A spectre is haunting Scottish Football

Avatar ByTrisidium

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football

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.

 

 

About the author

Avatar

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

4,164 Comments so far

Avatar

mcfcPosted on4:10 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Will Craig now be held at her majesty’s pleasure as a flight risk or will he be free to find himelf a safe house without benefit of a poassport. Tough call.

View Comment

Cygnus X2

Cygnus X2Posted on4:10 pm - Nov 27, 2014


The speed of Craig’s repatriation suggest to me that it may not be involuntary.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on4:13 pm - Nov 27, 2014


The Cat NR1 says:
November 27, 2014 at 1:09 pm

Ally
I though Regan was on the case?

Isn’t he on record as saying something along the lines of that the SFA have asked Mike Ashley if his secretary will ring up the SFA to arrange a suitable time so that they can discuss the possibility about making an appointment to have a preliminary meeting to look into the prospects of there being a discussion as to whether they should have a meeting to consider if it was appropriate for there to be at some mutually agreeable time some time hence talks about Mike Ashley’s relationship with RIFC PLC?
Of course they would then need to consider whether MA’s involvement with the RIFC PLC holding company has an impact on the running of TRFC Ltd (the football club). That may require a further meeting, of course.
:irony: :irony: :irony:
___________________

In a nutshell 😆

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on4:15 pm - Nov 27, 2014


mcfc says:
November 27, 2014 at 4:10 pm

0

0

Rate This

Will Craig now be held at her majesty’s pleasure as a flight risk or will he be free to find himelf a safe house without benefit of a poassport. Tough call.
————–
Maybe the polis could re-open their old Queens Park district headquarters:

Craigie Street :mrgreen:

View Comment

Bill1903

Bill1903Posted on4:39 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Meanwhile in other news there’s still no news on dates and venue for the league cup semi finals!!
Pathetic as expected from our governing body 😡

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on4:42 pm - Nov 27, 2014


And another post from Phil, get your popcorn out!!!

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-problem-shared/

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on4:47 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Mike Ashley’s alleged ownership has and always will be an issue for UEFA…the very same issue that they are investigating with the owner of Charlton whose wife is down as the owner of Standard Liege…and his son who down as an owner of a German professional club…

There is more to dual ownership than just a conflict of interest if the clubs play each other in competition…there is the possible manipulation of players between the clubs…the manipulation of finances between the clubs…

It is a slippery slope to allow dual ownership…there is no fathomable reason for one person to own 2 clubs…except for manipulation that I can think of!

View Comment

Avatar

TorquemadaPosted on4:48 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Phil saying Mick Ashley’s cash has dried up. Now we’re cooking with gas.

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-problem-shared/

Edit: Beaten to it!

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on4:50 pm - Nov 27, 2014


And as for Craig Whyte….I am wondering what he might cough out to avoid a long stretch at her Majesty’s pleasure?

How many are now secretly keeeechin it…at the thought of what Craigie can divulge for a reduced sentence…

My apologies…a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty…

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on4:52 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Torq…it must be on last fumes…shurely?

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on4:55 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Bill1903 says:
November 27, 2014 at 4:39 pm
…………………..

Is it because there could be one club who might be given a bye into the final

View Comment

Avatar

GoosyGoosyPosted on5:07 pm - Nov 27, 2014


paulsatim says:
November 27, 2014 at 4:42 pm
And another post from Phil, get your popcorn out!!!

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-problem-shared/
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Mmmmm…
Wasn`t it today that Ashley was due to hand over £1m without security?

Wonder if the £1m was attached to a bit of elastic just waiting on Deloitte resigning?

