It gets dafter and dafter. It is just over a year since the ridiculous and embarrassing – but failed – attempts by those in charge of Scottish Football to blackmail the SFL clubs and force them to parachute the shiny new Rangers into the SFL First Division.
A year where the new era of “transparency” heralded by a huge drum roll, gave way to secret agreements (which were never adhered to); panic-stricken measures to rush through change in the structure of the game without ANY delay or meaningful consultation – despite a hitherto intransigent approach to any kind of change; non-denial denials of the charge that Rangers were given a football licence without due process.
By the way, the SFA sent an official to an SPL Tribunal with a new convoluted interpretation of a rule which had been used to penalise clubs in the past, and ignored compelling evidence that one club had been economical with the truth on matters regarding banned directors when submitting their application for membership.
I could go on of course, but the incredulity bar is lowered with each ridiculous, contorted and corrupt episode, so that by the time we get to the claims made by several sources that Charles Green was in league with Craig Whyte when he bought some of the old club’s assets, we hardly blink an eye that the SFA appear content to accept the outcome of an internal inquiry ordered by the organisation most likely to be disadvantaged if the claims were true.
Whatever RTC was about, and it was about avarice, corporate malfeasance, theft of public money and the destruction of the integrity of competition in the game, we have moved on from there.
Even if the powers in charge of our game are forced to dispense proper justice in the case of both old Rangers and the new club, there appears to be little prospect that they will have done so because of a Damascene conversion in the ways of sporting integrity, fairness and Corinthianism. They will still be corrupt – just corrupt and bad at it. I am convinced that people have left the game in some numbers this season because of their disgust at the handling of the Rangers fiasco. I see no evidence at all that those people who voted with their feet last year will see a reason to change their tune this time around.
Whatever Rangers were guilty of, there is a general understanding of why they did what they did. They wanted to win – to be the best, and they pushed the envelope as far as they could before tearing the thing up altogether. What they did was 100% in their own self interest. It stinks, but at least it is logical.
What the authorities have done on the other hand is far more gobsmackingly illogical and unintuitive. They have acted in the interest of one club to the continued disadvantage of eleven others (in the case of the SPL, UEFA licences and player registration). They acted against the interests of new aspirants to senior football, and in concert with the interest of just one when they shoehorned Sevco (that’s what they were called then) into the SFL Third Division. I am sure they did that in the belief that a full season of no football at Ibrox would probably kill forever the cash cow that Green and his cohorts were fattening up for slaughter.
Despite the punishment that was accepted by Sevco (the transfer embargo), the SFA have stood by whilst the spirit of that sanction (although admittedly not the letter) was ripped up in their (still silent and impassive) faces as the MSM spun a market day frenzy of transfer activity by a club who were ostensibly proscribed from participating in that market.
Of course there are those who do not want to believe that their club, one of the forty-one good guys, is complicit in this nonsense – and yet ALL of our clubs ARE the SFA or the SPFL. Despite this catalogue of shameful inaction, sabotage and double-dealing, not one voice of dissent emanating from any of our clubs has been heard in print or broadcast media. Instead, huge pay increases and votes of thanks to the bureaucrats who acted out the farce authored by their masters, the clubs.
Is this because they (the clubs) are in agreement with what has transpired? I find it impossible to come to any other conclusion.
There are those who argue compellingly that if clubs, especially those who have a history of rivalry with Rangers tinged with some rancour, were to speak out, the press would have a field day; that allegations of bigotry and Rangers-hating would ensue from the MSM which would wind up the otherwise reasonable chaps who support Rangers.
In my view, if the situation is thus, then we are saying that we all have to keep our thoughts to ourselves, know our place and just take what scraps we get. If fear of violent retribution is the trump card here, then the trick for success in Scottish Football is not to have the most feared football team, but the group of fans which fills others with most dread. That is the death of the game – period.
What crystallises itself for me here is this fear factor. Anonymity has been carefully protected by most of us on this blog for exactly the reasons outlined above. Our desire to remain anonymous has been strengthened by the failure of authority, jointly AND severally, to itself stand up for the sport. The key from day one has been fear. Fear and corruption, which is merely a microcosm of the life in our country.
Whether it’s the media ignoring the wrongdoings of a football club, or a corrupt political system where for £40m donation you can get yourself £400m in tax breaks, we see those with resources pissing all over us from a very prodigious height. And when we do find out about it, we are cautioned to be very afraid of taking any action. Afraid of terrorism, afraid of unemployment, afraid of the mob.
I find myself resigned to the realisation that no matter WHAT evidence is uncovered, it will make absolutely no difference to anyone unless Joe Public keeps his hands in his pockets. People in boardrooms all over the country are betting that football fans are too emotionally invested in their clubs to do so.
The cheats, the spivs and the blazers will in the short and medium term get their own way, many of them aware of the fact that they are not quite as equal as others – and yet happy to go along with that.
We all have to decide whether or not we are as content as they are.
Suspecting as I do that most of us will find that unacceptable, I think there is still a war to be won, even if the battles seem to be going against us time and again. As long as we continue to feel that sense of outrage, that sense of betrayal by the custodians of our sport, we will still be shouting from these pages.
Thanks to the generosity and commitment of our readers, the shouting is about to get louder. We have reached our funding target and we hope to start organising our Podcasts within the next few weeks. The fight goes on, but hopefully it will also have greater reach.
TSFM
slimshady61 says:
July 17, 2013 at 9:30 pm
A great post, and I would like to add to your comments re Davie White, whom I remember as a good player for Clyde in the 50’s/60’s and a decent manager of Rangers and Dundee afterwards.
However I must take issue with you regarding Lawell, on one point only- the unopposed re-election of Ogilvie as SFA president. Now I know I’m becoming a real old bore on this topic, but can you justify that? Is that how Scottish football should be run? Am I supposed to pay for THAT? Well if Lawell or anyone else thinks that I’m chipping in to the Ogilvie benevolent fund, then sorry, but forget it. This issue should have been dealt with, once and for all, by the clubs, all of them, 4 weeks ago at the AGM. It is to the eternal shame of EVERY club in Scotland that it wasn’t. Now, Peter Lawell, stand up and tell me, as a lifelong Celtic supporter, why it wasn’t dealt with at the AGM, in clear and simple terms that even I can understand. Or go whistle for my money.
I only pick on Lawell because he represents the club that I have paid into over so many years. I could ask the same question of any other club in Scotland, but they owe me nothing. In my opinion Lawell owes me an explanation. Is that unreasonable? Will I get it? – no I won’t. Will he see another penny from me?- no he won’t. That’s the way it works in the very simple, but apparently very strange (to most people) neepheid world. As somebody posted earlier, individual boycotts have no effect. Of course that’s true. But this old sod isn’t being taken for a fool by anyone. They can get their money from someone else. That is not a call for a boycott. Others will see things totally differently. It is a statement of my own position. Nothing else.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:14 pm
‘…..is it possible the shares are being bought back by RIFC?….”
——–
You prompted me to google on the subject.
See the link
taxationweb.co.uk/tax-articles/business-tax/company-purchase-of-own-shares.html
Not sure I even begin to understand it, but there seems to be a lot of legal things and palaver if a company wants to buy its own shares.
If RIFC were doing so we might have heard something.
john clarke says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:40 pm
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:14 pm
‘…..is it possible the shares are being bought back by RIFC?….”
——–
You prompted me to google on the subject. See the link
taxationweb.co.uk/tax-articles/business-tax/company-purchase-of-own-shares.html
Not sure I even begin to understand it, but there seems to be a lot of legal things and palaver if a company wants to buy its own shares. If RIFC were doing so we might have heard something.
———————————————————————————————————————
In a nutshell it is possible certainly since the 2006 Companies Act but basically a resolution has to be passed to do so:
http://www.companylawclub.co.uk/topics/can_a_company_buy_its_own_shares.shtml
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:14 pm
‘…..is it possible the shares are being bought back by RIFC?….”
+++++
There used to be a total ban on companies buying their own shares. The rules were relaxed in the 80’s (part of “big bang”?), but I think that even now any such move would have to be approved by a shareholder vote (AGM or EGM).
neepheid says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:50 pm
1 0 Rate Down
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:14 pm
‘…..is it possible the shares are being bought back by RIFC?….”
+++++
There used to be a total ban on companies buying their own shares. The rules were relaxed in the 80′s (part of “big bang”?), but I think that even now any such move would have to be approved by a shareholder vote (AGM or EGM).
————————————
so no major obstacles to overcome for spivco then?
