Dear Mr Bankier

Posted on by

Readers may be aware that the group Fans Without Scarves have written to Celtic urging them to seek a review of Scottish football (See here)
On the back of that laudible effort, I have been persuaded to publish a letter I sent to that same board over a week ago (on 8 November)
At the time of publication, I have received no acknowledgment.  Some organisations are like that, of course. (I put it down to the inferior quality of the social upbringing of their boards rather than concern for their postage bill)

The following is the text of that communication;

Mr I Bankier,
Chairman,
Celtic Football Club plc
Celtic Park, Glasgow G40 3RE

08/11/2018

Dear Mr Bankier,

“Resolution 12”

You will, of course, recall as clearly as I that, at the Celtic plc AGM in 2013, the Resolution bearing number 12 on the agenda was not formally debated and voted upon, but was adjourned indefinitely.

I understand that over the intervening years (!) a number of conversations and discussions have taken place between the Board and the immediate proposers of Resolution 12 (among whom, I should perhaps say, I was not numbered in 2013 and am not now numbered).

As an eventual outcome of those discussions and conversations, as again you will recall, Celtic plc in September 2017, shortly before that year’s AGM, entrusted to the Scottish Football Association [SFA] the task of undertaking a thorough investigation into the circumstances under which the Union of European Football Associations [UEFA] granted a UEFA-competitions licence to the then Rangers Football Club in 2011.

Unfathomably, it was not until May of this year that the Compliance Officer of the SFA referred the matter to the Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal [JPDT]

In that same month of May 2018, evidence emerged that appeared to cast serious doubts on the legitimacy of the award of the UEFA licence to Rangers Football Club in 2011.

In late June 2018, and following careful consideration of that evidence, the legal representative of what is known as the ‘Res.12 Group’ informed both the SFA and Celtic plc of these doubts, passing to those bodies copies of the evidence which gave rise to those doubts.

In July 2018, The Rangers Football Club Ltd challenged the reference to the JPDT, arguing that the appropriate authority to which any such reference ought to have been made is the Court of Arbitration for Sport [CAS]

This challenge has apparently and inexplicably frozen all action by the JPDT.

To my eye, as a small shareholder, it appears that the Board of Celtic plc have been and continue to be at the very least dilatory and lukewarm if not yet totally remiss in looking after the interests of their shareholders.

It is now November: the reference by Celtic plc to the SFA was made over one year ago. Even by reference to the civil Courts let alone to the internal disciplinary body of a not very large sports governance body such as the SFA, that is an unconscionably long time for a reference not to have been acted upon. I now feel obliged to ask the following questions:

  1. Have the Celtic Board pressed the SFA to say what action they have taken vis-vis the challengemade to the legal powers of the JPDT to investigate the circumstances surrounding the award of the licence ?
  2. If they have not done so, would they care to give their reasons why not?
  3. If the response from the SFA was that the matter of the jurisdiction of the JPDT has been referred elsewhere (to UEFA or to the CAS), are the Celtic Board content with that response and prepared to take such subsequent monitoring action as may be necessary?
  4. If the SFA have not referred the question of jurisdiction elsewhere, have the Celtic Board ascertained at what stage the JPDT’s investigation is at, or even whether it has yet begun?
  5. If the Board have been told that the JPDT has stalled, perhaps indefinitely, what does the Celtic Board propose doing to ensure that the investigation that they were assured would be undertaken will indeed be undertaken by the JPDT as a matter of priority, with a timetable for completion?
  6. Does the Celtic Board actually trust the SFA/JPDT to investigate thoroughly, honestly and deliver true judgement? Is it not time that a vote was taken to pass ‘Res 12’, based on what is now known by Celtic plc, and the matter formally referred by Celtic plc to UEFA to investigate as thoroughly as was done in the recently reported cases of the Albanian, Serbian and Kazakhstan national associations?

The Celtic Board must keep in mind their obligations to shareholders. This would be especially so where there may be grounds for suspecting chicanery on the part of others, in consequence of which Celtic plc might have been denied an actual, defined sum of money and the opportunity potentially to compete for much more in ‘prize’ money.

In such circumstances it would not be at all for the Board on its own authority simply to ignore the possibility of chicanery and dismiss the matter.

There are sufficient grounds for me to believe that the award of a UEFA licence to the then Rangers Football Club in 2011 may have been made in the knowledge that that club was absolutely not entitled to that award.

In my opinion, the granting of a UEFA licence to the then Rangers FC in 2011 is not merely a ‘sporting’ matter, but one which might conceivably, in the absence of acceptable responses from the SFA/JPDT, require reference to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

The failure to date of Celtic plc to insist that the SFA take urgent action to fulfil the commitment they made that a thorough, independent investigation would be undertaken urges me to make such reference on my own initiative as a citizen who suspects that a crime may have been committed.

However, before taking such a step, I think I will await your replies to the questions above if you would be good enough to provide such.

