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

Avatar Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

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

Good Evening,

Whilst it is understandable that the continuing events at Ibrox remain a hot topic among all Scottish Football Fans — especially given the views of some sections of the press on such events– the never ending rush down the marble staircase is certainly not the only show in town.

The other morning we were treated to the “scoop” that Alistair Johnstone is afraid that Craig Whyte– the once proclaimed Multi Billionaire from Motherwell- may well still be pulling all the strings at Ibrox! This is a fear which is shared by those who walk the corridors of Hampden Park as they, too, are terrified of the prospect of Whyte returning in some shape or form and coming back to haunt them, especially as he has been deemed unfit and proper, banned sine die, and generally ridiculed for his past actions.

However, the Hampden jackets know fine well that their realm only stretches so far and that if by means of the proper application of company law, contract or some other piece of paper Whyte controls the shareholding of the self proclaimed “parent company” to the football club then they are in a fix. In fact, I will wager that they just would not know how to deal with such a situation as after all RIFC PLC neither holds a licence to play football nor is a member of the SFA and so, on the face of it, who owns it has nothing to do with them.

At this juncture, no one in authority knows who Blue Pitch Holdings are and, strangely, no one in authority knows who Margarita Holdings are either! Yet these two “holdings” whoever they may be, may well hold all the power down Govan way…… with the SFA completely powerless to find out who they are let alone get into any dialogue with them. All the SFA can do is talk to the appointed Directors and officers of The Rangers Football Club Ltd.

This, is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs.

Meanwhile, they will have no difficulty in finding out who the new shareholders of Dunfermline Athletic are. Those shareholders will come from the fanbase and will be clearly registered at Companies House, with the result that ultimately those fans/shareholders will appoint Directors who will then attend meetings and speak and opine on their behalf and in essence be the ” Voice of Dunfermline” at Hampden.

Perhaps, similar will follow from Heart of Midlothian?

However, those at Hampden — if they have any sense at all– will be most wary of events happening in the east end of Glasgow come November.

In the middle of the month, Celtic PLC will hold its AGM and amidst the items on the agenda is the fan driven notion that the Club— through its Directors—- should go further in holding the SFA to account and enquire into the granting of club licences, and in particular how it granted Rangers a club licence that allowed entry to the Champions League in 2011 when the small tax case was outstanding.

The Celtic board have deemed this motion as “Unnecessary” and in support of that contention have released documentation showing that they raised this very issue with the SFA on behalf of the shareholders and fans. Further– and here is the rub— The Directors reveal that they were not satisfied with the SFA response and have disclosed that they took the matter further and wrote to UEFA.

Ultimately, UEFA also provided a reply, which backed the SFA approach and which Celtic had little option but to accept  in the absence of admissible contradicting evidence..

It is on this basis, that Peter Lawell and Co say the AGM motion is not necessary. Note that saying that the motion is not necessary, is not at all the same thing as saying that what the motion seeks to achieve is not necessary or does not have the support of the board!

There will be those at Hampden who severely hope that the Celtic Board are successful in voting this measure down as obviously they deem their original reply sufficient and would like to end the discussion there.

However, my own view, is that whether the motion is successful or not, there are those within the SFA who will recognise there is trouble staring them in the face here. Real Trouble!

Let’s recap for a moment and draw some threads together.

Celtic’s past Chairman, Dr John Reid, said only a couple of years ago that the SFA was clearly not fit for purpose. He did so in the context of events surrounding Neil Lennon and other matters, but was unshakably robust in his condemnation of an institutionalised uselessness which he saw pervaded the Hampden ranks.

Prior to that, Henry McLeish produced a report which stated that he too had concerns about the Governance of Scottish Football and called for openness and transparency.

In the intervening period, we have seen Mr David Longmuir, former Chief Executive of the Scottish Football League, find himelf without a position following reconstruction– and this partly as a result of club chairmen being apparently kept in the dark about his payment, bonuses and expenes. I understand that there was considerable anger from some at the way in which they had been treated by Mr Longmuir.

Then there is Mr Campbell Ogilvie, El Presidente, who himself benefited from a Rangers EBT and who held sway at Ibrox during a period of time when Rangers– by their own admission— made unlawful and illegal payments to three high profile players in breach of tax laws and SFA/SPL rules. It is these breaches and the consequent Wee Tax Bill which has caused all the angst among Celtic fans and has lead to the highly regulated legal step of tabling a motion at the club’s AGM.

Basically, the position seems to be, that as at the due date when the appropriate documents and declarations were made for a Euro Licence by Rangers for 2011, the wee tax bill was outstanding and due. If it was overdue, then the SFA could not and should not have granted them a licence……. and potentially Celtic should then have been put forward as Scotland’s representatives in the Champion’s League.

However, that did not happen, and Ranger’s were granted a licence– something that the Celtic Directors clearly felt was not correct.

They may have disagreed with the awarding of the licence because there were those at Rangers at the time who declared that a payment to account had been made to the tax office– allegedly £500,000– and that they had entered into an agreement to make payment of the balance by instalments. Had that been so, then all would have been hunky dory and no more would have been said.

Alas, however, no such payment appears to have been made at all, and no such agreement was entered into and so, on that basis, the tax bill was overdue and outstanding as at 30th June in terms of Article 66 and as such no Euro Licence should have been granted.

However, the argument does not end there.

Auldheid, has posted frequently on these pages about the ins and outs of the licensing provisions and the mechanism and so I will leave that detail to him as he is far more expert in these areas than me.

Now, one of the SFA functions is to have an auditor– someone who can check books, contracts, paper work and so on, and it is part of the SFA licensing function to be satisfied that all the paperwork is of course correct and in proper fashion before they issue any licence.

In this case, it is alleged that the SFA did not perform their function properly.

In relation to the wee tax case, it is said that either they did not make sufficient enquiry of Rangers re the payment to account or the agreement which they were told was in place. At the time it was mooted in the press that no such agreement was in place as at the relevant date ( June 30th ) and a simple check with the revenue would have shown the truth of the matter.

Yet, for whatever reason, no such check appears to have been made, and if you recall a Radio Scotland interview with Alistair Johnstone, Rangers submitted the forms, the SFA replied with one or two enquiries about the BIG tax case which were answered, and thereafter the Licence appears to have simply dropped through the letter box without further ado.

You will also recall that the existence of the wee tax case became known BEFORE Craig Whyte bought David Murray’s shareholding in May 2011. In fact it was the subject of News Paper headlines weeks before the deal was completed, and so the fact that there was a wee tax bill was well and truly in the public domain.

When it came to filling in the appropriate forms,either, the SFA were mislead by those then at Rangers with regard to that tax bill, OR, they simply failed to do the requisite checks and make reasonable enquiries before they issued the licence.

However, the uncomfortable fact also remains, that one of the chaps who must have been in the know re the admittedly unlawful and offending side letters, contracts and payments to the three players concerned  was Campbell Ogilivie who was on the Rangers Board at the relevant time when the contracts and irregular payments were made under the Discount Options Scheme  from 1999 to 2002/3. Indeed he may even have initiated the first payment to Craig Moore in 1999. I reiterate that no one has ever contested that this was an unlawful scheme, and the irregular payments and paperwork are not denied in relation to that scheme.

There are Celtic shareholders who believe, rightly or wrongly, that when it came to the granting of the Euro Licence, the SFA did not play them fair on this occasion and that the wheels within Hampden were oiled in such a way that Rangers were favoured and Celtic were disadvantaged. It is a point that looks to have already been considered by the Celtic Directors in 2011, with the result that they concluded that they should formally write to the SFA and seek clarification.

However, we now have the prospect of those same directors having to go back to Hampden and say   ” Sorry, but I am forced to bring this up by my shareholders. I have a legal duty to them to enquire further”. Even if the motion is refused, the point has been made– there are shareholders who are demanding answers– just as shareholders of other clubs demand answers about the ever so secret 5 way agreement and other matters which have hitherto been not for public consumption.

The SFA have nothing to fear of course as they can simply repeat their previous answers,demonstrate that all was above board, and rest easy in their beds.

