A Guest blog by redlichtie for TSFM
From what I can see Mike Ashley is likely to be the only game in town for RIFC/TRFC fans unless they want to see another of their clubs go through administration/liquidation.
That particular scenario potentially allows for a phoenix to arise from the ashes but on past evidence it is probably going to be an underfunded operation with overly grandiose pretensions taking them right back into the vicious circle they seem condemned to repeat ad nauseam.
Ashley has the muscle to strongarm the various spivs to give up or greatly dilute their onerous contracts and I suspect that is what has been happening behind the scenes.
From Ashley’s point of view I believe that what is being sought is a stable, self-financing operation that he can then sell on whilst retaining income streams of importance to SD.
I also suspect that he will come to some arrangement with the SFA to dispose of his interest once he has stabilised the club.
The problem for RIFC/TRFC fans is that Ashley is not going to fund some mythical “return to where they belong”, though that is beginning to appear to be the second division of the SPFL where they are heading to have a regular gig.
Like at Newcastle, Ashley will cut their coat according to their cloth. This will mean, again like at Newcastle, a mid-table team with good runs every so often. If the finances can be fixed then they will have an advantage over most other Scottish clubs but in the main we will be back to actual footballing skills and good management being what is important (pace “honest mistakes”).
With recent results and footballing style clearly those are issues that will require attention and McCoist seems likely to present RIFC/TRFC with an early opportunity to address at least one aspect of that if he continues with his current “I’m a good guy” press campaign. It may take just one unguarded comment or action and he will be out.
But will the Bears go for Ashley’s plan? So far they seem antagonistic and still cling to their belief that the world owes them a top football club regardless of cost.
If the fans don’t get behind the current entity I can see Ashley deciding the game’s not worth it and cashing in his chips. Some ‘Rangers Men’ will probably turn up and create a new entity for The People to believe in and Ashley will continue to draw in income from shirt sales and, most likely, charging fans at the world famous Albion car park which he will then own.
The upcoming AGM is crucial and from what we have seen of Ashley so far he gets what he wants.
The crushing reality about to descend on The People is that there really is no Santa Claus. A Sanity Clause, perhaps but no Santa Claus.
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 1:30 pm
Is Speirs looking to fill Traynor’s boots with this nonsensical piece? Whether or not what he says comes to pass, how can anyone consider himself to be a serious journalist when he spouts this rallying call for one club’s influx of vast wealth while other clubs are being praised for their efforts to ‘live within their means’. I’m sure he’s joined in that praise for these clubs himself, which makes it clear he believes vast wealth is only to be divested on a club that has a ‘rightful place’.
If ever he claims to not be a 100% Rangers man, then this article should be stuffed down his throat! It really should be confined to Rangers Media or some other bear type blog.
“Under Rule 8.3(a) of the Code, any person who is interested in 1% or more of any class of relevant securities of an offeree company or of any securities exchange offeror (being any offeror other than an offeror in respect of which it has been announced that its offer is, or is likely to be, solely in cash) must make an Opening Position Disclosure following the commencement of the offer period and, if later, following the announcement in which any securities exchange offeror is first identified.”
http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Summary-of-provision-of-Rule-8.pdf
Which I interpret as meaning that if someone has made an offer for the whole shebang (which Sarver has) and you hold more than 1% of the stock then you have to make it known. Which is what River and Mercantile have done, and presumably all the others will follow soon. Does Ally McCoist have more than 1%?
y4rmy says: January 6, 2015 at 2:14 pm
Does Ally McCoist have more than 1%?
============================
If he still holds his 1M shares then yes. It equates to 1.23%
Kieran Prior’s holding also announced as 1,100,740 (1.35%)
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12205407.html
@oddjob. You’re correct mate.
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 12:50 pm
Celtic has been downsizing to meet the current financial constraints of Scottish Football – it’s bloody painful and there are no quick-fix cures and yip we will lose supporters which is a pity.
But I would rather be on the road we are on as a club than have a stadium sold-out on bigotry. That’s my personal choice and others have their’s. I’m sure there’s enough excitement for me in the title fight this year and, indeed, next year with the exciting promotions we’ll be seeing.
———————————————–
I actually found myself shouting at the TV yesterday evening.
I was kicking every ball and bemoaning the ref’s performance, questioning why some of the Killie team were not playing rugby instead, blaming a misplaced pass on the fact the missus wanted to discuss some very meaningless topic like the kids schooling right at that moment, storming out of the living room promising never to return because of some overpaid excuse for a footballer couldn’t hit a barn door from 2 yards, only to return 10 seconds later to explain to my wife exactly what it means when I asked her if that idiot was wearing 2 left boots……
I am really enjoying watching football just now that there is a challenge for top spot, more than one I may add.