For a Limited Company to buy its own shares it has to be financed from the company’s distributable profits or from a new share issue.
😈 😉
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:14 pm
4 1 Rate This
Just a thought, on the 400k shares bought/sold today.
is it possible the shares are being bought back by RIFC?
—————————————————-
No.
neepheid says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:32 pm
Replace Lawell with my own club’s chairman and you’re absolutely on the button. Same response from me re the SFA and the hampden games. For the club stuff genuinely haven’t decided for the coming season yet. Historically the season ticket was on the mantle piece long before now.
Finloch says:
July 16, 2013 at 2:34
Finloch says @ 8.15pm
What you post is entirely up to you. I questioned the wisdom of Neepheid using the evidence of your chit-chat over several beers (not in a bar I acknowledge) to demand a statement from Celtic FC. To his credit, Nh has since withdrawn this.
If you come up with something more convincing than your source doesn’t talk “ballacks” then I’d join Neepheid in looking for answers. Meantime, the good ole boys at the SFA go on their merry way.
iamacant says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:27 pm
‘..He’s back and going by yesterdays tweets, did he know something was in the air?.”’
——
Is AIM about to suspend trading in RIFC prior to de-listing?
( I’ve no idea what that actually means, except that it’s probably not a good thing to happen?)
Drew Peacock says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:49 am
21 4 Rate This
Peter says:
July 16, 2013 at 11:18 pm
=================================
By witholding money from Celtic does that not weaken them and Scottish football in general? In a few years time that will be to the benefit of Rangers.
——————————————————————————————————————————
Ah but you see what you are doing there is playing the emotional blackmail card and that is simply a card that doesn’t work any more.
I wont pay money to a scam or a corrupt sport, especially when my own club endorses it.
If Celtic are weakened because of this, then it’s time the decision makers at Celtic Park started to take a look at themselves because their silence in this is sickening people into staying away.
I wasn’t put on this earth to pay money to a scam. The emotional blackmail doesn’t work. It’s over.
I thought Celtic stood for something. They (board members) should hang their heads in shame every time they walk past the statue of Brother Walfrid.
They have accepted that they will always dance to the Rangers tune for money or fear or cowardice or whatever.
Not me.
This is not about paying money to Celtic – this is about not paying money to watch a fixed sport whilst Celtic look on and do nothing. A major difference.
ianjs says:
July 17, 2013 at 11:40 am
“I have these, but because they are jpgs they will take up a fair amount of space.”
———————–
Sorry about the delay in responding ianjs.
I’ve sent you a Private Message (PM).
Whilst logged in, if you go to the very top of the page you will see a row of tabs, one of which is labelled ‘Contacts’. If you click on this a drop down menu appears with the first item being ‘Private Message’. If you click on this it takes you to a page where hopefully you will pick up my correspondence.
I’ll PM you again once I’ve got my bearings.
iamacant says:
July 17, 2013 at 10:27 pm
“He’s back and going by yesterdays tweets, did he know something was in the air?”
—————————-
I was under the impression that the twitter account ‘AnOrangeCount’ was being used by Jack Irvine. I must have this wrong as I can’t see why Rangers media advisers would be celebrating the prospect of a share price collapse. Please correct my understanding if necessary.
Peter says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:27 am
“This is not about paying money to Celtic – this is about not paying money to watch a fixed sport whilst Celtic look on and do nothing. A major difference.”
————————
The sentiment is both principled and logical.
Like other posters however I can see a mismatch between the intent and the outcome. Obviously I have no levergae in your own personal decisions but I’d like to explore the cause and effect that have led you to this juncture.
As amply illustrated by the Rangers saga, the loyalty of football supporters is a commodity that has been exploited to allow irrational policy to be made plausible. Brand loyalty is a factor in all our lives but when I bought a duff pair of Puma training shoes I had no qualm about getting a pair of Adidas the next time round. We seem to have a spectrum of loyalty; some brands can be easily abandoned whereas at the other extreme some, like religious and political beliefs, are extremely stubborn to displace. It is interesting for me to observe that in the realm of these stubborn brands, the brand owner is often prone to taking our loyalty for granted.
This brings about a huge dilemma. The stubborn brands are important points of definition of who we feel we are and what our principles amount to. We need to trust the guardians of these brands to take their custodianship seriously. They would never have become so significant if historically this care had not been exercised and there is a natural presumption that this gravitas will be maintained. However nothing is forever and mighty brands have fallen in the past and will do so again in the future.
So how do you influence a mighty brand when you feel it is erring in its offer? Do you do it from the outside by abandoning the brand, however dear it might be to you or do you try and effect change from within the fold? I suppose it depends on the particular circumstances. In the commercial sphere a brand will be sensitive to its customers preferences but football is more like politics or religion; you are born into the affiliation.
One thing is for sure, when a stubborn brand suffers desertion it is a potential catastrophe. Not only does it lose one customer, it loses generations of them. So football clubs have a false sense of security. They feel they can rely almost unstintingly on their supporters loyalty but if that umbilical chord is broken the fallout could be long term. New supporters will not be tempted into brand switching to fill the breech.
There may well be a tipping point; a time when failure to make a decision invites inevitable disaster.
Can we look to a champion who will sally forth and risk their own persona for the reward of glory and honour. In a TSFM world this would be possible I believe but in the irrational real world it may be rather precarious to undertake. Perhaps in current circumstances, discretion is the better part of valour.
I wouldn’t decry anyone for abandoning their loyalty in an environment where such chivalrous notions had become misplaced. There is nothing for certain and we all must make and live by the consequences of our decisions.
If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.
Why Celtic and Lawell are silent is becoming a bit of a needless diversion. Why? because it’s in Celtic’s best interest to say nothing. It’s Rangers’ and the SFA’s mess. Lawell has obligations only to his shareholders. “The good of Scottish Football” is the SFA’s remit – not Celtic’s. That is how I can justify saying Celtic’s passivity is not complicity. It’s up to us as individuals to represent. Mobilise, Lobby. Don’t be fobbed off. Ask awkward questions of your chairman (even when they’re standing in the queue at Tesco for their lotto ticket!) 😀
The minute Craig Whyte was announced as the preferred bidder for Rangers, Peter Lawell would have known exactly what was about to happen. (If not before)
Here’s why: a short history lesson from celticfcblog on KdS –
“In 1999, GM Mining were rumoured to be launching a takeover of Waverley Mining.
Instead a little-known company, Corporate Resolve (effectively controlled by Craig Whyte) launched a bid that failed dismally.
Waverley Mining Finance then became Palmaris. And their first purchase? Custom Services Group, owned by wee Craigie’s dad Tom.”
Now, if you remember, the joint venture between Minty and the Gillespies (GM Mining) was
based in Bellshill – just round the corner from Tom Whyte’s operations, which was – plant hire. In a piece by Isabel Oakshot in the Sunday Mirror (May 7, 2000) young Craig was described as: ” the man who lived in West End, went to the city’s exclusive Kelvinside Academy and was tipped to be the new David Murray.”
Meanwhile, Hugh Martin – father of Whyte’s wife Kim – was the owner of Martin (Dundyvan) Ltd in Coatbridge. Until it closed in the late nineties they manufactured Iron & Steel, ferro-Alloys, and rolled & sold steel sections & bars. I wonder if they knew any metal dealers or steel stockholders to flog their wares to? Who bought all their steel?
So, before we all shout for Lawell to do this and Celtic to do that remember ; it was Murray and Rangers that brought Scottish football to the brink of extinction and the SFA that made it a laughing stock throughout the civilised world. Like it or not; it’s only Celtic (with the help all right-thinking Scottish football fans) that can, and will, restore it’s reputation. We must continue to go after the bad guys, one by one.
If that means Celtic keeping quiet whilst the blazers, the bigots, the cheats, spivs and hacks all consume themselves then so be it.
So how would Peter Lawell be aware of all this? Look at his CV. He must have known about them all.
He was at Palmaris.
Morning all,
I suppose our eyes will drawn to the share price this morning.
A quick glance at the DR/Sun this morning sees both carrying interviews with Craig Mather,who claims that TRFC are living within their means,wage bill lower than last year,etc.
I’d like to see his figures!.
Anyone think the shares will jump back to 50p this morning?.
Hearts administration: Bob Jamieson denies dispute
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/hearts-administration-bob-jamieson-denies-dispute-1-3005153
===============================
I like this bit:
“The bid fronted by Massone has been called into question, due to the Italian’s involvement at Livingston when they were placed into administration four years ago. The Scottish FA’s articles regarding club ownership and involvement on a club’s official return of directors seem certain to rule Massone is not “fit and proper” to take control at Tynecastle.”
