Good Morning,
A number of years ago I sat and watched while the late David Will, one time chairman of Brechin City, former President of the Scottish Football Association and Vice President of FIFA, peered over the upper rims of his glasses at the assembled board and management of St Johnstone Football Club and proceeded to brand them all as a “shower of thrawn buggers!”.
The reason for the tongue in cheek outburst from Scotland’s highest ranking official from the world of football was the organisation of the centenary dinner celebrating 100 years of the Perth Club— which the club saw fit to hold well outside the centenary year. Will had been invited to speak as a guest at the dinner ( yes Mr Cosgrove I was there ), along with then manager Alex Totten and Craigie Veitch the former sports editor of the Scotsman.
For those who are not familiar with old Scots words, Thrawn can have a couple of meanings which are very similar. If someone is being obstinate, stubborn, uncompromising, perverse or intractable then in auld Scots we say that he or she is being thrawn. Equally, the original meaning has been said to be crooked, twisted, misshapen or deformed. A tree could be thrawn, as could someone’s arm or other part of the body. To be thrawn-leggit was to have a crooked leg.
These meanings then sort of morphed into meanings like difficult or contrary, and so twisted and crooked in that sense, and when David Will called St Johnstone a shower of “thrawn Buggers” he meant that they were being awkward, contrary and perverse in holding a centenary dinner when it wasn’t actually the centenary. He was of course being lighthearted.
That episode came to mind this week when I read the latest statements from Alastair Johnston and Charles Green. Both set out an argument which suits their individual purposes and adopted perspectives, and both perhaps chose to ignore counter argument or salient facts which would obviously derail their logic and train of thought. With the greatest of respect to both men— what a pair of thrawn buggers!!!
In that vein let me recap as to where I think we stand on this September morn in relation to the EBT debate, the question of “Club” and the Independent enquiry into payment outwith contract.
Clearly, all of these issues are closely linked but each stands in its own wee pocket or chapter, and when taken together they serve to make a whole book or paint an overall scene.
The EBT issue has been repeatedly explained on the RTC blog and elsewhere but at the risk of repeating what is already known the fundamentals are as follows:
Employee Benefits Trusts under certain circumstances are or were a perfectly legal business and accounting tool.
However, in order for the trusts to provide substantial tax advantages, any reward, remuneration or compensation they provide to a beneficiary must not form part of their contract of employment or work package. If this rule is not strictly adhered to, then tax is payable on the sums “given” to the employee, with the employer being liable for tax and national insurance contributions of any employee.
It is alleged by HMRC, that a number of persons who were at one time employed by Rangers PLC have received benefits by way of a specific EBT. Further, the benefits which these employees received were clearly related to their contracts of employment and so these payments are liable to tax, together with interest for late payment and penalties for non-declaration and so on.
This is denied by Rangers PLC and by Murray International Holdings, and MIH have instigated and conducted an appeal against the HMRC view, with that appeal being determined by an independent tax tribunal (The FTT). The basis of their argument appears to be that the benefits received by the beneficiaries were nothing to do with MIH or Rangers and that these payments were purely discretionary and at the instance of the trustees of the trusts concerned– none of whom have any connection with Rangers PLC or MIH. Therefore– there is no tax payable.
Against this there seems to be a plethora of evidence which contradicts this stance including a number of side letters or second contracts which show that any payments to these EBT’s were indeed contractual and part of an overall contract of employment “package”– and if that is deemed to be the case then tax, interest and penalties are indeed, and always were, due.
These contracts or side letters then seem to fly in the face of the documentation lodged with the SPL and later the SFA, as both bodies require sight of all contractual documentation relating to players remuneration and their terms and conditions of employment. Contracts have to be in standard form and lodged with the appropriate bodies to ensure that the player is in fact properly registered to play for the team.
Further, the rules of football prohibit any player being paid by a third party, and so payments made to a player by someone other than his employer is a breach of that rule.
It is this issue that the Nimmo Smith Tribunal is to investigate and rule upon.
For their part, Rangers PLC appear to argue that the existence of EBT’s were always declared in the notes of their accounts, and so the footballing authorities should have known that they were in use at the club. More recently, Alastair Johnston has stated that the club did receive a request for clarification from the SFA in 2011 to which the Rangers PLC board responded disclosing documents ( although he does not specify what documents ) over and above the normal documentation sent re player contracts. Johnston has gone on to state that there was no response or follow up whatsoever from the SFA, and the appropriate UEFA licence simply arrived in the post without further ado. He concludes that as a result of the documentation sent, the SFA must have known at that time that the EBT payments were being used for “player compensation” purposes.
Now, AJ argues that if any misdemeanour or breach of rules has occurred it does not merit the much discussed and publicised “stripping of titles” and that any failure on the part of the Rangers PLC board amounts to no more than an oversight or an administrative error which does not justify the ultimate penalty.
Let’s just pause there and remember who and what AJ actually is in life. Alastair Johnston holds the posts of vice-chairman and member of the board of directors of International Management Group, the leading international sports and entertainment group. Now everyone knows that IMG was formed by Mark McCormack and represents sports stars as their agent. However what is less well known is that the majority of IMG’s work comes from broadcasting – not necessarily mainstream broadcasting – but the broadcasting of certain events to mobile phones and so on and in this context the company works with the likes of Vodafone and other major service providers in the sector. Further the company has the rights to market and broadcast the sports activities of a huge number of schools and colleges in the US as well as music channels, entertainment and so on.
I raise this aspect for one very important reason.
That entire industry is based on one thing and one thing only and that is………… a Licensing system. Broadcasters of any sort obtain the rights to broadcast by way of a licence. They licence content, they licence by area and geographical location, they licence for set time periods,they share licences, sell licences, create licences and terminate licences. Without a licence, they can have all the technology in the world, all the necessary content and so on but they are not able to show it, sell it and profit from it. Proper licensing is vital!
Further, they are very precious about licences- and rightly so– because unless they have the licences tightly tied up, others in the same field can attempt to steal their content, their territory and their rights– all of which are valuable assets.
So go back again and look at all AJ’s comments about proper registration of contracts, about proper administration of documents and licence applications for players, UEFA competition and so against the background of him being a grand fromage in a major company whose absolute lifeblood depends upon proper licensing.
Do you remotely believe that the continual and prolonged inability to properly declare all relevent contracts and player documentation to a licensing body ( both SFA and SPL in this instance) can be merely an oversight or an administrative error?
Further, take a look at the accounts for Rangers PLC at least in the year ended 2005, where it is made very clear that the football management side of the business was working extremely closely with the board in all business and contract matters.
The SFA in particular fulfills a licencing function– a function which is so important that without passing the tests laid down, any club of no matter what size simply cannot play or participate in the sole sphere it is designed to participate and play in. There are strict rules about licences, and a duty on the SFA as well as Rangers PLC to make sure that all of the conditions that must be fulfilled in order to gain a licence have in fact been met. It is not a process that should be left to chance or a process that any major organisation would leave to a junior member of staff or without there being a company defined process and procedure to ensure that the applications and compliance issues are properly dealt with.
Further, if you think about how a footballer player signs for a club– the negotiations, the transfer fee, the personal terms, the contracts, the agents commission and so on, you will realise that a player signing and the terms of his contract – or contracts for that matter – cannot simply come about by accident and outwith the boards knowledge or consent.
In short, it is impossible. It is also impossible, in my respectful opinion, to proceed on a decade long process of administrative errors involving the repeated failure to disclose secondary contracts or side letters. As someone once said to me, there comes a point where a continued and continual series of repeated errors or omissions starts to look suspiciously like a plan!
However, if we were to take AJ’s comments at face value, and accept that there were repeated failures on the part of the Rangers Board by accident, then to be honest there would be every right for shareholders and investors to hold the Directors liable for such negligence. Directors regularly and properly insure themselves against such claims– so I wonder if AJ has paid his insurance premiums?
Further, if he as Chairman presided over such mismanagement, then no doubt his time at IMG is limited as I doubt such an organisation could afford to have such a dunderheid permanently ensconced in a senior managerial position.
However, AJ appears to be a positively straightforward chap when compared to Mr Green.
He of course is on record as saying that if the proposed CVA were to be rejected and the club forced into liquidation then the club dies, the history dies, and so on and so forth– but of course that was yesterday or the week before or even the week or months before that. That was the message that Mr Green wanted to convey at that time in the hope that HMRC would buckle down and accept the proposals.
Now, Mr Green seeks to sing a different tune, and recently latched on to Lord Nimmo Smith’s comments about the “club” being a continuing entity and capable of transfer from one owner to the next. He muses that if that is the case then the “club” may well in fact still be a member of the SPL and the SFA as no matter what happened to Rangers PLC, Rangers FC are ” a continuing entity” and therefore should not be forced to apply to rejoin any body which it was always a member of– such as the SPL and the SFA. Of course this then means that all the history and so on remains– despite what he himself said earlier!
Now of course, Charles makes for a good soundbite and is mad keen to ensure that as many Rangers fans as possible take up shares in “the club” when he offers them for sale.
