A guest blog by Auldheid
In the previous blog (http://www.tsfm.scot/how-not-to-govern-scottish-football/), TSFM wrote to Harper Macleod raising questions on their advice supplied to the then SPL Board in February 2013 when the Lord Nimmo Smith Decision re use of EBTs and side letters was announced.
A reply was received from Mr McKenzie on 18th September the gist of which can be discerned in the following reply sent on 4th October.
Dear Mr McKenzie 4th Oct 2014
Thank you for your response of 18th September to my letter of 5th September regarding the consequences of information on the true nature of EBTs for Craig Moore, Ronald De Boer and Tor Andre Flo being withheld from your good selves when establishing in 2012 the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission into the use of EBTs and side letters by Rangers FC from 1999.
In recognition of the points you made about publishing your responses on line, your letter of 18th September will not be published although readers of TSFM will be able to gather from this reply which is being published what those points were.
Anonymity.
It is a matter of real regret that not only was anonymity required, but that Harper MacLeod were used as a conduit to try and elicit a reply from the SPFL or SFA. In terms of anonymity there were three factors at play:
- Security. The individuals asking the questions are aware that any raised concerning Rangers can attract threats from the worst of the Rangers support. We know that they are a minority but nevertheless, as we have recently witnessed, some are ready to turn threat into action. It is a condemnation of Scottish society that fear has played its part in preventing the truth being revealed about Rangers FC’s use of EBTs since 1999.
- Collective. The Scottish Football Monitor is made up of supporters of many clubs in Scottish football and is in effect a collective. The letters reflect to a large extent the thinking and feelings of the majority of readers. If a name is required for any future correspondence from the SPFL or SFA, then it can be addressed to Mr John Macnab, and a Post Box address can be supplied if necessary in addition to this e mail address press@tsfm.scot.
- Accountability. The final factor is the most important because it is why Harper Macleod were approached. It was not just because you were responsible for commissioning the Lord Nimmo Smith enquiry, but because there is absolutely no form of direct accountability by either the SPFL or the SFA to the supporters of Scottish football clubs. Correspondence can be ignored or the content not fully addressed and the customer who pays the wages of both organisations has no means of redress at all. Had there been some oversight in say an Ombudsman type role, it would not have been necessary to involve Harper MacLeod and indeed your good self. We sincerely apologise for doing so along with our thanks for actually responding to our correspondence, but we would like the reasons for our approach being addressed by the clubs who make up both footballing authorities. We hope you pass this particular point on to both SFA and SPFL.
Provenance.
You ask what the provenance is of the information/evidencethat you were given. The answer is we do not know, it was taken from material uploaded mainly in June last year for purposes unknown. Whilst its provenance may be in doubt there is no question as to the veracity of the content of the material itself.
This, when put together, sets out the narrative that prompted our correspondence. This question of provenance simply looks like an excuse for football authority not investigating what the material suggests took place when Duff and Phelps were asked to supply all documents relating to EBTs (no distinction being made) from the inception of the SPL.
Even if the material itself could not be used directly, it should have prompted questions that would have either corrected the narrative or established that the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission was indeed misled either by accident or design, when those documents were not supplied.
The SPFL must surely have the powers to seek the original documents from BDO and the SFA cannot be totally impotent in that regard either.
Then there is the personal knowledge of current SFA President Campbell Ogilvie to draw on. A simple statement explaining why he saw no reason to make any distinction between the irregular DOS REBTs that he launched in 1999 and the later MGMRT EBTs of which he was a beneficiary would surely help clear the air?
Existence of Side Letters.
We note that the Commission were aware of the existence of side letters to Moore, De Boer and Flo at the time of its decision of 28th February 2013 and these were taken into account when determining the appropriate sanction. The existence of side letters is not the issue that was raised in our previous correspondence, it was the nature of the EBTs that was the issue raised. In fact it would seem that the Commission themselves were confused by the switching from the irregular REBT ebts in 2002/03 to the MGMRT EBTs that are subject to further appeal with regard to regularity by HMRC.
The side letters to De Boer and Flo of 30th August and 23 November 2000 related to the DOS REBTs that they were both paid under. It is not known if they had subsequent side letters relating to the MGMRT EBTs , which is possible, but as set out in previous correspondence there were two distinctive types of EBTs and the side letters supplied relate to the earlier irregular type.
The position regarding the Moore EBT is interesting in that whatever EBT side letter was known to the Commission in February 2012 it could only have related to payments made to him under an accompanying side letter from the MGMRT ebts after 2002/03.
That Mr Moore was paid under the REBT scheme in 1999 is a matter of supplied evidence. However there is no record of any side letter in relation to the payment under the 1999 arrangement, which may or may not have been reported in the contract lodged with the SPL and SFA. It was the absence of any side letter in respect of this payment that prevented HMRC pursuing the tax due on it as they did for De Boer and Flo in what has become known as “the wee tax case. “ The evidence of deliberate concealment by the Murray Group of the side letters to De Boer and Flo allowed HMRC to seek repayment outside the normal 6 year time limit.
However the absence of a side letter or tax demand for Mr Moore does not mean this particular payment is not deserving of further scrutiny since
- It was an irregular payment that other clubs could not avail themselves of (as applies to the other two EBTs to De Boer and Flo)
- It is not known if it was reported to the SPL/SFA under the registration rules of that period.
Finally thank you for forwarding our letter of 5th September and previous correspondence to the SFA Compliance Officer. Hopefully any further correspondence will be between him and ourselves, first to our email address, later to a PO Box if required.
It is the hope of all readers of The Scottish Football Monitor that the SFA will stop hiding behind the provenance excuse, which is destroying any semblance of integrity and proper governance of Scottish football and they will use their powers to properly acquire the information that will set the record straight and in doing so start to restore some of the lost trust which is essential for the wellbeing of Scottish football.
