From the TSFM Manifesto 🙂
A spectre is haunting Scottish Football — the spectre of Sporting Integrity. All the powers of the old firms have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Billy and Dan, Blazer and Cassock, Record and Sun, Balance Sheet and P&L.
Where is the football fan in opposition to these that has not been decried as a “sporting integrity bampot” by his opponents in power?Two things result from this fact:
I. Sporting Integrity is already widely acknowledged to be itself a power for good.
II. It is high time that Lovers of Sport should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, and meet this nursery tale of the Spectre of Sporting Integrity with a manifesto of fair play.
To this end, Lovers of Sport of various partisanship have assembled on TSFM and sketched their manifesto, to be published on tsfm.scot.
Those who love sport though are challenged not just by the taunts of the monosyllabic automatons in the MSM, but by the owners of our football clubs who have displayed an almost total disregard to our wish to have a fair competition played out in the spirit of friendly rivalry. In fact the clubs, who speak those fine words, are not nearly as outraged as we are by the damage done to the integrity of the sport in the past few years .
In fact the term Sporting Integrity has become, since the latter stages of the Rangers era, a term of abuse; a mocking soubriquet attached to those who want sport to be just that – sport.
Sporting integrity now lives in the same media pigeon-hole as words like Islam, left-wing, militant, Muslim – and a host of others; words which are threats to the established order now set up as in-jokes, in order to reduce the effectiveness of the idea.
In fact, a new terminology has evolved in the reporting of football by both club officials and The Succulent Lamb Chapel alike;
“.. Sporting Integrity but …”.
For example
“We all want sporting integrity, but finance is more important”
Says who exactly?
Stated in such a matter of fact way that the obvious question is headed off at the pass, it is sometimes difficult to re-frame the discussion – perhaps because crayon is so hard to erase?
This is the backdrop to The Scottish Football Monitor and the world in which we live. Often the levels of scrutiny employed by our contributors are far in excess of any scrutiny employed by the MSM. Indeed our ideas and theories are regularly plagiarised by those very same lazy journalists who lurk here, and cherry-pick material to suit their own agendas; regularly claiming exclusives for stories that TSFM and RTC before us had placed in the public domain weeks earlier.
This was going to lead into a discourse about the love of money versus the love of sport – of how the sacred cows of acquisitiveness, gate- retention and turnstile spinning is far more important to the heads of our football clubs (the Billys, Dans and Blazers of the intro) than maintaining the traditions of our sport.
However events of Friday 14th November have given me cause to leave that for another day. The biggest squirrel of all in this sorry saga has always been the sleight of hand employed instil a siege mentality in the Rangers fans. The press have time and again assisted people (with no love of football in general or Rangers in particular) to enrich themselves – legally or otherwise – and feed on the loyalty of Rangers fans.
A matter for Rangers fans may also be the identity of some of those who had their trust, but who also assisted the Whytes and Greens by their public statements of support.
Our contention has been that rules have been bent twisted or broken to accommodate those people, the real enemies of the Rangers fans – and fans everywhere.
Through our collective research and group-analysis of events, we have also wondered out loud about the legality of many aspects of the operating style of some of the main players in the affair. That suspicion has been shared most notably by Mark Daly and Alex Thompson, but crucially now appears to be shared by Law Enforcement.
I confess I am fed up with the self-styled “bampot” epithet. For the avoidance of doubt, the “bampots” in this affair are those who have greater resources than us, and access to the truth, but who have lacked either the will or the courage or the imagination to follow it through.
We are anything but bampots. Rather, we have demonstrated that the wisdom of the crowd is more effective by far than any remnants of wisdom in the press.
I have no doubt that the police investigation into this matter is proceeding in spite of great opposition in the MSM and the Scottish Football Authorities – all of whom conspired to expose Rangers to the custodianship of those for whom football is a foreign language.
I have no doubt that the constant exposition of wrong-doing on this blog, in particular the questions we have constantly raised, and anomalies we have pointed out, has assisted and enabled the law enforcement agencies in this process.
If we are to be consistent in this, our enabling of the authorities, we MUST show restraint at all times as this process is followed through. People who are charged with a crime deserve to be given a fair trial in the absence of rumour or innuendo. We must also, if we are to continue as the spectre which haunts the avaricious – and the real bampots – be seen to be better than they, and give them no cause to accuse us of irresponsibility.
This affair has now evolved way beyond one club gaining unfair advantage over others. For all the understandable Schadenfreude of many among us, the real enemy is not Rangers, it is about those who enabled and continue to enable the farce at Ibrox.
This is now about systematic cheating at the heart of the Scottish game (in the name of cash and in spite of lip service to sporting integrity), and how the greed of a bunch of ethically challenged officials allowed another group of ethically challenged businessmen free rein to enrich themselves at the expense of the fans.
Whether laws were broken or not, the players at Rangers have come and gone and are variables, but the malignant constant at the SFA and SPFL are still there. Last night, even after the news that four men had been arrested in connection with the takeover at Ibrox in 2011, they were gathered together at Celtic Park with their Irish counterparts, tucking into succulent lamb (perhaps) and fine wines, doing some back slapping, making jokes about the vulgarities of their fans, bragging about the ST money they have banked.
The revolution won’t be over until they are gone, and if they remain, it is Scottish Football that will be over.
upthehoops says:
November 23, 2014 at 7:03 am
I do not get hung up whether Celtic are an accredited living wage employer or not. They are a model of football club governance and have looked after their fans very well regarding season ticket prices. I do not believe any club can always capitulate to every demand made by their fans. As for those who demand Mr Lawwell to leave, I think they might find attracting top quality CEO’s to Scotland is as difficult as top quality players.
====================================================
Couldn’t agree more with all your points. I have previously posted in detail on the pros and cons of the Living Wage as how it effects Celtic and won’t repeat my arguments.
But once you get beyond the emotional level for supporting it then it is a very complex issue indeed IMO.
As to PL and recent Celtic Boards all I can say is that those who aren’t old enough to have experienced the ‘Families’ don’t know they are living.
Those were dark, desperate and squalid days for a Celtic supporter with more damage done to us as a club internally rather than through Rangers or external Dark Forces.
The joy for me is that the culture change started by Fergus has been maintained and I honestly didn’t think it would be back when he left. But we have had by and large excellent directors and Boards enjoyed great times as a club even on the field of play.
