by Auldheid for the Scottish Football Monitor
On these pages at least there is a mounting lack of trust that the Scottish Football Association can or will govern our game in a fair and honest manner that recognises the principle of sporting integrity as paramount.
This mistrust is equalled only by the frustration at being unable to do anything to change the attitude and action of those at the SFA (and Leagues) responsible for that governance, a frustration compounded by the reluctance of the mainstream media to focus on the very issues of trust and integrity that concern us.
Back in early 2010 Celtic supporters represented by the Celtic Trust, various Association groups and individuals felt the same frustration and found a way to make their voices heard at the SFA – by using their club as a channel of communication to articulate their concerns.
A resolution was agreed and passed to Celtic to convey to the SFA and it was heeded by the club. There is no reason in why a similar conduit cannot be used by supporters groups of all clubs.
The enormity of the task, to get the majority of trusts and associations of all clubs to support this approach and give it sufficient weight, should not be underestimated, but in the interests of amplifying our voice, it is worth the effort.
Based on that 2010 experience, and on the discussion that has taken place on TSFM we have arrived at a (now amended) resolution below under the auspices of TSFM and which has been sent to all representative club supporters groups.
We believe one of the reasons the SFA and SPL were able to mislead (or simply fail to provide leadership) was because of the lack of clarity surrounding who should take provide that leadership and what principles should have been paramount.
The SFA were as tied to the commercial impact of Rangers demise as the SPL and indeed had to be reminded by the supporters of the importance of that sporting integrity. In the aftermath of the Rangers implosion, both the SFA and Leagues on the face of it appear still too commercially oriented to act in a way that balances commercialism and sporting principles.
We have attempted to address this in the resolution below. It also contains additional points raised already on TSFM and elsewhere. It is designed to assist in the widening of accountability in the sport.
We are not wed to the draft or the language. It is there to be revised but we hope it contains enough food for thought to be acceptable to the supporters groups and the clubs.
As recently as today, the SFA has published a Fans Charter. We welcome this development, and although it does not address our specific concerns with respect to governance it is a step in the right direction (http://www.fanscharter.com/).
Some of the principles published are;
- Challenge is to make a National Fans Charter known, accepted and influential
- Getting fan involvement in drafting charter important to acceptance, influence and growing awareness.
We think our resolution is an even bigger step in the direction of those principles.
DRAFT Proposal for Representative Supporter Groups e.g. Trusts or Associations to send to their club to convey to the SFA/SPL/SFL Boards.
We [Insert Association/Trust name here] and in association with fans’ groups of other clubs, ask [Insert Club name here] to convey the following to the Scottish Football Association, SPL and SFL on our behalf.
1 We believe that the commercial viability of Scottish football at the professional level depends absolutely on the belief by supporters that sporting integrity is at the heart of all competition, and that those governing them and the rules by which they exercise governance, must hold sporting integrity as paramount above ALL other concerns. This belief can be summed up in the one word “trust” Without trust in those responsible for governing Scottish Football, commercial viability will suffer, to eventual ruin of our game.
2 There is a perception (accompanied by some dismay and anger) among football supporters throughout Scotland that those who were charged with upholding the rules of the SFA and SPL/SFL, only did so partially – and even then only because of the threat of supporter action if they did not.
3 There appears to be no distinction or order of hierarchy between those governing the game (the SFA) for whom we believe preservation of sporting integrity should be the prime purpose, and the leagues (SPL/SFL) for whom commercial aspects are (understandably) uppermost. As a result sporting integrity lost its primacy and it was left to supporters to insist on it.
4 Consequently many Scottish football supporters have lost confidence that the Scottish Football Association will fulfil their purpose of safeguarding the sport. Indeed their silence following the revelation of a 5 way agreement last summer on the future of the liquidated Glasgow Rangers has exacerbated this loss of confidence in the SFA’s ability to administer professional football in Scotland in a manner that reflects their duty of care to all aspects of the game and everyone who takes part in it.
5 Decisions and deals have been taken by the SFA, SPL, and SFL without any public scrutiny. The operations and decisions of those bodies lack transparency and they are not accountable in any recognisable form to the football supporters throughout the land, without whom there is no professional association.
6 In our view this loss of trust can only begin to be restored by the SFA publically committing itself to:
(i) The production of an unequivocal “mission” statement of purpose/intent which will state (in whatever form they may exist) that maintaining sporting integrity is and will always be their prime goal. The statement will also describe how they intend to ensure this principle is followed in their interactions with Leagues and Clubs, particularly when commercial decisions that might undermine sporting integrity are implemented by the Leagues. (e.g. In the case of TV contracts, sponsorship or any significant league reconstruction).
(ii) Further: in recognition of the inability of some individuals to provide leadership during the past year simply because of conflicts of interest, take steps to remove any such conflict, and in doing so enable the organisation and its office bearers to function unhindered.
(iii) In the interests of transparency, publish the “five point agreement” that allowed The Rangers entry into SFL and SFA, provide a supporting rationale for entering into the agreement, and confirm that the terms have been or are being complied with.
Along with other trust restoring measures (see attached Annex) these steps should mark the end of the continuing lack of trust in the authorities.
7. We appreciate that it may be the start of next season before there is any visible evidence of our concerns being addressed although the statement of purpose/intent by the SFA (i) and action at (ii) can be readily put in place – would be a welcome early development.
8. All club’s supporters groups will be watching closely for signs of progress before advising our members and our other supporters if we feel the necessary trust restoring steps are being taken and advise that they can purchase their season books for 2013/14 knowing that sporting integrity is once more absolutely paramount in Scottish football to the betterment of our game.
Signed __________________________ on behalf of
[Insert supporter trust/association name here]
Date ______________
Annex to resolution.
The following is a list of other measures that the SFA should take in order to satisfy supporters that they should be entrusted with the job of governing Scottish football.
- To increase transparency and accountability in a meaningful way – possibly via creation of an active supporter’s liaison group drawn from representative supporter groups of each club. Its remit, using an agreed consultative mechanism to generate dialogue, to hear supporters’ concerns and consider them before key decisions are made. In an industry that is totally interdependent it is folly to exclude a major stakeholder from key decision making.
- A tightening of and an annual and independent audit of the process for granting UEFA Club (FFP) and National Club licensing reporting to the representative supporter liaison group as well as other SFA members to ensure all clubs are living within their means.
- Introduction of a rule requiring all Scottish football club directors to declare any financial interest/shareholding in any club other than their own and to rule that disposition of those shares/interest should be a part of a fit and proper assessment of a person’s qualification to hold office at an association club.
- A feasibility review of Scottish refereeing to assess the potential for creating a professional service that the SFA provide to the leagues by recruiting and training referees, but where the leagues monitor and reward consistently good performances to an agreed standard. Given the sums dependent on referee decisions, the current system must change for everyone’s sake including the referees.
- A full explanation about the circumstances (including dates) surrounding the award of a UEFA Club licence to Rangers in spring/summer of 2011 when there was unpaid social tax that prime facie did not meet the conditions for deeming the granting of a licence acceptable under the UEFA FFP rules on unpaid tax (the wee tax bill).
The [Insert Club Name here] Trust/Supporters Association asks [Insert Club Name here] to convey our concerns above with their provenance to the appropriate authorities as they see fit viz:
- Football Authority in Scotland (The SFA)
- Europe (UEFA)
- Scottish Government (on the issue of accountability to supporters and proper checks and balance governance.)
Edited to keep the mods/censors happy, but an interesting slant nevertheless.
Posted on KDS.
SensibleHibby Today, 9:43 PM Post #728 [Tweet]
Occasional Substitute
Group:
Members
Favourite all-time player
Pat Stanton
Q: If there is no ‘tax liability’ on Newco **** then why would he even consider corresponding with HMRC “in the strongest possible terms”?
A: Because HMRC can instruct the appointed liquidators, BDO, to reclaim the assets sold off from Oldco **** to Newco **** for the under-valued sum of £5.5Million.
And Chuck knows this, thats why he’s shampootin’ his pants right now.
It’s been a while since I posted.
As a lapsed fan of the team playing out of Ibrox, I can’t help but think that the quicker the LNS enquiry and the UTT case are over, the better.