John Macnab
TSFM
Not sure if it’s just me twopanda but I have not got clue what any of your posts mean
btw The Rangers Badge Mystery
Meant to say – maybe the “Scroll” bedge – RFC with 5 stars – is just better for perpetuating the continuity myth – or maybe an onerous contract insisst it is used and paid for – in Euros or horse feed.
John Clark says:
October 23, 2014 at 10:33 pm
A propos things like trade marks and badges, I’ve learned a wee bit about the Intellectual Property Office which seems to deal with applications to register such, and hears people who oppose any particular application. And was surprised to discover that The Rangers Football Club Ltd application to trademark RFC had been opposed, and a hearing heard and decision made on 29th July 2014.
If you are very interested in this kind of subject, this link will give you 17 pages of legal-style bumph!
O/329/14 PDF document340Kb
==========================================
Hi JC
Strangely Alistair Campbell Was Head of Brand Protection at “The Rangers Football club PLC” (whose version was that); on 7/4/2006 who wrote in favour of the proposed new IP laws to Andrew Gowers at the Treasury claiming that brand robbery was costing the then club £5m per year. This Russell Campbell attempted to IP it and lost. Is it the same guy, his son? Whatever it all points to the brand being worth much more if unencumbered than the actual football side.
mcfc says:
October 23, 2014 at 10:42 pm
————————————————————-
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/charlie-and-the-badge-kissers/#more-5191
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/quite-an-image/#more-5157
Actually having read the application in full it was a “hi-jack” attempt and no wonder he had to pay costs.
He lost which leaves the current owners in my opinion(messrs CG and mibbies CW) in clover.
Allyjambo says:
October 23, 2014 at 5:27 pm
21 0 Rate This
easyJambo says:
October 23, 2014 at 5:15 pm
——————————————————-
All plausible enough.
The McCoist salary cut info is spot on.
Phil
What sum of money do you reckon Ashley would pay for those IP rights.
The thing is I do not believe those rights in any way attach to any part of Sevco. I believe they are privately owned.
No?
ianagain says:
October 23, 2014 at 11:36 pm
0 0 Rate This
——————————————-
No idea.
Mr Ashley is a very astute chap.
He will get a good price.
Been reading on here forever and rtc, initially because I loved the Rangers are Knackered for want of a better description, but as things progressed the story behind the story , the press downright refusal to publish the known facts the realisation that the press are part of the problem not just as regards football but in general.
It is a sad fact of life that you realise when people call you cynical its not an insult it means you are actually enlightened.
Sadly the reason I have finally registered and posted is to say sickofitall thank you, I thought it was me, I have not got a clue what twopanda is saying either!
PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
October 23, 2014 at 11:49 pm
1
0
Rate This
ianagain says:
October 23, 2014 at 11:36 pm
0 0 Rate This
——————————————-
No idea.
Mr Ashley is a very astute chap.
He will get a good price.
==============================
The million dollar question therefore – from whom I guess.
If it does not reside within the Aim vehicle or the ‘Fitba club its over.
Clyde debt free
Feeling a mixture of pride and also humility. It was a situation we should never have gotten into but having done so, and not apparently being the “fabric of society” had to face either many years of hardship or oblivion. We could so easily have been the next Airdrie, Gretna, Clydebank or Thirds. They are taking pelters from a section of the support over the EK move and potential renaming at the moment but without certain members of the current board, Clyde FC would no longer exist.
Founded 1877, no liquidations, now no debt and 100% fan owned (the first in the country).
So
Ally is a legend
He loves his club
His club is skint
November salaries are in doubt
Ally is wealthy
He gets £800k pa
He wants his club to survive
So he takes a pay cut
Months ago
A sacrifice of love
To help save the club
A pay cut of nothing per annum
Now the club faces Administration
Ally`s pay cut was in vain
,,,,,,,,,,
The moral of the story ?
Mixing with Spivs eats your moral fibre
Until one day it vanishes
And you become
A Spiv
Cast of thousands @9:41, got sidetracked by my own pedantry but what I said was that in terms of the SFA Articles of Association that, unless SFA chose to rule otherwise, Dave King should be disqualified because a)He’d been convicted of a finance-related crime that had a tariff of 2 years imprisonment and, b) he’d been a director of an association football club that had suffered an insolvency event in the last 5 years.
The Tax Act I referred to is the South African one and the earlier discussion related to whether he bribed his way out of a 2-year or 82-year sentence.
A td for my post 😛 gaun yersel. Must have been from a QP or Partick fan!
Or possibly one of the current board critics who are very vocal in their opposition but will not use the democratic structure available to them to stand against or rally a vote against the board members they constantly criticise. This is a club where EVERY member of the board can be removed via the one member one vote system.
PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
October 23, 2014 at 11:17 pm
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/charlie-and-the-badge-kissers/#more-5191
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/quite-an-image/#more-5157
—————
Thanks – i read them with interest at the time. I thought the level of discussion at CRO was interesting – whether it’s osmosis or entropy there is certainly an emerging awareness happening – be it ever so slow and ever so late and still very much a minority interest it is definitely entering the accepted orthodoxy down G51 way.
ianagain says:
October 23, 2014 at 11:02 pm
‘..Hi JC, Strangely Alistair Campbell Was Head of Brand Protection at “The Rangers Football club PLC” (whose version was that); on 7/4/2006 who wrote in favour of the proposed new IP laws..’
————–
It’s a whole new world to me, Ianagain.
I have only the vaguest notion of how people can cash in on using someone else’s brand name or trademark.
I just hope that TSFM and RTC have registered those names, before some mini-CG starts flogging mugs and tea-towels at the Barras , emblazoned with “Integrity in Scottish football! Sack the SFA board’ or’ Convicted fraudsters out, out,out of OUR Game!’ or “‘Fit and Proper’king?Don’t make me laugh”, … or some such slogan!
