Comment on Armageddon? What Armageddon? by Finloch.
I don’t think Charlie is planning a return as such – just a return to the spotlight.
In fact Charlie and the other “central players” have never really or properly been away.
They are a consortium whose simple collective plan was to maximise maximum financial gain from the Ibrox project that fell into their laps.
To achieve that they had stuff to do and confusion to spread.
They’ve done both in spivbook fashion.
Sucking in a few mug punters, (bears and some, maybe even all of the investing city institutions) has maximised and prolonged their revenue streams.
And along the way all their paid advisers (lawyers and accountants have feasted on the dripping roast of fees with few questions asked).
Confusion abounds and was always part of the plan.
But as a natural part of the story at some point they have to have an exit strategy that will avoid them personally becoming targets for bad stuff.
Bad stuff because they have been ruthless in their revenue removal plans and the carcass will have been picked clean.
So if Charlie is now saying he wants to come back…
First thing he does is tell someone like the BBC – and it seems to be a story that the BBC might run with first.
But maybe in reality Charlie doesn’t really want to come back but simply wants to be seen to fail at trying to want to make a comeback because that failure makes it look like he is currently totally and completely no longer involved in any way, (when in reality he has never really been uninvolved or away – just over the water in his luxury chateau in France).
Then you get the picture and if bad stuff is about to happen in this wee project because people like Deloittes might finally say they’ve had enough fees and tell their clients they it looks like they are trading outwith their fiduciary duties and maybe even insolvently with no sign of a turnaround then the game has changed.
A Charlie attempted comeback could run at the same time as a Deloittes development and add a wee further bit of confusion.
Quite simple and an old tactic.
The reality is Charlie and others are part of the consortium, – the kind of organisation you never leave until the end.
I’d guess the clue to who the consortium representatives are or represent can be found in the attendees at Corsica’s Clandestine Swiss meeting nearly two roller coaster years ago.
So welcome back to the spotlight for a wee while, Charlie.
Finloch Also Commented
Armageddon? What Armageddon?
Auldheid says: June 12, 2014 at 11:38 am
In your post you highlight the problem when you lump Doncaster and Regan together in chasing commercial values. There is no one or remit to ensure that in doing so the integrity of the sport as a sport is not compromised.
It crept up on them all and now the Armageddon Boys have boxed our game into a nasty deteriorating corner where tv audience is everything and the clubs just have to agree that there will be issues along the way.
Also agree that much of it was chaotic and not thought through.
The turmoil will stay until they realise that the gold standard model they are trying to recreate never worked in the first place.
There is something wrong with our football administrator’s mind set was when the biggest attraction was the maintenance of a nasty bogited tribal dispute between our two best supported clubs and when the biggest focus is the reinstatement of it and all the nonsense and baggage that came with it.
Eddie Goldtop has right on his side but the contradiction of “national” revenues coming ahead of what is right for the clubs and the game will prevail unless one club chairman takes a public stance and starts an overdue evolution.
Armageddon? What Armageddon?
EGT – Fighting the good fight for us all…. But whom is he fighting?
Eddie Goldtop and people like him who sponsor individual teams are critical to the success of our game.
They are often heavily involved in the communities their clubs play in and may not even trade outside these local areas.
Of course they want their clubs to do well but they also often “invest because they care about their communities.
Their “investment” is returned mostly from local feel-good factors and in theory the more successful the team the better their return.
And yes the media value of their name being associated with their club can also work for them too but in many cases their sole motive is the “lift” they get in the community they trade in and often live in
This is a very different situation to sponsors who sponsor leagues or cups like William Hills or broadcast companies like Sky and BT
Typically they don’t trade in only one area or live in or particularly care about the community.
They are not sponsoring any league or cup because they feel that it would be good for the game or any local community.
They do it for commercial reasons and that is usually the media value they can extract from the “relationship”.
Media value of football fan audiences is high because it is very difficult to “reach” the key young male target audience in traditional mainstream media and their media advisers see football sponsorships and football live on TV as a way of reaching or attracting this important grouping.
This clash of motives explains much of what we have seen since the meltdown and explains much of what has passed and also much of what is to come.
In simple terms EGT and local sponsors want their club to win everything, fairly and so do the clubs and all their fans.
Local sponsors do that as part of a community and the naked media value of the spend is only part of the motive and only part of the benefits.
