Enough is enough

Avatar By

Https://johnjamessite.com/ …

Comment on Enough is enough by sannoffymesssoitizz.


sannoffymesssoitizz Also Commented

Enough is enough

Yer club’s deid mate – beat it.

Enough is enough
New Direction for Old Newspapers?

The two Glasgow titles have been struggling to retain both readership and credibility of late, and it may be that the owners, Newsquest Scotland, have decided to take the papers in a new direction.

In February, the BBC reported that..

The Herald fell by 10% to 28,900 average daily sales in the Audit Bureau of Circulation (ABC) figures. 

The Evening Times, targeting Glasgow and the west of Scotland manages to shift 23,696 copies a day on average. Which is an embarrassingly low percentage of its potential reach of around one million people.

So, clearly something had to be done, and a change at the top under these circumstances usually means a change in policy.

Will they pick the right people for the job, or will they draw their appointees from among the peepil?

There are several candidates within the mainstream Scottish media for the posts, but none of them are particularly radical enough to halt the decline and turn it around.

An editor is like a circus ringmaster, he books the acts, but should let them get on with the show, and with the right amount of trust and freedom, that show becomes one worth paying for.

At the moment, only a fool would deny there is a conservative agenda throughout the country. The way things were is the way they must be and the way they must be in the future.

We only have to look at the demise of the Murray group and its subsequent return to see that certain figures in society are untouchable.
Somehow, the idea that things must never change has become the mainstay of all newspapers, not only in business, but in politics, sport and everyday life.

Things are bad right now, but if we tighten our belts, they’ll get better ..

People don’t buy papers any more because they don’t want to read them any more.

Its actually that simple.

As a result, to survive, the papers must take on more advertising, either straightforward or subliminal, as with the advertising features that pass as news these days.

And if a company advertise with that paper, it holds a disproportionate influence on the editor, who cannot risk losing that account.

Before, a company would place an account with a paper that sold well, and paid whatever the going rate was.

Now, as papers lose credibility and sales, and as other outlets for advertising become available, the advertising revenue is dropping, and its scaring the life out of the printed news industry.
It would take a brave editor in this climate to call in his staff and tell then to publish and be damned.

It would take a brave editor to send his hacks to uncover what went on at Murray Group, for instance, or at Rangers.

But at the Herald Group that opportunity is there…

Cast you mind back to the independence referendum, and the London based papers and the BBC…

That 45% of Scots managed to withstand the combined onslaught of the mass media is remarkable and praiseworthy.

The London owned titles lied, pure and simple, in the same way that they lied about Brexit and the EU.

And most people fell for it.

They still believe what they see on television, they still believe what they read in the papers, though really its just the old maxim of repeating something over and over until the lie becomes a truth.

With new editors on the way at two Scottish papers there is an opportunity to open the windows and let in a bit of fresh air.

New media has plenty of promising and brave people who have chosen a different career path, and its only a perceived lack of credibility that is preventing a mass takeover of the old news establishment.

A change in direction by the two Glasgow titles, a willingness to report the facts, whoever they may upset, would see sales increase, it would see advertisers demand a place on their pages, and above all, it would spark a change in the fourth estate, at least in Scotland, that would make in society who hold a position of responsibility accountable for their actions.

That’s why we have newspapers.

That’s why its time for change, and a new direction.

Digital media is all well and good, but whilst the papers may see increased “clicks 2 on their articles, its only articles, and not the full newspaper, which should be produced as a whole, and not a collection of parts.

It’s what editors do, they put a narrative and a theme throughout each issue every day, and the reader can them see a bigger picture than he can by dabbling in just the stories that interest him.

One of the reasons politicians, for instance are getting away with so much these days is that few people “click ” on those stories, and, of course, not enough are buying the papers or responding to editorial comment to make the issue worth pursuing.

That needs to change.

The Herald Group has that chance.

Don’t blow it.

This time there will be no way back.


Enough is enough
upthehoops November 12, 2017 at 13:26

Here’s a link to the HMRC guidance on the taxation of dividendshttps://www.gov.uk/tax-on-dividends

I’m delighted you brought up this subject.

