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In recognition of the points you made about publishing your responses on line, your letter of 18th September will not be published although readers of TSFM will be able to gather from this reply which is being published what those points were.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
Apart from Mr Llambias, two others touted for consultancy roles are Mr Leach and Mr Mucklow :irony:
Chicos off on the fantasy MA just “bought” Rangers, Chick away back to your wee South side club and the boys with money there will tell you exactly this. Its a fantasy. Hes looking for the one thing that will make him money. Its not football its Kapa taps and the dummies that wear them.
GoosyGoosy says:
October 28, 2014 at 9:20 pm
‘..Ashley’s victory came as a result of an alliance with the two major factions on the board – Chairman Sandy Easedale, who controls 26% of the voting rights, and the hedge fund Laxey Partners, who control 16%. ..’
————
The price of Laxey Partners’ support must be a deal to go for Administration, Ashley believing that a buyer ( miserly King/skint Murray/the aye unready Kennedy or some such) will be found to keep the ‘brand’name ( which of course is falsely claimed!) alive so that he can continue to flog sweat- jerseys ad infinitum, and Kingsnorth looking for a far earlier return than is promised by a distinctly unlikely European football success within his normal return-expectancy timescale!
It would need a better mind than mine ( but they’re out there on this blog!) to work out what kind of return a well-handled, conspiracy-free, bloody ordinary, everyday business Administration might provide for shareholders like Laxey Partners and the Easdale boys. ( The latter would probably have to leave the country, maybe buy some buses in Malta.)
Can there be a more telling example of the powerless predicament that Rangers fans now find themselves in than today’s announcement by Rangers First that they have now passed the 500K mark in shares owned.
This benchmark comes on a day when news that a little more than 2M shares were exchanged for less than 1/3 of the price that many Rangers fans paid for shares at IPO.
Put bluntly Rangers First now own a little over ½% of the shares available and the voting rights associated with them.
In terms of fund raising it amounts to something over £100k assuming that the shares were purchased at the current price. In that respect it’s a good effort.
The pity is that this effort is essentially meaningless when it comes to having an impact on Rangers Int.
With more than 81M shares in circulation, significance for the fans group remains a fantasy.
When Rangers slipped toward an inevitable liquidation the slack jawed astonishment among the support quickly turned into a baby bird expectant gape.
The notion that some sort of saviour would inevitably arrive scuppered any idea that a fan inspired movement would be necessary.
Too little too late.
“He finds CG/CW or Rivzi sit on what he wants and either buys it and walks away or simply walks away. Price dependent.”
If you look back at the wee spot of bother with the boys Up North, what did Ashley do? He blew the whistle, the authorities stepped in, people were spanked, and Ashley moved in.
I’m not saying that that will happen here, but, if there is anything iffy, and the iifyness is standing between Ashley & his objectives, he is just as liable to be ruthless, as he is to walk away with what he has.
Phil could yet get a trilogy out of this 🙂
John Clark says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:05 pm
Administration might provide for shareholders like Laxey Partners and the Easdale boys. ( The latter would probably have to leave the country, maybe buy some buses in Malta.)
______________________________________________________
Now,now John. I’ve told you before, the Easdales would have to spend a fortune removing all the Altars at the front of all the buses in Malta and Gozo! 🙄
berrty says:
October 28, 2014 at 9:23 pm
Just finished watching the match on tv. Is that really the best that either team could muster ? if so then St Johnstone fans should be very concerned as they were awful, and the worst part is Rangers were only marginally better. Scottish football must be in real trouble if that is 2 of our best teams.
Without deliberating club politics that’s what happens when you trim a cup winning squad by letting five of them leave without replacing them with players of equal or better quality. You then allow one of your two decent goal scorers to move on, admittedly to enhance his career. If shortly afterwards the other striker picks up a long term injury – with the size of squad we can afford you are in sh!t street.
To say Saints fans are not happy with the way things have been handled since the cup win in May would be something of an understatement.
Danish Pastry says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:00 pm
‘.Apart from Mr Llambias, two others touted for consultancy roles are Mr Leach and Mr Mucklow.’
——
Geez, have we wandered into a Dickens novel, another world of pure fantasy, where characters’ names brilliantly reflect their personal characteristics? ( I ask the question-and make no assertion to any real person alive or dead!Honest, m’lud,)
Absolutely priceless, and well spotted, DP.
OK, peeved lifelong fan of a diddy club here. As Danish just said, Sevco can’t even afford the players they’ve got on the park. Tom English wrote on the BBC site today that the 48 hours to insolvency story ‘didn’t just fall out of the sky’. Sevco have a two million advance, secured on assets, from one of the most aggressive capitalists in the western world. He must see (and have negotiated), an angle.
Meanwhile, football teams with one hundred years’ plus history, based in their communities and paying their bills, are expected to play this lot and accept the result.
As a far from unique example, my team dropped two points to them a few weeks ago. Later in the season, Sevco may be playing with reduced playing resources, the result of famine following feast. Our fellow strugglers may pick up a few points. We may get relegated.
For playing the game by the damn rules.
There was no sporting reason this lot should have been admitted to the league in 2012. There were good reasons for questioning their participation in season 2014/5. There are a lot of football fans in Scotland outside of the Sevco mob. And mob is the right word.
Evening,
Just a general thought based on the gut , whilst Mr Ashley will always be looking to further his commercial interests , I’d hope he takes on the challenge of knocking the spivs out of Rangers and Scottish football then good luck to him.
I expect the SFA to offer Mr Ashley a free run , it is in everyone interest that Ibrox is cleaned up, the governing bodies are structured to deal with life 40 years ago , so it needs a bruiser to shift the muck out the stable.