The SFA!
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
July 18, 2013 at 7:30 am
‘..The Scottish FA’s articles regarding club ownership and involvement on a club’s official return of directors seem certain to rule Massone is not “fit and proper” to take control at Tynecastle.”’
—–
It’s early in the morning, but that made me laugh out loud.
Could Halliday have written that with a straight face?
I must ask him !
slimshady61 says:
and others
There has been quite a lot of nonsense spouted in recent times that needs to be addressed.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Agreed Slim and others.
Have a re-read of what I posted – The views I express in it are not my own.
They are however balanced and different. I can see where he was coming from as a paid club executive – I just don’t agree with what he (and our clubs and chairmen think and how they have acted on our behalf.)
Instead of jumping in and shooting the messengers my intention was to raise something that had disturbed me.
And Auldheid it was I who mentioned and posted Hearts not my relative because in my mind I was talking about several years of cheating and Hearts in my mind had missed out an SPL championship by the practices of the club in administration.
My questions and discussions were never about specific clubs – just the “clubs” who missed out on opportunities and revenues by Rangers and the establishment.
I asked why they were not looking for recompense.
I was simply told it had all been agreed and was done and dusted and it was no big deal.
I freely acknowledge what he “knows” is second hand from his boss who was at the meeting and may or not be true.
I think my post says as much and was a call to ask questions and not for action.
Please don’t jump on bandwagons guys for either lynching the club heads or the messengers.
Debate is much healthier and will take us further.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Finloch says:
July 16, 2013 at 2:34 pm
I recently had a few interesting conversations over several beers with someone who works in one of our premier league clubs.
He knows what is going on at his club, in his club and through his club.
He is in one or other boardroom every Saturday with his wee blazer.
He said that one of the frustrations of a year ago was the uncertainty.
His club was constantly finding stuff out from the media rather than from their paid administrators.
He confirms there are definitely clubs in the know and clubs who aren’t at the real top table.
He was not complimentary about the people who run our game and he also feels the big three or four clubs think they are much better and more important than the rest- even the ones they play every week.
Its a divided community of SPL heads.
He personally was aware of the 5 way agreement but hadn’t seen it and wasn’t particularly interested.
He thought it was “just business” and for the common good going forward from a mess.
He totally supported and agreed with Sevco being given a berth in the SFL because he is convinced it is in his clubs and his chairman’s interest to keep the Rangers spend and more importantly the tv money from Rangers playing football in the game.
“What would Spartans or Preston bring financially to our coffers next year when Rangers have such a massive support and tv audience”.
He told me to get real – the SPL clubs have wages to pay and need all the ammunition they can get.
He also painted a picture of the finances at the clubs that is scary and while he acknowledged that the situation had been caused and exacerbated by the historic testosterone-driven spending by SDM and the other alpha male club heads he said that was then and survival was about now and looking forward.
He sees Celtic as profitable but landlocked and in danger of not selling out as they have no real competition. (It is inevitable the fans will get bored and last year they took less supporters to his club for the first time in years)
He sees others like DUFC and Aberdeen as way overspent and probably trading on the edge of their own fiduciary duty but with a friendly owner, for now. Friendly owners who are probably looking for exits and certainly not increasing OD’s.
He sees others like Killie who are way overspent but with no rich owner in the background. He doesn’t think they are in a nice place.
And he admires from a distance the skinflint clubs who remember what it is like to be poor and where every pound is a prisoner – teams like the Saints and Caley.
Clubs that are at the heart of their communities.
He doesn’t think Hearts and Dunfermline will be the last to wobble then fall.
When asked about why Ogilvie was re-elected unopposed and why Doncaster got the top job he said its because in the absence of any vision the clubs have circled the wagons.
When asked about whether Celtic and Hearts could sue for losing their prize money and European spots to the cheating club he said something that amazed me.
He was absolutely certain there had already been an agreement reached over this between the administrators and the clubs and that “compensatory money” had already been agreed and changed hands.
If that is true….
Hmmnn….
See mine at 8.10 above
I’ve asked him in the email below. two minutes ago.I used stephen.halliday@scotsman.com and the message hasn’t bounced back.
–
“…Come on, now, Mr Halliday.
Did you write that with a straight face?
Seriously, there is no way in the world that the present corrupt Board of the SFA could dare invoke the rules about ‘fit and proper persons’.
How could they, when they cynically and blatantly did not apply them in the case of RFC(IL) and the new club, RIFC?
If they were stupid enough to indulge in such inconsistency, though, I hope you would lead the attack against them, demanding their resignation as hopelessly incompetent and unspeakably one-dimensional in their bias.
Cheers,
John Clarke
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/5m-wiped-off-rangers-shares.21628245
£5m wiped off Rangers shares
Martin Williams
Senior News Reporter
Thursday 18 July 2013
NEARLY £5 million has been wiped off Rangers’ value on the stock market after more than 400,000 shares were sold as new chief executive Craig Mather said the club was “living within our means”.
The stock sale which took place yesterday resulted in a 15% drop Rangers International Football Club (RIFC) plc’s share price which finished the day on 42.5p.
The value of the shares sold was just over £180,000 but it brought the market value of RIFC down from £32.6m to £27.7m.
Four 100,000 tranches of shares were sold between 3.30pm and 4.20pm as Mr Mather released a statement saying the club was on an even financial footing.
Three blocks of 100,000 were sold before Mr Mather’s statement was published online, the other was sold 25 minutes afterwards.
Mr Mather’s comments came as some fans expressed concern about the volume of new recruits manager Ally McCoist was allowed to bring in, with some assuming more money is being spent.
The club have signed seven new players so far this summer as they prepare for a new season in the Scottish Second Division, while offloading two high earners in Carlos Bocanegra and Dorin Goian.
It is just over a year since a consortium led by Yorkshire business Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers as the parent company under the leadership of Craig Whyte went into administration and subsequently liquidation.
However, Mr Mather said it was simply the budget provided was being “worked well” and there was “no reason to panic”.
He said: “People are talking about the signings we have made and we’ve agreed deals to bring in seven players so far but in comparison to last year’s wage bill, it’s less this season.
“Yes, we’re bringing more people in but we’ve worked hard to ensure from a financial perspective we’re living within our means.”
The slump in the share price wipes nearly 40% off the holdings of fans and investors who bought into December’s share issue when they were on offer for 70p.
The Initial Public Offering championed by former chief executive Charles Green raised around £22m.
The Rangers Supporters’ Trust, who bought £250,000 of shares on behalf of members, was philsophical about the development.
Mark Dingwall of the trust said: “I think most people bought their shares with their eyes wide open. Most fans regard it as an emotional investment rather than a long-term financial one.
“People bought them to help the club rather than to make money from them.”
He believed the shares might have been sold by those investors who were locked into their shares till July 1.
Despite Mr Green’s resignation as chief executive, in the wake of claims he had covertly worked in conjunction with Mr Whyte when purchasing the business and assets of Rangers for £5.5m in May 2012, the Yorkshire businessman remains the biggest individual shareholder with 7.68% of the plc.
Under stock market rules, Mr Green is locked into owning those shares until December 7 this year. He has already agreed to transfer 1.1% of his stake to Isle of Man-based investment company Laxey Partners when the lock-in period expires.
A Rangers spokesman said: “Rangers do not comment on the sale of small numbers of individual share transactions.”
Finloch says:
July 18, 2013 at 8:13 am
Haing reread your post I think I was entitled to think Hearts were a mentioned club and to clarify.
As to the rest I dont believe it. (Meldrew style)
From the Herald as posted above
It is just over a year since a consortium led by Yorkshire business Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers as the parent company under the leadership of Craig Whyte went into administration and subsequently liquidation
Question to the reporter (senior one!) Martin Williams – what was the name of the parent company? Wavetower? Or RFC Ltd?
And so the daft season continues
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/rangers-line-up-two-new-2060974
THE Ibrox chief says that Bilel Moshni will be joined by another addition as Rangers target “a certain quality of player” to get them back into Europe.
RANGERS chief executive Craig Mather believes Bilel Mohsni will sign up at Ibrox and there could be another new arrival by the weekend.
Mather spoke about eventually getting back to challenge Celtic, and where the Ibrox club stands with the SFA, before the 1-0 friendly win over FC Gutersloh last night.