I am also frustrated when we do not win; when we do not score as much as I believe we could considering the difference in squads, when I see the downsizing compared to the past…..etc.…etc…
But….and it’s a big but, I also get excited when I see young Henderson playing, and then to see him joined by Fisher and McGregor in the same game and to see the percentage of home grown players in the first team increasing.
I am genuinely hopefully of a new, young, fast moving style of football once the manager has had a chance to coach the current younger boys to his way of thinking.
Maybe if Celtic (Fans and Management) allow that evolution to continue, the whole of Scottish Football will improve so that we can all compete at least to a semi-decent level within the European competitions.
easyJambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 1:51 pm
4 0 Rate This
It seems that River and Mercantile have reduced their holding by 1,050,000 shares. Question is, who bought them?
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12205385.html
___________
it was mentioned on FF the other day that King had bought some from River mercantile
dont know how true it is
Ah yes – Kieron Prior – I remember him – now what number saviour was he? Number Ten I think, after Whyte, Blue Knights, King, Kennedy, Miller, Walter, Green, King and Easdales but before King, Ashley, Soros, King, The Three Bears and Sarver.
Here’s a quick reminder of his own greatest moonbeam hits from Google:
1. Ibrox investor Kieran Prior has thrown his weight behind …
2. Rangers investor Kieran Prior reveals his agm voting plan …
3. Rangers investor Kieran Prior explains why he decided to …
4. Rangers latest: Kieran Prior: I tried to buy out Charles Green
5. Rangers investor Kieran Prior backs Dave King – The …
6. Kieran Prior: my £400K investment in Rangers is just the start
mcfc says:
January 6, 2015 at 3:12 pm
1
0
Rate This
Ah yes – Kieron Prior – I remember him – now what number saviour was he?
**********************
If someone has the time and the inclination perhaps they could mock up a “top 20” of “Rangers Saviours” since this sad story began.
I could read it with Allan Freeman’s voice in mind , have a chuckle and enjoy while drinking a nice glass of wine.
Maybe Keef “Radar” Jackson could do a centre page spread in the Record ? Anyone got his email address ? 😛
Surely the time has arrived when RIFC/TRFC puts Ibrox and/or Murray Park up as security against a loan.
The question is Will they? Or more to the point can they?
andy says: January 6, 2015 at 3:05 pm
it was mentioned on FF the other day that King had bought some from River mercantile
dont know how true it is
============================
I was aware of that rumour but the numbers didn’t stack up unless Artemis or Miton had been selling a few in recent weeks.
From the RIFC website, as at 01/10/14. Artemis held 8,109,223 (9.95%) and Miton 4,060,282 (4.98%), Total 12,169,505 (14.93%).
New Oasis bought 11,869,505 or 14.57%. That leaves exactly 300,000 unaccounted for, without R&M’s missing shares.
If King did buy R&M’s 1,050,000, then either Artemis or Miton, or both had to have been selling recently, but not enough to trigger an AIM notification.
oddjob says:
January 6, 2015 at 3:22 pm
Surely the time has arrived when RIFC/TRFC puts Ibrox and/or Murray Park up as security against a loan.
The question is Will they? Or more to the point can they?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In my opinion they cannot because Sevco 5088 should be the beneficial owners
It will take someone with large cojones and an even larger wallet to give money for a security which may be reduced if Green actually did dupe Whyte.
Thereby lies the problem.
Who owns the unchallengeable Titles to Ibrox and Murray Park?
Whoever does holds all the aces.
If TRIFC do not hold an unchallengeable Title then everything that has followed from the IPO is possibly fraud
Madbhoy24941 says:
January 6, 2015 at 3:03 pm
Nice post.
The problem is that the mantra for too long has been that, being big clubs, both Celtic and Rangers must win every single game they play or it is some kind of national tragedy.
Unfortunately due to the last few decades of league dominance it has been forgotten by younger genrations that this was not always the case.
As someone said the other day the difference between Ashley’s two clubs is that people in Newcastle turn out to watch their team win lose of draw.
Celtic taking a small backwards step to see the rest of Scottish football take a bigger step forward would do us no harm at all.
I am sure in the long run Celtic fans would much rather see an entertaining 2-1 win against a range of teams willing to have a go as opposed to a 5-0 hammering of those playing 11 behind the ball as we have seen in the past.
While it has been a rocky start, Deila could be the best thing in ages to happen to both Celtic and Scottish Football if the ship is held steady and the results become more obvious as his time in charge progresses.
In the same way the Bunnet lead the charge on sustainability then maybe Deila along with the likes of MacNamara, McInnes, Neil and perhaps Stubbs and Neilson can help lead clubs in Scotland into a new era of exciting young, hopefully local, talent playing decent stuff.
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 1:57 pm
‘…I was thinking more that he might find it obnoxious rather than something to take advantage of, John…’
———
Oh, yes, I agree entirely.I just meant that his knowledge of that kind of stuff would probably be very limited and he wouldn’t be at all interested in expanding it, let alone cynically using it the way Green did.