The detail is interesting but in the bigger picture stable cleaning is key ; hey we may get an apology at the end of it – then everyone can move on
‘And make no assertion about, or reference to, any real person alive or dead’ is a necessary amendment to my previous post!
smallchange says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:32 pm
‘..To say Saints fans are not happy with the way things have been handled since the cup win in .’
———–
Mrs C took me quite by surprise earlier this evening when she said, quite without prompting, that she thought Mr Wright’s pre-match interview was rather like John Hugh’s: downbeat and defeatist.
I kind of felt that, too, listening on the radio.
I have mentioned previously, I think, that I am reading some histories of the First World War. I am also remembering some of my experiences wearing(as a civilian)the uniform of the Royal Navy, and my experience in the ordinary everyday office ‘team’ environment.
It is absolutely anathema for a team leader, a manager, a petty officer,a Flag Officer, or a CEO, to BE defeatist, or even show an attitude of ‘defeat expectancy’.
It simply should not be done.
” My centre is giving way,my right is in retreat, situation excellent.I attack”. So said ( I think) Marshal Foch) at the Marne.
If Wright in the dressing room came across to his players as negatively as he came across to my wife ([who, God bless her,last played any kind of sport in 19-oatcake ( netball, I believe, at which she is said to have been quite good)]then there might well have been a weakening,unconscious indeed, but nevertheless real,of the team’s belief in its capacities..
It is the hallmark of a leader that he/she can overcome personal doubts and reservations and somehow inspire his/her followers to great effort, no matter the odds they face.
I don’t know, of course, what Wright may have said to his team, or with what degree of conviction he delivered his team-talk.
But I would hope he came across much more positively than he did in his radio interview.
Apologies if it has been mentioned previously but does anyone else find the structure of the MAsh deal a bit strange?
Football clubs are most cash strapped just before st renewals in may /june. MAsh have taken effective control of rangers for a £2m loan that will be repayable late april. Where exactly are they getting the money to pay it back? Cant pay it back in April? No probs MAsh now own your car pack and a great new site for a SD store. Also we appoint 2 directors to the board despite owning less than 10% of the club.
Little by little revenue streams that used to go to Rangers now go elsewhere yet MSM tell us that as long as the strips sell MAsh will put money in. Why does he need to? He already controls the revenue streams.
When this money went to rangers they had a deficit of £10m pa now that it doesn’t they will be better off? SERIOUSLY?
To say Saints fans are not happy with the way things have been handled since the cup win in May would be something of an understatement.
I’m not having a go at the saints, but we saw the same thing with Hughes earlier this year. Talking as though Rangers are the big guns in Scottish football and that their side is the underdogs against them – it’s always going to make players question themselves. If I was the chairman of any premiership side and my manager came out with that before a match with a side the division below them then the manager would be unemployed the next morning as he has just stated that he cannot build a team capable of challenging for a lower division title, let alone the division his side are in.
jean7brodie says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:27 pm
‘..Now,now John. I’ve told you before, the Easdales would have to spend a fortune .’
———-
I can’t remember,jean7, whether I reported ,or mentioned on the blog, that McGill’s buses had in fact made a bid to run the Malta buses, but ‘withdrew’ it- or perhaps were sifted out when questions were raised about one of their directors? That is, the Malta reference was not purely a random reference!
The realists know that Sports Direct will be the ultimate winner in the Ashley age at Ibrox. Until we know what exactly he’s got planned then it’s hard to make that call.
If there is one certainty, it is this – Rangers are at his mercy now (Tom English)
==================================================================================
I do not normally read the BBC let alone quote from it but…and bearing in mind, this is a shareholder with apparently less than 10% of the issued share capital who will, apparently, be calling the shots in future…..
Be afraid dear Bears…be very afraid…!
EKBhoy says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:43 pm
‘… it is in everyone interest that Ibrox is cleaned up, the governing bodies are structured to deal with life 40 years ago , so it needs a bruiser to shift the muck out the stable.’
——————-
I share the sentiment, of course.
But without being too parochial, it is our muck- and it’s our own SFA member clubs who, if for no other reason than their own survival in the longer term, have to deal with it.
It is not an impossible task:
A gentlemanly purge of those who may have abused their office,
an apology for the harm they caused,
a rectification/reversal of unsound and improper decisions and actions they made,
a (perhaps reluctant) acceptance of the new club but a strict insistence on removing from it any claim to the honours and titles won by the old , dead, RFC….
This would be all perfectly right, honourable and achievable by the votes of decent, fair-minded men and women who are in the business of sport and for whom Sporting integrity lies at the heart of their business.
Because without it, their businesses die! Sooner or later.
To me, it’s as simple as that.
What looks like a random story in the Scotsman, brings a couple of well known folk together some three years ago.
http://www.scotsman.com/what-s-on/tv-radio/dj-suzie-mcguire-tried-to-take-own-life-over-abuse-1-3586627
“Giving evidence, she described being assaulted in the Grill Room at 29, a private members club at Royal Exchange Square, Glasgow, in December 2011. She said she had hosted the Cash for Kids lunch at the Hilton hotel earlier that day and afterwards had gone on to an after-party with her husband and others, including Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley and former Rangers owner Craig Whyte, who was then still with the club.”
IMO, it’s worth keeping Mr.Ashley’s level of ‘investment’ in perspective.
A very successful, self-made businessman supposedly worth iro £3.75 Billion.
His exposure in RIFC/TRFC is relative to the loose change we have in our pockets at any given time.
IMO, he will devote a proportional amount of time on dealing with or thinking about the Govan club: nanoseconds.
If it pans out well for him (including possibly establishing a blueprint to replicate at other distressed clubs) then fine. If it all goes pear shaped then he’s not lost much – but probably learned what he wanted to know.
Either way, he’s certainly not the Sugar Daddy that the bears demand… 🙄
“She said she had hosted the Cash for Kids lunch at the Hilton hotel earlier that day and afterwards had gone on to an after-party with her husband and others, including Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley and former Rangers owner Craig Whyte, who was then still with the club.”
