe it if/when a Court confirms an insolvency event down Govan way…
StevieBC 8th March 2020 at 17:41
I don't think it has dumbfounded many people.
The PLC has
a, had a share issue to raise funds.
b, Received loans from directors and others associated to them.
c, had another share issue and converted those loans to equity.
Basically it has been spending money it hasn't got and producing more and more worthless shares in order to raise that money and keep going.
If there is an insolvency event it will be because the PLC has continued to live outwith its means and no-one is left who is willing to fund that overspending.
I think they are currently hoping to sell one or two players for big money in order to balance the books. Which is a perfectly valid business model for a football club.
Timtim 8th March 2020 at 17:10
At the time of preparation, the forecast identified that the Group would require £10.0m by way of debt or equity funding by the end of season 2019/2020 in order to meet its liabilities as they fall due. The first tranche of funding is required from investors in November 2019. However, the final amount required is dependent on future football performance, European football participation and player trading amongst other factors.
The Board of Directors have discussed the Club’s forecast cash flow shortfall and have reached agreement with Laird Investments (Pty) Limited whereby it will provide additional loan facilities as necessary to meet shortfalls to the above requirements and any further amounts that may be required a result of variances to forecast cash flows. Further to this, Laird Investments (Pty) Limited have agreed to provide a £5m facility to October 2021.
The Board has considered the level and timing of additional funding that may be needed and is satisfied that any such amounts will be made available as and when required.
Homunculus 8th March 2020 at 20:00
The going concern statement in the TRFC accounts was dated 4 December 2019 (The RIFC statement was dated 31 October)
The TRFC statement differed in terms of the amount required to see out the season, £6m instead of £10m. It’s not clear if the amount had dropped because of EL “success”, or if the £6m was the balance following earlier partial funding. I see the former explanation as being more likely. My reason for doing so, is that I’m not aware of anything that has occurred between October and March that has made their financial position worse.
easyJambo 8th March 2020 at 20:30
Perhaps Laird had provided the money they promised.
"The first tranche of funding is required from investors in November 2019"
They would already have factored in some EL in their original predictions, would they have an additional £4m (over and above their prediction) by that stage.
Homunculus 8th March 2020 at 21:32
easyJambo 8th March 2020 at 20:30
Perhaps Laird had provided the money they promised.
"The first tranche of funding is required from investors in November 2019"
They would already have factored in some EL in their original predictions, would they have an additional £4m (over and above their prediction) by that stage.
======================================
I don't know is the short answer.
Would they have needed to spend £4m+ in the five weeks between 31 October and 4 December.
My personal view that their results in the EL generated sufficient income to delay the funding requirement for a month and that their progress towards the knockout stages generated further forecast income to reduce the season's requirement.
I may be completely wrong and that cash was both needed and spent in November, e.g. to pay transfer installments. Similarly, they may have budgeted for some incoming transfer income in January that hasn't materialised and that they are now running on fumes. We just don't know, which is why I've adopted the Occam's Razor approach.
I suspect that if they had good news to impart to their now-suffering fans they would get that out through their friendly media outlets as soon as was humanly possible.
Even unaudited accounts however must have some basis in reality. Directors need to be very careful what they publish with regard to the trading position of their organisations.
Is there actually a chance that they won’t in fact publish interim results this year?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Is the significant phrase not " at the time of preparation" ? they were prepared using figures up to June so didn't include the Kent and Helander spend of approx 10m . These can be kicked down the road to the interims that don't need to be published or audited or wait until next year . Laird have stepped up it would seem with the first tranche with an interest bearing loan which should see them to end of Feb/March where the share issue was intended to raise the remaining shortfall that would get them to ST renewal time and the opening of the transfer window . Barisic is the latest to be put in the shop window for 22m . King has used L5 to drum up interest in order to sell his shareholding, the management team and any player , he would have tried selling the kitchen sink as well if it wasn't a secured asset to Close Brothers. I think the estimated shortfalls were viewed using blue rose tinted spectacles and may have factored in a Scottish cup SF and Final as well as maximum walk up demand . Of course as others have pointed out they always seem to kick the can further down the road of reckoning and won't believe it til they see it regards administration . I remain of the thought that the odds are very much stacked against them.