And his words would have been reassuring for boss Ally McCoist.
Mather said: “It’s no secret Alistair quite likes the trialist (Mohsni) and the reports I’m getting back are positive.
“So if we can come to an agreement I think there can be a positive outcome.
“But there’s a bigger picture. We have to win the Second Division convincingly while playing good football.
“Some of the fans were critical of what we saw on the pitch last season and Alistair has never shied away from it.
“I’m happy to stand by the signings we’ve made. They’ll allow us to have a better start to the season.
“The biggest predicament with Mohsni isn’t the player. There has been a lot of speculation because he is a trialist.
“He’s here playing in games and in the public eye. But there are another couple of faces we’re looking at as well and that was one of the things Alistair and I were discussing on Tuesday night.
“There are two or three players we’re looking at and we are making sure we get the right man for the long-term.”
One of the players in the frame is former Dundee keeper Steve Simonsen, 34, and assistant boss Kenny McDowall confirmed the club’s interest last night when he said: “He’s in the mix.”
Mather knows the ultimate challenge is to rejoin the top flight and resume competitive hostilities with Celtic.
He said: “We have to win back-to-back promotions. Nothing else will satisfy me. We know players like Jon Daly and Nicky Law can play at a high level.
“We’re trying to create the momentum so that when we do get back to the top and are playing against Celtic regularly, we’re in a position to compete convincingly.
“In our opinion, we will be going into that derby thinking we can win.”
Mather has to balance the expectations of the fans against the club’s financial security – at a time when Celtic are cash rich.
He said: “We know damn well Rangers need to be competing in the Champions League. The only way you do that is with a certain quality of player.
“It’s another stepping stone that the SFA have cleared us of any links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte at the time when the club was purchased.
“I’ve been in open dialogue with the SFA and had a number of discussions with them about our vision.
“They’re satisfied with where we are and have drawn a line in the sand.
“There has been so much in the media but positivity is imperative now to help Rangers grow.”
McCoist wants Kenny Miller to be part of the growing process but Mather didn’t offer instant hope of the veteran striker returning for a third spell.
He said: “There’s a balance in the players we have signed. Daly is an older head while Nicky Clark is younger.
“But there’s a possibility some players could move on and that might influence our requirements.
“Something could happen regarding a new signing by Friday but agents do make things interesting.”
Mather assured the fans Rangers are living within their means and added: “We’ve done deals to bring in seven players but in comparison to last year’s wage bill, it’s less this season.”
Mather travelled to Germany this week with chairman Walter Smith and said: “On the flight over here, Walter and I spoke non-stop about ideas. We have the same vision and it was productive.”
Chairman Smith believes Mather can take Gers forward. He said: “Craig came in when Charles Green left and has had three months where he has been doing extremely well running the club more or less on his own.
“It’s essential the manager and chief executive have a good working relationship. And they seem to have that at present.
“They can get on with running the club and are the two most important people at Rangers.”
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
July 18, 2013 at 8:38 am
Now we see the importance of the SFA’s actions in regrad to the value of shares held by supporters and investors.
All players remuneration is lodged with the SFA (don’t laugh) and so is other financial detail. In short the SFA have all the information they need to reassure shareholders in clubs that all is ticketyboo at any club.
To be fair the SFA have said they will make public the ratio of wage to turnover this summer but with The Rangers share price falling you would think they could give the market some re-assurance that all is well.
But what if a club withold full remuneration details or exagerrate turnover?
How do the SFA know they are not being misled? What steps do they take to confirm what they have been told? What lessons have tey learned as a result ofmeekly accepting what Rangers told them over the years?
Do sharholders in clubs not have a right to expect the SFA to appy their rules fairly across all clubs as not to can affect sgare value. Do the SFA not have a duty to protect themselves from being misled?
A statement from the SFA would do much to reassure shareholders in The Rangers that their money was in a safely run business.
I am now convinced that shareholders are the medium through which to make our game accountable.
The RST would be doing their members a favour asking the SFA for re-assurances that all is ticketyboo.
Auldheid says:
July 18, 2013 at 9:13 am
I don’t think that it is realistic, or even reasonable, to expect the SFA to effectively carry out an audit of figures coming in from 42 clubs. They simply aren’t equipped to do it, apart from any other consideration. If a club materially misleads the SFA by submitting false figures, and the SFA finds out, the sanction should be immediate expulsion- no ifs, buts or maybes.
Shareholders should be having their interests protected by their board of directors. That is a legal duty. What is badly needed in this country is strict and effective enforcement of the Companies Act, together with a complete rewrite of the Insolvency Act to actually protect creditors, instead of the frankly farcical D&P style administration process we saw at Ibrox last summer.
Auldheid
The RST would be doing their members a favour asking the SFA for re-assurances that all is ticketyboo.
—————————————
When did you start trusting the SFA or realistically expect them to be pre-emptive, day to day financial watchdogs ?
The FSA don´t often use their teeth and look the other way but you think the SFA might begin to find some 🙄
It´s fine to have new ideas but try to be realistic.
greenockjack says:
July 18, 2013 at 9:41 am
Auldheid
The RST would be doing their members a favour asking the SFA for re-assurances that all is ticketyboo.
—————————————
When did you start trusting the SFA or realistically expect them to be pre-emptive, day to day financial watchdogs ?
The FSA don´t often use their teeth and look the other way but you think the SFA might begin to find some
It´s fine to have new ideas but try to be realistic.
=======================
I am mate. The SFA policy is to publish the information I have referred to. They have been asked and say that they will be doing so this summer.
All I’m saying is bring forward the date.
My other point is that we are in a mess precisely because of what has been missing which has been not to trust what clubs tell them but actively confirm what the SFA have been told is true.
PS If the SFA do not publish then at least one journo will be asking why.
neepheid says:
July 18, 2013 at 9:39 am
I am thinking easily verifiable stuff. The SFA have what a player is due in his contract, why not sight of a clubs payroll? Player wages are the biggest cost factor so concentrate on that with the odd look t other income sources.
It does bot have to be every club each month, the fact that a check is being made wll have deterrent effect.
They have the sanction you suggest already and do not use it, so is that any more realsiic?
Anyhow my main point is about the cost of SFA ineptitude to a club’s shareholders. Look at what it cost Ranger’s shareholders.
Is there any particular reason as to the 15% slump in the Rangers share price yesterday?
It’s lost about 50% of its value in a year, I’m no marketing guru but that’s not a great performance, is it?
When the investors are allowed to take to the life rafts around Christmas……..will the lights go out?
These are the questions of an engineer 🙂
Auldheid says:
July 18, 2013 at 10:12 am
“.. Look at what it cost Ranger’s shareholders…”
—–
imo, it hasn’t cost the knighted, one-time majority shareholder nearly enough, either in cash or in public reputation!
😡
The heart of the issue is that even when people at the SFA clearly knew ,from personal involvement, that they were getting a non-repayable loan facility as part of their remuneration, they failed to make the obvious enquiry into whether players, managers and former managers might be getting a similar facility.
That is my problem with the current SFA administration , based on a long history of chicanery in support of one particular club.
As I’ve often said, the ‘crimes ‘ of a club are as Nothing compared to the crimes’ of a twisted, inconsistent administration.
We kind of expect that there are people like the CWs and the Imrans and the bus drivers and the fabulously successful school-boy sprinter and footballer, and the really, really corrupt Jill Troons and the pathetic :slamb: eaters.
And we are entitled to expect and demand that the governing bodies of our game should be vigilant in ensuring that their own rules are consistently and fairly applied and enforced, in order to protect and maintain the integrity of the sport from the depradations of such low-life specimens
.
We have foolishly believed that they were vigilant in the past.
We would be even more foolish to believe that the present Board, hopelessly enmeshed in a net of lies and intrigue and double-dealing of their own making, will somehow suddenly be restored to a position of truth,decency, honour and efficiency.
They must go.
Now.
On the issue of club supporters deciding to walk away away because they feel their club should have done more to expose the failings and corruption of the football authorities I have always believed that this is an individual choice for people to make and I have no disagreement with the decision they make. If they wish to deny their club or even Scottish Football in general with revenue that is their choice.
Personally though I wonder at the vitriol that some erstwhile ‘supporters’ appear to harbour for their old ‘club’ and some of the executives running them.
I believe the corruption involved in this whole saga is centred on supporting the Establishment Club to ensure its existence either for all the historical reasons and ties that we are all well aware of or because there was a genuine belief that the loss of Rangers from the SPL could seriously financially damage Scottish Football. Indeed it could also be a mixture of the two and I fully recognise the arguments of those who believe that the reckless spending at Rangers had already delivered a body blow.
