As most of you will be aware, the Guardian recently agreed to and accepted payment from CQN for an advertisement which was intended to raise awareness of the Resolution 12 issue, an issue pursued determinedly by Celtic shareholders for the last three years. Subsequently, and citing the thinnest of excuses, they decided not to run the ad. This developed hard on the heels of the Herald actually soliciting the business from the advertisers for their own paper, and then without even seeing the copy, refusing to move forward. (See CQN story here)
A troubling aspect of GuardianGate is that CQN were lied to. They were initially advised that the ad was to be removed after editorial scrutiny. Subsequently they were advised that the decision came from an intervention by senior officials.
We are now focused on a media conspiracy to impose censorship in favour of a multi-million pound industry – to the detriment of its small investors and paying customers.
So which was true – and which was the lie?
Here’s a thing about the truth; it is seldom complicated, which is why the failure by the Guardian and the Herald to deliver a straightforward answer implies that there may be more to this nonsense than any of us first imagined.
At this point, it is worth noting that the Guardian is currently running an ad campaign by Toyota, a company who have admitted lying to environmental regulatory bodies for years about emissions from their cars (the Guardian professes to be a major campaigner on environmental issues), but won’t accept a paying ad that asks some polite and important questions about the conduct of a multi-million pound industry.
The denial of the Res 12 guys’ right to ask questions (no accusations – just bloody questions) via the once assumed to be pluralist and free press, should be ringing alarm bells all over the country, and the substantive issue has become largely irrelevant as a consequence. We are now focused on a media conspiracy to impose censorship in favour of a multi-million pound industry – to the detriment of its small investors and paying customers.
Two so-called quality newspapers, have mysteriously, after touting for advertising business, refused that very same business, and have given no good reason for doing so. If the Guardian refuse to accept an ad, I don’t believe that is censorship in itself, but when the dwindling number of newspaper proprietors in this country conspire to arrange an effective blackout of ideas, that is quite clearly censorship.
And for something so relatively inconsequential as football, I can only assume that we have all stumbled on to something far more serious.
Given the recent media rhetoric about Russia Today and their forthright coverage of Chilcot and Tory Election Fraud, it seems that like so many of the players in this saga, the irony circuit in the collective press brain is now as devolved as a human tail.
There are dark forces at work in our country, and they are running riot with basic freedoms. However it is important to put the football issue into the proper perspective; if the media can go to these corrupt lengths for a game of football, what will they do to protect the capital interests of arms manufacturers, food producers and media dictatorships?
They may have lost the war, but through fix after fix at the SFA and the SPL, in the press and in the media, the authorities are winning the peace – basically by denying that any peace is possible until we all accept the notion that black is white, right is left, and wrong is right
Migrant fruit-pickers
© Scotsman
Back in soccer La-La-Land’s Mount Florida Fruit Factory, the football authorities most definitely lost the recent war. RFC went out of business and failed the fundamental task of any football club – to sustain itself. In allowing that to happen on their watch, the authorities failed in their most fundamental role – to keep RFC alive.
However through fix after fix, at the SFA and the SPL, in the press and in the media, they are winning the peace – basically by denying that any peace is possible until we all accept the notion that black is white, right is left, and wrong is right.
And still, even in this atmosphere, the major shareholders at all of our clubs sit and do nothing. Are they part of the problem, an integral part of the conspiracy? Or are they scared witless of the forces that may line up against them if they dare to grow a pair, like the Resolution 12 guys?
Sporting integrity has taken a back seat recently. Season ticket sales are up all over the place; Celtic provided a marquee manager; the red tops are ablaze about the ‘return’ of the Rangers; Hearts and Aberdeen are newly emerged from financial difficulty, and now enjoy the realistic prospect of new eras of success; and another competitive and exciting year beckons in the Championship.
In normal circumstances this would be fantastic news. But all of it is based on a Lie – the Lie that the game is run according to the rules, and for the benefit of all clubs. When the euphoria at Parkhead dies down; when TRFC are reinstalled (actually it will need to be with a shoehorn, but it will be done) as part of the old duopoly that sees the vital contribution made by the likes of Hearts and Aberdeen and others as insignificant; when the next major ‘bending’ of the regulations becomes necessary; all we will be left with is that Big Lie.
The clubs will eventually have to deal with that – and the complicit roles they played in ramming it down each and every one of our throats.
I hope we make them pay.
Another thing about the truth though is this;
Everyone with skin in this game, with the exception of the mentally deficient, know exactly what the truth is;
- RFC cheated;
- RFC evaded, avoided, and deliberately withheld payment of tax;
- RFC failed to register players properly over (at least) a decade;
- RFC lied to the SFA, the SPL and LNS;
- Whilst all the above was happening, RFC won over a dozen on-field prizes;
- The SFA rewrote the terms of LNS to better tailor their preferred outcome;
- RFC were punished by way of a £250k fine. No other penalties were suffered by RFC;
- RFC entered liquidation and a new club, which co-existed with RFC, began playing in competition BEFORE RFC’s SFA/SPL membership lapsed;
- That club (TRFC for differentiation purposes) just achieved promotion to the Premiership;
As long as we keep reminding everyone of those truths, as long as we continue to give them a voice, they won’t go away.
And what if, next time, it is Hearts or Aberdeen or Celtic, who make a desperate attempt to get an edge over their rivals (an emergent TRFC perhaps)?
The irony (and I exclude the TRFC fans who frequent this site) is that TRFC, despite having the weight of the football and press establishments behind them, are being done no favours at all.
The increasing pariah status of their club is a sad but inevitable consequence of the wrong-doing by the old club, because the fans (understandably to be fair) seek to side with their own partisan interests in the face of outside hostility.