Winter 2020 Fundraiser……Wow!
Timtim 8th March 2020 at 22:21 If i remember correct, and always happy to be corrected. The last time an ibrox club went into Administration i think they had about £2mill in the bank?
Just now do they have anything? i can’t remember if they even have a bank.
@C1 I'm sure the ST money is being released on a game by game basis and if that's the case it would also have been taken into account so while they may have money in the bank it's not enough to cover the running costs.
Its possible that over the next week or so either the Scottish or UK powerbrokers will take the view that in the interest of public safety all sporting events likely to attract large crowds are to be played behind closed doors for rest of this season then surely creditors that have been promised that the cheque is in the post will have second thoughts and it will only take one nervous trigger finger to pull the plug and ringfence their cash
No luck for RC today but the fight for Premiership safety will continue.
The Record online is reporting that there are calls from the German health minister for any event with more than a 1000 people to be cancelled. No decision is made yet but Rangers EL return game must be at some risk of being played behind closed doors if going ahead at all. Supporters who already have paid for travel, accommodation and match tickets will hopefully have taken out insurance.
Adam812
I don’t know exactly what the German situation is re Coronavirus, but I don’t think ours is at that stage yet. Numerically we are light years behind the Italians for example.
Little or no sympathy for TRFC of course, but any football club facing N existential crisis because of the pandemic is not blessed with good luck.
Adam 812
I think RCFC should be clear of worry rev relegation
Hope so anyway.
Homunculus 8th March 2020 at 19:55
I think they are currently hoping to sell one or two players for big money in order to balance the books. Which is a perfectly valid business model for a football club.
======================
It absolutely is a viable business model, particularly in Scotland where there is so little TV money. What is not viable in my view is to maintain that they MUST get a certain price for their players just because their rivals got a certain price. This has been the stance all along and even their Chief Executive has publicly alluded to it. There is a lot more to it than that. Genuine ability for starters, followed by what a player has achieved and at what level. Petted lips because your rivals can get big fees does not come into it.
redlichtie 8th March 2020 at 22:15
Is there actually a chance that they won’t in fact publish interim results this year?
================
I may be completely wrong, but the quite absurd interims last year were used by the SFA to grant them a European Licence. If that is the case then I expect very healthy interims some time soon.
If the price of getting a UEFA licence is imposed austerity (aka living within your means), then everything depends on some serious transfer funds arriving.
Question is how the Scottish authorities would view any breach of the UEFA criteria. Is it possible that standards are lower in Scotland than at UEFA? Surely not??
StevieBC 7th March 2020 at 11:34
"Library basement"?
#intrigued
Big Pink 9th March 2020 at 08:24
StevieBC 7th March 2020 at 11:34 "Library basement"? #intrigued
==========================
BP, for context you have to read a certain blogger's post from a couple of days ago – where SFM gets a special mention.
redlichtie 8th March 2020 at 22:15
'…Directors need to be very careful what they publish with regard to the trading position of their organisations..'
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Indeed so.
And Directors are also to be careful that an IPO Prospectus issued in their name is not designed to mislead prospective investors.
Sadly, not all Directors are men of probity and integrity. In fact, I believe that some can be quite criminally minded.
Such directors take comfort from the fact that not very much seems to happen to such criminals when they are caught out.
A second UCL game is now being played behind closed doors. Got to fulfil those TV contracts after all.
I think we all know where this is going. The players, coaching staff and match officials are obviously immune to the virus.
I watched a few bits of footy over the weekend and was amused at the Coronavirus protocols – bump elbows at the start of the match , full on handshakes and hugging at the end . That'll learn it !
paddy malarkey 9th March 2020 at 14:05:
As I wrote last week, the football authorities should be banning the disgusting practices of players spitting & blowing their noses on to the pitch at this time. I don't suppose they will though…
BigPink@08.24
The library basement might prove to be the safest place to be shortly.
Ex Ludo
Building one as we chat ?
How to go into administration, dump your debts and not incur a points deduction.