Equally simplistically Mr Doncaster and Mr Regan are charged by the self same member clubs to sell the sponsorship rights of their leagues, national teams and also the viewing rights of as many games as they can package for as much as they can*.
They are packaging and selling numbers to faceless corporations not local contacts they meet every week.
What they are primarily selling is access to male readers/viewers.
The media package is greatly enhanced by a complicit MSM who have pages and pages to fill and who provide free branded publicity.
Doncaster and Regan may talk platitudinally from time to time about “transparency” and “integrity “ but the only integrity that drives them is the bottom line they can extract.
And to them the media values and tv viewing-figures of a league which suddenly was about to lose, then lost it’s (possibly) “most supported club” and (certainly) it’s “most cherished entity” were a driving force.
They feared “Armageddon”.
So if we accept the old adage “He who pays the piper calls the tune”’
Doncaster and Regan head up allegedly democratic organisations there for the benefit of the clubs and the game.
They are there because our clubs put them there.
Our club heads who put Doncaster and Regan in post- people we all know like Petrie, Lawwell. Cameron, MacGregor, Thompson Milne et al from Wick to Stranraer need people like EGT to keep spending locally.
In fact they have local commercial departments dealing with the EGTs of this world and without these revenues would have to make substantive changes to their business plans.
These same heads like Petrie, Lawwell. Cameron, MacGregor, Thompson Milne et al again- every club from Wick to Stranraer constantly ignore their commitment to EGT and to their fans when it comes to their tacit unquestioning acceptance of income from “National Accounts” like TV, Satellite and League and Cup sponsorships negotiated by the likes of Doncaster and Regan on their behalves.
This makes them jointly and severally complicit in everything that has happened.
No only are they treating all the EGTs up and down the country like fools they have compromised all the fans whose money and support is the very reason they have an existence.
So Good luck EGT.
Cut them to the quick..
it’s a dirty business but …
Arbroath FC needs strong EGTs
Scottish Football needs strong EGTs
Scottish Football needs just one strong chairman to start the evolution.
* They are not very good at selling it
Armageddon? What Armageddon?
wottpi says: June 10, 2014 at 4:25 pm
No great fan of Butcher but he must be wondering why he left his heilan hame?
When will the Hibs board actually support a manager that they appointed in the first place?
Not sure if Petrie is the problem but something seriously bad needs cutting out of the Easter Road club.
Got a feeling that it is not Butcher.
Hibs have undoubtedly suffered because they have done two things and I think Butcher was just the wrong guy at the wrong time.
Firstly they have run the club as a business in the last few years and refused to speculate like their city rivals. By doing this they unashamedly became a selling club and unfortunately saw the Glasgow clubs as their customers. You can’t blame the fans for being frustrated when their city rivals win silverware with money they didn’t have.
Hibs have supported every manager but only with the money they could afford.
Secondly they have had three bad managers in a row.
Calderwood was awful
Fenlon nearly as bad
And then they backed what they thought was a winner stealing TB from Caley.
It was a perfect storm
Some demotivated old pros and a squad not fit for purpose, and then TB tactics of playing 4 centre halves at the back coupled with his long ball into the corners philosophy.
I think TB should have resigned two weeks ago and think he shoulders more blame than Petrie who backed what he thought was a winner.
I also think TB will surface again in the Highlands.
Recent Comments by Finloch
It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
I heard today that Craig Graham the Spartans chairman is awarded an MBE in the New Year Honours list.
I’m pleased for Craig and Spartans.
Craig took a Corinthian and undisciplined club going nowhere fast, rooted it into a previously ignored community and has achieved some incredible health and social goals deep into that community using football as glue.
other clubs are now slowly learning from his vision and Scottish football is better for what he has done
Yes he could have been and should have been knighted
but to paraphrase our old pal Red Lichtie
Scottish Football needs more Craig Graham’s.
It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
DECEMBER 20, 2017 at 09:04Given all the recent conjecture re PSC and potential new loans, I am still wondering what exactly it is that King is getting out of his involvement in T’Rangers.
Its a legitimate business with amazing annual revenue generation capacity and a very committed customer base and friends on high.
It was a unique opportunity to talk down a share price to the disadvantage of some mug punters and to get significant control level shareholding quite cheaply.
With an inside well-coiffeured friend in situ he had access to knowledge most people wouldn’t have access to.
There are various sub companies in the group where personal unseen revenue streams might be forthcoming.