————————————————————————————
I’m sure Mike Ashley was just there to ensure the future wellbeing of the next generation of young purchasers of shoddy sportswear.
berrty says:
October 28, 2014 at 11:34 pm
I thought much the same as yourself at that time and posted the following on one of the club’s sites recently in the hope that someone might read it and that Mr Wright’s team talk might be a bit more positive.
“I hope that Tommy’s team talk is a bit better than Yogi’s was when his ICT squad visited IBROX in the last round. Yogi’s tactic appeared to be to convince his squad that they should consider themselves privileged to be allowed to play at such an iconic venue, the headquarters of the Scottish establishment club, an institution without which Scottish football simply could not exist.
By the time his players took the field he had them convinced they should be scraping and bowing in deference as they walked by the executive box now occupied by …” well you get my drift.
John Clark says:
October 28, 2014 at 11:27 pm
A very astute observation, I believe Mrs JC may have noticed the developing pattern. 😆
Intrigued by the mentions of Ashley possibly going for administration.
We’ve been led to believe that admin won’t break Charles & Co’s stranglehold on the ‘contracts’.
Of course, as mentioned by many, it could clear the decks to make way for a new crew and manager — and, perhaps by adding another year of Championship fitba, stop Charles benefitting from any contract clauses that come into effect in the top tier.
Could there be a private battle going on here? Isn’t Charles is supposed to have started a legal action (to the tune of £400,000) to get some rights back from Ashley?
What possible leverage does he have on Green and the boys? Revealing identities of the anonymous? The threat of liquidation? And at what point do the Easdales switch horses? Could they decide to switch their allegiance to MA and leave BP and MH high and dry? If they switch could that magic 75% be reached for the pre-emption dis-app-thingmyjig — sidelining Rizvi?
Bit cloudy here.
Is Mike Ashleys new guy the same Mr Barry John Leach who is a director of Rangers Retail?
@ Carfins Finest
That’s a big fat “yes”. He was there right at the start, before even Charles Green. (credit to lestuk at KDS)
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/08142409/RANGERS-RETAIL-LIMITED/directors-secretaries
THC
Same old, same old everywhere today. The media seem desperate for the o*d f*rm to meet in the League Cup but forget Celtic must still beat Partick – far from a certainty.
Noticeable over the internet the amount of Journalists that are beating Celtic up because Hearts will now pay the living wage. I said earlier on this blog Hearts should be commended, but I feel duty bound to point out nearly £30m of debt was shed at Tynecastle recently. That is not the fault of the current board but without that shedding of debt there would be no opportunity for any Hearts board to put the living wage in place.
Many on here feel it is tiresome when Celtic fans say the media give the club a hard time. I have no issue with that view because everyone is entitled to hold one. I do believe there are three issues to the living wage question though. The first one is a number of Celtic shareholders have asked that the club move to pay it. Unless any of the media hold Celtic shares it has got nothing to do with them whatsoever. Secondly the media appear to be using that move as an excuse to hammer Celtic. Hearts are the first club in the UK to pay the living wage, but only Celtic have had media criticism for not paying it. Thirdly it is clear as day that the media regard a properly managed football club as being for mugs.
BBC’s (‘Rangers’) expert, Chris McLaughlin’s take on matters ibrokes
….he says that various chunks of the ‘Club’ are owned by different shareholders.
I wonder (as I’m not an expert) but did he mean they own the ‘Company’ and not the Club ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29811387
John Clark says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:40 pm
18 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
October 28, 2014 at 10:00 pm
‘.Apart from Mr Llambias, two others touted for consultancy roles are Mr Leach and Mr Mucklow.’
——
Geez, have we wandered into a Dickens novel, another world of pure fantasy, where characters’ names brilliantly reflect their personal characteristics? ( I ask the question-and make no assertion to any real person alive or dead!Honest, m’lud,)
Absolutely priceless, and well spotted, DP.
——–
It is very Dickensian, John.
It was actually pointed out by an observant soul on twitter that the mewly arrived Mr Leach was seated next to Mr Llambias (about to become Mr Llambias Scrooge?).
Not sure what Mr Mucklow actually does. Ibroxians must hope that the clue is not in the name!
Good morning
Much to take in over the past few days.
Take heart the Ashley money is a loan. It is repayable at his request and will be repaid from cash flow- but where is that going to come from? – or the security will be sold.
It is not an investment and I do not think it will ever become so.
The tangled web of deceit which started with CW continues to this day. All of the main players have been known to each other from the beginning and are still pulling the strings. When have you ever heard of a 10% stakeholder controlling a business?
A set up from day 1 in my opinion.
Meanwhile the SFA sit in their bunker and the media put out non stories. For example the Daily Rancid state that Man City want £5 million for Guidetti- absolute rubbish. The players contract is up in the summer and if he sits tight till 1st January he can go to whomever he chooses for free. Why do they feel the need to make this up?
Ah but MA gets control of the mighty Glasgow Rangers and all of their players for £2 million but Celtic need to pay £5 million for one player.
I predict administration before the New Year.
A primary 7 schhool child could do the maths. If you need £2 Million to get through October 2014 how much will you need to get to May 2015?
The football club is not sustainable and yet again the plc cannot provide Ibox or Murray Park as security. Why?
Who will ultimately hold the keys to the marble staircase?
There is much more mileage in this story.
One great bit of news to come out is that Mr. McCoist a bright young manager with a great future in management in the champions league has been confirmed in his position.
All is well in the land of Sevconia.
UTH,
Whilst largely in agreement re the meeja’s apparent desire to brickbat CFC over, in this instance, the living wage, it does work in other directions too.