If Rangers are found guilty of paying their players outside of the rules (as any sensible person would find), the Titles are removed, the “Old Co” is fined and a proper “New Co” is started.
The good history is left behind with the bad history and a new Rangers emerge. Time for a dose of reality. Fans might leave, but, I suspect, those fans that do leave are only there for the “Culture”, not the beautiful game.
But at least there might be a Club left.
Unfortunately some of the support (and I don’t know the %) seem more concerned with what the Club won, and who is “kicking them when they are down” and how they can retaliate, than what the Club should be doing today, Feb. 2013.
This is no ones fault other than those who were in charge of the Club.
Very sad.
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
The good history is left behind with the bad history and a new Rangers emerge. Time for a dose of reality. Fans might leave, but, I suspect, those fans that do leave are only there for the “Culture”, not the beautiful game.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s not a “culture” for some. It’s a political movement. You can’t tell me that those moaning Minnies from Norn Ireland upset about the flag flying restrictions haven’t been over here stirring the pot with a big spoon not long after CG was over there asking for their money. Can You?
bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 01:02
I’m not looking to tell anybody anything. I’ve never been to “Norn Ireland”, I’m simply stating my opinion.
And it wasn’t a political/religious one.
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 01:06
bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 01:02
I’m not looking to tell anybody anything. I’ve never been to “Norn Ireland”, I’m simply stating my opinion.
And it wasn’t a political/religious one.
=========================================================================
It was a rhetorical question.
Ok – your point wasn’t religious – neither was mine. Your point wasn’t political. Mine was. What do you mean by “Culture”
bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 01:12
“It was a rhetorical question”
If it’s a rhetorical question, then you already know the answer?
Look, I have no intention of getting into any argument with anyone here. It’s a well known fact that a section of TRFC support still live in the 17th Century, where “No Surrender” means that the application of the Rules, should not matter. I certainly do not subscribe to that – my posts on here and on RTC should confirm that.
I can roll with the punches, but I can answer for everyone (500 million….ahem) who support Rangers.
Good God – I meant “Can’t answer”
Apologies. I don’t have the time or the mindset to do that!
theglen2012
I commend your reasonable approach to a disastrous period for your club .
IMO the Murray era ,although bringing trophy’s on the park ,will go down as the worst period of business in the running of the club .
I have stated a few times that there was always going to be a new club set up to fill the void of the old club and had hoped that the real football fans would finally pick up the baton and emerge in the driving seat ,alas I believe the opposite now exists .
The entity that has emerged ,instead of being more moderate ,modern and forward thinking ,is more radical backward and entrenched .
The fans needed a new club with strong leadership with a solid business acumen and plan ,not a new club with a rabble rousing leadership with a very precarious business strategy (7m wage bill in 3rd div ).
A leadership that seems to think the fans could not be trusted to be told exactly what situation the new club will find itself in and trust them to back the new club no matter what.
They did not need promises of 10m transfer kitty’s,bumper kit deals ,CL last 16 regularly and a new deck on the stadium .
Would the fans who now attend ,not have done so if they were told
We regret the tarnishing of the old club name by foolish policy decision making and we make a promise that there will be a structure put in place to ensure no repeat .
This club needs the fans now more than ever and regrets having to ask you ,the fans to shoulder a very heavy financial burden to help us build the club on a solid financial footing from the offset .
etc.
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
64 3 Rate This
Unfortunately some of the support (and I don’t know the %) seem more concerned with what the Club won, and who is “kicking them when they are down” and how they can retaliate, than what the Club should be doing today, Feb. 2013.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One wonders if the numbers of those that engaged in the boycott versus those that still went along provides us with any indication of the percentage split? At least amongst the travelling support. Roughly 90/10?
Glen2012
It seems to me that the death of Rangers has just been too big for many in football to contemplate and handle.
It is as if the guy applying the electric shock treatment to start the heart is shouting ” clear” for the 25th time whilst being abused by the relatives of the deceased
When their situation is realised then all the factors including the culture that precipitated that death will have to looked at and the unhealthy stuff dropped or risk a repeat.
I believe there is a future for a new Rangers if it is built on ethics. Ethics often require unselfish decisions and letting go of attachments. A football club is not defined by where it plays but by those who occupy the stadium.
Ground sharing would cut costs and allow some creditors to be paid which would have to be seen as a redeeming factor, as would surrender (now there is a break from tradition) voluntarily of titles won rather than threatening those who feel they have been wronged.
This will require a newmindset and I hope that many more like you speak their minds in order to persuade others. The kind of change needed has to come from within.
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
96 3 i
Rate This
It’s been a while since I posted.
As a lapsed fan of the team playing out of Ibrox, I can’t help but think that the quicker the LNS enquiry and the UTT case are over, the better.
If Rangers are found guilty of paying their players outside of the rules (as any sensible person would find), the Titles are removed, the “Old Co” is fined and a proper “New Co” is started.
The good history is left behind with the bad history and a new Rangers emerge. Time for a dose of reality. Fans might leave, but, I suspect, those fans that do leave are only there for the “Culture”, not the beautiful game.
But at least there might be a Club left.
Unfortunately some of the support (and I don’t know the %) seem more concerned with what the Club won, and who is “kicking them when they are down” and how they can retaliate, than what the Club should be doing today, Feb. 2013.
___________________________________________________________________________________
the glen2012’s approach is admirable and he is to be commended for it. Would that all New Rangers supporters were the same.
However,
It is clear that the support which CG wants is not made up of fans like the glen2012 – far from it.
New Rangers’ support, as has been well documented, continue to behave according to the now famous description given them by Ian Archer (deceased) – ” a permanent embarassment and an occasional disgrace.”
In fact, Ian Archer’s phrase may be due an update, in keeping with the current state of affairs,
to ” a permanent embarassment and a constant disgrace.”
They behave, not like football fans, but like footballs worst nightmare.
Further, there are no signs that their defiant, vengeful rage is going to dissipate any time soon.
Indeed, for as long as New Rangers are in lower league football, their current mood will probably prevail.
It was Walter Smith who said, after RFC(IL) went into administration, that his biggest disappointment was that no one from within the Rangers family could solve their problems – or words to that effect.
To my mind, this is still the case.
A club which has lost control.
And that’s a big issue for a Loyalist.
A very big issue.
Lord Wobbly says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 07:33
————-
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
64 3 Rate This
==============================================
I’d guess a good number who turned up were local …from the bulk of the TRFC fans – the Glasgow/WoS fans – there were maybe some who went along with the boycott because the club officially supported it and some who were a bit scared not to break it.
Taking that DU game attendance as any measure is wrong I think. I suspect (just opinion but so is eveyone else’s thoughts here on this) I’d say the extremist fans are probably a minority but unfortunately a large and loud and active (and sometimes threatening) minority.
monsieurbunny says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 09:27
Lord Wobbly says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 07:33
————-
theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
64 3 Rate This
==============================================
I’d guess a good number who turned up were local …from the bulk of the TRFC fans – the Glasgow/WoS fans – there were maybe some who went along with the boycott because the club officially supported it and some who were a bit scared not to break it.
Taking that DU game attendance as any measure is wrong I think. I suspect (just opinion but so is eveyone else’s thoughts here on this) I’d say the extremist fans are probably a minority but unfortunately a large and loud and active (and sometimes threatening) minority.
====================================
If it was a minority then it would be easy for the majority to shout them down. That this doesn’t happen tells us all we need to know. It would be easier to get a Muslim to eat a Tesco burger than it would be for RFC to get rid of these “fans”.
Did anyone find the news interesting yesterday?
Europol (sp) have discovered systemic cheating across the European leagues with specific regards to match fixing.
How does one define match fixing I wonder?
The heat is very much on UEFA at the moment but surely they should extend the investigation beyond betting scandals and include illegally registered players?
How many did the old Rangers potentially field on there way to the UEFA cup final of 2008 for example?
whether its attending games,or boycotting, it seems that intimidation is the tactic employed. The new Rangers football club will not be accepted back by the senior clubs of Scottish football, or at least by their fans until this mindset changes. There needs to be fundamental changes to this new club that allows democracy, freedom and an all inclusive approach.
New Rangers needs to be a football club first and foremost and not this political dinosaur that is completely out of touch with a modern Scotland.