It’s easy to crticise PL and others from the sidelines and I know because I’ve done it. Usually when I have learnt the bigger picture I’ve felt a bit silly and contrite – well until the next time I sound-off.
There’s a helluva lot of passion about the Celtic support and every single one of us are all experts not just in football matters but in successfully running a major Scottish company especially in very difficult financial times. And we don’t have any problem in proclaiming our expertise and opinions to anyone within earshot.
However in general I have no real qualms about placing my trust in PL and the Board to keep the club on track financially – whether it makes a profit or not 🙂
And as to Sporting Integrity I believe our Board not only has that but actually does listen to fans and, where possible, will implement or resolve their suggestions and concerns.
Us older ones have no problem is appreciating how far Celtic has come as a club and how important its has been as a driver in the social changes that have inexorably been shaping our new Scotland.
That statement is meant to simply reflect the extent of social inclusion in our country and its continuing development and perhaps, more importantly, the demise of the old entrenched ways and the compartmentalised insularity it created between communities.
Long long way to go and Celtic will play its part – as it should. But sometimes some fans should understand and accept that its primary function is as a football club – hopefully with the highest standards of integrity throughout the organisation – and not as a political party with the often justified opprobrium that usually carries.
Sorry, hit send too early and timed out. Previous post should have finished ..that I would ex
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:37 am
Thought provoking post.
One of the lessons that all the political parties need to learn from the the #indyref, is that whilst social media is a useful campaign tool/comms channel, it can too easily degenerate into the committed talking to the committed.
I think you are right, to achieve meaningful change, a social media campaign ain’t enough, you need an honest to God organisation, with a clear policy portfolio, and a SMART plan for putting those policies onto practice.
The often derided supporters direct, could be such a vehicle, perhaps what’s required is fixing that orgs roof from the inside.
Argh I hate smartphones!
I would expect a particularly troubled case with a repeating history to develop a habit for it.
There said it!
Yesterday’s frenzied 2-1 loss at Tyncastle is not the point in all honesty……Writes Ian King.
Did i miss something?
Is my new TV fixed in a way it only shows the opposition goals 😕
John Clark says:
November 23, 2014 at 12:20 am
8 0 Rate This
———
OT
John, it must have been in the era of commentator/cameraman technology. Although I also recollect the late evening Scotsports where the film was still being developed/edited and masterful small-talk from Arthur was maintained until the highlights reel was ready to roll.
Btw, one memory of Firhill was the advert with the horse and the text, ‘There’s nothing like a good roll.’ Odd the things you remember. All part of the tapestry, though.
Smugas says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:11 am
I take your points but even if a conspiracy existed to the extent that some believe then the real problems for those behind it IMO is that we are dealing with football.
Once those teams get on the field anything can happen, all bets are off and the outcome is never certain as bookies can attest to. And as we all know money doesn’t necessarily guarantee success.
In the longer term whether this version of Rangers continues or not I believe is immaterial because there will always be enough Bears – perhaps with different agendas – to make a new club viable if run correctly.
Of course any ‘helping-hand’ especially if counter to the rules or done secretly cannot be countenanced. I tend towards hoping that the Scottish Football Authorities and in particular the SFA wouldn’t be that stupid again.
However there are now people in place who I don’t think will allow it. But, as always, we’ll see and I can but hope the fan response will be as good if not better than last time if required.
But as I say I don’t think the Hsampden suits can afford to take the risk a second time.
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:43 am
A caricature, that works, because like all caricatures it contains an element of truth.
Its become fashionable in some circles to deride the indref as a national hate fest.
Its worth remembering that there were no riots (well one if you include the Nazi saluting No supporters after the event), the number of arrests for violence can be counted on the fingers of one hand, no bombs, bullets or troops on the streets, there was one egg and a massive fit of pique though
That said, the ratio of noise to signal on the internet was hugely disappointing, which was kinda my point.
The Daily Mail claims St Johnstone and Dundee United have jointly written to the SFA because they are unhappy with the final distribution of cash from the Cup Final. This has left each of them with less than 30% of the take from the match at just over £500K each. Apparently Celtic were paid £267K for the use of Celtic Park.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/st-johnstone-dundee-united-continue-4678330
It’s another example of a murky lack of transparency in recent years arousing suspicion, rightly or otherwise. How does this compare to the usual allocation to each finalist? Is £267K a reasonable charge for the use of Celtic Park (it seems a lot to me if Celtic made around 50% of what each participant earns simply for hosting.)
What is happening with the scheduling and venues for the League Cup semi finals? Good money for two clubs if Ibrox and Celtic Park are selected as the venues in preference to Hampden?
Basic Motivation Rules
When I’m trying to guess the probable outcome of the mess The Rangers / SFA / SPFL / Ashley have gotten themselves into, I always find it useful to think about the basic motivation of each player. Ignore all the fluff and noise, and try to imagine. In their minds what do they want, what do they need, what do they dream of. And consequently, what are they doing to make it happen. So here goes…
The Rangers
We Want: the old order back, easy supremacy, more cups and titles, amnesia about Green/Whyte
We Need: money, money, money, honest mistakes
We Dream of: winning CL to trump 1967
We’re Doing: nothing right: crap squad/team, crap football, crap manager, burning money aka onerous contractors sucking money out
SFA & SPFL
We Want: the old order back, easy life, two team domination, the Green/Whyte thing to go away and be forgotten
We Need: The Rangers promoted, then Hearts & Hibs, sponsors, TV deals, Rangers Men at Ibrox, opacity
We Dream of: Rangers in CL, UEFA jobs, EPL style money, A time machine back to the 80s or 90s
We’re Doing: hoping it will work out, keeping quiet (less said, easiest mended), bending over for Ashley, planning desperate measures, consulting our lawyers
Ashley
I Want: make Sports Direct global
I Need: no-one’s opinion or advice, just execute global domination plan, focus, focus, focus
I Dream of: making Nike & Adidas grovel to me, top ten UK Rich List top ten, replace Sugar on The Apprentice, Sir Michael Ashley, selling NUFC for £300mil, nothing RIFC can help me with
RIFC Owners and Onerous Contractors
We Want: to keep the bear alive so we can drain its gall bladder for as long as possible
We Need: a bigger yacht, RIFC can help with that, another money-spinning project
We Dream of: nothing RIFC can help us with
We’re Doing: taking the money, encouraging Ashley to give life support to RIFC
The Rest of Scottish Football
We Want: fairness, entertaining football, level playing field, administrators acting in the interests of all clubs/fans
We Need: governing bodies (including ref’s assoc) focussed on above. youth development, financial stability
We Dream of: justice, euro for all, international success, EPL style sponsors / TV deals
We’re Doing: waking up to the idea that the game in genuinely corrupt, expecting the worst.