But think of this. If the initial-ism ‘RFC’ above was replaced by the name of any other club in the country, wouldn’t TRFC fans be complaining as loudly as the rest of us?
And what if, next time, it is Hearts or Aberdeen or Celtic, who make a desperate attempt to get an edge over their rivals (an emergent TRFC perhaps)?
What if they run roughshod over the same rules that were broken before but remain unfixed? What if, as a consequence, a compliant TRFC are denied an opportunity to play in Europe, or compete in a final, or win a league?
Will we then still be ‘Rangers haters’ if we protest about that or merely Hearts or Dons or Celtic haters?
This is not about revenge – it never has been – and no amount of wishful thinking will make it so. For most of us on SFM, there is no RFC to have our revenge on anyway, so the accusation makes no sense.
What we are about, what we are all about, is weeding out the clucken wort in Scotland’s football garden on level six at Hampden.
And it appears that some extraordinarily powerful individual or group, with enough muscle to bend the fourth estate to their will, wants to keep us all away from that garden..
NAEGREETIN
JULY 1, 2016 at 17:38 1
Re Journos covering The Rangers US “Tour”
The Times have journo Lindsay Herron in Charleston with The Rangers…
——————————————–
I believe Mr. Herron is a freelancer.
He also used to be an Ibrox employee, I think.
Jingso.Jimsie @ 19.18 1 July
Thanks for that info Jingso – I didn’t think The Times had the money to splash out on an embedded journo of their own to cover this farce of a “tour” hence the use of the freelancer .
I’m away off to watch Wales v Belgium, c’mon the celts! (cousins)
I think when one is facing only one opponent the word “tour” is somewhat grandiose.
I think most folk would call that a … game.
JIMBOJULY 1, 2016 at 19:16 3 0 Rate This
Slightly off topic, but seeing as how we are now self moderated I take my chance.
——————–
I will take my chance also.
I saw a certain Mr Barton had a horse running yesterday.The horse named after a certain TRFC fans chant.
I never saw the race but i know it did not win.Is there any truth in the rumour that it did win but got demoted to last place after an irregular weigh in by the jockey
CLUSTER ONE
I saw a certain Mr Barton had a horse running yesterday.The horse named after a certain TRFC fans chant.
is there a horse called “we’re dead and we know we are”
naegreetinJuly 1, 2016 at 19:30
‘..I didn’t think The Times had the money to splash out on an embedded journo of their own to cover this farce of a “tour” hence the use of the freelancer..’
_____________
Or did you mean ‘free-loader’?
Did the Welsh boys do well or what.
What about Wales?
I posted on here at the start of the Euros that I’m not a big fan of Internationals and got hundreds of TDs
I take it back. I’ve watched some really entertaining games the past weeks and the teams representing the British Isles have given a good account of themselves, perhaps excluding England
So looking forward to Wales’s next match, Bale v Ronaldo, what’s not to like?
I’m up early because I’m going to the opening of the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. It’s on BBC Scotland from about 11am. I believe I’m getting a freebie lunch but hoping I don’t have to meet & greet any of the politicians.
Be nice.
NAEGREETINJULY 1, 2016 at 17:38
Re Journos covering The Rangers US “Tour”
The Times have journo Lindsay Herron in Charleston with The Rangers – in to-day’s missive he is reoprting Warbo has issued an alcohol ban on the trip for his players – I bet that doesn’t go for the travelling journos because there must be eff all else to do all day apart from a daily 10 minute Warbo presser . I can almost understand the DR sending someone but The Times ? How much is that costing & who deems its worth it ? The Scottish editor I presume but surely there must be other ways of spending your Scottish football budget – incredible .
===========================
I could be wrong, but straight off the top of my head I think Lindsay Herron works for Rangers media, therefore it’s likely the Times are taking updates from him. As an aside his father is Alan Herron, an old school Scottish football writer, who I recall writing for the Sunday Mail in the 70’s.
I’m not an advocate of plugging other people’s blogs on this site but I’ve just read JJ’s latest post & it contains some fascinating content in both the post & comments .
The Charlotte Fakes/Fakeovers story merits a book in its own right – how did Sir Craigie’s recordings end up in the public domain – remember them ? Some classics like the conversation in the mens’ loo at a Mayfair restaurant (with Grier I think) or CG’s name dropping of Souness etc – maybe one day the full story will be told (maybe by Sir Craigie in his book !) or maybe by JJ if his post is to be believed .
As Naegreetin said above, JJ has posted an interesting blog and some of the comments also cause interest. One comment directs readers to the following blog –
https://daviesleftpeg.wordpress.com/2016/07/01/the-golden-fleece/
Just what to make of it, I can’t say, but it does seem to back up my own thoughts on corrupt organisations and people, that they both tend to attract lowlifes like a cow-pat does!
I wonder if there are any other sporting organisations (claiming to be one and the same) in the world that has had so many words written about it, and it’s peripheral organisations, speaking of corruption and dishonesty that go, apparently, unread by the authorities and media – and also don’t result in denials or lawsuits!!!
Whatever his motivation, however good his information might be, JJ has made a great many inflammatory claims about those who surround Ibrox, some with genuine reputations to defend, and yet he is never challenged (by those he writes about) or threatened with lawsuits (I’m sure he’d delight in telling us if he was) and never had his site closed due to complaints by those he might be ‘slandering’.
One thing is undeniable, there are people, both directly and indirectly, involved with TRFC, who have criminal records and/or unsavoury reputations – and some of them are getting their hands on other people’s money… and meanwhile the authorities stand idly by!
AllyjamboJuly 2, 2016 at 11:282
” …….corrupt organisations and people, that they both tend to attract lowlifes like a cow-pat does!”