Except that answer did not satisfy the Celtic Directors on a previous occasion as they decided to take the matter to UEFA, and it would appear that some Celtic shareholders remain dissatisfied with the known stance of the SFA and so they want the Directors of the club to delve further. Without wishing to point out the obvious, if it turns out that the 2011 Licensing process was somehow fudged and not conducted rigorously or that those at Hampden were in any way economical with the truth or omitted certain details from the previous explanation, or covered up a failure in procedures—- well such omissions have  a habit of becoming public these days whether that be through the internet or otherwise.

The point here is that the actions of Hampden officials are coming under organised, legal and planned corporate scrutiny over which they have no control. The Blazer and club mentality that was once so widespread within the governing bodies is under increasing attack and is being rendered a thing of the past.

In short, the move by Celtic shareholders, is making it plain that they will demand proper corporate governance from their club in ensuring that any alleged failure in corporate governance by the SFA or SPFL is properly investigated and reported on.

Of course, if it turns out that the 2011 Licensing process was somehow fudged and not conducted properly for whatever reason, then it could be argued that Celtic were disadvantaged in monetary terms along with other clubs who may have been awarded Europa League licences, then the consequences could be cataclysmic. Hence a tendency to circle the wagons rather than admit to failures in the process that need addressing.

It is this reluctance to come out and accept that the licensing process appears to have failed, say at what point the process failed and what needs to be done to address those failures that in many ways has driven the resolution. It is clear to all that something is amiss but the SFA will not admit it, probably from fear of the consequences of doing so?  Perhaps some form of indemnity, a lessons learned enquiry with no prejudice might help?

It would come as no surprise to me at all if there were those at Hampden who live in dreaded fear of admitting that their processes were flawed and that a grave mistake was made. Under these circumstances, there may well be those at Hampden who simply wish that Celtic and their fans would just go away!

 

About the author

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

4,365 Comments so far

Avatar

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on8:31 am - Oct 29, 2013


Fisiani says: (26)
October 29, 2013 at 7:28 am

“they are losing 1,000,000 a month”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I think they lost more than that this month – no home games. There was £11M in the bank at End June. They are burning just over £2.5M a month in operating costs. That would make them just about bust I hear you say? Slow down, they still have matchday income and other revenue streams. The matchday income is easy to work out based on last year – at least enough to have a reasonable guesstimate. Sponsorship and borrowings – the timing and value (and, indeed, their existance) – that’s the great unknown. If they pull in similar sums to last year then money will run out mid-February (by my fag packet calculations). If anyone has a different idea I would be delighted to hear it.

Without a serious injection of cash, Rangers are in trouble, we all know that. So what are the options?

– Banks turn on the credit tap. Non-starter.
– A Sugar Daddy rides to the rescue. Much more likely, but who? The Easdales don’t have the financial muscle to match the ambitions of the supporters. Jim McColl has the muscle but won’t use any of his own – austerity will be the name of the game. Dave King is waiting to be crowned, but I just don’t see it working out for him.
– Sell players in the January transfer window. Who is going to pay the over-inflated wages? I don’t think Graeme Souness is in management at the moment, so no-one.
– Sale and leaseback. This has been touted but there is a Whyte shadow over the assets that is yet to play its hand. Can’t see it, but you never know.
– Adidas enter at the 11th hour with juicy sponsorship, or the Dallas Cowboys? Okay, I went too far.

There are many on here who believe that the current owners will crash the bus, keep the useful parts, and all the next owner will get is the number plates. I’m not so sure this will be allowed to happen. One thing for sure, it will make interesting watching.

View Comment

Avatar

FrankiePosted on8:54 am - Oct 29, 2013


Re John Ferguson’s article in Record today, the headline is that the LSE say he can become a director (chairman?) but if you read the comments of this unnamed spokesperson he talks about stake & investment:

“So the question would be whether these things would stop him taking a stake again.
“I think the answer on both these points is they wouldn’t.
“From the Exchange’s point of view if we are satisfied Rangers’ nominated adviser Daniel Stewart and Company has carried out the correct checks then he would be allowed to make this investment.”
Nothing to say the Stock Exchange would allow him to be on the board.
This to me is typical of the journalism in this country.

View Comment

Avatar

stevensanphPosted on8:58 am - Oct 29, 2013


Frankie – glad you spotted this as that’s exactly what I was about to post. Headline is completely different to the what was actually said. EG, he’s welcome to invest.

As previously noted, for King to be a director and on the board he will need the courts approval. If he gets that he’ll then need to pass a fit and proper persons test (which we all know he will…i’m sure they are trying to figure out how to get RR to also pass that test!)

View Comment

Avatar

JoburgbhoyPosted on9:01 am - Oct 29, 2013


toby says: (74)
October 29, 2013 at 8:31 am
3 0 i
Rate This

It says much about The Rangers fans unwillingness to look at the facts…. etc

The rangers fans groups and rangers fans in general have no interest in integrity, honesty or anything else that the rest of scottish football would like to see coming from govan way. All they want is rangers playing at ibrokes, they dont care if it’s King, Murray, Hitler,Jack the ripper or Attilla the you know what, so long as whoever it is didn’t go to a school that begins with St. They really don’t care who saves them and they don’t care how it’s done….

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on9:20 am - Oct 29, 2013


Further to the two posts above
. . . which the posters have quite rightly pointed out, that AIM have said nothing about the LYING King being appointed to the board of Sevco for the very first time in their 1year existence
(But others have pointed out that he was a board member of Rangers* just before they went out of business)

AIM see no reason why he can’t [buy a stake] invest in Sevco, and as far as AIM are aware, the Sevco NOMAD has also to make an assessment regarding the Lying King.

Nothing whatsoever is mentioned about joining the board, either as a director or chairman !!
SMSM – pfffffffft !

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on9:23 am - Oct 29, 2013


. . . Oops forgot the link !

DAVE King has been given the go-ahead to return to the Rangers boardroom by the London Stock Exchange.

A spokesman for the LSE last night confirmed the businessman would be free to become chairman so long as Ibrox advisers rubber-stamped the move.

It had been thought King’s South African tax conviction and his previous board appointment at Ibrox may have stood in the way of a comeback.

But a spokesman for the LSE, where Rangers shares are listed on the Alternative Investments Market (AIM), appeared to clear the way for King to plough money into the club.

He told Record Sport: “I had a look in the reports and there were these issues in South Africa, the other thing was that he had been on the board previously.

“So the question would be whether these things would stop him taking a stake again.

“I think the answer on both these points is they wouldn’t.

“From the Exchange’s point of view if we are satisfied Rangers’ nominated adviser Daniel Stewart and Company has carried out the correct checks then he would be allowed to make this investment.”

King is believed to have met Paul Shackleton of Daniel Stewart yesterday to discuss returning to Ibrox as chairman.

Earlier this year he struck a deal with the South African Revenue Service (SARS) to settle a long-running £227million tax dispute.

He agreed to pay SARS £44.75m after admitting he owed income tax, and in return the revenue service agreed to drop prosecutions over dozens of criminal fraud charges.

He pled guilty to having contravened tax legislation by failing to provide correct information about earnings.

The payment agreement was reached as an alternative to an 82-year jail term for 41 counts of breaching tax legislation.

During his 10-year legal battle a judge once said of King: “He has no respect for the truth and does not
hesitate to lie … if he thinks it will be to his advantage. He is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is supported by objective evidence.

“In our assessment he is a glib and shameless liar.”

King arrived in South Africa in the 1970s with £10 in his pocket but went on to build up a £200m fortune as a high-powered financial consultant.

He also had a seaside holiday home, a £165,000 Ferrari, £64,000 Mercedes-Benz and two private jets worth £14m.

King bought up vineyards too and, along with golf legend pal Gary Player, ploughed £1m into a stud farm.

SARS began to ask questions when the tycoon claimed to be earning only £5000 a year.

King’s defence was that nearly everything he had was owned by an offshore company called Ben Nevis.