You may disagree with some of my quick and glib assessment above but what you can’t miss is that the players in this panto have very diverse and conflicting wants, needs, dreams – that are not all centred around the success of The Rangers. The means there will be winners and losers, happy and sad, richer and poorer, smug and angry. This makes it more important act decisively for what you want whenever you can.
This exercise always reminds of the best put down in rock music, which the mass of Scottish fans could easily adopt towards the SFA, SPFL ,The Rangers, The Onerous Contractors and Mike Ashley.
Hey babe, come over here,
let me buy you a beer,
what’s your name ?
She said “boy, it doesn’t really matter, don’t you see?
You ain’t what I want,
You ain’t what I need,
You ain’t what I fancy,
You ain’t what I dream of”,
and I’d silently leave, ugly!!!
Rain, Ian Hunter
Another article in the Sunday Mail caught my eye. Quotes from Peter Lawwell at the AGM that there is no way Celtic would support a contrived reconstruction to get Rangers back into the top flight:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/peter-lawwell-warns-rangers-2014-4669488#rlabs=1
“But as Rangers and Hearts prepare to meet in a championship table topping clash at Tynecastle, Lawwell moved to distance himself from suggesting Celtic would ever give their backing to an end of season leg-up for any of the second tier’s big three.
Celtic posted profits to the end of June of £11.2 million on turnover of £64.7 million and admit the absence of the Light Blues is costing them around £10 million a year.
Lawwell said: “I love Gordon dearly, he is a pal. But he is way off the mark there. We would never support that and there have been no discussions on it.
“There is a £10 million effect, that’s the case. But if you go back to the application from Rangers – as it is now – to get back into the SPFL the same logic is being applied.
“It’s sporting integrity. It’s a competition. It’s a sporting football competition and above all else you have to apply the rules.
“To manipulate those would be wrong. There would be clubs that would benefit – but others would suffer.”
Apologies if this quote has already been posted on here, but if they are accurate then credit to the man for these comments which I’m very relieved to read.
Did the SFA not get rent money from letting out Hampden to the Commonwealth Games? This affair stinks, and emphasises the target here should be the authorities.
Hopefully Steve Brown and Stephen Thompson get answers, and in the process rock the boat.
Ecobhoy
The point that needs to be got across to as many supporters as possible is that good governance is in the interest of every club and if the died in the wool Rangers supporters who think that debunking LNS and asking questions of the SFA are Rangers hating and can see common cause then it’s not hopeless.
To do that the case needs to leave cyberspace and reach those who attend games. This needs a bit of work and an assessment thereafter if indeed no one gives a toss. If so we all go home.
I think Res12 is the vehicle for this and by Jan we will know the full strength of the case. As will the SFA because of the possible link to criminal proceedings. It will be in everyone’s interest to rethink their stance.
Whilst the overreaching objective of TSFM for me is SFA reform there was an underlying one behind Res12 that supports my top aim for TSFM and that is making the SFA know they are accountable to supporters even if through a prolonged AGM process by club shareholders (although something better is required).
The SFA need to know that their decisions or evading them can cost clubs money. Res12 arguably cost Celtic at least £300k, the reward for playing in a qualifying game.
From 99 to 2003 clubs received less in placement money than they should have because Rangers played ineligible players made ineligible not by not registering side letters but by paying them by an illegal means. This is a fact.
If the SFA were accountable for such mistakes and making recompense then their attitude to rule observance would be much more rigorous.
So the importance of seeing Res12 through to conclusion ( and RFC get no mention in it) is that it represents the best opportunity football supporters have of telling the SFA ( and so clubs) that they are accountable.
No more ignoring letters or half truth replies, no more treating supporters like half wits. No professional run organisation would treat it’s customers in this way and this is the message TSFM is sending out daily and it’s a message I think all supporters will get behind but it’s going to mean face to face dialogue with supporters organisations to get the message across.
TSFM says:
November 23, 2014 at 9:53 am
================================
Of course the Celtic living wage issue can be discussed. A sizeable number of Celtic fans want the club to pay it. Where I will disagree with you is your assertion that the club are not being singled out. I think there is evidence they are but I won’t derail the blog. We can have opposite views though I hope.
Great memories of ‘getting a lift over.’
I eventually had to start paying,under protest though. Nobody wanted to lift me over as I had started shaving – and, my carry oots were getting too heavy!!!
I should add that we used to let in around 5,000 priests for free at home games! Add that to the many thousands of those getting a lift over, there was probably less than 10,000 actually paying to get in! :lol:(I’m talking of Celtic park in case you didn’t guess.)
yakutsuki
Correct. My dad used to give my parish priest a lift over all the time 😉
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:12 am
22 2 Rate This
As to PL and recent Celtic Boards all I can say is that those who aren’t old enough to have experienced the ‘Families’ don’t know they are living.
Those were dark, desperate and squalid days for a Celtic supporter with more damage done to us as a club internally rather than through Rangers or external Dark Forces.
————————————————————————–
Ecobhoy…You have two TD’s at 14.00 hours today…may I postulate (and on a Sunday too?) that they are from Chris White another CA!) and Michael Kelly?
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:26 am
Of course any ‘helping-hand’ especially if counter to the rules or done secretly cannot be countenanced. I tend towards hoping that the Scottish Football Authorities and in particular the SFA wouldn’t be that stupid again.
However there are now people in place who I don’t think will allow it. But, as always, we’ll see and I can but hope the fan response will be as good if not better than last time if required.
============
Who are these “people”- I think we need to know who they are.
Auldheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 1:04 pm
Ecobhoy
The point that needs to be got across to as many supporters as possible is that good governance is in the interest of every club and if the died in the wool Rangers supporters who think that debunking LNS and asking questions of the SFA are Rangers hating and can see common cause then it’s not hopeless.
To do that the case needs to leave cyberspace and reach those who attend games. This needs a bit of work and an assessment thereafter if indeed no one gives a toss. If so we all go home.
==================================================
As you know I totally support your efforts which simply cannot be praised highly enough both in your research and dogged determination to achieve your aims.
On a more general standpoint I think ordinary dyed in the wool Rangers supporters have undergone quite a significant change over the last few years.
