.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers


.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers

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)

guardianGateA 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

Support for the SFA © Scotsman

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..


About the author

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.

1,359 Comments so far

upthehoopsPosted on7:21 am - Jun 11, 2016

WINNING CAPTAINSJUNE 10, 2016 at 23:01 
Other newspapers are asking to run the advertisement. Maybe the next one…

Surely there is one, just one, who will not bow to threats or expensive, misleading PR

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on8:44 am - Jun 11, 2016

Roy Greenslade appears to be saying they were duped. I suppose there may be that possibility, The artists mock-up, sent from a fake email account with a dot missing or added.
   If this is the case, and as this has caused considerable damage to both parties, the obvious thing to do now would be to have it traced by experts from the English police force.  
                    Roy Greenslade‏@GreensladeR@McNallyMirror @CQN Nobody at theGuardian constructed this. It was obviously sent to paper by someone.


View Comment

JoeninhoPosted on9:29 am - Jun 11, 2016

A wee aside

JOHN CLARK JUNE 11, 2016 at 00:32

I smiled when you mentioned Sean Connery’s “Irish” accent.
Always thought he did a “Sean Connery” accent, regardless of whether it was an Irish, Russian, etc. character he played.

View Comment

hen1rikPosted on10:38 am - Jun 11, 2016

Written by James Forrest on http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/a-what-if-scenario-that-should-scare-the-sfa/ A “What If …?” Scenario That Should Scare The SFA.

I’m going to tell you a story here, and please bear with me.

Before I do I want to thank two people; one directly, and one anonymously.

The direct thanks I send to the writer of the John James blog, whose recent works have been great reference points in helping me get to the bottom of a murky story I heard earlier this year and which another source all but confirmed over the weekend.

That source is the one I’d like to thank anonymously. He knows who he is and why it’s important that I don’t use his name.

What I am about to write for the next few paragraphs is all fact.

I’ll tell you when I start speculating, because it’s important to separate the two things.

On a day when The Guardian is publishing unsubstantiated crap in an effort to attack the Resolution 12 team, and maintaing that Scottish football governance issues are of concern only to Celtic and our fans I am not about to claim, for one second, that what you are about to read is all referenced and properly sourced and 100% accurate.

I’m not even going to tell you the specifics of what I’ve heard; I’ll give you the background and a hypothetical scenario based on some of it, and what I don’t write you can check out for yourself. Some of it is already online.

You can then decide what you think.

Nothing I’ve seen is actual evidence; I want to reiterate that now, although I’m equally certain neither John James nor my other sources are going on rumour alone. Under normal circumstances I wouldn’t write an article based on such rumours, but it is not how real or not these stories are that bothers me and made me decide it was a worthwhile piece.

I’m writing it because this isn’t impossible. It isn’t even implausible.

It’s all very … doable.

And that’s what worries me.

This story starts in South Africa in 2013, when the tax authorities there brought an end to their campaign of chasing the assets of, and threatening to jail, one David Cunningham King, now the chairman of Sevco, otherwise referred to on the various Celtic blogs as the “glib and shameless liar.”

One of the key provisos of the deal was that he “repatriate his overseas assets.”

In other words, they wanted his cash reserves and his future earnings right where they could see them, where they could keep a close watch on what he was up to.

One of those overseas assets was a company called NOVA.

He sold that company to another, MicroMega. The South African government got the proceeds of the sale.

NOVA had been a pretty important part of the King portfolio. It had subsidiary branches in China, Brazil and Peru.

But it was a strange deal, one that bore scrutiny. It was so strange that the South African government had to independently investigate it to make sure the shareholders at MicroMega got themselves enough bang for their bucks. Because, you see, MicroMega is partially owned, and chaired, by none other than David Cunningham King himself.

This isn’t uncommon in the business world, and here it was a perfectly logical step.

King still does a lot of business abroad and NOVA still has offices in various nations; what’s changed is simply that the company now has its headquarters in South Africa. Although MicroMega also has subsidiaries in various nations around the world, they are registered at home, whereas the registered offices for NOVA had been in Hong Kong.

At various times in the last two or three years I’ve looked into King for this and for the CelticBlog.

It wasn’t hard to discover that his reported wealth these days is mostly on paper, tied up in the share value of companies he is sitting on the boards of and has shares in.

It’s an established fact that all of his disposable assets were seized by the government; the cars, the houses, the wine cellars. His liquid assets were either turned into cash to pay the fines or likewise seized. The settlement didn’t wipe him out, and in comparison to the likes of us he’s still a wealthy man, but it didn’t leave him much to “invest” in Sevco either.

But he still works hard and he has a lot of shares, and based on the values of those he still appears to be quite well off.

But this has always been a fundamentally misleading indicator of actual wealth, because if, say, Mark Zuckerberg were to announce, tomorrow, that he was putting up the entirety of his Facebook shareholding as a public offering, the value of those shares would go through the floor as people wondered why he was bailing out.

King’s done that before, of course, which is what got him into trouble with SARS in the first place, and although it is possible for him to liquidate shareholdings in little chunks, this potentially has a negative impact on the value of the rest of his shares.

In June of last year, King sold 15 million shares in MicroMega for a value of £8.5 million.

I’ll get back to that number shortly.

South Africa is a country that takes a dim view of the things Dave King did in his tax avoiding years.

Other countries have a similarly dark attitude towards tax evasion, but South Africa take it more seriously than most, in particular because much of the cash they lose out on ends up overseas. Their government likes to keep their national wealth in-country, as it were, which is one of the reasons King was told to “repatriate” his assets back to where the tax man could get at them.

South Africa also has rather robust exchange control regulations, which heavily penalise high worth individuals who want to move cash out of the country. They’d prefer that cash was invested, and taxed, right there at home, for obvious reasons.

There’s a financial cost to transferring money out of South Africa.

There are also regulations in place which require disclosure on where the money is going and what it’s ultimately for.

These rules would be even more rigorously enforced with a man like Dave King.

Without prior approval from their government and Treasury, no resident can transfer cash out of the country in any significant sums. There’s simply no getting around that fact.

This site has long argued that the combination of Dave King’s tax settlement, the government’s insistence on the repatriation of assets and the harsh exchange controls which the South African government has in place, make it virtually impossible for him to “invest” in the club to the extent he and others seemed to suggest he would.

In short, even if he had that kind of wealth he’d never be allowed to spend it catering to the egos of Scotland’s most ungrateful and impatient football fans.

This site and others are on the record as having said that King has spent precisely nothing on NewCo Rangers up until now, save for the purchasing of some shares and giving a loan of £1.5 million in the name of New Oasis Asset Limited, which is referenced as a “King family trust” and, for all we know, doesn’t even have his name on it.

Any further “investments” should be very easy to demonstrate because something like that would leave a very long paper trail.

Or so I long suspected.

At the same time, this site and others have long argued that the present directors, none of whom are high worth individuals – save for Douglas Park, who has always shown great reluctance to pour it into the black hole of a football club – will be able, or are willing, to keep on funding the club from their own “soft loans.”

The only person in the history of Sevco who had the financial wherewithal to do that into perpetuity is the one King has worked so assiduously to push away; Mike Ashley, who’s Sports Direct billions could have kept the lights on indefinitely.

That means that without “outside investment” sooner or later it’s going to fall on King to keep his promises, or not.

King can buy shares in, and invest in, any company he likes, just so long as he does it through a South African registered “vehicle”, and the tax man knows how it’s been done. There are “foreign portfolio investment allowances” which have to be run through registered bodies, and individual allowances, which can be up to £400,000.

It is possible to get certain funds abroad for such purposes.

Buying shares in foreign registered companies comes under the exchange control laws and his initial share purchase, plus the £1.5 million in loans, probably doesn’t push him over the threshold depending on what’s in the “family trust.”

In the main, however, the more money he has to “invest” the more likely it is that the South African government will draw a big line and subject him to those more rigorous investigations and rules. South Africa’s government is not of a mind to let any high worth individual – far less one they had to chase for years – take significant sums out of their country.

And this is where our friend Keith Jackson comes in.