Yet there is the problem,– shares in what are being offered for sale? According to Charles– and following his logic— he can offer as many shares in the Rangers Football Club Ltd for sale as he wants — but that company will not actually be Rangers FC– will it? If Rangers PLC was not actually Rangers FC– then what was it that David Murray was offering for sale all those years ago? Or could it be that Charles has just got it plain wrong?
You see for some reason he did not quote Lord Nimmo Smith in full– especially that part where the learned judge gave a brief description of his interpretation of the law of clubs.
For example Charles chooses not to comment on this sentence from the learned judge:
“This is not to say that a Club has legal personality, separate from and additional to the legal personality of its owner and operator. We are satisfied that it does not, and Mr McKenzie did not seek to argue otherwise. So a Club cannot, lacking legal personality, enter into a contract by itself. But it can be affected by the contractual obligations of its owner and operator.”
Earlier, Nimmo Smith said this:
“While it no doubt depends on individual circumstances what exactly is comprised in the undertaking of any particular Club, it would at the least comprise its name, the contracts with its players, its manager and other staff, and its ground, even though these may change from time to time.”
So let’s pause there.
A club is an undertaking— in other words any type of loose arrangement involving a group of people with a common purpose. If a club is not an incorporated club ( a limited company ) then to be anything other than a loose idea of a few folk getting together for a common purpose such as a holiday or a meal or to read a book or anything else– then of course it should have a formal constitution and a set of rules for its members.
So– where is the constitution for Rangers Football Club? Where are its rules of admission which says who can join? Are there certain rules that preclude you from joining? Is there a set limit on how many members there can be at any one time? Who are the officers of this club?
At the current time, Mr Green seems to be very keen on everything British and everything of a loyal and royal nature. So here is a quote from the pages of the Royal Yachting Association of Great Britain on the legal status of unincorporated clubs and so on.
“Since an unincorporated club has no legal status, it is incapable itself of owning property or being party to a contract. It is therefore standard practice to appoint trustees, who are usually required in the rules to comply with committee instructions, to hold the property (whether freehold land and buildings, yachts or a long leasehold of a reservoir) on behalf of the club members.”
Eh going by that statement – Rangers FC never owned Ibrox or Murray Park– and indeed can never own Ibrox and Murray Park. Someone had to be the trustee.
Further, it can never have been granted a licence to play football— you can’t grant a right to a non legal entity or to a body which has no legal status. You cannot accept a licensing application from a body which has no legal status. You cannot be employed by a body with no legal status.
Rangers FC has no constitution, no legal persona, is not allowed to own property ( heritable, moveable or intellectual), can’t enter into contracts and so on.
In short, Rangers FC is a body with no legal status– it does not exist and has never existed— unless it is to be found within the confines of Rangers PLC which everyone now recognises is in Administration and will soon be liquidated.
Still don’t believe me?
Ok here is a recent release by the Scottish legal commission setting out changes that they want to make to the law so that “clubs” can gain some legal status:
“In Scotland, and indeed throughout the United Kingdom, unincorporated associations are not recognised as entities separate from their members. Consequently, such organisations cannot carry out acts such as entering into contracts, owning property or engaging employees. The lack of legal personality can also give rise to unfortunate, and perhaps unforeseen, repercussions for members. For example, it is possible that, under the current law, a member of an unincorporated association could, by virtue of that membership alone, find himself or herself personally liable in delict to a third party injured at an event organised by the association. Further difficulties relating to this area of the law are set out in our Discussion Paper on Unincorporated Associations (DP 140) which was published at the end of 2008.
Our Report recommends a simple regime, with the minimum of administrative burdens, to ensure that associations and clubs are recognised as legal entities. Separate legal personality will be accorded to associations which satisfy certain conditions. The main conditions are that the association has at least two members; that its objects do not include making a profit for its members; and that it has a constitution containing certain minimum specified provisions. These provisions are: the association’s name; its purpose; membership criteria; the procedure for the election or appointment of those managing it; the powers and duties of its office-bearers; the rules for distributing its assets if it is dissolved; and the procedure for amending its constitution. Many associations will already have constitutions which contain these provisions but, for those which do not, we anticipate that style constitutions will be made available, free of charge, on the websites of organisations such as the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations”
Maybe Charles should seek some advice from the Scottish Council on Voluntary organisations? And perhaps he should note that part about not making a profit for members too!
Then again, as Lord Nimmo Smith has said the actual status of a club and who or what a club is depends on individual circumstances. So with regard to Rangers, let’s look at who would know– for example, who did Charles get “Rangers” from? Duff and Phelps of course — so what do they say?
Well they have stuck to their guns because in each and every report that they have issued to the court, the shareholders and the creditors they have included the following definition:
| Rangers / the Company / the Club | The Rangers Football Club Plc (In Administration), Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow, G51 2XD (Company number SC004276); |
Now that doesn’t really help Charles does it.
Ok so, lets ignore Craig Whyte because everyone knows that he was a diddy— let’s go to folk that are far more sensible– how about the Board of Rangers PLC before Craig Whyte– what did they have to say:
Well, here is a statement from May 2011 which seems to set out who and what the then Directors thought amounted to the club– and let’s face it– they should know!
“Further to today’s statement from Wavetower Limited (“the acquirer”), the Independent Board Committee of The Rangers Football Club plc (“the club”), comprising Alastair Johnston, Martin Bain, John Greig, John McClelland and Donald McIntyre, (”IBC”) would like to make the following statement:
“In recent weeks the IBC has been engaged with the acquirer and has secured an enhanced financial commitment from Wavetower for future investment into the club. The decision on the sale and purchase of the majority shareholding in the club firmly and ultimately rests between Murray MHL Limited (“MHL”) and Lloyds Banking Group (“LBG”).
“Although the IBC has no power to block the transaction, following its enquiries, the IBC and Wavetower have differing views on the future revenue generation and cash requirements of the club and the IBC is concerned about a lack of clarity on how future cash requirements would be met, particularly any liability arising from the outstanding HMRC case.
“Wavetower is purchasing MHL’s 85% shareholding in the club for £1 and the club’s indebtedness with LBG is to be assigned to Wavetower. This share transaction would ordinarily trigger a requirement on Wavetower under Rule Nine of The Takeover Code for a mandatory offer to be made to the other shareholders.
“Given this transaction structure and following discussions with the Takeover Panel, the IBC considers there to be no purpose in the acquirer making such an offer to acquire all other shareholdings at effectively nil value per share. Accordingly the IBC has agreed that the offer period for the club will now end.
“In agreeing that no offer should be made to all shareholders the IBC has insisted that the acquirer issues a document to all shareholders setting out the full terms of the transaction, comprehensive details on the acquirer and the sources of its funding and giving firm commitments to agreed future investment in the club.
“The IBC is committed to ensure that the transaction and future investment and funding proposals should be transparent to all the shareholders and supporters of the club”
Ah— that doesn’t really help Charles Green’s current argument either does it?
So here we are, on the cusp of the FTT ruling, with a share offering in the offing, and SPL enquiry scheduled for November and no doubt Mark Daly and the Panorama team beavering away in the background getting ready for another documentary.
The decision of the FTT may reveal yet more of what the bold AJ describes as “Administrative errors” by way of failing to administer EBT’s properly so resulting in a massive tax bill, and the SPL enquiry may reveal further “Administrative errors” in failing to properly record player contracts for a decade, with the result that players were never properly registered in the first place and so were illegal players during championship winning games.
Yet all that is history and in the past.
Today’s Rangers has a new hero, a new commander– even though who he works for is a closely guarded secret and remains a mystery to most of us who may be interested to find out who Charles Green really is and who he represents. He seems to attack certain quarters then retreat, antagonise and appease, and has a habit of constantly contradicting himself when it suits.
In the interim he reminds me of the most famous creation of the American writer Timothy Zahn who brought about a revival in the fortunes of the Star Wars franchise, bringing it widespread attention for the first time in years. He did this by creating a new villain to follow in the footsteps of the administratively challenged and ultimately vanquished Darth Vader.
Zahn describes this new villain’s command style as considerably different from that of Darth Vader and other typical Imperial commanders; instead of punishing failure and dissent, he promotes creativity among his crew and accepts ideas from subordinates. He is a tactical genius who has made extensive study of military intelligence and art, and is willing to retreat instead of making a stand in a losing battle.
His full name and his true origins are only known to a few select individuals of the Empire and the New Republic.
To quote Wikipedia:
“His name is ………… reminiscent of the old Scots word meaning Twisted ot Crooked.
The character’s name is……….. Thrawn.
I suspect that we are about to see some pretty Thrawn statements from a shower of Thrawn buggers as the late David Will would have said!
Brenda says: Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 21:27
…I heard from a very reliable source that it was squeaky bum time for the EBT ers players etc.
…
Hearing tonight that sevco are very short on readies (must be all those free tickets) and are highly unlikely to see 2013 shame…
==============================
That is interesting Brenda – anymore detail especially on Sevco cash position?