That would hold some feet to the fire

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on5:14 pm - Nov 27, 2014


The speed of Whyte’s capture and return seems quite overwhelming, especially so, in my limited knowledge, for a fraud case involving around a mere £20m. It’s not as though any of the money will be recovered and it is extremely unlikely that anyone considered ‘wronged’ will be recompensed in any way, at least not by Whyte. So why have the authorities done such a Sterling job in catching Whyte and bringing him back to face trial so quickly? It must have cost a small fortune, to boot, with a nice little jolly for some lucky plods and no doubt a hefty fee paid to some Mexican legal eagles (not to forget the contribution to the Mexican Police Benevolent Fund).

It all just seems so incredibly efficient with no cost spared for hardly the crime of the century. Unless, of course, there’s bigger fish to fry! And come to think of it, there could be cash available to recompense any victims – Ticketus and the RFC creditors spring to mind – paid by the employers of, perhaps, the people entrusted to ensure the whole affair was handled within the law and the creditors’ interests protected. I wonder who that could have been?

Hmm, a night in a Mexican jail; I bet Craigie was singing like an X Factor competitor – tunelessly, but loud 😆 , as soon as the UK Polis arrived!

Something else I’ve been musing over. Those who have played major parts in ‘The Rangers Downfall’ (hope you don’t mind, Phil?) who are called to give evidence, might well not have to face prosecution themselves, but so much could, and should, come out about the build up to Whyte’s involvement that reputations (for want of a better word) might well be shattered if the SMSM report the proceedings fully, whether during, or after, the trial.

View Comment

Avatar

mcfcPosted on5:30 pm - Nov 27, 2014


All I Want for Christmas is

Oh please Santa, I’ve been better than very very good all year and I would like Mr Justice Mitting to be involved, somehow, anyhow, in the Ibrox Five trial.

With one-liners like this one about the pleb-gate copper – he’ll be doing Live at The Apollo in no time:

Weighing up the competing claims, the judge said PC Rowland was “not the sort of man who would have had the wit, imagination or inclination to invent on the spur of the moment an account of what a senior politician had said to him in temper”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30235009

Ally, be afraid, be very afraid

View Comment

Avatar

weemanPosted on5:40 pm - Nov 27, 2014


bailemeanach says:
November 25, 2014 at 9:40 pm

His answers as the SFA CEO to the actual questions asked, especially in the context of a Northern Irish interviewer asking them on behalf of the large number of Rangers fans in that country, are perfectly acceptable
____________________________________________________________________________
To frame his answers in the context of the interviewer’s nationality is ludicrous. Same questions, same answers. Simple.
——————————————————–

I agree that should be the case but it isn’t where Rangers and the SFA/SPFL are concerned.

As I have previously posted a Scottish interviewer would most likely have got nothing. Complicated.

P.S. Pendolino says: November 26, 2014 at 2:48 am provides a better background to my reply than your excerpt from my initial post.

View Comment

Avatar

mcfcPosted on5:41 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Emmental

No not Ally’s latest signing, but if PMG’s latest is true and Mike will walk, then Regan has dodged the latest bullet, but there’s a whole magazine’s worth still in the air. He’ll be lucky to get out of this without a reputation that resenbles swiss cheese.

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on5:42 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Allyjambo says:
November 27, 2014 at 5:14 pm
———————————————
I don’t mind at all :mrgreen:

View Comment

Avatar

davythelotionPosted on5:58 pm - Nov 27, 2014


It would be fitting if Arthur got a minute’s applause at Celtic Park tonight.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on6:00 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Has to be said this’ll test kingy’s resolve. He now has a second opinion from bill millers right up to a tenth opinion (and counting) from lambiass and they’re all in firm agreement. This thing is the fleas on the fleas on the dog with fleas. In proper finance world language it sux. But it’s there for him now, just hanging deliciously from the saviour tree.

Of course there’s an even better one hanging lower on the liquidation tree just round the corner, but there you go! Thems the breaks.

