Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!


Oliver Stone’s JFK is apposite to the sevco saga. …

Comment on Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer! by davythelotion.

Oliver Stone’s JFK is apposite to the sevco saga. An assassination carried out by a variety of organisations, some legal, some not, working together for motives which were founded in polar opposites of the moral compass. After the deed the establishment conspired to not only protect the guilty but to allow the corruption of the body politic to continue unchecked. Anyone who questioned the official version of events was ridiculed as an obsessive. Anyone in the media who deviated from the dictated script found it difficult, if not impossible, to find work.
And don’t get me started on JFK!!!! 😎

davythelotion Also Commented

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
jimlarkin says: (651)
November 21, 2013 at 8:57 am
Graham might also wish to comment on the dubious practice of employing interns for free (or more accurately at their parents’ expense) in the media. Or he may feel moved to comment on the fact that a club in Scotland is currently paying eye watering sums of money to win the lower divisions whilst making loyal, long serving backroom staff redundant. Or he may wish to cast an acerbic eye over the ‘manager’s pay cut’ that appears to have disappeared. Or he might want to enquire as to the whereabouts of ordinary supporters money, that was hoovered up in an IPO with the express assurance that it would not be spent on running costs, yet appears to have gone to pay ‘(higher than normal) expenses and fees’. Or he could cast an investigative journalist’s eye over the SFA’s lack of comment on the Pinsett Mason report into links between CW, Sevco and Charles Green. Or he could raise a query as to the granting of a licence to a club to play in Europe, to the detriment of other Scottish clubs, whilst the club was in breach of a fundamental qualifying rule. Or he might want to mull over the multiple murky connections between sevco and the SFA.
But only if Jack let’s him.

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
upthehoops says: (665)
November 21, 2013 at 7:23 am
I see on Graham Spiers Twitter timeline he is urging the SPFL to give up on the pursuit of £250K from Sevco, citing it as ‘daft’.
Jack has told Graham to say it’s daft.

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
StevieBC says: (890)
November 18, 2013 at 8:07 pm
Jack has neutered RM by disallowing any discussion of the board/finances and only letting favoured posters comment on poppies, lawell, minutes’ silence, Lennon, armed forces day, media references to ‘deidco’. But mainly how obsessed everyone else is about their club.
Jack’s feeding the flames with petrol!

Recent Comments by davythelotion

A Sanity Clause for Xmas?
justshatered says:
December 23, 2014 at 11:04 pm
Many football rules are unenforceable. In the sense that you can’t make clubs field their best teams, you can’t make clubs try to win a game, you can’t make players ‘not cheat’, you can’t make officials ‘perform, to the best of their ability, in an impartial way.
When it comes to ownership, the same owner can have more than one horse in the same race, the same garage can have more than one car in F1 races, the same sponsor can be represented by more than one club in the same competition.
Why have rules?
To ensure that the paying public see genuine competition and not the corporately desired, most lucrative outcome. The rules ensure genuine competition.
Ashley owning rangers lock, stock & gazebo has no influence on the integrity of competition.
Why doesn’t he make his move for 30%?
Why doesn’t he underwrite the £8m offer (thereby becoming de facto owner)?
Why did MASH vote against No 9?
Because he’s not an idiot. He wants the schmutter, he’s got it.
The rest is just smoke and mirrors. Nobody knows who owns Ibrox & Murray Park, the SFA can insist on knowing the names of the beneficial owners behind Margherita and Blue Pitch Holdings, why are they so reluctant?
The AGM was a big circus in a very small tent.

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
James Doleman says:
December 16, 2014 at 3:01 am
The penny drops, yet the notion that paying +£750 000 pa to AMcC for managing a ‘Champions League team’goes to the heart of the problem.
If I buy longer trousers it doesn’t make me taller.
Ally didn’t manage a champions league team, he didn’t manage an SPL team, he managed a 3rd division team that couldn’t win the Ramsden’s.
The SMSM has constantly trumpeted the chorus that supporters wouldn’t join ‘the journey’ if The Rangers lived within their means. When Chuck got Ally to sign his unread contract the club were debt free with money in the bank. Two years later they are mortgaged to the hilt and the income stream is a trickle. Yet players, who presumably had a quick shuftie at their contracts, are on five figure weekly wages. At the same time people who receive low five figures per year are receiving redundancy.
A McA’s replacement will be on a vastly reduced wage but they will have an incredibly difficult task.

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
120 day review highlights rapid burn of cash via onerous contracts
£3.3M raised via share issue
Car park & Eddie House redeemed
Car park & Eddie House rehawked
Nomad bails
Accounts detailing Retail arrangements
CW picked up
Ally gives 12 month notice
CW newspaper interview
Players’ Christmas party
Company confirms resignation of manager and return to normal pay
Hacks repeatedly claiming MA will buy club as a European advertising masterstroke.
£12M needed to see out the season
MA & club charged by SFA.

When so many things come together it’s rarely an accident.

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
I expect Ally will be receiving lots of letters, open and private, reminding him of friendships and favours.
The subtext appears to be that Ally knows where the bodies are and who put them there. It would appear that none of the current regime can afford to provoke Ally, hence the ridiculous 12 notice period.
As for the AGM, MA may decide to underwrite a share issue (with the agreement of the SFA) but will anyone in their right mind take a punt on a diluted share in a company like this? They couldn’t raise £4m at the last one.
My guess is that when the Court turns it’s full glare on sevco etc, the only person smelling of roses will be Craig.

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
Graham Spiers has resorted to the theory, aired on here some time ago, that Ashley was going to use rangers as an advertising vehicle to promote the expansion of Sports Direct into Europe.
This kind of straw clutching was treated contemptuously by Cosgrove.
If Mike Ashley wanted to promote his brand via rangers why would he close the shop in Belfast?
MA wants to make money. Ally knows that the days of marble, five star hotels, high wages and onerous contracts are over.
This transfer window will be one way. ‘Living within your means’ is the only show in town.

About the author