On 7 December 2015, Jackson wrote one of his best articles of last year, if not the very best. In it, he questioned King’s “investment” in the club and wondered where the £5 million which they had recently announced would pay off Sports Direct was going to come from. It was one of the first articles to actually ask hard questions about the Sevco board and their long term plans.

And a certain man in South Africa was spooked by that, because he has always been able to rely on a subservient media in order to get the things he wants. He had made promises and Jackson was asking he keep them, but the Record writer was also casting doubt over the veracity of a lot of King’s claims and that bothered him most of all.

Was Jackson reading up on South African exchange control laws?

No, he was simply wondering why, when it only takes 11 hours to fly here from Johannesburg, that King hadn’t already simply delivered the money and given it to the Newcastle owner.

For all it was a ridiculous notion, there was a core of truth in what Jackson actually said … and he was right to be asking the question. He should have asked more questions though, such as where King had allegedly found the two “investors” who were said to be putting up the bulk of the cash. Jackson had doubts about those guys, and those doubts were not without foundation.

Whether Jackson pushed King and his people into speeding things up or whether his intervention was shrugged off inside Ibrox and utterly ignored is something we’ll never know, but that money duly found its way to Ibrox shortly thereafter and the debt to Ashley was cleared. The Sevco board agreed another £1.5 million in loans, and they were able to get through the season.

Just a month after he had written that piece, with the money now in place and with Ashley paid off, Jackson was singing a very different song. Yet oddly he wasn’t giving the credit where it was supposed to be due.

In fact, he was telling everyone that King had actually invested “north of £7 million” in the club himself.

Myself and others mercilessly and brutally mocked him for that assertion.

Where did he get that number from?

Was it “direct knowledge”?

Was it a wee emailed memo, perchance?

Something thrown to him by a PR firm?

If it was then it was the daftest ever released in the history of public relations in Scotland, because it has been focussing minds ever since. As John James has already pointed out, the total “take” Sevco had brought in since King became chairman was not far from that sum and we know much of that had come from other members of the board.

But there was still that rather large chunk of money that came from elsewhere, from “Hong Kong-based fans” Barry Scott and Andy Ross.

Sadly, for Sevco, it quickly became apparent that Ross had some “background”.

In December 2014, he had been charged by the Securities Commission over there, and found guilty of numerous failures in relation to his handling of an audit involving a company that was being investigated for fraud. The charge was “improper personal conduct” and he was fined and banned from serving on an SEC-regulated company for a term of three years.

It’s not clear if he knows, or has done business with, George Latham, the other Hong Kong based Sevco investor, who is rumoured to be deeply unhappy with things at the club. Perhaps he’s aware of stuff that the average punter isn’t. I have heard that he was explicit in demanding that King finally show the others the colour of his money.

And this is where we head into speculative territory.

According to the people I’ve spoken to, and as John James has suggested quite openly, neither Ross nor Scott has that kind of money. With Ross unable to sit on a board of directors, and with his net worth unknown, we can’t really say whether that’s true or not, but it can’t be easy to just find £2.5 million that’s going spare, even if, as some have suggested, there’s a Wonga rate of interest on it.

If these guys don’t have that kind of money, if John James and others are right, then they’re not the source of the £5 million which is attributed to them in the Sevco accounts and which so famously bought Ashley off and ended his hold over the club.

We know the money is real, but if it didn’t come from them then where did it come from?

Let’s start there. Let’s speculate a little.

Did that money originate elsewhere?

Say, in South Africa?

Was it funnelled through Hong Kong and into the accounts at Ibrox, with those two “investors” playing patsy, and either taking their cut of the interest or being looked after some other way?

In short, did that money come from Dave King himself?

First, with King’s financial situation being what it is, where would he get the cash?

Well, I suppose, if we’re speculating, that it’s possible the genesis of these funds was the £8.5 million in shares which he sold in MicroMega in June last year. This, after all, was the very company he used for the incestuous deal that let NOVA become a South African company, although it was based in Hong Kong. In fact, isn’t it also possible that the £5 million actually went through NOVA itself?

As I said, I’m not saying this is true.

This is all speculative, a “what if?” scenario.

But the way the game is run here in Scotland, it’s not impossible.

It’s not even improbable.

Because this isn’t even about King, not really. This is a scenario that could as easily have involved Craig Whyte or Charles Green or the Easdales or whoever else has sat on the Ibrox board over the last few years. The loopholes that allowed those guys to get their feet under the table are still wide open, and God alone knows what might happen in the future if they stay like that.

As to King himself, well what he does with his own money is his lookout. He’s already proven to be a little slippery, but also a little stupid. In the documented instance which he’s famous for he did, after all, get caught.

I expect someone who screws up that badly would be odds-on to do so again.

It’s not as if there aren’t people looking.

As simple as it would be for someone like him to move money around like that and find ways of doing it, he has to know he wouldn’t be operating in the dark. He’d be doing it surrounded by eager eyes.

I’m 100% certain that SARS keeps a close one on him and they aren’t the only ones. He has seriously pissed off an actual billionaire, a guy who knows his background and will be very aware of South African exchange controls and the corporate structures at NOVA and MicroMega, and will be understandably curious about what the source of the £5 million which paid him off is.

Is that a guy you’d want digging into you?

We already know King provokes him to a foolish, even dangerous, degree but could he really have been that stupid?

Ego does things to people. It doesn’t keep them smart.

But like I said, that’s his business.

If he’s done something daft then it’s on his head, and there’ll be no dodging the bullet this time.

The issue here, as ever, is football governance or what passes for it in Scotland, because I cannot imagine another association where a scenario like the one I just proposed is even remotely possible, in light of all the outside agencies supposed to be watching.

What troubles me is this; what does it mean to Scottish football?

Because we’d be talking about money laundering here, and that’s the best case scenario. That’s the long and short of it, and that goes well beyond the usual nonsense we often hear about. This would be the illegal transfer of funds from one country to another, evading financial controls and other laws, and probably screwing with the tax man into the bargain. Again.

It all comes down to how this kind of thing could easily happen with the people we have running the Scottish game. As John James has pointed out, if someone wanted to do this kind of thing he only has to look at the way the media ignores any issue it doesn’t want to deal with and the way in which the SFA turns a blind eye to all manner of things, no matter how dark.

None of this should be possible with the proper controls, but it is.

Good governance doesn’t even have to be that complicated, not in this case.

I cannot overstate enough times that Dave King is an open book. His history is not a secret and neither is the fact he needs to comply with South African laws involving investment and the transfer of funds. That’s a fact and whether he simply found two Hong Kong based mugs or whether he used them as conduits for a scam is beside the point.

To get where he is right now, he had to pass a “fit and proper person” exam.

We all know that. Ashley took the SFA to court to find out how they arrived at the decision, and he demanded they make their report on it public. He hinted at some deadly information in there. I think I know what that information is. It’s not what they asked King or what answers he gave. It’s what they didn’t bother to ask him at all. It’s the answers they didn’t even look for.

When he sat in front of the SFA for his fit and proper person examination, how much did they really want to know?

Did they quiz him on South African financial regulations?

How much clarity did they seek about how he was going to meet all of his stated commitments about investing tens of millions of “his children’s inheritance”?

We know it’s impossible.

But this guy was presenting himself as the saviour of the club, in the same manner Whyte did, with glib assurances painting over blatant bullshit. Remove Dave King and his grandiose and utterly ridiculous promises and isn’t Sevco a club in serious danger of collapse as a going concern already?

It’s his alleged wealth that underpins the “business plan”, the one on which the club getting a UEFA Level License to compete in the top flight next season legally depends … this is right there, in black and white, in the SFA and UEFA rule books.

Wasn’t it important to know where the cash was coming from?

Surely they didn’t just accept all that nonsense about how easy it would be to find “outside investment”?

Who better than Stewart Regan knows how hard that is?

This is a Scottish club that emerged from a liquidation, which is still haunted by a tax scam and wIth no record of posting profits. As Phil is fond of saying, “this is a loss making company with no credit line from a bank.”

Sevco’s short term business plan is wholly dependent on Dave King’s promised pot of gold, and as we’ve seen even if that exists he’s not going to be able to use it for that purpose, not legally, not by any means that would be palatable to his government or in line with the deal he’s made with them. So where’s the money actually coming from?