Yours sincerely,

name and address

This entry was posted in Blogs, Featured by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

630 thoughts on “Dear Mr Bankier”


  1. At the recent TOP v King hearing, I joked with Chris McLauglin, asking if he was allowed to ask Dave King a few questions outside the court room. He responded by saying "I'm not sure if he is allowed to speak to me".


  2. Dr Mo 10th December 2018 at 19:55

     

    THE BBC have once again decided to boycott Rangers after the club reimposed a ban on sports reporter Chris McLaughlin, according to The Herald.

    Read more at: https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/bbc-begin-new-boycott-of-rangers-after-reporter-ban-1-4007810

    As stated , according to the Herald .

    The BBC statement doesn't mention "boycott" .

    “We will continue to report on Rangers both on and off the pitch and will feature match action where appropriate but, until this issue is resolved, we will not be sending journalists to Ibrox or attending Rangers’ press conferences.”
     

    So ill looking for a link where the BBC say they are boycotting Ibrox/TRFC .

     


  3. "People knock on the door,people shake their head when they are not in the team. People are disappointed.

    But when you are given a chance,go and back it up.

    There will be less knocks at the door,if players are honest with themselves and watch that performance back, i don't think they have a leg to stand on.

    But i would welcome the knocks because i have all the evidence and ammunition to show them why they are not in the team.

    ………………….

    Mr Gerrard we would like to buy one of your players you value him at £2million. We believe this is too high and will offer 50k.

    But he is worth £2mill.

    Mr Gerrard go have a look at your evidence and ammunition that shows why this player is  in the first team, then come back to us with a figure that is not £2 mill

    ……………………..

    Transfer business the steven Gerrard way.

    Slag players in the media and state that you have evidence and ammunition to show them why they are not good enough to get a game, then try and flog them for top dollar in the transfer window.


  4. "The BBC will not be sending journalists to I brox  or attending Rangers (sic) press conferences"

     

    they may not have mentioned the word boycott, but if the above is not a boycott then what is it?

    Puzzled………


  5. Higgy's Shoes

    Solidarity . All in or none in .TRFC caused the problem and can easily resolve it .


  6. I watched the highlights of the Rangers game on the BBC the other night.

    I then listened to the presenter and two pundits discussing the game.

    If you want to see the highlights of the Dundee v Rangers 1-1 draw you can get them here.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46416238

    Ten-man Dundee moved off the bottom of the Scottish Premiership as they held out for a draw against Rangers.

    The BBC are really bad at doing boycotts.

     


  7. Higgy's Shoes 

    10th December 2018 at 21:05

    … but if the above is not a boycott then what is it?

    ———————————————————

    I think I can answer that.

    Its the BBC telling a club "You don't tell us who we get to cover stories about you, we make that decision"

    The BBC are not "boycotting Rangers" that is patent nonsense. 


  10. Higgy's Shoes 10th December 2018 at 21:05

    "The BBC will not be sending journalists to I brox  or attending Rangers (sic) press conferences"

    they may not have mentioned the word boycott, but if the above is not a boycott then what is it?

    Puzzled………

    —-

    I suppose you could call it a withdrawal of reporting in protest at Rangers' decision, though at that stage you're just splitting hairs. I think there's some confusion either that boycott is pejorative or means pretending something doesn't exist. For brevity, I'll stick to boycott. 

    Semantics aside, I'm just genuinely puzzled by the idea that pursuing a boycott and being favourably biased could work together. Seems straightforward to me that if the BBC wanted to show favour to RFC they might have just voluntarily stopped sending McLaughlin the first or second time he was banned. Or made some move to resolve the third time over the last 3 years or so. 

    I'll clarify this isn't a claim that the BBC is anti-Rangers. I think the BBC stance is consistent with indifference around the issue, but seems a real stretch to argue for positive bias.  


  11. Dunderheid 10th December 2018 at 14:57

    It's a funny old game. Cruz Azul managed by Caixinha on the brink of a wee bit of history. (See: http://www.tablesleague.com/teams/cruz_azul1/)

    Was in Cuba for 2 weeks holiday (I know, you were all wondering where I was…) – lousy web access but wall to wall Pedro interviews. Though it does look like CF America are the form team… Good luck Pedro.

    As for the recent racism shown to Scott Sinclair, the traditional silence from the SP(F)L on contentious matters is in stark contrast to the authorities' backing given to Raheem Sterling in light of recent racial abuse. Plus ca change.


  12. Interesting to see a wee spat re the word 'boycott' and how the Ibrox/BBC fall out was reported by the SMSM as opposed to what both T'Rangers and the BBC have said.

    If only some folk had been so willing to understand and agree with the terms used by the SMSM in relation to Liquidation,  Rangers RIP etc etc 


  13. I think the allegations of a BBC pro-Rangers bias is based mainly on their failure to report the truth about Rangers, and the authorities. Less than on the situation surrounding Chris McLaughlin.