________________________
Like, calling unto like.
A rotten cheatin’-minded majority shareholder of an organisation looks to exploit the greed and lack of conscience of his chosen henchmen, particularily if any of his chosen henchmen end up being ‘responsible’ for ensuring that his organisation is quietly assisted in its wizard cheating wheeze, no questions asked in return for a little dinner money.
And easy money attracts the vilest elements in society-even in, perhaps specially in , ‘high society’.
I heard on radio this morning some guy talking about ‘price comparison’ sites.Honest to God, the stench of lies and corruption came reeking over the air waves as he used ‘business speak’ to deny his company made its money by doing deals with companies and recommending only those companies, in return for kickbacks.
What a blessing it is in the sports world, where Integrity rules, financial fair play is supported and defended, cheating is punished, truth is told…………….
Re : Worthington Grp
I see Tom Winnifrith (Share Prophets) is speculating that above shares will not now be re-listed on Aim as the company it was supposed to be merging with (Nuna) is bankrupt & he thinks the police should be getting involved . Another of Craigie’s schemes seems to be faltering .
JC
My pet hate is “independent” financial advisors.
I had one hang up on me when during a follow up phone call on the three visits I had to his office. Every visit I defined clearly what I wanted with regard to a private pension and every time he came back with products that had add-ons that I had said I didn’t want. In the end I put together a spreadsheet that showed that if I paid the amount he was recommending into a standard low interest rate bank account, allowing for standard tax deductions, and took out each month after retirement the amount he was saying I would get, then I would have to live until I was 93 before I ran out of money. That also had benefit that the amount left if I died early wouldn’t belong to some insurance company but to my family instead.
So when he phoned me I got as far into my first sentence as “I put together a spreadsheet…” before he slammed down his phone literally cursing as he did so.
I nowadays think that you will get a better deal at a bookies than you will at an insurance company. They are in the same business afterall.
“Excuse me Mr Ladbroke/Hill what odds will you give me on me dying during my two weeks in the Cote d’Azur?”
NaeGreetin
Tom has been reporting on Worthington for somewhere about five years now and I think this is probably the third merger with a bankrupt company he has reported on.
His main point of action isn’t against the likes of Whyte, Earley and Ware but at the Stock Exchange themselves. The more I look into the likes of SDM and his pals the Gillespies the more I move to Tom’s point of view. Abuse of the system on such large scales and with so many different scams could only really happen with a great many blind eyes turned within the walls of the LSE.
The LSE have paid millions to have IT systems that lets them sell shares at the right time and to ring warning bells when the market is heading for trouble. Perhaps if they paid a fraction of that amount to ring bells when the patterns show that someone is running a scam we may have financial systems that the rest of us can have faith in. Murray left you and me picking up the bill for MIH pensions and the huge losses he left behind while walking away with property worth millions. He didn’t even try to hide the scam, the liquidators sold the profitable parts to the “Murray Family” for god sake. It would have been less obvious if he had created a shell company to take these properties at a fraction of their true value and named the shell “Rip Offs R Us Co Ltd”.
I should say in addition to my previous post that these post-Brexit market fluctuations have very little yo do with Brexit per se and more to do with the gamblers in the Stock Exchange making the wrong call on the result. And guess who is paying the price for this. Yet again the media reports anything other than that these greedy Bas”!%ds are ripping off the man in the street. Politicians, gamblers and fraudsters are taking the piss out of you and I and we just let them go ahead and do it.
Who started this talking about our financiers? I am in a bad mood now.
Reiver
I too have had pretty poor dealings with my pension ‘investment’. At the relatively young age of 23 I decided on the advice of my accountant to contribute a fair old whack of my hard earned cash into a couple of funds, I now find that I will need to live to the ripe old age of 108 to realise my investment in full, granted the crash of 2008 had a lot to do with the depreciation in their value along with various goverments moving the goal posts, in hindsight I would have been better off storing the cash under my bed. A bet on the Shire each week would have been more exciting and would have probably outperformed the returns of our so called experts. Maybe I should bite the bullet and buy some TRFC shares, naah, on second thoughts!
Reiver
July 2, 2016 at 16:14
My pet hate is “independent” financial advisors.
————————————————-
Reiver same here, 110%
That may be a surprise to some on here who know that the industry I worked in was Insurance.
Regulation of that industry began in the mid-1980s with the Financial Services Act 1986, by 1988 the company I worked for decided (along with many others) to change its structure.
Instead of composite ( all business classes) it separated into:-
Personal and Commercial and Life and Pensions.
All sales employees were interviewed as to their preferences. I was the only one to choose Personal and Commercial.
When asked why, I referred my sales manager to the changes about to be made (see link below) and that I was not going to be a party to pushing this disgrace.
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/feature/2261768/how-thatchers-governments-changed-pensions
The conception of an £11.8bn mis-selling scandal.
I dodged the fallout.
Are the fans (pun intended) about to become excrement encrusted? A tweet from James Doleman:-
@TheTributeAct @Barcabhoy1 Word is former Labour MP who was on Rangers First board has resigned and is speaking to the Sunday Mail.
Allyjambo, If you don’t mind me asking, where have you been? Holidays?
You have been missed.
AllyjamboJuly 2, 2016 at 21:57
‘…former Labour MP who was on Rangers First board ..’
____________
Is that Brian Donohoe? And is he singing about what JJ was on about?
JIMBOJULY 2, 2016 at 22:01
Allyjambo, If you don’t mind me asking, where have you been? Holidays?
You have been missed
_______
Thank you for asking, Jimbo ☺
Have been enjoying the Lanzarote sunshine for 11 nights ? Been following events but too hot for typing ?