Hoopy7 says,
January 6. 2015. @3.54 pm
So the “contingent liability” could be the straw that breaks the camel`s back, all else failing.
wottpi says:
January 6, 2015 at 4:01 pm
‘..As someone said the other day the difference between Ashley’s two clubs is that people in Newcastle turn out to watch their team win lose of draw.’
——
Indeed. And aren’t there some words in a Celtic ( very,very old) song about not caring ‘whether we win, lose, or draw because we only know that there’s going to be a show…’?
Whether even Glen Daly meant that or not, the song nevertheless expresses an admirably Corinthian view, that it is the sport itself that is the entertainment,not the winning.And far more important than winning by cheating of any kind.
Hoopy 7 says:
January 6, 2015 at 3:54 pm
——————————————-
Agreed. this would have been done by now if there was confidence that TRFC are the beneficial owners of Ibrox and Murray Park.
Sevco5088 now belongs to Worthington (whose shares are still suspended). another sketchy company without adequate cashflow. i doubt Worthington have the means to do anything about this at the moment. either that or they are waiting for an influx of cash into RIFC (say by a new share issue) before making their claim. i still don’t believe this one has just gone away…….
oddjob says:
January 6, 2015 at 3:22 pm
Surely the time has arrived when RIFC/TRFC puts Ibrox and/or Murray Park up as security against a loan. The question is Will they? Or more to the point can they?
=========================================================
Maybe not just yet as the Darkside seems to believe the next asset to be tied-up by Ashley is the TRFCL 51% shareholding in Rangers Retail Ltd. Obviously that would mean Ashley would own the merchandise operation outright if TRFC went down the pan.
Ashley could end-up owning Rangers Retail Ltd anyway if TRFCL went bust or if a deadlock situation arose wrt running the company under the terms of the joint venture agreement for Rangers Retail which allows Ashley to buy-out Rangers Retail on payment of 50% of the profits of Rangers Retail in the previous 12 months.
Can anyone give an estimate of what that 50% would be? What strikes me is that it would not only cost less but be more hassle free for Ashley to secure any loan on the RR shareholding than to buy-out RR under the joint venture agreement.
And don’t forget that if he picks-up Edmiston House and demolishes the wreck then that’s his new SportsDirect Mega store.
I reckon the Board might have enough bits left to get to a share issue of some description before they have to use Ibrox or Murray Ppark as
security.
But Rangers will continue to bleed money even with the Ashley men in full-throttle austerity mode. No matter how I look at this I can’t see it making business sense for Ashley in the longer term.
If he fights the RRM off then gates will decline and so will merchandising revenue. I’ve always tried not to predict imminent doom at Ibrox but something has to happen and it has to be soon IMO. I just don’t think this charade can continue much longer.
oddjob says:
January 6, 2015 at 4:11 pm
So the “contingent liability” could be the straw that breaks the camel`s back, all else failing.
===================================================================
In the real world, you’d think that resolving the Contingent Liability issue would be the most important job to get done. Clearing it up would make borrowing much easier and it would be possible to imagine a rational business plan for the next five years.
No doing so, hog-ties the ability to gain credit against disputed assets and makes City chapesses cough out their coffee at the most creative investment proposition and can blow the who project to smithereens at the whim of the latest chancer who holds the Contingent Liability – together these make life a daily joust with Administration down Govan way.
So what is the plan that is preferable to facing down the Contingent Liability issue now? It seems to be, to stagger on until some mug zillionaire and his mates pony up a few £mil, £bil, £zil then bung the latest custodian of the Contingent Liability due consideration to go forth and multiply.
But the accounts and prospectus try their best to give the impression (within the law) that the Contingent Liability is not the elephant in the room wearing a suicide vest, but just some minor inconvenience to be sorted at a later date. If that was the case, then things have changed, so it’s time to get it sorted, borrow against Ibrox and Murray Park, publish a five year plan and Zadok here we come. . .
I think most people looking under the bonnet of this issue might conclude that RIFC’s demonstrated strategy is prima facie evidence that the Contingent Liability is indeed the captive pachyderm in need of Dignitas, which is being diligently ignored at the top of the stairs, on the sixth floor and by the lamb-munchers.
Last night on twitter there was some tweets that suggested the tax payment made yesterday wasn’t under the threat of a winding up order, or at least wasn’t as serious as was originally made out. I have a suspicion, though, that it was merely the case that some bears were reading more into the inaction by the SPFL than was actually the case ie once again a club at Ibrox escaped penalty, therefor there was nothing to get excited about – so let’s get excited 😯 and abuse some journalist for reporting bad news about ‘Rangers’.
Does anyone have any idea of the truth of the matter? Was there a real threat of a winding up order, or had it not reached that stage…yet?