Firstly I distinguish these supporters as those who actually support their team on the field by attending matches rather than those who do so purely on the telly and internet.
Those I refer to I feel have moved beyond the simple ‘victim’ mentality and all that entails and I have come across few that don’t trace the whole shambles back to DM although there is a variety of opinions on how to apportion blame for the various debacles which followed.
But those supporters who are left I feel have got beyond a lot of the ‘mechanics’ of why they think they are where they are. A lot of people have fallen away over the years and some have become cyber-warriors rather than Rangers fans. I can only hope that the majority of the hard core which is left has more interest in football than baggage.
I believe a lot of Bears are almost in a state of suspended animation going through the motions of supporting Rangers and waiting for things to develop. Either Ashley saves the day or a new club will be formed. To the fans I talk about it doesn’t matter – they will still support.
Armchair Bears whose main ‘support’ is internet-based desperately need to maintain the ‘Rangers Hating’ facade to justify their existance and bile. Many IMO are directed by a PR agenda and others are as bad as the spivs in attempting to carve-out a bit of Rangers as a powerbase to further their own ambitions.
There is no point in engaging with these people and their followers IMO – and I totally agree with you that the fans who matter are those who attend games. And I believe that holds true of all football club supporters.
It’s the reaching out to these supporters that’s the difficult bit – it would be impossible to do so on their existing fan sites and I can’t quite see how it can be done.
Even if we get the message right but can’t deliver it effectively then we ain’t going to change anything. A united fan front is the answer I have serious doubts it can be achieved.
So perhaps the only real hope is Res 12 and possible breakthroughs following any criminal proceedings. I think the latter could be a slim hope because that’s not the purpose of any potential prosecutions as I understand the position so far.
essexbeancounter says:
November 23, 2014 at 2:01 pm
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:12 am
As to PL and recent Celtic Boards all I can say is that those who aren’t old enough to have experienced the ‘Families’ don’t know they are living.
Those were dark, desperate and squalid days for a Celtic supporter with more damage done to us as a club internally rather than through Rangers or external Dark Forces.
————————————————————————–
Ecobhoy…You have two TD’s at 14.00 hours today…may I postulate (and on a Sunday too?) that they are from Chris White another CA!) and Michael Kelly?
==================================================
I couldn’t possibly comment – I’ll just let Celtic’s financial record before the Bunnet landed speak for itself. I’m sure any CA – worth their salt – would come to the same conclusion as I did many moons ago.
‘Gretna: the Club that Vanished’ on Sky Sports 3.
A disappearing entity!
C.A’s getting discussed on here. I’m not one but I was having a pre-Christmas drink with some colleagues in December 2012 and a C.A was among them. He was excitedly telling me he had applied for shares in RIFC, and that they ‘would go through the roof’ as they moved up the leagues. He’s a nice guy, so I never mention it to him
upthehoops says:
November 23, 2014 at 4:34 pm
5 0 Rate This
C.A’s getting discussed on here. I’m not one but I was having a pre-Christmas drink with some colleagues in December 2012 and a C.A was among them. He was excitedly telling me he had applied for shares in RIFC, and that they ‘would go through the roof’ as they moved up the leagues. He’s a nice guy, so I never mention it to him
===============
When love comes through the door, common sense goes out the window. As a friend, I’d be rubbing his nose in it, just in case he’s besotted enough to do it all over again.
Eco,
Thanks for the reply earlier. My point was essentially that any manipulation required now is not the SFA’s fault per se, surely any idiot with a 15m leg up and 30,000 season tickets could get back to an SPL, especially one harnessed by zero sponsorship.
(As an aside and contra to my arguement of course the SFA have a monitoring role that should have red flagged the new club before now)
Where the dilemma occurs of course is that IF the new club needs assistance again then frankly hell mend them, and as you say I agree it is unlikely they would want to be seen doing naughty things again so visibly so soon.
Unless of course they feel backed into a corner. And I feel that’s the new battleground. A corner of who’s making exactly?
Put it this way, who do you trust not to blink first? Campbell or Mike?
Smugas says:
November 23, 2014 at 5:20 pm
Where the dilemma occurs of course is that IF the new club needs assistance again the frankly hell mend them, and as you say I agree it is unlikely they would want to be seen doing naughty things again so visibly so soon.
====
If assistance is required from the SFA, then it will be provided. Because if the “new club” fails, then questions might be asked of the SFA, so it can’t be allowed to happen, because exactly the same people are in place at the SFA as last time. There was a chance of a clear out at the 2013 SFA AGM. What happened instead was the coronation of Ogilvie by acclamation. From that moment on, the game’s a bogey.
Yes, but ogilvie’s golden clock moment was supposed to be holding the ribbon at the end of the glorious journey, not driving the bus, again!
..”..No more ignoring letters or half truth replies, no more treating supporters like half wits. No professional run organisation would treat it’s customers in this way and this is the message TSFM is sending out daily and it’s a message I think all supporters will get behind but it’s going to mean face to face dialogue with supporters organisations to get the message across.”
A laudable aim Auldheid, but why are supporters direct apparently so much in denial over this? Are they infected with same ‘lets not tell them the truth mentality’ as the SMSM?.I advocate your long time position on truth and reconciliation but without the proper vehicle to get us there then I despair.
Ecobhoy has posted recently on the joy,thrill and buzz of attending live football.It is something currently being denied me and my daughters and grandchildren precisely because of the refusal to recognise the years of cheating and what it cost my club in potential trophies and celebration.My family paid to watch a rigged game..we all refuse to return until justice is seen to be done.I have no idea how many refusniks hold the same view as I have never attempted to influence or sway people either way..it is a personal choice.
Erstwhile 2 x Hamilton supporters, 4 x Celtic, 1 and a half Rangers (my grandson god help him.)
“..one can declare an identity until the cows come home but if people go “yeah right” then its not going to work” Grayson Perry.
Who are You Channel 4 2014
neepheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 5:36 pm
6 0 Rate This
Mr Heid,
My view is familiar. This whole thing is subject of an establishment stitch-up. It had to be. Anything else would allow tensions to develop. Regardless of whether tension and challenge is a necessary part of democratic and healthy set-ups, the approach needs to be protect the protected, ignore the deserved.
Fine! But, to place that in the hands of ‘oor Cammie’ and Regan is just negligent. That is where the establishment solution will come unstuck. Especially if challenged under caution.