Some folk in a position to know assertain that everything about the Hong Kong deal is fishy. That nothing about it really fits. Where the Hell did King find these guys? Why didn’t they “invest” before? Their £5 million could have bought the assets of the club in 2012, so why now? Why have they only now popped up out of the woodwork?

They were initially touted as being “Rangers men.” But they were previously “investors” in Workington Reds, where they were similarly packaged as “fans” investing their cash in an act of love.

It’s not hard to come up with tenuous links between Ross and King, if we wanted to take speculation to absurd heights. Ross works for Baker Tily. They are one of the biggest accounting firms in the world, so it may just be a coincidence that they’ve worked with NOVA. That they’ve got offices in both Hong Kong and Johannesberg. That there are other subtle connections.

But they were also linked with Sevco itself.

In August 2015 they were being touted as the club’s official auditors, and in an odd turn of events Phil reported that a “senior client” of the company had strongly objected to that. He sent them a bunch of questions on the matter, alleging that they’d turned down the opportunity and that Campbell Dallas LLB had been approached instead. As it turned out, they were duly appointed a day or two later.

Although The Offshore Game and the Tax Justice Network guys have had all the ink recently, they’re not the only NGO to have looked into the dark corners of football. In 2009, The Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental agency, wrote a report called Money Laundering Through The Football Sector. It is a damning, shocking, and incredibly prescient piece of work.

Since then, of course, Scotland has seen a parade of less than savoury characters troop across the landscape singing The Billy Boys. As one guy on TSFM said recently (and thanks to him, REIVER, for posting a link to the FATF report, “organised crime has its grubby hands in sport all around the world why would Scotland be left out?”

Who says we’ve been left out?

Does any of this even remotely compute at the SFA? Do they give a damn? Can something as potentially damaging as this really happen right under their noses? Of course it could. Because it’s happened already.

I mean, don’t these people have a fiduciary responsibility to scrutinise the means by which a football club comes into millions of pounds?

My God, doesn’t that open the doors wide to corruption on a grand scale?

How do we know clubs aren’t being financed by the proceeds of crime right now?

That there isn’t at least one Scottish club paying its bills with drug money or loan sharking debts or worse? The Ashley loans were at least open and transparent, his company at least reputable if not entirely wholesome.

King couldn’t wait to get Sevco off the stock exchange. We’ve all wondered why. Is it because, as he puts it, that it’s expensive and wasteful of time and effort? Did he really ditch is so he wouldn’t have to fill in a few forms? It’s a lot of inconvienance, including not being able to start a share issue, just to save on the admin costs.

Or was there another reason? A darker one?

One more to do with transparency and openness?

These are just some of the reasons why a scenario like the one I’ve outlined is more than just a flight of fancy and the stuff of the internet Bampot. We have rules here so lax you could get around them in a hundred ways, and it wouldn’t take an international super villain out of a Bond movie to come up with a dozen strategies for pulling it off.

Doesn’t our football association need full transparency about these sort of things?

Isn’t it way past time for fit and proper person criteria to do what it says on the tin?

Isn’t it time for financial fair play to be introduced so stuff like this is impossible and not just unbelievable?

Because the only reason I’m not wholly convinced of this is that it just sounds so absolutely out there and unreal because of all the implications of it.

And that begs one last question; at what point does a failure in governance become complicity?

When does looking the other way graduate to something more serious?

Is wilfully ignoring a possible criminal act not, itself, a criminal offence?

The SFA is a public body. It has responsibilities beyond covering its own backside and that of a certain football chairman.

If the SFA has helped Dave King commit a crime here – either by accident or design – then not only should heads roll but people should be indicted alongside him as co-conspirators or accessories after the fact.

I can’t put it more bluntly.

This policy of “look the other way” when it comes to Ibrox has been disastrous for the club and for Scottish football but we’re on a whole new playing field if a scenario like the one I just proposed ever comes to pass and the authorities find out about it.

People will say this is a crazy suggestion, and at any other association it would be.

As those who’ve been following the Resolution 12 situation though, we know what these folk are capable of.

The SFA knew what Whyte was planning months before he pulled the plug, allowing Rangers to trade whilst insolvent and continuing to run up debts it had no intention of paying.

They allowed the assets of the liquidation to be bought by a company which wasn’t named on the original sales documents, and they gave that company a license.

They allowed Green to sell shares when it was apparent to many they might not be his to sell and they stood back whilst his board of directors investigated itself over links to Craig Whyte, links which had a direct bearing on that share issue.

I have long contended that this might have made them party to a fraud.

Does it still sound unlikely to you?

Americans have a law that I sometimes think would work very well over here; they call it RICO. The Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organisation Act, which seeks to destroy entire groups involved in what the FBI refers to as a “continuing criminal conspiracy.”

Regan, Doncaster and others have gone out of their way to help first Rangers and then the NewCo avoid the scrutiny every other club would get, and through all of it their only defence is to accuse those of us who question it of bias and being motivated by hate.

What’s the line from The Godfather?

“It’s business, not personal.”

This wouldn’t be a shock if it turned out to be true, and people at Hampden who should have known better either averted their eyes or simply pretended it wasn’t happening at all. For people who understand the words “continuing criminal conspiracy” better than most, having assisted Craig Whyte in one, this wouldn’t be personal.

It would just be business as usual.

View Comment

ReiverPosted on10:49 am - Jun 11, 2016

EJ @2212
“King’s shares were taken up by two other Directors of Micromega, with 12M going to Greg Morris and 3.375M to Duncan Carlisle”

Could this be where the rumour that King was trying to buy Carlisle originated?14

View Comment

ReiverPosted on11:02 am - Jun 11, 2016

Just a quick update on the actions taken by John Lamont MSP at my behest. I enquired as to how things were progressing and was told that 20 days must be given for people to respond to the contact from Mr Lamont’s office. Here is the body of the latest email to me from his office.-

“John wrote to the SFA and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport in the Scottish Government on 2nd June.     The letter to the SFA went by post, almost certainly 2nd class, so I think that you should work on it arriving in that office on 6th or 7th June.  The letter to the Minister went by email.
John will let you know as soon as he has a reply.
Kind regards.
Debbie Whalley
Caseworker – John Lamont MSP”

View Comment

wottpiPosted on11:32 am - Jun 11, 2016

Just catching up re the RES 12 Advert

Correct me if I am wrong but it now looks like Greenslade is saying that some one at the Guardian got hold of a designer’s draft of the proposed AD No2 and that this was in French.

CQN seem to suggest this was some form of mock up but did not include the proposed final text.

This all seems reasonable in terms of advance planning if the intention was to follow up Ad No 1 with Ad no 2 a few days later.

However without going to the bother of translating what has been posted as the mock up, it appears to mention three individuals by name. Ogilvie, Dickson and Whyte. This is an escalation from AD No 1

While we can all be pedantic and agree that this may not have been intended as the final text for Ad No2, if it was passed to the Guardian it may well have given their people a taste of what was to follow, directly,  if they had run the Ad No 1.

I am sure I am not the only one but in my line of work I sometimes get a feel for being asked to get involved in something that, reading between the lines, has the potential to grow arms and legs of a type I would rather not get involved in. In such circumstances I generally say no thanks at the earliest opportunity to stop myself getting dragged in.

With the potential to start pulling in named individuals,  the legals in the Advertising side or even higher up the tree may have thought they were just opening themselves up for a potential shit storm. 

What that may have been,  I have no idea. However I can see the sense of someone wanting to head things off at the pass without any particular conspiracy being in place.

A decent explanation would of course be in order but again I won’t be the only one on here who has maybe just side stepped an awkward or unwanted client by not responding in the hope they get the message to go elsewhere. 

As Greenslade says the issue is probably best handled by means of investigative journalism where there is more leeway to make allegations without ending up in court or in front of the ASA.

Either way the AD campaign has at least got people talking and gained a bit of coverage in the Guardian.

Maybe Greenslade will put his money where is mouth is?