View Comment

Avatar

essexbeancounterPosted on6:03 pm - Nov 27, 2014


he Cat NR1 says:
November 27, 2014 at 12:23 pm
17 0 Rate This

It seems reasonable to conclude that the unusual delay is due to a problem with the auditors signing off the accounts. The following two links go to the relevant ISAs on going concern and audit objectives and they may clarify the situation somewhat.
============================================================================
Just in from work and catching up on today’s posts…and what do I come across…? Links to ISAs aka International Standards on Auditing (no not the savings schemes!)…is there no rest for the wicked?

The Cat NR1…your round next…haufs an’ hauf pints…for your sins! 😆

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on6:08 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Davy,

An applause (perfectly observed silence would be better but these are modern times) ended not by the whistle but the opening bars of scotsport. Perfect memorial.

Good luck tonight btw.

View Comment

Avatar

essexbeancounterPosted on6:08 pm - Nov 27, 2014


mcfc says:
November 27, 2014 at 12:41 pm
13 0 Rate This

ecobhoy says:
November 27, 2014 at 12:24 pm
=============================
Did Craig go to Mexico on the run, or just for a bit of sun, sand and sex. Either way, he’ll probably be getting sun, sand and sex sharing a cell with some hairy arsed, drug dealing oso.

lol – if you search on “oso” on google you get:

Special Agent Oso – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Agent_Oso
His name ‘oso’ is Spanish for ‘bear’. He and his friends work for U.N.I.Q.U.E. (The United Network for the Investigation of Quite Usual Events). The show was …

“”

Oso – honest – try it
======================================================================
MCFC…I couldn’t bear to…!

View Comment

Avatar

hectorPosted on6:26 pm - Nov 27, 2014


I see two trades of 1 million Rangers shares have popped up on the Rangers shares page dated 25th of this month. Any of you clever types any idea what is going on . 😕

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on6:34 pm - Nov 27, 2014


AGM confirmed

http://www.investegate.co.uk/rangers-int-f-c–plc/rns/notice-of-agm/201411271828092479Y/

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on6:42 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, or the “Company”)

Preliminary Results

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12165769.html

View Comment

Avatar

berrtyPosted on6:49 pm - Nov 27, 2014


About Rangers Football Club

Rangers Football Club, formed in Scotland in 1872, is one of the world’s most successful clubs, having won 54 League titles, 33 Scottish Cups, 27 League Cups and the European Cup Winners’ Cup in 1972. The Club’s loyal and sizeable supporter base, both in Scotland and around the world, enables the Club to boast one of the highest percentages of season ticket holders in the UK. Playing at the 51,082 seat Ibrox Stadium and benefitting from the world class 37 acre Murray Park training facility, the Club has been a dominant force in Scottish football for decades. This world class stadium, training infrastructure and a loyal and passionate global fanbase provide an excellent foundation for the Rangers Group.

The Club was confirmed as unbeaten SPFL League One Champions for Season 2013/14 and it is the intention of the Directors and the Manager for the Club to return to top level football as soon as possible. The history, facilities and ambition of the Club are such that it remains a desirable destination for foreign and domestic players alike. The first team squad is managed by Alistair McCoist, the former Rangers and Scotland forward, who remains the Club’s all-time leading goal scorer.

I thought the statements anounced with the accounts had to be truthful ?

Where do you start with this pile of keech

View Comment

Avatar

sickofitallPosted on6:54 pm - Nov 27, 2014


EMPHASIS OF MATTER – GOING CONCERN
In forming our opinion on the financial statements, which is not modified, we have considered the adequacy of the disclosures in note 1 to the financial statements concerning the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. The Group requires additional funding to continue to meet its liabilities as they fall due. The Group has made key assumptions in relation to its ability to secure further funding in addition to the timing and value of season ticket income, increases in matchday income and sponsorship, the timing and value of dividends and further cost reductions.
These conditions around the need to secure further funding, along with the details provided in note 1 of the financial statements, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt over the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the Group may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Group was unable to continue as a going concern.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on6:54 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Dilute I say, dilute dilute dilute.

Oh and it’s only 8.3m we need this year. Thanks for showing interest. Press 1 to invest. Press 2 to get the hell out of dodge.