The headline to the herald report on the Suzy Macguire story that Eco mentioned earlier is,
“Husband assaulted me in front of Rangers owner Ashley,” as if it was for his own personal entertainment or something.
upthehoops says:
October 29, 2014 at 7:18 am
________________________________________________________________________
I didn’t think the articles were beating up or hammering Celtic about the living wage. There is a certain amount of pressure on Celtic to now introduce it but that comes predominantly from some of their own shareholders. They could’ve been the first club to do this, potential good bit of PR, now they might be the second. Or not introduce it at all. If Hearts and then Celtic were to implement the living wage then perhaps that would lead to pressure on other clubs to do the same. I happen to think there is nothing but positives in that scenario. Just my view.
As for it being no business of the media, unless they own shares, I don’t agree. If Celtic were to introduce it should the media not report that because they don’t own shares? And if they didn’t report it I’d imagine there would be a few on here using that as an example of more perceived media bias by refusing to report on news stories that reflect well on Celtic. And to extend that logic further, should the media not report on certain going ons in the Rangers boardroom because they don’t own shares? Should you, or anyone else on here not in possession of shares in Rangers (whatever company, I get confused sometimes) refrain from comment on Rangers shareholder business? I’d hope not.
jimlarkin says:
October 29, 2014 at 7:42 am
BBC’s (‘Rangers’) expert, Chris McLaughlin’s take on matters ibrokes ….he says that various chunks of the ‘Club’ are owned by different shareholders.
I wonder (as I’m not an expert) but did he mean they own the ‘Company’ and not the Club?
=================================================
Yea and what company? I’m afraid it’s been a long time since I put much faith in any analysis from Mr McLaughlin.
Green proudly stated from the word go – before he even bought whatever it was from D&P – and was actually assembling his original consortium of investors (Sevco5088) that gone were the days of anyone single individual being able to control Rangers.
The Bears loved it because that guarantee meant that there would be no future Whyte’s and – for some – no neo-Murrays either. IIRC Green said that that no one would own over 10% and I even seem to remember that he said he wouldn’t have any shares – perhaps I’m dreaming about that right-enough 😆
Some financial journalists in papers outwith Scotland – which no longer seems to have independent financial journalists afaik – pointed out the danger in this model for a public company because it could lead to different warring factions blocking each others plans and creating a morass where most of the energy would be spent in trying to control the Board especially in terms of the composition of its members.
Personally I tend to go down the road that some football clubs can be likened to some countries – with powerful disparate ethnic groups many of which hate each other. I think of the likes of Yugoslavia and Iraq and the carnage which followed the demise of the strong and brutal dictatorships which had previously kept a semblance of order.
However back to the Green ‘model’ for Rangers. The real beauty of his pledge is that the actual identity of many of the largest shareholders is secret so IMO it’s impossible to know who pulls the strings in the background.
And so back to McLaughlin: I really had to laugh with his simplistic comment: ‘Sandy Easdale, who controls voting rights totalling around 26% of the club, has aligned himself with Ashley.
‘Easdale has the shareholding vote, while Ashley now has the boardroom votes and cash to fund the club until it gets back on its feet financially. Cash is king at Rangers because it has been in such short supply recently.’
Amazing that if the Easdale Camp has aligned itself with Ashley that they didn’t appear to even have prior knowledge of the Ashley tank recce squadron arriving at Ibrox or indeed who their commander was.
I’m not an expert in how proxy votes work and obviously I know that Easdale, when required, casts the proxy votes of various mystery overseas investors.
But I had never imagined he decided how these major shareholder – compared to his own holding – would actually vote or apply their not inconsiderable shadowy presence to achieve their objectives which might not match those of a west of Scotland bus company. As I say I thought Easdale simply cast the proxy votes in the way he was instructed to and I didn’t realise he ‘controlled’ these voting rights.
Still you learn something new every day 🙄
And as to McLaughlin’s risible observation that: Cash has been in short supply at Ibrox recently. Really? I think there has been overwhelming riches in cash generated by rangers recently. The question that needs answered by a journalist is what black holes much of it has disappeared into.
Smugas says:
October 29, 2014 at 9:32 am
UTH,
Whilst largely in agreement re the meeja’s apparent desire to brickbat CFC over, in this instance, the living wage, it does work in other directions too.
The headline to the herald report on the Suzy Macguire story that Eco mentioned earlier is,
“Husband assaulted me in front of Rangers owner Ashley,” as if it was for his own personal entertainment or something.
=============================================
Not guilty – well at least not this time 😆
On the question of media balance – perhaps it would have been useful to contrast the seeming business philosophy of the man who the meeja informs us now owns/controls Rangers and the use of zero hours contracts for SportsDirect staff with that of Hearts and the living wage.
Indeed – perhaps I missed this – but I don’t remember the SMSM carrying the recent tribunal decision regarding SportsDirect and zero hours contracts following a crowd-funded case brought by a SportsDirect employee.
EJ @ 1.04am
My apologies Eco!
Good morning,
My ‘conversations’ with Darryl Broadfoot ‘Head of Communications’ at the SFA have ceased. The reason stated:
“No point in discussing anything further with you after last week’s fan site guff. Goodbye.”
I posted my questions, and his selective answers, on here last week.
I really fail to understand his issue as he disclosed absolutely nothing of relevance, it does however prove that this site, unlike his role, has relevance.
Hasn’t taken McCoist long to sniff the change in wind direction – now there’s a surprise 🙄
From ET this morning:
Meanwhile another departure from Ibrox: PR guru Paul Tyrrell last night handed in his notice at the club and will follow Wallace and Philip Nash out of Rangers.
Jane Lewis @BBCJaneLewis 15m15 minutes ago
The chairman of #Rangers Plc David Somers has told BBC Scotland that HE invited Derek Llambias & Barry Leach to the club as consultants.