View Comment

tonyPosted on12:49 pm - Jun 11, 2016

JJ’s latest 

View Comment

TommyBPosted on1:44 pm - Jun 11, 2016

Regardless of the how, why or even who refused to carry the ad for the guardian; the result is more talk about res  12 than even the ad being published would have provoked. We can only hope that the can of worms that has been opened, spreads far and wide. However, CFC must come out and openly support the questions being asked by the requisitioners. Only then will football authorities show more than a passing interest. Celtic have kept this issue at the bottom of the pile for too long and appear to have strung the requisitioners along in the hope that their appetite would diminish. This has not and appears unlikely to happen; it is now time to state their intentions fully. Scottish football needs strong leadership, not lies,deceit and prevarication. 

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on4:10 pm - Jun 11, 2016

TOMMYB JUNE 11, 2016 at 13:44
Regardless of the how, why or even who refused to carry the ad for the guardian; the result is more talk about res 12 than even the ad being published would have provoked. We can only hope that the can of worms that has been opened, spreads far and wide. However, CFC must come out and openly support the questions being asked by the requisitioners. Only then will football authorities show more than a passing interest. Celtic have kept this issue at the bottom of the pile for too long and appear to have strung the requisitioners along in the hope that their appetite would diminish. This has not and appears unlikely to happen; it is now time to state their intentions fully. Scottish football needs strong leadership, not lies,deceit and prevarication
In his recent 81 sec prepared statement to STV on Res12, Regan tried to shift the blame of allegedly lying to UEFA to RFC 
This equates to claiming that the SFA are in the clear and the guilt lies with RFC or with RFC and someone at UEFA who colluded with them.
Either way it isn`t difficult to see where UEFA would stand on any investigation that involved interviewing UEFA officials
Their aim will be to put the blame fairly and squarely on the SFA as the organisation responsible for ensuring RFC submitted truthful returns.
If UEFA were eventually cleared and the blame apportioned to the SFA and RFC what would the likely punishment be?
A lengthy Euro ban for RFC to punish them for lying
A fine and/or a lesser Euro ban for the 41 other Scottish Clubs to punish the SFA (who are the trade organisation for all 42 clubs)
While none of the 41 clubs will give a hoot about RFC or TRFC being punished
The bigger clubs will be desperate to avoid a general Euro ban and all clubs will have to contribute to the fine.
If I was UEFA and wanted to smother this issue I would strongly hint to the SFA and their current champions that a Euro ban was on the cards if the SFA are found guilty of corruption
And if I was Celtic I would want this issue investigated by a 3rd Party like the Police or the Judiciary

View Comment

theredpillPosted on4:34 pm - Jun 11, 2016

Could it be that the Rangers could fit in quite well down south, despite us assuming they wouldn’t with all the baggage that it would bring ?

View Comment

jimboPosted on7:01 pm - Jun 11, 2016

Whereas I wish Peter Lawwell had taken a lead on all of this, I don’t think he should demonised for his inaction, not any more than every other club in Scotland.  I think Kilmarnock & Motherwell were affected by Rangers getting an illegal place in Europe.  Why is it only Celtic fans upset? (apart from the folk on here who seem to be on the minority)

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on7:54 pm - Jun 11, 2016

I had one of the best nights of my life down at the old port in Marseilles. It was rugby World Cup quarters in 2008. During the afternoon we had shlepped out to the stadium for a nail-biter between Australia and England. The evening was pure carnival as 50,000 of all nations watched the improbable and magnificent victory of Les bleus over the mighty All Blacks on the big screens. 

What a difference a sport makes. Sad and disgusting scenes. 

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on8:23 pm - Jun 11, 2016

TOMMYBJUNE 11, 2016 at 13:44 32 7  Rate This 
 However, CFC must come out and openly support the questions being asked by the requisitioners.
JIMBOJUNE 11, 2016 at 19:01 13 5  Rate This 
Whereas I wish Peter Lawwell had taken a lead on all of this, I don’t think he should demonised for his inaction,
in separate communication officially from Celtic FC PLC, which arrives at three offices at UEFA today.

maybe celtic are supporting the questions and are taking a lead on all this. But they just don’t want to shout about it.
(like some clubs do22)
And they are awaitng word from UEFA before they jump the gun and release a statement…..OFFICIALLY

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:56 pm - Jun 11, 2016

It is all about Fear!   I said this last year.  Can you imagine Keith Jackson, et.al. being able to speak openly and honestly?

They would be terrified.  For themselves and there families. From a sector of Scottish society, of whom we should be ashamed.  Ask Neil Lennon.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:13 pm - Jun 11, 2016

The reclusive Mr Warburton appears to be staying put, according to the Express.

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on11:47 pm - Jun 11, 2016

Oh how right you are 
Alas this is a side effect of the SFA/SPFL/SMSM refusing to put the truth out there after CG came out with the ,I bought the history bull .
All the papers carried the story of the old clubs death ,yet never once questioned CG on his utter tosh about it being the same club . In fact anyone in the media even hinting such has found themselves cut adrift .
They will all tell you that they are doing it for the good of scottish football and we are bampots who are incapable of seeing the BIGGER picture .
Where in fact the only reason they are doing it is to ensure the team playing out of Ibrokes has as many peepil paying in as possible .
If truth be told they need the Ibrokes fans to believe their club never died and they are more thn happy to perpetuate the myth that everyone including themselves are kicking sevco when they are down as the victim myth fills seats .
The trouble is that even the victim myth will not sustain them if they are not competing on the field of play ,if results don’t go their way even the more rabid in their ranks will finally get fed up and that wee nagging annoyance in the back of what’s left of their mind will come to the fore and reality will finally dawn on them .
The ragers I grew up with are gone.
Does anyone think if any other club in Scotland went bust the MSM would refuse to question their status ,no me niether 
The thing is ,if it had happened to my club I would have accepted it and although not shouting it from the rooftops I would know in myself that it was not the same club my father and I supported all our days but if anyone questioned me on the matter I would not make an idiot of myself by arguing it was .
All the pandering to sevco fans has done is prevent their acceptance and stoked up a complete bitterness of any statement of the truth 
Now I ask you ,how can that be good for Scottish football in the long term 

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on11:54 pm - Jun 11, 2016

EASYJAMBOJUNE 11, 2016 at 23:13 
The reclusive Mr Warburton appears to be staying put, according to the Express.http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/679026/Exclusive-Mark-Warburton-Rangers-Stay-Ibrox-SPL-Manager-Contract-News
   Talks must have collapsed over the phone then EJ…….Or was it a while ago?….
Looks like no more dark o.clock starts from now on. A back me, or sack me. 

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on12:01 am - Jun 12, 2016

Well ,,,,,,,where do you start with that article 

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on12:01 am - Jun 12, 2016

or was it a tweet 

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on12:04 am - Jun 12, 2016

FAN OF FOOTBALLJUNE 11, 2016 at 23:47
    “All the pandering to sevco fans has done is prevent their acceptance and stoked up a complete bitterness of any statement of the truth Now I ask you ,how can that be good for Scottish football in the long term ”
    It has also stopped them from booting in the doors of Hampden asking the SFA, “WTF happened to our club?”.. It has gone so far, and the Stockholm syndrome taken such hold, that they are actually defending the SFA against attempts to highlight Res 12……Lets face it. They are not coming doon the road, They are just in the road.

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on12:32 am - Jun 12, 2016

It does make you wonder where the helping hands will stop regards the new club 
I mean what if they are struggling to make the top 6 next season 
What if they need euro cash 
What if they need two home ties that guarentee a full house and satisfy the TV companies 
What if the get a fine for the SC debacle and need the prize money to cover it 
I suppose we will see soon enough 

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on12:35 am - Jun 12, 2016

I tried to get across to the other clubs supporters on their forums how res 12 affected them also 
A few got it but more thought it had nothing to do with thier clubs .
Think a few of their minds will be changed next season 

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:39 am - Jun 12, 2016

The truth is out here for anyone who wants to know.  I would guess most people under the age of 80 have access to the internet.  This site proves it.  Fans of all clubs know the truth. 

If I was Rangers fan I suppose I would take a desperate stance but I reckon I would have a niggling doubt.   The Rangers were founded in 2012. That is it.

View Comment

zam1Posted on10:13 am - Jun 12, 2016

I don’t know if anyone has thought of sending an email to Dia Chakravarty, Political Director of The Tax Payers Alliance

If I had the skills or the knowledge regarding all this I could word it myself, unfortunately I do not. Just a suggestion.