Mmmm.. I wonder..(thinks ££££s!)
mcfc says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:34 am
———————————————-
Cheers
To follow up on comments above…
A good while ago I heard directly from geographically separate ‘very reliable sources’ that McCoist never took a pay cut – despite what the SMSM reported.
He will have to deal with that when it does eventually does become public knowledge.
Another point I intend to follow up on…
Remember when ‘Walter’ resigned his Scotland post – when they were doing well – to return to Rangers ?
A compensation amount was widely publicised – which Rangers was due to pay to the SFA.
Was it actually paid ?
To be continued…
blu says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:08 am
The Tax Act I referred to is the South African one and the earlier discussion related to whether he bribed his way out of a 2-year or 82-year sentence.
==========================================
I was one of those you were having the discussion with. You have been able to show details which appear to show Dave King’s 41 convictions for tax fraud would have carried a two year concurrent jail sentence, while I believe it is also easy to see why other released details gave the impression the sentence would have been consecutive, totaling over 80 years. If what you have shown are the facts of the matter I’m more than happy to accept.
What I’m not happy to accept though is that Mr King can have these 41 convictions on record and be considered suitable to become involved with a Scottish club. Recent coverage throws up issues regarding media attitudes which I believe should have been dropped long ago. It is now crystal clear that King’s status as a ‘real Rangers man’ affords him a aura in Scotland which flies in the face of his criminal record and how he was described in court by a South African Judge. Had the only difference been that King was born and raised in the East End of London, with no Rangers affiliation, I believe the Rangers support and the Scottish media would be running him out of town. Personally I am really fed up that in 2014 a man’s qualities can be so easily defined depending on which Scottish football team he favours. It smacks of something still underlying which should have been confined to history long ago. However, the deference to King, the previous deference to Whyte and Green before it all went sour, and the continued deference to David Murray suggests a superior social status is still attached to being a Rangers Director. Given everything that has happened it is as ridiculous as it is sad.
I wonder how all of those other Scottish club directors considered inferior to those at Ibrox manage to run their clubs in a proper manner.
Seeing the Act doesn’t really answer that though. He pleaded guilty to 41 charges, each with a 2 year tariff atatched. The discussion is whether those 41 x 2 years would be served consecutively or concurrently. Sentence concurrence seems to be the norm inhte UK, but that is not true for other jurisdictions.
upthehoops says:
October 24, 2014 at 7:12 am
============================
UTH, I agreed with you and said so before sidetracking into the 2/82 business. I’ve always been sceptical about the view that Celtic get a poorer deal from the SMSM than Rangers – believing that they were both favoured too much in comparison to the rest of Scottish football. However, I’ve been around long enough to remember how Fergus McCann was treated by the Scottish press and compare it with the unquestioning response to a man in a navy suit and brown brogues who happens to be a convicted tax criminal. There is a difference in media presentation by the two individuals concerned of course, but this current cynical stringing along of their target readers by the SMSM (Sun/DR)is contemptible.
UTH
Correct. Unless of course king isn’t all he seems money wise (surely not) or, alternatively, the situation is presented as if not fair accompli then certainly last chance saloon for the famous old club. But then of course you hit the problem that on one hand if a club (and apologies we’re back to the ethereal cloudy thingy wot the fans follow, not the silly number on the form thing) can survive liquidation then why not survive another. Especially if doing so actually makes you stronger, no debt etc. Secondly, and you’re right on the mark with your ‘other clubs’ comment, is what is actually being said, is that ‘the club’ can only be ‘the club’ when it is partaking in glorious journeys and competing with THEM hence the procession of ex old firmers telling us so.
Anything else is but a pale imitation (neat link to the badge debate).
blu says: October 24, 2014 at 8:43 am
The Tax Act I referred to is the South African one and the earlier discussion related to whether he bribed his way out of a 2-year or 82-year sentence.
scottc says:October 24, 2014 at 12:08 am
Seeing the Act doesn’t really answer that though. He pleaded guilty to 41 charges, each with a 2 year tariff atatched. The discussion is whether those 41 x 2 years would be served consecutively or concurrently. Sentence concurrence seems to be the norm inhte UK, but that is not true for other jurisdictions.
=======================
Scott, – In its press release NPA said an effective 82 year sentence, SARS said 2 years, the Tax Act says a maximum of 2 years. The point is that in terms of the SFA Articles of Association, the Board of the SFA must be satisfied that all officials, office-bearers, secretary, directors or members of the board of directors or the board of management or committee of any member club is fit and proper to hold such a position within Association Football. Among the examples of reasons for deeming a person not fit and proper is;
I happen to think that describes the situation of convicted tax dodger Mr David Cunningham King and that he therefore would be excluded from holding an official position at Rangers. The SFA might consider that landing Rangers with yet another person who gets into bother with the taxman is a bad idea, bad for Scottish football. Who knows?
Nice concise comment from Saltedpopcorn on the LSE share site.
“I agree with you about King; I think he is a tyre-kicker. But unfortunately the car is also a dud.” 🙂
On the concurrent/consecutive sentencing in South Africa…
There is a presumption that multiple sentences are consecutive (cumulative) rather than concurrent but regard must be paid to the judgment in the State v Koutandos 2002 (2) SACR 222 (In the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa) in terms of the effect of the consecutive/cumulative sentence passed.
So 41 sentences of 2 years may look like 82 years when properly consecutive but in reality the cumulation may be reduced (though not entirely made into the same as if it were concurrent). ie. the punishment should fit the crime(s).
Typically someone sentenced to 2 years on each of 41 counts would see the sentence on the day as 82 years. He then goes through appeal and gets a reduced sentence – as seen in State v Assante ((446/02) [2003] ZASCA 39 (31 March 2003)) – it’s a dry read 🙂 http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2003/39.html
Gym Trainer says:
October 24, 2014 at 9:42 am
3 0 Rate This
On the concurrent/consecutive sentencing in South Africa…
it’s a dry read 🙂 http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2003/39.html
=================================================================================
Gym…but not as dry as some tax cases, of that I can assure you…!
blu says:
October 24, 2014 at 8:55 am
______________________________________________________________________
I also remember the treatment of McCann by the SMSM. It was pretty poor. However, it was no worse than the treatment of McCann by a large and vocal section of the Celtic support. All for having the good sense to run a club within its means and building a new stadium in to the bargain. Evidence that sometimes it’s not just Rangers fans who demand their club lives beyond it means and spends money it doesn’t have. He is now correctly regarded as a saviour by the SMSM and probably most of the Celtic fans who booed him when he unfurled the championship flag.