He flew into Glasgow Airport on Friday to hold meetings with the Rangers board, and was last night thought to have headed to London to continue discussions with the LSE and Daniel Stewart.

Under stock exchange rules, should regulators have any questions about his suitability to be a director, Daniel Stewart and Company would have to signal to AIM that it had carried out due diligence on King before putting him forward as a board member of a publicly listed company.

Meanwhile, Gers boss Ally McCoist said: “I saw Dave briefly at the East Fife game. We exchanged pleasantries and spoke about the match.

“I haven’t had a chance to talk to him in great detail but effectively it’s none of my business.”

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on9:25 am - Oct 29, 2013


Frankie says: (2)
October 29, 2013 at 8:54 am
‘…This to me is typical of the journalism in this country.’
——-
Leaves us in a bit of a pickle when it comes to notions such as ‘freedom of the press’, doesn’t it?

Is it better to have one set of lying bas.ards making money by printing untruths, or another set of equally lying scum in government securing their political careers by lies?

Not much to choose between the two sets, except perhaps that governments can legislate to put you in jail.

And won’t it be nicely ironic if Rebecca and her accomplices go to jail?
Or will their activities be regarded in the same light as the crimes of Davie frae the ‘mulk? Badges of honour for dishonourable persons?

Ps. It might be rather nice if the editor of the DR could be put away in the pokey for a while, to give us all a break from the really, really piss poor ‘journalism’ that he/she presides over. Where is jack with his bag of secrets? 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

tobyPosted on9:27 am - Oct 29, 2013


Joburgbhoy says: (13)
October 29, 2013 at 9:01 am

Agreed. Rangers fans couldn’t have cared less who was providing the cash as the club steadily burned through resources that were never being paid back. They thought it was Murray but that was a lie…it was the banks and ultimately you and me and every other taxpayer who lost out. They are desperate, but this time round there is no line of credit, and it would be madness for anyone to throw money at The Rangers. The expectations of the fans is to be able to throw money at it. Just not theirs. The business plan is a joke for a club in their division, with a burn rate any financial director would rip up and start again. They don’t have that luxury but maybe that was the plan after all. He won’t be around for much longer given the AGM is imminent. The assets are safely tucked away for someone else to stump up for..or lease… In retrospect I would say the plan has gone very well for those sufficiently far away when the ship is about to sink. It’ll just take a good deal more than £5.5million & the Duffers to make it work next time.

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on9:53 am - Oct 29, 2013


john clarke says: (1310)
October 29, 2013 at 9:25 am
Frankie says: (2)
October 29, 2013 at 8:54 am
‘…This to me is typical of the journalism in this country.’
——-
Leaves us in a bit of a pickle when it comes to notions such as ‘freedom of the press’, doesn’t it?

Is it better to have one set of lying bas.ards making money by printing untruths, or another set of equally lying scum in government securing their political careers by lies?

Not much to choose between the two sets, except perhaps that governments can legislate to put you in jail.

And won’t it be nicely ironic if Rebecca and her accomplices go to jail?
Or will their activities be regarded in the same light as the crimes of Davie frae the ‘mulk? Badges of honour for dishonourable persons?

Ps. It might be rather nice if the editor of the DR could be put away in the pokey for a while, to give us all a break from the really, really piss poor ‘journalism’ that he/she presides over. Where is jack with his bag f secrets?

Feeling a bit dyspeptic this morning John? Nauseous? No wonder, not even slimshady61 (October 28, 2013 at 11:16 pm) – in generous mood could provide any rationale for that John Ferguson piece. A fantastical exercise in ignoring the facts to present a ‘good news’ story.

View Comment

Avatar

ratethisthenyabampotsPosted on9:57 am - Oct 29, 2013


scottc says: (343)
October 29, 2013 at 8:07 am

I note on the Bears Den site that ‘Boardroom and Financials’ discussion, since yesterday, has been moved to a separate thread which seems to prevent access to non-members

I noticed they are also starting to complain about the quality of the merchandise. Badges peeling off after a couple of washes and excessive wear etc. That won’t augur well for future sales
—————————————————————–
I can think of 5 wee star shaped objects that should be peeled off the tops.

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on10:02 am - Oct 29, 2013


Today The Daily Record has the headline:

Rangers boardroom battle: Dave King gets the all-clear from the Stock Exchange to return to Ibrox
DAVE King has been given the go-ahead to return to the Rangers boardroom by the London Stock Exchange.

Interesting headline and story, so what does it actually mean and what information do they have to back up this claim?

A spokesman for the LSE, where Rangers shares are listed on the Alternative Investments Market (AIM), appeared to clear the way for King to plough money into the club.
He told Record Sport: “I had a look in the reports and there were these issues in South Africa, the other thing was that he had been on the board previously.
“So the question would be whether these things would stop him taking a stake again.
“I think the answer on both these points is they wouldn’t.
“From the Exchange’s point of view if we are satisfied Rangers’ nominated adviser Daniel Stewart and Company has carried out the correct checks then he would be allowed to make this investment.”

At no point in the quoted remarks does the spokesman say it is ok for DK to become a director, the quotes listed mentions some key words: “Stake” and “Investment”. I could be mistaken or maybe I am just too cynical but I could easily see a conversation going along these lines:

DR “We have a question regarding the suitability of DK playing a part in the building up of the new Rangers Football Club, he wants to invest millions into the club but some people believe that he would not be allowed to make that investment.

LSE “I had a look in the reports and there were these issues in South Africa, the other thing was that he had been on the board previously. So the question would be whether these things would stop him taking a stake again. I think the answer on both these points is they wouldn’t. From the Exchange’s point of view if we are satisfied Rangers’ nominated adviser Daniel Stewart and Company has carried out the correct checks then he would be allowed to make this investment.”

So there you have it, the reporter gives the story to his editor who looks at it and says:
“So DK is allowed to buy shares in the company….. But hold on, that doesn’t answer the question about him becoming CEO”…. Not to worry, we will take care of that in the unquoted parts of the article.

If I was to be even more cynical and critical, I would say there is something obvious missing, there are no clear indications that these were full quotes and there are no quotation marks on the end of 3 of them. I would also say that a question mark is missing from the 2nd quote.

Here we have a spokesman for LSE giving an opinion where no rules or regulations are mentioned, where the journalist states that this spokesperson “appears” to give an all clear based on a quote where that spokesman states that he “thinks” it would be ok.

All in all, it is at worse, a poorly written piece.

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on10:04 am - Oct 29, 2013


Dave King – A man with Convictions.

Sounds just about right for the star of this seasons pantomime.

View Comment

Avatar

borussiabeefburgPosted on10:17 am - Oct 29, 2013


Another difficult day here in Stirlingshire: I won’t be anywhere near Ochilview tonight for that Ramsden’s Cup match, for which Stenhousemuir, “regrettably”, have main striker, talisman and top scorer John Gemmell suspended. Nor will I watch on a television.

Anyway, a thought occurred as I mused this morning. Has anyone asked Doncaster, Regan, Ogilvie et al whether they regard the SPFL as a ‘new’ league, or a continuation of another league. And if a continuation, of which organisation is it a carry-over?

Mind David Longmuir said this: “Today’s decision will lead to the winding up of the Scottish Football League as we currently know it, an organisation that has been the bedrock of our game for 123 years.” And Jim Ballantyne this: “It is very sad that the Scottish Football League has had to be a casualty.” The old spl website has gone, and that league is described as ‘abolished’ on various football sites.

It’s a ‘new’ league, isn’t it?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on10:20 am - Oct 29, 2013


On DK

Settle people.

The blue masses want DK’s cash – as Ally said in his after game report the finances were nothing to do with him (as long as they keep winning in turn requiring that Ally receives non refundable cash to out buy the rest of the league by a factor of 10). The blue masses could not give a monkeys if he’s on the board or not since they already have seasoned campaigner Paul Murray and his ready made “used to be Liverpool CEO” board all set to fly in at a days notice.