But my feeling is that it doesn’t actually matter what caused the corruption or whether it was based on evil or good intention. The fact is that it was done at the top levels of Scottish football administration in secret and from that everything else flowed with rules ignored, changed, misinterpreted and without any explanation.
These people at the core of the corruption have decided to ride out the storm by battening down the hatches and with the help of their SMSM and PR buddies eventually tire fans out with seemingly getting nowhere in their fight to actually ‘cleanse’ Scottish Football.
And of course a weapon always used in this type of fight is to split the oppositions and have them fight each other and thus waste energy, lose focus and become dispirited. I have even watched with amusement at attempts to set hares running on what to me are ‘false’ trails to soak-up investigative time rather than concentrate on the corruption at the top of the SPL and SFA.
That is the real target and the more we allow ourselves to be deflected then the less chance of actually achieving a meaningful change of culture in the organisations involved.
And for those who attack their own club then in my experience just because there is no smoke doesn’t mean that a fire in raging in the corridors of power and I believe one of our major roles should be to concentrate on getting facts out there that fans and even club managements can read and be reliably informed by.
Transparency, information and objectivity really is the key to all of this and also keeping our attention riveted on the main targets. If we fail then they will win while we bicker on the fringes as Scottish Football continues its slow collapse into oblivion at least as far as full-time football is concerned for probably all but two teams who will have departed for more financially lucrative climes.
TallBoy Poppy says:
July 18, 2013 at 3:37 am
—————————————————
Palmaris acquires Custom
PALMARIS Capital has made its first acquisition since being listed on the Alternative Investment Market in May, following its name change from Waverley Mining Finance.
Palmaris has paid (pounds) 1m in cash and shares for Custom Plant Services, which runs plant hire, contract cleaning, retail security and site security from bases in Aberdeen, Elgin and Glasgow, and employs 450 people.
Tom Whyte, owner, received (pounds) 500,000 in cash, and 10 million new shares, which will give him a 4.88% stake in the enlarged share capital of Palmaris. Whyte will also receive a proportion of any profits of more than (pounds) 200,000 over the next three years.
Auldheid says:
July 18, 2013 at 10:12 am
Anyhow my main point is about the cost of SFA ineptitude to a club’s shareholders. Look at what it cost Ranger’s shareholders.
++++++++++
If I was a Rangers shareholder who had lost everything, I’d first of all be blaming Sir David Murray and the other directors, who had a legal duty to look after my interests. I’m just surprised that so few of the “old” Rangers shareholders seem to take that view.
PALMARIS CAPITAL PLC
Previous company name
WAVERLEY MINING FINANCE PLC
Name change date
5/8/2001
Company Overview
Palmaris Capital PLC, with headquarters in Coatbridge, United Kingdom, is a mineral extraction company that engages in the deep mining of coal and gold as well as open cast coal mining in Australia and Scotland. Palmaris Capital was incorporated on 1987 and was previously known as Waverley Mining Finance Limited.
Originally an investment company concentrating on mining operations, the company re-registered as a mineral extraction company in 1996.
Palmaris Capital has two producing companies: Mining (Scotland) Limited (coal mining) – the largest opencast coal mining company in the United Kingdom and Perseverance Corporation Limited (gold mining) – operates the Fosterville Gold Mine and a leading Australian-based gold producer and in the service industry:
Palmaris Services Limited (cleaning, security and plant hire) – based in Coatbridge with depots around Scotland and offer a wide range of services from emergency or contract cleaning (factories and plants) to portacabin hire to instore detectives and security personnel. In 2005 the company sold Palmaris Services Limited.
The company’s subsidiaries include Waverley Asset Management Limited and Perseverance Corporation Limited.
Its shareholders include: Waverton Holdings Limited; Patersons Quarries Limited; Credit Suisse First Boston Client Nominees; Phildrew Nominees Limited; P.M.B. Bucher; Richardson J.; T.P. Noble; W. Paterson.
Business Summary
The company continues to have a substantial interest in the coal mining industry in Scotland, in open cast operations, through its investment in Scottish Resources Group Limited.
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 10:49 am
‘…The fact is that it was done at the top levels of Scottish football administration in secret and from that everything else flowed with rules ignored, changed, misinterpreted and without any explanation.’
—–
Hear, hear!
The SFA Board must go, and the many, many decent SFA members ( bludgeoned and threatened by their ‘elected’ board and paid CEO0 must from among their number, appoint a new , untainted board and a new CEO.
Simples, as that blo-dy wee Russian insurance pest keeps saying!
[February 14, 2007]
(The Herald Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)
Harper departs the Scottish Resources coalface
PROFESSOR Ross Harper, the Scottish lawyer, has resigned as chairman of the company behind Scottish Coal, 12 years after he led the purchase of British Coal’s assets in Scotland by investors.
Scottish Resources Group, which owns Scottish Coal, said the 71-year-old Harper had decided to step down from the chairmanship and board of the company and its subsidiaries.
The move will end an involvement in the management of the company on Harper’s part which has spanned years of momentous change for the industry.
Harper became involved in the mining business after enjoying a successful career in law, during which he founded the firms Ross Harper & Murphy, and Harper, Macleod.
He became chairman of the Mining Scotland business formed by investors, including the former Waverley Mining operation and trades unions, to acquire assets including the Longannet deep mine in Fife in December 1994. His time at the helm included a series of changes in the investor base at Mining Scotland, in which Palmaris, the mining investment house, now holds the significant stake formerly owned by Waverley Mining.
Now known as Scottish Resources, the company’s business has undergone significant changes.
News of Harper’s resignation comes a month before the fifth anniversary of the decision by Scottish Coal to close Longannet, Scotland’s last deep mine, as a result of flooding.
In December, Scottish Resources, which produces 4.5 million tonnes coal annually from opencast mines, unveiled an underlying loss of GBP11.4m for the year to the end of March, compared with an operating profit of GBP1.3m the year before.
However, Harper insisted the company was poised to return to profitability in the current financial year.
Industry watchers believe coal is set for a comeback as ministers try to ensure the country does not become too dependent on imported energy.
Scottish Resources said it was very grateful for Harper’s “enthusiasm and wise counsel” over the last 12 years and the support which he had provided to directors.
Deputy chairman Brian Staples will act as chairman until a replacement for Harper is found.
A past president of the Law Society of Scotland and of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Association, Harper’s interests include the chairmanship of Scottish Biopower, which develops alternative fuels.
Ecobhoy is right. The SFA are battening down the hatches and have been throughout. They have to much at stake. It’s very hard to imagine the SFA board being forced to resign en masse. It’s hard enough to imagine even one decent person among them breaking ranks. That would be a first step, though.
If something incriminating of the SFA’s actions in all this were to come from Charlotte, for example, it would only lead to a resignation if the MSM picked it up. You can’t help but form the impression that the MSM would only go after an individual if they had their own reason to do so.
In recent times, they have swung from Craig Whyte having wealth off the radar to Craig Whyte being at the root of all evil, and something similar with Charles Green. They turn when it suits them. My guess in those cases was the time came for them to jump from one horse to a different horse in their pursuit of the Rangers pound (clearly some journalists pursue that line out of love, but the people running the media outlets are all bean-counters; nothing matters to them except money).
What parallel could you draw for the SFA? I’m not sure I can see one. Unless Scotland lose 25-0 to England and Stewart Regan, say, becomes persona non grata.
Asking the questions the media won’t ask.
That is the TSFM mission satement.
So why won’t the media do their job? Why have they become a propaganda machine?
A free press is essential to any democratic society. Those in positions of power need to know that they may be held accountable for their actions, even when they act surreptitiously. Now we find a state of affairs where it is the press who are acting surreptitiously. Social norms have become inverted.
I can understand that this would cause such frustrations that individuals would wish to turn their backs on the whole sordid affair. Why support institutions that to a lesser or greater extent have been infiltrated with forms of corruption. However I also recognise that the rancour created by individual standpoints may deflect from the main issue; the pursuit of justice. There is only so much walking away you can do defore you reach the sea shore. Better to confront your foe on ground that may offer some advantage to you than be hemmed in by insurmountable odds.
Jack Irvine and Media House have been gaining greater and greater prominence in the saga. Rightly so. I wonder what other Scottish Football clubs retain PR advisers part of whose remit is to place negative stories concerning their rivals? Is the potential targetting of public officials executing their duties a standard PR mode?