It will never succeed by threats, boycotts and intimidation. I would make sure that a clubs charter is in place before TRFC gets to the top league and the charter will state that no club can join this league or operate within this league whilst encouraging boycotts, disrespecting fellow members or any aspect of bullying against management or officials.
I would also dock a point from Celtic, Rangers, Hibs , Hearts and the rest whenever a banned song is sung. I would also encourage the clubs to disown so called club websites that encourage Neanderthal behaviour. It will take a major effort to drag the majority into the 21st century but there is always hope.
I pub landlord in Scotland who took over ownership of a number of pubs was asked if he ever threw out Scottish people and his answer was obviously yes. He said that on their first day they threw out 30 people but it was not because they were too drunk but because they introduced a no swearing rule.
He said that those who where thrown out did return…with their wives.
So the moral of the story is people who would have you believe their position is set in stone can change when faced with no alternative. A modern RFC based on sport and sport alone would still attract a huge support , after all, what are these fans going to do ? Spend Saturday afternoon in the pub with their wives.
I’d hazard a guess that the TRFC fans who turned up at Tannadice were the real fans, the ones who only want to watch their team play football, the ones who realised that by boycotting Tannadice and Dundee United they would also be boycotting their own club. I have no doubt too, that many who didn’t go to the game, despite what they might say amongst their own, stayed home purely out of fear – genuine physical fear or fear of being treated as scabs. I wouldn’t be at all surprised, but still mightily shocked, if one day soon a huge schism comes between various sections of TRFC’s support, with the more moderate calling for common sense and reconciliation within the game, and those who see protest and violence as the only answer, ever, to their problems escalating into all out war. I can see this leading to violence within their ranks which will spill over into assaults, and maybe worse, on those totally innocent, but seen as guilty by the Rangers’ hordes for over a century! If the removal of one flag, from one building, can cause the mayhem in Belfast we’ve seen in the past weeks, just think how, should it happen, the collapse of Green’s Rangers might affect those of a similar mindset!
What chance of a line being drawn and everyone can get on with Scottish football when Charlie has put Traynor in charge of the tool cupboard ,its now not being beaten with big sticks its crowbars ,you certainly have a strange mind Jim.
theglen2012 says: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:51
Welcome back to the blog, we do need to get reasonable fans of ‘Gers on here to give their input…
Going back to HMRC: I am enjoying the knots that Green et al are going through by having to refer to the OldCo and distance themselves from the debts incurred by the old “club”.
Also VERY interested in these comments regarding how muach was actually raised by the float. That does seem to make a lot more sense – couldn’t understand why the “city” was investing so much but if it was a debt for equity swap, that makes a little more sense to me… Also isn’t new Rangers wage bill around £7m? If so they are burning through their cash pile pre-tty quickly.
I wonder how many of the Europol matches investigated involved, not the players, but the referees.
I listened to your interview last night Mr. Traynor and although there were several anomalies regarding the tax case, (RFC were not found to be innocent, merely less guilty than anyone assumed, inc. DM), the punishments bestowed upon TRFC, (there have been no punishments handed to the new club other than the transfer ban), the main thing that caught my attention was your continual insistence that you were not issuing threats when suggesting alternative ways of skinning the cat.
I don’t believe you.
You stated that you hadn’t spoken to your boss regarding any regret over the boycott.
I don’t believe you.
You are the Director of Communications. I assume a mobile telephone is part of the deal?
You stated that TRFC should be part of the decision making in Scottish football because they are the biggest club in the land.
I don’t believe you.
Neither does HK, the man who would not even utter the ‘A’ word 18 months ago. He mentioned something along the lines of RFC having a 1st anniversary and CFC playing some side from overseas. Go figure.
The boycott was a huge success for every other group of football supporters in Scotland.
The Dundee United supporters made sure it was a party. Something to celebrate and a great day out.
I wonder how many arrests there were without TRFC?
I wonder how much damage was done inside the stadium without TRFC? Arabest?
The boycott portrayed what is wrong with TRFC and it backfired spectacularly and you know it. You stated quite clearly it was not the way to do things re skinning the poor cat.
What it done though was prove once and for all what everyone else knows. Scottish football does NOT need TRFC.
It is a happier place to be. It is safer. It is more sporting. Oh, and the football is better.
And if you don’t believe me, ask the supporters of Hearts, Kilmarnock and St. Mirren just to begin with.
Personally, I’m delighted with your new position. It’s gonna be fun.
Btw, you never did tell Jim Spence where your team was playing on Saturday 🙂
Going back to the debt for equity swap suggestion, this would also make sense if they, as senior suggested, have some sort of lock in. I couldn’t understand why more “professional investors” weren’t cashing in on an immediate 28% return on their investment whioch they could then reinvest into somehwere they might make additional returns or at least manage the potential risk associated with the share price dropping back. I know this is all speculation based on hearsay or rumours, but isn’t that what the City is? 😉
jockybhoy says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 10:46
Also isn’t new Rangers wage bill around £7m? If so they are burning through their cash pile pre-tty quickly.
======
I’ve just looked again at the prospectus. Based on that, the total annual wage bill is around £14.5m (that covers 175 total staff, of which 45 players) Other expenses come to approx. £8m per annum.
Taking everything into account, there should have been around £5m in the bank at the end of December, so with £9m from the IPO, that gives them £14m available to cover expenses and wages until the next tranche of season ticket money arrives. That’s about 7 months’ worth on my figures, and of course there will be some money coming in from match-day tickets, pies, etc.
So they should, just, make it through the summer, but then the fun really starts. How can they possibly cover £20m+ of expenditure next season? I can’t see total income getting past £14m even if season ticket sales go well. Green just has to get expenditure down substantially, or it’s goodbye RIFC. Another IPO is surely not a realistic option. As for the £10m warchest, that really is pie in the sky. The transfer embargo is a Godsend for Green right now.
Of course all the above is blown away if PhilMac is correct, and there are creditors (men from the east!) knocking on the door. In that case, the game’s a bogey right now. No wonder Green looks like a man under real pressure.
neepheid says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 11:55
————————————————–
Thing is, is CG spends all that money keeping the club running…..what does HE and his consortium get out of it?
He’ll need to take his slice NOW, while the cash is there – which shortens your 7 months life expectancy somewhat
RFC using EBTs to avoid tax and sign players they couldn’t afford
Lance armstrong (and LOADS of others) taking banned substances to win trophies he couldn’t manage on his own
Europol suggesting hundreds of matches are fixed in betting scams
Andy Murray calling for more widespread drug testing in tennis
Ten of the twelve members of the gold medal-winning Spanish basketball team at the 2000 Summer Paralympics were revealed to have no disability
NBA referee -Tim Donaghy – under investigation in 2007 for betting on league games, including some in which he worked.
Investigation into a gambling ring allegedly operated by National Hockey League assistant coach Rick Tocchet.
In July 2011, As part of a major match-fixing investigation by authorities in Turkey, nearly 60 people suspected to be involved with fixing games were detained by İstanbul Police Department Organized Crime Control Bureau and then arrested by the court
Bundesliga scandal (2005) – a match fixing scandal in German football centering on disgraced referee Robert Hoyzer.
Brazilian football match-fixing scandal (2005) – another match fixing scandal involving referees, this time in Brazil.
2006 Italian football scandal – a match fixing scandal in Italian football involving several major teams, including three of the country’s four qualifiers to the 2006-07 UEFA Champions League.
“Bloodgate” – A scheme by the English rugby union club Harlequins to fake an injury to wing Tom Williams to allow a blood replacement to be brought on at a critical moment in their 2009 Heineken Cup quarterfinal against Leinster. The scheme, which included deliberately cutting Williams’ mouth open after the match in order to cover up the fake injury, ultimately led to Quins head coach Dean Richards being banned from the sport for three years
Hansiegate – scandal in 2000 involving former South African cricket captain Hansie Cronje with three other teammates for involving in match fixing.
Pakistan cricket spot-fixing scandal – In 2010, three Pakistan players—team captain Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir—were accused of involvement in a spot-fixing scheme in which they allegedly accepted large sums of money to influence specific events within a match, as opposed to an actual match result. After an investigation, the ICC banned all three from the sport for periods from 5 to 10 years. Later, Butt and Asif were tried in a London court and found guilty of charges related to the scheme, whilst Amir pleaded guilty to similar charges in the same court. All received prison sentences ranging from 6 to 30 months.