This all comes down to can DK get his cash in or not. If you want me to be more specific (and cynical) it comes down to DK getting his cash in so that the blue brigade can match it (is that the correct term for when the 500m fans put in a token sum and the friendly bank then decide the club can have their overdraft for keepsies) which allows DK to promptly pull his cash back out again.

The latest chapter of the saga per the MSM is this. Portray to the masses that if DK can invest (subject to the above conditions) then the CL music will once again drift across the hallowed turf. If he can’t then its admin 2, obviously all a timmy conspiracy (see CFC AGM 15th Nov for details) and the SFA once again kicking them when they’re down.

View Comment

Avatar

BigGavPosted on10:39 am - Oct 29, 2013


stevensanph says:
October 29, 2013 at 8:58 am

As previously noted, for King to be a director and on the board he will need the courts approval.
——-

Indeed – the MSM seem to have missed this point entirely, either through ignorance or deceit.

Can any of our legal bods explain what process this entails?
Is it a public court hearing or simply a paper application and subsequent reply?
For a pointer to the likely result, I would be interested to hear of real case histories where a similar application has been
(a) rejected
(b) approved
and the reasons given.

View Comment

Avatar

Tic 6709Posted on10:44 am - Oct 29, 2013


personal allowances for South Africans

Exchange Control
The South African Reserve Bank controls and oversees the movement of capital both into and out of the country: exchange control regulations. The Reserve Bank designates power to authorised dealers (banks) who oversee and regulate this function on their behalf.
Important points relating to Exchange Control Regulations
◾ It is applicable to all cross-border transactions no matter the size
◾ No South African resident may effect a foreign transfer without prior approval
◾ Only authorised dealers (banks) are allowed to effect currency transfers
◾ There are set amounts for personal transfers in the form of allowances that must be adhered to
How do Exchange Control Regulations affect you?
For individuals Exchange Control Regulations dictate how much and under what circumstances you may transfer money out of South Africa. It should be noted that the Exchange Control Regulations apply to South African residents, not citizens or permanent residence holders.
Allowances that may be utilised for the transfer of money abroad:
◾ Emigration allowance
◾ Capital investment allowance
◾ Discretionary allowance
Emigration allowance
Key elements ◾ Allowance – R4 000 000 per adult and R 8 000 000 per family unit
◾ Personal Goods – An additional allowance to export personal goods to the value of R1 000 000 is also available to emigrants
◾ Discretionary Allowances – Emigrants are also entitled to transfer capital in line with the annual discretionary travel allowances: R 1 000 000 for each adult and R 200,000 for each child (see below)
◾ Additional amounts – At the discretion of the Reserve Bank additional amounts over and above theses allowances may be transferred offshore
Details ◾ Foreign assets held need not be deducted from the above amount
◾ Transfers that have been effected under Section 0 (point 6.1.1) of the Exchange Control Manual need to deducted from the above allowances
◾ Applicants need to have been resident in South Africa for at least five years
◾ The South African Revenue Services (SARS) need to confirm that appropriate arrangements have been put into place to settle any outstanding tax obligations
◾ The applicant is required to provide documentation to evidence the fact that they have been granted permission to take up residence in another country and they must also satisfy the authorised dealer (empowered by the Reserve Bank) that it is their intention to permanently relinquish South African domicile.
Capital investment allowance
Key elements ◾ Allowance – R4 000 000 per adult, annually
◾ Conditions – Funds may only be invested into offshore investment portfolios, property, bank accounts or other investments
◾ Applicable to – All taxpayers over the age of 18
Details
Authorised dealers (banks) may allow private individuals (natural persons) who are taxpayers in good standing with SARS and over the age of 18 years, to invest R4 000 000 outside of South Africa, on an annual basis.
Prior to any transfer of funds a specific tax clearance certificate issued by SARS must be presented to the authorised dealer.

Discretionary Allowance
Residents (natural persons), who are over the age of 18 years may be permitted to avail of a single allowance within an overall limit of R1 000 000 per individual in each calendar year, without the requirement to obtain a Tax Clearance Certificate.

====================
Today £1 = 15.86 rand.
That should keep the lights on till Thursday.

View Comment

Avatar

ptd1978Posted on10:48 am - Oct 29, 2013


Questions to Reagan:
What are the critieria you consider when deciding if someone is fit and proper?

Do you even have specified criteria and if not how can anyone fail to be fit and proper?

If someone fails most of the unfit tests conducted by the financial authorities, is branded a “shameless liar” by a judge and has a criminal conviction meriting 84 years in prison, how can they possibly be “fit and proper”?

If they can pass convicted criminal Dave King as fit and proper, doesn’t the life ban on Craig Whyte, (whose actions are somewhat less serious) seem a little excessive?

View Comment

Avatar

tobyPosted on10:49 am - Oct 29, 2013


Finloch says: (203)
October 29, 2013 at 10:04 am
5 0 Rate This

Dave King – A man with Convictions.

Sounds just about right for the star of this seasons pantomime.
—————–

The goings on at Ibrox are a year round pantomime – the Krankies must be wondering how they can get a piece of that action.

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on10:54 am - Oct 29, 2013


Tic 6709 says: (511)
October 29, 2013 at 10:44 am
==========================================
Forget the SA regulations on taking cash out of the country, Dave hasn’t got any but his Mum has loads. It’s the Rangers way.

View Comment

Avatar

JoburgbhoyPosted on10:58 am - Oct 29, 2013


ptd1978 says: (97)
October 29, 2013 at 10:48 am

If they can pass convicted criminal Dave King as fit and proper, doesn’t the life ban on Craig Whyte, (whose actions are somewhat less serious) seem a little excessive?

borussiabeefburg says: (196)
October 29, 2013 at 10:17 am

Mind David Longmuir said this: “Today’s decision will lead to the winding up of the Scottish Football League as we currently know it, an organisation that has been the bedrock of our game for 123 years.” And Jim Ballantyne this: “It is very sad that the Scottish Football League has had to be a casualty.” The old spl website has gone, and that league is described as ‘abolished’ on various football sites.

It’s a ‘new’ league, isn’t it?

————-

Craigy boy was barred for life by the SFA or the SFL – who no longer exist. Maybe I am missing something but does that mean he is also barred by the new SPFL or is he back in play??

View Comment

Avatar

Tic 6709Posted on11:00 am - Oct 29, 2013


v
blu says: (404)

October 29, 2013 at 10:54 am

Tic 6709 says: (511)
October 29, 2013 at 10:44 am
==========================================
Forget the SA regulations on taking cash out of the country, Dave hasn’t got any but his Mum has loads. It’s the Rangers way
=================
I think you’ll find that SARS froze some of King’s assets to stop him moving them.
Do you really think his mother paid his fine ?.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on11:26 am - Oct 29, 2013


borussiabeefburg says: (196)
October 29, 2013 at 10:17 am

Anyway, a thought occurred as I mused this morning. Has anyone asked Doncaster, Regan, Ogilvie et al whether they regard the SPFL as a ‘new’ league, or a continuation of another league. And if a continuation, of which organisation is it a carry-over?

It is, of course, just a renaming of the SPL (I’m sure you knew that deep down), so technically TRFC have made it to the SPL. They can claim ‘mission accomplished’ (or not as the case may be)

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC175364/THE-SCOTTISH-PROFESSIONAL-FOOTBALL-LEAGUE-LIMITED/company-summary#basic-information

View Comment

Avatar

CarntynePosted on11:44 am - Oct 29, 2013


slimshady61 says: (282)
October 28, 2013 at 11:16 pm

Lest it be thought we are just hitting journalists over the head for the sake of it, we should acknowledge that the challenges facing the press have never been greater.

Journalists are given little leeway and even less expenses. They are not encouraged to go out and look for stories, they are actively discouraged from doing so.

In the old days, Alex Cameron or Ian Archer would leave the Record/Herald building and go over to Ibrox to get a story from Jock Wallace. He would then head across the city to Celtic Park to see Jock Stein.

Stein would ask what the news from Ibrox was and usually reply “that’s a good story, but I’ve got an even better one….” and so on as the one-time rivals tried to out do each other in the PR stakes, with not a PR guru in sight.