My old Da used to have a thing about someone getting in the way of a man doing his job. It was one of the unwritten rules of working class society. Alas this common chivalry has been lost and any number of people might suffer intimidation simply for executing their job of work in a diligent fashion. Simply by trying to keep bread on the table and their weans clothed and shod.
Its like a reversion to slavery. Like slavery, this restricted approach to our everyday duties will lead to impoverishment. If we can’t strive and achieve then we are left in abject moral poverty.
Without reliable information we are deprived of the ability to make viable choices. You could reconfigure the speedometer in your car so it couldn’t move above 70 mph, irrespective of what your road speed actually was. You might then convincinly tell your passengers that you were not breaking the law. You would have completely missed the point however.
Esteban says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:16 am
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The SFA are so unfit for purpose they couldn’t even sack Levein properly and made a right erse o’ that.
We correctly attack them for their corrupt governance of our game but seem to forget that on the football side it has been a shambles for 20 years or more. They can’t even focus on protecting and growing our game domestically or internationally.
I
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 2m
Will Doncaster and Topping explain the reasons for their meeting with HMRC Recoveries in November 2011? #Rangers #NoToCVA #TVDealPanic
Auldheid says:
July 18, 2013 at 9:13 am
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
July 18, 2013 at 8:38 am
A statement from the SFA would do much to reassure shareholders in The Rangers that their money was in a safely run business. I am now convinced that shareholders are the medium through which to make our game accountable.
================================================================
The SFA have no remit, let alone expertise, to reassure shareholders of any club that their investment is in a safely-run business.
Also the aims of shareholders might have nothing to do with football but are much more likely to centre on making a profit on share dealing and always remember that money can be made from falling share prices in a variety of ways.
Taking Rangers as a case in point there are 65 million shares issued in the club and the potential for another 35 million to be issued from memory. Fans hold 7-8 million shares approx although I think the fan amount invested at flotation may have been ‘inflated’ somewhat. But, in any case, it shows that the fans have no power in deciding events.
The following link is something I wrote on football clubs and share flotations a year ago which is still valid IMO:
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/has-green-got-the-right-aim-for-rangers-footballing-share-issues-guest-post-by-ecojon/
Esteban says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:16 am
If something incriminating of the SFA’s actions in all this were to come from Charlotte, for example, it would only lead to a resignation if the MSM picked it up.
=====================================================================
Charlotte posted what I believe to have destroyed any SFA credibility the other day and exposed the depths of corruption at work. Quite surprisingly it has been almost ignored here – I have my own thoughts as to why this has happened. But if I was CF I would be dispirited after supplying a fully primed gun and ammunition and it appears that TSFM either ignores it, for whatever reason, or fails to understand the significance.
If we don’t do anything with it then you can be sure no one else will and especially not the SMSM.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec
Castofthousands says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:40 am
PM.
And CF returns to the subject that we let slip – perhaps it’s time to wake-up and actually read and understand what was in the previous post: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 15m
Will Doncaster and Topping explain the reasons for their meeting with HMRC Recoveries in November 2011? #Rangers #NoToCVA #TVDealPanic
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:47 am
________________________________________________
It was SPL double dealing that was exposed not the SFA’s all too frequent double dealing.
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:49 am
-‘..time to wake-up and actually read and understand what was in the previous post: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec.’
—-
I read that post, but it didn’t mention the meeting with HMRC, did it? I only saw that mentioned when I was on my own twitter account a few minutes ago and saw a tweet Charlotte sent to some other tweeters, ( and now your reference to it, of course).
We must hear more of this. surely.
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:49 am
You are correct. I will definitely devote time to understanding it better this evening. I hope Charlotte isn’t dispirited. She deserves better.
One of the problems may be that we want the information handed to us on a plate. That’s what journalists are for and our journalists will only touch Charlotte when it suits them (see for reference the Daily Record story a few weeks ago that didn’t even name-check Charlotte as its source).
Drew Peacock says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:53 am
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:47 am
________________________________________________
It was SPL double dealing that was exposed not the SFA’s all too frequent double dealing.
——————————————————————————————————————————-
I did mean to write SPL and not SFA and apologise for that slip. But as I pointed out on previous occasions I find it almost impossible to believe that the info that came from Gary Withey to Rod Mckenzie wasn’t passed on to the SFA as well as the SPL especially with regard to the permissions required from the SFA apparently to retain Rangers in the SPL and indeed the SFA are mentioned in the email from McKenzie to Withey with Doncaster copied in.
john clarke says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:54 am
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:49 am
-’..time to wake-up and actually read and understand what was in the previous post: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec.’
—-
I read that post, but it didn’t mention the meeting with HMRC, did it? I only saw that mentioned when I was on my own twitter account a few minutes ago and saw a tweet Charlotte sent to some other tweeters, ( and now your reference to it, of course). We must hear more of this. surely.
————————————–
The meeting with HMRC that CF has just tweeted on is new afaik. At a guess it might well link to the initial Withey/McKenzie discussions in Early October 2011 that Rangers were going down the financial plughole. Again this all links to other things and that is mainly just how many clubs and organisations were aware in October-November that Rangers were about to hit the iceberg.
Were the SPL Board members Eric Riley (Celtic), Steven Brown (St Johnstone), Derek Weir (Motherwell) and Stephen Thompson (Dundee United) aware of the situation or was this kept from them. Had the info remained only with Doncaster and Topping?
Look at how the meetings were arranged and the moves underway to get a desired vote without aleeting the bulk of the SPL clubs know what was actually going on. It looks to me as though it wasn’t just the fans that were kept in the dark but the majority of SPL clubs and I hope that the four I have mentioned were also kept in the dark because, if not, then we most certainly have a serious problem.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec really is the knub IMO of where not only the corruption lies but actually may well provide all of the necessary evidence. This is where the whole sorry story began and we know what followed.
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:49 am
And CF returns to the subject that we let slip – perhaps it’s time to wake-up and actually read and understand what was in the previous post: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rldjec
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In summary – on 31 Oct 2011 the SPL clubs met to discuss awarding the TV rights to SPL games. There were two alternatives. Sky/ESPN and Fans TV. The meeting was adjourned until 21 November where further detail would be presented concerning the Fans TV proposal.
It is worth noting there was no requirement for 4 Old Firm matches per season in the Sky/ESPN proposal but as the crisis developed months later Doncaster fed this line to the MSM – Keevins made many remarks and emphasised the existence of the clause when attempts were being floated to keep RFC in the SPL. I reckon it was Keevins who was fed by Doncaster. There was only one break clause in the proposal relating to ESPN if they obtained EPL rights.
It is believed that on 31 October 2011, immediately after the SPL clubs meeting, the SPL Board met and discussed “new” information regarding the basket case status of Rangers finances. Of course this “new” information wasn’t new at all as the SFA/SPL following discussions/dinner with Craig Whyte knew about the Rangers crisis prior to the meeting of the SPL clubs.
Panic ensued – On 4 November Doncaster sent an email saying that the Fans TV proposal would not be ready for the proposed 21 November meeting and that clubs should now vote by resolution to accept the Sky/ESPN deal.
Of course the real reason for the rush was the prospect of Rangers going bust and not completing their fixtures rather than the Fans TV deal not being ready for consideration. In short the allegation is that he misled the clubs. In the event two clubs did not vote for the resolution.The meeting on 21 November then had to go ahead.
The minutes of that meeting (written in code) clearly express the concern that the clubs were misled at the 31 October meeting as they were not told about something the Board and CEO knew about at that time i.e. the perilous state of Rangers finances.
Of course the Board knew prior to the meeting on 31 October because Rangers had been in discussions/correspondence with the SPL’s lawyers via the indefatigable Rod McKenzie about the situation at Rangers. Doncaster is copied into an email and the implication in that correspondence is that the SFA were also aware of the impending disaster.
In short the clubs and possibly the Board were misled by Topping and Doncaster who may have witheld vital information from them. Soon after I recall Weir and Thompson left the Board – not sure about Brown and Riley.
I assume this was because they found out about the deception carried out in their names. I recall Keevins on SSB putting Thompsons resignation down to him being a bit surly and presenting it as a clash of personalities – of course that will have come from the line Doncaster fed him.
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:03 pm
1
0
Rate This
Drew Peacock says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:53 am
ecobhoy says:
July 18, 2013 at 11:47 am
________________________________________________
It was SPL double dealing that was exposed not the SFA’s all too frequent double dealing.