The BBC website are still saying the payment was made ‘to avoid the club being wound up’.
MCFC. “I think most people looking under the bonnet of this issue might conclude that RIFC’s demonstrated strategy is prima facie evidence that the Contingent Liability is indeed the captive pachyderm in need of Dignitas”
Yes, I’ve often said that!
wottpi says:
January 6, 2015 at 4:01 pm
In the same way the Bunnet lead the charge on sustainability then maybe Deila along with the likes of MacNamara, McInnes, Neil and perhaps Stubbs and Neilson can help lead clubs in Scotland into a new era of exciting young, hopefully local, talent playing decent stuff.
————————————————————–
There’s been a sea change in Scotland as far as I’m concerned this and last season as clubs have been forced to face-up to financial reality.
Celtic is a bit later to the party not in terms of recognising the necessity to live within its means but it’s a bit like turning round a super-tanker – it simply takes a bit longer especially because of massive fan expectations that demand the traditional route must be followed.
The future has got to be on young players coming through the ranks and playing their hearts out and actually enjoying their football for the sake of it rather than simply for the wages paid.
Don’t get me wrong as I have no problem with anyone being paid what they’re worth but they must have pride in they product they produce.
I would say the last year has seen me start to enjoy football more than I have for a long time simply because of ther enthusiasm being shown on the pitch at clubs all over Scotland.
I feel sorry for those Bears who so wanted their start in SFL3 to be accompanied by a policy of developing and playing youngsters. No point in analysing why it didn’t happen or we’ll still be discussing it in 6 months.
It looks as though perhaps the youngsters might finally get their chance but there financial issues might put paid to that. If Rangers do survive then no matter who’s in control will have to follow the managers mentioned above-mentioned if they want football fans to turn-up to watch and support their team.
And I have to say that I often watch womens football which I never would have even 2/3 years ago. It most certainly isn’t all doom and gloom about the game and there’s a lot of good football getting played in Scotland.
We should never lose sight of that ❗
Cosmic Truth says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:07 pm
====================================
🙂
BTW, If Mike’s surveyor’s think it will take £10mil or £20mil to fix up Ibrox, then how much is the old shed really worth as security, regardless of the Contingent Liability.
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:06 pm
Last night on twitter there was some tweets that suggested the tax payment made yesterday wasn’t under the threat of a winding up order, or at least wasn’t as serious as was originally made out. I have a suspicion, though, that it was merely the case that some bears were reading more into the inaction by the SPFL than was actually the case ie once again a club at Ibrox escaped penalty, therefor there was nothing to get excited about – so let’s get excited 😯 and abuse some journalist for reporting bad news about ‘Rangers’.
=======================================================
I’m happy to go with Barca Bhoy’s tweets on it which were posted on here last night.
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · 24h 24 hours ago
Rangers would have automatically been deducted 25 points and a transfer embargo put in place. Rule E5 applies
View conversation
0 replies 5 retweets 3 favorites
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · 24h 24 hours ago
A threat to wind up is not treated by the league as an insolvency event. However if HMRC had nit been paid and had acted to wind up,
0 replies 4 retweets 4 favorites
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · Jan 5
Rule E29 , which effectively meant Rangers were automatically under transfer embargo from Jan 1 until today … http://tl.gd/ni5q1s
View conversation
0 replies 6 retweets 7 favorites
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · Jan 5
SPFL Rule E27 requires all clubs to authorise SPFL to receive information from HMRC on individual club tax affairs.
View conversation
0 replies 9 retweets 4 favorites
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · Jan 5
However no SPFL breach as tax only viewed as overdue by them if not paid by Jan 19. Which shows flaws in SPFL rules
View conversation
0 replies 12 retweets 3 favorites
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 · Jan 5
Winding up notice story accurate. Tax due Dec 22, not paid. Letter issued Dec 30. If no payment by Jan 6 , HMRC commence winding up. ➡️
For those keeping an eye on things, another days trading draws to an end yet still no sign of the TR-1: NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARES for the shares the board were informed King had acquired.
The 3 bears have been dealt with. Surely it must turn up tomorrow?
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:16 pm
Thanks for that, ecobhoy.
wottpi says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:18 pm
0 0 Rate This
For those keeping an eye on things, another days trading draws to an end yet still no sign of the TR-1: NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARES for the shares the board were informed King had acquired.
The 3 bears have been dealt with. Surely it must turn up tomorrow?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The important RNS confirmed the Sellers end position which in this case is nil shares
There may be a delay in reporting the Buyers end position if buying continued after Laxey et al sold out. So the final total may turn out to be higher than we thought
wottpi says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:18 pm
For those keeping an eye on things, another days trading draws to an end yet still no sign of the TR-1: NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARES for the shares the board were informed King had acquired.