View Comment

Avatar

parttimearabPosted on6:57 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Wrt the financial results…a long standing question answered ❓

Staff Costs are down by 18% from £17.9m to £14.7m with the biggest progress coming in a £1.9m reduction in salary costs following the Manager’s decision to take a salary cut together with a reduction of the wage bill and termination payments in the playing squad.

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on6:58 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Two paragraphs, two different clubs……sneaky

View Comment

Avatar

James DolemanPosted on7:01 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Auditor’s report

These conditions around the need to secure further funding, along with the details provided in note 1 of the financial statements, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt over the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the Group may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Group was unable to continue as a going concern.

View Comment

Avatar

parttimearabPosted on7:05 pm - Nov 27, 2014


…and interestingly enough, given current events, there’s one wee problem that just refuses to go away…

“Litigation
The company operates at risk of litigation procedures from third parties, which are dealt with as they arise and on an individual basis. The ongoing case relating to Craig Whyte and Aidan Earley referred to in Note 30 is the only case deemed worthy of disclosure.”

…and can’t help wondering what the ones that are not deemed worthy of disclosure are… ❓

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on7:05 pm - Nov 27, 2014


EMPHASIS OF MATTER – GOING CONCERN

In forming our opinion on the financial statements, which is not modified, we have considered the adequacy of the disclosures in note 1 to the financial statements concerning the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. The Group requires additional funding to continue to meet its liabilities as they fall due. The Group has made key assumptions in relation to its ability to secure further funding in addition to the timing and value of season ticket income, increases in matchday income and sponsorship, the timing and value of dividends and further cost reductions.
These conditions around the need to secure further funding, along with the details provided in note 1 of the financial statements, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt over the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the Group may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Group was unable to continue as a going concern.

EMPHASIS OF MATTER – UNCERTAIN OUTCOME OF POTENTIAL LITIGATION

In forming our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, which is not modified, we have considered the adequacy of the disclosures made in note 30 to the financial statements concerning the uncertain outcome of the potential litigation following the receipt of two letters before claim from legal advisers to Craig Whyte and Aidan Earley. The Company commissioned an independent investigation (‘the Investigation’) to investigate the first

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on7:12 pm - Nov 27, 2014


LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

The RIFC Group maintains cash to fund the daily cash requirements of its business. The Group does not have access to any further banking facilities. The Group also has two finance lease agreements totalling £0.9 million.
As at 30 June 2014, the Group held £4,607,000 of cash. Included within cash and bank balances is £3,069,000 (2013 – £946,000) relating to Rangers Retail Limited, which is not immediately available as working capital to the Group as a whole.
Since the year end, the Group company The Rangers Football Club Limited has entered into a credit facility agreement with MASH Holdings Limited, a company controlled by Mike Ashley, an existing shareholder of the Group.
On 27 October 2014, the first credit facility of £2m was agreed, for a period of six months, interest free. The facility is secured by standard security over the properties of Edmiston House and Albion car park.
On 12 November 2014, an extension to this facility of £1m was agreed, under the same terms. Approved by the Board and signed on its behalf by:

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on7:17 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Hard to see how the SFA and SPFL can ignore the fact that the auditors of a member club are unable to certify them as a going concern. That surely has repercussions for the other members? Weren’t Livi forced to post a bond in similar circumstances?

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on7:21 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Has someone got a link to the full report rather than the RNS announcement? Thanks.