£1.25 million for plant and machinery cf £1.5 million for the properties, looks like the hover pitches were already installed.
iceman63 says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 21:31
‘..Hodge’s silence is deafening….’
—
No, no. Stay cool, iceman.
D&P are applying for discharge- it has not been granted yet, and won’t be until LH has decided whether or not to have them busted for knowingly being complicit in a conspiracy.
Remember, he appointed D&P before he had any knowledge or suspicion that they might not have been entirely honest. It was only after the Daly documentary that his professional concern was aroused. He quite properly ask for a report.( Who would have questioned it if he had not?)
He will deal with them appropriately in due course. And he knows this case like the back of his hand.
In my personal, possibly Dickensian view , and not being any kind of business man myself, I would bring back Newgate Prison or the ‘Fleet’ for the directors of companies who leave their creditors high and dry while their own personal monies are untouched.
And I would seriously think of amending the law to remove the ‘ try to keep the company as a going concern’ concept.
No. Insolvencyt? – Straight to liquidation, no ‘secured’ or ‘preferential’ creditors: all creditors getting paid on a pro rata basis.
Unfortunately, it’s the MP equivalents of Whyte and CG who make our laws.( The Camerons and Millibands and Osbornes and Cleggs could teach those shysters a thing or two about shafting people).
torrejohnbhoy says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 20:44
The highest fee Aberdeen have ever paid for a player is £1m (for Paul Bernard). With the amount of money Rangers saved, Aberdeen could have bought thirty four Paul Bernard’s
————————————————————————————————————–
One was enough thank you 🙂
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:19
1
0
Rate This
Agrajag says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:15
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:09
====================================
Do you have reason to believe they are, or is that a purely hypothetical question.
————————————
See my post at 21:57
===================================
The report lists the secured creditors.
That includes Wavetower, presumably that is the floating charge.
Surely if Ticketus, or Sevco held a security that would be listed in the administrators report. Or are you suggesting that not only are Ticketus Sevco, but they are also Wavetower.
As you say though, it is all speculation on your part, so I’m taking your answer to be “hypothetical”.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:29
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:19
===================================
The report lists the secured creditors.
That includes Wavetower, presumably that is the floating charge.
Surely if Ticketus, or Sevco held a security that would be listed in the administrators report. Or are you suggesting that not only are Ticketus Sevco, but they are also Wavetower.
As you say though, it is all speculation on your part, so I’m taking your answer to be “hypothetical”.
=======================
Wavetower hold the floating charge over RFC plc. Wavetower is the previous name of RFC Group. Liberty have been assigned a floating charge over the assets of Wavetower/RFC Group.
Ticketus are pursuing CW & Liberty.
The floating charge over RFC plc’s assets is therefore at the end of a chain that potentially has Ticketus as the ultimate beneficiary.
None of that is speculation.
StevieBC
No exact details but have incurred a trading loss of lots 🙂 if I get any more info I will duly pass on 🙂 rumours at the moment but it is from a reliable source …….. bangordub nearly 153 🙂
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:36
Wavetower hold the floating charge over RFC plc. Wavetower is the previous name of RFC Group. Liberty have been assigned a floating charge over the assets of Wavetower/RFC Group.
Ticketus are pursuing CW & Liberty.
The floating charge over RFC plc’s assets is therefore at the end of a chain that potentially has Ticketus as the ultimate beneficiary.
None of that is speculation.
============================
Well the speculation part is.
Thanks Brenda ! 😉
torrejohnbhoy says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 20:44
The highest fee Aberdeen have ever paid for a player is £1m (for Paul Bernard). With the amount of money Rangers saved, Aberdeen could have bought thirty four Paul Bernard’s,
—–
Jeez. Thanks for that thought. 34 Paul Bernards? I’ll have nightmares now.
Could we not have 1360 Steve Archibalds instead, please?
Thanks.
Well done Europe dedicated to Seve x me thinks 😉
The Ticketus that invested £27m into Rangers is only a small part of Octopus’s £1bn suite of venture capital trusts and enterprise initiative schemes. To give a simple explanation of what these are: a large number of high earners invest in these qualifying companies that are supposedly high risk and HMRC provides an income tax rebate of between 20 to 30% on the investment. this is the main way the investors make money because the companies involved are generally designed to cover the expenditure and are actually lowish risk, I.e securitising ticket sales is perfect for this. The fund managers take out a whopping 6 to 8% in fees, so the loss in rangers is small change for them. In fact the 2.7% loss in overall funds would allow Octopus to demonstrate to the regulators that their investments do in fact carry a risk and so can be made into a positive. These sort of funds are very often exploited by sleekit entrepreneurs in the CW or CG mould, in cahoots with the fund manager, as the investors are a dispersed group and are more than covered by the tax rebate. In all these things it is ultimately the honest tax payer who picks up the tab.
The fund manager, for the sake of reputation, has to give the impression that they are chasing the losses, but in reality there is no way that Octopus have much cares about these losses and certainly won’t be going to any great lengths to recoup them. The idea that they would secretly back Sevco is absurd I’m afraid.
iceman63 says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 21:31
I suspect that Lord Hodge is taking his time, rather than playing for time.
Was it not Lord Hodge who asked for the report from Duff and Duffer (copyright acknowledged) – where he was concerned about their conduct and possible conflict of interest?
I would place a bet that the main players CW (and others who ever they may be) did not bank of Lord Hodge taking an interest in the role of the administrators?
Lord Hodge cannot walk away – there is evidence in the public domain i.e. that presented during and after the Mark Daley documentary [the e-mails] that Duff and Duffer (copyright acknowledged) were aware of the CW deal with Ticketus to purchase RFC.
I would imagine that the administrators must be wishing that they had never laid eyes on CW.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:50
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 22:36
Wavetower hold the floating charge over RFC plc. Wavetower is the previous name of RFC Group. Liberty have been assigned a floating charge over the assets of Wavetower/RFC Group.
Ticketus are pursuing CW & Liberty.
The floating charge over RFC plc’s assets is therefore at the end of a chain that potentially has Ticketus as the ultimate beneficiary.
None of that is speculation.
============================
Well the speculation part is.
==================================
🙂 🙂
I’m saying that the Ticketus debt would be largely secured if they hold the RFC plc floating charge at the point in time when RFC plc enter liquidation AND the Ticketus investors are behind Sevco.
I’m not saying that I have documentary evidence that these are known facts; but I am saying that there is an increasing & considerable weight of circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely.
I am saying that D&P could disallow an almost £27m claim by a creditor – if the claim has not been properly made. I’m speculating that the Ticketus claim may not have lodged an official claim with D&P as a deliberate ploy to best protect their investment.
I’m saying that in the scenario I have described, it would be important not to have crystallised their debt until they have secured possession of the floating charge.
I think in my original post I clearly differentiated between known facts, my interpretation of those known facts and my speculation as to how it may all fit together.
Johnbhoy75 (@Johnbhoy75) says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:27
The Ticketus that invested £27m into Rangers is only a small part of Octopus’s £1bn suite of venture capital trusts and enterprise initiative schemes.
===========================
The Ticketus which bought season tickets from Rangers (they never invested anything they pre-purchased season tickets at a discount, to then re-sell at face value) is only one of many Ticketus companies.
Octopus set up a new “Ticketus” for each deal. At least they used to.
The model is actually very simple. A club needs money in January. It sells season Tickets early, to a “Ticketus” company, at a discount. They have their cash-flow which keeps the business going. When renewal time is due they then sell those season tickets on behalf of that company at face value. The fans have no knowledge of this and it doesn’t effect them. Ticketus make their profit on the difference between the face value and the discounted price (minus an agency fee).
The club passes the money on to Ticketus. The deal is done and dusted.
It is intended as a short team solution to cash flow problems. Not a mechanism to fund the purchase of a business. It was a ludicrous way to fund a takeover.
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:38
================================== 🙂 🙂
I’m saying that the Ticketus debt would be largely secured if they hold the RFC plc floating charge at the point in time when RFC plc enter liquidation AND the Ticketus investors are behind Sevco.
————————————————————-
What makes you think either is true.
Johnbhoy75 (@Johnbhoy75) says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:27
0 1 Rate This
…
The fund manager, for the sake of reputation, has to give the impression that they are chasing the losses, but in reality there is no way that Octopus have much cares about these losses and certainly won’t be going to any great lengths to recoup them. The idea that they would secretly back Sevco is absurd I’m afraid.
==================================
Hmmm
There is much to speculate around why/how the Ticketus investments were made (remember there were 2) in this particular financial basket case, via that particular “off the radar” billionaire, at that particular time and for that particular purpose.
The speculation surrounds whose investments these may be.
As you will know, Ticketus are not a trading company. They, as you do know, are simply a series of subsidiary companies of 2 Octopus companies – which collectively act as vehicle for tax-efficient investments. When we talk about Ticketus, this is simply shorthand for the unknown investors in this particular investment.
Remember the proposed Blue Knights/Ticketus consortium? With that consortium proposal, the principle was established that the unknown Ticketus investors were not going away. All the investors did (I believe) is find a slightly different business model that cut out the potential loose cannons (from their perspective!) within the Blue Knights.