And so it went on – journalists competed amongst themselves for genuine “exclusives”, papers sold in their hundreds of thousands, Glasgow supported two evening papers, even on a Saturday when the late goals were posted in the “extras column” even as the matches were still being played.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

You make many good points in your post Slim.

I’d like to add another important reason that has caused newspaper sales to drop like a stone.

In the old days, as you put it, virtually the only source of information about football was newspapers.

Journalists had more standing with the newspaper buying football fan, not in my opinion because they were any better, but because they were regarded as the men in the know.

The reader by and large believed what was written, but even if there was a suspicion the writer was a little less than impartial in his scribblings, there was no mechanism for fans to challenge what had appeared in print, except to write a letter which hadn’t much chance of publication.

The downturn in newspaper sales in recent years, I am sure, is down to many factors, but one of the main ones is the internet, where sports journalists opinions are challenged on a daily basis.

Their dismissive responses to such challenges are such that the esteem in which they were once held has virtually disappeared.

Those journalists see the danger in being contradicted at every turn, often with biting sarcasm and solid evidence that they are many times completely wrong, whether it’s by ineptitude or just not caring if what they write is true or not, as long as it fills an empty page.

If it wasn’t for the Internet Bampots…eh? 😀

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on12:06 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 6s

Sources close to AIM tell me that they have told the Daily Record to make some…err…’amendments’ to that Dave King piece.

Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 2m

Note to Succulent Lamb collectors: I would do a screen grab as I suspect that “article” will be changed fairly soon…

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on12:13 pm - Oct 29, 2013


More from Twitterland:

Fr. Paul Stone ‏@FrPaulStone 2h

Hi @Record_Sport Does your reporter John Ferguson know that an AIM rep would have broken the law by speaking to him? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/8/section/118

Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 2m

Very naughty of the Daily Record checking their story with Mr Shackleton of Daniel Stewart as he is on holiday at the moment.

Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 1m

I’m sure they did check and they didn’t just regurgitate a press release. No, they don’t do that kind of thing.

View Comment

Avatar

billyj1Posted on12:23 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Over 800 bears gathered at a Glasgow hotel on Sunday evening for a Testemonial Dinner for Sandy Jardine. I hear the night went swimmingly. I wonder if any of the Easdales have anything interesting to say about the evening in general or the small altercation which happened late in the evening , which they may or may not have witnessed.

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on12:35 pm - Oct 29, 2013


http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-newspaper-fit-for-a-king/#more-4115

It took me minutes to check on the Daily Record story and blow it out of the water.
I’m embarrassed for them at this stage…

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on12:36 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Tic 6709 says: (512)
October 29, 2013 at 11:00 am
blu says: (404)
October 29, 2013 at 10:54 am

Tic 6709 says: (511)
October 29, 2013 at 10:44 am
==========================================
Forget the SA regulations on taking cash out of the country, Dave hasn’t got any but his Mum has loads. It’s the Rangers way
=================

I think you’ll find that SARS froze some of King’s assets to stop him moving them.
Do you really think his mother paid his fine ?.

I’m sure it said in the Daily Record that she had. Did she not? Maybe it was Imran’s Mum that paid it.

I would speculate that SARS hasn’t secured details and tax liability of all the assets in Ben Nevis, Glencoe or whatever other entities King (and his Mum) created in BVI, Guernsey or the multiplicity of other offshare tax shield dominions around the world he had access to. Smugas @ 10:20 am has fair stab at how King would manage this situation to his best advantage, for the fewest SA Rand.

Whether it’s him or someone else that fronts the next fundraising round, the only ‘clean’ money will come from the fans, again.

View Comment

Avatar

GeronimosCadillacPosted on12:40 pm - Oct 29, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1102)
October 29, 2013 at 12:13 pm

Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 1m

I’m sure they did check and they didn’t just regurgitate a press release. No, they don’t do that kind of thing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There’s a lot of spinnin’ and lyin’ going on. So much in fact that it smacks of desperation. Admin I coming soon.

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on12:43 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 17m

For the avoidance of doubt I checked the facts on the DR “article” on King by calling AIM and Daniel Stewart.

A journo actually checking facts?.
Why didn’t the DR think of that!.
Well done Phil.

View Comment

Avatar

slimshady61Posted on12:46 pm - Oct 29, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1103)
October 29, 2013 at 12:43 pm
————————————————-
When you’re writing fiction, there is no need to check facts.

Just ask Accurate Al Lamont, Rich Wilson or “John Ferguson” (who he??)

54 (facts) to 0 (truth in the rumours)

View Comment

Avatar

Araminta Moonbeam QCPosted on12:55 pm - Oct 29, 2013


The amount of spin coming out of Ibrox just now makes me even more confident that we are looking at imminent doom.

Admin 2 or the return of the bold Craig? Or both? Both would be fun.

View Comment

Avatar

Tic 6709Posted on12:57 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Blu, this is from 2012, By the way,I really don’t know who paid the fine.
===============
Two Dave King companies, Ben Nevis and Metlika, applied to the court for an interdict to prevent Sars from seizing and selling their assets.

Had King read as far as page 20, he would have read the judge’s ruling: “The order of Ledwaba J is operative and binding and the assets referred to therein … are declared to be regarded as assets owned by Ben Nevis and the order authorises their attachment and sale in execution in order to satisfy in whole or in part the tax liability of Ben Nevis to SA Revenue Service.”

King and Ben Nevis will also pick up the costs of the application.

Judge Ledwaba had ruled that there was no difference between King and the two companies involved.

The judge also ordered money held in trust by an attorney following the sale of a King farming company, Bothma Boerdery, should not be attached as well.

Another asset that was the subject of this application was the Quoin Winery and the Quoin Wine Estate. It was not considered in the case because Quoin is in liquidation.

King has so far lost a number of actions. Sars has so far collected R130m from the sale of the Falcon jet in France and R70m in cash. There were other cash receipts bringing the total to more than R300m – but even that total is far short of the claimed tax bill of R2.76bn.

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on1:09 pm - Oct 29, 2013


billyj1 says: (98)
October 29, 2013 at 12:23 pm
7 1 Rate This

Over 800 bears gathered at a Glasgow hotel on Sunday evening for a Testemonial Dinner for Sandy Jardine. I hear the night went swimmingly. I wonder if any of the Easdales have anything interesting to say about the evening in general or the small altercation which happened late in the evening , which they may or may not have witnessed.
============================================

Oh! Do tell

. . . Or will the responsibility be on Phil MacGiollaBhain’s shoulders AGAIN to get the truth !?

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on1:12 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Staggering ignorance and bias from STV newsreader John Mckay on twitter today

@RealMacKaySTV

When asked which players never really made it. His choice was Paul McStay !!!

4th most capped Scot of all time. Captained Scotland and Celtic, yet the guy who brings us the news commented “Paul McStay DEFINITELY never really made it”

Barry Ferguson played 200 club games at the top level less than McStay and had 30 caps less.

Gough, Goram, Willie Miller, McCoist , Souness . They all had less caps than McStay. Yet they weren’t on Mckays list. For the avoidance of doubt , they all had fine careers and wouldn’t be on any neutrals list of players who “never really made it”

Mckays comments, and he wasn’t the only hack who made the same claim about McStay, show the level of malevolent intent from some journalists in Scotland.

Paul McStay was voted by Celtic supporters in Celtic’s greatest team of all time. That obviously carries no weight with Mckay

View Comment

Avatar

GeronimosCadillacPosted on1:17 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Tic 6709 says: (513)
October 29, 2013 at 12:57 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So are we to conclude that by dragging the tax case out for so long he was merely buying time to relocate his assets outside the reach of the SA tax bods? Do you think he will be coming back to live in Castlemilk ?