View Comment

ReiverPosted on10:25 am - Jun 12, 2016

Interesting that the Warbie article in the Express is accompanied by and ad that invites us to predict the result in the England v Russia game.
Reminds me of the Newman/Redford movie “The Sting”.
Maybe there is money to be made there.

View Comment

ReiverPosted on10:27 am - Jun 12, 2016

Just in case it was an ad that varied depending on circumstances.
Note the article date as proof.

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on12:11 pm - Jun 12, 2016

EASYJAMBOJUNE 11, 2016 at 23:13 The reclusive Mr Warburton appears to be staying put, according to the Express.http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/679026/Exclusive-Mark-Warburton-Rangers-Stay-Ibrox-SPL-Manager-Contract-News
Level 5 control all the news emanating from Ibrox. They decide which paper runs TRFC stories. Indeed they write the stories. If MW is staying they would have headlined it everywhere in the gutter press together with free information on ST renewals
In any event
MW`s strange behaviour after the cup final suggest he has much bigger concerns than signing a new contract.
So the issue will not simply be or even be a new contract for MW
It’s much more likely to be MW getting paid his promotion bonus for the current contract on the promised date. If this had been settled Level 5 would be headlining that issue also
If talks have broken down it can only mean the current contract isn`t being honoured by King or he has found the £500k necessary to honour it. But I doubt King would have embarked on lengthy negotiations on a new contract only to cave in at the last minute
This nonsense “exclusive” is probably Level 5 positioning King as the good guy if and when MW carries out some action he has threatened to take if he doesn`t get paid his bonus on the promised date
And trying to position the issue as failure to agree a new contract not TRFC refusing to honour his existing contract 

View Comment

tonyPosted on12:35 pm - Jun 12, 2016

phil’s latest 

View Comment

shugPosted on12:52 pm - Jun 12, 2016

It would seem that people are either misunderstanding what CQN posted about the designer graphic mock up or they are somehow reading what they think is there as I am seeing posts elsewhere that seem to suggest that CQN have admitted to having a full french version of the ad.

View Comment

tonyPosted on1:28 pm - Jun 12, 2016

bit of humour for euros

View Comment

ReiverPosted on1:58 pm - Jun 12, 2016

As I see it Mr King has spent too much time communing with the fans where, if there is any arithmetical understanding at all, adding up numbers with no more than 2 digits is too advanced. He has obviously been unable to extract himself from that mindset when discussing remunerations with Warbie. With his background in the money market Warbie is more advanced than that with the ability to count in millions(for when his bonus came round) and even negative figures as demonstrated when the markets crashed. Anyway, when Dave said that Warbie’s promotion bonus was to be spread over next season with 20% deduction to allow for his holidays and that, because the premiership(because Hibs aren’t in it)was actually not as good a league as the Championship, he would be having his salary cut for the next season(call it a lead parachute payment) Warbie saw through him. He has now published in International Mathematics Journal the results of his research highlighting the now globally accepted Negative Equity Darwinian Principle which is succinctly encapsulated in the formula.

G + A5 = L

Where G  = New Annual Salary
           A5 = Previous Annual Bonus
           L    = Old Annual SalaryNow, those of you who are over 40 and have Higher maths will recognise that has actually been plagiarised from Nobel recipients Abbot and Costello ground breaking work entitled “Two tens for a Five”. The difference is that he has incorporated the “For every Five We Will Spend Ten” research undertaken by David Murray for which he was awarded a knighthood.This faux pas by King is easily explained as, when Warbie was talking with him about his time in the financial sector, he thought the terms Bear and Bull market to which Warbie referred was the same as King’s own working strategy of the Bears and the Bullshlt market. A simple error that proved an error too far for the Magic Hat.

View Comment

theredpillPosted on2:26 pm - Jun 12, 2016

Teaser from John James 11

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:46 pm - Jun 12, 2016

JUNE 12, 2016 at 12:52

I think people may be in danger of, like the 2 to 1 decision in the EBT FTTT , not seeing the woods for the trees.

Happy to be corrected but regardless of what colour, what language or what draft the Ads were in,  the Res 12 guys appear to have been in communication with the Guardian about, not one but two ads.

At some point in the process someone somewhere in their organisation has taken a view the subject matter, as a whole, was not one they wanted to run with in terms of their advertising policy.

The papers editorial staff have clearly allowed Greenslade’s articles through referring to TOG and allowing him to comment that something stinks in terms of the administration of Scottish Football and it needs investigating.

I am assuming the Guardian was chosen in the belief that they played with a straight bat, they are detached from the SMSM and because they were more likely to support the cause.

Greenslade came back pretty quickly, after an admittedly relatively poor first attempt, to explain the situation.

I therefore find it highly improbable that they will have been ‘gotten at’ by the dark side.

Indulging in shooting the messenger and whataboutery about other adverts the Guardian may run is just going to be  waste of time and effort.

People need to focus on the issue at hand and not be side tracked into issues that could end up giving other ammunition to raise the old ‘paraniod’ tag again.

As some degree of dialogue has been opened with Greenslade/Guardian then maybe more should be done to develop that relationship to see if he/they are going to step up to the plate or maybe even provide guidance on how to take the Res 12 issue forward as opposed to getting bogged down in arguments about the papers advertising policy.


View Comment

shugPosted on4:10 pm - Jun 12, 2016

Seems england could be kicked out of the euros if their fans repeat their rioting.

View Comment

Pat ByrnePosted on4:50 pm - Jun 12, 2016

I think there is a real chance of the Guardian taking an interest in this as regardless of the truth, they have been embarrassed by the way it has all unfolded, could this be the breakthrough Res12 deserves?
As for England being thrown out of the Euros, there is more chance of his glibness putting £30 Mil into the coffers of the new entity. Hilariously BBC pundits blaming everyone bar their own (this seems rather familiar for some strange reason) perfectly law abiding supporters. Money is God when it comes to our ruling body and England generate huge sums, why does that sound familiar?
Meanwhile the ‘Where’s Warby’ saga rolls on without a squeak from the sqwaks parading as the press.

View Comment

shugPosted on5:49 pm - Jun 12, 2016

James forrest latest.http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/a-union-jack-a-six-pack-away-they-go/?