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on7:25 pm - Nov 27, 2014


easyJambo says:
November 27, 2014 at 7:21 pm

Scroll down on the attached.

http://www.investegate.co.uk/rangers-int-f-c–plc/rns/final-results/201411271834472477Y/

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on7:28 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Financial mumbo jumbo – & expensive!! mumbo jumbo – opaque nonsense to deceive folk
Overkill by parasites to confuse normal people

Looks like more buying time
Would be beneficial (IMO) if ALL the Authorities cleared up ALL this nonsense once and for all
Better for everyone
tp

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on7:30 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Thanks Martin – I didn’t scroll down far enough 😳

View Comment

lagerbeer

lagerbeerPosted on7:34 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Nothing like a slow news day to release the financial results eh? ….. 😀

Maybe some heavy duty Accountant types on here can comment on the highlights. First look straight to the Auditor’s comment and then the Consolidated Cash Flow Statement.

At least wages / turnover ratio down ……

But, where’s all the money gone / going?

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on7:35 pm - Nov 27, 2014


A bit off of BBC to give out THE FUGITIVES flight arrival time at GLA. This is going to get out of hand pronto.

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on7:37 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Since the year end a further severance payment has been made to Graham Wallace of £100,000.

View Comment

Avatar

sixtaesevenPosted on7:38 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, or the “Company”)
Preliminary Results

Are the club’s results separate (and any better…)?

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on7:39 pm - Nov 27, 2014


A 6 mil rise in retail? How everyone layering ?

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins FinestPosted on7:39 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Have they included the last wee share issue even though it was outwith the reporting period?

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on7:41 pm - Nov 27, 2014


The Investigation was overseen by Roy MartinQC.

On 30 May 2013, the Company announced that the Investigation had been concluded on 17 May 2013 and Pinsent Masons and Roy Martin QC have reported to the Investigation Committee. The Investigation Committee was satisfied that a thorough investigation was conducted despite the inherent limitations of a private inquiry.

Based on the assessment of the available evidence, the Company considers that the Investigation found no evidence that Craig Whyte had any involvement with Sevco Scotland Limited (now called The Rangers Football Club Limited), the company which ultimately acquired the business and assets of Rangers Football Club plc from its administrators; nor which would suggest that Craig Whyte invested in The Rangers Football Club Limited or Rangers International Football Club plc, either directly or indirectly through any third party companies or vehicles.

On 28 May 2013, a further letter before claim was sent to (inter alia) The Rangers Football Club Limited and Rangers International Football Club plc on behalf of Craig Whyte, Aidan Earley and (purportedly) Sevco 5088 Limited. The Board is of the view that the claims set out in the letter before claim are entirely unsubstantiated based on legal advice received to date by the Board and the outcome of the Investigation. This letter is now 18 months old.

View Comment

Avatar

gc58Posted on7:42 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Broadcasting rights increased by £6 million in the last year.
Have I missed something???????

View Comment

Avatar

berrtyPosted on7:43 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Maybe I am reading this wrong but the accounts say they had ~£4m in june, the then raised ~£3m in the open offer and have borrowed £3m from Ashley. If they have ran out of cash again then surely their annual losses cannot be ~£8m and must be closer to £20m.

View Comment

lagerbeer

lagerbeerPosted on7:46 pm - Nov 27, 2014


ianagain says:
November 27, 2014 at 7:35 pm
1 0 Rate This

A bit off of BBC to give out THE FUGITIVES flight arrival time at GLA. This is going to get out of hand pronto.
——————————

Wonder if his collection of tapes is in his hold baggage or carry-on …. 😀

View Comment

Avatar

andygraham.66Posted on7:50 pm - Nov 27, 2014


@Propa_Gander 14m14 minutes ago
Anyone know why JUNE END Financial Highlights “Successful Open Offer raising £3.13m provided valuable additional working capital” in SEPT?

View Comment

Avatar

parttimearabPosted on7:53 pm - Nov 27, 2014


…and putting a figure on how much they need to get them through to the next season ticket bonanza…

” The Group’s ability to secure further debt or equity finance to allow the Group to continue to meet its liabilities as they fall due. Without taking account of the possibility for refinancing the £3m short term loan facility falling due for repayment in April 2015 or of the impact of any cost reduction measures or of any other potential sources of revenue, such as player transfer or loan fees, the forecast identifies that the Group will require up to £8 million by way of debt or equity finance within the next 12 months. The forecast indicates that these significant further funds will be required in early 2015, the first tranche of which being required in January 2015, to meet day to day working capital requirements.”