As the Covid19 outbreak continues and the SPFL is ultimately forced to accede to the government's restrictions on public gatherings (now expected within the next two weeks), games may be played behind closed doors or cancelled all together.
At that point a club could reasonably claim that their cash flow was impacted to such an extent (no matchday income or refunds required on STs), that administration was the only way out.
That would normally invoke a 15 point penalty (this season) plus 5 points (next season). However the SPFL rules allow for an appeal on the basis of "force majeure".
Simples
I would respectfully suggest that the financial ‘direction of travel’ any club was on when the ‘force majeure’ was encountered would be a consideration?
Mon, 9 Mar at 18:38
Reference
Dear
Thank you for taking the time to contact us about the BBC Sport article ‘Saracens relegation ‘is most remarkable scandal in the domestic game’’ (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51168926)
We apologise we have been unable to respond to you until now. This is because we had recently been receiving unprecedented volumes of complaints and have experienced delays in being able to reply.
We wish to reassure you that on the day you contacted us your points were read in full and circulated to staff the next day. This is our internal report of all complaints and other comments, which we distribute each morning to programme teams and producers. They were able to read and consider both your and other reaction we received at the time.
I note your points about Tom Fordyce’s reference to Rangers toward the end of the article (“Rangers are challenging Celtic again at the top of the Scottish Premiership, eight years after being demoted to the fourth tier.“).
In keeping with a judgement by the BBC Trust (the body which previously regulated the BBC) on the matter – please see below – we will continue to refer to the team in a sporting capacity as Rangers FC and only when reporting on the business matters pertaining to the club will we, when and as appropriate, refer to the old and/or new operating companies.
The BBC Trust finding on the issue may be accessed (on page number 25) of their archived June 2013 bulletin, at
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/appeals/esc_bulletins/2013/apr_may.pdf#page=27.
While aspects of this finding may not entirely align with elements of your complaint, the underlying theme – that of how the club should be described – lies at the heart of the finding. In this respect we would draw your attention to the BBC Trust’s conclusion points on page 5 of the bulletin, as summarised below:
The Committee concluded:
– that the choice of the right language by the BBC was highly dependent on the purpose and context of the output, including the intended audience and, for example, whether it was a sport story or a business story.
– that, while there was no reason to treat the football club itself as “new” simply because the assets that make up the club had been transferred from one company to another, there was good reason to distinguish between “newco” and “oldco” when referring to the owning companies and the corporate transactions involved in the sale of the club.
Thank you again for contacting us. We hope that our reply helps to clarify matters and allays any concerns you may have.
Thanks again for getting in touch.
Kind regards,
Brian Irvine
BBC Complaints Team
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
Please note: this email is sent from an unmonitored address so please don’t reply. If necessary please contact us through our webform (please include your case reference number).”
@EJ 18.33
That pesky going concern notice would show they were already holed below the waterline
easyJambo 9th March 2020 at 18:33
“….the SPFL rules allow for an appeal on the basis of “force majeure”.”
Bawsman 9th March 2020 at 19:05
“I would respectfully suggest that the financial ‘direction of travel’ any club was on when the ‘force majeure’ was encountered would be a consideration?”
%%%%%%%%%%%
Will we see TRFC Ltd v The SPFL in the Court of Session?
Quite interesting stuff on ‘force majeure’ on this link
https://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/insights/articles/coronavirus-applying-force-majeure
I would not go so far as to suggest that Mr James Don Blair and the litigious Dave King may be hoping that the coronavirus situation continues and worsens, but I dare say they are preparing their case: and I would not be surprised to learn that they might have been pointed to the ‘force majeure’ possibility by a friendly counsellor in Football Governance.!
[ lord! I hate how that cheat SDM and the men guilty of creating the 5-Way Agreement have caused me to turn into such a distrustful and suspicious person. I was not ever thus!]
I note that
'..A new so-called “counter disinformation unit” will see Whitehall staff identify and respond where necessary to inaccurate or misleading stories and posts about coronavirus.'
Oh, that there was such a unit to identify and respond where necessary to 'inaccurate or misleading stories and posts asserting that TRFC is continuity Rangers of 1872!'
George Orwell! Where are you when we need you!