Kieren Fallon race fixing scandal
Boxing – in general!
—————————–
just a wee selection of recent scandals in world sport.
really, why do we bother. it’s just about money, money and more money. By watching we only encourage the spivs.
jockybhoy says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 10:46
re the wage bill, when the prospectus came out there was an interesting discussion at
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/rangers-share-prospectus-sees-the-light-of-day-discussion-here-please/comment-page-1/#comments
where Cowbig,Ecojohn, Stephensanph and Adam (yup Adam) reached a consensus that the total wage bill including Admin staff, Directors and Tax/NI was £14.5M. The £7M referring to players wages only.
Anybody got harder info?
neepheid says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 11:55
Snap! And I think you are correct about next season and this depending on the shortfall in the share cash income.
I would like to throw something into the mix, something that I have always believed and still do no matter evidence is presented to me that appears to contradict my view. More so now that I have heard feedback from some Arabs and the report from GS about his experience in among the fans.
I don’t think believe that the majority of Rangers fans are bigots or racists! I don’t believe that about the fans of any club.
I don’t believe that any more than I believe I am a fatist (is that a real word?), ageist or any other distinguishing feature I choose to pick on as I make fun of or a joke at someone’s expense. I don’t have a hatred or dislike for people who are thin, I don’t treat them differently just because they are thin, I don’t revel in any ailments they may have due their current weight and appearance and I certainly don’t feel I am better than them simply due to me being of average weight… But it doesn’t stop me making jokes about pencils or matchsticks (when the person has red hair) when the opportunity arises.
So when thousands of people belt out a racist or offensive song at The Scottish Cup Final, I am not immediately enraged about being surrounded by a group of intolerant people. Reason being, I just think some of them join in not even thinking about the words, others are ignorant to the meaning and a lot of them are drunk and would sing and dance to the birdie song if the others started.
I understand the argument between “banter” and “abuse” but the point I am making is that although it comes across as abuse, I believe a lot of these fans believe it is banter.
Are we seriously saying that some of the lower working class cretins that we hear singing those songs or posting threats on the internet every week, walk about with a feeling of superiority over the average educated person? Sorry, not buying it. If I look at some of the people up in court over the last 24 months for incidents involving football, none of them gave me a feeling that they felt they were better than anyone, they were just bitter, angry individuals frustrated at their own inability to progress in life and lashed out accordingly, if anything, it was the opposite, they resented feeling inferior.
I am however more disappointed and frustrated by the individuals who make comments knowing exactly what that comment means to the ignorant, I am talking about The Club CEO or other directors, Coaches, former players, media pundits or reporters and fan representatives. These are the real bigots and racists in our mist, they are the ones who know exactly what they are doing and why.
This is why I would recommend not concentrating too much on what the individuals on the stands say or do and focus our attention on the leaders of those masses, no point preaching to a child whose parents have an opposing belief. Minority/Majority of fans singing? Who cares about the amount? As in all cases, the majority are always led by a minority, let us stick to challenging that minority.
One of quotes I read from GS made me take note and kick started this little rant, when speaking with The Rangers Fans, he said something along the lines of “what do you think of the boycott?”, and the response “I cannot be arsed with boycotts mate”. And in there lies a part of the truth, a lot of fans only want to go see the game and are not interested in the politics being played by others. Our aim should be to increase that mindset by decreasing the spin!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21338533
Alex McLeish has left the club by mutual consent after just 40 days in charge.
If they spend the money from the IPO keeping the club operating then it will be loans from the holding company. Which will have to be paid back with interest and charges.
The football club would simply be going back into debt, albeit to the company who owned them. Not that much different from the setup with Wavetower.
Madbhoy
Have you just explained your nom de plume.
Heids both Neep & Auld….
The exact figure for NewRangers wage bill is obviously moot – I think we all know it is too high for the league they are in (heck its probably too high for the SPL if Willo Flood is on £2k/week!) and as you say they can’t keep going back to the captial markets to top up whenever they feel like it.
As you also say, the “ban” was probably the best thing financially that could have happened to NewCo as it gave them no chance to “invest” in players. What will be interesting is how the board deals with the pressure from the fans to top up the squad on the expiry of the ban. The prospectus was pretty clear, and insti investors have quoted it as being a reason to invest, that the wage bill would “stick” at one third of turnover. If as you suggest over the next couple of years turnover is consistently £15m, then that’s c. £4.5m for player wages. That means there is still another 1/3 to come off NewCo’s player salaries’ bill, even allowing for attrition of the older players contracts expiring, that’s quite a chunk of wages still to lose…
The EBT 5
the FTT found that 5 players had been paid contractual wages via an EBT thus avoiding tax.
So, i have some questions
if they were paid wages via an EBT and no tax was paid – if the contract lodged with the SFA included the EBT details, do they have a case to answer to the SFA/SPL in regards the non payment of tax (i.e. does this invalidate their registration or are the club guilty of the non payment of social taxes? affecting things like UEFA license)
Basically, have they broken a football rule by paying players this way
If the EBT was not disclosed to the SFA along with the players contract – will this 5 admitted cases be part of LNS’s enquiry? The club have admitted they paid contractual wages via an EBT, so wouldn’t this 5 be a starting point for LNS? I guess we’ll find out next week/month when they write it up.
basically, when will ANY action be taken over the Wee Tax case (Discounted Options Scheme to De Boer and Flo) and over the 5 ADMITTED cases where players were paid illegally through an EBT?
@Neepheid A WU Order can, of course, be merely a “shake down”. People want paid and they have to go there. However, it is never a good sign.
When it gets to the stage that a Winding Up order is being used to get paid I think “never a good sign” is being a bit generous.
Petitioning the Court to have a business wound up if they do not pay you should only really be a last option.
Such is the lack of information flowing from Ibrox , that none of us can know how well or how badly the club is doing financially.
That alone ought to have been enough for their application to join the league to be declined. The ludicrous gamble of putting in a brand new unknow, unknowable entity into the league syatem as an integral part may be about to be revealed as a spectacular misjudgement if Phil Mac and others are speaking true.
The club appears from the outside,and in the absence of concrete information and using best guesstimates, to be unsustainable without outside backers to cover its day-to-day expenses. As such as it is presently constituted it seems to have no long term future.
These guesstimates have all tended to suggest that without external financial support and ignoring the IPO moneys then about now would be when the money runs out! The ipo money would thus be needed at about 1.5 milllion per month from here on in to keep them afloat until the next tranche of ST cash. Dare I suggest that the promises of cash made from the Far East have not, to date, been forthcoming , hence the flurry of rumours and stories of serious trouble doing the rounds.
bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:10
Thanks for the reply bogs…..do you mean these loans from RFC were afterall, not loans? If only the loans had been given to proper Rangers men, you know the types who captained, managed and played for the club, those who ‘know what it means’ to be a Ranger, those ‘nacho men’ who kissed the badge…….then they would shirley have responded in the clubs hour of need, repaid the loans and saved the day……….50 statues lined up in front of the big hoose! The millionaires who never forgot the fans and the great institution that enriched them! 😉
Just a small word to congratulate the fans of TRFC who turned up on saturday to witness that horror show from their side. Despite the threats and intimidation, they actually turned up to support their team and kudos to them for doing so. I know it must be very easy to try to turn that into an extrapolation of the mindset of the support as a whole, but I firmly believe the majority of fans are like those on saturday. How many of us would be brave enough to attend a game, live on TV, knowing that there will be people lining up ‘revenge’ on us for doing so?
However, as for the game itself, Saturday served to show TRFC exactly where they stand in the greater picture. I think a large section thought of themselves as the best team in the country (or if they were being generous, in the top two), and merely happened to be in the wrong division due to the Machiavellian plans of others. So, it must have come as a bit of shock to see themselves picked off seemingly at will by a team whose wage bill is a fraction of their own, to see just how far off the standard they actually are. The response from the Papers, which were really laying into them over the weekend about the result, says to me that the spell has been broken, and they are no longer having the influence that they might once have had – I’m guessing JT has been instrumental in bringing this situation about, and it does seem to have been a major mistake appointing him.
madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:31
“. . . .a lot of (New Rangers) fans only want to go see the game and are not interested in the politics being played by others. ”
________________________________________________________________________________
In the week after RFC(IL) went into administration, RFC were due to play at Ibrox against Kilmarnock, and AMcC was asked about how the RFC fans would react to the news of administration.