The 3 bears have been dealt with. Surely it must turn up tomorrow?
===============================================================
I seem to remember seeing something somewhere that if shares are held by a trust then additional info has to be provided rather than simply just the name of the holder.
But if that’s the case what about all of the mystery overseas shareholders surely that would mean they have to provide more info as well?
I could be totally wrong about this but I know I have read something but it didn’t really mean much at the time.
Mcfc says,
January 6 2015 @5.15 pm
I understand that Mr Sarver`s father made his money in the Hotel business.
Maybe he’s a chip off the old block !!
Message from Neil Doncaster, SPFL Chief Executive (To a poster called Four Green Fields on CQN)
Dear ***
Thank you for your email of 2 January. I am happy to clarify the position under SPFL Rules, as you request.
The SPFL Rules (and the SPL Rules that preceded them) draw a distinction between a football club (“Club”) on the one hand, and the company that owns or controls the Club on the other hand. There is no suggestion that the Club is a legal entity or has a legal personality which is different from whatever is the legal entity or person which is the owner and operator of the Club.
This important distinction was acknowledged by Lord Nimmo Smith’s Independent Commission dealing with undisclosed payments to players and was fully reflected in the preliminary and final decisions of the Independent Commission. Lord Nimmo Smith is, as you may be aware, a former Senator of the College of Justice and a judge sitting in The Inner House of the Court of Session. He was supported on the Commission by two of the leading Sports Law QCs. An internet search will confirm each of the Commission members’ expertise and standing.
The concept of a football club being distinct from the company owning or controlling it is not a new concept in UK football, with the likes of Leeds United, Bristol City and Crystal Palace Football Clubs all having been owned or controlled by different companies over their lifetimes as a result of insolvency events. I have not heard it suggested that those historic football clubs are not the same ones that were formed in 1919, 1894 and 1905 respectively.
I trust the above is helpful.
Kind regards
Neil
Bawsman says
January 6 2015 @ 5,46pm
I notice that Mr Doncaster refers to Leeds United and others experiencing “insolvency events”. He makes no reference to “liquidation”.
He also, once more , referred to Lord Nimmo Smith`s opinion.
As I understand it, that opinion has no force of law.
Will Sarver mount a Hostile Takeover Bid?
A series of delayed trades from 2nd have just come through. Looks like the buy and sell trades for Dave King who appears to have acquired the shares at 20.1p
02-Jan-15 13:05:24 20.10 11,869,505 Sell* 23.00 27.00 2.386M
02-Jan-15 13:04:18 20.00 8,109,223 Sell* 23.00 27.00 1.622M
02-Jan-15 13:03:24 20.00 3,260,282 Sell* 23.00 27.00 652.06k
02-Jan-15 13:03:16 20.00 500,000 Sell* 23.00 27.00 100.00k
wottpi says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:18 pm
0 0 Rate This
“For those keeping an eye on things, another days trading draws to an end yet still no sign of the TR-1: NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARES for the shares the board were informed King had acquired.
The 3 bears have been dealt with. Surely it must turn up tomorrow?”
wottpi, for a numpty like me, could you clarify this please?
Does it mean Dave King hasn’t bought the shares he claimed he had?
easyJambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:14 pm
A series of delayed trades from 2nd have just come through. Looks like the buy and sell trades for Dave King who appears to have acquired the shares at 20.1p
———————————————————
Means the Institutional Investors got a 2p premium on the Sarver takeover offer so it’s a small mercy 😈
McLaugh-In reports that RIFC received just over £200K today – that’ll keep Admin at bay for the next few days.
“Just over £200,000 was paid by the Tannadice club on Tuesday following a long battle over compensation for the 19-year-old midfielder.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30700561
But 9th Dec, McLaugh-In reported that DUFC had already paid £72K (£60K + VAT @ 20%)
“United had paid £72,000 and recently upped their offer to around £100,000, while Rangers wanted double that sum.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30395680
Come on Chris – experience has taught us not to expect professional reportage from you in return for our Telly Tax – but at least read your old stuff before talking tripe
The full award was £204K = £170K + VAT @ 20%. Let’s assume that the £72K was paid to RIFC and spent. So the balance to RIFC today would be £132K, with £34K due to HMRC in VAT in due course. So that’s a net £98K to RIFC today.
Bawsman says:
January 6, 2015 at 5:45 pm
‘The SPFL Rules (and the SPL Rules that preceded them) draw a distinction between a football club (“Club”) on the one hand, and the company that owns or controls the Club on the other hand. There is no suggestion that the Club is a legal entity or has a legal personality which is different from whatever is the legal entity or person which is the owner and operator of the Club.’
_________________________
Other than saying that the rules ‘draw a distinction’ there’s nothing there to explain what that distinction is, nor any attempt to describe what the SPFL recognise as being a ‘club’. He does, though, tell us what this distinct club is not!