View Comment

Winning CaptainsPosted on7:45 pm - Jun 12, 2016

The Guardian were given two versions of the one ad. Both were included in the CQN article on Friday evening and are just like the ad that appeared in the Swiss newspaper.
The exact same ad that appeared in the Geneva paper would have appeared in the Guardian on both 1st and 4th June. 
The text came from the Res 12 guys and was written by two regular posters on SFM and CQN. 
We booked 2 half page ads and paid in advance an agreed  fee. We asked for the size of the ad space booked. The designer entirely independent to CQN set up the design proposal in correct sizes for both newspapers.
He had no text at this stage. He was waiting on CQN. We were waiting on Res 12 guys supplying it. 
He took some sample text from his CQN file, dropped it into an early design he had created (which before all this kicked off CQN rejected) and also put his sample text into Google translate to see if a French version would be significantly longer than the English text. We saw and rejected his English version of the design).
From this he was able to advise on maximum word length from a design point of view. Both authors have a reputation for being long winded! He passed this suggested word count to CQN and we passed it on to the Res 12 guys. 
You will notice the text in the real ad was significantly shorter than in the designer working. 500 words became 200 for the final ad. All standard stuff.
CQN had senior French academic staff available to translate the final text. My wife is fluent in French and a few years ago graduated with an honours degree in French, her second degree. The headline the Guardian produced – which I had never seen – was riddled with errors. It was in pidgin French.
It was a designer mock up and I have a statement from him which I may use on CQN. It’s probably getting too boring though and the refund will be VERY handy to assist  after the breaking news developments. The story has moved on. 
The Guardian asked for a size that was smaller than the half page booked. The designer added a pink square on top of the template for the actual ad (Persistence Beats Resistance) to demonstrate the difference and this was sent to the Guardian Production office, who acknowledged their error.
Everyone knew that CQN were awaiting text at this stage. 
The designer’s file which was sent to production to query their size error had the his earlier design workings in the file. They included the Google translate example he worked on which CQN had never seen at any stage. It was not apparent from opening the file.
The Guardian said they translated the ad and got lawyers involved to check text. They must have checked this and not the print ready black and white ad we supplied and they say they rejected.
Yet they asked for the real ad and were given the real ad late afternoon on 27 May. At no stage did we discuss putting a French ad into The Guardian.
if we did go with a French ad in the Tribune de Geneve then we would have had French national academics translate the Res 12 text for us. We would never have relied on a Google Translate. 
Our submitted text was good to go from a legal point of view as the Geneva newspaper confirmed. While the ad is for Res 12, CQN were in the firing line re any potential legal consequences. So we took this very seriously. 
On Friday we had no idea what the Guardian were talking about re a French version of the ad. We submitted our ad in English, in black and white, as requested by the ad department and with Res 12 text legally cleared. They acknowledged they got this the only print ready ad we ever supplied and said that it was rejected. Unlike the Guardian, CQN at all times acted in good faith.
Their media professor is either dishonest in the way he has outlined the facts or he has been spoon fed a cut up version of the designer/ production working and told that is the ad. Clearly it wasn’t. 
If the Guardian – as we have said – simply pulled the ad and returned the funds, that would have been that. However they started all this nonsense that we submitted our ad in French, to discredit Res 12/ CQN.
Their Media Professor then got involved and made matters worse. He will have to explain that officially but some may suspect he has been stitched up.
Consider too the strange withdrawal from the Herald without ever seeing copy. To me it looks like some folk wanted to stop The Resolution 12 message get out.
One poster on CQN sided with the Guardian and said he doesn’t believe me. However I am sure that this account will be seen when it all comes out in the wash as being fair, reasonable and accurate. 
We might find out that there is one bad apple at the Guardian, who will read this and should know we are coming. 

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on8:24 pm - Jun 12, 2016

WINNING CAPTAINSJUNE 12, 2016 at 19:45
    I think I speak for a lot of people when I say your efforts and commitment are very much appreciated. 04

View Comment

justshateredPosted on8:29 pm - Jun 12, 2016

Over the last fourteen days Resolution 12 has dominated the blogosphere, yet questions remain unanswered.
All at the same time a lot of people started releasing statements saying that the impasse between the requisitioners and Celtic had been resolved and they expected action from the club in the next week. This was a few days before the ad in the European newspaper. Some people close to the action stated that not only would the club be writing to UEFA but they would also be releasing a statement.
All of this took place as Celtic were attempting to sell their own season tickets with anything up to five thousand fans standing firm with their refusal to part with their cash until these concerns were addressed. Many have now renewed based on the optimistic reports.
Were the requisitioners duped, conned, fooled, or led up the garden path by a club who are savvy enough to know that the vast majority of their fans no longer read newspapers but get their news from the internet?
This is great for them on two fronts; they can deny discussions ever took place and, as none of the people involved are registered press people nothing will have been recorded……. Hopefully.
We are quick to challenge the veracity of statements which emerge from across the city but perhaps with this aspect of the story we should be looking closer to home.
Still there has been no letter, as far as we are aware, from Celtic to UEFA and definitely no announcement and the stadium nears a season ticket sell-out.
As for the guys working on Resolution 12 themselves:
These guys deserve all of our praise. I don’t know what they have had to put up with over the last two and a half years, not only from the horrible side of our society, but from the very club they have attempted to assist. Remember this was to HELP the club they have shares in and at every turn, up until recently if we are to believe rumour, they have been stalled.
Not only was this action taken to help Celtic but the immediate beneficiary would also be Scottish football itself. Rules, yes that dirty word in Scottish football, may actually have been written to protect the game from unscrupulous individuals. I remember reading once that the refusal of our media and sporting authorities to accept that corruption could be active in our sport actually makes it easier for corruption to flourish. That is one of the truest things written in this scandal.
The lengths they have had to go to in an attempt to get the message across has been astounding. That so many doors can be closed in attempting to simply ask questions is a truly astounding indictment of our media.
I now visualise their meetings taking place in sound proof rooms with no electronic devices allowed. When they announced that they had bought space for advertisements in the Guardian I was concerned. The old adage of “never letting your enemy know what your plan is” sprung to mind. I sure they will not make the same mistake again.
Now on to ‘Guardiangate’:
The article from Roy Greenslade certainly had a few errors in it particularly when referring to a European licence for ‘new’ Rangers but the real issue was the ‘French version’ of the advertisement.  
After complaints Roy Greenslade followed that up later in the day with a screenshot of a colour headed graphic which was in French. Now the requisitioners informed us that this was not the advert but a graphic mock-up. Although I know nothing of the print industry I’m surprised that a colour mock-up was sent for a black and white advertisement.
“Truth is always the first casualty in war” and the requisitioners, on behalf of every football fan in the country, are now in one. I hope they have kept all email correspondence as this will now develop into my word against yours.
The fact that this incident has probably given more publicity to the Resolution 12 cause than the advert itself may be a bonus yet it could all be assisted by the aforementioned statement from Celtic. That would turn the story on its head.
Good luck guys.
Keep fighting the good fight!

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:24 pm - Jun 12, 2016

JUNE 12, 2016 at 19:45

Thanks for the explanation but IMHO it still looks like an unintended game of Chinese whispers with an unfortunate conclusion as opposed to a conspiracy. 

Please don’t get too distracted by this and keep up the good work.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on9:32 pm - Jun 12, 2016

justshateredJune 12, 2016 at 20:29
‘…That so many doors can be closed in attempting to simply ask questions is a truly astounding indictment of our media…’
By now, we have got used to the fact that  it is not the media themselves who are asking the questions. It is a sinister new twist that they will block even a paid-for advert in order to prevent others asking questions!
By way of contrast, there was another gangland murder in broad daylight on the streets of Dublin yesterday. ( I think that’s about the eighth in seven months, as two Dublin families under  Eastern-European  drug-gang control fight a turf war).
The Irish media guys are right in there covering the story, and providing essential background.They are looking for links with Irish government agencies and people with high political influence to try to explain how these gangs are getting away with it. They will not be shut up or bought off as easily and willingly as our media chaps, who are feart to report a football story!

View Comment

jimboPosted on9:53 pm - Jun 12, 2016

`Are any of you folk watching Euro2016?

I have to admit that I have no interest in International football unless Scotland is involved.  I don’t even watch English clubs.  I suppose I am not a purist.  I just love Scottish football.   The Championship has been great this past few years,  Hibs, Hearts The Rangers, Falkirk etc.   I never took an interest before.

I think it is time to enlarge our top tier to 18 teams.

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on11:01 pm - Jun 12, 2016

Corrupt officialJune 9, 2016 at 23:07

” Maybe it was a poor analogy, but far from suggesting they were arbiters of fair competition, I was rather suggesting they would take advertisers fees from wherever and whoever, as the would do with, for e.g. BMW, Toyota, Mazda, etc. ”
I don’t think a media brand would risk upsetting Marquee customers by playing them off against one another. However something like a campaign ad which did not offer a continuing revenue stream might easily fall foul of the commercial imperative.

Marquee brands don’t want to associate themselves with controversy generally. They want the media brands they use for advertising to have a middle of the road feel to them. Even avowed campaigning outlets will have their enthusiasm curbed by the commercial imperative.

The obvious question is what type of brand would have been discomfitted by the Res 12 advertisement?

It seems fairly clear from what I have read that the Res 12 ad was nobbled.

Not only that but it was necessary to embroil a very well regarded journalist (an endangered species) in the controversy to cover the tracks.

A bit like shooting a mountain gorilla to save a wayward child. All very unfortunate but obviously motivated by genuine concerns.

Res 12 thought the EMSM were free of the grasp of the invisible hand but this appears not to be the case.