  14. Big Pink 11th December 2018 at 11:05

    '…I think the allegations of a BBC pro-Rangers bias is based mainly on their failure to report the truth about Rangers, and the authorities. Less than on the situation surrounding Chris McLaughlin'

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    I agree.

    McLaughlin was banned only in 2015!

    But it was in June of 2013 that BBC Scotland had, disgracefully and cravenly, given in to the[thank God, now abolished] Editorial Standards Committee  when that Committee [of, of course, the 'great and the good' in the eyes of the Establishment ]  invented ,or capitalised on ,the nonsense that it was the company that was liquidated, not the 'club'  .

    Thereafter, the BBC settled for the quiet life, stifling all on-air / on-screen questioning into  the whole murky, rotten years of SDM's perversion of our 'sport' and the ready acceptance of that perversion by our Football Governance bodies.

    But of course, not even the [ happily now defunct] Editorial Standards Committee could have lived with the idea that any particular business, or organisation or individual should be able to overtly dictate to them , whatever might be the nods and winks  in private.

    In the larger scheme, a piddling little football club cannot, any more than a Hitler/ Putin/Trump/May, be allowed to be seen to have the 'BBC'  at their beck and call in the way that they have had, and continue to have, individual salaried employees of the BBC bending every effort to try to convince us that The Rangers FC of 2012 origin is the Rangers Football Club founded in 1872.
    So,they have to resist pressure to field only ‘chosen’ reporters.

     

     

     

     


  15. Dr Mo

    11th December 2018 at 08:23

     

    I suppose you could call it a withdrawal of reporting in protest at Rangers' decision, though at that stage you're just splitting hairs.

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

    Would it be splitting hairs to say that is just wrong.

    The BBC are reporting on Rangers on TV, Radio and On-Line, on a regular basis.

    Here is the part of their website dedicated to Rangers.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers

    There has been no "withdrawal of reporting" you just made that up.


  16. Homunculus 11th December 2018 at 14:38

    '  Here is the part of their website dedicated to Rangers.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers

    There has been no "withdrawal of reporting" you just made that up.'

    %%%%%%%%%%%

    Not only is the BBC reporting, but reporting in propagation of the lie that TRFC Ltd of 2012 is the same Rangers that went into Liquidation!

    Some folk are never happy, even when people throw away their personal integrity to support untruth.

     


  17. Homunculus 11th December 2018 at 14:38 3 0 Rate This Dr Mo 11th December 2018 at 08:23 I suppose you could call it a withdrawal of reporting in protest at Rangers' decision, though at that stage you're just splitting hairs. ========================================== Would it be splitting hairs to say that is just wrong. The BBC are reporting on Rangers on TV, Radio and On-Line, on a regular basis. Here is the part of their website dedicated to Rangers. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers There has been no "withdrawal of reporting" you just made that up.

     

    thanks Homunculus that’s what I was thinking. I was beginning to fear I was hearing things from the radio when Chic and Steven Thomson seem to be looking at TV pictures from Ibrox and providing updates to Sportsound


  18. Who is responsible for no radio commentary / live TV action from Ibrox?

    Have rangers told the BBC to stay away or have the BBC decided to stay away?

    1 honestly don't  remember who instigated this.

     


  19. Higgy's Shoes 11th December 2018 at 15:58

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

    IIRC there was a previous dispute between BBC and Rangers which was resolved. Not very long after Chris McLaughlin of BBC reported the fact that some Rangers fans had been arrested for sectarian offences at a game at Easter Road. Rangers took exception to this fact being reported and said McLaughlin was no longer welcome at Ibrox which in turn led to the current dispute.  

    The BBC very often now simply lift sugar coated coverage directly from the Rangers website, while other clubs are subjected to critical analysis.


  20. Higgy's Shoes 

    11th December 2018 at 15:58

     

    Who is responsible for no radio commentary / live TV action from Ibrox?

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

    Forgive my ignorance.

    Do the BBC provide live tv coverage from any SPFL Premiership ground.

    I genuinely don't know either way.


  22. The Crown office confirmed that king's ban from dealing in” realisable property” in scotland has been in force since 2006.

    Realisable property is a legal catch-all term for property or cash assets of any description, so the order effectively prevents king from investing in any takeover of rangers. He would require the permission of the court of session to move or transfer assets in scotland to fund any takeover.

     A  Crown office spokesman said "we can confirm that David Cunningham king is the subject of a restraint order. It would not be appropriate to comment further on an ongoing case.

    …………………………………

    I take it he is not barred now.

     

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1072580211848425475?p=v


  24. Well McGregor is back having walked away, Lafferty is back having walked away.

    Why not Davis as well.

    Its good to see such a new club developing youth and looking to the future. 