Again squiggle, that backs up my point. There wasn’t supposed to be a next time leading to court appearances, even if they did refer to conduct at the initial re-entry.
Any ‘issues’ were either supposed to be met with “aye but they’ve left noo” or “aye but they’re back, what are we going to do, relegate them again?”
This arguement is weakened somewhat by polis involvement and a threat of liquidation, again!
Thought the Gretna documentary on Sky was pretty good.
Very romanticized and touching story of the club and its rise, though the creditors were mentioned only in the passing. It’s as though stiffing suppliers is almost acceptable when you’re a fitba club.
Those behind Gretna 2008 who were interviewed were far more honest about the club’s status than those behind Sevco Rangers 2012.
Apologies if this has already been determined, however if the current board give Ally notice (eg. Today) that his rolling contract will not be renewed, does the contract period start ticking down?
Danish Pastry says:
November 23, 2014 at 8:37 pm
Very romanticized and touching story of the club and its rise, though the creditors were mentioned only in the passing. It’s as though stiffing suppliers is almost acceptable when you’re a fitba club.
========================
Sadly that does seem to be the case.
stifflersmom says:
November 23, 2014 at 9:02 pm
1 0 Rate This
Apologies if this has already been determined, however if the current board give Ally notice (eg. Today) that his rolling contract will not be renewed, does the contract period start ticking down?
================
In theory yes, but in practice an employee on such a contract is just paid off with 12 months salary. It would be unthinkable for a football manager, for example, to be given 12 months notice, and expected to work his notice. And to be fair, that’s true in most walks of life.
So it would cost at least £600k to get rid of McCoist, if rumours regarding his contract are correct. Plus you have to pay someone else to do the job. The cost of getting rid of him is, in my opinion, the only reason he wasn’t got rid of some time ago. Others may, of course, disagree.
yakutsuki says:
November 23, 2014 at 1:47 pm
‘..I should add that we used to let in around 5,000 priests for free at home games!.’
———
Actually, the real story was that Fergus discovered that about 3000 assorted people were apparently entitled to free entry to Celtic Park- former players’ wives and dependants, former staff, retired ball-boys, the disabled who dove the wee three-wheeler cars, the blind and all those categories. Priests, too, were supposedly admitted free of charge, but there were scarcely 5000 priests in the whole of northern Europe, let alone within striking distance of Celtic Park!In the 1990s there were about 240 priests in the whole of the Archdiocese of Glasgow, and proportionately fewer in the seven other dioceses!
I gather that Fergus nearly had a fit at the idea of that many people (3000) getting in for nothing. 🙂
I’ve no idea what the current policy is, come to think of it.
Neepheid – thanks for that
There have / are many other unthinkable things that have gone on there. Many ‘supporters’ are of the opinion that fresh blood would bring enough regular additional support to provide for his exuberant monthly wage.
stifflersmom says:
November 23, 2014 at 9:54 pm
0 0 Rate This
Neepheid – thanks for that
There have / are many other unthinkable things that have gone on there. Many ‘supporters’ are of the opinion that fresh blood would bring enough regular additional support to provide for his exuberant monthly wage.
===============
If he really is on £600k, that’s about £20k per home game, so just an extra 2000 on each home gate would cover the cost. I think that would easily be achieved, especially if his replacement provided a more attractive product on the pitch. Looked at that way, I’m surprised he’s still manager.
Neepheid
Can you imagine some of Scotland’s other ‘legends’ hanging about on the sidelines sapping the lifeblood of the support that gave them all that they achieved?
He risks becoming a permanent embarrassment. He’s already an occasional disgrace.
stifflersmom says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:20 pm
1 0 Rate This
Neepheid
Can you imagine some of Scotland’s other ‘legends’ hanging about on the sidelines sapping the lifeblood of the support that gave them all that they achieved?
He risks becoming a permanent embarrassment. He’s already an occasional disgrace.
=============
Walter Smith is in danger of heading down the same road, in my opinion.
stifflersmom says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:20 pm
__________________________________________________
He most certainly is, and not occasionally, a complete disgrace to honour and decency.
Neep / Jean
Few of the rank and file disagree. Richard Wilson too. I was also interested to read that he has Neil’s sympathy.
Given the circumstances, the spoils already enjoyed, there is a risk that prolonging his stay will damage his reputation amongst the faithful.
I’m more interested in the line the BBC will take when he eventually finishes his stint. Surely he can’t ever be considered for future payroll gigs? I for one would refuse the licence fee.
Gunnerb 5.53
Supporters Direct ‘ s objective is increasing fan ownership of clubs not reforming SFA.
They have SFA support for their objective but not for SFA reform.
If they were to make that their aim they would risk biting the hand the wish to shake.
stifflersmom says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:47 pm
I for one would refuse the licence fee.
__________________________________
As already stated, Stifler, I have already given up on the licence fee. Watch ‘Catchup’ instead!
For those who disagree, think about what you are contributing to 👿
Ecobhoy 2.28
So perhaps the only real hope is Res 12 and possible breakthroughs following any criminal proceedings. I think the latter could be a slim hope because that’s not the purpose of any potential prosecutions as I understand the position so far.
=============
Agreed. However if the line of proving culpability were to look at honest behaviour when in a position to demonstrate it, then who knows what might come out…..
Auldheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:52 pm
Supporters Direct ‘ s objective is increasing fan ownership of clubs not reforming SFA.
—————————–
Thanks Auldheid, I had assumed that their purpose was to represent supporters on a more universal basis.It would be comforting if official supporters clubs were to take some kind of united interest in reforming governance but perhaps I shall have to be content with the long game.Sit by the river bank etc.
Jean – I might just cancel it. Once I get my league cup final ticket!
John Clark says:
November 23, 2014 at 9:36 pm
—
Current policy is that if you want to watch the game, you have to have the same paid-for means of access as everyone else, dog collar or no dog collar.
It’s important to bear in mind that Church of Scotland ministers could and did avail themselves of the same privileges.
It wouldn’t bring it anywhere near the 5,000 mark, but seminarians used to get into Celtic Park free of charge too.
Surely the only solution to getting rid of Ally and replacing him , given the cost of his contract is to continue to pay him and have him on demeaning meet and greet duties at the foot of the marble staircase as he works his notice. I suspect even his brass neck would eventually get the hint and walk. As for a replacement, Durrant and McDowall ought to manage the duties between them.