Neil Doncaster is a qualified solicitor, words are his stock in trade. As I see it, for something to have a ‘distinction’ it must exist, or at the very least, be possible to describe. It should also be possible to explain how, and why, the club exists side by side with the company, but this man of words doesn’t even try to do so.
Doncaster also says that LNS ‘acknowledged’ this distinction, but, of course, fails to explain how his Lordship’s ‘acknowledgement’ creates anything that can be considered decisive, in any way, legal or otherwise.
Outside of a court of law, LNS could acknowledge anything he wants, it wouldn’t make it a fact, and in reality carries no more weight than any other learned person’s opinion. He was actually being paid to observe the SPL rules, and his acknowledgement shows that that was what he was doing. Perhaps if he had cited case law to back this up, or even quoted company law, then his acknowledgement might have carried some weight, but he didn’t, and we know why.
In a whole paragraph regarding LNS only five words have anything to do with the matter at hand, and two of those words are ‘the’ and ‘was’, the rest of the paragraph is an effort to impress the addressee with His Lordship’s credentials.
The last paragraph is mere ‘whataboutery’, and for a man in his position to use that is quite pathetic.
What Doncaster says moves the OC/NC debate not one millimetre forward, but does show the man’s inability to make a case for his assertion, and perhaps explains why he doesn’t use his qualification as a solicitor to practice law.
8,109,223 equates exactly to the last published holding of Artemis
3,260,282 is exactly 800,000 fewer than Miton’s last published holding.
I don’t know if Miton had sold the 800K between 1/10/14 and 2/1/15, or have retained a smaller holding. Even if they had sold the 800K, then they wouldn’t have triggered a reporting threshold.
The 500,000 could also have also come from Miton, or may have come from River & Mercantile whose holding has dropped by 1,050,000 since 1/10/14.
oddjob says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:03 pm
He also, once more , referred to Lord Nimmo Smith`s opinion.
________________________________
I think it’s important to observe that Doncaster doesn’t say it was His Lordships ‘opinion’ but that he merely ‘acknowledged’ the SPL’s ‘distinction’. There is, I think, quite a big gap between a law lord’s opinion and what he might acknowledge as being in the SPLs rules!
First-team starter
Group:
Members
Barcabhoy @Barcabhoy1 21m21 minutes ago
Did Harry Redknapps dog temporarily save some very famous brogues from potential jail time ? #nuclear #meyerlansky #suharto #notimelimit
BBC News
The rejection of the £18 million Ibrox takeover mentioned and the presenter states: ‘But are they any closer to a deal at Parkhead?
I nearly fell off my chair and then she explained it was in relation to the Chris Commons contract extension negotiations.
FFS – So these two news items are regarded as in some way comparable? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry or put it down to a conspiracy or stupidity.
Allyjambo,
Agreed.
Thanks
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:43 pm
==========================================
Eco – Laugh til you Cry, too Stupid to organize a Conspiracy.
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:39 pm
oddjob says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:03 pm
He also, once more , referred to Lord Nimmo Smith`s opinion.
________________________________
I think it’s important to observe that Doncaster doesn’t say it was His Lordships ‘opinion’ but that he merely ‘acknowledged’ the SPL’s ‘distinction’. There is, I think, quite a big gap between a law lord’s opinion and what he might acknowledge as being in the SPLs rules!
=================================================================
LNS wasn’t sitting as a Law Lord but as the chair of an SPL mickey-mouse tribunal sitting in private with the evidence carefully screened by the SPL to obtain the desired result.
LNS must be bitterly refecting on the reputational damage that not only he suffered in this whole tawdry episode but Scots Law Lords in general.
Robert Sarver:
“I’ve had detailed research carried out on Rangers and I’m convinced that we could take it back to the top of the Scottish game on a stable and sustainable basis.”
I suggest he sack his research team, as TRFC have never played at the top of the scottish game 😕
http://forum.ea.com/uk/posts/list/491446.page7
Initially I avoided posting this link to the late Hugh Adams words in 2002. The article is a direct comparison of how Rangers were managed at that time compared to Celtic, but there are some statements in there regarding Rangers so called global appeal with some evidence to back them up.
What made me think of this article is the apparent willingness of a self made rich American to take the word of an ex-Rangers player who was there through those oh so false times, that Rangers are a huge worldwide brand.
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:56 pm
I agree with you, but think Lord Nimmo Smith more than likely walked away from the tribunal and never gave it a second thought. I always feel men in such lofty positions only concern themselves with much more important matters than the running of a football league. Some might call it arrogance, others might see it as the result of concerning yourself constantly with very important matters and detail, and all too often, peoples’ lives. It will also be very important to distance themselves from everything they deal with, or face personal gremlins they’d rather not have.
BBC Radio Scotland. Johnson interview and general discussion re Pheonix offer.