Sevco & CG appears to me, to be that alternative model. It seems perfectly logical and taken with all the known facts, seems the most likely scenario.
I don’t see how anyone would consider absurd, the idea that the Ticketus investors and the Sevco investors are one and the same.
It would seem absurd to me to not have it as the number 1 option in a fairly small range of possibilities.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:43
1 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:38
==================================
I’m saying that the Ticketus debt would be largely secured if they hold the RFC plc floating charge at the point in time when RFC plc enter liquidation AND the Ticketus investors are behind Sevco.
————————————————————-
What makes you think either is true.
========================================
I thought the bit of my post you edited out had answered that question. 😕
HirsutePursuit says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:14
You mean stuff like this.
“I’m not saying that I have documentary evidence that these are known facts; but I am saying that there is an increasing & considerable weight of circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely.”
So, speculation.
” …circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely”
FFS you don’t commit yourself to very much. Circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely is abut as non-committal as you could make it.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:39
..It is intended as a short team solution to cash flow problems. Not a mechanism to fund the purchase of a business. It was a ludicrous way to fund a takeover.’
—–
Dead right.
But it’s a very simple way for a shyster to ( perhaps fraudulently) get his hands on sufficient monies to clear someone else’s debt and take over!
Isn’t it this aspect of potentially fraudulent claim to ownership of the club ( perhaps aided and abetted by the actual owner) that is at the heart of the police investigation into the sale of the club?
john clarke says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:24
===============================
You have me at a disadvantage, I have no idea what is ” at the heart of the police investigation into the sale of the club?”
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 21:57
But, what if Sevco and Ticketus are one and the same? If that is the case (and lets face it, nothing else makes any sense), Sevco are 100% immune to potential action by BDO in terms of accusations of gratuitous alienation. Any additional sum that Sevco are required to pay to keep the Rangers assets would effectively be paid to themselves.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
HP
Great analysis
I would go one step further
What if Ticketus, CW, Close Leasing and D&P are one and the same?
Thus demonstrating that it is in Greens and D&P `s interest to buy RFC assets with as much debt as possible because it gives the Spiv team a legal debt they can use to milk the fans perhaps liquidating ( after paying off the debt to themselves) as soon as they have enough fans cash in the bank eg if they get into the SPL next year via a corrupt SFA and collect £45m in STs
THey then sell Sevco to genuine Bears for perhaps a bargain £10m and skip off into the sunset
goosygoosy says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:35
… as soon as they have enough fans cash in the bank eg if they get into the SPL next year via a corrupt SFA and collect £45m in STs
===================
That’s an interesting piece of nonsense.
Presumably 45,000 season tickets at £1,000 each gives you the £45m.
Is tonight officially make it up as you go along night and no-one told me.
Johnbhoy75 (@Johnbhoy75) says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 23:27
The fund manager, for the sake of reputation, has to give the impression that they are chasing the losses, but in reality there is no way that Octopus have much cares about these losses and certainly won’t be going to any great lengths to recoup them. The idea that they would secretly back Sevco is absurd I’m afraid.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Johnbhoy75
With your knowledge of Octopus whats your view on why Ticketus have made no provision for a loss by Ticketus 2 on the RFC ST monies advanced to CW?Their annual accounts to end June 2012 make no mention of a provision. Are Ticketus deceiving their auditors?
Why do you think the RFC ST Ticketus investors who managed a combined maximum of £5m in 2009 2010 and 2011 were suddenly able to come up with £24.5m for CW in 2011?
Could you shed a light on why Fern Trading (owned by Octopus) took out a floating charge in March 2012 on the total assets of Ticketus? Are they about to liquidate Ticketus and “lose” the names of those loyal RFC ST investors who backed CW?
Agrajag says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:23
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:14
You mean stuff like this.
“I’m not saying that I have documentary evidence that these are known facts; but I am saying that there is an increasing & considerable weight of circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely.”
So, speculation.
” …circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely”
FFS you don’t commit yourself to very much. Circumstantial evidence to suggest that it is likely is abut as non-committal as you could make it.
=====================================
And you missed the bit where I said:
TBH, I’m not even sure what point you’re trying to make now. What is it you’re actually disagreeing with.
I’ve highlighted some known facts. I’ve placed my interpretation on those known facts. I’ve speculated as to how these facts might fit together. I haven’t listed all the relevant circumstances because it would be too long. I’ve simply highlighted the most important and most obvious connections.
You might no agree. Fine. You can put your own interpretation on events. You can choose to speculate on the cause/effects of what you know. I might see some fault with your logic. Also fine.
If you think I’m wrong, tell me where my assumptions are shaky. I might come back with additional points that strengthen my arguments. You might enlighten me to a glaring error in my logic. Give me a different interpretation of what we know as an alternative. Opine, if you wish, that my facts, interpretation or speculations are based on a false premise.
This is what this blog is all about.
Very little in this world is 100% certain. I will present my opinions of events with a level of certainty appropriate to my understanding of the circumstances.
If I say something is likely, I will not say it is more than that. If you need comfort by only operating in certainties you must find this world a frustrating place. 😕
Guys! Let’s debate the merits of the governance of Scottish football … with a bucket of popcorn and some ice cream and jelly! (sorry)
It’s ‘sit back and watch the show’ time! ;
Agrajag says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 00:34
‘You have me at a disadvantage, I have no idea what is ” at the heart of the police investigation into the sale of the club?”’
—-
I understand that there is ‘fraud squad’ interest in the sale of the club by SDM to CW.
It is mere speculation on my part that that interest would relate to the question of CW’s financial resources to buy the club and the origins thereof.
It seems to have been established that he sold the season ticket rights to Ticketus.
It also seems to be alleged that they were not ,at the time, his to sell, and that, consequently, he may have been guilty of a criminal offence. ( And that the sale would be null and void!)
I do not, of course, assert anything of the kind. Only that it is my understanding that there is some investigation into the sale, and into whether the real owner , wittingly or unwittingly, helped in the perpetration of a crime by providing false evidence as to ‘ownership’.
All hypothetical, but when one is discussing even high level shysters and cheats, one has to be prepared for any dirty deed.
Octopus don’t do walking away.
I have some VCTs with Octopus from a previous life.
They are tax efficient investments in allegedly high risk ventures (but not really) and before handing over their investors cash they do all the right kind of stuff and get all the right guarantees and charges to protect their investments if things go wrong.
Things like floating charges on assets to cover off the angles.
If not they would become a city and VCT pariah overnight and their investment funding would dry up.
I always thought they went kinda quiet when The CVA was discussed and in my previous existence as Neal said so on this forum.
They are smart operators whose silence means they are part of whatever is going on
This is probably passive but with their investment covered by assets that protect them either way.
That doesn’t mean they are part of the Murray/Whyte/Greene pact just financiers who have covered their risk.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/forres-mechanics-0-1-rangers-rangers-hang-on-despite-wobbles-1-2556769
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/stuart-bathgate-spl-also-rans-in-equally-dire-state-1-2556631
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/forres-0-1-rangers-rangers-toil-past-mechanics-1-2555498
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/forres-mechanics-0-rangers-1-young-legs-carry-ibrox-side-into-next-round.19018907
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/forres-0-rangers-1-stuck-in-bottom-gear.19014855
Danish Pastry says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 19:12
jmaclure says:
Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 16:21
It pains me to say it, but I don’t see the same thoughts on our situation, in fact, some want us gone forever.
Yes, I know we have left bills unpaid and we have tax issues to be dealt with, but people seem to forget it is 10 years or so out of 140 years existence. Why should the authorities see that to lose such a club as Rangers with their vast support will do more harm than good for Scottish Football?
Punish Whyte and Murray, but let us get on with supporting our club and watching football.
————-
jmclure,
RFC have been given every chance to continue. The reason other fans don’t like it is that it has taken extraordinary decisions by all of the governing bodies to make sure that the club did survive. It looks as though rules have been circumvented to achieve this. It is seen as enormous blue bias because it is.
So I’m not surprised that other fans don’t like Rangers. Though it’s probably also got something to do with many issues which are outwith football altogether. I am sure many believe these issues will only leave Scottish football if Rangers disappear.
My personal views have changed over the course of events. I now feel it would have been best to shut down the whole enterprise. What could be sold should have been sold, even if this meant the stadium. A new start, a fresh club, no matter how modest. It would have been a project many football fans would have supported, even from a distance. Green’s Rangers has no attraction for me, even less than the former club. Most of my family in Glasgow don’t go near Ibrox anymore and were pretty much disenchanted before the end of the Murray era. RFC have long been unrecognisable to the version I grew up with and even back then there was something rotten at the core.
The only way the club will get certain supporters back is by zero tolerance of all forms of sectarianism, whether it be songs or banners, and by a complete disassociation with Irish politics and religious b*****y. Will it happen anytime soon? Not at the rate our resident son of Yorkshire is going. Rangers might survive but they’ll remain dead to some of us.