Esteban says:
November 23, 2014 at 11:46 pm
‘..It wouldn’t bring it anywhere near the 5,000 mark, but seminarians used to get into Celtic Park free of charge too.’
———
I’ve just this minute sat down in my computer suite ( aka the bloody useless wee boxroom that’s hardly bigger than a wee cupboard ), saw your post and for some extraordinary reason I was put in mind of a brilliant ‘Punch’ cartoon of about, oh, maybe fifty years ago: a crowd round a road accident casualty, and a guy carrying a wee black bag running up shouting ‘ Let me through. I’m a chiropodist’.
I’m laughing as I type, both at the original cartoon, and at how the heck my sub-conscious thinks there is any kind of connection or relevance.
At the foot of it, I suspect, is some kind of corny sense of humour that I should probably bring to heel. 🙂
Auldheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:52 pm
‘.Supporters Direct ‘ s objective is increasing fan ownership of clubs not reforming SFA.’
————-
That explains their complete lack of interest in matters relating to the governance of Scottish football, and my ( some time ago) criticisms of their lack of interest in whether the sport was corrupt.
But I, as a football supporter, would still like to ask why they seem never to have asked even themselves why they should be using public money to assist and advise supporters to get into shared ownership of their football clubs when those clubs are members of an Association about the integrity of which there are massive questions?
I would have thought their remit ought to have included some kind of obligation to ensure that they cautioned supporters about the risks attached to ownership of clubs that may be operating in a ‘rigged sport’ environment, where the dice may be loaded in a very unsportsmanlike fashion.A distinct possibility, given that our Football Authorities have already shown that they have no notion of Sporting Integrity.
But who am I to ask these questions?
ecobhoy says:
November 23, 2014 at 2:28 pm
‘..It’s the reaching out to these supporters that’s the difficult bit – ‘
———–
The difficulty has been, and is, compounded, I think, by the SMSM’s use,for whatever reason, of phrases like ‘since they came out of Administration’ instead of plainly stating the truth, the abundantly evidenced truth, that RFC is no more, like Third Lanark Rifles and Renton and Thornliebank.
If the SFA and the SMSM had been matter-of-factly truthful and accurate, there would by now have been no real problem.
The rational bulk of the RFC support would have accepted the fact that what had been their club was no more, and that they would have to transfer their allegiance to a new club, which for all its aping of the old club’s ways and manners, was, really, just a new creation, unentitled to any past history.
Perhaps the really real enemies of Scottish football have been the partisan hacks, disgraces to their profession, whose distorted and perverted coverage of the disgrace that was SDM ,and whose support for the absolute fiction that TRFC/RIFCplc is the Rangers of their and our boyhood ,has stultified the reasoning power of thousands of honest punters, and encouraged them to be cannon fodder for crooks and swindlers and rip-off merchants.
It is exceedingly difficult to reach out to truth deniers.
John Clark at 1:03am
‘ But I, as a football supporter, would still like to ask why they seem never to have asked even themselves why they should be using public money to assist and advise supporters to get into shared ownership of their football clubs when those clubs are members of an Association about the integrity of which there are massive questions?’
……………………………….
Supporters Direct. Fingers in ears. nananananana .Brogue and blazer trainees perhaps? Talking shop.
John Clark says:
November 24, 2014 at 1:03 am
==================================
Look back no further than a few weeks. In fact a search on Twitter shows it was the early weeks of October. The hacks were already planning when the Champions League theme would be heard again at Ibrox, bankrolled by Mike Ashley’s millions, and all to raise the profile of Sports Direct. Yet, Sports Direct have no access to advertising in the CL, and as Arsenal will testify, sponsored stadium names are taboo as well. Into the bargain, throwing £20-30M at an already busted flush losing nearly £1M a month hardly makes sense to someone who operates the way Ashley does. Especially when all it would do is increase an already unsustainable payroll.
Rather than being an enemy, the hacks are just a pathetic joke, yearning for byegone days which will never return. They provided the perfect smokescreen for decades, including the recent history which allowed Whyte then Green to destroy the clubs from Ibrox. Chickens coming home to roost, reaping what you sow in life, call it what you like, but it has hit them square between the eyes and their only answer is to flutter their eyelashes at anyone who comes along. This of course includes a serious billionaire businessman like Ashley, a convicted tax evader like King, the PR hungry (but with little substance) Murray and Kennedy, and even fantasists like the long forgotten Graham Duffy.
John Clark and Esteban – I was joking about the amount of free admissions at Parkhead. That’s why I used the ridiculously high figure of 5,000!
And, as already pointed out, ministers of all faiths had the same free invite. That was until wee Fergus put a stop to any freebies.
ps- maybe I should have said 500 million priests? lol
I’m glad we finally got around to acknowledging that it was clergymen of all denominations who were given free admittance to Celtic Park, not just Roman Catholic priests, a fact, the estimable Rev Robert Jack, Church of Scotland minister in Reykjavik and founder of the Icelandic Celtic Supporters Club, never tired of pointing out.
Welcome to “The National”, first issue today and Adam Rooney on the back page! I hope they bring some real journalism to the game but probably not.
Wee story today on how two clubs are not engaging with the Holyrood anti-sectarianism advisory group although happy to take public funding. Advisory group source say they are “taking the p***”. Good start, honeymoon period I suspect, they will toe the line pretty sharpish.
This could be an interesting week. In the next 48 hours, we will see whether or not Ashley is walking away or continuing the life support. The recent feeling of collars may have put him off, or the 9 point gap under the most overpaid manager in British if not world football, might also be troubling him. My gut feeling is he will drip feed them for another month or two before forcing radical changes at the clumpany.
Maybe then he will have all the information he needs to decide whether it’s right to try to reform this two and a half year old basket case of a club/company. The money he will need to throw at it in order to get it back to, and keep it near the top of the SPFL will never be repaid in shirt sales. My guess is he is looking at the most cost-effective route to get control of the whole caboodle. Then we will see his long term vision, be that as a feeder club for the toon or some other plan.
Interesting times…..
Yup. A spare 2m in, just to keep the lights on and the shirts and stocking fillers selling. Keep that nice man from Deloittes hanging. Then present that nice Ogilvie man with the problem re his dream fixture (his words not Mike’s) in January and ask what HE proposes to do about it.