I have now read that the ex MP in question is Brian Donohoe and he’s apparently been speaking to the Sunday Mail! Sons of Struth have, I believe, issued a statement on the matter. I’m sure they will provide a crystal clear explanation of what’s been going on…
“Have been enjoying the Lanzarote sunshine for 11 nights ? Been following events but too hot for typing ?”
Spot the not so deliberate mistake ?
ReiverJune 29, 2016 at 11:07
‘..My MSP has contacted me with the SFA’s reply to him ‘
________
Reiver,( and other readers), I apologise for going back a space: I had meant to ask whether you had seen a copy of what your MSP, Mr Lamont, had written to the SFA. [And I doubly apologise if you did, and posted it on here].
But the SFA’s reply seems to me to suggest a recognition that they have to be very, very careful in what they say in response to a query from an MSP.
That is, they recognise that an MSP is not just a an ‘internet bampot’, or even an auld stoopid bampot of a has-been ‘sports journalist’, or a simple fan whose money helps fund the game and pays thesalaries of men on the understanding that they run an honest sport.
Of course, I remember one Westminster MP whose letters to the department were ‘ Dear—-, my constituent Mr xxx came to see me about his….. situation. Would you kindly look into it, and give me a full report at your earliest convenience?’
But from the wording of the SFA’s reply to him, I rather think Mr Lamont’s letter might have been more pointed.
It would be nice if it were so.(But I appreciate that you might not feel able to let us know ( if, tht is, you already have done and stupid, inattentive me missed it!)
paddy malarkeyJune 27, 2016 at 20:25
‘Mamade..’
______
Just to report that this very afternoon the distaff side picked up a tin of ‘Mamade’ at the Tesco in Musselburgh.
What she didn’t do was ask whether supplies were under threat, or whether Tesco had a special deal with the suppliers that Sainsburys and ASDA don’t have!
( Geez, if I can ask questions about trivia like marmalade, what the hell is wrong with our SMSM when they fear to ask real questions about important things, like ‘the possibility’ that our Scottish football administration may have something to hide? )
Do you know these men.
If so do the right thing and tell Police Scotland who they are.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hampden-riot-more-pictures-released-8335906?
John ClarkJuly 2, 2016 at 23:58
Unfortunately, John , I don’t have a sweet tooth , but I do remember my Ma buying lime marmalade for one of my siblings . Gayles ?Jar like a hand grenade ?
JC @2336
No John I haven’t a clue what was in the letters to the SFA and the Minister responsible for Sport but I know that he read my report before writing so it may well be quite direct. The reply from the minister is still to appear but I know it is being chased up by the MSP staff. I don’t don’t know how much can be read into the letter from the SFA, it having been written by someone other than the top(?) man. It could be he was trying not to write anything that could get him in trouble when Regan returns.
I do hope that Mr Lamont continues to help once the inevitable reply from the minister arrives. I have had personal replies from that department and my Westminster MP that basically said it did not concern them and that I should raise my concerns with the SFA personally as it was they that would deal with it. Occasionally we do get a reason to smile in all this even if it is wryly.
Test
The excrement arrives…now where are the fans? The last paragraph demonstrates just how ridiculous the whole sordid affair is! Quite incredible, really!
“Brian Donohoe, Peter Ewart and Kelly Johnstone have left Rangers First A RANGERS supporters’ group have been left in turmoil after three influential figures quit in a row over management.
Former Labour MP Brian Donohoe resigned as a director of Rangers First amid concerns about governance.
Directors Kelly Johnstone and Peter Ewart have also left.
Rangers First were set up two years ago to enable fans to buy shares in the club and get representation on the Ibrox board. Their mission was to protect the club from takeovers by hostile new owners such as Craig Whyte and Charles Green.
More than 14,000 people have contributed and they have raised enough money to buy a 3.2 per cent stake in the club. They also have £700,000 in the bank and are one of the UK’s biggest fans’ ownership bodies.
Yet members are concerned over the way the group are being run and the decision to merge with other fans’ groups to form Club 1872.
Donohoe is concerned Rangers First do not have a register of members, approved minutes, a constitution, chairman or office bearers.”
Couldn’t get the above post to work until I removed the link to the DR. here it is for anyone wanting to look:-
http://www.dailyreco…PIlWiwRlgYrL.99
A Twitter poster who has a bit of form is saying Rangers will be decanting to Hampden for at least one season as Glasgow City Council are not signing off a safety certificate for parts of Ibrox. It is also claimed they will be given the use of Hampden free of a rental charge. No idea if true but nothing should come as a surprise now.
What state aid for The rangers surely not.
UPTHEHOOPS
JULY 3, 2016 at 12:47
=======================================
That seems unlikely to me, surely they wouldn’t sell over 40,000 for a ground they weren’t going to be able to use. Certainly not without letting the support buying those season tickets know that it would be at another ground.
As to it being rent free, no-one could justify that, not in any way. According to the wiki page Celtic were charged £500,000 in the 94-95 season.
The whole thing just seems highly unlikely to me, certainly the way it has been described.
That very important part of the Sunday Mail piece:-
Donohoe is concerned Rangers First do not have a register of members, approved minutes, a constitution, chairman or office bearers.”
I may be wrong, but I think some laws, particularly those covering trusts and their funds, might well have been broken if what Brian Donohoe claims is correct. A bank account with £700,000 but none of the above. No wonder a ship is being jumped…I do hope every transaction can be fully accounted for as being in the interests of the members and purposes of the trust, which should, of course, be the case regardless of how properly constituted the trust is. The waters will become even murkier if, as I suspect is the case, they have altered their purposes from buying shares (in TRFC) to using the trust funds to prop up the club/board, for just how could such a major shift be taken without these vital legal requirements being in place?