Will we believe what Whitehall says about coronavirus any more than I believe what the 6th Floor and BBC Scotland have to say about TRFC?
John,
“ while there was no reason to treat the football club itself as “new” simply because the assets that make up the club had been transferred from one company to another, there was good reason to distinguish between “newco” and “oldco” when referring to the owning companies and the corporate transactions involved in the sale of the club”
When a business goes bust and the assets are held by the administrators who subsequently sell the assets to a new owner they are not TRANSFERRED! They are sold and bought, there is a difference. A transfer of assets might happen within a corporation to a separate department/company. When CG trumpeted about buying the assets he never mentioned ‘I was transferred the assets’!
Transfers are internal, the BBC trust used that language to suit their desired outcome.
Let me put it another way. When I leave a job to take up a post with another firm, I am not ‘transferred’.
Perhaps they got mixed up because we talk about footballers being transferred. It’s actually a loose use of terminology. They are bought and sold. Probably came into use in the mists of time when clubs were clubs and not plcs. And it was to do with registrations transferred within an FA.
jimbo 9th March 2020 at 23:18
"…the assets are held by the administrators who subsequently sell the assets to a new owner they are not TRANSFERRED.."
%%%%%%%%
Yes, jimbo.
It is blindingly obvious that if any of the bidders for 'Rangers' as Rangers had not chickened out when they saw the amount of tax debt they would be (potentially) accepting responsibility for, and had gone ahead and bought 'Rangers', then of course they would have bought Rangers football club of 1872, debts and warts and all!
But nobody did buy Rangers of 1872 out of Administration.
CG bought ( and suspiciously cheaply!) a stadium, and some related properties ,and had to set up a new football club, which had to apply for membership of a league, and could not enforce the contracts that 'Rangers' players had signed with RFC of 1872.
The entity that held the share in the SPL, on foot of which it was a member of the SFA, was Rangers football Club plc. There was no 'holding company' owning the share in the SPL. It was RFC of 1872 that went bust, and lost any entitlement to membership in Scottish Football.
It was such a different legal entity that HMRC couldn't get from it the taxes that RFC of 1872 owed!
And that such a monstrous fraud by the SFA should have been perpetrated, that allowed a very obvious lie to be foisted onto Scottish Football marks out Scottish Football governance as rotten to the very core.
The passing of 8 years or so does not legitimise the rottenness.
The liars and cheats ( or their successors in office)are still there at the heart of our game.
May they be confounded, sooner or later.
Oh dear, from the TDs it would appear some posters have misunderstood the intentions of my posts or I have not explained them well enough. When I rubbish the BBC Trust’s claims that the assets of the oldco were TRANSFERRED to the newco, I am arguing against the continuity myth. We all know that CG did not buy Rangers 1872, but he did buy the assets. The bricks and mortar so to speak. That is unarguable. The scandalous things that happened after that with the SFA is another matter entirely.
What did not happen was a seamless transfer of assets from one facet of a club to an updated version of the same club or company. If that were true, why did money change hands? From one bank account to another? If it was merely a transfer in the normal sense it would a paper transaction carried out by a bookkeeper within a set of accounts – trust me I was a bookkeeper for the Government.
Obviously CG did not buy the accounts of oldco.
For the BBC Trust to suggest the assets were transferred is nonsense. But it helps to blur the lines to the uninformed gullibillies and lower level media. It makes the differences between oldco and newco look grey rather than black and white.
“ there was good reason to distinguish between “newco” and “oldco” when referring to the owning companies and the corporate transactions involved in the sale of the club”
Now read that again. They admit there is reason to distinguish between newco & oldco when referring to……….the corporate transactions involved. The SALE of the assets (not an internal transfer) was a corporate transaction.
I would also take issue with them in……the sale of the club. The CLUB was not sold! Only the assets.
The BBC are on weak ground relying on that conclusion from the Trust. (The Trust R.I.P.)
” there was no reason to treat the football club itself as “new” simply because the assets that make up the club had been transferred from one company to another”
So, the assets = the club. “The assets that make up the club.” Really? So UEFA would have allowed the newco to participate in Europe the next season if they won the Scottish Cup? Don’t think so. Were we not informed that as a new club it would not be allowed for 3 years?