Meanwhile in the real world, the real world of Keef that is
“…It might just be the only business in the history of insolvency events to have allowed this spend-at-all-costs mentality to survive the catastrophe of liquidation…” Daily Rag this morning in an admittedly otherwise decent attempt at the problem file down Ibrox way called Ally.
So now we’ve a company surviving liquidation, picking and choosing the bits it wants to continue and then complaining because they picked the wrong bit.
John Clark says:
November 24, 2014 at 1:39 am
“The difficulty has been, and is, compounded, I think, by the SMSM’s use,for whatever reason, of phrases like ‘since they came out of Administration’ instead of plainly stating the truth…”
————————————————————
But, what is the ‘truth’?
Ok, lets suppose …………….The only way this “ethereal entity” has managed to exit administration (the business and assets being sold off in a liquidation sale) would have been to go down the “incubator” route (as proposed by Bill Millar).
AFAIK There never has been any evidence of this.
We do know that D&P re-registed the “Company” down south. Was this the enabler for “un-incorporation”? AFAIK you cannot “un-incorporate” a legal entity in Scots Law.
The club and the Company (PLC) where synonymous. One and the same.
The question perhaps many should ask the SFA and UEFA (if this example is true), is, did the SFA knowingly allow a Scottish Company to be broken in England to allow itself to shed all of its debts to continue as the self claimed same ‘entity’ albeit extracted from the registered and incorporated club?
ernie says:
November 24, 2014 at 9:29 am
3 0 Rate This
Welcome to “The National”, first issue today and Adam Rooney on the back page! I hope they bring some real journalism to the game but probably not.
Wee story today on how two clubs are not engaging with the Holyrood anti-sectarianism advisory group although happy to take public funding. Advisory group source say they are “taking the p***”. Good start, honeymoon period I suspect, they will toe the line pretty sharpish.
——–
Nice pilot edition. I’ve taken the 5-issue digital subscription for £1.50.
Nice un-Glasgow centric sports pages. Got to hope it tells it like it is on all topics. That story did catch my eye, too. Straight talking.
further more……. if the company was ‘re-registered’ down south. Can it hold a Scottish Football licence?
……….tell a lie often enough. You’ll get caught as a liar!
you know….. the one that was ‘Transferred’ after “The Rangers” played Brechin….. 😯
Sorry, I’ve said this before and will say it again. The only reason there is not a palpable distinction between administration and liquidation in the various authority guidelines is simply that at no point did the various writers ever envisage a scenario where a company/club (and nothing to do with the immortal ethereal fairy) encountering liquidation would still be around the next day to be debated about.
Open that door ajar, and the English Law variation is just another version of the same thing, is to throw the door wide open, light the “come and win trophies here sign” and lay down a welcoming mat for the same thing to happen again.
If you dance with the devil, particularly if you deliberately trample all over his toes whilst your doing it then you don’t get burned, you combust.
Someone above asked for solutions by the way. I would have thought a quick one would have been the automatic denial of promotion at administration to be one easily brought in (I appreciate there’s issues with automatic relegation so fine, split the two and vote on both, but don’t allow one to block the other.) And for liquidation, if a club fairy thingy turns up and says “that’s me oot ra incubator” then fine. Change the name, however slightly, and ensure it is used on all official tables and documents.
Not difficult.
John Clark says:
November 24, 2014 at 1:03 am
Auldheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:52 pm
‘Supporters Direct‘s objective is increasing fan ownership of clubs not reforming SFA.’
————-
I, as a football supporter, would still like to ask why they seem never to have asked even themselves why they should be using public money to assist and advise supporters to get into shared ownership of their football clubs when those clubs are members of an Association about the integrity of which there are massive questions?
=====================================================
@JC I can sympathise with your comments and even support them but I have to accept that Auldheid’s comment is correct.
However my beef with Supporters Direct is that they are advising fans to buy shares in a public limited company with a significant and possibly controlling percentage consisting of anonymous overseas investors based mainly on offshore tax havens.
There are also some other identifiable major investors whose interest appears to be more based on commercial interests than the success or otherwise of Rangers on the football field.
It is a publicly established fact that Rangers is currently a financial basket-case surviving on a drip-feed of short term loans usually secured on property assets.
It’s possible the agm won’t even be held on time, if at all, because the accounts haven’t been signed-off by Deloittes and even if they are there is a strong possibility they might well contain ‘going concern’ warnings as to financial viability.
And yet Supporters Direct is currently encouraging fans to invest in this basket case. IMO the organisation is a joke and it’s time for the appropriate government agency which provides funding to have a serious look under it’s bonnet not just in financial terms but in the suitability of its personnel to provide balanced and informed advice.
IMO now is not the time for fans to be investing in the holding company of their football club. There is a battle going on behind the scenes for control of RIFC which is all about control for commercial reasons. It’s about making money off-the-back of fan support and retaining onerous contracts.
It’s also hinges on the 75% figure required to impose the rights to sell shares to investors without having firstly to offer them to the existing shareholders. At its simplest this can result in the shareholding of the ‘non-favoured’ investors being diluted and losing value in monetary and voting terms.
There is also strong possibilities that this version of Rangers could again end-up in administration and also enter liquidation like its predecessor.
If Rangers II goes down this route then the biggest creditor holds valuable cards as to how the next stage of the game is played so – strange as it may seem – it could suit someone to lend money to a Rangers in its financial death throes if it means they control its subsequent dismemberment.
And yet, in spite of all of this, Supporters Direct advise fans to invest in a tottering edifice comprised of cheap playing cards. All I can say is it’s as well I don’t do conspiracy theories.
My advice to Bears who want to invest in their club and create a shareholding interest that provides some power is to save your money and await results.
You won’t have long to wait IMO and then decide if you should invest or not having worked-out whether the combined fan shareholding will give you any access or control of the public company Board.
I don’t think it ever will but you have to DYOR and decide. Meanwhile if you buy any shares all you do is put money in the pockets of speculators and not your club.
And if you decide not to buy shares then the money you have in the kitty would be essential in forming your own club over which you can achieve much greater control.
And always remember if the current version of Rangers fails there is always the possibility that any successor might become a private limited company whose shares aren’t traded on AIM. What good will the shareholding pushed by Supporters Direct be then in terms of control?
Yip! You’ve got it! Zilch!
I should make it clear that anything I have stated should not be taken as financial advice as to whether anyone should or shouldn’t buy shares in Rangers as I am not qualified to give such an opinion.
My opinion is simply given from the perspective of a football fans and – as always – before making any decision you should DYOR – Do You Own Research.