In reply, AMcC said that the fans would come to Ibrox and show the world what they were all about.
The fans packed Ibrox out and spent the entire time singing sectarian songs – anti-Catholic and anti-Irish. Songs that were nothing to do with football.
AMcC was also asked what would be the mood of the fans for that same game.
“Defiance” he replied.
On that day, as on many, many others, RFC have shown the world what they’re made of.
Those who’ve seen and heard, over many years, are not mistaken.
” . . . a lot of (New Rangers) fans only want to go see the game.”
I don’t think so.
Take away the politics, the anti-catholic, anti-irish, hatred out of Ibrox?
Take Loyalism out of Rangers ?
I’ll get the dog.
RE tRFC fans at Tannadice. Inside the ground did not hear a peep from them, when approaching the ground I saw one individual chanting about the Pope and goading the fans walking towards him, but he was ignored by everyone, including the police, regrettably.
tomtomaswell says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 09:44
21 1 i
If it was a minority then it would be easy for the majority to shout them down. That this doesn’t happen tells us all we need to know. It would be easier to get a Muslim to eat a Tesco burger than it would be for RFC to get rid of these “fans”.
==========================================================
Only if it’s a small majority. I said it was unfortunately a large minority and that can intimidate a majority – especially if they all have the same mind set and are likley to act in unison against disparate groups.
Re burgers. Do Tesco make their burgers out of ham? Surely most Muslims realise the name (origin obscure though possibly related to Hamburg) has nothing to do with ham. Hindus may avoid them though.
:::
madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:31
Good post: said what I meat to say earlier much better than I could.
Not the Huddle Malcontent;
Quite a good list of sporting misdemeanors.
Any reason why you missed out John Higgins ?!
You’re right though, sport like your average spiv, is all about the money.
dentarthurdent42 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:42
7 0 Rate This
If they spend the money from the IPO keeping the club operating then it will be loans from the holding company. Which will have to be paid back with interest and charges.
The football club would simply be going back into debt, albeit to the company who owned them. Not that much different from the setup with Wavetower.
———————————————–
all well and good, but at some point the “consortium” will want their money
racking up debts will lead to admin, then liquidation and that means pennies (at most) back
so, spending the IPO money to keep things running is a non starter. 1st things 1st, get back the money invested to get the ball rolling – with interest/charges/consultancy fees etc
that leaves less to keep the ship afloat – so are we looking at disaster before the season ends?
And if they ARE looking at a disaster before the season ends, you can be sure they’ll jack up their fees/charges before disappearing – as there won’t be anything left to bleed in years to come. May as well fill your boots now as it ain’t going to last.
This from Mr Hutton at Raith Rovers:
Edward
Thanks for that. We all enjoyed Celtic’s visit. Best team obviously won, but we battled away as best we could on a difficult pitch. Maybe that helped us as I wouldn’t want to play a team as good as Celtic on a bowling green!
The Celtic board were charming, the support great. Interesting that the trainers were never on the pitch. Match was played in a good spirit.
We need Celtic to win the Cup. We can then say we went out to the eventual winners!
Not sure about us reaching the SPL any time soon. League reconstruction may well help us though, as does a good cup draw like we’ve had this year!
Onward and upward.
Good luck in the Champions League.
Kind regards
Turnbull
Contrast this to the outpourings of people in a similar position within the game in Scotland. This man even has the common decency to reply to all my emails without fail. How we need people of this stature at the top of our game.
rougvielovesthejungle says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:29
—————————–
no reason at all – not a snooker fan, so wasn’t on my radar and didn’t jump out on a google search!!!
but the over riding fact is that in commercial/professional sport, or even the amateur game where someone can have a financial interest, there is an all too eager desire to cheat for personal gain.
Not always the participants either.
As spectators though, we are being sold a pup. At every turn someone is on the make and corrupting the sport for their own gain.
We may have to look at draconian measures to clean the game up – banning gambling on sports, prison sentences & HUGE penalties (way beyond what they have amounted in their careers)for anyone found to be cheating – drugs/bungs/gambling/other forms of cheating.
Compulsory expulsion/winding up of clubs involved in any of these nefarious schemes.
Sadly, we’d end up killing the sport completely before we’d weed out the bent ones ruining it all.
Kinda kills ones enjoyment knowing that somewhere, someone has ensured a desirable result for a few quid.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:57
0 0 Rate This
The EBT 5
the FTT found that 5 players had been paid contractual wages via an EBT thus avoiding tax.
…..
========================
The FTT(T) heard the MIH/Rangers QC admitting that in the case of footballers who were given side letters, the EBTs were contractual. LNS really needs no further evidence than to read the witness accounts at the FTT(T).
Regardless of of the taxable status of the sub-trust “loans”, the payments by MIH/Rangers into the player’s trust fund was a contractual benefit arising from playing football.
The SPL rules on contract disclosure are not simply limited to a notification of taxable emoluments. It requires complete disclosure of each player’s contract – and any additions to it – as it relates to playing football.
LNS does not need to concern himself why Rangers declined to disclose these parts of the players’ contracts: only that that choice was made.
The 5 players who had bonuses paid through EBTs are (to me at least) a bit of a red-herring, which tend to deflect/minimise from the real meat of Rangers’ mis-deeds. It may be part of what LNS looks at; but, it is just a small fraction.
HirsutePursuit says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:39
————————————————–
thanks
however, there is also the aspect that for these 5 – tax WAS due to be paid, but wasn’t
as well as not disclosing this part of their contract, (breaking one SPL/SFA rule) have they broken another – for which they should ALSO be punished – by not paying the tax due on these wages?
arabest1 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:10
bogsdollox says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 00:10
Thanks for the reply bogs…..do you mean these loans from RFC were afterall, not loans? If only the loans had been given to proper Rangers men, you know the types who captained, managed and played for the club, those who ‘know what it means’ to be a Ranger, those ‘nacho men’ who kissed the badge…….then they would shirley have responded in the clubs hour of need, repaid the loans and saved the day……….50 statues lined up in front of the big hoose! The millionaires who never forgot the fans and the great institution that enriched them! 😉
===========================================================================
Aye – Nae bother.
As matters stand, two members of the FTT believe they are loans but one believes they are remuneration derived from employment by RFC. This misconception will be sorted out when HMRC win their Appeal and the loans were not from RFC.
I doubt that even repaying the loans would have saved RFC such was the enormity of their debts.
Phil MacGiollaBhain (@Pmacgiollabhain) says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:00
5 0 Rate This
@Neepheid A WU Order can, of course, be merely a “shake down”. People want paid and they have to go there. However, it is never a good sign
——————————————————————————————————————–
WU maybe merely a “shake down” but possible Govan team heading for a showdown.
Other not so good signs emanating from Govan:
No remorse towards creditors.
Boycotts for designated clubs (targets)
HMRC not letting go off the bone.
Poor team on the field with a big wage bill
Poor manager off the field
Fans still singing certain banned songs
League reconstruction not going their preferred way
Free tickets for matches
Embarrassing PR man
MSM making slight whimpers that not all is well
Charlie and backroom staff not seeing eye to eye
Charlie Says being rather quiet at the moment
All other fans outwith Govan standing firm for justice and sporting integrity.
So a sign of the times is basically times they are a changing.
Time to sign off.
Re:Phil’s Blog
Phil has often been spot on with his blogg predictions however I notice none of the other “enemies of Rangers” (Andy M, Paul Mcc) are touching this story about the structure of institutional investment in Rangers. Maybe that they don’t have the information Phil has or they are not as confident in their sources as Phil is, either way they must be aware of it but are holding off even discussing it for the time being. So I don’t think we can criticise the MSM for their silence right now.
Bearing in mind I know little about the stock marked let alone AIM, there are are a few things I don’t understand about the share issue :
* Why would institutional investors put £17.5m for a 35% share in Rangers, these professional investor types ain’t stupid despite what you read in the papers and that doesn’t look like a good deal to me.