Supposing that sentence read, “The assets of the old club had been sold to another company” How would that sound?
https://twitter.com/tamsellicsoniii/status/1237119975648829440?s=21
Speaking words of financial wisdom before the times of trouble came to pass. Where did it all go wrong?
JohnClark@22.51 yesterday
‘..A new so-called “counter disinformation unit” will see Whitehall staff identify and respond where necessary to inaccurate or misleading stories and posts about coronavirus.’
Don’t worry JC it’s just the Party getting us ready to disbelieve the evidence of our own eyes. In the US, Fox News does the dirty work whilst the BBC fulfils that function here. The difference is that we pay for the privilege.
Speaking of privilege I note that Nigel Farage is once again appearing on Question Time this week.
John Clark 9th March 2020 at 22:51
I note that ‘..A new so-called “counter disinformation unit” will see Whitehall staff identify and respond where necessary to inaccurate or misleading stories and posts…
=====
The phrase: “Who guards the guards?” immediately jumps into my head.
I guess the BBC and most other MSM outlets will be getting into trouble soon…?
And related to this: without touching on the Salmond case at all, none of the MSM has reported that the general public – including citizen journalists – is NOT allowed into the Court in Edinburgh for the evidential hearings.
However, the Courts Tribunal has decided, unilaterally ?, that only accredited / MSM journalists are allowed access – to a part of a public building for a public court case.
That’s a worrying development, IMO: mibbees our resident Court Reporters could add anything / correct me…?
A quick Google re public access to courts:
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/coming-to-court/victims-of-crime/visitors
‘Generally courtrooms are open to the public and you can attend and listen to proceedings. There may be occasions when courts are closed to the public, perhaps where a child witness is giving evidence or because of the nature of the proceedings. Court staff will be able to advise you. There are some rules and you should read more about Attending a Court before visiting.’
That section links to this:
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/coming-to-court/attending-a-court
…which then links to this:
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/coming-to-court/public.pdf?sfvrsn=4
‘If a court is closed in the interests of justice, the public is excluded. This may happen occasionally to protect vulnerable witnesses, such as a child or the complainer of a sexual offence; or to protect confidential information.’
The procedures that are in place to protect witnesses have been utilised in this case, so not really ‘decided unilaterally’.
Jingso.Jimsie 10th March 2020 at 10:46
A quick Google re public access to courts:
…
The procedures that are in place to protect witnesses have been utilised in this case, so not really ‘decided unilaterally’.
=====================
Agreed, re: restrictions mentioned above.
But, I'm also referring to the fact that a public body is deciding which reporters are allowed to attend a criminal Court hearing – and which reporters, including citizen journalists, to bar from proceedings.
Some bloggers nowadays have a significantly wider reach than some print media outlets.
This 'selection' doesn't seem right, IMO.
Anyone who missed the "library basement" piece by John James at the weekend has, well, missed it. It, and everything apart from a piece dated yesterday and two paywall pieces including some pseud nod to Shakespeare, has gone. I don't know if this is part of the terms and conditions of the many different forms of contract negotiated/imposed on that site but each to their own. Going by what I would call "Comments" but are called "Thoughts" on that site the lieges are delighted. When you read the views of the site supporters you can't help thinking the author, proprietor, majority voteholder, editor and sole beneficiary couldn't have written more glowing reviews, tributes and expressions of admiration himself. If he could they would be there.
There's only one viewable piece on the entire site and yet the first and last paragraphs manage to include a self-penned description of the author etc. as "humble". A little less of The Bard Of Govan and a little more Dickens would help.
Looking at the bright side if there are that many "Thoughts", and you only get your "Thoughts" aired if you are not a parasite, simple arithmetic tells us funding must be robust leaving other bloggers to look on with envy and jealousy and leaving belly and backbone in different postcodes.
https://za.investing.com/equities/micromega-holdings-ltd-chart
Quick update on King's company in Sth Africa , down 12% to 189 (from 215) so far today which is a reminder that this recession/depression is a global phenomena with very few safe havens . When companies get squeezed they call in debts , heavily indebted companies are the first to go . That may leave King with a dilemma in the near future if he needs to call in a loan to Rangers* to help Sebata . Be in no doubt that this virus is not to blame, it's merely the straw that broke the camels back from years of mismanagement, abuse and greed .