—————————————-
I am sorry, once again you, like many others take a broad brush approach, tarnishing all Rangers supporters as bigots. It will not do.
Rangers have zero tolerance of all forms of sectarianism, they are in constant touch with their support regarding this and are still working hard behind the scemes with initiatives.
Arrests are made every week, read the papers, of Celtic and Rangers supporters who step out of line both at the football and on public transport and that combined with education will and is helping. To say there has not been an improvement in the last 20 years is disingenuous. Offenders often pay with losing their liveliehood.
‘and by a complete disassociation with Irish politics’, I agree, stamp it out, I take it you mean Celtic Park too.
That said ‘sectarianism is today is overplayed, look around, you, at work, at play, howmany times are you aware of it?
No, continue with the present steps, drip, drip, drip, it is working and will work.
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
Rangers have zero tolerance of all forms of sectarianism, they are in constant touch with their support regarding this and are still working hard behind the scemes with initiatives.
================================
So THAT’s what Green’s little tour of Northern Ireland was all about! Thanks for clearing that up for me. Having read the report of what went on there, there was me thinking that he was playing the good old orange card with a view to extracting yet more cash from the supporters. Silly me! It was actually an anti-sectarian initiative!
Interesting division of views overnight between those who believe the evidence suggestsTicketus in the scam and those who don`t
Mmmm……
I distinctly remember a similar period when the RTC Blog had some persistent posters who were upholding the integrity of D&P.
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
Before everyone jumps on you for these comments, I will try to offer my view on this.
Most fans I know did not actually want Rangers to disappear, much the same as they would not like England to not exist. We don’t have a burning hatred for English people or Rangers fans as individuals, what we despise is the superiority complex displayed by these teams, touted at every opportunity by a complicit media and used against as a tool to put us in “our place”.
Football is not just a sport to watch, it is also a bragging game for the fans which most of the time, lasts until the next game comes around. At home, in the work place, you cannot escape the smiles, jokes or sometimes abuse when your team is on the losing end of a key game.
The problem of discrimination in Scotland is not exclusive to Rangers, of course it isn’t. It isn’t even exclusive to football. The main problem is that for a long time, Rangers have been seen as a vehicle, a rallying point for those in our society that need this feeling of being part of group who have a common purpose, I am not quite sure what that purpose is but it tends to manifest itself in the discrimination of others. By promoting that “WATP” mindset then the club were leaving themselves open to infiltration by some of the more radical groups.
Up until a few years ago, I might have agreed it was getting better but the last years have seen the emergence of serious threats to life through various acts of stupidity or just plain evil (not in a biblical sense). The “Cup Final Songbook” is well documented and this season has seen a marked increase in the singing of offensive or banned songs, this trend is going in the opposite (wrong) direction and certainly not a small minority.
Now I am not as sensitive as others about CG visiting NI, that is his right and I would actively support that as a great number of fans reside there. I would however not align the team with any groups that are religious or dicriminatory and that is where your argument falls down as promoting Orange coloured replica strips is pandering to those such groups.
In summary, not all Rangers fans are bigots a lot of them are even very nice individuals but I would argue that the institution that is The Rangers Football Club is not one that is “all inclusive”.
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
I am sorry, once again you, like many others take a broad brush approach, tarnishing all Rangers supporters as bigots. It will not do.
——
Reminds me of the prosecutor in Pink Floyd’s “The Wall”, that. 🙂
—–
Rangers have zero tolerance of all forms of sectarianism, they are in constant touch with their support regarding this and are still working hard behind the scemes with initiatives.
—–
Perhaps Rangers, as an organisation, have this zero tolerance thing. It seems to me that this is like one of those workplace “policies” that you get, which actually mean very little in practical terms.
——
To say there has not been an improvement in the last 20 years is disingenuous.
——
I’d say that the internet, which has only been effective for the last 18 years or so, has exacerbated matters considerably. One only needs to look at the usual fan forums to see this.
——
‘and by a complete disassociation with Irish politics’, I agree, stamp it out, I take it you mean Celtic Park too.
——
Well, I certainly do. There is absolutely no place for this sort of thing in football. Religion and politics should be utterly irrelevant. Religion, particularly Christianity in its many guiises, is also pretty much irrelevant to modern society in this country. Glasgow, as a whole, needs to get a grip. Either that, or practice what your religion tells you to – like not wearing clothes woven from two types of material, for a start (Deuteronomy 22:11).
——
No, continue with the present steps, drip, drip, drip, it is working and will work.
——
I must say I’m quite removed from all that bilious nonsense, which I’m quite happy about. If things are improving from the point of view of you who are in the middle of it, then great. What I see is the odd headline about someone getting stabbed for wearing the wrong colour shirt, and what I experience is going into a pub in Glasgow before a gig and immediately being asked what team I support by a big guy with gold rings and stubble. I see people at factories refusing to wear green hair nets, refusing to shop at Asda and such absolute nonsense. Whether these things are strictly “sectarianism” is debatable, especially up here in the North East, but they are at the very least obnoxious (or noxious as the case may be)! 🙂
164! Still not a peep……. Something definitely reeks 😉
Brenda says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 10:15
=========================================================================
WRT your info from last night,has your source received new information,or is there a chance that confusion exists between CG trading at a loss and the D&P loss reported in their statement.
torrejohnbhoy @ 10:32
Haven’t spoken today yet but don’t think that’s the case. Will share whenever there is anything further 🙂
goosygoosy says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 09:52
Interesting division of views overnight between those who believe the evidence suggestsTicketus in the scam and those who don`t
Mmmm……
I distinctly remember a similar period when the RTC Blog had some persistent posters who were upholding the integrity of D&P.
======================================
There are those of us who simply have seen no evidence that Ticketus are involved in the scam.
They may be, they may not, however just saying they must be is at best poor debate.
Brenda says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 10:39
=======================================================================
Cheers.
The league cup final of a couple of seasons ago was a disgraceful display by the Rangers fans. I said at the time, it was like going back to the seventies.
The fact that a prominent politician and a senior policeman actually praised them after the game made it even worse.
Any claims to improvement were absolutely rubbished that day, any claims to it being a minority were proven to be absolute nonsense. It was every anthem of hate, sung by the majority of the fans, it was clear and it was consistent throughout the game.
So let’s not have this gradual improvement stuff, it simply isn’t true.
I certainly want this form of Rangers to disap[pear. One hustled into being dubiously run by a shyster and utterly opaque in its ownership accountability and future intentions. the last one disappeared of its own volition.
Only an extinction event which is a genuine extinction event can allow a clean legal fair rangers to emerge.
When that club emerges I will embrace it – not support it. To date no such entity exists.
Do I want to see Rangers disappear? – yes – but only for a wee while!
madbhoy24941 says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 09:54
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
Before everyone jumps on you for these comments, I will try to offer my view on this.
Most fans I know did not actually want Rangers to disappear, much the same as they would not like England to not exist. We don’t have a burning hatred for English people or Rangers fans as individuals, what we despise is the superiority complex displayed by these teams, touted at every opportunity by a complicit media and used against as a tool to put us in “our place”.
Football is not just a sport to watch, it is also a bragging game for the fans which most of the time, lasts until the next game comes around. At home, in the work place, you cannot escape the smiles, jokes or sometimes abuse when your team is on the losing end of a key game.
The problem of discrimination in Scotland is not exclusive to Rangers, of course it isn’t. It isn’t even exclusive to football. The main problem is that for a long time, Rangers have been seen as a vehicle, a rallying point for those in our society that need this feeling of being part of group who have a common purpose, I am not quite sure what that purpose is but it tends to manifest itself in the discrimination of others. By promoting that “WATP” mindset then the club were leaving themselves open to infiltration by some of the more radical groups.
Up until a few years ago, I might have agreed it was getting better but the last years have seen the emergence of serious threats to life through various acts of stupidity or just plain evil (not in a biblical sense). The “Cup Final Songbook” is well documented and this season has seen a marked increase in the singing of offensive or banned songs, this trend is going in the opposite (wrong) direction and certainly not a small minority.
Now I am not as sensitive as others about CG visiting NI, that is his right and I would actively support that as a great number of fans reside there. I would however not align the team with any groups that are religious or dicriminatory and that is where your argument falls down as promoting Orange coloured replica strips is pandering to those such groups.
In summary, not all Rangers fans are bigots a lot of them are even very nice individuals but I would argue that the institution that is The Rangers Football Club is not one that is “all inclusive”.
========================
A poster on KDS probably hit the nail on the head when he/she commented “Rangers are becoming the sporting wing of the O@ange Order”
CG is playing to every gallery he can but it would appear that the only one’s who are appreciative are those who favour a return to the “good old days”
Oh, really?
Just have a read again at Agrajag’s post on Friday!
Since arriving in Glasgow in the late forties from Dublin, I have had to confront again and again the same, evident sectariansm…….on both sides.
With all my heart and soul, I utterly detest people being disadvantaged by their creed, race or culture or their being seen as a threat because they are different. Such attitudes stem from delusion in perception of personal status or feelings of inadequacy and insecurity. It is a land in which intelligent, rational people should not dwell……ever.