——————————————————————————————————————————-
I did mean to write SPL and not SFA and apologise for that slip. But as I pointed out on previous occasions I find it almost impossible to believe that the info that came from Gary Withey to Rod Mckenzie wasn’t passed on to the SFA as well as the SPL especially with regard to the permissions required from the SFA apparently to retain Rangers in the SPL and indeed the SFA are mentioned in the email from McKenzie to Withey with Doncaster copied in.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Apology accepted.
You’re right about the SFA knowing as that is implicit in the McKenzie email dated 6 October 2011.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 1h
Will Doncaster and Topping explain the reasons for their meeting with HMRC Recoveries in November 2011?
=================================================
What I take out of this is:
Who were Doncaster & Topping representing and were they appointed by said club as their agents?.Surely they cannot claim impartiality in any future discussions,independent commisions etc if they were legal spokesmen for a third party(COI)?.
If they weren’t authorised to act on another party’s behalf,why did HMRC meet with them?.
Just a laymans thoughts.
Peter says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:27 am
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I admire your principals but this need not be an either/or decision. It should be possible to continue to support your club in the full knowledge that all is not well within the game and at the same time campaign for change.
As an aside – I don’t agree that Celtic “endorse” the current situation – they may be complicit but I don’t think, given a real choice, they would give it their seal of approval. It is what it is and they need to contnue as a football club in the circumstances they find themselves in. I know that sounds a bit wishy washy but that’s how it is – for now.
Puzzled?.
Here’s the dealing info for the 4 big share sales yesterday,
4 lots of 100k sold at these times,
15.28-15.33-15.39-16.20.
The 1st 3 at 45p and the last at 43p
Now 2 delayed purchases from yesterday have appeared.
Both for 100k shares and both at 45p.
Thing is,the 1st 100k were bought at 15.18.
That’s before the 1st sale.The 2nd lot were bought at 16.08.
Any of our share dealing friends detect a pattern?.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:59 pm
I reckon its the RST baling out 🙂
Drew Peacock says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:31 pm
Summary of events
=================================================
There are a couple of comments I would make:
You state: ‘It is worth noting there was no requirement for 4 Old Firm matches per season in the Sky/ESPN proposal but as the crisis developed months later Doncaster fed this line to the MSM’.
However I would refer you to: http://i.imgur.com/KrGoHxF.jpg
It clearly states that under the new contract there would be 4 home games for Celtic and Rangers and that was also the previous arrangement.
I also think it’s important to date when the SPL first knew officially of the looming Rangers financial meltdown and that came on the 5 October 2011 in what appears to have been a meeting between Gary Withey and Rod McKenzie the SPL lawyer.
I think this is important because obviously I believe that major discussions would have then taken place between SPL, SFA and Rangers prior to the SPL club meeting of 31 October when the smoke screen and deflection was put in place and the plan to deceive begun,
Drew Peacock says
Great posts IMO outlining how it all began.
If correct I think it goes a long way to explaining (to me anyway) why clubs are not kicking up a stushie now. At the time they were suckered in and / or didn’t want to be the one to bring the whole of Scottish football to a crisis point.. That things are now patently worse only explains why there will be a need for even more hatches to be battened down. No-one wants to be part of the blame and no-one want to be the one to start pointing fingers.
They couldn’t have foreseen just how bad it was going to get but/and probably were all loath to lose the blue pound outright. The staggered decisions which eventually led to Sevco getting a leg up etc was an acceptance, as promoted by the SFA power brokers, that something had to be done even if it wasn’t in line with their rules or any concept of sporting integrity. Fan power of course had its place.
So if this scenario is correct we can all forget any of the stakeholders getting integrity all of a sudden any time soon regardless of how many times the SFA embarrass us all. That’s not to say we should give up digging, analysing and theorising. An “external” factor or two will eventually ride over the horizon and come into play. (CF? RIFC shareholders? BDO? HMRC? jail time for someone?)
We can look forward to enjoying the delights and challenges of this site for a wee while yet living in hope that some justice will prevail as well as seeing some of the dastardly characters get their comeuppance as we go.
An interesting thought would be what would the clubs have done if the SFA had stuck to the rules, and suggested that RFC’s licences and membership would be withdrawn with no place in the league for any reincarnation. Would there have been a groundswell of relief or anger?
Drew Peacock says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:31 pm
———————————————————-
– Rod McKenzie of Harper Macleod email
cc Neil Doncaster
To Gary Withey;
6th October 2011
‘I have briefed the Chief Executive on our call. He has indicated that if there is an appetite to pursue this route that an outline paper is prepared setting out the process that is being proposed to achieve the discussed end.
This paper should include, as well as the structure of the proposed transactions, how it is proposed that the points we discussed on compliance with SPL Membership Criteria, ground registration and player registration both with the SFA and SPL, would be addressed.’
———————————-
Why would a discussion on SPL Membership Criteria etc require to be addressed?
Clearly, an Insolvency event was known & going to happen.
No mention of the Creditors?
Imagine how the poor Creditors of this debacle are feeling having to read this!
Clearly and knowingly, this entity was trading while Insolvent.
Drew Peacock says:
July 18, 2013 at 12:31 pm
In short the clubs and possibly the Board were misled by Topping and Doncaster who may have witheld vital information from them. Soon after I recall Weir and Thompson left the Board – not sure about Brown and Riley.
I assume this was because they found out about the deception carried out in their names. I recall Keevins on SSB putting Thompsons resignation down to him being a bit surly and presenting it as a clash of personalities – of course that will have come from the line Doncaster fed him.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And yet, less than 18 months later we get-
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/revealed-spl-chief-neil-doncaster-1743449
closely followed by-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23180447
Those clubs must have been really really cross with Doncaster, don’t you think? In fact about as cross as they were with Ogilvie.
Let’s not blame the clubs for anything, folks, let’s just pin it all on the SFA/SPL. Five way agreement? Obviously none of the clubs have ever seen a copy, or agreed its terms in advance, or any stuff like that. And as for Ogilvie getting elected unopposed, well, that’s a bit harder to explain, but I’m sure all the clubs are totally innocent, and we should look somewhere else for any guilty parties- if there are any, of course, because sometimes stuff like that just happens, and it’s nobody’s fault, just the way things are, for the greater good, and all that..
Some folk need to wake up and smell the coffee. The clubs are the members of the SFA/SPL/SFL. If one of these organisations does something, and the person responsible not only keeps his job, but is rewarded handsomely, then that person has carried out his duties to the satisfaction of the clubs, who ultimately employ him. It really is that simple.
bad capt madman says:
July 18, 2013 at 1:37 pm
If correct I think it goes a long way to explaining (to me anyway) why clubs are not kicking up a stushie now. At the time they were suckered in and / or didn’t want to be the one to bring the whole of Scottish football to a crisis point.. That things are now patently worse only explains why there will be a need for even more hatches to be battened down. No-one wants to be part of the blame and no-one want to be the one to start pointing fingers.
============================================================
The BIG question is when were the SPL Board members who represent a number of clubs in the League told what was happening. Were they part of the deception of the other SPL clubs?
I assume all SPL clubs knew the score by 21 November 2011 about Rangers and that they had been fed a load of bullsh*t at the meeting of 31 October 2011.
So who exactly knew on 31 October 2011 the details of the plan to keep Rangers in the SPL at all costs that had obviously been put together from the bombshell dropping on 5 October 2011?
Of course when fan integrity kicked into gear we ended-up with the corruption spreading to the SFL to ensure Rangers didn’t drop below SFL1.
I am now beginning to understand the undertaking sought from Rangers in the 5-Way Agreement that neither Rangers nor executives of it would take legal action against footballing suits over their ‘conduct’.
Rangers AIM Prospectus
12.1.7 5 Way Agreement between SFA, SFL, SPL, RFC 2012 plc and RFCL
RFCL also agreed to release the SFA, SPL and SFL and their directors and officers from all claims connected with their conduct, the registration embargo and the obligations under the 5 Way Agreement. Further, RFCL agreed to procure that its directors and officers will not commence any proceedings
in this connection.’
HEAVY HEAVY STUFF!
Sam says:
July 18, 2013 at 1:40 pm
Clearly and knowingly, this entity was trading while Insolvent
===============================================================
And may well have continued doing so until February 2012.
I have the feeling that if Doncaster and Topping met with HMRC Recovery Unit in November 2011 it wasn’t as an agent for Rangers or anyone else but to provide HMRC with ‘comfort’ that everything possible would be done to keep Rangers solvent and in the SPL and playing in Europe.