Jane Lewis @BBCJaneLewis 14m14 minutes ago
Somers added “things will turn out for the best, it’s good to get new investment in the club.” #Rangers
Comedy Gold levels of legal fiction
Hurdles to overcome
Accounts
AGM
Finding 16m to see season out
Administration may not guarantee breaking of onerous contracts but it could call the bluff of the contract holders would they challenge the administrators in court?
Despite all the distractions anyone in the media like to propose how all this will be achieved without an insolvency event?
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 10:29 am
I met Mr Broadfoot once and have seen him in passing on a couple of other occasions.
The word ‘smug’ would be an understatement. As my dad would have said “thinks his farts smell of roses”
I am not in the least bit surprised that the interaction tailed off when he may have felt under pressure to actually answer.
the taxman cometh says:
October 29, 2014 at 11:30 am
Presumably, if he is serious, Mr Somers new top man, Llambias, will be seeking independent legal advice on the status of these “onerous” contracts?
Ads you say say, the beneficiaries might be a bit court shy, there may be grounds for arguing that the should be set aside? Note, as my old boss said, an arguable case, can be almost as as good as a winnable case when dealing with shysters
The Chairman getting confused between investment and a loan. You’d think someone in such high office would be able to differentiate.
Danish Pastry says:
October 29, 2014 at 6:18 am
Could there be a private battle going on here? Isn’t Charles is supposed to have started a legal action (to the tune of £400,000) to get some rights back from Ashley?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Green is a top notch Spiv
When he claims he spent £400k on legal costs, only two conclusions can be drawn
1 TRFC lost £400k from its cashflow booked to a cost centre called “legal costs”
2.The lawyers involved didn`t get £400k
Carfins Finest says:
October 29, 2014 at 11:58 am
————————-
Wouldn’t you think? George Orwell would have had a field day with the double-speak that passes for coverage of the Sevco debacle.
A short-term, interest-free loan tied to the only assets that we can say for certain are unencumbered is allowed to pass for ”investment” by the uncritical SMSM. Truly farcical.
Think it’s fair to say the `Brand` is now damaged by two years of cash pillaging of Bears
Probably true the value of the Brand has suffered as have merchandising sales
Probably true some reputations have degraded
So could we expect someone(s) to wish to correct these problems?
Probably yes
That would be stopping what’s going on in its tracks,
And getting rid of all the problem(s)
mtp
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 10:29 am
Re Darryl Broadfoot bringing his communication with you to an end, on the one hand I guess maybe if he didn’t know that your exchanges would be put on a public forum he could argue that you should have advised him of this as a courtesy.
This does however beg a bigger question about SFA communication or lack thereof (and the SPFL too). At one point a couple of years ago it seemed that every other week Regan and Doncaster were on the radio.
But I don’t recall either the SFA or the SPFL communicating via the media or otherwise with the fans for well over a year. Maybe they don’t fancy pesky questions about five way agreements, risks of one club going into admin and their response, dual ownership etc. But it’s a strange way to treat the customer base of Scottish Football and surely totally at odds with one of the “four strategic pillars” of their 2020 vision recently quoted on here:
“Respected and Trusted to Lead”
Perhaps if you read this site Darryl you could let us know how the SFA plans to ensure that this “pillar” is delivered?
Any announcement on the venues for the League Cup Semi Finals this year? Time for the Rangers semi to be scheduled at Ibrox agaain?
twopanda says: October 29, 2014 at 1:08 pm
Think it’s fair to say the `Brand` is now damaged by two years of cash pillaging of Bears
Probably true the value of the Brand has suffered as have merchandising sales
=======================
Following Sevco’s purchase of assets from RFC, including goodwill for £1, the Rangers Football Club “Brand” was valued at £16,042,000. The half year accounts showed the value virtually unchanged at £16,054,000. If/when the full year accounts are published, it will be interesting to see if this figure is maintained or reduced in line with IP having been sold off.
It would seem there are some on the case of Whyte Green Ashley links
Good Heavens
Didn`t the Pinsett Mason Independent inquiry sort all that out
And the SFA assured all was well
In fact didn`t they send a `forged` signature on sevco5088 stuff to the Polis
Surely some mistake
What is the world coming to? 😉
mtp
I don’t think the SFA likes anyone actually asking them any difficult questions. For too long they have had an easy ride with the SMSM being both toothless and brainless at the same time.
Evasive responses and then dismissive e-mails when pushed seem pretty much the SFA approach.
Is there something about football authorities (a lack of respect for their core market, perhaps?) that leads them all down this path? A complete unwillingness to engage properly with the people who turn out every week to support their teams?
What a mess their approach has brought to the game. It is a source of real pride that so many teams are doing well despite official declarations of impending armageddon.
Scottish Football needs a proper operator to sort out these useless hangers-on. Probably someone like Mike Ashley! 😈
Taysider says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:22 pm
==================================
Right at the outset of our ‘conversations’ I declined an invitation from Darryl to ‘give him a call’ to discuss my questions.
I informed him that I would prefer him to put all of my questions, and all of his answers, on the SFA website. I wasn’t asking for myself, they were questions the paying public (Scottish football supporters – us) have a right to know.
I would never dream of breaching trust.
easyJambo says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:45 pm
EJ, you have reminded me of something that bugged me a wee while ago. I find it unlikely that the naming rights for the stadium would have been valued at £1 in the accounts, (granted they may not have been valued separately, being aggregated in, but come on, surely not at a £1), then shouldn’t we have seen that fig reduced, with a write-off and note?
Or I am I being thicker than usual?
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Can understand why he would prefer to discuss on the phone! How did Darryl respond to your proposal to put the exchange on a public forum?
Taysider says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:22 pm
0 0 i
Rate This
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Can understand why he would prefer to discuss on the phone! How did Darryl respond to your proposal to put the exchange on a public forum?