Unless anyone can explain to me why the Pheonix offer is actually serious – please let know – my sanity clause needs it -then I think the BBC is no longer of any relevance concerning anything to do with this story. It’s time to make fun of them, they are no longer a disgrace, they are just funny…………stupid funny, ……………….irrelevant funny.
I’m assuming that’s from the unofficial LSE site as opposed to the official one. The official one isn’t showing them and doesn’t have the ability to show Friday’s delayed trades. There appears to be an echo. All 4 are marked sell and the last 3 add up to the same share number though (because of the 0.1p price difference) not the same value. Is it a blip in the LSE reporting ?
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 7:13 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 6:56 pm
I agree with you, but think Lord Nimmo Smith more than likely walked away from the tribunal and never gave it a second thought. I always feel men in such lofty positions only concern themselves with much more important matters than the running of a football league. Some might call it arrogance, others might see it as the result of concerning yourself constantly with very important matters and detail, and all too often, peoples’ lives. It will also be very important to distance themselves from everything they deal with, or face personal gremlins they’d rather not have.
=======================================================
I would agree with you in cases where he was sitting on the bench and I would think that goes for most judges. But I wouldn’t like to give the impression that all judges dispense cold, unfeeling justice as I know from personal experience that isn’t the case.
However wrt the SPL Tribunal I have absolutely no doubt it raised many comments, eyebrows and more than a few laughs in certain Edinburgh legal circles especially on social occasions. Everyone, including judges, like to be on the inside track 😆
@tykebhoy
Maybe Mr King likes the clumpany so much he bought his shares twice?
@Cosmic Truth.
You may have already worked it out but until late this afternoon there was no proof that King’s trust had bought the shares RIFC were claiming it had. The proof comes in two parts, the actual share dealing transaction(s) which have now appeared on the LSE site (as EasyJambo posted just before you). This does not identify the purchaser, or the seller for that matter, but if a sale or purchase of shares takes the seller and/or buyer below and/or above certain thresholds then a for TR1 needs submitting by the seller and/or buyer. No TR1s have yet appeared and I think there is a 3 working day timelimit so its getting close.
tykebhoy
The ‘buy/sell’indicator is pretty meaningless. It’s just based on the middle price at the time of the trade and doesn’t reflect the actual intention of those involved in the trades.
My guess is 3 tranches bought and parceled up by a market maker then sold on to, presumably, the vehicle created by or for Dave King.
Cluster One says:
January 6, 2015 at 7:07 pm
Robert Sarver:
“I’ve had detailed research carried out on Rangers and I’m convinced that we could take it back to the top of the Scottish game on a stable and sustainable basis.”
I suggest he sack his research team, as TRFC have never played at the top of the scottish game 😕
===========================================================
Well if the research has been carried out by professionals he should be OK as their Professional Liability insurance will kick in when he loses his lot 😆
I wondered if the ‘experts’ interviewed Laxey and the rest of the Institutional Investors for their views on the clusterf*ck. Of course perhaps Sarver’s experts were the same ones that advised the IIs who have been fighting to get out the Ibrox fire escape and onto the last lifeboat.
I have more or less come to the conclusion that Sarver is simply here with a bit-part in the charade or else a ‘mark’ who is going to be taken rotten.
I understand that in light of Mr. Sarver’s possible bid everyone with a holding of 1% or more has to make themselves known.
Has anyone thought to open the window and tell the gardener?
andygraham.66 says:
January 6, 2015 at 11:22 am
29 1 Rate This
More Ashley problems.
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/newcastle-united-supporters-trust-write-8390077
////////////////////////
Don’t think NUFC fans have to worry about Glasgow Rangers playing in EUFA competition anytime soon
As as far as I’m aware no such team plays in any country in Europe or anywhere else for that matter
@Kilgore Trout
Thanks so the market maker effectively earned a 0.5% commission of just under £12k with the “markup”
EUFA? 😳 ….UEFA
Bloody phone 👿 👿
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 7:56 pm
But I wouldn’t like to give the impression that all judges dispense cold, unfeeling justice as I know from personal experience that isn’t the case.
__________________________________
Though without close personal experience, I believe what you say above to be the case, and one reason that they might appear aloof or arrogant when viewed by members of the public. When dispensing justice an almost supreme level of self belief must be required, as with top surgeons, and the very distressing stories they hear will require the ability to leave it behind with their wigs and gowns when the day is over. I doubt any manage it completely.
It may well be that LNS finds himself involved with some banter from fellow judges over his jaunt on an SPL tribunal, but I doubt he worries too much about his findings or whether he got it right. He really does have more serious matters to concern himself with; that no one will find amusing.
@tykebhoy
It’s a dirty job but someone’s got to do it!
tcup 2012 says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:25 pm
EUFA? 😳 ….UEFA
Bloody phone
===========================
In fairness EUFA is more euphonious….