Timtim, I don’t know what to read into King’s share price being down. I read in the past couple of days that Celtic’s share price is down from the start of the year and you couldn’t get a more healthy club financially.
The people who manipulate share prices are gamblers nothing more nothing less.
@Jimbo it's future expectations , Celtic is healthy and well managed but it relies on a healthy economy to function well. When people lose their jobs or inflation kicks in then people have to make sacrifices . They cancel sky or don't buy that ST or strip etc . Historically football tended to thrive during recessionary times as people were looking for an escape but then it was an affordable pastime ,that's not the case now . Transfer fees drop, advertising revenue goes down , attendances suffer etc etc. A affects B affects C and so on , the strong can manage the storm and recover , the weak go to the wall. In this regard the laws of business are the same as the laws of nature. Your last sentence though is spot on , the economy for many is a casino and like Murray or Trump or King they play it using other peoples money . Debt is never written off it is merely added to the taxpayers bill or taken from the value of the fiat currency.
‘StevieBC 10th March 2020 at 11:25
But, I’m also referring to the fact that a public body is deciding which reporters are allowed to attend a criminal Court hearing – and which reporters, including citizen journalists, to bar from proceedings…’
#################################
There’s a piece by Dani Garavelli in the Scotsman which indicates that the number of journalists (and I expect those scribes will have the required accreditation & be NUJ members & thus aware of what is permissible to propagate from the court itself) is limited by the facilities, in a converted court-room, available to them. They’re not in court during ‘sensitive’ evidence; they’re listening to a link.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/dani-garavelli-strange-scenes-outside-alex-salmond-trial-2444730
The case is being widely reported: James Doleman is tweeting live updates. I fully accept there is a place for other non-professionals (I don’t mean that in any way disparagingly, BTW) to report on cases where there is no other (or very limited) coverage. That’s not the situation here.
Timtim,
I have to say that your posts on the mega rich scumbags are spot on, and Jimbo.ji sie is covering things very important, too.
I'm afraid I am rather three sheets to the wind having enjoyed a glass or two in the Lanzarote sun so don't ask me to expand on what I am saying…just be jealous
The mention of Court proceedings made me look at my emails where I see a judgment issued today.
Summary:
The [English] Court of Appeal finds that the Appellant’s non-gender identification engages Article 8, as there can be little more central to a citizen’s private life than gender [47-48]. In this case however, the passport issue cannot reasonably be considered in isolation, given that the driver for change is the notion of respect for gender identity across the board [71]. The court finds that there was no positive obligation on the state to provide an “X” marker in order to ensure the right of the Appellant to respect for private life. Therefore, the current policy of HMPO does not amount to an unlawful breach of the Appellant’s Article 8 private life rights [108].
Elan-Cane -v- Home Secretary
10-03-2020 10:50 AM GMT
Neutral Citation Number: [2020] EWCA Civ 363 Case No: C4/2018/2086 In The Court Of Appeal (Civil Division) On Appeal From The High Court Of Justice Queen’s Bench Division 10 March 2020 Before: Lady Justice King Lord Justice Irwin and Lord Justice Henderson Between: The Queen (On The Application Of Elan-Cane) – Appellant – and […]
(Just thought I'd share that with you!)
https://twitter.com/scotnational/status/1237403965186363393?s=21
The SFA are springing into action.
Ex Ludo
Timely???
https://twitter.com/record_sport/status/1237322258135334917?s=21
”Floating “ pitch you say?
Ex Ludo 10th March 2020 at 16:54
https://twitter.com/scotnational/status/1237403965186363393?s=21
The SFA are springing into action.
========
Now that the Hampden blazers have woken up – and asked a question about insurance cover…
Maxwell has rushed out a follow up statement;
"The SFA is doing everything in its power to minimise the risk and has today enforced an immediate ban throughout the Hampden hospitality areas: Corona Beer will not be allowed on the premises."