I just hope that the Rangers fan organisations associated with Supporters Direct are asking searching questions as to whether Bears should actually be buying shares at this time given the huge uncertainty which surrounds the financial future of Rangers.
As much as I ‘hope’ I fear that it won’t happen as previous history doesn’t provide much confidence that those who seek to build ’empires’ and perhaps a blue blazer don’t have much of a history of unearthing the truth and dealing with it for the benefit of ordinary football-loving Bears.
neepheid says:
November 23, 2014 at 10:09 pm
I’m surprised he’s still manager.
=======================================
Increasingly I’m not. He’s just another diversion offered-up to the fans to stop them actually looking under the bonnet.
I must digress and say that I really don’t think ‘looking under the bonnet’ has stood the test of time. I used to be an enthusiastic mechanic even as a teenager and my motorbike with stripped-down engine would spend the winter in my bedroom being polished and oiled and tweeked incessantly.
I always thought I’d failed if I couldn’t rebuild it without having bits left-over 🙂
Car engines and gear boxes followed until after my lightweight aluminium Hillman Imp engine ended up in the great scrappy in the sky.
From then on it was shared lock-ups with fellow nutters boring out 105E Anglias. However now I look under a bonnet and find it difficult to work out what anything does never mind what’s broken or how to fix-it.
But as I said earlier as long as McCoist is there it diverts the attention of the fans not inclined to boycott or to question the role being played by the Board and the major, often unknown, shareholders who control decisions from afar and by proxy.
It’s just another part of the deflection shield like the land grab nonsense, the Celtic bankrupt nonsense and all the rest. It’s all about deflection.
Once McCoist’s usefulness is exhausted then he’ll get the heave and some other panto villain will be pushed towards centre stage at Ibrox to soak-up the boos and pick-up the discarded red cards after the dwindling crowds have headed for the pub.
Bears are being kept dazed and mentally exhausted to stop them organising a revolt which could see them help launch a new club. Instead they tilt at PR provided windmills.
Keeping McCoist also fits in with the strategy of some to financially destroy Rangers with Bears not boycotting but simply unable to face the dreadful football on offer.
To their credit it isn’t enough for a lot of Bears these days just to win. They want to watch football – you know that thing they see on their telly being played all over the world and which is never seen at Ibrox.
Sorry meant to add the following edit to my post of 10.18.
Bear in mind the clubs voted on automatic relegation post an admin event around the same time as Laxey amongst others were considering admin for a dominant RFC > 15pts ahead in Div 2 as was. The blocking of promotion appeared to be voted down due to the risks posed by automatic relegation, when in fact the two things were, in my eyes, entirely separate.
McCoist given a mauling (of sorts) in the DR today!! et tu Jacko :slamb:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/opinion/sport/keith-jackson-cold-hard-cash-4683056
John Clark
Ecobhoy
Anyone
Here are a couple of links to Support Direct to amplify my view on their role.
First is in funding
http://www.supporters-direct.org/homepage/what-we-do/faqs
and second is About Them.
http://www.supporters-direct.org/homepage/aboutsupportersdirect
Their main aim is supporting fan ownership but looking at their site it could cover a wider remit but so far they have tended to concentrate on fan ownership and work within football rather than confront other aspects.
To change that they need to be asked if they are aware of the concerns of many supporters regarding good governance.
helpmaboab says:
November 24, 2014 at 6:50 am
=========
John Clark at 1:03am
‘ But I, as a football supporter, would still like to ask why they seem never to have asked even themselves why they should be using public money to assist and advise supporters to get into shared ownership of their football clubs when those clubs are members of an Association about the integrity of which there are massive questions?’
……………………………….
Supporters Direct. Fingers in ears. nananananana .Brogue and blazer trainees perhaps? Talking shop.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You would think they would realise that without proper honest regulation in football that fans groups buying shares to get some control of their clubs could easily end up wasting their money. (One can easily think of a big example where that might be the case).
John Clark
Here is a link to Supporters Direct Web site
http://www.supporters-direct.org/homepage/aboutsupportersdirect
Fan ownership is main aim but you could argue they have a wider remit but possibly have not pursued other issues because they work within football and do not want to get involved in anything that might impact on the pursuit of their main aim.
To be fair I don’t know if the issue of football governance in Scotland has ever been raised with them…
Yes, I bought a copy of ‘The National’. And yes, as DP remarks above, the Sports pages are clearly designed to break from the traditional west of Scotland football mould, and widen the coverage of other sports. So, I can award some marks for that.
Sadly though, the editor and football writers appear to be ‘Liquidation’ deniers- they continue to prat on about the “Old Firm”, and put little ‘player says’ observation cheek by jowl on the page, in an attempt to pretend that we’re still back in 2011.
Truth is indivisible. You simply cannot have any credibility if what you say is based on a fundamental and known untruth.
‘The National’ is therefore, in my opinion, no better than the other organs of the SMSM when it comes to the ‘saga’ and the denial of the poison coursing through the veins of Football Governance.
I will not buy another issue any more readily than I would buy the DR.
John Clark
I’ve made three attempts to post links to the Supporters Direct Web site one to their source of funding ( which includes the SG) under FAQs and the other to their full remit under About but I’m getting a duplicate post message but no post.
So anyone interested will have to look them up. Maybe the two links is causing a problem.
Q. Can the ‘Assets & Business’ be bought from a liquidated company (no tittering at the back 😳 ) without that ‘business’ being a going concern?
TBK says:
November 24, 2014 at 12:52 pm
1 0 Rate This
Q. Can the ‘Assets & Business’ be bought from a liquidated company (no tittering at the back 😳 ) without that ‘business’ being a going concern?
———–
Intriguing posts today @TBK.
No, seems the obvious answer. What do the non-laymen say? I am still puzzled by that D&P formulation.
My gut feel would be yes, in so far as the going concern test is not one of whether or not you have the ability to make/stop losing money, but whether you have sufficient proveable resources to cover the position whilst you’re finding out. It would be interesting in so far as the creditor position is much different to last time and indeed it is not, as would normally be the case, the creditor position that is causing the cash shortfall as such.
This assumes that MASH don’t play hardball regarding their loans and equally that RIFC don’t call in their debt.
Yet another complication would be if TRFC could be bought out of RIFC, Business, assets, history and all thus leaving RIFC in the crap. I’d be surprised if that were possible without an asset or two coming under scrutiny.