It looks to me like people, with more enthusiasm than financial nous, have been led up a garden path by people with more nous than integrity. It does seem incredible, though, that Rangers First could have gone 2 years without these very basic requirements being in place, even more so considering someone of the (supposed) standing of an MP (former) was on the board. The spirit of David Murray’s board room – where directors ‘turned a blind eye’, and knew nothing of what was going on and ignored their director’s duties, – lives on in everything surrounding Rangers, old and new!
The general run of MPs are not noted for being,and are not expected to be, above the general norm in terms of IQ.
But I would have thought that even the dumbest MP would take more care than the average fan to check out any organisation of which he proposed to become a director, let alone one that raising money from fans on mere appeal to emotional loyalty.
It seems an act of folly on the part of someone to accept a directorship of an organisation which, reportedly, does “not have a register of members, approved minutes, a constitution, chairman or office bearers.”
What was the man thinking of?
John ClarkJuly 3, 2016 at 13:18
Possibly the first thing that came into my head when I read the piece, John. It does seem incredible, but so normal in everything surrounding an Ibrox club, where directors seem only too ready to leave it to someone else to ensure the ‘integrity’ of the institution they are charged with protecting!
AllyjamboJuly 3, 2016 at 13:24
‘…. but so normal in everything surrounding an Ibrox club, where directors seem only too ready to leave it to someone else to ensure the ‘integrity’ of the institution they are charged with protecting! ‘
________-
It ( the ‘saga’) is a socio-economic-political-juridical-moral-ethical phenomenon. Surely there is at least one doctoral thesis in there for a quick acting would-be Erasmus student afore the Erasmus funding gets chopped after Brexit!
Except, perhaps, that just as our SMSM appears ready to refuse to report on the ‘saga’ with any degree of objective Truth, I suspect that the academic world in Scotland would also not be of particular assistance to any student developing a thesis related to the ‘saga’, if it looked like nailing the Truth!
I could be wrong but think the issue is they are treating Rangers First as if it was just another supporters group as opposed to a Community Interest Company. As I understand it they have now started Rangers 1872 which is absorbing the other groups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_interest_company
Rangers First Ltd 08904536 (it is an English company) has one shareholder Rangers First 2014 Community Interest Company
It has one director, James Blair who is also a director of Club 1872 Limited SC525940. The only other director being AS Company Services.
I believe Mr Blair is Rangers’ Company Secretary (Both the PLC and the subsidiary Ltd Co).
John ClarkJuly 3, 2016 at 13:50
AllyjamboJuly 3, 2016 at 13:24‘…. but so normal in everything surrounding an Ibrox club, where directors seem only too ready to leave it to someone else to ensure the ‘integrity’ of the institution they are charged with protecting! ‘________-It ( the ‘saga’) is a socio-economic-political-juridical-moral-ethical phenomenon. Surely there is at least one doctoral thesis in there for a quick acting would-be Erasmus student afore the Erasmus funding gets chopped after Brexit! Except, perhaps, that just as our SMSM appears ready to refuse to report on the ‘saga’ with any degree of objective Truth, I suspect that the academic world in Scotland would also not be of particular assistance to any student developing a thesis related to the ‘saga’, if it looked like nailing the Truth!
____________________
Oh how that just rolls off the tongue, John
There certainly appears, to this layman, a whole cornucopia
of subject matter for budding lawyers within the ‘Rangers’ saga, though perhaps best viewed from a learning perspective as examples of how the law can work in an opposite direction to the way the public might perceive as just!
On the SMSM refusing to report on certain Ibrox related matters. They seemed quick enough to run with this latest part of the saga! I wonder who’s pulling their strings on this – it doesn’t seem like the kind of thing Level5 or Dave King/TRFC board would want out there! Or do they (SMSM), perhaps (at last), consider it in the ‘best interest’ of the rank and file bears to get a crucial (even if negative) story out there?
I wonder if this latest development might prevent further monies heading to Ibrox (from RF) and even put a, perhaps temporary, stop to any further share purchases, until the matter is cleared up, even if only to prevent getting further into the mire!
ALLYJAMBO
maybe it is out there because an MP is involved
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 13:51
I could be wrong but think the issue is they are treating Rangers First as if it was just another supporters group as opposed to a Community Interest Company. As I understand it they have now started Rangers 1872 which is absorbing the other groups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_interest_company
Rangers First Ltd 08904536 (it is an English company) has one shareholder Rangers First 2014 Community Interest Company
It has one director, James Blair who is also a director of Club 1872 Limited SC525940. The only other director being AS Company Services.
I believe Mr Blair is Rangers’ Company Secretary (Both the PLC and the subsidiary Ltd Co).
_____________________
I’m sure I’ve read of much disquiet amongst some of the more financially and legally astute bears over James Blair’s involvement in RF and Club 1872 suggesting a conflict of interest. It might be quite embarrassing for him, and TRFC (for he provides a link all the way from RF), if anything untoward has happened resulting in RF monies hitting the club’s coffers.
tonyJuly 3, 2016 at 14:27
ALLYJAMBO maybe it is out there because an MP is involved
____________________
Though he’s an ex MP you could be right, though more importantly, he’s a fairly high profile bear – with an axe to grind, and possibly the contacts to make an editor prepared to publish his story (it is a good one, after all).