View Comment

Avatar

manandboyPosted on1:17 pm - Oct 29, 2013


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/24685973

Speaking last Saturday to Richard Gordon on BBC Sportsound,
Stewart Regan had this to say at 59 secs in :-

“Well, I spoke to Brian Stockbridge last night personally and he assured me that as far as the club is concerned there is no . . . emm . . . no discussion as far as Dave King’s fit and proper requirements . . ”

The entire ‘extracts’ is worth listening to carefully but let’s look at the above statement from Stockbridge to Regan in a little more detail.

Stewart speaks briskly and has no hesitation until he says ‘ emm ‘ and then his train of thought seems to come to a set of points and he decides to change track. ‘No . . . emm … , becomes ‘ no discussion’.

But ‘no discussion’ doesn’t match up with ‘ as far as the club is concerned ‘.

Brian Stockbridge either said –

a) there has been no discussion at the club about Dave King and fit and proper, (or similar),

or, he said,

b) as far as the club is concerned we see no reason why he cannot join the board, (or similar) .

But it is highly unlikely imo that Stockbridge said what Regan said he said.

Stewart Regan will have known that he simply could not say b) (assuming BS said something to that effect)

In the context of the Sevco – King part of the interview, the above switcheroo is consistent with the rest of his replies which he appeared to give parrott fashion or at least speaking from a script.

Regan also repeats himself quite a bit, using the word ‘process’ six times and the word ‘premature’ three times.

He contradicts himself by saying at the start that the SFA have heard nothing from Rangers re Dave King, but then he admits to speaking personally to Brian Stockbridge last night on the subject.

Further, in the latter part of the interview, beginning with a question about the Scotland team, Stewart relaxes and is able to speak in an easier style until, on the subject of Scotland’s top two women coaches, he is a different man.

Now, while the devil is in the detail, usually, does the above point to anything useful ?

For myself, I think it shows that Regan can’t be trusted to tell the truth, which admittedly we already know,
but also that Dave King is not going to trip over any SFA hurdle, because there won’t be one.

Regan may not yet have polished his interview skills to the point of glib & shameless, like Mr King,

but I think he has achieved the third part of the SA judges’ description of DK

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on1:18 pm - Oct 29, 2013


One curious thing if the DR comments section is anything to go by. Dave King is fast emerging as a real Saviour on a white charger! As a PR exercise amongst Rangers fans, King is playing a blinder, but to what end? And that is a pretty big rod he’s making for his own back if he ever does come into power.

McColl is in the business of lowering expectations. King it appears is doing the opposite. As many have stated in the past, no business pedigree can prepare you for owning a football club. Success criteria, business models and PR strategies are not in accordance with those of ordinary markets. Whatever, King appears to be emerging as the Ace in the pack to help the Easdales fend off McColl and Murrays. In fact expectation-wise, the antithesis of McColl.

From a lay viewpoint, it is difficult to see how King could possibly gain market approval as a director – unless TRFC remove themselves from AIM (which many believe they will do in any case) and approval is unnecessary. Maybe that is the sting? Disturbing and cheap maybe, but interesting nonetheless.

View Comment

Avatar

GeronimosCadillacPosted on1:20 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (250)
October 29, 2013 at 1:12 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As a neutral I wouldn’t argue that McStay “never really made it” because he played at a high level but I always thought he was over rated.

View Comment

Avatar

Tif FinnPosted on1:25 pm - Oct 29, 2013


The ironic thing is that the people who should probably be most annoyed about the King “story” are the Rangers’ fans and investors.

They are systematically and deliberately being lied to on a regular basis, in order to smooth the way for rogues and charlatans to maintain control of their club.

We saw this lying and propaganda with Murray, then Whyte then Green, an awful lot of it coming from the same rag. It has been going on for decades.

To any Rangers fans reading this, you are being lied to … again. It is all happening to you … again. You have been told this before, on several occassions and you have put it down to obsessed {insert sectarian pejorative here} Rangers haters. Honestly it’s the people lying to you who you should beware of, not the people who are exposing their lies.

View Comment

Avatar

Exiled CeltPosted on1:37 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Here is the biggest hurdle with TRFC folks at the moment – they are being fed the notion that everyone is up in arms about The Glibbed One ONLY because they are scared that he has the wherewithal and means to take TRFC back to their “rightful” place at the top of the table. Only reason anyone is concerned with 41 parking ticket infractions in Durban is because it stops them having the billionaire with money to burn.

Many issues with this – what about the F&P test they decried the SFA for not having on CW? Does he have money to burn and how can he get that war chest to Ally?

Biggest though is just because all fans of other clubs agree with the judge that we would not believe him even if his tongue was notarized, then he must be the one.

With that equation – can we also now state going forward that we hate Ally/Jack Irvine/Jabba too – they must be removed.

Shhhhh – don’t tell them these are idiots – just watch them rally behind these others now we are “scared” – no fools them! Like dealing with a child who has a constant need to get their own way 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on1:38 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (250)
October 29, 2013 at 1:12 pm
================================
Barca, OT, but setting aside the crassness of Mr McKay, I can’t believe that I’m alone in thinking that Paul McStay, a proper footballer, had the quality to play at a better level. I’ve no doubt that he can look back and be proud of his achievements and that he is more than comfortable with the choices he made in life for both him and his family, but there’s still that wee niggling thought that with his ability he could have achieved more than either Murdo McLeod or Paul Lambert in a foreign league. Narey of Dundee United and Miller and McLeish of Aberdeen come into the same category.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoia

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on1:50 pm - Oct 29, 2013


blu says: (406)
October 29, 2013 at 1:38 pm
———————————

Entirely reasonable point of view blu

But not the same as Never made it !

View Comment

Avatar

ratethisthenyabampotsPosted on1:50 pm - Oct 29, 2013


John Ferguson confirming to us bampots that the staff were told that the club was being liquidated and brought to its knees by businessmen who cared nothing for the history.
Thanks John – nice piece today as well John. Keep up the good work.

From 13 Jun 2012
Grim news at shrine to legends; RECORD JOIN STAFF AT BOMBSHELL MEETING BY JOHN FERGUSON.

Link to this page
Byline: JOHN FERGUSON

RANGERS staff were told the club were being liquidated in an Ibrox bar honouring the team’s glorious history.

Forlorn employees including manager Ally McCoist huddled into Bar 72 on the stadium’s third floor yesterday, after being summoned to an 11am meeting.

The pub was named to mark Rangers’ historic 3-2 victory over Dynamo Moscow in the European Cup Winners’ Cup Final on May 24, 1972.

Club legend John Greig glared down from a giant poster on the wall as the devastating news was broken by joint administrators Paul Clark and David Whitehouse, and takeover consortium leader Charles Green.

The ironic choice of venue will not have been lost on workers who have given their heart and soul to the club they love, only to see it brought to its knees by businessmen who cared nothing for the history.

Canteen and office staff stood shocked as Clark – whose firm Duff and Phelps are making millions from the demise of Rangers – explained that Green’s pounds 8.5million CVA proposal had been rejected.

Incredibly, he still appeared to hold out hope that HMRC and other creditors could yet accept a deal, saying there was a slim chance of a “change of heart”.

But the wildly optimistic view did little to lift spirits around the room, where dozens of low-paid staff were left fearing their jobs could disappear within days.

Many of the dedicated backroom workers have been with the club for decades and are facing being thrown on to the dole queue as they see their club humiliated.

McCoist, tanned and sporting a beard after returning from a holiday, chose to stand at the very back of the room yesterday along with the rank and file staff.

He showed no emotion as the grim fate of the club he has supported, scored goals for and managed, was unveiled by three men unknown to Rangers less than six months ago.

And while Clark, Whitehouse and Green left together in a black Range Rover immediately after the meeting, McCoist stayed on at Ibrox to do a day’s work.

Leaving the meeting, one worker said: “It wasn’t anything we weren’t sort of expecting.

“The CVA was never going to be easy. We have been told not to discuss things so I can’t say any more.”