  25. Homunculus 11th December 2018 at 21:27
    Southampton paid £800,000 for him,Could be spun, we got a fee for him that stopped people losing their jobs. And he was glad an ibrox club got some money for him.


  26. Homunculus@21.27

    Return of the prodigal? (no pun intended) Maybe have to bring back Mr McCoist if things continue to slip away from Stevie Gerrard. 


  28. Homunculus 11th December 2018 at 14:38

    Would it be splitting hairs to say that is just wrong.

    The BBC are reporting on Rangers on TV, Radio and On-Line, on a regular basis.

    Here is the part of their website dedicated to Rangers.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers

    There has been no "withdrawal of reporting" you just made that up.

    —-

    No, that wouldn't be splitting hairs. It would be applying some faulty logic. The Sun have a web page for Liverpool FC and write match reports etc. Wouldn't a similar argument to yours conclude that LFC haven't banned them? 

    The strange thing is you realise there's a reporting impact e.g. your initial take on why it wasn't a boycott was 

    Its the BBC telling a club  "You don't tell us who we get to cover stories about you, we make that decision"

    So McLaughlin's credentials being removed prevented him from covering stories. Which contradicts your more recent take that no one at the BBC using press access to Rangers represents intact reporting. 

    For clarity, the BBC "boycotting" doesn't mean pretending something doesn't exist. I think BBC (or media) blackout would be the term for that. 

    To give an example that people might be less emotionally invested in: there was some discussion around a White House boycott when CNN's Jim Acosta had his press pass pulled last month.
    I don't think anyone who knows what the word boycott means would think that the suggestion was news organisations would stop discussing anything to do with the President. 

    Hopefully the above (or a dictionary) resolves the boycott confusion. Making another at the substantive issue here. Could someone explain the tension between 

    (i) the idea that the BBC are predisposed to give Rangers ongoing favourable treatment
    (ii) the BBC are boycotting

    I think the only response on this is that the BBC continue to follow a five and a half year old decision from the BBC Trust around RFC's continuity.

    I'm not sure to what extent that represents ongoing. That said, given that BBC Scotland argued against the Trust decision on RFC reporting would suggest the boots on the ground are 'new club', but operating under editorial constraints. Something like that recent Douglas Fraser piece springs to mind. 

    More simply: wouldn't a pro-RFC BBC have started reporting RFC continuity before a complaints procedure made them?


  29. Each time I read the word "boycott" I think the user should be obliged to reference the origin of the word and compare the facts then with the current case to show an equivalence.

    The word comes from Charles Cunningham Boycott; an English Land Agent in Ireland who acted in a certain way and those affected acted in a certain way.

    Following Sevconian genealogy, in which ancestry can be traced through your middle name, David Cunningham King has described the historical treatment of Boycott as Romish running dog lies, Chris Cunningham Graham has Ze List of haters and James Cunningham Traynor knows where we all live.

    Whether there is a boycott by the BBC or not I neither know nor care.

    What I do know is there is a Mo by me.

     


  31. Ex Ludo 13.22

    Even Allan McGregor couldn’t save her.

    Just been told the news regarding Leigh Griffiths and genuinely hope he gets the help and support he obviously needs.


  32. Dave King is just a couple of days away from the next deadline imposed by his undertaking to the Court of Session, to appoint an acceptable "cash confirmer" with a UK presence and a "legal advisor", by close of business on Friday.

    Here's what the undertaking said:

    Take all such steps as are required to instruct a third party cash confirmer in the United Kingdom (the “Cash Confirmer”) that is considered appropriate by the Panel and confirmed as such by the Panel in writing, as soon as practicable and in any event by no later than 17:30GMT on 14 December 2018, being the date that is two weeks from the date of this undertaking, to do all such things as are required in order to provide a public cash confirmation statement for the purpose of assisting Laird Investments (Pty) Limited (“Laird”) to make an offer for the entire issued share capital of Rangers International Football Club Plc (“Rangers”) on a fully diluted basis (or on such other basis as is agreed in writing by the Panel and the Cash Confirmer) (“the Offer”) including, if required, transferring all such funds as are required into the United Kingdom.

    …… and

    To appoint a legal advisor by 17:30GMT on 14 December 2018 to undertake all such matters as are required to ensure that the documentation complies with the Code and to liaise with the Panel in relation thereto.

    I fully expect that King will comply with these deadlines, but we may have to wait a bit longer to see how much he is being asked to put up in cash. I'd anticipate that the "not willing to sell" letters of undertaking he has obtained from shareholders who participated in the September share placing will significantly reduce the funds required, down from the headline £19m figure to maybe half of that. 


  34. EJ, thanks for update.

    Guess King will have no problem retaining a lawyer, as he throws so much business their way.

    But, a 'cash confirmer'?

    If it is relevant, we saw that King couldn't attract a NOMAD when he took control at RIFC.  [OK, he probably didn't really want one anyway.]

    If a cash confirmer organisation is bound by similar restrictions and/or are particular about who they accept as a customer, then will King have a problem.