Ah’ll get ma thesaurus….. 😆
Fair play to Jim McColl….
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/multi-millionaire-jim-mccoll-donates-10000-4929696?
Suspect he may be relieved to be out of it (if he was ever really in)
@tykebhoy. Thank you for the explanation.
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:26 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 7:56 pm
It may well be that LNS finds himself involved with some banter from fellow judges over his jaunt on an SPL tribunal, but I doubt he worries too much about his findings or whether he got it right. He really does have more serious matters to concern himself with; that no one will find amusing.
=======================================================================
I bet in his whole career he will never ever deal with a case which has had so much written about it or debated as exhaustively and it appears it still refuses to lie down and die just like the eternal or should that be infernal club 😆
parttimearab says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:43 pm
Fair play to Jim McColl….
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/multi-millionaire-jim-mccoll-donates-10000-4929696?
=================================================
Yip nice touch! I just worry about all the fans who have invested as it’ll be a right kick in the teeth if Rangers collapse. It’s a hard one and I wonder if I would invest at the moment if I was a Bear.
Rock and a hard place.
Allyjambo says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:26 pm
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 7:56 pm
It may well be that LNS finds himself involved with some banter from fellow judges over his jaunt on an SPL tribunal, but I doubt he worries too much about his findings or whether he got it right. He really does have more serious matters to concern himself with; that no one will find amusing.
=======================================================================
I bet in his whole career he will never ever deal with a case which has had so much written about it or debated as exhaustively and it appears it still refuses to lie down and die just like the eternal or should that be infernal club 😆
==================================================================
Except perhaps this:
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/lockerbie-trial
HirsutePursuit says:
January 6, 2015 at 9:03 pm
______________________________
Indeed.
ecobhoy 6:43 pm
Laughed reading your near falling off chair experience today at BBC news linking the failure of the latest Sevco takeover to Kris Commens’ contract negotiations.
I heard it too, and perhaps I’m far too cynical, but I didn’t bat a proverbial eyelid as I just feel so used to this sort of jobby journalism, but yes, when you take a step back, it’s utterly pathetic.
Gym Trainer says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:00 pm
‘..Maybe Mr King likes the clumpany so much he bought his shares twice?
————-
I meant to ask earlier: just how much control does King have of his ‘Family Trust’? Is it a Trust like the phoney Employee Benefit tusts that certain football personnel had, over which they had full untrammeled control? Can we find out from any kind of public record who the Trustees are and which power they have to spend the monies in trust? Is King spending his weans’ inheritance and/or avoiding tax: in other words, not spending a damned rand of his own, as usual?
Any Trust law experts out there?
John Clark says:
January 6, 2015 at 9:28 pm
I’d imagine it’s more likely to be some vehicle for getting the money out of South Africa. Wouldn’t it be just lovely if he got SARS knocking on the door at Ibrox 😈
From Jackson on Twitter-
Make your own minds up, but doth he protest too much? I don’t think even Jackson buys it-
SoS have started a petition today to sack the Board addresses to the Nomad – got over 4k sigs already. Be interesting to see if they can get more for this than they did against the HMRC.
https://www.change.org/p/rangers-plc-board-remove-the-existing-board-accept-external-investment-and-place-external-directors?recruiter=83780195&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive
ecobhoy says:
January 6, 2015 at 9:41 pm
SoS have started a petition today to sack the Board addresses to the Nomad – got over 4k sigs already. Be interesting to see if they can get more for this than they did against the HMRC.
======================
And particularly, unlike the latter, if it can avoid using unsuspecting relatives, fictional characters and much loved family pets….
Doncaster’s reply has the supposed cleverness, arrogance and vacuousness of a Medieval theologian. Its starting point is that the club exists, like God, and given that unchallengable assumption, he can then prove his own supposition. He supposes that there is an entity divorced from the legal, material and physical entity which exists. He does not state, and cannot state what it actually is, but by bringing it into existence as distinct from the legal, corporeal, corporate entity he then proves its existence when the corporate entity dies. At no point is it defined, nor identified, nor described in any concrete fashion. He then throws in a couple of earlier miraculous non corporeal clubs someone made earlier, and ends satisfied with his own baseless, tautologic bilge as being the ultimate in reason and logic.
If he ever gives up football administration, clearly a job as an Archbishop awaits.
What a smug, arrogant buffoon of a man, he truly is.
parttimearab says:
January 6, 2015 at 8:43 pm
‘..Fair play to Jim McColl…..’
——————-
Yes, fair dos.The man is an angel (in the theatrical rather than theological sense),compared with the likes of King and the others.A few more, patently honest men like him , providing support and guidance to the fans’ groups, might have been able to hunt the scavengers and the self-seeking rip-off merchants long before now.
His donation, I fear, has come too late to be of any real use.