As for the fit and proper test, I don’t think the SFA has the funds to administer something that is stringent enough to stop the wrong sort of person getting involved in the game. It all seems a bit vague with, I think, the burden falling on the person and club to provide the SFA the required information. Which they then just accept, giving the SFA a nice wee get out.
Off the top of my head, over the years the SFA has let down fans of Rangers, Raith Rovers, Dundee, Gretna and Livingston by allowing people to become involved with those clubs who probably shouldn’t have been anywhere near Scottish football. And the SMSM? best to Ignore most of their sporting output. But here’s the kicker. Most fans are happy when someone takes over their club and splashes a bit of cash and promises moonbeams. When someone takes over a club and tells the truth they are usually met with hostility. Celtic fans treatment of McCann is evidence of that.
Don`t look like Board/Shareholders/MA going to stump up 16m,
So admin probable after a no going concern report.
Last Administration MO seems to be the buyers of the remnants need only to stump up for administrators fees plus deal only with those tied into secured rights.
But after squandering 67m in 18 months and later pleading insolvency
Not sure the CoS is going to take such a light touch this time.
Could be entertaining if they throw the company law book at them.
Possibly could be very entertaining as mystery types de-cloaked, Directors banned, accounts disclosed, where the assets really are etc etc.
As an extra bonus heads should roll at the SFA
mtp
upthehoops says:
October 24, 2014 at 7:12 am
‘…..However, the deference to King, the previous deference to Whyte and Green before it all went sour, and the continued deference to David Murray suggests a superior social status is still attached to being a Rangers Director. ‘
———–
Even though ,and most paradoxically, in recent times,many who were, are, or would like to be such Directors were/are essentially either incompetents ,or knaves, or miserable miserly cheapskate conmen and one-time convicted fraud merchants on the personal make.
Nothing to be at all proud of, in being a ‘Rangers’ director these days-it’s more a badge of shame!
Not quite as shameful, though, as the ‘badge’ worn by the SFA and other football authorities. And definitely not as harmfully shameful as the banner of betrayal/concealment of Truth that is waved daily in our faces by the organs of the Press..and BBC Radio Scotland.
Just looking at King’s statement again
“The board has APPARENTLY engaged constructively on our proposal while advancing its own points as to what it believes is in the best interest of the club and its shareholders.”
&
“Sandy Easdale has similarly APPARENTLY engaged constructively including highlighting some concerns.”
The use of ‘apparently’ (definition: used to say you have read or been told something although you are not certain it is true) doesn’t appear to me to offer any certainty that the board and Sandy Easdale are taking King’s proposals seriously or that any meetings or negotiations were getting down to the nitty gritty stage.
All seems a bit lightweight if you ask me.
Gym Trainer says:
October 24, 2014 at 9:42 am
‘..On the concurrent/consecutive sentencing …’
—————-
To be briefly OT ( but not entirely so) for a minute, whatever about South Africa, one of the biggest sentencing shocks in the UK was the sentence imposed on George Blake,the spy,in 1961(?)
In those days, the maximum sentence for conviction on charges relating to the Official Secrets Act was 14 years.
Blake was found guilty on four charges. Now,whereas ,just a year or two earlier, Gordon Lonsdale and a handful of other spies had been sentenced to about 5 or 6 years, Blake got the 14 year max on each charge, with 3 of them to run consecutively- 42 years in the pokey.
Even at the time, the sentence was seen by many to have been just a piece of malicious revenge exacted by an ‘establishment’ judge (Good Lord, can there BE such a creature? Never, surely, in Scotland at any time!)at the behest of the made-to-look-like-absolute-mugs Security Services. (Who then went on to be seen to make bigger arses of themselves right up to the Anthony Blunt case, when the real traitors to their country were seen to have been the Cambridge mob right at the heart of the Services).
(Having had a very,very, transient and co-incidental meeting in the 1970s with someone who played a significant part in Blake’s escape in 1966, I have just finished reading ” The Greatest Traitor-the secret lives of Agent George Blake” by Roger Hermiston.(Aurum Press,2013)
It is an interesting and enjoyable read.
Gym Trainer says:
October 24, 2014 at 9:42 am
On the concurrent/consecutive sentencing in South Africa…
============================
Good find Gym. The law seems to be as flexible as the SFA’s rules. My assertion remains that at the point of sentencing King was presented with the option of paying the fine or doing two years. His lawyers and money put him in a much better position than Vito Assante.
Cheers,
blu
incredibleadamspark says:
October 24, 2014 at 9:53 am
===============================
“However, it was no worse than the treatment of McCann by a large and vocal section of the Celtic support.”
This myth needs challenged.
The was a brief (and swiftly shouted down) bit of boo’ing when the Bunnets name was announced, “large and vocal” it was not.
Dave’s Pitch
As I understand it, Dave the Saviour’s pitch is: give me the majority of shares and control of the board and choice of Chairman for £9.5mil (loan, credit-line, promise, whatever) and a defo promise of £6.5mil more from unknown Rangers Men sometimes later, honest Mr Deloitte. That’ll get the accounts signed-off, Wallace & Nash saved, administration averted and solvency until ST time, most probably Then we can set about stopping Celtic getting 10-in-a-row. I don’t want to own the club, even I don’t trust me, I want the fans to own (pay for) the club (again and again, and maybe one more time).
So what’d think Sandy? Dilution you say? Well the best malt is always better with a wee drop of Highland Spring?