    What would happen if nobody wanted to touch King with a long, smelly stick?

     


  37. EJ
    Not so sure I’m as confident as you that DK will comply on time. All actors in this pantomime have displayed special skills when it comes to finding long grass with the ball. I expect further procrastination.


  38. BP

    i think the time for procrastination has passed. It was one thing to play the daft laddie. We now have specific date requirements which I would imagine are best met rather than coming up with an excuse v


  39. Big Pink 13th December 2018 at 11:39

    EJ
    Not so sure I’m as confident as you that DK will comply on time. All actors in this pantomime have displayed special skills when it comes to finding long grass with the ball. I expect further procrastination.

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

    At this stage there is no reason not to comply. The appointments are at an early stage in the process, and something that would have been arranged in early course in a normal takeover situation. Where I think King may procrastinate is on the amount of funds required to be lodged with the "cash confirmer" and the process of getting exchange control approval.

    There was a clue to his approach in the Court of Session, where King would only complete the bare minimum in terms of the details requested on an exchange control application form. That in turn would generate questions from the "approved dealer", seeking more information on the nature of the investment and expected returns. I can see that process, together with delays in correspondence on agreeing the cash amount, being extended to such an extent that King would seek an additional time from the Court to allow him to complete those tasks.

    However, I'd didn't see anything from Lady Wolffe's demeanour that she would be receptive to further delay on something that was discussed in Court. She made it very clear that he would be back in Court pdq if he didn't comply with his undertakings, without good reason. 


  40. easyJambo 13th December 2018 at 12:36

     

    Thanks for the update to this EJ. Can you say if the cash confirmer identity is something that will be announced publicly or are we to assume compliance ?


  41. gunnerb 13th December 2018 at 21:59

    easyJambo 13th December 2018 at 12:36

    Thanks for the update to this EJ. Can you say if the cash confirmer identity is something that will be announced publicly or are we to assume compliance ?

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

    I'd hope that it would be announced on the website. I seen to recall a statement coming out from the RIFC independent directors (in early April) saying how the offer would be funded, although raising doubts about the funding as it was dependent on a special dividend being paid by Micromega. Perhaps the RIFC directors will provide an update.

    The likeliest candidate will be Investec, going by what was said in court, as they have a presence in London and they have sufficient profile to keep the TOP onside.


  42. Nae luck Celtic, they were just the better team on the night.


  43. Big Pink 13th December 2018 at 11:28

    '…WRT the main post, I assume JC has received no reply?'

    _________________________

    Sadly, I am not in apposition to say! 

    No reply had been received by 3rd December when I left on my travels, and , while  a very good neighbour and friend is clearing my letter-box while I'm away, I didn't leave any request to be notified if any envelope bearing  Celtic plc logo were to be received!

    But, of course, whether Bankier replies to me or not, there must be a time when a motion adjourned at an AGM has to be dealt with by a vote at some subsequent AGM.

    Directors simply cannot be allowed to dodge uncomfortable subjects for ever, else they could get away with any dirty business!

    On a very simple personal basis, I was brought up to expect a certain standard of personal and commercial behaviour from company directors. Mr Bankier no doubt ensures that the heels of his shoes are polished and that he wears a clean shirt to work;

    but in failing to arrange for some kind of timeous acknowledgement to personally addressed correspondence, he has proved himself to be fairly plebeian, and little above barra-boy level as a commercial figure. What school did he go to? I'm sure his form master would be disappointed!

     


  44. Dr mo,

    are you the same person who once posted as Nial Walker, Ernest Becker,Steerpike and the lawman2?  honest answer, please.


  45. Portbhoy 13th December 2018 at 23:38

    I think I see a flaw in your question.

    "…honest answer, please."


  46. Portbhoy

    Nae luck Celtic, they were just the better team on the night.

    ———————————————————————

    You may want to review the first part of that sentence?

     


  47. bordersdon 14th December 2018 at 09:13

    Portbhoy

    Nae luck Celtic, they were just the better team on the night.

    ———————————————————————

    You may want to review the first part of that sentence?

    ————————————————————————-

    And maybe delete the last 3 words?


  48. Seeing that there's not much happening on the blog today, can I go a little off topic as I sit here savouring a Fat Yak [tastes as good as I remember]?

    This afternoon  , while down the local park with the granweans, I fell into conversation with another pair of grandparents, similarly minding their grandchild. 

    It turned out that he had been a linesman , and had been running the line in games that Frank Haffey had played in (in whatever Aussie league that was) and had on one occasion at least had to flag the referee when Haffey repeatedly crossed the 18 yard line holding the ball.

    It also turned out that he had been an acquaintance of Willie Wallace, and I was able to tell him that 4 years ago I had had several pints with Wispie in O'Malley's bar in Brisbane, and that Willie had been in Glasgow not that many weeks ago.