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on1:52 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Maybe slightly ‘off topic’, or maybe not. I was reading an article about Barack Obama and mention was made of sociopathic bahaviour. Certain words caught my eye

1. sociopath
A person with antisocial personality disorder. Probably the most widely recognized personality disorder. A sociopath is often well liked because of their charm and high charisma, but they do not usually care about other people. They think mainly of themselves and often blame others for the things that they do. They have a complete disregard for rules and lie constantly. They seldom feel guilt or learn from punishments. Though some sociopaths have become murders, most reveal their sociopathy through less deadly and sensational means.

Charles Manson
Ted Bundy

Both are sociopaths

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sociopath

Profile of the Sociopath

This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths.

Glibness and Superficial Charm

Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as “their right.”

Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.

Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others’ feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.

Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet “gets by” by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.

Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others’ lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.

Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.

Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

I found some of those bullet points quite enlightening ❗

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on1:54 pm - Oct 29, 2013


John Mackay’s selection of Paul McStay as a player who ‘never really made it’ is hardly something to shout about.
Many people, rightly or wrongly, hold that view.
While McStay served his club and country well there are plenty Scots who want to see our players perform well at the top level, outside our little goldfish bowl. Like under-achieving parents we transfer our fustrated ambitions onto some players in the hope they can show the world we can be just as good as everyone else.

For some, McStay was the type of midfielder one could imagine strolling around the fields of Serie A or elsewhere. IMHO thats where the ‘not fulfilling his potential’ tag came from because some people wanted him to do more than stay with Celtic regardless of the fact that he appeared to be happy playing for the one club for all of his career.

It is a long time since we produced a world class player and every lad that comes along that looks like they may fit the bill will get tagged with the ‘McStay brush’ because in so many ways we just don’t have it anymore.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoia

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on1:57 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Paul McStay suffered from the same unrealistic expectations as did Kenny Dalglish.

For about half of his career, Paul McStay played in a poor Celtic team which went 6 years without a trophy and I shudder to think how bad Celtic might have been without him. The perception in some (usually non-Celtic supporting) quarters was that the guy should have been winning games week in week out single handedly, but this just doesn’t happen in football – ask Robbie Keane.

Similarly, Kenny Dalglish went from playing for possibly the best club side in the world to a national team of an inferior standard which more often than not was competing against stronger opponents. Dalglish was viewed as some sort of underachiever because Scotland weren’t wiping the floor with opponents and qualifying for the latter stages of major tournaments presumably – something we never did with Law, Johnstone, Baxter, Bremner et al 30 goals from 102 caps 33%ish strike rate for a Scottish forward who wasn’t an out and out striker and didn’t have San Marinos and Faroe Islands around to boost goals tally is good in my opinion

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on1:57 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Torquemada says: (30)
October 29, 2013 at 12:15 am
What is happening with the Sevco story is all but unparalleled in my experience. George Bush and Karl Rove would blanch at what is occuring. Downright lies are knowingly passed off as fact; proven criminal tax evasion is blithely ignored or downplayed; tax avoidance on an industrial scale is presented as legitimate because it hasn’t (yet) been deemed illegal;
—————————————————————————————-

Today’s daily record confirm the above statement
Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 6s
Sources close to AIM tell me that they have told the Daily Record to make some…err…’amendments’ to that Dave King piece.

I do not buy the DR
In fact I do not buy any papers in this country
I do not buy into the DK saving messiah agenda but then again I am not one of the people.
What I do buy into is if this club goes down the tubes again then bye bye will be a term I will say with with great glee.

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on2:00 pm - Oct 29, 2013


MoreCelticParanoia says: (35)
October 29, 2013 at 1:50 pm
blu says: (406)
October 29, 2013 at 1:38 pm
———————————
….But not the same as Never made it !

Agreed, I wish I’d never made it just like Paul McStay.

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on2:04 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Wottpi

The question wasn’t ” did they fulfil their potential” or could they have done more by moving abroad. The question was ” who never really made it”

The fact that the answer was a player recognised as an all time great by the people who saw most of him , is just a cheap shot by STV.

View Comment

Avatar

Greenock JackPosted on2:10 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Everyone that I hear speak about Paul McStay always says that he was an excellent footballer.
However a recurring theme has developed where the same people say that he could have and perhaps should have attempted to play at a higher level.

So I think it would have been within this context that the STV newsreader has probably made his comment. You could actually take it as a back handed compliment.

I’d say it was more about relative opinion, rather than any bias.

edit.
Barcabhoy
The question wasn’t ” did they fulfil their potential” or could they have done more by moving abroad. The question was ” who never really made it”
————————————–
To call people out for bias on what comes down to an interpretation of a phrase is a little strong.

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on2:26 pm - Oct 29, 2013


PAUL MCSTAY

And that is what makes football discussions so interesting, it’s all about opinion.

I remember Peter Grant being the favourite midfielder of many at that time, simply because he worked his socks off.

I think the problem here is the terminology used, to say Paul McStay never made it is just ridiculous. However, to say that he never fulfilled his potential would be more accurate. I think that was down to him not making the move to England when he could have. He was a superb player in an average team, in my opinion.

If I was to sum up McStay then I would use his own words, when asked why he was playing so deep (after a bad day at the office for the team), he responded by saying, “I can usually tell after 10 minutes if I am having or going to have a bad game so from that time I make it a point of ensuring my opposite number does not have a good game”

Football is so simple sometimes…..

View Comment

Avatar

Exiled CeltPosted on2:29 pm - Oct 29, 2013


I knew Paul McStay during his days at Celtic – the reason he never moved was because he did not want to move from his family – pure and simple. He was a shy guy who was a fantastic player – and with a little bit of belief and self confidence would have been an all round great. Would he have got this confidence from playing abroad? I doubt it – being away from family and friends would have been too much for him.

Its ironic that the media loved to tell him he was a lesser player because he would not leave Celtic – the same media who begged RFC-NIL to sign players from the stronger teams at the time – Dundee Utd/Hearts/Aberdeen – in order for them to “stay in Scotland” yet anyone who was any good at Parkhead (McStay and McClair were the biggest examples) were decried if they stayed put in Scotland

Double standards as usual!

Scotland needs more paranoia!

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on2:32 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (251)
October 29, 2013 at 2:04 pm

While I can appreciate why you would take umbrage at McKay the point is, that for some people, playing for Celtic, winning the Scottish Leagues & cups and gaining 50 plus caps for the Scottish national side isn’t ‘making it’ in the wider world of football.

Hard working pro who gives 100% but never one to be decribed as an outstanding player,Gary Caldwell, ticks all the above boxes but these days many could argue that by adding playing down south, even with lowly Wigan, to his CV he has ‘made it’ more than McStay.

McStay is just unfortunate to have been tagged.as one of those players who people thought could have done a lot more. He will always get mentioned when the conversation heads in that direction.

If you look back at Peter A Smith’s twitter account McStay gets a couple of mentions from folk other than McKay. So he is not alone in either misreading the question or putting McStay up top of the list.

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on2:41 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Greenock Jack says: (113)
October 29, 2013 at 2:10 pm
4 3 Rate This

Everyone that I hear speak about Paul McStay always says that he was an excellent footballer.
However a recurring theme has developed where the same people say that he could have and perhaps should have attempted to play at a higher level.

So I think it would have been within this context that the STV newsreader has probably made his comment. You could actually take it as a back handed compliment.

I’d say it was more about relative opinion, rather than any bias.

edit.
Barcabhoy
The question wasn’t ” did they fulfil their potential” or could they have done more by moving abroad. The question was ” who never really made it”
————————————–
To call people out for bias on what comes down to an interpretation of a phrase is a little strong.
———-

How else can you interpret “never made it”

Why did he pick mcstay and not barry ferguson, why pick 4 Celtic players and nobody from Rangers as not making it.

His comments were ridiculous and if there is an explanation that doesn’t include bias, then i’d like to hear it

View Comment

Avatar

Matteo GalyPosted on2:41 pm - Oct 29, 2013


So Rangers/Sevco fan John ‘blue tie’ McKay doesn’t rate Paul McStay?
Earth shattering news! :mrgreen:
Incidentally, didn’t Souness try to sign McStay at one point?
If he had, would McStay have ‘made it’ then as far as Mr McKay is concerned?!