Another enlightening chapter in the case study.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:17 pm - Jun 12, 2016

Mike Ashley  being invited by D&P to bid for 50 BHS stores.
Those initials kind of remind me of something that I can’t quite bring to the forefront of memory.
There’s something in my mind that is wryly  smiling at the incongruity of a firm of administrators which ‘oversaw’ the demise of one old  Scottish Football club ,encouraging the ‘enemy’ (but big shareholder!)of the  new football club,which pretends to be that very ‘demised’ club,to sort of asset-strip another business!
Will any of us ever hear the sound made when we say ‘D&P’ forget the connection  that sound has with the most extraordinarily dirty story in the annals of Scottish Football?
(And, perhaps, in an idle moment,reflect on the question of whether the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal service is really up to speed? Or even, perhaps, whether it is allowed to be up to speed?)

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on11:35 pm - Jun 12, 2016

CastofthousandsJune 12, 2016 at 23:01
‘…….Not only that but it was necessary to embroil a very well regarded journalist (an endangered species) in the controversy to cover the tracks…’
And that is the most disturbing aspect of this affair.
Greenslade has hitherto been regarded by most of us as being on the same plane of journalistic integrity as , say, the Watergate guys. I have previously emailed him to commend him for that.
It was something of a shock to me that he should have so badly got things wrong.
I hope, as the lesser of two evils, that he was lied to by someone on the paper, and was not himself party to deliberate deception.
And I would hope that, if he was lied to by his colleagues on the paper, he will make an issue of it, and tell us as much.
Or at least apologise to the Res 12 people.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on12:05 am - Jun 13, 2016

     I agree Cast, Deffo spiked, and I confess by methods unknown by me, although the motive seems pretty clear.  It would also appear circumstantial that “The French Connection” may well have come into play. 
   Which brings me around to retail stores, (see what I did there?) 
John Clark
   When Ashley was holding court with the parliament committee last week, he was asked if he wanted to buy BHS.  Bishop, his PR guy told him not to answer, but he went for it, stating that BHS would have slotted in nicely to his plans. Does that jog your memory?

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:25 am - Jun 13, 2016

Just a minute ago I heard on BBC news the report that Ashley has been invited to  blah blah  blah the brand name of BHS and acquire 50 stores.
I have emailed D&P New York the sentence in my  post above at 23.17
“… Will any of us ever hear the sound made when we say ‘D&P’ forget the connection that sound has with the most extraordinarily dirty story in the annals of Scottish Football?..”
Pure devilment, of course.02
I know that there may be city traders, and insolvency firms,and pornographer  solicitors who are honest men, in the world of finance.
Just  as I know that there are ,somewhere, surely, honest Football Governance people.
Somewhere furth of Scotland.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on7:06 am - Jun 13, 2016

Morning all.
Just some thoughts on this piece by James Forrest:
I see that he mentions a Company owned by King called Nova.Forgive me if I’ve got this wrong but was Charles Green not connected to a Co also called Nova something in the far east,a company that changed its name to something like Tembuska?.This was the same company “controlled” by Rafat Ritzvis wife,was it not?I think it was also tied to the mob that issued the WU order against TRFC for £400k a wee while back.
This was all discussed on the RTC site & may(or may not) tie in with some of the information available at the time,including our late friend Corsicas revelation of a meeting between King,Green,Whyte & Ellis(remember him?) held in Switzerland.
May be nothing.Just pointing out that the name Nova,has cropped up in this story,in the past.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on10:08 am - Jun 13, 2016

Nova Resources, I think Nova is too common a word to attempt to draw any link.


Green’s background

Mr Green’s ‘Sevco consortium’ could be linked to the company incorporated at the end of March of which he is the sole director, called Sevco 5088 Limited. The business address matches that of London law firm, Field Fisher Waterhouse, who Mr Green has instructed to deal with his takeover of Rangers.
This entity could be the consortium’s ‘newco’ in waiting, should the CVA proposals administrators hope creditors to vote on next month fail.

He recently left a post with construction management firm Formation Group plc in February, citing “personal reasons” for stepping down in an announcement to the company’s investors.

Currently his business interests appear to be focused away from the UK, with his role as chairman of Nova Resources Limited, which was formed in Bermuda in 2007 but has a Singaporean trading address listed on its website.

Nova is an investing company, which according to announcements on the stock exchange, appears to be concerned with coal transportation in Mongolia. The last financial results for the company, released last September before it changes its name from Tembusu Investments, described it as “not active” in 2010-2011 and had net assets of £1.7m.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:24 am - Jun 13, 2016

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) June 13, 2016 at 07:06
Homunculus June 13, 2016 at 10:08
James has got the name wrong. It’s NOSA.

Here is a list of “NOSA” companies owned by Micromega.
NOSA (Pty) Ltd
NOSA Agricultural (Pty) Ltd
NOSA Certification Authority (Pty) Ltd
NOSA Global Holdings
NOSA Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd
NOSA Investment Holdings Hong Kong
NOSA Mozambique
NOSA Namibia
NOSA New Zealand
NOSA Technologies (Pty) Ltd
NOSA Zambia
Incidentally, Micromega announced their annual results a couple of weeks ago, with both their profits and dividend up.

Through his family trust King owns 63% of the shares. It is quoted on the Jo’burg stock exchange and at Friday’s closing price, and the current exchange rate, his stake is worth £31.7M.  
As chairman of the Company he takes a salary (£109K in 2015), however he also receives a dividend from the companies profits. The recent accounts announced that a dividend of 43 cents (Rand) a share will be paid from profits of £7.3M, which for King will amount to £1.43M.
He is not exactly skint, but nor is his wealth “off the radar”.

View Comment

ReiverPosted on11:28 am - Jun 13, 2016

To return to the Mexican stand off between King and Ashley. Surely all Ashley has to do is produce the strips without the badge and issue a statement that it IS the official strip as to include the badge would be against the liquidation laws. His actions would obviously be seen as in the best interests of the Ibrox club who can’t even afford to pay the LNS fine never mind one that would come from passing themselves off as a phoenix company.
The bears would all rally to back a gentleman with their best interests at heart. Surely?

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on11:48 am - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 11:28

A Rangers top without a Rangers crest isn’t really a rangers top though is it.

Bearing in mind we aren’t just talking about replica kit here, we are talking about every bit of official merchandising, anywhere in the World.

It appears to me that Ashley is able to sell existing designs, it is only anything post the IP being withdrawn, if it has been that would be unauthorised.

Therefore the stuff he is selling just now, on the assumption that it is the kit the team wears next year, will still be the official kit.

There clearly won’t be as big a market as people already have that kit, however if there is no new design then Ashley will still be selling the official kit. 


View Comment

ReiverPosted on12:03 pm - Jun 13, 2016

Sorry Homunculus I should have put in the emogees to show that what I was writing was done with my tongue firmly in my cheek.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on1:21 pm - Jun 13, 2016

   Worth remembering that Roy Greenslade has pointed out that Scottish fitba governance “reeks” and has supported calls for an independent inquiry. This is probably his first experience of tasting what a lot of Bampots face every other day in Scotland. Lies and treachery off the radar.
      I doubt he is too enamoured at being thrown under a bus by his own paper, but more importantly, he has a reputation as a good journalist to protect.
   A reputation that may well hinge on how he reacts to, what must be an “unusual” situation for him.


View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on3:48 pm - Jun 13, 2016

As a light diversion I would heartily recommend The Secret Assistant Manager. A series of online pieces on our favourite game. 

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:01 pm - Jun 13, 2016

BDO has apparently sent out the latest RFC 2012 (IL) report to creditors.  It’s not on their website as yet.

A poster on Rangers Media has noted that the creditors pot is down by £6.5m in fees and that it will be 2017 before the Supreme Court rules on the big tax case.

It should be posted here when made public.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:20 pm - Jun 13, 2016

Re the poster’s £6.5M fees claim:

BDO’s total fees, since 31 Oct 2012, were at £2.6M a year ago, while litigation costs were at £6.22 (mainly as a result on the no win no fee arrangement re the £24M Collyer Bristow settlement).

It may be that the total litigation cots have gone up to £6.5M off the back of the EBT appeal.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:06 pm - Jun 13, 2016

EASYJAMBOJUNE 13, 2016 at 18:01

I’m not a financial type. I simply don’t get why BDO are appealing, or why they are even allowed to. They were nothing to do with the implementation of EBT’s at Ibrox, and the last ruling at the Court of Session has zero impact on their reputation. There is a creditor pot and the law deals with how creditors are prioritised. I know my thoughts will no doubt be debunked by those who know the process but as a layman I just think it’s crazy they are allowed to appeal something they had nothing to do with.  