* On the other hand why would CG say he £17.5m already, in the knowledge that this would cause a lot of fans to think that everything was on track and they didn’t need to invest?
* The share issue came up £5m short yet the next day shares hit the ground running at 76p. Why would people rush into to buy these shares first thing in the morning when they were going abegging at 70p the day before?
monsieurbunny says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:26
tomtomaswell says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 09:44
21 1 i
If it was a minority then it would be easy for the majority to shout them down. That this doesn’t happen tells us all we need to know. It would be easier to get a Muslim to eat a Tesco burger than it would be for RFC to get rid of these “fans”.
==========================================================
Only if it’s a small majority. I said it was unfortunately a large minority and that can intimidate a majority – especially if they all have the same mind set and are likley to act in unison against disparate groups.
Re burgers. Do Tesco make their burgers out of ham? Surely most Muslims realise the name (origin obscure though possibly related to Hamburg) has nothing to do with ham. Hindus may avoid them though.
———————————————–
Their beefburgers were found to have traces of pork in them. It was a joke 😀
Don’t know if this is already on the site so apologies if it is. Good read / info from Corsica1968 re the TRFC share issue.
http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/39/
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:44
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:39
————————————————–
thanks
however, there is also the aspect that for these 5 – tax WAS due to be paid, but wasn’t
as well as not disclosing this part of their contract, (breaking one SPL/SFA rule) have they broken another – for which they should ALSO be punished – by not paying the tax due on these wages?
======================================
I presume you mean for Club Licensing purposes?
As I understand it, the FTT(T) allowed the parties to “agree” the amounts due on the 5 admitted cases. Up to that point, these specific cases had been merged into the general BTC appeal. As the entire BTC was subject to appeal, I would say no. I don’t think the tax currently outstanding from these 5 was (technically) breaking the SFA rules at the time they held a Club Licence.
By the time, that tax liability was admitted, Rangers were no longer operating as a football club.
Now, what about the WTC and the Club Licence…? 🙂
Phil MacGiollaBhain (@Pmacgiollabhain) says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:00
1 0 Rate This
@Neepheid A WU Order can, of course, be merely a “shake down”. People want paid and they have to go there. However, it is never a good sign.
===========================
I’m sure that’s right. My point wasn’t that they face insolvency right now, there is clearly money in the bank to pay these creditors, but whatever is paid to them leaves that much less in the kitty to meet the monthly bills. Roughly speaking, every two million pounds they have to pay to creditors now, brings forward the day when they run out of cash by a month. So it really all turns on how much they owe these people.
Doncaster on Radio Scotland tonight
jackglasgow says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:56
The article from Corsica1968 is an excellent read.
My read on this is that Ticketus have a sizable number of shares in RIFC (for which they have not paid any cash) and that future season ticket sales will go to pay off the previous debt which Ticketus believe is due to them,
Does this mean that the football side of the club will have very little cash going forward to improve and strengthen the team?
It looks as of Sevco are going to be saddled with financial constraints for years to come – if as Corsica1968 suggests that Ticketus may hold the shares in TRFC as security against repayment for season ticket sales. If that is what is going on here – can Ticketus secure money in this way at the expense of other creditors?
I think the article from Corcica1963 is worthy of wider scrutiny – hopefully the MSM will pick this up and begin to ask more challenging questions.
Bogsdollox and others.
If RFC plc had called in the loans, those who received the loans may have produced evidence that repayment was never going to happen. What disturbs me is that it was stated after 14/02/2012 that there was no chance ot the loans being repaid. Why not|? Why didn’t the administrators demand repayment? This would be the normal procedure when a firm go in to administration would it not? The creditors ought to be screaming loudly and asking that The Administrators renders account of his stewardship ….. which hasn’t happened. Why no screams? And what ever happened to the investigation in to The Administrators? Quietly lost? Recent events have meant that I have moved from utter despair that justice would eventually be seen to be done to a situation where I think that there is a faint chance that it will happen! LNS tribunalpapers will be circulating, being read and reread, signed and countersigned after ammendments and corrections. If the tribunal members had little else do do then one would expect a report around …..14/02/2013 … a date which rings a bell … now what was it?
exfallhoose2012 says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 14:14
Bogsdollox and others.
====================================================================
The loans were made by the MIH Remuneration Trust’s sub trusts not RFC plc and therefore because MIH Remuneration Trust is a seperate legal enttity the Administrators had no way of calling in the loans.
Big Eck will be raging that he didn’t “mutually agree” to leave Forest a couple of weeks ago…
His pals at the SFA might have had a wee job going a-begging for him…
This tells me as of the date below Rapid still had NOT been payed but “expect” to offset the loss partially. When was it Green made all the noise about paying all his Euro debts. Im sure it was December ??
From Rapid Vienna Forum.
21.01.2013, 16:26EC-free year SCR cost 3 millionThe number of Austrian festivities of the credit protection Association (KSV) for the season 2011/2012 were released on Monday. This was an Austrian football club, in a season starts with a certain risk, and has no patron in the background documents, not this competition without the participation of an international can conclude with a positive result. “We had to swallow this bitter pill now, even though we competition compared to the season 2010/11 the income from the national significantly could increase and are already in the current season in a good way, to reduce the resulting negative equity”, so General Manager Werner Kuhn.So ended the SK rapid expired season from the financial perspective with a negative profit of 3.29 million euros and it results a negative association capital of 1.8 million euros (the difference stems from the fact that rapid in recent seasons by participating in the Europa League and transfer revenues make profits could, note).As we all know, Grün-Weiß goes every season with a risk at a height of 2 to 3 million euros in the new season. 2011/2012 any European Cup revenues fell off however as mentioned by missing an international competition, was also – in contrast to previous seasons – no lukriert plus from transfer transactions. Last but not least were lower income in its merchandising business in particular also by the absence on European stage. Also a provision amounting to 450,000 euros for an imminent failure of a transfer payment of Glasgow is included in this result Rangers for Nikica Jelavic. To date this provision should be dissolved fortunately however largely in the balance of the current season.Compared to the previous season 2010/11 could the results of the national competition to increase almost 1.8 million euros. However, revenues from the international fell competition still several million euros into the Club cash flushed, the 2010/11, completely away. There were also a negative transfer balance (468.000 euro), in the season before was with EUR 2.7 million in the season 2011/12 clearly positive.Due to take part in the UEFA Europa League group stage is SK rapid in the current season 2012/13 at least balanced after date settled, even if the revenue from international competition because of the “ghost game” against Rosenborg not so will be higher in the season 2010/2011.Total is the SK rapid enterprises GmbH as well as the SK rapid sports centres operating GmbH was founded in the first half of 2012 for management and rehabilitation, and the re / construction of the stadium in the reported numbers to a consolidated balance sheet of the SK rapid.
Old Pesky
Excellent read
@THE_TBK @delamancha1605 @lwordsmith Cough, splutter, ahem! Did someone mention persecution complex? http://oldpesky.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-rangers-persecution-complex.html?m=0 … #blatantplug
BBC Sportsound @bbcsportsound
The SPL Chief Executive Neil Doncaster joins us live in the studio tonight – What questions do you want to ask him?
=====================================================
Bet we could think of a few.
abigboydiditandranaway says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 14:38
0 0 Rate This
Big Eck will be raging that he didn’t “mutually agree” to leave Forest a couple of weeks ago…
His pals at the SFA might have had a wee job going a-begging for him…
============
How about Charles Green? He might have a vacancy coming up soon? Although McCleish might be a bit too expensive, given that CG is rapidly running out of cash. Plus he’s not got a great track record. If Green was truly interested in the football side, in cutting costs, and in giving his side a fresh clean new start in Scottish football, the perfect choice would have been Jackie McNamara.
However Green has had to cower in a “safe house” once already, so I guess he didn’t fancy a second instalment. But think what a move that would have been, to lance the boil of sectarianism in Scottish football. A bit like Jock Stein coming to Celtic. No chance, though, and if Green, an Englishman, can’t do it, then it simply can’t be done. Not until after the second liquidation, anyway.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 13:31
=======================
I don’t disagree with any of that.