View Comment

Avatar

andygraham.66Posted on2:42 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Was hoping the Sevco mega bus would make the FIFA coach of the year award but, alas, no.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on2:44 pm - Oct 29, 2013


andygraham.66 says: (48)
October 29, 2013 at 2:42 pm

Was hoping the Sevco mega bus would make the FIFA coach of the year award but, alas, no.
=================
I heard the mega bus was the red-hot favourite too… 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

tomtomPosted on2:46 pm - Oct 29, 2013


andygraham.66 says: (48)
October 29, 2013 at 2:42 pm
0 0 Rate This

Was hoping the Sevco mega bus would make the FIFA coach of the year award but, alas, no.

==========================

Not enough appearances. Looked good in it’s first few games but disappeared after that. Probably tried too hard and burnt itself out 😥

View Comment

Avatar

Greenock JackPosted on2:50 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Barca
You’d be better asking JMcK directly, give him the opportunity to explain.

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on2:59 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Joburgbhoy says: (14)
October 29, 2013 at 9:01 am
74 1 Rate This

toby says: (74)
October 29, 2013 at 8:31 am
3 0 i
Rate This

It says much about The Rangers fans unwillingness to look at the facts…. etc

The rangers fans groups and rangers fans in general have no interest in integrity, honesty or anything else that the rest of scottish football would like to see coming from govan way. All they want is rangers playing at ibrokes, they dont care if it’s King, Murray, Hitler,Jack the ripper or Attilla the you know what, so long as whoever it is didn’t go to a school that begins with St. They really don’t care who saves them and they don’t care how it’s done….
——————————————————————————-
The above also applies to SFA and SMSM

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on3:22 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Some AIM info from David Low:

AIM Nomad Fit & Proper Questionnaire http://wp.me/p2VPkU-Q via @wordpressdotcom. This is the type of form DK will have to complete.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on3:27 pm - Oct 29, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1104)
October 29, 2013 at 3:22 pm
0 0 Rate This

Some AIM info from David Low:

AIM Nomad Fit & Proper Questionnaire http://wp.me/p2VPkU-Q via @wordpressdotcom. This is the type of form DK will have to complete.

2. two recent (no more than three months old) documents confirming your residential address (these may include utility bills, tax demands, bank statements etc.)

Should be able to lay his hands on one of them

View Comment

wildwood

wildwoodPosted on3:46 pm - Oct 29, 2013


The questionnaire will be a skoosh for DK since he hasn’t been convicted of anything and hasn’t had any adverse press

View Comment

Avatar

andygraham.66Posted on3:49 pm - Oct 29, 2013


http://www.nufcdirect.com/puma-rangers-rain-jacket-mens-374990?colcode=37499018

Newcastle fans not happy on twitter

View Comment

Avatar

manandboyPosted on3:50 pm - Oct 29, 2013


A Contemporary History of Scotland.
by RTC and TSFM

Degree Course
Available Online
Learn At Your Own Pace
Fees Discretionary

Sign up Now
Don’t get left behind.
A New Future Awaits You
A Bright New Tomorrow

You Can Be Part Of It
Register Today !

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on3:57 pm - Oct 29, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: (1104)
October 29, 2013 at 3:22 pm
Some AIM info from David Low:

AIM Nomad Fit & Proper Questionnaire http://wp.me/p2VPkU-Q via @wordpressdotcom. This is the type of form DK will have to complete.
…………………………………………………….

Strange…but there does not seem to be a question asking….

“have you ever been a director of a liquidated football club/Company that somehow managed to defy the laws of corporate business and Scottish law and continue in business even though they were liquidation owing millions”…

View Comment

Avatar

Reilly1926Posted on4:26 pm - Oct 29, 2013


A strange, if not sinister, comment from John McKay regarding Paul McStay. A full career playing for the club he loved doesn’t appear to me to be an under achievement. McKay should maybe stick to reading off an auto-cue.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on4:29 pm - Oct 29, 2013


I have received a reply from the BBC to my letter of 16th October ( posted on here).
The reply is a piece of deflection, totally ignoring my main point.
I am sending the following reply by first post tomorrow.

” Ewan Angus,
Commissioning Editor, Television
&Head of Sport,
BBC Scotland
40 Pacific Quay,
Glasgow, G51 1DA

Dear Mr Angus,

I have received your letter of 28th October in reply to mine of 16th October.

I regret to say that I find that you have not addressed the more serious of the two points I raised, namely, the shocking attempt by Young to mislead the listening public as to the verdict of the South African Court in the case brought against King by the South African Revenue Service.

That verdict was that he was GUILTY of many charges of fraudulent tax evasion, each carrying a potential jail sentence of two years. That is an easily established fact., and one that you might have established before you replied.

Whatever King may have done by way of plea bargaining to avoid actually being jailed does not change the fact that he is a convicted criminal.

Young’s attempt to argue to the contrary was either a display of appalling ignorance or was part of a deliberate attempt to mislead.

If it was ignorance, he should be sacked as being utterly incompetent.

If it was deliberate falsehood, he should be sent packing in disgrace.

Please read my first letter again, and do me the courtesy of replying properly without any deflectionary and patronising waffle.

Yours sincerely,

(real name)

View Comment

Avatar

Araminta Moonbeam QCPosted on4:32 pm - Oct 29, 2013


DR story seems to have been edited a bit. Strange, that…

View Comment

Avatar

ratethisthenyabampotsPosted on4:44 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Daily Record change their headline from:
Rangers boardroom battle: Dave King gets the all-clear from the Stock Exchange to return to Ibrox

To:
Rangers power battle: Dave King gets all clear to return to boardroom but needs rubber-stamp from Ibrox advisers

And add this to the article:
The LSE added: “London Stock Exchange’s approach to regulation is aimed at maintaining the integrity, orderliness, transparency and good reputation of its markets.

“With regards to the appointment of Directors, the London Stock Exchange AIM Rules outline the need for a company’s Nomad provide advice to the company on any changes to the board of Directors and to consider each director’s suitability and experience in relation to their (proposed) company role recognising that the company is admitted to a UK public market.

“The nominated adviser oversees the due diligence of this process, satisfying itself that any material issues are dealt with or otherwise do not affect the appropriateness of the company for AIM.”

View Comment

Avatar

Tic 6709Posted on4:51 pm - Oct 29, 2013


Knowing that he has not spoken to anyone at the SFA,Stewart Regan must have been pissed off to read that the man who would be King said, “I have spoken to all the relevant people”.
Or ……….

View Comment

wildwood

wildwoodPosted on4:57 pm - Oct 29, 2013


ratethisthenyabampots on October 29, 2013 at 4:44 pm

The update does little to improve a glib and shameless article bereft of fact.

I would say for any professional organisation to publish / endorse that is beyond belief.

In addition, it reads horrifically, an absolute mess an insult to the profession.

I feel dirty having given their website a hit.

Never again

View Comment

Avatar

alexander276Posted on5:02 pm - Oct 29, 2013


While looking for the precise court decision on King in SA, I stumbled on the following on a Mail online site 16th Nov 2012):Was this the basis for his confidence? Or was there maybe someone with expertise in SFA and Ibrox business he could have consulted in a personal capacity?
Clearly, from what he said, Stewart Reagan was out of the loop.

‘‘I wrote to the SFA at the end of last year when I was looking to be involved in one of the consortiums, telling them of the allegations against me and asking if this might cloud their judgment in terms of my ability to be a fit and proper person at Rangers?

‘Their response was that because it was only allegations they would take representations from my legal team and if they could convince them I had a strong case then there would be no issue.

‘Now that has gone away. My assets have been freed and it’s just not an issue any more.’

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on5:14 pm - Oct 29, 2013


alexander276 says: (8)
October 29, 2013 at 5:02 pm
=================================
I think we have to remember that Mr King has pleaded guilty in court to being a glib and shameless liar (do we believe him though?). The Mail Online site may be the busiest in the world but even Mr Dacre wouldn’t claim that everything published is the truth.

View Comment

Comments are closed.