When I worked as an Tax Investigator in HMRC I came across directors who voted themselves dividends of £40,000(+). They then drew these down from their Directors’ Loan Account on a monthly basis over the following accounting period.

I tried to challenge these withdrawals on the basis that the company should treat the monthly sums as earnings that should be subject to income tax, employee and employer NIC but I could not get any of my superiors to agree to my challenge.

I was disgusted at the lack of support.

No wonder I later had a breakdown and had to fight for ill health retirement.

Recent Comments by sannoffymesssoitizz

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
On the subject of player valuations remember that:

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One

Dave King is a man of the most appalling selfishness. When George Letham tried to stop him from buying more than 10% of the club’s shares, to stop from triggering the Takeover Panel case which now threatens to engulf him and Sevco, he ignored it and bought 14% of them instead.

He has consistently made statements which force other directors to put their hands in their pockets. He lies with a brazenness that is astonishing, and then retreats across the water and leaves others to deal with it in the aftermath.

But if, as some are reporting today, he has decided that he will appeal the Court of Session verdict which affirms the Takeover Panel’s demand that he make an offer for all of the club’s shares he is even more selfish than we were aware.

King knows this is going to catch up to him.

Appeals don’t operate on the basis that a particular party does not like a verdict; they have to be fought on a point of law. But the decision in this case was not like other legal cases; Lord Bannatyne made it clear that the hearing he presided over was not an effort to re-litigate the Takeover Panel’s own inquiry into King. That inquiry has already been held. That decision has been made. That decision has been finalised. It is written in stone.

King is not appealing against the Takeover Panel decision; he cannot. He is ignoring it. The Takeover Panel was merely asking the Court of Session for an enforcement order. They were asking that the court issue King an instruction he could not so readily dismiss.

But the media, and King himself, appear to have taken their decision to go to court in the first place as proof that the Takeover Panel is powerless and it never was. Even if King’s appeal succeeds and the judge’s order is rescinded, the Takeover Panel’s own verdict will stand.

And their own consequences will follow as night follows day.

These include, but are not limited to, the now notorious “cold shouldering” of King and the companies with which he does business. As the company at the centre of all this is Sevco it is sheer fantasy to believe that they will not be impacted by this.

The media’s failure to understand this simple thing is astonishing even to seasoned watchers of the Scottish press, well aware of their ignorance on any number of subjects.

For openers, Robertson was talking the other day about it not changing the club’s plans for a share issue next year. He knows that is arrant nonsense but he also knows the media is not going to challenge him on it. But any share issue has to be approved by the City. A broker has to be found. A nominated advisor needs to be appointed. Finally, an exchange has to agree to relist the shares. It is a self-evident fact that the Takeover Panel’s decision compels King to make an offer for those shares and that whilst this ruling applies – and remember, it is a final judgement from the City of London’s own regulator – no exchange anywhere will agree to do so.

King is compelled to make an offer, and sooner or later he will get instructed to do so by a court from which there is no appeal. Because the “second house” – the Outer House – of the Court of Session made this judgement there is an avenue to appeal to the Inner House. Beyond that the only other appeal is to the Supreme Court … but crucially, the Inner House has the power to refuse him leave and to say their own instructions stand.

Regardless, whether a court tells him to do it or whether they uphold the appeal it makes no difference at all. King stands to win nothing. The club stands to gain nothing. He knows that whether he complies at this point or fights tooth and nail the end result has already been decided. The Takeover Panel have judged him and as long as he is at Ibrox they will not allow that club to re-float on the stock market without his being in compliance.

His decision to resist this judgement, when the only conceivable end is that the Takeover Panel will be left with no choice but to impose its own sanctions, including cold shouldering, is appalling in its protection of his interests alone. The Ibrox board must be astounded by this and by the negative effects it will have on every single person around the boardroom table.