I would add that if the holding company owns 100% of the shares in the club, then effectively the club is only the trading arm of the holding company. In fact it’s only trading arm and as such it’s only source of income.
However it also effectively means that the holding company owns the assets. In addition the board of the holding company controls the board of the club. Which leaves a lot of options open to them.
They could sell the whole club to another consortium, add the proceeds to anything they already had, and split the money between themselves. Alternatively they could liquidate the assets of the club and take what they could that way.
I think the shareholders of the holding company have some degree of cover, however it does involve divesting itself of the club, either by selling it whole or splitting it up.
It is strange how things come along in batches. After a relatively benign period in its very short history, things have gone pear-shaped for Sevco and its followers since the turn of the year.
First there is the SPL commission which has convened and will report back shortly; don’t expect good news
Secondly, there is the on-field performance of Sevco which, if Saturday is anything to go by, means they are unlikely to progress much beyond Division 2 (or its equivalent under reconstruction) anytime soon.
Thirdly, there is HMRC’s appeal to the Upper Tier Tribunal. That appeal will be heard in the early autumn, with a verdict before Christmas. There will be no kicking it into the long grass this time by Murray and his advisers.
Finally, there is UEFA’s financial fair play (“FFP”) proposals. Strangely the words of UEFA general secretary Gianni Infantino yesterday have not been widely reported in the MSM, to wit
“FFP is not about blocking the system as it is,” he said, pointing to the way in which clubs such as Arsenal, Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich had diversified their revenues in a sustainable way. “It is healthy and much more sustainable than someone coming in, promising a lot and then the next day the club is bankrupt. Look at the situation with Rangers.”
I would have thought that warranted at least passing comment from someone – Richard Wilson? Mark Guidi? Graham (“I’m impressed”) Speirs?
It doesn’t get much worse for Mr Green, he is relying solely on his shares to obtain a financially worthwhile exit from Sevco as soon as decently possible. The share price has already dropped 10% from its high and in the coming months it is only going to go in one direction. That, if nothing else, explains his latest diatribe to HMRC on the iniquity of pursuing RFC(IL) to appeal.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:10
20 0 i
Rate This
RFC using EBTs to avoid tax and sign players they couldn’t afford
Lance armstrong (and LOADS of others) taking banned substances to win trophies he couldn’t manage on his own
Europol suggesting hundreds of matches are fixed in betting scams
————————————
I think we’ve all known for years that boxing and horse racing were fixed. That is one reason why I’ve nver bet on a horse in my life. The now well-confirmed suspiscions about cycling must go back about 40 years at least. Football has always been in the grey area. There was the betting scandal of the early ’60s, and occaisional seemingly random incidents but despite the money involved in the modern game, until now it has seemed relatively clean.
The real shockers have been Rugby and Cricket. Until only a couple of decades ago Rugby Union was a totally amateur sport and Cricket had its mix of “Gentlemen and Players”. Yet almost as soon as these sports became purely professional and entered an era of big money, the scandals have emerged.
I can’t say I’m too surprised about the Europol investigation. A friend of mine was convinced that Eastern European betting syndicates were behind some of the perverse (well more preverse than usual!) refereering decisions that the Dons sufferred from two or three seasons ago.
Will all professional sport eventually go the way of wrestling and seen as no more than “sporting entertainment?”
BTW, first post for a while, in fact first time on the site for a while. I seem to have come back at an interesting juncture!
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 12:41
2 0 Rate This
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21338533
Alex McLeish has left the club by mutual consent after just 40 days in charge.
_____________
just as well he hasnt paid any of the millions he got in loans back yet
or he would have been signing on
I hope Corsica1968 won’t mind if I report his blog piece (alzipratu.wordpress.com) here:
Yesterday I tweeted that 6 major City players had told me that Sevco had only raised c£9m in the recent share flotation. I promised to explain more today…
A few weeks ago I had arranged a lunch in the City with some contacts to discuss a work issue. Given their backgrounds and knowledge, I took the opportunity to ask about Sevco and the recent flotation on AIM. Obviously there are no paper trails only supposition, rumour and guesswork. But these people are not amateurs or idiots and I would trust their judgement 100%. If you don’t believe me that is your lookout. For obvious reasons, I will not name my sources other than:
A, Director of global private equity and securities firm
B, Partner in international asset manager
C, major UK entrepreneur
D, Director of global niche bank & asset manager
E, CEO of a UK bank
Between them these people control, own and/or manage well in excess of £100bn. The discussion threw up some interesting points which I sent to a couple of people simply to add to the gathering body of evidence and rumour. The key point here was:
The only cash raised in the flotation was from individual investors (ie fans). Everything else was in the form of promissory notes and loans and the “institutional investors” were acting on behalf of and directly under instruction of clients (in other words, not your pension fund).
One of the people to whom I sent the info raised a very valid point which was that they understood one could not use promissory notes and loans in a share flotation. Not being an expert, I promised to go back and clarify matters.
I asked D about this as the person with most knowledge of shares, market regulation and flotation. I provided them with a copy of the flotation prospectus. They explained it thus:
Firstly, remember there are two companies:
Sevco (or, The Rangers Football Club Ltd if you prefer);
Rangers International Football Club plc (RIFC).
Right now, we are only interested in RIFC plc because Sevco did not float on AIM and it is now owned entirely by RIFC (ie. all shares in Sevco are owned by RIFC plc and not by individual people). RIFC plc is owned by its shareholders who (subject to any legal restrictions) may buy and sell shares in RIFC plc.
Secondly, think of there being 3 types of shares – equity swaps; placed shares; offer shares.
1. Equity Swaps – these shares were simply given to existing shareholders of Sevco at a pre-determined rate (eg 2 for 1) prior to the flotation. No cash changed hands.
2. Placed Shares – these shares were pre-sold to a number of institutions (but see above) subject to certain conditions. If you read the Prospectus very carefully not all of the conditions have been revealed. It is our understanding and perfectly feasible therefore that no cash has been paid to RIFC plc for these shares. Furthermore, if you read the Prospectus very carefully again, there is no definitive statement that cash is guaranteed to be received for these shares. They do ‘though have a cash value hence the Prospectus and subsequent statements refer to “Share Capital”. The suspicion is that these are a front for Ticketus. In other words, Ticketus have swapped the money they are owed by Rangers FC for shares in RIFC plc. At some point in the future, Ticketus will sell these shares in order to recoup its losses and/or may even just be holding them as security against repayment from season ticket income.
3. Offer Shares – these are the shares which fans were invited to purchase. The Prospects is unequivocal that these – unlike the Placed Shares – are irrevocable, ie they must be paid for in cash and effectively constitute a legally binding contract between purchaser and RIFC plc.
Therefore the cash that was generated for the company by the flotation potentially only came from the fans who bought the Offer Shares, ie c£9m.
Note also that there is no definitive guarantee that the money supposedly raised by the Placed Shares will be spent on the list of improvements set out in the Prospectus. Now contrast that with how the funds raised by the Offer Shares will be spent. Spot the difference?
Note also that the flotation also allows for further delays to the production of any meaningful accounts for Sevco. RIFC plc must produce interim results every 6 months under AIM regulations but audited accounts can be delayed to August 2014.
My contacts have made clear they can see nothing illegal in what Sevco/RIFC plc has done here. Immoral and unethical perhaps, but not illegal. The fans have paid to save the club several times over because the current directors have already had their initial outlay (in the form of loans) handsomely repaid; fans’ season ticket funds have been used to keep the club going to date; and funds from the fans through the Offer Share are being used as new working capital. The Prospectus also sneakily gets the fans to pay the costs of the flotation. You really have to hand it to Chuckles…
I should add that prior to discussing the matter with me:
Nobody had heard of or seen the fabled institutional investor roadshows;
Bar two people with strong football connections and who had previous knowledge of Charles Green from Sheffield Utd, nobody had heard of Charles Green;
Nobody had heard of Zeus Capital or Imran Ahmad.
Every single person at the lunch was incredibly scathing about the idea of any institutional investor going into football shares now let alone in Scotland. It’s “just financial suicide” was the unanimous verdict. The consensus opinion was that there would be another insolvency event because the numbers just do not and could not stack up and they do not have enough cash to see them through 2013 (their only hope is immediate league restructuring to parachute them back into the top league).