Possibly this may have stayed the hand of the HMRC because I was always more than a little surprised that they hadn’t acted sooner against CW as they knew better than anyone he wasn’t paying taxes especially NI & payroll.
And of course there was the external pressure applied to the HMRC who might have been a bit wary of the ‘politics’ involved if they were seen to be unreasonable in the face of the Scottish Football Establishment stating that Rangers was too big to fail and they wouldn’t allow it to happen so the tax money was safe although it might take a bit longer to come in.
No doubt a glowing picture was painted of the riches that would flow from a European adventure that would magic away the tax liability.
Finloch says:
July 18, 2013 at 8:13 am
“He was absolutely certain there had already been an agreement reached over this between the administrators and the clubs and that “compensatory money” had already been agreed and changed hands.
If that is true”…
………………………………………………
With the list of clubs referred to above we can narrow it down to someone from 1 of 2 SPL clubs…
Now if he is suggesting financial payment to counter lost European revenue….then we are talking a serious amount of cash….so how does one make a payment of this amount…through the books of 2 separate entities and still avoid who the payment was from and to….for what purpose and how much?
Unless of course the money is moving in a questionable way across places such as the BVI?
Can anyone see Celtic place themselves in such a precarious position na me neither!
I might be a bit behind the curve here but pleasue indulge a couple of my observations –
– Payment of “compensatory” monies to Celtic and/or Hearts/Kilmarnock and lack of statement from SFA/clubs concerned…. if this was indeed the case there could be no public statement under the current paradigm as the natural question then arises “Why was there any need to compensate these clubs?” which is at odds with the current “The Gers were found innocent” doctrine espoused in the media. This would represent a sea change in media reporting and would require public acknowledgement of the misdeeds of dead club which just aint gonna happen as it would undo all the work put into the LNS/Bryson fudge and would take an earth shattering change in the Scottish football landscape.
– Re Jack Irvine’s planting of negative stories about other clubs – I would’ve though this was as obvious as the nose on your face to anyone paying the most cursory notice to Scottish media stories over the past decade or so “THUGS AND THIEVES” etc – I was more intrigued by the line “place stories that we wouldn’t want to be official club policy”. This could be interpreted as “Wee Arra Peepil” type stuff, although the new club including their sleekit manager seem to have no qualms about such public utterances these days. So much for all that tireless whattaboutery…. sorry… I meant work to eradicate sectarianism.
Paulmac2 says:
July 18, 2013 at 2:30 pm
Now if he is suggesting financial payment to counter lost European revenue….then we are talking a serious amount of cash….so how does one make a payment of this amount…through the books of 2 separate entities and still avoid who the payment was from and to….for what purpose and how much?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And where does the money come from? The SFA don’t have spare millions lying around I assume. And even if they did, that money belongs to all of the clubs. The really sad part is that I should find this story unbelievable. Unfortunately, I don’t.
Surely there’s another programme in this for BBC’s Mark Daly or Alex Thomson on C4? to get this scandal to the wider public.I appreciate the mission statement of TSFM ‘asking the questions the media wont ask’, but sometimes I feel we are talking to ourselves.If no one takes it up on a scale that reaches the masses then what’s the point? Sometimes in my frustration,the image of Monty Python’s Life Of Brian pops into my head a la The People’s Popular Front who discuss everything, but don’t do anything.
Finloch says:
July 18, 2013 at 8:13 am
“He was absolutely certain there had already been an agreement reached over this between the administrators and the clubs and that “compensatory money” had already been agreed and changed hands.
If that is true”…
========================================
As part of the purchase of Rangers’ business & assets to Sevco Scotland, the club’s administrators sold the then pending SPL 2nd place prize money (£2.55m) for season 2011/12. Effectively meaning that the club’s assets were purchased for £2.95m – not the headline £5.5m that is often quoted.
Later, as part of the 5-way agreement, Sevco waived their right to this £2.55m which was retained by the SPL and (possibly) distributed to the remaining SPL clubs. Of course, before distribution they had the extra expense of the LNS Commission and the £1m TV rights payment to the SFL to pay for.
It is not clear (to me at least) why Sevco would have needed to pay the SPL anything. They have never been a SPL club and owed nothing to that league. As Rangers had completed the season’s fixtures, the SPL had no straightforward legal cause to withhold the prize-money.
Anyway, as a technical step, the SPL required the administrators of the old Rangers to sign-off on Sevco’s prize money waiver; but as they had already sold it on, it caused no further deficit in the old club’s accounts.
I am sure the £2.55m has to be the “compensatory money” that your friend refers to.
As I’ve said before (on many, many, many occasions 🙂 ) the SPL behave in their own commercial interest at all times.
Unless you were to take the very cynical view that the £2.55m was a straightforward payment for constructing the dodgy LNS remit and case execution – and I make no such allegation – you would have to think that this “forced” payment by Sevco to the SPL was grossly unjust.
HirsutePursuit says:
July 18, 2013 at 3:59 pm
——————————————-
Excellent post
😎
With tomorrow’s UTTT hearing in mind, I took the occasion of being in town (really,really nice, is Edinburgh on a day like today) to go along to 126 George St., to George House, the home of various Tribunal bodies.
Not matching the mood of the day, the kind of female receptionist of indeterminate age asked ‘Can I help you’ , in that snippy kind of tone of voice that means she’s silently adding “not if I can help it!”
She was distinctly frosty when I enquired whether tomorrow’s UTTT hearing was open to the public.
Maybe I imagined it, but when she quite ungraciously said bluntly “No!” she said it with a certain relish, as of a spoilsport spoiling someone’s fun.
( I resisted the temptation to air the casual and quite unworthy thought that it was probably the only fun she ever got).
So, I regret to say, there will be no first hand report of whatever the Hearing deliberates upon. ( And I was looking forward to posting live, if possible, or otherwise just as soon as proceedings ended.)
Paulmac2 says:
July 18, 2013 at 2:30 pm
With the list of clubs referred to above we can narrow it down to someone from 1 of 2 SPL clubs…
HirsutePursuit says:
July 18, 2013 at 3:59 pm
As I’ve said before (on many, many, many occasions 🙂 ) the SPL behave in their own commercial interest at all times.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Paul iIt doesn’t matter which club he works at because they all sing off the same song sheet and HP I don’t know how much or to whom and we may never know.
I do believe there was financial disbursement to certain “wronged” clubs.
………………….
What I do know is that the clubs all believed a year ago that keeping the Rangers supporters involved for the gate and tv money was critical to the budgets they each and individually had in place at the time.
And to look forward in that time of crisis I think they must have agreed they would stop looking backwards and avoid what they saw as unhelpful retro analysis. (I wonder who corralled them)
Thus they were all complicit in the shenanigans and in the finagling that saw the construction of the 5 way agreement.
All of them.
Every single SPL club chairman and board.
And my conversations confirm they all still believe it was the right thing to do.
That is why nobody at any club is fighting the corruption we want them to address.
They think it was just good business or at least their best option from a Hobson’s choice.
None of them see through their ££ blinkers that they are just cheating themselves and their own fans.
None of them knew enough to see just how much worse things were and how much worse they are about to get
HirsutePursuit says:
July 18, 2013 at 3:59 pm
”’….I am sure the £2.55m has to be the “compensatory money” that your friend refers to.”
——
Not sure I quite follow,HP.
Are you saying that ‘there was no specific ‘compensation’ to those clubs who had particularly suffered (as Finloch’s source seems to imply), in order to keep them happy and compliant, but that the money was shared out as a ‘bribe’ among all the SPL clubs ?
Neither course of action would have been honourable, although the second would have more distinctly dishonourable!
How did, or will, the clubs receiving any such monies account for them? How will it show in the SFA’s own accounts?
Ecobhoy
I’ll elaborate on my point.
I know full well who has the voting majority but a resolution from supporter shareholders has to be answered.
Getting an answer that made sense would be a step forward and it would tell the SFA that if they fail in their duty to the game and that failure costs shareholders money, then they cannot act without fear of the consequences which is the current position.
The SFA by failing to govern properly cost Rangers shareholders a good few bob. If I were one I would be asking what is the purpose of a licensing system that is thr SFA’s responsibility to apply if the SFA fail to apply it?
Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold
.http://www.potw.org/archive/potw351.html
The sooner the guys at the centre realise this the better.
John Clarke
Indeed they must but SDM did not hold all the shares and there must be some who have lost out.
Complaints from them because they lost out would carry more weight than us frustrated Tims.