The Spivs don’t know what to think, either Dave is a total fool or a bloody genius. They’ll take a few days to decide.
wottpi says:
October 24, 2014 at 11:03 am
‘…Just looking at King’s statement again.’
———–
You are absolutely right in your ‘textual criticism’. King’s statement is an attempt at clever crafting ( by his lawyer, rather than by him personally) to mislead the gullible, without actually telling a definite lie or getting into defamation-territory, into believing that the facts are other than what they are.
He will be banking on the fact that the Board, fractured and fractious as it is will not even attempt to make a counter-statement to show him up , politely, of course, as a cheapskate scrounger looking for something for very little. If reasonably well recompensed, I’m sure any one of us could write such a statement for the Board, with wide-open eyes of innocence, as we trash him. 🙂
John Clark says:
October 23, 2014 at 10:33 pm
Was surprised to discover that The Rangers Football Club Ltd application to trademark RFC had been opposed, and a hearing heard and decision made on 29th July 2014.
If you are very interested in this kind of subject, this link will give you 17 pages of legal-style bumph! O/329/14 PDF document340Kb
===============================================================
I had previously noted the opposition to TRFCL registering both ‘RFC’ and ‘R.F.C’.
TRFC applied to register the two trademarks on 12 March 2013 and the application was opposed in August 2013 by an Erskine resident on the basis that ‘RFC’ stood for Rugby Football Club. It was a very weak case and IMO very poorly presented with little effective evidence and eventually on 30 July 2014 judgement was issued in favour of TRFCL and the complainer was ordered to pay £800 in terms of the company’s costs.
It seemed to me that the complainer was either totally into rugby or possibly acting on behalf of an un-named rugby club but I doubt if his motivation is important to the issue.
However in looking at the matter again I now have to wonder about the timing of the initial application to register these trademarks in March 2013 when of course there were some very interesting comings and goings from Ibrox.
Could certain steps have been taken to ensure that onerous contracts in favour of someone exiting the Blue Room also left the building at the same time ❓ Shirley Not 🙄
I have been concentrating for some time on the missing trade mark registration of the scrolled RFC crest topped by 5-stars. This trade mark has been in use on and off since circa 2004 but seems to be much more in evidence in the last year or so.
The CRO article is interesting in detailing photographically how it is steadily replacing the ‘Ready’ logo on all sorts of branding. The ‘Ready’ logo trade mark is registered to TRFCL. It has to be remembered though that the RFC scroll is probably the oldest Rangers emblem and dates back to the original formation of the club it would appear.
We now seem to have an unregistered trade mark increasingly representing the public image of Rangers. But who owns this trademark? TRFCL apparently owns all registered ‘Rangers’ trade marks and Rangers Retail Ltd also has an exclusive licence to use all of them.
Rangers Retail Ltd are also using the non trade marked RFC scroll crest surmounted by 5-stars on Rangers merchandise but do they have a licence to do so? Without knowing the owner of this trade mark I am unable to answer that question but if I was a Bear I would be demanding to know.
Another intriguing point about the scroll RFC crest surmounted with 5-stars is that the RFC scroll segment of the crest is a long standing trade mark owned by TRFCL – according to IP records. See: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/4/EU002557387
But I can find no trade mark for the stars combined with the RFC scroll. I also think that only TRFCL would be allowed to register this combined trade mark which has become increasingly prominent since Rangers went into admin – see: http://www.rangers.co.uk/club/history/crest
Obvious Mr Ashley is an honest businessman and I’m sure he wouldn’t be using this trade mark unless he either owned it or was using it under licence from the owner which seems to be the case for every other Rangers trade mark except the RFC scroll with the 5-stars.
Trade Mark and IP law is quite complex and way beyond my skills to fully understand. But I am fairly confident that when it comes to the combined stars and RFC scroll crest that only TRFCL would be allowed to register this trademark because the RFC scroll is already a legally registered trade mark in its own right owned by TRFCL.
Therefore IMO anyone else using it without a licence could be infringing the legal consequences of ‘passing-off’. It also has to be borne in mind that in the UK there is no legal requirement to register a trade mark but it would be remiss of Rangers not to do so with what is regarded as an iconic trade mark which is very valuable in commercial terms.
So CRO are eventually getting there and it’s always better late than never IMO so they have to be applauded for their interesting contribution to the Great Rangers Badge Mystery ❗
John Clark says:
October 24, 2014 at 11:20 am
1 0 Rate This
——–
Intriguing stuff, John. Not to mention Kim Philby who embarrassed them big time in 1963.
From what I’ve read of those events, Philby was given the chance to run. Better for him to end up in Moscow than having all the old boys being made to look like upper class twits at a trial.
You admire their idealism, in some ways, especially since later revelations and events lead you ask who the real traitors were/are. Thing I find difficult, though, is the betrayal of agents to torture and execution. Earlier Donald McLean passed on military secrets to ‘even up’ the balance of power, I believe — the US as a lone a-power was a recipe for global dictatorship in his eyes. He put only himself at risk.
Oh, that was a bit OT. Actually came on to give an extra shout for @STVGrant who is turning out to be a very decent soul. His twitter stooshie with certain FF types last night showed a brave and principled journo.
It was reported that the deal is still on the table. I can only think that that’s the same table where Mr King keeps his pens. In Johannesburg. It was also reported that peace talks continue. Presumably, that was a typo and referred to Mr King muttering into his Easyjet sandwich. My fictitious sources tell me he didn’t have the requisite coinage for said sandwich but managed to convince the cabin crew that some fellow passengers were going to make up the shortfall. He was, however, unable to identify his backers.
incredibleadamspark says:
October 24, 2014 at 9:53 am
——————————————
Jeezo! I though I was reading the record there – boak!
I was at the game and can assure you that almost all fans were applauding.
I witnessed no fans booing near me at all, but could hear a few that got very quickly shouted down.