ALLYJAMBO
that was my thinking,he had firends in the smsm
HOMUNCULUSJULY 3, 2016 at 12:59
========================
I suppose anything from Twitter should be treated with caution however the poster concerned does have a bit of form. As for selling circa 40K season tickets they could easily just offer the holders a seat at Hampden. In terms of rent for Hampden, nothing, absolutely nothing would surprise me in how far the authorities would go to assist Rangers, especially if they faced a hefty repair bill for Ibrox. The SFA made up rules on the hoof in order to treat Rangers as the same club. Not charging a rent for Hampden would be small beer compared to that.
ALLYJAMBO
JULY 3, 2016 at 14:31
============================
From the official Rangers website January
“RANGERS International Football Club plc note Rangers First’s decision to seek approval from its members to offer the Club a loan of £500,000.
The Club is not considering further loans at this time beyond what has already been committed and announced. However, any offer from Rangers First will be considered as part of any future fund raising.”
And from May
“IBROX legends Willie Henderson and Alex MacDonald joined Rangers Managing Director Stewart Robertson and supporters at the Stadium today to launch Club 1872 – a new, united fan group which aims to rebuild, maintain and protect Rangers for future generations.”
It appears to me that Rangers have control over the Rangers First funds. Three prominent members leaving so publicly would cause me concern if I had put money into Rangers First and thought it was going to be used to buy shares in the PLC which owns the club I support.
From what I see though the Rangers support just see it as three wasters leaving and it’s good riddance to them. Probably not even Rangers supporters anyway.
UPTHEHOOPS
JULY 3, 2016 at 14:41
===========================================
Indeed, they could offer them seats at Hampden. However that’s not what they were selling and if they knew there were issues prior to selling them then the very least they should have done is made that clear to the people buying them.
I suppose they are covered so long as they offer a full refund, but that’s not really the point. You shouldn’t be selling that which you cannot also supply.
Like you say though, little would surprise nowadays.
With regards rent, I’m quite sure if they do it rent free then Celtic (and everyone else who has ever been charged to use Hampden) will be requesting their refund in short order. At today’s equivalent value.
Mr. Donohoe (who used to be my MP) was Grand Poo-Bah of the House of Commons Rangers Supporters Club.
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 14:41
ALLYJAMBO JULY 3, 2016 at 14:31 ============================
From the official Rangers website January
“RANGERS International Football Club plc note Rangers First’s decision to seek approval from its members to offer the Club a loan of £500,000. The Club is not considering further loans at this time beyond what has already been committed and announced. However, any offer from Rangers First will be considered as part of any future fund raising.”
_____________________
I wonder if there is a link between RIFC’s decision not to consider further loans and the news today. Could it be that the bad/non constitution of the CIC came to light at that time and King baled out of any transaction, though surely he would have wanted to get his man out before the news broke, assuming they did know at this time, (unless he thought, and it would be in his character, that no one would spill the beans until the mess was sorted)?
Whatever transpires, it is yet another scandal within the scandal!
Re the possibility of The Rangers moving to Hampden for a period at advantageous terms.
Remember that Hampden is owned by Queens Park, and the SFA are merely tenants, with as far as I can remember not a great number of years remaining on their lease.
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 15:02
…With regards rent, I’m quite sure if they do it rent free then Celtic (and everyone else who has ever been charged to use Hampden) will be requesting their refund in short order. At today’s equivalent value.
________________________
I suspect they’d just take the rent from TRFC’s end of season prize money, just like they did with the LNS fine. And be just as transparent over whether or not they do withhold the money!
I think, though, that if the rumours are sound, then where they will be playing next season, and how they pay any rental, will be secondary to how they fund whatever repairs mean they have to move out of Ibrox for a whole season (or even a half season). A year’s work, or even half a year, must cost a fair few millions! Millions spent on something that doesn’t increase revenue!
JINGSO.JIMSIEJULY 3, 2016 at 15:07
Mr. Donohoe (who used to be my MP) was Grand Poo-Bah of the House of Commons Rangers Supporters Club.
==========================
He also appeared live on TV in 2012 and stated HMRC should just take what they can get from Rangers. ‘Something is better than nothing’ was the phrase IIRC. I thought it was appalling that a MP was effectively wanting HMRC to overlook the deliberate tax evasion that took place at Ibrox.
ALLYJAMBO
JULY 3, 2016 at 15:27
=================================
It would be even more difficult with no line of credit to fund the rental and repairs.
Celtic did it via shares issues, I’m not convinced Rangers would be able to do the same as things stand. So it may be down to the mythical wealthy supporters putting even more of their personal wealth into the loss making project.
I know it is close season but I think we are indulging in a lot of guesswork here. Now that we are aware that there is a possibility then,yes, we should be ready to act. What arrangements will be put in place are the exact sort of things that have to be answered under FOI requests but only after they have happened.
La Florida Bhoy
My nephew was over on a visit got speaking about Res 12 etc, not heard a lot about it even though he is a 3rd year student Journalist at Napiers Edinburgh , he did say there is a lot of talk about the SFA one thing and the other, he was very interested he has now gone home with copy’s of all the work done by Tax Justice Network and The Offshore Game, he did say he would have to show his work to his editor, still you never know.
I have committed to dropping all references to JJ’s site but there is part of his rant against me that is sitting on his site that it is relevant to SFM that I need to correct. As I don’t have a right of reply on JJ’s site please indulge me if I do it here.
It was stated in his article that I was placing posters and dropping leaflets regarding Res 12. I must make it clear that I am totally unconnected to Res 12 and, while I appreciate all that they do, I try to keep their work at arms length to keep what I do non club specific. Also my actions take a blunderbuss approach taking in many more SFA inconsistencies than the Res 12’s sniper attack on UEFA licensing.
I know the regulars here are already aware of this but we do get readers who are new to the site or only come here when they see it referenced elsewhere.
Thanks.