…less than some figures going sround…but confirmation (if any was needed) that the fumes they’re currently running on run out in January)…and a hint that some players will be on their way come January..or loaned out to NUFC ❓

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on7:53 pm - Nov 27, 2014


The internal debt (Amounts due from Subsidiary Undertakings) has actually gone down from £16.1M to £15.7M.

View Comment

Avatar

sixtaesevenPosted on7:58 pm - Nov 27, 2014


8M needed (not including the 3M and counting MA loans)…

What are the SFA doing (apart from imposing heavy sanctions on diddy holding companies/clubs/teams//players/…)?

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on8:07 pm - Nov 27, 2014


So, accounts’ opinions required – what level would you set these accounts at:

(a)Bad?
(b)Very Bad?
(c)Extremely Bad?
(d)Terminal?

Even I can work out that the answer is not, (a)Bad 😐

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on8:12 pm - Nov 27, 2014


easyJambo says:
November 27, 2014 at 7:53 pm

Suggestion only, but could it mean the debt actually went up, but at the date of the accounts whatever ST money that had been collected by the club had been transferred to RIFC, creating a net, but temporary, reduction?

View Comment

Avatar

mungoboyPosted on8:20 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Ianagain,

I think they gave out Craigie Boys flight details on the BBC just in case Jack McRuby was hanging about outside flight arrivals

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:26 pm - Nov 27, 2014


ianagain says:
November 27, 2014 at 7:39 pm

“A 6 mil rise in retail? How everyone layering ?”
————————
Assuming a sale price of £50 per shirt, that equates to 120,000 additional sales. Once you factor in manufacturing and distribution costs you must be getting near 200,000 additional sales.

Impressive.

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on8:28 pm - Nov 27, 2014


mungoboy says:

November 27, 2014 at 8:20 pm

2

0

Rate This

Ianagain,

I think they gave out Craigie Boys flight details on the BBC just in case Jack McRuby was hanging about outside flight arrivals
—————————————-
Aye but who gave it out and why? Could only be Polis Scotland which makes me think before anything has happened seriously legally (everyone “held” “interviewed” etc so far). That this is heading down the wrong path already.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on8:36 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Accounts is not my forte but it strikes me that a loss making company that is leaking cash via onerous contracts might be the sort of place a successful sportswear entrepreneur might stuff a bit of spare money out of the way of the taxman.

Of course those more knowledgeable in such matters will soon show me the naivety of my presumption I suspect.

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on8:36 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Castofthousands says:

November 27, 2014 at 8:26 pm

0

0

Rate This

ianagain says:
November 27, 2014 at 7:39 pm

“A 6 mil rise in retail? How everyone layering ?”
————————
Assuming a sale price of £50 per shirt, that equates to 120,000 additional sales. Once you factor in manufacturing and distribution costs you must be getting near 200,000 additional sales.

Impressive.
=====================================================
COF1000s

Impressive? Bloody puzzling. I mentioned my mate bought 6 to take back to OZ but he did not have a few tens of thousand mates Gers supporting with him.
Something’s off about that number.

View Comment

Avatar

mungoboyPosted on8:37 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Ian,
Might not have been the Polis.
There are Press stringers based all around Heathrow with access all areas passes and they will have their friendly informants among airline staff etc. Could have come from them.
However, I’m with you.
I think there’ll be plenty of people more than willing to head it down the wrong path.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on8:49 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Sorry but I have to keep harping on about it.

The accounts have an item under expenditure of Other Operating Expenses.

For 2013/14 is £16.4m, this is an increase in £3.1m from the 2012/2013 figures.

In the SDM days the figure was always around £14m to £15m, sometimes a bit more if there was a euro run.

Nash had supposedly trimmed costs by £7m.