=================================================================
“How did Darryl respond to your proposal to put the exchange on a public forum?”
Like the awkward questions I put to him.
He ignored it
Sent: 14 July 2014 13:09
To: ‘info@scottishfa.co.uk’
Subject: FAO Mr. Darryl Broadfoot
Good afternoon Mr. Broadfoot,
I have tried in vain to elicit any kind of response from the SFA to this point, I thought if I put a ‘target’ name to my correspondence I may stand more of a chance.
1. Can you find out for me why Mr. Campbell Ogilvie did not mention when asked that some EBT’s were illegal and so misinformed the judge?
2. Why did the SFA omit to mention the monitoring role of Article 66 when Celtic asked a question about the granting of the UEFA licence in 2011?
Many thanks for taking the time to read this e-mail, I look forward to your response.
Regards
Dear John, happy to chat tomorrow if you send me your number. D
Darryl,
My phone number is xxxxxxxxxxxx. Tomorrow I’m in a meeting all morning, then more straight after lunch but should surface later in the afternoon.
Frankly, I’d much prefer the points I have raised to be answered openly and honestly on the SFA website than a have a ‘chat’ Darryl, there’s many thousands like me who want some simple straightforward answers.
You must be fully aware the Scottish football fans treat the SFA with contempt since the clandestine manoeuvrings of the SFA’s office bearers two years ago when Rangers were liquidated.
The fact that the individual who sanctioned the whole illegal payments scenario at Ibrox (Wee Tax Case), is the beneficiary of a £95,000 EBT, who covered his tracks when questioned on the Wee Tax Case EBT’s, is the SFA CEO, is simply surreal to thousands of us.
I expect my SFA to be the watchword for integrity, to apply honest governance fit for all, have a rule book that is applied without fear or favour, that’s not what we see in Scotland.
Regards
Happy to but equally you must understand that these quickly end up on fans’ forums.
All I ask is for you to put my questions, and the SFA’s answers, on YOUR website?
Truth, transparency and communication is what you (the SFA) promised, I take you (the SFA) at your word, I ask for no more.
Yes but you have made some serious (and wildly inaccurate) assertions and given some of the ludicrous and petty tit-for-tat that has plagued us for the last few years while trying to commit to our strategy, there comes a point where we simply can’t reply to every conspiratorial, hostile or aggressive correspondence.
I will endeavour to assist tomorrow
Ok, taking your points in order:
1) Campbell has, to my knowledge, been more open than anyone on his involvement with the EBT scheme. To recap, he was not involved in the creation, implementation or otherwise in the scheme, was as you know was operated by the Murray Group. Campbell did, however, receive an EBT as an employee. To say he was ‘economical with the truth’ is not only defamatory but also hugely disrespectful to a man who has the utmost integrity. It is also worth noting, as he has stated publicly, the extent to which he was marginalised at Rangers in the period before his departure.
2) The response to Resolution 12 was submitted to the club and, as I understand it, was discussed at the club’s AGM but you would naturally need to speak to the club themselves in respect of their own AGM.
Hope this helps.
db
Daryll, I notice you only talks of EBT as in the Big Tax Case one.
You’ve omitted to mention Ogilvie ‘ s presence at the 1999 Remuneration Board meeting and signing the DOS EBT’s, where Rangers FC were found, and admitted to, their guilt.
Was Ogilvie as open about that and when?
Did the implications of Rangers using an illegal method of payment never occur to Ogilvie when LNS was being commissioned?
The general point I would make is that Ogilvie is either disingenuous or incompetent if he did not understand what he was getting Rangers, Scottish Football and even himself into.
His judgement is faulty in the extreme and as such would best serve himself and Scottish football by stepping down.
The fact that he cannot see even that says much about his judgement and honour.
You have misunderstood my question about Res12 (I apologise if I did not make myself clear). You are talking about the response the SFA made to Celtic last year for the AGM, not where things are now. I.e. have the SFA responded to Celtic and/or their shareholders on the questions they asked?
Regards
Silence……………………………. 🙄
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Taysider says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:22 pm
==================================
Right at the outset of our ‘conversations’ I declined an invitation from Darryl to ‘give him a call’ to discuss my questions.
I informed him that I would prefer him to put all of my questions, and all of his answers, on the SFA website. I wasn’t asking for myself, they were questions the paying public (Scottish football supporters – us) have a right to know.
I would never dream of breaching trust.
==========================================
Exactly Bawsman – and this is where the Internet Bampots can actually help Darryl & the SFA, IMO.
The SFA is spectacularly failing in its objective: “Respected and Trusted to Lead”.
I think I can safely say that the vast majority of Scottish football fans – of all teams – would agree there.
So if Ogilvie and Regan won’t come out the bunker to engage with the fans and/or the MSM, then shirley it falls more so on Darryl and his team to try and ‘Communicate’ with the paying customers ?
By publishing Darryl’s email responses on websites such as TSFM, then it shows that he/the SFA is trying to engage with the customers, and address their concerns.
The more he replies to emails, the more they are shared with other Bampots…then we just might start to have a wee bit more respect for the SFA. He doesn’t have to agree with the email content, [or can’t], but at the very least it would show that the SFA is starting to respect its customers. Which can’t be a bad starting point ?
Rather than a threat, Darryl should be regarding us Bampots as an opportunity to help him help the SFA senior management – and the SFA’s image as an organisation.
It’s not rocket science.
So come on Darryl, please reply to my email sent on Sunday. 😉
easyJambo says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:45 pm
…
Following Sevco’s purchase of assets from RFC, including goodwill for £1, the Rangers Football Club “Brand” was valued at £16,042,000. The half year accounts showed the value virtually unchanged at £16,054,000…
=================================================
OK it’s only an immaterial increase of £12K…
but how – with the ‘Rangers’ brand becoming almost toxic from early 2012 onwards – could there be any increment at all to its value ?