    The chap I was talking to was a Londoner who had emigrated to Oz in 1967, and has a son and grandchildren now domiciled in England, as well as the other grandchild he and his wife were with today.

    It further turned out that that granddaughter there in the park was the primary school sixth year who was my granddaughter's school 'buddy' when she was in Prep last year.

    It is these little serendipities that add to one's life experiences in a wonderfully positive way!

     

     

     

     

     


  49. John Clark 14 December 2018 @ 1204

    Frank Haffey, a real blast from the past.

    I recall in Primary School our learned schoolteacher trying very hard to impart a modicum of culture and education to a group of lads whose only interest was football. I recall vividly his question to the class “who stops 1 in 3” to which he received the response “ my dad says it’s Frank Haffey”. How were we to know he was referencing the Ancient Mariner. The thought still makes me smile after all this time. Thanks for that JC


  50. Haudthebus 14th December 2018 at 13:20

    Frank Haffey, a real blast from the past.

    ———————————————————————-

    April 1961. After the match at Wembley when asked the time a wag said it was 9 past Haffey!!


  51. Haudthebus 14th December 2018 at 13:20

    '..How were we to know he was referencing the Ancient Mariner.'

    ____________________________________

    One of my favourite poems.

    But I remember struggling with 'barred sun' . I had never seen a 'barred sun' over the skies of east Glasgow, or anywhere else, and I don't think my teacher had, either! 

    Years later, when my own first child was about four, I came across a magnificently  illustrated children's version which showed exactly what a 'barred sun' looks like. 

    I have over the years tried to remember that book, which I had borrowed from Dublin City libraries in about 1976 or so, when I was stationed there.

     


  52. borderson,

    You seem to pick up on sentences,, … your attempt at the Frank Haffey joke was back to front,

    9 past Haffey?????? …. it was Haffey past 9, …. at least we're quite savvy doon here in the Port.


  53. JC – Ancient Mariner…

    I wondered about the 'barred sun', being unable to recall any personal sightings or reading about such a solar event.

    I found the following explanation of the poetic lines…

    "The Sailors at first take great joy in the Mariner’s announcement that another ship is approaching, since they believe that they are going to be saved. But that joy quickly turns to horror, as they begin to question how the ship could possibly be approaching without a breeze or tide. As the ship approaches close it seems to be the skeleton of a ship, creating a “dungeon-grate,” barred effect as it passes in front of the red setting sun. "

     

     


  54. Portbhoy 14.53

    Not the version I recall! But I do think yours is better.


  56. There is still no new notice on the RIFC website as to whether or not King has appointed a "cash confirmer" and a "legal advisor".  We may not be advised in any event.

    I did have a look at the latest shareholding disclosures though. One that caught my eye was that of River & Mercantile.  When the offer was first announced, their disclosure on 14 March 2017 indicated that they  held 3,523,059 shares (4.32%)

    They have subsequently posted two new disclosures dated 5 December 2018 which showed that they had sold 700,000 on 27 November 2018 and 400,000 on 4 December 2018 and that their holding was now down to 2,123,059 (1.47% following the share placing).  The difference from 2017 is 1,400,000, so I assume that the other missing 300,000 were sold at an earlier date. The sales were at 19.5p.

    I then had a look at the JP Jenkins site which showed a number of trades all at 20p (no dates or other info given)

    (400,000, 400,000),   (700,000, 700,000),   106,222,   62,222,   100,000,  200,000

    The bracketed pairs looked like the matched bargains for the two notified R&M sales. The next two also appear to be linked with the "222" figure. The other 100,000 and 200,000 could be the "missing" R&M 300,000.

    Why would R&M sell now.  Perhaps they think that King has gerrymandered a situation where he won't need to finalise the offer, because the 50% threshold won't be met. However, it seems they still wanted out so were prepared to sell at 19.5p a share.  That would need a matched buyer, so who has bought their shares. There may be a new disclosure issued. If so, then we may find out if it is Club 1872 or one of the other placees.

     


  57. easyJambo 14th December 2018 at 17:01

     

    So it could be that Club1872 have had to fork out more of their hard earned to bale King out. What a Real Rangers Man he is. And what mugs they are if this is the case.


  58. Timtim 14th December 2018 at 16:20
    2 0 Rate This

    ” provide a public cash confirmation statement ”

    https://media.rangers.co.uk/uploads/2018/12/20181130-King-Undertaking.pdf

    It reads to me that King has until 5pm today to make a public statement re the cash confirmer and legal advisor.
    ………………….
    It is Christmas time, so everything stays open a little later than usual. It is the Christmas rush this time of year that makes one’s mind wander on other matters and makes one forgetful.


  60. Ex Ludo 14th December 2018 at 19:00
    5 2 Rate This

    https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/jim-spence/505460/jim-spence-changing-football-club-ownership-model/

    Since it might be a long wait for a statement here’s a piece from the pen of one J Spence to while away the time.
    ……………….
    I suspect that many football clubs in the not too distant future will be part of multi ownership arrangements, with the larger clubs having ownership of, or a share in, several clubs of different sizes.