I don’t think I have cringed so much at a match before or since. The FEW
guilty of booing are an absolute disgrace, but please bear in mind that it was pre internet bampot days and certain tabloid rags had been at it all season trying to wind fans up against Fergus McCann.
Bawsman says:
October 24, 2014 at 11:30 am
===============================
“However, it was no worse than the treatment of McCann by a large and vocal section of the Celtic support.”
This myth needs challenged.
The was a brief (and swiftly shouted down) bit of boo’ing when the Bunnets name was announced, “large and vocal” it was not.
___________________________________________________________________________
There are no myths in what I’ve written about the hostility towards Fergus McCann. I was not referring to the booing when I used those words and think that’s pretty clear. By extrapolating one line of my post you deny it’s context. McCann ruled Parkhead with an iron fist and there was a perception very little money was being spent on the team and for this he was derided by, and I repeat, a large and vocal section of the Celtic support. As well as the SMSM.
The attitude of the fans toward McCann during his time at Celtic is one giant blind spot for many and an uncomfortable truth that has been conveniently revised over time. In fact it’s rare for me to meet a Celtic fan now who will admit to disliking McCann back in the day. But it happened because football fans are a fickle lot.
yakutsuki says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:23 pm
__________________________________________________________________________
See my post above. Not specifically referring to the booing. Can’t be any clearer on that.
incredibleadamspark says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:24 pm
========================================
The bunnet is and was a giant, he came with a plan and saw it through.
We bought into it BIG STYLE (I have 3000 share cert on my wall). He gave us his 5 year plan and he stuck with it, he deserves every penny he made as he put his money where is mouth was.
You are believing what the Daily Record was spinning (hated more than Saddam etc.), don’t, it’s a myth.
shawfieldtoteboard says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:06 am
92 1 Rate This
Clyde debt free
———
Nice stuff. Liked this bit:
“It has taken ten years to readjust the structure of the club to live within its means and repay its creditors, a process that necessarily saw financial survival take priority over sporting ambition. Throughout this time we have relied on the support of our creditors as well as our supporters and we close this chapter with thanks to all involved.”
There you have it — financial survival above sporting ambition.
Timescale for the EK move?
What is the purpose of all these trips from SA to Ibrox?
These trips get nowhere. Yet they always seem to end with a comment from either party that offers a glimmer of hope
Heres one reason that fits the facts
When Spivs deal with each other trust is completely absent. There no shame or huffiness about it. It’s just how these guys do business
So
King has made these visits by agreement with the Spivs
His so called ST boycott was probably done in cahoots with the Spivs. The aim being to create a pretext for an Administration event that could be blamed on the fans. Unfortunately too many gullible fans ignored the boycott and the Administration event had to be called off.
So
What we are witnessing now is the lead up to another joint attempt by King and the other Spivs to secure an Administration event that can be blamed elsewhere.
That “elsewhere” is Mike Ashley
I don’t believe for a minute that Ashley has or ever had any intention whatsoever of buying the basket case that is TRFC
However
It currently suits Ashley`s strategy to have an element of doubt about whether he is interested in buying the club. But all he is really doing is leveraging the fact that he can afford to do so
And of course the numpties in the SMSM have went along with this myth
By promoting the nonsense of “two bidders” the SMSM are playing an unwitting part in the road to Administration
An Administration which the Spivs including King hope to blame on Ashley
Meanwhile there is one achievement that derives from these frequent visits by King
And it`s this
It enables RIFC to use negotiations with King to con Deloittes The pretence is clean up their accounts with a last minute loan that enables Deloittes to describe TRFC as a ”going concern”
I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the Wallace Statement promising an AGM by 31 Dec was made at the behest of Deloittes
Not that I expect Wallace to announce a date for the AGM
More likely
Wallace will be gone and some interim CEO will announce an Adminstration event instead of an AGM
Bawsman says:
October 24, 2014 at 12:48 pm
========================================
The bunnet is and was a giant, he came with a plan and saw it through.
We bought into it BIG STYLE (I have 3000 share cert on my wall). He gave us his 5 year plan and he stuck with it, he deserves every penny he made as he put his money where is mouth was.
You are believing what the Daily Record was spinning (hated more than Saddam etc.), don’t, it’s a myth.
__________________________________________________________________________
Tabloids have never been my papers of choice and when I have read them I can assure you their content would not inform my opinion.
Seems all Celtic fans have a positive view of McCann now. And so they should. Back then opinions weren’t always so universally positive. That is my recollection of events, regardless of what was in the Record and I’ll leave it at that.
ecobhoy says:
October 24, 2014 at 11:58 am
‘…..So CRO are eventually getting there and it’s always better late than never IMO so they have to be applauded for their interesting contribution to the Great Rangers Badge Mystery .’
————
( Thanks for your post overall, by the way, which adds quite a bit to my-and I’m sure, other posters’- knowledge)
In relation to the wee excerpt I’ve extracted, I am again moved to sympathy with Bomber-just about the only ‘hard questioner’ ( although also fairly late on,having been as as much an early sucker as the rest).
Must be the greatest sporting conundrum of our time: how the Rangers’ support sleep-walked into liquidation without any kind of a meaningful resistance to or questioning of what was happening, until much, much too late!
keith jackson @tedermeatballs 2m2 minutes ago
But with regards the ongoing Rangers situation, there will be significant breaking news coming up on here very shortly…
A Board press release per chance?
Ally presser now on sky
wants to concentrate on the football this week 🙄
Here you go.
@TheClumpany: “MIKE ASHLEY has tabled an emergency funding offer to the Rangers board after helping to kill King’s £16m bailout” http://t.co/ftBmFXDff1
incredibleadamspark says:
October 24, 2014 at 1:33 pm
———————————-
“Tabloids have never been my papers of choice and when I have read them I can assure you their content would not inform my opinion.”