Homunculus
July 3, 2016 at 15:45
ALLYJAMBO
JULY 3, 2016 at 15:27
=================================
It would be even more difficult with no line of credit to fund the rental and repairs.
Celtic did it via shares issues, I’m not convinced Rangers would be able to do the same as things stand. So it may be down to the mythical wealthy supporters putting even more of their personal wealth into the loss making project.
___________________________
The money raised through the Celtic share issue didn’t just provide the funds to get a necessary job done, it helped to increase a revenue stream and make Celtic Park the biggest stadium in Scotland. Roof repairs, however funded, will not put one more bum on one more seat. Fergus McCann was able to sell shares to non-supporters because he could demonstrate that a profit would be made as a result of this capital expenditure. Dave King can only point to dry heads as a selling point for any shares to carry out his ‘improvements’!
The bears to dig deep, it is then! Or isn’t…
Rangers First said:
“Perhaps this adherence to democracy did not suit everyone and it is true that some were acting in self-interest and contrary to the wishes of members. Thankfully, however, they have removed themselves and we can now proceed unobstructed with the business of uniting all Rangers fans together with Club 1872.”
Ah so the 3 that left were the bad tatties.
From the pen profiles on Rangers First it would appear that regardless of their Rangersness all three who resigned have reputations and activities that mean they could not afford to be involved in anything they saw as being dodgy.
How many warnings do sensible Bears need before enough start asking the right questions and demanding transparent answers as opposed to being led up the garden path by King and Level 5?
I note Donohoe made specific mention of the original intention of of Rangers First was to protect fans from the activities of Spivs such as Whyte. I read that as him implying that similar spiv like activities are ongoing and this has resulted in his resignation.
wottpiJuly 3, 2016 at 17:36
Clearly, they don’t fit the profile that TRFC, and so their supporters organisations, look for, as witnessed by their marquee signing, Joey Barton.
In truth, they all read as being well suited for their roles in RF, but one has to wonder at the length of time it’s taken them to realise something was amiss, or to act once they realised all was not as it should be if they were carrying out their roles dilligently.
As Shug said, they were obviously the bad tatties…in a tattie field of such innocents!
Oh, and Shug, any idea what this ‘democracy’ was that they were meant to ‘adhere’ to?
‘Adhere’ tends to suggest they were meant to accept things as laid down by some politburo, as opposed to something the majority agreed with, as in most forms of democracy, or at least those run properly.
In truth, that statement reads like so many issued by the many branches of Rangersness, cobbled together in a hurry by people not as intelligent as they think they are (though treated by their masses as wordsmiths of the highest Level5) using words (‘adherence to democracy’ anyone?) not really suited to the issue at hand. I suppose though, the target audience see it as ‘fighting talk’, which appeals to the WATP mentality; no doubt to take the attention away from what has actually happened!
AJ going by the report it seems they were against the join up with club 1872.It would seem the fans groups all voted to join with the club 1872 lot at least 3 times.
A month or so ago a ‘Rangers’ blogger, a sensible chap with knowledge of how things should be done, wrote of the conflict of interest so obvious in James Blair’s roles within RF, Club 1872 and TRFC/RIFC! His blog might well be interesting over the next few days, even if just a wee bit smug
. It certainly looks as though he may well have been right to raise such concerns.
I can’t remember his name, or his blog title, so if anyone can point me in the right direction, I’d be grateful, I’m sure he will have something to say!
I would think that anyone who wanted to make sure their good name was not being linked to unsavoury goings on would do the same. Of course there lies the problem unless you are willing to divulge all that is going on that led you to the decision you have made then you leave yourself open to character assassination.
AJ, I think you’re referring to Brian Bowman.
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/01/08/a-letter-to-james-blair/
I don’t have the name of his blog, unfortunately…
shugJuly 3, 2016 at 19:08
AJ going by the report it seems they were against the join up with club 1872.
____________________________
No wonder, if, as they claim, RF was not a properly constituted Community Interest Company! For with no list of members – amongst other unfulfilled requirements – it could hardly carry out a ‘democratic’ vote!
I suppose it’s possible that they’ve been trying to correct the position, or seek answers while in a position to do so, hence the length of time it’s taken them to act. This development might suggest they have been unable to achieve either outcome!
Still, I believe Richard Gough is involved somewhere along the line (Club 1872?), so, with a lifetime working in finance and company law behind him, with particular involvement in trusts (EBTs), I’m sure he has the expertise to have ensured that all aspects of UK Company and Trust laws were adhered to!
Jingso.JimsieJuly 3, 2016 at 19:19
AJ, I think you’re referring to Brian Bowman.
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/01/08/a-letter-to-james-blair/
I don’t have the name of his blog, unfortunately…
_______________________
Cheers, Jingso, that’s the man. Maybe I’m wrong in thinking he has a blog. If he hasn’t, I hope to see something from him on JJ’s site.
Having just re-read the letter, it kind of makes today’s news even more explosive!
Perhaps their issue is that Club 1872’s stated intent is to spend funds raised as follows.
Shares – 47.5%
Other Project – 47%
Administration – 5%
Whilst Rangers First did say that they would spend money on things other than shares the impression was that it’s raison d’etre as a CIC was to buy shares in the PLC leading towards fan ownership.
Or perhaps they objected to the supporters money being lent to the PLC (unsecured) to later be converted to equity. Which was going to be difficult if they couldn’t get a share / rights issue agreed.
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 20:23
Perhaps their issue is that Club 1872’s stated intent is to spend funds raised as follows.
Shares – 47.5%
Other Project – 47%
Administration – 5%
Whilst Rangers First did say that they would spend money on things other than shares the impression was that it’s raison d’etre as a CIC was to buy shares in the PLC leading towards fan ownership.