Coupled with the timbre of the RTIDNI meeting of last week, as well as the extreme and triumphalist language around some of the Sevco foundling’s support of late and the oldco’ club past policies, only modified resentfully through external pressures, I find your post a tad blinkered, to say the least.
Can’t see much ‘zero’ tolerance amongst that little lot! I am afraid the wagons are still hitched to many of the same old, tiresome horses.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
I am sorry, once again you, like many others take a broad brush approach, tarnishing all Rangers supporters as bigots. It will not do.
Rangers have zero tolerance of all forms of sectarianism, they are in constant touch with their support regarding this and are still working hard behind the scemes with initiatives.
Arrests are made every week, read the papers, of Celtic and Rangers supporters who step out of line both at the football and on public transport and that combined with education will and is helping. To say there has not been an improvement in the last 20 years is disingenuous. Offenders often pay with losing their liveliehood.
‘and by a complete disassociation with Irish politics’, I agree, stamp it out, I take it you mean Celtic Park too.
That said ‘sectarianism is today is overplayed, look around, you, at work, at play, howmany times are you aware of it?
No, continue with the present steps, drip, drip, drip, it is working and will work.
************************************************************************************************************
Agrajag says:
Friday, September 28, 2012 at 23:26
We are all adults, read it for yourself and decide
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
As you are aware R.T.I.D.N.I invited Rangers F.C – C.E.O Charles Green over to Northern Ireland for a meeting with ourselves and Supporters Clubs to meet with the support.
Supporting Charles Green in his visit were Imran Ahmed and 2 other invited guests.
First thing on the Agenda was a short meeting with ourselves as a group which included myself, Gary Lenaghan, Jim Wilson and Trevor Maxwell.
Charles thanked us for the outstanding work that we had undertaken in helping to raise funds for the fighting fund.
We then moved Charles and guests to lunch with Senior representatives of Linfield F.C, which included discussions for a return match between Rangers and Linfield at Ibrox.
In attendance were Rangers Reps, Linfield Reps, and R.T.I.D.N.I Reps, Myself, Gary Lenagahan, Jim Wilson, Graeme Barr, Mark Rice and Trevor Maxwell.
A number of dates have been mooted and will be given out after further discussions.
A meeting was then planned in Castle Buildings with First Minister Of Northern Ireland Peter Robinson.
In attendance at an introductory meeting with The First Minister were Charles Green and guests, R.T.I.D.N.I Committee members, Myself, Gary Lenaghan, Jim Wilson and Sammy Douglas.
The purpose of this meeting was to explain to The First Minister, the disgraceful way that Politicians in Scotland have shown absolutely NO support for Rangers Football Club.
The words that Mr Green used were “If it was a Pie company going bust with the loss of Revenue to the local Economy and Job losses, Scottish M.Ps and Government Ministers would be bending over backwards to help”
Political backing for investment i.e Shops in Northern Ireland was also brought to the table and discussed,and after a lenghty discussion programme Mr Green informed us that he was extremely happy with the meeting and had found it very productive.
Mr Green and Peter Robinson then gave interviews to U.T.V Live.
Next stop was to to Stormont buildings where Mr Green and ourselves had a meeting with Ulster Unionist Party Leader Mike Nesbitt and M.L.A Danny Kennedy.
This was also a very Productive meeting.
R.T.I.D.N.I and guests then headed to The Hilton, Templepatrick to meet other Reps from Rangers Clubs throughout Northern Ireland.
After thanking everyone for attending, I explained our future plans for R.T.I.D.N.I.
This included getting ALL Clubs, Fan Groups and Fans in Northern Ireland to work together for a N.A.R.S.A type Convention in Northern Ireland.
First thing on the Agenda after introductions and thanks for Support etc, was for Mr Green and Imran to give a Presentation on current affairs at the Club and their outlook for the future.
Everyone was in agreement that our Clubs future was looking extremely good with plans of Hotels, Cancer Centre, New Shop, New Ticket office and renovations to Edmiston Club along with Football Academies in America, Asia and widespread Global Marketing.
A few key points where made by Charles Green before a Q&A, which had to be shortened due to time.
Key Points
1: Charles Green stated quite categorically that although it was not ALL Clubs in the S.P.L that he had a problem with, his main problem was with The Leadership and running of the S.P.L.
He said the Agenda from the S.P.L against Rangers F.C and their fans and their constant attacks upon our Club will not be forgotten.
He then stated that whilst things are the way they are, the onslaught continues AND as long as he is C.E.O of Rangers F.C, Rangers will NEVER play in the S.P.L again.
This was met with a round of applause from the Audience.
2:Charles then brought up the question of Rangers Shares.
He explained that Rangers Shares will ONLY be available Direct from Rangers F.C.
They will be sold at first to Rangers Fans and Rangers Fans only, as in Season Ticket Holders registered Supporters Clubs and Members of the Rangers Family.
No other option for buying shares will be available.
A shortened Q&A then took place and was as follows.
Q1: What is happening about the money that is owed to Rangers by the S.P.L etc ?
C.G: “The S.P.L are refusing to hand what is due to Rangers and the fight against these disgraceful decisions was still ongoing”
Q2: Would Rangers Consider putting a Team back into the N.I Milk Cup ?
C.G: “This had already been raised by the Youth Team Coach and would definitely be looked at in the future”
Q3: Would Rangers consider bringing out an Orange Top ?
C.G: “Yes, they have a number of designs and are coming near agreement with Adidas” (my bold print)
Q4: Will you continue with the fight against all Rangers enemies out there as you have been doing ?
C.G: “Absolutely and with everything in my body, I wasnt a Rangers Supporter when I came here but I am Now”
Q5: Would Rangers Consider flying the 4 Home Nations Flags alongside the Flags already above Ibrox ?
C.G “I dont see why Not as the contribution and dedication of Rangers Fans throughout the U.K and the world is second to none and should be recognised”
After a massive thanks to Mr Green from myself on behalf of the Committee, 6yr Old Rangers Season Ticket Holder Johua Wilson, made a Presentation of a Crystal Clock with the words, ”To Charles Green, from R.T.I.D.N.I.”
Mr Green then stayed behind to sign Autographs and pose for photos before retiring to bed.
We met up with Charles Green today, Fri 28th and took him into Belfast City Centre to look at a proposed building to open a New Rangers Store.
Greg Mcafee had arranged a number of premises for Mr Green to look at and hopefully this will be concluded soon.
We then run Mr Green and guests to the Airport and thanked them for visiting Northern Ireland.
All in all we found Mr Green to be very honest and upfront and along with all the other Supporters thought his plans were excellent.
Therefore on behalf of Myself and R.T.I.D.N.I We would like to give our FULL backing to Mr Green and his plans for Rangers F.C.
WE Support fully, his stance with regards to the hatred towards our club and the Agenda by The S.P.L/S.F.A and fully back him every step of the way in his fight against the haters of Rangers F.C and their Fans.
We also Support fully the plans on the way forward for Rangers F.C and we would urge ALL Fans, Fan Groups Clubs etc etc to Support The Share Scheme (I.P.O) which will be put forward by Rangers F.C. and to buy Shares when available.
R.T.I.D.N.I has taken great steps and have worked tirelessly to get the Opportunity of actually getting a Rangers C.E.O to come to Northern Ireland, something that has never been done before by ANYBODY.
Mr Green was so impressed that he has promised to visit us again, such is the connections that are there.
I would like to thank Everyone involved, from Ourselves, Friends in Scotland, The Leaders of both Unionist Parties and eveyone who helped make this happen.
We believe that Mr Green is the real deal and has the Full Backing of R.T.I.D.N.I and we would urge ALL fans to do the same.
We would also urge ALL Northern Ireland Fans, Groups and Clubs to join with us to form a new gouping more representative of N.I. Rangers Fans to not only have a big say at Rangers, but to organise a good convention every year.
Together We Are Better !!
Thomas Mathers.
Chairman
R.T.I.D.N.
SC Draw Part 1
Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
Albion Rovers v Greenock Morton; Cowdenbeath v Selkirk/Vale of Leithen; Edinburgh City v Queen of the South; Stirling Albion v Deveronvale;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
2m Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
Airdrie United v Raith Rovers; Stranraer v Queen’s Park; Partick Thistle v Cove Rangers; Forfar Athletic v Clyde/Nairn County;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
3m Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
William Hill Scottish Cup third round draw: Buckie Thistle/Annan Athletic v Turriff United; Dumbarton v East Stirlingshire;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
Rangers v Alloa Athletic; Elgin City v East Fife. Ties to be played 3rd November 2012. #RoadToHampden
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
54s Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
Inverurie Loco Works v Arbroath; Ayr United v Clachnacuddin; Stenhousemuir v Berwick Rangers; Brechin City v Bonnyrigg Rose;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
2m Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
Albion Rovers v Greenock Morton; Cowdenbeath v Selkirk/Vale of Leithen; Edinburgh City v Queen of the South; Stirling Albion v Deveronvale;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
3m Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
Airdrie United v Raith Rovers; Stranraer v Queen’s Park; Partick Thistle v Cove Rangers; Forfar Athletic v Clyde/Nairn County;
Expand
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
4m Scottish FA Scottish FA @Scottish_FA
William Hill Scottish Cup third round draw: Buckie Thistle/Annan Athletic v Turriff United; Dumbarton v East Stirlingshire;
Expand
Reply
Retw
Just thinking(dangerous I know but I can’t stop),
The SPL/SFA brought in new rules regarding penalties,punishment,whatever for clubs who fail to pay their tax/nic on time.