An exctract from a Broadfoot email to Bawsman
That quote really sums up why I have had nothing to do with Scottish football since the unanimous acclamation of Ogilvie by ALL the clubs at the 2013 SFA AGM. I wont even watch any of it on TV, not even free. That is the level of disgust I feel.
Ogilvie joined the SFA owing 90k to a member club, over which he then had administrative responsibility. How about somebody asks Darryl whether the Ogilvie of such integrity made that fact clear to the other clubs when he applied? And if not, why not? I will not ask Darryl myself, because the whole thing just nauseates me. But if anyone is really interested, and has a strong stomach, just ask Darryl.
jimlarkin says:
October 29, 2014 at 10:46 am
As a Hearts supporter and believer in old fashioned socialism, I am obviously delighted, and somewhat proud, that my club has made this move, though also somewhat saddened that it has taken until now to implement it. On the implied criticism of Celtic, I find it somewhat unfair, but also somewhat understandable. I, along with others outside of Celtic, I’m sure, have admired the way the Celtic supporters and shareholders have used what influence they could to force the board to introduce the ‘living wage’. I was unaware of any similar stance being made anywhere else, including Hearts. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Ann Budge recognised the merits of this move from reading of those Celtic socially minded people. A movement was started, and it’s great that it started in Scotland, the home of socialism. I do hope Celtic introduce the ‘living wage’ and can get credit for it in their own right, not as copying Hearts as I’m sure those stalwarts of the press will paint it. A movement has to start somewhere, and it’s not always the originators who get the credit.
I stated that it is somewhat understandable that Celtic are used by way of comparison to Hearts over this matter as, as stated previously, they are, as far as I am aware, the only other club to have it publicly on their agenda.
StevieBC says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:36 pm
By publishing Darryl’s email responses on websites such as TSFM, then it shows that he/the SFA is trying to engage with the customers, and address their concerns.
======================================
I have watched with interest the email correspondence between Bawsman and Darryl.
It’s clear that Darryl is just there to provide a smokescreen and will never ever answer a ‘difficult’ question. The SFA have no intention of addressing the concerns of its customers because IMO it doesn’t think it requires to – it’s that simple IMO.
I don’t say this to attack Bawsman’s efforts because I think they have been very valuable in showing the amount of deflection operated by the SFA through its employees who are paid to trumpet their master’s Voice and never ever reveal the Hampden secrets.
Trying to get an honest answer from the SFA is liking beating your head against a rubber wall. You never actually get injured in the process but you get helluva tired and eventually realise the futility of the process and give up.
But it’s worth keeping going and also worth publishing the questions which would be answered by a responsible Association and the ludicrous non-replies which are issued by the SFA which often wilfully ignore the original question and give some inane answer which has nothing to do with the question asked.
Tbh Darryl is treating every TSFM poster with contempt by feeding us crap and throwing the toys ootra pram when he is put under pressure.
He appears to be very poor at his job because he’s kidding no one – he doesn’t have any answers because he doesn’t know how the decisions are made at Hampden or even what the decisions are. So he can’t actually defend them.
He’s just another a defence layer for the ruling clique and well-paid for his role. I wonder how much job satisfaction there is?
I wonder if Darryl would be open to the idea of posting a blog here to Communicate the SFA’s perspective ? 🙄
Firstly, can I give great credit to “Bawsman” for enlightening us with the wisdom of Mr Darryl Broadfoot – SFA ‘communications’ director, who refuses to communicate !!!!!
Secondly,
GoosyGoosy says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:03 pm
12 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
October 29, 2014 at 6:18 am
Could there be a private battle going on here? Isn’t Charles is supposed to have started a legal action (to the tune of £400,000) to get some rights back from Ashley?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Green is a top notch Spiv
When he claims he spent £400k on legal costs, only two conclusions can be drawn
1 TRFC lost £400k from its cashflow booked to a cost centre called “legal costs”
2.The lawyers involved didn`t get £400k
I was wondering…is the goings on at ibrokes just now, a result of a falling out with Green and Ashley?
Is it a case now that Ashley too has been unhappy at they way money has been ‘disappearing’ (due to the Onerous Contracts) and has not benefitted as much as he thought and suspects the books have been cooked, and that is why he needs to get his ‘own people’ in there to asses those Contracts and check the books have not been cooked ?
ecobhoy says:
October 29, 2014 at 3:16 pm
===========================================
The useless responses from Darryl were what you expect from a tabloid journalist to be honest.
The point of the exercise is to make him, and the rest of the SFA officials cognizant that THOUSANDS of Scottish football fans are aware of the extent of their corruption.
I want them to be as uncomfortable in post as possible, I want them in retirement fretting every time their door gets chapped.
Every question we ask, every time they refuse to answer, strips them of the ‘ignorance’ alibi.
We KNOW, and I want us all to let them know we know.
The truth, the whole truth, will come out one day, I want them to be worrying about that EVERY day.
Once the dam is breached (hopefully BDO will do that), or the tax appeal but it will be carnage one fine day.
Bawsman says:
October 29, 2014 at 2:36 pm
===========================
Good for you Bawsman. I think that your approach with DB is right and that he should be confident enough to give a response to any stakeholder that may be shared in public. He has already provided you with quite strong statements attesting that the President has conducted himself appropriately on disclosure in the EBT matters and can’t have expected you to be subject to a confidentiality agreement. I’d expect you’d have noticed by now if there was anything actionable in what you’ve posted.
I wonder though, whether the messenger should be shot? From the responses you’ve shown DB doesn’t help himself but, as Ecobhoy notes, the Head of Communication is speaking on behalf of others and acting as a screen, which is fairly standard.
Maybe those who sit on the SFA Board could be asked directly what their position is? The NED is new and could be excused for not having views on matters taking place before his time but the others?