From these figures I find it hard to believe.

Therefore even if these costs were down to say £10m that means that, at £400 per season ticket of 40k per season, then only £6m is left for all other costs. Therefore a further £14m is required just to get match Celtic’s £20m footballing budget.

Chuck in the sponsorship and retail income etc and you are still going to be a few mill short.

Still the potential to put out a half decent side in the Scottish Premiership but no more than that.

View Comment

Avatar

justbecauseyoureparanoidPosted on8:55 pm - Nov 27, 2014


“These conditions around the need to secure further funding, along with the details provided in note 1 of the financial statements, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt over the group’s ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the group may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business.”

And the response from the SFA is what precisely?

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on9:02 pm - Nov 27, 2014


I’m thick as sh*t!!! Does this mean Deloittes have signed off the accounts?

View Comment

Avatar

Jake CantonaPosted on9:06 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Castofthousands says:
November 27, 2014 at 8:36 pm

4

0

Rate This

Accounts is not my forte but it strikes me that a loss making company that is leaking cash via onerous contracts might be the sort of place a successful sportswear entrepreneur might stuff a bit of spare money out of the way of the taxman.

Of course those more knowledgeable in such matters will soon show me the naivety of my presumption I suspect.

———————–

Especially if said (theoretical) entrepreneur were also possibly benefiting from said onerous contracts…

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on9:14 pm - Nov 27, 2014


jean7brodie says:

November 27, 2014 at 9:02 pm

2

0

Rate This

I’m thick as sh*t!!! Does this mean Deloittes have signed off the accounts?
======================================
Jean
Yes but with caveats as usual.
Our more learned will fill the detail in in good time.
To my untrained eye not good news.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on9:16 pm - Nov 27, 2014


jean7brodie says:
November 27, 2014 at 9:02 pm

‘I’m thick as sh*t!!! Does this mean Deloittes have signed off the accounts?’

Jean,

Why would you being thick as sh*t!! mean Deloittes had signed off the accounts? 😐 (sorry just couldn’t resist it 😯 )

But I think so, yes, but with the much anticipated ‘going concern’, or lack of it, problem!

View Comment

tykebhoy

tykebhoyPosted on9:16 pm - Nov 27, 2014


@Jean. Yep those nice chaps at deloittes have signed off, probably in more ways in one. They are still accepting doubts about the ownership of MP and Ibrox and also saying without further investment there is doubt RIFC are a going concern.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on9:22 pm - Nov 27, 2014


mungoboy says:
November 27, 2014 at 8:20 pm
‘…I think they gave out Craigie Boys flight details on the BBC just in case Jack McRuby was hanging about outside flight arrivals
———-
I note that “The company has passed a resolution in accordance with section 506 of the Companies Act 2006 that the auditor’s name should not be stated.’
And that section allows the name of the Auditor ( either the Firm or the individual person)to be omitted ,
“..if the following conditions are met
(2)The conditions are that the company—

(a)considering on reasonable grounds that statement of the name would create or be likely to create a serious risk that the auditor or senior statutory auditor, or any other person, would be subject to violence or intimidation, has resolved that the name should not be stated, and

(b)has given notice of the resolution to the Secretary of State, stating—

(i)the name and registered number of the company,

(ii)the financial year of the company to which the report relates, and

(iii)the name of the auditor and (where the auditor is a firm) the name of the person who signed the report as senior statutory auditor..”

Deloittes must also have had their concerns about Jack McRuby and the safety of their people! In the wider scheme of things, that auditor has possibly done as much damage to RIFC plc as Craig did to RFC(IL)!
His or her name may,of course, be known to certain TRFC directors.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on9:22 pm - Nov 27, 2014


ianagain, Allyjambo, tykebhoy

Thanks guys. I’m amazed, dumbfounded, scunnered…

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on9:26 pm - Nov 27, 2014


And I hate to stir any pots 😈 but “they need 8m to see out the next 12 months, but we’re confident we’ll get it from any number of sources” gets them only to mid season 15/16. Over to you Stewart.