To gain membership,CG agreed to accept any footballing sanctions applicable to oldco.
Therefore,when the FTT(T) result is released,and if RFC(IA) are found liable,can the SFA/SPL punish Newco under footballing rules?.
Does anyone know what is meant by the following re-tweet from RTC? What relevance (if any) do Brentwood Estates Manchester Property Management have?
RFCCreditorOfTheDay @RFCCreditors
@rangerstaxcase Please RT Rangers Creditor Of The Day No. 1 Brentwood Estates Manchester Property Management £42963.06
jmaclure says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 08:14
4 21 Rate This
————-
The microphones on my Rangers TV stream must have been picking up singing from another era then, relayed back through a cosmic wormhole. And Charles Green’s rhetoric isn’t exactly appealing to the jolly Morris Dancing fraternity among the blue masses, more’s the pity. I know some things have been done, but the time for drip drip drip is past.
The main points I was making were an attempt to answer you on why other supporters perhaps dislike Rangers – the club and its fans. There’s no point in just saying ‘Whit aboot Celtic?’ Why is it so difficult to take an honest look deep into the soul of RFC past and present? All I’m saying is that there are things there that turn people off, sectarianism is part of it but not all. The same things also turn off a sizable number of the club’s own supporters. As far as the offensive songs and chants go, you find out who’s responsible and you ban them for life. The technology is there, but is the will?
The current financial mess with the ‘it wisnae oor fault’, and moaning about punishments, plus the attitude that special treatment is a birthright does folk’s heids in. Why is it so difficult to man up and acknowledge what is actually happening? If the club and certain fans would get off the triumphalist horse, and show a bit of humilty and honest respect for other clubs, it might win some friends and some sympathy. Instead we get stuff about ‘oor enemies’ and ‘not everyone will be welcome at Ibrox’ and ‘we won’t forget who voted against us’. And now this NI love in. Why is this? As far as I know Rangers was not founded by people from Ireland to celebrate anything particularly Irish. The founders were Highland lads, aye, teuchters. If anything, the club should celebrate teuchterism 🙂
Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 11:09
Does anyone know what is meant by the following re-tweet from RTC? What relevance (if any) do Brentwood Estates Manchester Property Management have?
RFCCreditorOfTheDay @RFCCreditors
@rangerstaxcase Please RT Rangers Creditor Of The Day No. 1 Brentwood Estates Manchester Property Management £42963.06
===========================================================================
LTL,
Had a quick look.It just seems to be a Twitter account set up to name a different RFC creditor every day.I assume just to show a list of creditors to folk who would not normally see one.Not relevant to any actions etc.
LTL,
Here’s the link.
https://twitter.com/RFCCreditors
“RFCCreditorOfTheDay
@RFCCreditors
A daily guide to those who were unfortunate enough to be cheated financially by Rangers FC”
Danish Pastry says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 11:10
As far as I know Rangers was not founded by people from Ireland to celebrate anything particularly Irish. The founders were Highland lads, aye, teuchters. If anything, the club should celebrate teuchterism
==============================
You got me into nostalgia mode there, all right.
You’ve made me recall, for the first time in about 40 years, Angus Og, a cartoon strip in the Record (back when it was still a newspaper). The very essence of Teuchterism. Talk about stereotyping and casual racism! I can’t imagine it passing muster these days. It used to make me laugh, though. It just encapsulated every Glasgow preconception about teuchters, who were deemed to start about 10 miles from the Tolbooth, as I remember!
Totally off topic, I know,
OT but worth a mention 😆
Anthony R. Hamilton @polishturnstile
Neil Lennon was asked by a Russian journalist if he would turn to Sean Connery if the club was in financial difficulty… Priceless
Agrajag says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 10:39
goosygoosy says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 09:52
Interesting division of views overnight between those who believe the evidence suggestsTicketus in the scam and those who don`t
Mmmm……
I distinctly remember a similar period when the RTC Blog had some persistent posters who were upholding the integrity of D&P.
======================================
There are those of us who simply have seen no evidence that Ticketus are involved in the scam.
They may be, they may not, however just saying they must be is at best poor debate.
,,,,,,
Agrajag
You may be right
Perhaps the Ticketus Fund Manager Ross Bryan who did the deal was an innocent victim of a scam by Craig Whyte with the witting (or unwitting support) of David Greir, Gary Withey, Phil Betts and the Investors who invested in RFC STs in 2009 2010 and 2011
Who knows ?
Its unlikely anyone from Ticketus will volunteer the true story of their role. So we are left to join whatever dots are in the public domain.
Like
C Whyte is considered a Spiv for not paying income tax and NI deducted from RFC employees. G Withey was fired from his job at Collyer Bristow. D Grier is under investigation by a High Court Judge for conflict of interest. P Betts resigned from RFC at a critical juncture.
A celebration dinner was held after the takeover was completed. Attendees were the Ticketus Fund Mgr Ross Bryan plus Whyte, Grier, Withey, Betts and various lawyers.
Like
Why did Ticketus make no provision for a loss by Ticketus 2 on the RFC ST monies advanced to CW? Their annual accounts to end June 2012 make no mention of a provision.
Like
How were the RFC ST Ticketus investors who managed a combined maximum of £5m across 2009, 2010 and 2011 suddenly able to come up with £24.5m for CW in 2011 when RFC were a basket case being sold for £1?
Like
Why did Fern Trading (owned by Octopus) take out a floating charge on 24 March 2012 on the total assets of Ticketus? .Is it a coincidence that liquidatingTicketus and moving funds to Fern Trading quickly enables the repayment of RFC investors and removing their names from the list of Ticketus investors?
Thanks to the magnificent exploits of Team Europe, I was away from my computer last night but, checking back, it seems to have been just like the good old days of RTC.
Great analysis and deductive reasoning from the likes of hirsutepursuit and a lot of scoffing and “nonsense, nonsense” comments from agrajag and johnboy75 (no relation!).
They seemed particularly keen to rubbish suggestions that Ticketus are at the heart of the Sevco scam.
Well, if the trolls say black, we know for sure it’s white.
To me, the whole story rests on that one extraordinary transaction in which an experienced investment company allowed £27million to be forwarded into the account of a formerly disqualified director with an abysmal credit history BEFORE the takeover had even been officially completed.
These companies simply don’t do that unless they have platinum-clad guarantees that their cash is safe.
Or unless the transaction had been waved through on the express instructions of the person who had invested the vast majority of that £27m into Ticketus in the first place.
Which is perhaps a reason for the interest shown by the Serious Fraud Office.
Getting back to Sevco, the fact that their chief financial officer Brian Stockbridge was sent to Scotland by Zeus Capital in late February within days RFC PLC going into administration is, to me, a clear signal that Ticketus are involved here.
Ticketus showed a keen interest in just about every proposed takeover deal. Then they went quiet.
And then it became clear that a deal had been stitched up by Fudd and Duffer. With Imran Ahmad (formerly of the infamous Hoodless Brennan stockbrokers) and Stockbridge running the show and Green keeping the gullible idiots onside with increasingly distasteful and logic-defying outbursts.
It’s Ticketus all the way. But it could be even worse than that.
With Minty Moonbeams showing his big fat head above the parapet again, I suspect (and, to be fair, have always suspected this) that the equation could be:
Sevco = Ticketus = Minty’s offshore trust fund cash.
And the more agrajag and johnboy75 say it ain’t so, the more sure I’ll be that I’m right.
Couple of small point’s,
D&P had 3 directors resignation dates down as N/A,well just to help them out,Andrew Ellis,Dave King and Craig Whyte all resigned on the same day,the 1st june 2012.
Gary Withey is still named company secretary,anyone know why?.I thought he got the chop.
Just been noseying around and found that Andrew Ellis was appointed director to WAVETOWER/THE RANGERS FC GROUP LIMITED on 20/10/2010,that’s 4 months before Craig Whtye joined on the 11/02/2011.I was under the impression that Wavetower/Trfcgl was a CW company to handle the takeover,so why would AE be a director before CW?
johnboy5088 says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 11:47
==========================
You miss the point.
I don’t know if Ticketus are involved in a scam, I don’t know if they aren’t. I have not seen decent evidence either way.
Loads of conjecture, hearsay, people recounting theories until they become received wisdom.
If you really think that’s the proper way for a blog to operate fair enough. However disagreeing does not make me a troll.
I think it is perfectly clear that Ticketus will be doing what they can to try and secure as much as they can for their investors. That is surely only right. However it is a million miles away from them being involved in a scam.