    Whether Scotland becomes part of such a new football landscape may become an intriguing and a very vexed question, for fans who see their club as integral to their sense of community.


  61. Brazilian premier league soccer club Atletico Mineiro has launched a fan token dubbed “GaloCoin,” Cointelegraph Brazil reports Friday, Dec. 14.

    The GaloCoin is named after Atletico’s mascot, a rooster (“galo” in Portuguese). It is based on Footcoin — a platform that allows to launch utility tokens on the Ethereum blockchain. The GaloCoin is tied to the national fiat currency exchange rate and is equal to one Brazilian real.

    Atletico’s token will allow fans to purchase game tickets, official apparel, as well as participate in discount programs. To use the club’s cryptocurrency token, one has to buy at least 50 GaloCoins (equivalent to approximately $13).

    Utility tokens are steadily increasing in popularity among soccer teams.
    …………….
    The changing face of football.
    sorry i had to split those last two posts.


  62. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17298555.businessman-who-attempted-to-buy-rangers-says-club-has-nothing-to-worry-about-despite-reports-of-22m-debts/
    …………..
    Mr McColl, who heads the Clyde Blowers Capital industrial investment firm told The Evening Times: “I don’t think there is any concern there. As they improve their earning capacity is going to go up, if they can get further in Europe each year.

    “It is well-managed now – it wasn’t before when it went through that tough time. It is very well-managed now I think.”
    …………….
    I think puff piece.


  63. easyJambo 14th December 2018 at 17:01

    There is still no new notice on the RIFC website as to whether or not King has appointed a "cash confirmer" and a "legal advisor"…

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

    EJ, and I thought King was the tyrant!

    You've only given the chancer one minute past the deadline…  ?

    I'm sure there is a perfectly rational explanation for King's tardiness;

    As 'Rangers Chairman' he had expected cash confirmers and lawyers to deferentially approach him for his business.

    T'internet was down in his SA neighbourhood.

    His dog ate his carefully prepared statement.

    WATP!

    etc…

    King and Compliance are strangers… always have been, always will be… IMO.

     


  65. Seen a few YouTube videos of dodgy, drunken singing by the bears in Vienna streets.

    But, no reports of trouble.

    Did they – relatively speaking – behave themselves then?

    Or has it just not been reported by the SMSM?


  67. paddy malarkey 21.15

    In the interests of balance i feel it should be known that the objects mentioned in the pro Rangers BBC article were in fact scrunched up paper balls from the pre-match display and were aimed at the idiot who entered the field of play in a show of anger at the individual concerned.

    As far as i'm aware there was no-one else involved so not sure why the pro Rangers  BBC mention "invasions" and "supporters" when only one person was involved. 

    Sick of their bias towards us.  

     

     


  68. slimjim
    14th December 2018 at 22:13
    1 27 Rate This

    paddy malarkey 21.15

    In the interests of balance i feel it should be known that the objects mentioned in the pro Rangers BBC article were in fact scrunched up paper balls from the pre-match display and were aimed at the idiot who entered the field of play in a show of anger at the individual concerned.

    As far as i’m aware there was no-one else involved so not sure why the pro Rangers BBC mention “invasions” and “supporters” when only one person was involved.

    Sick of their bias towards us.

    …………………….

    Eh….?

    The BBC report is entirely factual. No opinion or commentary whatsoever was made.

    The words you seem to find objectionable are not the BBC’s, they’re in the charges as uefa set them out.

    Should the BBC not report on the fine levied against your club?

    Or perhaps you would prefer it to use alternative facts to explain why your club is being fined?

    If they had tried to downplay the moronic behaviour of those involved – as you have just done – we would quite rightly condemn the writer.

    That the writer has not added commentary to condemn those morons, is sad if not completely unsurprising.

    That the writer does not report on what the club is doing to identify the perpetrators, might also be wondered at.

    Any so called fan of any club who enters the field of play or throws objects within the ground should automatically be condemned.

    Read the article again.

    Complaining that this particular report – lacking in any critical commentary whatsoever – indicates some sort of bias against your club, simply does you no favours.


  69. Following me looking up the shareholdings in the club regarding the required TOP offer, I happened to look at the latest share price of Sebata Holdings (the new name of Micromega).

    The company had been trading at around 10 Rand a share about a year ago. It then dropped following the special dividend that was paid after the NOSA subsidiary was sold off, but has continued to fall in value since then.  The latest share price quoted for Sebata Holdings was 3.5 Rand. At that level King's (family trust's) 63% investment in the company has dropped by almost two thirds in the last 12 months, leaving the value of his investment as just £14m at the current exchange rates.