Or perhaps they objected to the supporters money being lent to the PLC (unsecured) to later be converted to equity. Which was going to be difficult if they couldn’t get a share / rights issue agreed.
_____________
You may be right, but I wonder if it’s that simple, ie not agreeing with the direction RF is going, for surely it would have been better to have said something along those lines than to cast doubts on the legitimacy of RF itself by saying there was no constitution, list of members etc.
It’s worth visiting JJ’s site to read the letter, published by JJ on 8 Jan, that Brian Bowman sent to James Blair, company secretary of TRFC, RIFC, RF and Club 1872, it is remarkably relevant to today’s news. He calls for the vote to lend £500,000 to TRFC to be delayed and calls for Blair to resign due to a conflict of interest with his position at all four interested bodies. He also mentions that a board member had just resigned, making that four this year!
If you remember, the vote to make the loan was passed, but King/TRFC declined the ‘offer of a loan’. (‘Offer’, yeh, Withdrew their request more like.) I do wonder if Brian Bowman’s letter led them to discover some pitfalls, ie the CIC was not properly constituted etc, and so they decided to wait a bit. Maybe now King/TRFC are back looking for that ‘offer’ and, with the problems not sorted, the board members have decided to leave before they get tainted with whatever might happen next.
As is the norm, the SMSM will probably just let the story drift away, and we may never get the full story, but something is very wrong there, good people don’t just walk away, en mass, otherwise. When able, qualified for the position, people walk away, leaving an institution, close to their hearts, in the hands of unqualified, but enthusiastic, amateurs, amateurs whose hearts are ruling their heads, then something serious is up.
I think, you, Hom, are possibly qualified to take up a similar role if it were Celtic in TRFC’s straits. Would you walk away, along with all the other qualified people, leaving hundreds of thousands of Celtic supporters’ pounds in the hands of amateurs, if it was only that you disagreed with a change in policy, if that change in policy was legally, or ethically, allowable? I think it would take something extremely serious for you to do that, something intrinsic that you know can’t be made good.
Link to JJ’s site for the Brian Bowman letter
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/01/08/a-letter-to-james-blair/
ALLYJAMBO
JULY 3, 2016 at 21:10
===========================
It may be significant to note that not long ago Rangers First bought a load of shares, taking their holding to something like 6%.
Whilst that was money spent in furtherance of their aim, to get as large a holding as possible in the PLC (I believe their ultimate goal is 25%) it would not have actually put any money in to the PLC or the club. That must have been quite disappointing for some people.
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 21:27
It is quite amazing how so many still don’t get it. The only way that buying shares, other than new shares, will help TRFC is if they are bought from the club’s perceived ‘enemies’! Though it is questionable whether that would constitute ‘help’ for the club, rather than just helping King to get what he wants
ALLYJAMBO
JULY 3, 2016 at 21:36
===================================
Indeed.
My opinion on Club 1872 is very straightforward. I believe it is a way in which the club hope to get control of the supporters groups whilst making it look in some way independent.
There are several advantages to this. Including but not limited to.
1, They get direct access to money the supporters are paying into it. Through either loans, repaid as shares at a later date, or the group funding special projects.*
2, Any shares the group buys are almost certain to vote in whatever way Dave King tells them. It’s as good as him owning the shares himself without actually buying them.
3, They can issue press releases which the club wouldn’t itself, for example after the cup final. So long as they have the right people in place they will do as they are told. So other people can be attacked but it isn’t the club it’s an independent supporters group.
The true genius is that it is a manipulation which the people totally buy into and anyone suggesting it is simply a “Rangers hater”.
*As a linked aside. They have form for it.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/14289607.Rangers_Fans_Fighting_Fund_proposes___450_000_Murray_Park_stand_development/
HomunculusJuly 3, 2016 at 21:53
‘…The true genius is that it is a manipulation which the people totally buy into and anyone suggesting it is simply a “Rangers hater”. ‘
______
Beautifully succinct and on-thebutton summary, Homunculus,which ought to make even the densest fan cock an eye-brow at Blair’s position ( which I think is, if not technically illegal, sailing very close to the kind of ethical boundaries the crossing of which can get solicitors into professional trouble)
ALLYJAMBOJULY 3, 2016 at 18:59 wottpiJuly 3, 2016 at 17:36
Clearly, they don’t fit the profile that TRFC, and so their supporters organisations, look for, as witnessed by their marquee signing, Joey Barton.
In truth, they all read as being well suited for their roles in RF, but one has to wonder at the length of time it’s taken them to realise something was amiss, or to act once they realised all was not as it should be if they were carrying out their roles dilligently.
………………..
Spot on
When 3 Directors deliberately resign it smacks strongly of a failed attempt to change some recent action they deem illegal
i.e. “a step too far”
The accompanying comment to their resignation statement …..
“Rangers First do not have a register of members, approved minutes, a constitution, chairman or office bearers.”
is a deliberate attempt to imply that these 3 individuals have been driven by their “integrity” since they were appointed to get the organisation to comply with basic corporate governance.
And
Although they have failed in this task they are leaving with “clean hands”
Interestingly
The Level 5 admission that 3 individuals acted inappropriately and have now left
Is a statement from a party on the back foot
It smacks of a damage limitation attempt to keep the matter in house
However
If they want to keep the matter in house
What Level 5 really want
……….is to keep it from the ordinary members of Rangers First
<<<<<<<
Why?
IMO
Serious lawbreaking has occurred with the active support of the in house Spiv
The nature of the offence can be easily exposed
The departure of the 3 Directors is a precursor to calls for independent investigation
The support of the MSM suggest a media campaign is about to be launched on behalf of “the fans”
If so it will explode in the next week or so