He is dragging them all down with him, and the club too. He has lost this battle, but is determined to resist the consequences of that defeat as long as possible. If they continue to tolerate his presence on their board they are shackling themselves to him and to whatever penalties the final outcome brings. I cannot believe they are so foolish. I cannot understand why they do not cut him loose, for their own good and the good of the club they claim to love.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One

Rangers chairman Dave King is to appeal against a Court of Session ruling ordering him to make a share offer totalling around £11m.

Lord Bannatyne ruled in favour of the Takeover Panel that King acted in concert with other shareholders when he bought a controlling stage in 2015.

King was ordered to offer investors 20p per share for the share capital not controlled by him and three partners.

He now intends to challenge that ruling, though.

The South African was ordered to submit an offer within 30 days after a written decision by Lord Bannatyne following an earlier hearing at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

King owns around 15% of the Rangers International Football Club plc shares through his family trust, New Oasis Asset Limited, and the judge rejected his claim that he did not have control over its assets.

Lord Bannatyne also dismissed King’s argument that he could not afford to buy the shares and his assertion that the 20p share price set by the Takeover Panel was so far below the market price that shareholders would not accept it. Both arguments were deemed “irrelevant”.

Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson insisted the decision would not impact the club’s plans to hold a fresh share issue early next year.

He said on Friday: “It doesn’t impact the club and its day-to-day business. It will be business as usual for the club and the PLC so we will just continue with the plans we have got in place.”

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus, December 23, 2017 at 09:52

I took the phrase “bowing out” to mean King disposing of his shares to (an)other RRM(s) – if he could find anyone daft enough to buy them at a premium?!  

Of course, to the uninformed, this would seem a way to avoid compliance with the Court of Session order, when in reality Lord Bannatyne has ruled that this would be irrelevant. 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Martin Hannan (Journalist) goes off message in today’s The National?http://www.thenational.scot/news/15790853.Martin_Hannan__Dave_King_needs_to_pull_another_rabbit_out_of_the_hat____but_will_he_want_to_/?ref=mrb&lp=4

THE future of the current ownership of Rangers will be decided in the next 30 days. In that period, unless he appeals the decision – and not a single legal expert last night was prepared to say he should – chairman Dave King has been ordered by the Court of Session to make an offer to the club’s shareholders to buy their stock at 20p per share.

Lord Bannatyne decided to ignore King’s protests that he personally doesn’t have the money – theoretically, it could cost him £11m – and accept the Takeover Panel’s evidence that King has control of two trusts which do have the cash.

The most damning piece of evidence as highlighted by Lord Bannatyne was that King’s ally George Letham had warned the South African-based Glaswegian businessman that buying more shares would trigger the Takeover Panel’s rules that he would have to offer to buy all the shares. The judge basically concluded that King knew what he was doing and must now make that share offer.

Another matter highlighted by the judge was that King said he did not even have the money up front to pay those who would organise the share offer – and Rangers are still without an official Nominated Adviser (Nomad) who could do that. That is a real problem.

King has proven a controversial figure since he took over the club more than two years ago. On the one hand he has played brilliantly to the Ibrox gallery, portraying himself as a fan who understands their desire to see their club back at the top of Scottish football and succeeding in Europe.

King has undoubtedly put some – emphasis on “some” – of his millions into Rangers, as have his allies on the board with soft loans that can be converted into shares. Yet the chairman is also a divisive figure because the vast sums he promised have been slow to appear and have been wasted on two under-achieving managers and a host of players who simply have not cut it in the Scottish Premiership.

King could say that it’s not his fault that Rangers have not been supreme on the pitch, but supporters do not see it that way – they want success and believe they are entitled to it because they have invested their hard-earned cash in the club.

That’s why there are growing doubts about King’s chairmanship among fans. The appointment of stand-in Graeme Murty as manager until the end of the season had supporters in uproar with many on social media saying it was a deflection tactic.

The betting is that Dave King will either pull another rabbit out of the hat, possibly from investors abroad, or try to delay the share offer. That could land him in contempt of court, for which he would be extradited from South Africa – the courts there have pummelled him before – and perhaps even land in jail. He has to ask himself if continuing with Rangers is worth the candle, or should he now bow out and let others have a go.

About the author