The only place the Bunnet was getting grief from was the Scottish media (the Record sets the agenda), they hated him because he was doing a brilliant job at dragging Celtic into the 21st Century.
The SFA wouldn’t have got away with their shenanigans with him in post, wherever your opinion was formed mate, it wasn’t at Celtic Park.
I always look back on that time as our own mini-Rangers episode. We vastly overspent with money we didn’t have, to try and reach the promised land of the SPL. We almost made it, but fell at the last fence, and reaped what we’d sowed
There’s no doubt it was painful and a shameful episode all round, the absolute nadir being when we held open trials to try and get a team together (if memory serves correctly, we even charged people to attend the trials!).
However, we’ve paid people what they’re owed (rather than just going ‘Eh, that was with old Co, know?’), and are finally on a stable financial footing.
Interestingly, I would suggest that where Clyde ‘belong’ is probably bottom half of the championship/top half of the 1st division, but not once in the last 8 years or so have we splashed money we didn’t have to ‘get back to our rightful place’. We have passed that time cutting our cloth according to our material. Of course, it’s meant watching the likes of Pat Scullion waddle about the park where we used to have Bryson and Greer, but the point is that we’re still here.
BTW I for one do not want to see us move to East Kilbride, and would love to see us stay in Cumbernauld. I’m aware of the irony that the only reason we’re here in the first place is due to a similar set of circumstances, albeit 25 or so years earlier, but given that EK already have a professional side with access to the Scottish league set up (the stated aim of getting Clyde to come in the first place), I don’t see it happening, and I’m uneasy with the concept of teams moving about every few years, chasing mythical bigger crowds.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 24, 2014 at 2:13
================
So Ashley is last man standing? And Dave King is all mouth and no trousers? What a shocker. I think Wallace and Nash are about to regret their dalliance with the King across the water.
Now that Ashley stands alone as sole saviour, he can extract whatever price he wants for his generosity in keeping the ship afloat. This will be painful to watch for anyone of a Bear persuasion.
On the plus side, he will ensure that the books balance. So Ally better start rehearsing his “cheeky chappie” routine for Question of Sport. Because that’s his future.
“Rangers power battle: Mike Ashley moves into pole position to take control at Ibrox as Dave King bid fails”. “MIKE ASHLEY has tabled an emergency funding offer to the Rangers board after helping to kill Dave King’s £16m bailout plan stone dead.
Record Sport can reveal the Newcastle United owner has been in discussions with the crisis-torn Ibrox regime in the last 24 hours after it became clear that King and his consortium had failed to win enough shareholder support to push their rescue package through.
Now Ashley believes his cash is the only option left to a club which is facing imminent financial distress and which, without securing new funds, may be unable to cover November’s wage bill.
In return for his loan he will demand control of the Rangers boardroom with the immediate removal of chief executive Graham Wallace and finance director Phil Nash – with Ashley handpicking their replacements.
Ashley’s proposal is currently under consideration by the board.
Wallace and Nash had been supporting King’s group but that deal was torpedoed when it became clear that director Sandy Easdale – who is control of a 26 per cent bloc of shares –
would not sanction a further rights issue, which would have diluted that holding.
King was also unable to secure the backing of Ashley, who currently owns 8.92 per cent of the club. King’s offer, which was made in alliance with a group of high net worth fans including George Letham and Paul Murray, has not been withdrawn and will remain on the table but Ashley believes he is now in pole position in the battle for control of the Ibrox club and the Sports Direct boss is demanding a quick answer.
The Londoner already has control of the club’s shirt sales and retail division and, as we revealed last month, has secured the naming rights for Ibrox Stadium in a £1 deal with former CEO Charles Green.”
The company announces that it has received a notice dated 7 October 2014 from Mike Ashley, a director of MASH Holdings Limited (“MASH”) under Section 303 of the Companies Act 2006. The notice states that MASH holds 4,265,000 Ordinary Shares of 1p each in the Company amounting to 5 per cent of the voting rights of the Company.
“MASH requires the company to call a general meeting of the shareholders of the company and to put certain resolutions to shareholders for inclusion in the business at such a general meeting of the company (the “notice”).
“The notice puts forward resolutions for the removal of Graham Wallace and Philip Nash as directors of the company.
The company is currently verifying that the notice is properly constituted. “If valid, the board intends to seek to have such notice withdrawn in order to avoid the cost and disruption of an ad hoc general meeting particularly given the company’s forthcoming annual general meeting, further details of which will be announced in due course.
“The board is united in its support of the executive team.
If the notice is valid and is not withdrawn, the directors intend to recommend that shareholders vote against the proposed resolutions. A further announcement will be made shortly.”
So we await this further announcement.
The addendum share offering fell short of full subscription by circa £800,000.
I would therefore argue that December payroll is now at risk and not November as reported.
However it’s a moot point as a loan is now desperately required and the board will have to swallow their pride and negotiate with Ashley, or resign.
We will know soon enough
As I said yesterday, Ashley will make his “offer” and if the terms of it cross certain red lines (e.g. on the handover of further branding rights or securities over Ibrox and/or Murray Park), then the Board (which is not exactly pro Ashley) could reject it on the basis that it is not in the interests of the shareholders.
Should that happen then we could still see a voluntary “managed” administration with compliant administrators. The other shareholders may see that as a better outcome in terms of a return on the value of their investments via a CVA or Newco purchase of assets, than having Ashley siphon further funds out of the club.
Ashley would get the blame for being greedy, King would retain his white knight status and the Spivs would still get a pay off.
Bawsman
“..a loan is now desperately required and the board will have to swallow their pride and negotiate with Ashley, or resign. ”
As a starting point could I maybe suggest the directors leave their cardigans at the door and approach the table on a “take whatever scraps are going” basis rather than any damn fanciful notions like “negotiate.”
Just a suggestion that may improve their weekends somewhat.
easyJambo says:
October 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Yes it is all getting interesting.
I recall a while back some stuff over Laxey being able to influence companies when only holding 10% or so of the shares and Ashley seems to be in a similar position just now.