It might even be a good way to repatriate monies from South Africa or maybe elsewhere into the UK or indeed somewhere else.
Chairman of an establishment club is also a nice position to have if you have an ego that needs constant tending and you know that no media outlet will ever look at what is really happening under the bonnet.
Maybe there is also an opportunity to take advantage of some other directorial shareholders, who may be real Rangers men, but are just not be as incisive with the particulars skills G&SL seems to have built his wealth upon.
And finally if there is a sort of nod and wink understanding in certain quarters that when the time is right that SDM and a new consortium will come to the rescue then the shares will be worth having.
Or control of a situation that needs Blair Nimmo or Bryan Jackson called in?
But what do I know anyway?
It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
John Clark – Have you been tapped up?
Fans for Judicial Review – Counsel Opinion
A few initial thoughts on the counsels view that “There is not a case in law to force the SFA to comply”.
i.e. The SFA has the right not to have a review because there is no precedent.
(I wish Paul McConville was still with us).
Firstly there may be no precedent and yes in law that makes it difficult but surely there must always be a first to make a precedent.
Could this be a first?
Then two thoughts are about following the money because that may also be a route that offers traction.
As someone who paid money to watch the game over the period do I personally and or jointly with other fans who similarly paid have the right to take action either against my club or the SFA?
Are there precedents here?
And on a larger scale if our government have provided funds in any way during the period do we as fans have the right to take action against the government or the government the right to take action against the SFA?
There will almost certainly be precedents here because Government money always comes with built-in controls and conditions attatched.
And looking forward will the Scottish Government ever agree to be seen to provide future funds to an organisation which has highly questionable internal and no external controls?
Who Is Conning Whom?
So the Derek McInnes “Tapping by Media” project failed well after the 11th hour when the media had told us he was already choosing curtains in Glasgow.
The Ibrox club and their fans were convinced by their chairman’s statement last week at the AGM and the media barrage too and last night were in shock and caught napping – hence the stupid press statement and attempt to make it known to us all that they didn’t really want him anyway and were just having a concomitant kick at the McInnes/Docherty tyres.
However that isn’t all that happened yesterday.
There was a wee meeting at Hampden called “The SFA Congress and Convention”.
Its a kind of series of regular very important meetings where everyone who is valued in football gets invited to see what a great job Stewart Regan and the SFA are undertaking on our behalf.
And let me say that there is no doubt that some of what The Congress seeks to do and does will indeed be for the good but we the fans wouldn’t know it because we were not invited.
This is a paragraph from this weeks SFSA (Scottish Football Supporters Association) newsletter that I received having filled in their recent survey on Scottish Football.
The SFA Convention this ThursdayOn Thursday, member clubs will gather at Hampden for the 2017 Scottish FA convention to share best practice, discuss current trends and participate in workshops geared towards improving the game: scotfa.co/convention17 according to their publicity on social media. Sadly the SFA has failed to invite any representative from Scotland’s only national fans organisation, the SFSA. We had anticipated that given the huge amount of unpaid work that we do for fans and clubs and being Scotland’s representatives at the Football Supporters Europe network our presence might have been merited. Despite claiming it has invited the “football family” the SFA have missed yet another opportunity to engage properly with ordinary football supporters. Could it possibly be related to the independent academic research that we organised last month that dared to criticise the governance of the game or maybe the invite was just lost in the post?
The failure to engage with fans is nonsense.
SFSA’s recent research asked some real questions from over 16000 bona fide Scottish fans. This was an incredible response that provided an incredible insight into what we the fans really think.
I know that Supporters Direct Scotland who are funded by the SFA were there as valued guests but SFSA who have people like Henry McLeish (of the report) and Cathy Jamieson (of Bernard son) on their board were not even invited.
Given that economic analysis of revenue generation confirms that in Scotland the real stakeholders and economic generators are us the fans
We are the people (Sic) who pay for season books and buy merchandise and pies and fund the clubs and their wages.
The people who get to see English Internationals on council telly but not our own country’s.
The people whose game seems to only have Betting Company Sponsors.
The people whose administrators cannot organise things like properly numbered balls in their top cup competitions so that there are two Brora Rangers in some draws!
Why were the SFSA not invited as valued members and contributors to your Congress Stewart?
Are the real fans and their views such a threat to your Congress and Convention?
Is there a danger they might ask questions that don’t fit with your pre determined script?
And a wee hint to the SMSM
Isn’t there a story in this?