View Comment

TheGamesABogeyPosted on7:31 pm - Jun 13, 2016

@UTH, I suspect they believe that if they win this will increase the overall creditors pot. As it stands HMRC will have the money that should have been paid in NI, PAYE and VAT that was withheld to keep the club going after being dumped out of Europe plus the monies due for the EBT and DOS schemes.
If BDO win the appeal then that’s just the first part that is due. And the other creditors will be better off.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on7:35 pm - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 19:06

BDO aren’t appealing per se, it is the company in liquidation which is appealing. It’s just a case of when a business is in administration or liquidation that the administrator or liquidator becomes the management team of that business.

Why are BDO deciing to appeal, I would imagine they are doing it in consultation with the liquidation committee. In addition to HMRC currently being the biggest creditor, by far, they also sit on the liquidation committee. Bearing in mind they insisted on BDO getting the job as liquidator.

I suspect that HMRC have no particular issue with this appeal going ahead, on the basis that once it is won that is the matter settled for good. As it is in the highest Court in the UK then it sets precedent over every other Court and Tribunal. 

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on7:38 pm - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 19:31

As I understand it HMRC are not a preferred creditor. They will get their proportion of the creditors pot the same as everyone else.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:45 pm - Jun 13, 2016

HOMUNCULUSJUNE 13, 2016 at 19:35

I guess my frustration is to do with the media and many Rangers fans desperation a few months ago as the appeal deadline drew nearer. When BDO appealed it was almost portrayed as a cause for celebration. They really couldn’t care a toss about a single creditor, including HMRC. All they care about is ‘Rangers’ potentially being deemed to have had a sporting advantage if the EBT’s are ruled illegal, with a subsequent request by other clubs for another review. 

View Comment

TheGamesABogeyPosted on8:30 pm - Jun 13, 2016

HMRC as far as I am aware are not a preferred creditor. But it’s a big difference to them being owed £16 million to £80 million.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on8:30 pm - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 19:45

I genuinely don’t see how anyone could not accept that by being able to pay players more (by avoiding tax) that they were not able to attract better players and as such obtain a sporting advantage. On some occasions a full team on EBTs (with tax being avoided) as I understand it

I actually find the claim laughable, in fact embarrassing for anyone who chooses to make it.

The notion that the club would have paid those wages anyway, had they not decided to cheat everyone in the country and steal from them just makes the position even more ludicrous in my opinion.

View Comment

TheGamesABogeyPosted on8:41 pm - Jun 13, 2016

@UTH It doesn’t matter if EBTs are declared illegal or not. The LNS declaration about sporting advantage was flawed. Celtic asked HMRC if EBTs were legal or not and were told they were illegal. After taking this advice from HMRC, I doubt they would have a leg to stand on if they were then to use EBTs.
Oh and even if HMRC were to have said that EBTs were legal, the fact that RFC didn’t inform the SFA about them, meant that the players who had them were not eligible to play for the club. The rules are that the SFA have to be informed about all monies paid to the player from the club.
As an aside, if the draft version of the side letter published in the first edition of the Sun on Sunday (Scotland) is correct, these payments were for first team appearances and win bonuses.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on8:51 pm - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 20:41


EBTs were not illegal as far as I am aware.

If they were genuine discretionary payments into trusts for the benefit of the employee, and were at the discretion of the employer, with loans out to the beneficiary at the discretion of the trustee and he alone, then there was no reason not to use them.

That is not what Rangers did. I can think of no situation when a player or agent would agree to that.

The side letters just proved that these were contractually agreed payments. Rangers had no option but to hide them from the SFA as declaring them would just provide proof of tax avoidance.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on8:59 pm - Jun 13, 2016

JUNE 13, 2016 at 20:30

They definitely are not a preferred creditor. The previous Departments used to be as a matter of course but that status was removed with the Enterprise Act 2002.

I believe the logic was that HMCE and the IR getting paid in full prior to small businesses getting anything was wrong. 

I think it’s covered in Section 251, abolition of the crown preference. 

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:05 am - Jun 14, 2016

HOMUNCULUSJUNE 13, 2016 at 20:30
The notion that the club would have paid those wages anyway, had they not decided to cheat everyone in the country and steal from them just makes the position even more ludicrous in my opinion.

Agree totally. The Bank of Scotland well dried up once it fell out of Scottish hands, and Celtic had more season ticket holders. EBT’s were a deliberate act to attract players of a quality they could otherwise not afford. Anyone who thinks that is not a sporting advantage is in complete denial. 

Unfortunately though we had people like Alastair Johnston saying in 2011 David Murray would still have funded the transfers without EBT’s. Due to the fact he was a Rangers Chairman of a type whose word was gospel with the media, it simply became an accepted fact.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on9:30 am - Jun 14, 2016

Off Topic:

Just bought an Aristo Scholar Sliderule for £20 from a mate who bought a job lot of them from a school 🙂

When I saw the box full of them, I nearly had a panic attack.

But the nostalgia! You could cut it with a knife 14

Summer task: Re-learn how to use a sliderule. Not easy after all this time 050505

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:49 am - Jun 14, 2016

Big PinkJune 14, 2016 at 09:30
You have caused me to break into a cold sweat, BP06
I remember my parents having to buy one for me in about 1964 and it cost them 30 shillings then!!!! My dad was a blacksmith so you can imagine the hardship it caused. Could never work the f**cking thing and you have just reminded me of it!!

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on9:55 am - Jun 14, 2016

Big Pink.   From slide tackles to slide rules. I love it.

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on10:36 am - Jun 14, 2016

OT  Alert
Once again, SFM memory lane.
1614 – Invention of logarithms by John Napier, Baron of Merchiston, Scotland.
1617 – Developments of logarithms ‘to base 10’ by Henry Briggs, Professor of Mathematics, Oxford University.
1620 – Interpretation of logarithmic scale form by Edmund Gunter, Professor of Astronomy, London.
1630 – Invention of the slide rule by the Reverend William Oughtred, London.
1657 – Development of the moving slide/fixed stock principle by Seth Partridge, Surveyor and Mathematician, England.
1775 – Development of the slide rule cursor by John Robertson of the Royal Academy.
1815 – Invention of the log log scale principle by P.M. Roget of France.
1850 – Amédée Mannheim, France, produced the modern arrangement of scales.
1886 – Dennert & Pape, Germany, introduce white celluloid as a material for inscription of scales.
1890 – William Cox of the United States patented the duplex slide rule.
c1900 – Engine divided scales on celluloid increases precision of slide rules.
1976 – The final slide rule made by K&E donated to the Smithsonian Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Today, slide rules can be found on eBay, antique stores and estate auctions. Lost inventories of brand new slide rules turn up every year.
 International Slide Rule Museum.  ( I kid you not.)
On February 1 1972, the Hewlett-Packard HP-35 was the first handheld electronic calculator sold by HP, and the first handheld ever to perform logarithmic and trigonometric functions with one keystroke. In effect it was the world’s first electronic slide rule.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on10:40 am - Jun 14, 2016

jean7brodieJune 14, 2016 at 09:49
‘…in about 1964 and it cost them 30 shillings then..’
Whatever about slide rule measurements, my ‘price inflation’ measure is the 1964 ‘Esso’ ‘Tiger in the Tank’ advert, in the days when you could buy 4 gallons ( or whatever that might be in litres-I canny be ar.ed looking it it up!) for £1.00.
30 bob would have bought , therefore, 6 gallons, and at today’s prices that would equate to what?.. £30?
That was a helluva lot of dough! I think I was being paid about 10 quid a week, full-time, in the job I had then, as a single man. And my old man wouldn’t have been getting all that much more: and credit cards were the preserve of the very well off!

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on10:50 am - Jun 14, 2016

Former Celtic defender Mark Wilson believes that new Rangers arrival Joey Barton has played into Scott Brown’s hands by dismissing the quality of the Celtic captain ahead of their midfield battles next season. (Daily Mail)
And They Wonder Why Nobody Buys Papers?

View Comment

Comments are closed.