While I guess there is a degree of professional pride etc you would not blame the like of Wallace and Nash heading for the door and telling them to go lie in their own pish.
Still can’t call how this is going to work out.
Can’t see what Ashley gets out of the deal other than the merchandising income and a further set of fans hating his guts. However sometimes that is what these guys thrive on. Just working a deal, manipulating folks and showing guys like King and the members of the board and other shareholders how high they can piss up a wall.
Is anybody else getting the feeling that we’re reaching another end game and the recent negotiations are to maximise the number of carcasses each of the vultures pick up ( to suit the multiple agendas ). Final payout for this round of spivs before the new lot move in. With all the goalposts already being moved to the corner flags by the SFA. “Don’t blame us – we take our lead from AIM” & “he wasn’t found guilty” etc.
wottpi says: October 24, 2014 at 3:10 pm
———————–
Goosy called it in his post at 1.14pm.
The alternative is that Ashley keeps them on life support while sweating the assets (including IP) as far as he can.
easyJambo says:
October 24, 2014 at 3:17 pm
EJ et al. The only thing that can be said with any certainty is that there are no good outcomes for the bears in the foreseeable future.
easyJambo says:
October 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Ashley getting his way is not a done deal with enough shareholders I would speculate but don`t know. The delay in the EGM response gave the `Board` time for DK tabled negotiations but possibly also time to organise a “voluntary “managed” administration with compliant administrators”.
That would be a plan they must have considered.
No point in handing over revenue assets just to keep going till the next asset strip.
That can`t be considered as a going concern tick in the box by accountants (Essex?)
Agree they`ll want compliant administrators.
It would not be in their interests if Bears found out what really happened
and who creamed of the money and assets.
But there`s reports sitting with the Procurator Fiscal, the sevco5088 can of worms, remember the forged signature stuff, and goodness knows what else under the iceberg.
I would wager the Court of Session would appoint their choice of administrators and use the opportunity to clean up the whole mess in one go. I really doubt the CoS would want another set of Duffers with any connection to spivs that selected them as choice.
mtp
Mike’s New Ringtone
Don’t you walk thru my words
You got to show some respect
Don’t you walk thru my words
‘Cause you ain’t heard me out yet
Well he looked down at my silver chain
He said I’ll give you one dollar
I said you’ve got to be jokin’ man
It was a present from me Mother
He said I like it I want it
I’ll take it off your hands
And you’ll be sorry you crossed me
You’d better understand that you’re alone
A long way from home
Dreadlock Holiday, 10CC
easyJambo says:
October 24, 2014 at 3:17 pm
The thing about the assets is, other than the merchandising and IP what would Ashley want with a dilapidated stadium, a crumbling office block, a car park and a training ground.
Even Jim Delahunt on SSB last was pointing out the Sports Direct branding in Euro Competions would be limited to having the name on the shirts if outwith the main sponsorship deals.
I have been wondering what level of merchandising sales it takes to keep enough money rolling in to make it all worth while for MA. Does he think there are enough mugs out there who will buy red white and blue gear regardless of the circumstances the football teams finds itself in?
Any loan now is just another Ticketus debt swap that will need resolved or repaid in a few months time.
As spoken about many times before Ashley may get his return from the merchandising and recouping loan monies from asset ownership and increased premiership prices but it is hard to see him putting in the multi-millions required to make T’Rangers a sure fire certainty for Scottish and Euro domination.
Smugas says:
October 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Resignation rumours are already spreading. Only a matter of time I think.
Taxi For The Airport !
I don’t think Mike will be doing any negotiating with Wallace and Nash over life-line funding – except to say no negotiating while those two are still here – time’s running short – call me when they’ve gone – it’ll save you the trouble of an EGM.
If these saviours are putting in real(?) money for control (King) or assets (Ashley) are they both discounting the Worthington claim?
First post from long time lurker and subscriber – be gentle.
“Unlikely to make good reading for the bears”
Relative to what? Ok they won’t be signing Laudrup and Gascoigne any time soon (actually whisper that, Ally just might) but similarly, as others are speculating, Ashley will sell more shirts if the team does well ergo it is in his interests that they do well. Whether its well enough is another matter (and we all know the key barometer pinch point!) but similarly, it’ll be interesting to see where an Ashley primed austerity RFC* would sit and be considered to sit by its competitors and observers alike.
And like above, can he achieve that without an event first? Sacking Wallace and Nash would keep the pesky boardroom quiet but something might be needed for the masses, just to keep their perspective under check.
John Greechan @jonnythegreek 2m2 minutes ago
Philip Nash resigns from #Rangers.
Grant Russell @STVGrant 43s44 seconds ago
Phillip Nash resigns from the board of Rangers. If Mike Ashley is at the table, will chief executive Graham Wallace follow?
Nash gone
RNS Number : 2876V
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
24 October 2014
Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers” the “Club” or the “Company”)
Board Changes
The Company announces that Philip Nash has resigned from the Board of Rangers (“Board”) with immediate effect.
The Board would like to thank Mr Nash for his significant contribution to the Company during what has been a particularly challenging period.
A Subtle Adjustment
The BBC and DR have each suggested that November finances are now safe and that the fan will not redirect the brown stuff until December. A subtle change with no supporting explanation or evidence. Designed, I think, to ease the immediate angst of the masses and avoid them thinking too hard about the very limited options available until after Xmas.
Looks like short term `loan` maybe a million
Enough time to get the `Badge` in the Bag so to speak
Then administration
Hope the CoS gets their ducks in a row
mtp
keith jackson @tedermeatballs
BREAKING: New funding proposal put to Rangers in 11th hour bid to block Mike Ashley’s grab for control of the boardroom. Story up soon.
From @AyeMcLane on twitter re ownership of the badge and trademarks,
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B0uJU9DCAAEtBjc.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B0uI7_TCYAA_2-_.jpg