    I'm sure that he still has a fair amount of cash stashed away in offshore trusts, but his primary (only?) SA investment has plummeted in value.

    He may have earned around £13m from his dividend back in April, but his wealth will have been reduced significantly with the latest share movements, which would put his ability to fund future investment in TRFC, and funding of the TOP offer, in jeopardy.  


  71. Hirsuit Pursuit 00.18

    In the past the reporting of similar charges by UEFA have been qualified with either a more detailed account of the incident or/and a representative of the club having their say.

    Despite Steven Gerrard making his opinion clear the BBC chose not to include this.

    At no time did i "downplay the moronic behaviour of those involved". I referred to the one person who entered the field of play as an "idiot".but added that the "objects" thrown at him were in fact pieces of paper which was childish and has cost the club financially.

    Don't know about you but i would rather get hit by a paper ball than a coin.

     


  72. easyJambo 15th December 2018 at 02:03

     

    Following me looking up the shareholdings in the club regarding the required TOP offer, I happened to look at the latest share price of Sebata Holdings (the new name of Micromega). The company had been trading at around 10 Rand a share about a year ago. It then dropped following the special dividend that was paid after the NOSA subsidiary was sold off, but has continued to fall in value since then. The latest share price quoted for Sebata Holdings was 3.5 Rand. At that level King's (family trust's) 63% investment in the company has dropped by almost two thirds in the last 12 months, leaving the value of his investment as just £14m at the current exchange rates. I'm sure that he still has a fair amount of cash stashed away in offshore trusts, but his primary (only?) SA investment has plummeted in value. He may have earned around £13m from his dividend back in April, but his wealth will have been reduced significantly with the latest share movements, which would put his ability to fund future investment in TRFC, and funding of the TOP offer, in jeopardy.

    ____________

     

    As ever EJ, your research is second to none, saving us all the mighty effort. You shame the SMSM.

     

    Unfortunately I don't think the ruling enforces King to issue a statement at this time, rather it states that King must instruct a cash confirmer by this date to do all such things as are required to provide a public statement, with the date for the public statement not stipulated. Hopefully I am wrong and this lack of a statement indicates his failure to comply – I'd imagine a cash confirmer would need sight of £19m of liquid funds, or, at least, proof that King could, without question, have that liquid amount available within the required timescale. I suspect that a cash confirmer is putting their reputation on the line whenever they accept this type of position and will want to be as definite as they can be. If, as EJ has discovered, King's SA based investments are somewhat diminished, and not liquid, he may well be having difficulty even at this first stage of compliance (actually stage 101indecision). 

     

    It could be some time before we know whether or not King has complied with yesterday's deadline as, if no statement is made by King/RIFC, we will have to await a court issued one.

     

     

    I, David Cunningham King, the Respondent, hereby undertake to the Court to take the following actions, or procure that they are taken, in each case by the time specified: 1. Take all such steps as are required to instruct a third party cash confirmer in the United Kingdom (the “Cash Confirmer”) that is considered appropriate by the Panel and confirmed as such by the Panel in writing, as soon as practicable and in any event by no later than 17:30GMT on 14 December 2018, being the date that is two weeks from the date of this undertaking, to do all such things as are required in order to provide a public cash confirmation statement for the purpose of assisting Laird Investments (Pty) Limited (“Laird”) to make an offer for the entire issued share capital of Rangers International Football Club Plc (“Rangers”) on a fully diluted basis (or on such other basis as is agreed in writing by the Panel and the Cash Confirmer) (“the Offer”) including, if required, transferring all such funds as are required into the United Kingdom.


  73. ClusterOne@20.32 yesterday.

    Interesting re the virtual currency. I think we’re half way there already in a general sense through using contactless payment. I have a friend whose son lives and works in Sweden and the use of cash over there is almost nil. Of course the other side of that coin is that begging in the street has stopped because no-one carries cash. Looks to me like more people are being marginalised and not just football supporters.


  74. slimjim 15th December 2018 at 10:55
    the “objects” thrown at him were in fact pieces of paper which was childish and has cost the club financially.
    …………….
    I have seen the last few ibrox tifo’s no wonder they tried to get rid of the piece’s of paper quickly, should have just released a statement.
    “We acknowledge that a tiny minority of Rangers fans also encroached on the pitch but only after having been faced with prolonged and severe provocation and in order to protect our players and officials who were being visibly attacked in front of them.

    “Any club’s supporters would have done the same. This distressing and deeply disturbing episode would never have happened.
    If the union bears could get a half decent display going.
    Something along those lines, or has that been used before.


  75. Ex Ludo 15th December 2018 at 11:34
    0 0 Rate This

    ClusterOne@20.32 yesterday.

    Interesting re the virtual currency.
    ………………..
    Not a crossbar challenge kind of way to make money but what if say celtic released a £1 coin that could be bought for £1. How many would be sold and kept just for a keepsake.
    would it all be worth the effort?

Comments are closed.