I think people are forgetting that Ticketus believed that their purchase of season tickets survived insolvency because of the nature of rights. They were told they were wrong, in Scotland, because those rights are different in Scotland. This is not conjecture, it comes from the Court of Session ruling.
Ticketus believed they would be entitled to the proceeds of sale of tickets whether Rangers went into administration, came out via a CVA, or were liquidated. They believed that they would be no part of that process and sat comfortably outside of it.
They were wrong, and as far as I can see are reacting to that.
In this apparently new age of understanding by the average bear, it may be notable that RM felt the need to post this message the other night:
——
Posted 27 September 2012 – 06:50 PM
Jadams posted the following a while ago, recent events mean I’m posting it again. Without going into detail, suffice to say the police (specifically FoCUS) are paying close attention to posts on RM and are likely to ask for personal details of anyone making threats in posts. We cannot monitor every post, please be aware you can be held responsible for what you post. If you see a post that could be interpreted as a threat, or are concerned about something you’ve posted, please alert the moderator/admin team.
The rules are here, please read them and protect yourselves by posting within the law.
If you are in anyway unsure of what you can and cannot say, or what details RM may have to provide to police, please PM one of the moderator/admin team.
Jadams, on 11 March 2011 – 07:48 PM, said:
Due to the Summit of 8 March 2011 involving the SFA, police, Scottish Government and Old Firm representatives; RangersMedia (“RM”) has no option but to obey these rules. Please understand our new measures are for the protection of Rangers fans.
For clarification, and for the avoidance of doubt, RM are not liable for any member’s posts and you are personally liable for your comments.
No threats to anyone, as interpreted by the law
Sectarianism will not be allowed, as interpreted by the law
——
Robert Coyle says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 11:58
============================
Ellis set up Wavetower in Sep 11. He claims to have met Whyte in the November and “invited” him to be part of the takeover. The whole thing’s a sham. Murray couldn’t be seen to be selling RFC to Ellis as he was not a “Rangers man” so, in my opinion, he got Ellis to get a “Rangers man” to front it and the rest is history. They are all involved in this together with pretend spats going on between them.
Are we really to believe that Murray sat down last week with a man who was determined to have his name removed from RFC’s history and had a “fruitful discussion” The only fruit under discussion was that supplied by Jaffa.
Elllis involvment has always stank to high heaven
He was a failed bidder for Rfc* yet Whyte brought him in to his consortium almost immediately
Why would Whyte want or need Ellis ?
The truth would seem to be Ellis needed Whyte for the reasons pointed out above by tomtom
I know on the early days of RTC tomtom and myself kept dragging up the Ellis factor
as being highly significant and I still think there is a smoking gun connecting him with this whole affair. Any links between Ellis and Green ?
Danish Pastry says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 11:10
As far as I know Rangers was not founded by people from Ireland to celebrate anything particularly Irish. The founders were Highland lads, aye, teuchters. If anything, the club should celebrate teuchterism
————————————————————
So does that mean Cove Rangers are the real Rangers??
tomtomaswell says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 12:11
Sorry – “jaffa” ?
twopanda says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 12:43
tomtomaswell says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 12:11
Sorry – “jaffa” ?
—————————–
The bogit pound. Murray knew exactly how to play this particular game and probably briefed Charlie before the visit to NI.
…………167 and counting ……….. Maybe a statement explaining the lack of statement from SFA? No ……. Too much to ask I suppose that would mean transparency ooooohh bad word in hampden 🙂
RTC clearly got Allan Rennie & Traynor in his cross-hairs very good to see don’t let these men get away with it. I suspect Mr Rennie’s twitter account will soon be liquidated as RTC is on to him. Rangers Tax Case you deserve the freedom of the land like the batman of the journalistic world, no filth and lies escape your truth. Keep it up destroy the D Record’s filth once and for all.
monsieurbunny says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 12:41
6 0 Rate This
————————————————————
So does that mean Cove Rangers are the real Rangers??
————
Perhaps, along with Brora, the true Teuchter Rangers 🙂
neepheid, I remember Angus Og. I always thought of it as an adult cartoon. I was more Oor Wullie, Beano, Dandy, and Hotspur, that type of thing. By the way, although teuchter (big ‘T’?) is used to stereotype, it used to carry the complimentary ‘big, strapping Highlander’ meaning. I appreciated your geographical definition regarding the Tolbooth as that makes me most definitely part teuchter – and proud of it!
Hootsmon.
The old Rangers Football Club owed more than £94m in unpaid tax and penalties, according to its administrators.
Creditors have until 12 October to vote on the report. When the administration period ends, the old Rangers FC will be placed in the hands of liquidators BDO.
He (Green) has since formed a new club which is playing in the Scottish Football League Third Division.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-19786824
Anybody got the time to examine G D Stefano claims etc. He seem’s to be getting worked up about no liquidation etc. Not sure how he bases these his thought. I suspect he’s just looking for attention but anyone got facts and figure’s to show he’s full of whatever it is again.
I was looking again at the article from the BBC Web site re Duff and Duffer (copyright acknowledged) and the report that Lord Hodge seeks:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18549293
In defence of the alligations – in traditional style the administrators have said that the matter is in the hands of their solicitors (presumably they have moved to seek re-dress from the BBC).
He [Mr Grier – Duff and Duffer copyright acknowledged] said “the false allegations made by the BBC” were now in the hands of Duff and Phelps solicitors.
As far as I could see, no montion of Duff and Phelps persuing action against the BBC in their final report to creditors. Has there been any news as to whether the administrators have moved to take legal action?
I must say I’m quite removed from all that bilious nonsense, which I’m quite happy about. If things are improving from the point of view of you who are in the middle of it, then great. What I see is the odd headline about someone getting stabbed for wearing the wrong colour shirt, and what I experience is going into a pub in Glasgow before a gig and immediately being asked what team I support by a big guy with gold rings and stubble. I see people at factories refusing to wear green hair nets, refusing to shop at Asda and such absolute nonsense. Whether these things are strictly “sectarianism” is debatable, especially up here in the North East, but they are at the very least obnoxious (or noxious as the case may be)! 🙂
——————————————————-
Absolute garbage.
I have posted before on these lines, but here we go again. Firstly, I do not believe any of the stuff we are being fed by the MSM. Does anyone?
The idea that Ticketus just swallows a £26m loss lying down is not credible. That money is real money. The bank were really paid off. No matter what the tax relief position, no genuine 3rd party investor is going to be happy seeing that amount going south. So given the total passivity of Ticketus since Green arrived, either a) the money has not gone south, or b) the investor is not a genuine 3rd party investor. [or c), both, of course]
The Ticketus deal was clearly negotiated while the saintly “Sir” David Murray owned the club. That deal could not have gone through without his personal involvement. And, no, I haven’t any documentary evidence, but it is perfectly clear from the timeline. Anyone who disagrees, just tell me how it could have been done without his involvement.
Whyte (an interesting character) has put sweet hee haw of his own money into this. He is the man in the middle, involved only to put a bit of space between Murray and Green. No doubt he has, or will be, handsomely rewarded for his trouble.
Now we come to Green, the man who came from nowhere (or Sheffield) to buy up the lot at 10 minutes notice. Does anyone believe all that? There are credible (to me) reports on this forum of D&P refusing higher offers to hand Green the keys to Ibrox. It is certainly clear that Green was around long before his last minute cut-price offer.
Green, to be fair, has always said that he is a frontman for other interests, in it for the short term. I take him at his word on that. Who are these other interests? We will never be told. Green promised to divulge to the bears, but now that they are eating out of his hand, why bother? They clearly don’t really want to know. (apart from Bomber).
My own conclusion? “Sir” David Murray has never let this one go. It is dear to his heart, it is “his” club, and he still owns it. HMRC (and the pieman) have been seen off, there is a new, debt free RFC still playing football at Ibrox, maybe not at as high a level as he wanted, but still in the mix. By the time BDO get control of the paperwork and carry out a 10 year forensic investigation, it won’t matter to him. Or probably anyone else, by then.
Which brings me to my favourite topic, Lord Hodge, who has now delayed liquidation by 3 months. Why? I know he is admired and respected by some posters on here, who clearly have a professional relationship with him. But why the delay? All the delay in liquidation has done is to serve the interests of Sevco. Could the RFC membership have been transferred to Sevco if RFC were in liquidation? I would love to know the answer to that one. I’m guessing not, because that membership would have been extinguished on liquidation. So what was the point of Lord Hodge blocking the liquidation? Whose interests did it serve? Why? I watch and wait.
Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, October 1, 2012 at 13:33
=======================
Amazing, the truth from the mainstream.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-19786824
The old Rangers Football Club owed more than £94m in unpaid tax and penalties, according to its administrators.
…
After HMRC rejected proposals for a creditors agreement that would have allowed the old club to continue, Duff and Phelps negotiated a sale of assets to a consortium led by Charles Green for £5.5m.
…
He has since formed a new club which is playing in the Scottish Football League Third Division.