Interesting tweet re checking insurance , would point to the SFA actively considering closed door games and maybe more relevant putting the onus on the clubs for not protecting themselves . Are they just getting ahead of themselves?
I am slightly jealous of AJ sunning himself in Lanzarote as the Canaries were an annual family jaunt in Feb/March for me , Playa Blanca being my choice on that island . I have since discovered Madeira where I dream of retiring to ……one day. Actually I'm very jealous AJ , I really need some sun.
Timtim 10th March 2020 at 19:28
Interesting tweet re checking insurance , would point to the SFA actively considering closed door games and maybe more relevant putting the onus on the clubs for not protecting themselves . Are they just getting ahead of themselves?
==================================
I don’t think they are getting ahead of themselves. I assume that each SPFL club determines the level of cover that they need. I’d assume that Celtic would require, and pay for, better cover than say Livingston or Albion Rovers.
I don’t think that either the SFA or the SPFL have the resources or reserves to bail out anyone, at least at the Premier League level.
The Lowland League at tier 5 operates a group insurance policy on behalf of all its clubs. It’s a mandatory requirement that clubs subscribe to the policy. I guess that it is easier for lower leagues to operate such a scheme as all their clubs are similar in their size and needs, therefore the LL is in a position to negotiate a better deal for everyone within a collective policy
There's no way the sfa/spfl will be bailing any club out , they don't have the resources and wouldn't want to set a precedent even if they did.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/03/10/risky-business/#more-15928
P MacG alluding to a certain club having let their policy lapse due to cash flow issues , maybe more wishful thinking than backed by hard fact but knowing how they operate and cut corners would not be a great surprise .One thing is for sure ,any club without adequate cover will not be able to find a broker now that will offer a deal.I also note that the return leg in Leverkusen has now been made a closed doors event so may benefit the away club more. Talking of benefits I see Mr Beaton will be the ref for Sunday's game , after his last performance in this fixture I don't know if that's the wisest of decisions , whatever the result the conspiracy theorists will have a ball.
https://twitter.com/btsportfootball/status/1237465959839019011?s=21
Inside the Mestalla.
The UEFA website 'news' page yesterday ,listing a few 'closed doors' games also had this :
"In addition, the UEFA Youth League match FC Internazionale Milano vs Stade Rennais FC, scheduled to be played on 11 March 2020 at 15:00 CET at FIGC National Team Technical Center, will not take place following the refusal to play of FC Internazionale Milano. The UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body will take a decision regarding this matter in due course."
As far as I can see from the website of the Rennes youth team they were prepared to travel to Italy!
I wonder whether , given that Bayern Leverkusen's home game v TRFC will be behind closed doors, they might properly request that Thursday's game also be played behind closed doors.
After all, losing home advantage by reason of 'force majeure' introduces an element of unfairness, ist nicht so?
Allyjambo 10th March 2020 at 15:08
I'm afraid I am rather three sheets to the wind having enjoyed a glass or two in the Lanzarote sun so don't ask me to expand on what I am saying…just be jealous
………………………..
Too scared to go see the Buddies, eh?
me, too. (Huh, cmon the buddies! I have great faith… worked well in 2013….)
I’m in the fabled Playa Blanca, of which Tim Tim speaks.
nirvana for me. Done a shoal of hills, the day. Done rehydrating practice.
still logging on… for the big [must be soon!) crash….
Ex Ludo 10th March 2020 at 22:18
'..Inside the Mestalla.'
%%%%%%%%%
You know, when I saw that picture , I thought immediately of the 'winchers stance' statue in Buchanan St bus station, Glasgow. I always give one of the figures a wee pat as I pass.
That statue represents you and me and everybody else who has been waiting in a bus station or arriving at a bus station to meet a loved one after a period of separation.
And the Mestalla figure poignantly represents the humble football supporter , the very life-blood of the game, blind physically, but nowhere near as blind morally as our Football Governance people are who have caused immense damage to the game by their cowardice and complicity in sporting wrongdoing.
JohnClark@23.24
Yes, it’s hugely symbolic given the present situation. The statues at football grounds tend to be outside the stadiums. I’m unaware of anything similar to the Mestalla inside football grounds.