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on9:36 pm - Nov 27, 2014


Jean

I’m definitely not amazed. Auditors are pliable to a degree, but the On-going concern and notes to the accounts have been the death knell of many an outfit.
For instance I worked for Chinese companies who would go to the ends of the earth to ensure Nothing but Nothing appeared in that space “notes to accounts” In Taiwan SE for instance its the end of a company if it receives such comments. No matter how large.

View Comment

Avatar

MartinPosted on9:41 pm - Nov 27, 2014


SPECIAL RESOLUTION

9. “THAT the Directors be and they are empowered pursuant to Section 570(1) of the Act to allot equity securities (as defined in Section 560(1) of the Act) of the Company wholly for cash pursuant to the authority of the Directors under Section 551 of the Act conferred by Resolution 8 above, and/or by way of a sale of treasury shares for cash (by virtue of Section 573 of the Act), in each case as if Section 561(1) of the Act did not apply to such allotment provided that:
(a) the power conferred by this resolution shall be limited to:
(i) the allotment of equity securities and sale of treasury shares for cash in connection with or pursuant to an offer of, or invitation to holders of equity securities and other persons entitled to participate in proportion(as nearly as practicable) to their then holdings of equity securities (or as appropriate the numbers of such equity securities
which such other persons are for such purposes deemed to hold) subject to such exclusions or other arrangements as the Directors may deem necessary or expedient to deal with treasury shares, fractional entitlements or legal, regulatory or practical problems arising under the laws or requirements of any overseas territory or by virtue of shares being represented by depository receipts or the requirements of any regulatory body or stock exchange or any other matter whatsoever; and
(ii) in the case of the authority granted under paragraph (a) of Resolution 8 and/or in the case of any sale of treasury shares for cash, the allotment, otherwise than pursuant to sub-paragraph (i) above, of equity securities or sale of treasury shares up to an aggregate nominal value equal to £407,392; and (b) unless previously revoked, varied or extended, this power shall expire either on 31 December 2015 or, if earlier, at the conclusion of the Company’s next Annual General Meeting in 2015, except that the Company may before the expiry of this power make an offer or agreement which would or might require equity securities to be allotted (and treasury shares to be sold) after such expiry and the Directors may allot equity securities (and sell treasury shares) in pursuance of such an offer or agreement as if this power had not expired.”

______________________________________________________________________________________

DEFINITION OF ‘TREASURY STOCK (TREASURY SHARES)

The portion of shares that a company keeps in their own treasury. Treasury stock may have come from a repurchase or buyback from shareholders; or it may have never been issued to the public in the first place. These shares don’t pay dividends, have no voting rights, and should not be included in shares outstanding calculations.

______________________________________________________________________________________

From Rangers int website:

Currently, 17.50%+ of the Company’s Ordinary Shares are not in public hands. The Ordinary Shares are freely transferable and no Ordinary Shares are held in treasury.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on9:42 pm - Nov 27, 2014


ianagain says:
November 27, 2014 at 9:36 pm
______________________________________

Many thanks ianagain. I feel so much better now 😉

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:00 pm - Nov 27, 2014


ianagain says: November 27, 2014 at 7:39 pm

A 6 mil rise in retail? How everyone layering ?
===========================
What the accounts don’t tell us is what were the costs of Retail operations.

The half year figures for Retail were Income £4.8M and Costs £3M, i.e. a profit of £1.8M to be shared with Sports Direct?

If the ratio of income to costs was maintained over the whole year then the costs would be around £4.75M giving a profit for the year of approx. £3M.

The Cash in the Bank figures for what was not available for immediate use were Jun 13 £946K, Dec 13 £1.669M and Jun 14 £3.069M. I suspect that the bulk of the Retail profits is sitting in that account.

View Comment

Comments are closed.