Welcome back Slim 🙂
Long Time Lurker says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 14:13
The article from Corsica1968 is an excellent read.
My read on this is that Ticketus have a sizable number of shares in RIFC (for which they have not paid any cash) and that future season ticket sales will go to pay off the previous debt which Ticketus believe is due to them,
————————————————————————————————–
how would this work?
OK, ticketus now have shares in RIFC, how could they take money out of the ST sales of TRFC Ltd
surely any money would need to be split evenly amongst all shareholders (as in a dividend)
OK, they could sell their shares – but i didn’t see any rush to do that despite the 28% increase in share price. So they haven’t done that to get capital back.
How would a deal to divert ticket sales from TRFC Ltd to RIFC PLC to a select group of shareholders work?
Also – how would this leave them with regards BDO and still claiming a share of the creditors pot? Aren’t ticketus still represented on the liquidation committee and still claiming money? so they couldn’t have moved the original debt from newco to oldco
unless of course the original debt is still with Oldco and what we have here is a “spivs” agreement to give ticketus the money back – but why would they do that when they didn’t have to? I can only assume then that this plan goes back to the GEFs days and that CG was indeed the GEFs man and this has been the plan all along
I can’t believe that, as they have made so many mistakes and blunders that if they were that smart, they would have done it much better.
http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/212788-ex-rangers-boss-craig-whytes-evidence-in-theft-case-may-be-false/
Slightly O/T, but became aware of this interesting football story just this morning.
A football club, which had historically enforced a strict s*ctarian signing policy has recently signed 2 players to break that policy.
Their fans are going nuts, with demonstrations, unacceptable chanting at games – and perhaps even burning of scarves !
Lots of parallels with a certain club we all know well, from about 1989.
One slight difference noticed though: their local FA has recently fined the club for their fans b*goted chants.
http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-racist-fans-muslims-jerusalem-soccer-20130130,0,7646666.story
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 15:30
OK, they could sell their shares – but i didn’t see any rush to do that despite the 28% increase in share price. So they haven’t done that to get capital back.
_____________
something i have been thinking about
if someone was to try and sell a load of shares who would buy them ?
Link to SlimShady61 reference to UEFA general secretary Gianni Infantino’s quote yesterday …’Look at the situation with Rangers.’ (it’s towards the end of the article)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/feb/04/manchester-city-financial-fair-play
WGS. The master of the one line quote:
Reporter: “Did you give Scott Brown the armband for his hunger?”. Strachan: “No, I gave him a banana for that”.
Oldtime RTC follower and (very) infrequent commenter. Note all figures are from memory and could use clarification.
Going to weave a hypothesis here, someone shoot me down please:
First, were Sevco – I can’t remember which one – not financed by loans themselves? They needed cash to buy the assets of the old club after the CVA failed and to pay immeadiate running costs before season ticket money started arriving and I’m sure I remember that being in the form of loans from their investors. It was all spelled out as to the rate that the investors would be repaid over time and at what interest rate. The number that sticks in my head is in the region of £12mil.
So, the one thing that’s always been a big question mark is how D&P could justify selling the assets of the old Rangers to Sevco at such a cut rate price. They could only do it if it represented a better value to creditors than leaving the assets there to be sold off in liquidation (either as a package or by piece).
The outcome of the Ticketus case is not something I’m sure I, or many others, understand at all. What makes sense to me though is that if the oldco had achieved a CVA with the OTHER creditors then Ticketus’ contract would have survived as well: they had ownership of the future tickets so long as oldco continued. But what I thought the decision suggested was that if the old club went into liquidation then Ticketus would be able to sue the oldco for failing to provide the contracted “goods” and, should their claim be upheld, that would make them regular creditors. Sadly, since they’d just be a fraction of the regular creditors – with the then belief of a massive BTC liability still presumed – it’s likely that they would have got very little in return and there was a great deal of quantum anyways since the judge refused to explicitly rule on such a scenario. He basically said that Ticketus could sue but refused to rule on what would happen. And that’s before even mentioning the lack of clarity on the possibility of preferential creditors.
Maybe I’m off track already but what if Ticketus offered D&P a deal? They’d fund an attempt at a CVA (that would maintain their contract with the old club) with the existing creditors or, if that failed, would offer to extinguish their possibility of becoming regular creditors in a liquidation in exchange for being able to buy the assets at a discount. For D&P it’s a win/win: after Bill Miller looked into the abyss and went running away no one was going to be fronting cash for an even halfway viable CVA and the subsequent asset sale can be justified because it removed a potential substantial creditor from the liquidation (and thus could be justified as being in the interests of the other creditors).
But here’s the thing: Ticketus buying the assets and attempting to start a new club claiming to be a continuation of Rangers (and playing out of Ibrox) looks really, really bad. Remember, these are the people who financed (the by then arch-villain) Craig Whyte. The less thinking Bears have, when not blaming their “enemies”, decided that he was the one who killed their club and Ticketus were in bed with him. Further, they’re obviously only in it to get their money back and not to win trophies or fight back against the “enemies”. There’s a distinct danger that the Rangers fanbase could fracture. Some might stick with the new Ticketus club playing out of Ibrox but others might be siphoned off by a different Rangers backed by “good Rangers men” if there’s a perception that the new Rangers aren’t “Rangersy” enough. Further, Ticketus aren’t in the business of running football clubs and have no background there.
So they recruit Charles Green and set up a new company – Sevco whichever – to front and manage for them and actually make the deal. What’s been suggested by some since nearly the beginning is, in fact, the case: Sevco IS Ticketus? The old contract is dead, Ticketus don’t own the season books, but in return exchanged the oldco’s potential liability (plus £5.5 mil) for ownership of the assets.
Keep in mind: while all this is going on there’s probably still a reasonable belief inside Ticketus that the Scottish football authorities and the other SPL clubs will engineer a way of keeping “Rangers” in the SPL. There’s a steadfast belief that the commercial imperative will overrule any sense of sporting justice. Then, all of a sudden, after an uprising amongst the Scottish football public, it’s not impossible that Sevco might have no professional league to play in at all! Hasty negotiations behind closed doors shoehorn Sevco into the bottom division of the Scottish Football League two years further away from an SPL return than they ever countenanced. Fortunately, Charles turns out to be great at playing the role of rabble rouser and instead of selling football Sevco starts selling bogitry and the season book money rolls in none the less.
But here’s the next thing: Ticketus are already in for whole bunch of money from the Whyte deal and not willing to risk more. Ticketus are trying to do it all on the cheap: get a viable club going again that they can sell off later – keep in mind: that’s actually not bad for the legitimate fans – but NOT WITHOUT USING ANY MORE OF THEIR OWN MONEY. It’s Craig Whyte 2.0.
So that’s where the loans – Sevco’s financing – I mentioned way back at the top come in. Sevco/Ticketus needed money to pay D&P for the assets and finance running costs over the summer. Did they get it from Phil’s “men from the East”? Were, as suggested by some, Charlie’s “institutional investors” merely expected to swap that existing debt for equity in the company now that Sevco’s gotten financing to cover short term cash flow from the fans? Has the lower than hoped for uptake on the share issue from the public caused Sevco’s investors to reneg on the deal because they’ve realized that their debt is more valuable (and safer)?
None of this would necessarily mean that Sevco is going to disappear tomorrow. But they would be hamstrung by having to keep servicing the debt on the existing terms. Without knowing their cash position and whether or not they’re a loss or profit making business it’s impossible to know. And Ticketus could always keep the club going by actually investing some money. The possibility of a winding up order from Sevco’s lenders could just be way of getting Charles’ attention if he’s been playing hardball and really trying to talk those investors back into the debt for equity swap Ticketus wanted. In a liquidation they’d be higher in the cue than Ticketus and could scoop up the assets themselves!
Again, for those not following: Ticketus get (a portion of?) their Craig Whyte money back by selling their equity, held through intermediaries, off in a year. Unless they can realize more through a liquidation or sale of the assets (CQN’s proposed terms of sale document from a few months back?). Since they haven’t risked any more of their own money (yet) ANYTHING they get for that equity (or from a liquidation) is more than they would have got as ordinary creditors in the liquidation of the oldco.
Does that make any sense and explain what’s going on now?