There are two other directors, Peter Lawwell and one of the SFA legal staff is the Company Secretary. All directors including CO have an obligation to disclose any potential conflict of interest (this may have happened of course) and all have a duty to ensure the company is properly run. The Company Secretary is usually expected to provide or access appropriate legal guidance for the company so maybe that’s where the next query could go?
As Taysider says (October 29, 2014 at 1:22pm) one of the SFA’s four strategic pillars of its strategic plan, Scotland United: A 2020 Vision, is that it should be “Respected and Trusted to Lead” – transparency and accountability ought to be central to this.
blu says:
October 29, 2014 at 4:28 pm
=======================================
He did casually threaten me as I was using a work e-mail address when asking him questions which obviously hit the tender spot but he’s there to answer questions is he not?
twopanda says:
October 29, 2014 at 1:54 pm
26 0 Rate This
It would seem there are some on the case of Whyte Green Ashley links…
——–
Indeed so, though not sure what more they are digging up apart from attending same social function (which may be entirely benign).
@McNallyMirror tweeted (saw it on Phil’s twitter timeline):
“Thanks to those supplying useful info on further linkage between Ashley, Green & Whyte. Working on it now. DM for email details please
2:29pm – 29 Oct 14”
incredibleadamspark says:
October 29, 2014 at 9:46 am
———————————
I think you are missing my general point. Celtic are a properly managed, properly governed club who comply with all statutory requirements. If they were not and were having an adverse impact on the governance of the Scottish game then it becomes the business of everyone who is a stakeholder in the game. The living wage issue is a request from a group of shareholders for Celtic to alter their wage structure. Whether or not they do has no adverse impact on the Scottish game whatsoever, and it is an internal matter which has nothing to do with the media. What has happened at Ibrox is the business of a wider group, because it has impacted on every stakeholder in Scottish football.
Why is it the SMSM need to give us a running ‘update’ on what people at ibrokes are coming and going and what they ‘hope’ to achieve.
No other Clumpany gets such a running commentary
What did Anne Budge do/say today. What does she hope for at Hearts?
What did Leanne Dempster do/say today.
What does she hope for at Hibs?
What did Stephen Brown do/say today.
What does he hope for at St.Johnstone?
Who did he meet in the course of his job today?
. . . ????
As we weekly await news on the EC preliminary investigation into complaints that Celtic received illegal State Aid I thought it would be handy to post a wee reminder – in very simple terms – what the whole thing is about.
For those who want to be up with the news then the place to watch is the EC State Aid Weekly Newsletter site where the latest decisions are posted every Thursday: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/newsletter/
Quite amusing are the SMSM at the moment
Their `insiders` are outsiders now
Out in the cold
Nothing to say with credibility
Distractions ignored
No influence
Nothing
I`d call that a result
mtp
FC United of Manchester beat Hearts to it, although only just
http://www.fc-utd.co.uk/m_story.php?story_id=5772
Apologies for the following long post. Also, I hope the Blockquote thing works else it’s going to get a bit messy!
With regard to Daryl’s non-communications with Bawsman, I found exactly the same issue in March this year when RFC*’s audited accounts were due/late. I’ve attached the full chain of communications just to give anyone who hasn’t tried to ask the SFA questions a good feel for how it feels. Unless they think they can fob you off easily, they quite happy to ignore you completely.
I initially went through the contact us page of their website on 12 March, with the accounts due to be received by the SFA by 31 March.
To my surprise I received a next-day response from a named individual – Derek Hunter, Club Licensing Manager.
I’m convinced that he was willing to reply only because he thought he could fob me off with a “silly boy, they’re not due yet!”
I immediately replied.
By 20 March, Derek hadn’t replied to my follow up, so I emailed him again.
Next day, Derek replied with…
Being apparently more au fait with the club/company licensing requirements than the SFA’s club licensing manager (thanks to TSFM), I was able to respond same day.
By 26 March, Derek had not replied (questions must be getting harder!), so I chased him by email.
On 28 March, Derek sent me the National Club Licensing Document and referred me to Section 8.12 presumably for the answer to my question. This section reads…
and goes on to say
As I was unsure how this answered my questions, I replied same day.
By 1 April, with no reply (and with RFC’s submission to the SFA now officially late), I emailed Derek again.
By 15 April, still with no response I emailed Derek again.
With no reply by 24 April and developments regarding RFC*’s ST income, I emailed yet again.
Still with no response and with yet more developments around RFC*’s finances, I had one final attempt.
On 6 May, I had one more try…..!
again, no reply and by now I was fed up hitting my head against this particular wall. I am convinced the SFA strategy is fob them off if you can, but if they seem at all knowledgeable and might be hard to get rid of, then just ignore them. Shameful.
David Somers convincing no one that he is in control of events 🙄
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/297635-rangers-chairman-refuses-to-confirm-derek-llambias-appointed-by-mike-ashley/
Hate to be a party pooper
It`ll take many millions to keep this nonsense going with no rationale for doing so
It`s a clean-up act now, translates as keeping out of jail and reputational protection
This is going to the wall
It’s not an if, it’s a when
Whatever MAs doing right now doesn’t matter in the great scheme of things
What does matter?
Is why ALL the authorities are avoiding this fracas like the plaque?
Polis should be all over this and long ago
And forget SFA PR`d spin on `tell us your intentions MA`
SFA do what they`re told, pick up a pay check, bonuses, pay-offs and pensions
That`s what they do – well apart from studious avoidance of supporters interests
and from trying to say and do nothing – except when they do it`s mince
Plus nobody believes or trusts them
mtp
nawlite says:
October 29, 2014 at 6:22 pm
======================
Mirrors my experience exactly, I get the distinct feeling they really are out of their depth with even t’internet bampot level questions, the spivs must laugh at them.