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In recognition of the points you made about publishing your responses on line, your letter of 18th September will not be published although readers of TSFM will be able to gather from this reply which is being published what those points were.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
Martin says:
November 12, 2014 at 1:45 pm
4 0 Rate This
1M shares in Rangers Int just traded at 26p / share.
Is it possible for this to be a ‘trade off’, i.e – MA being given the shares at a ‘price’, but no money changing hands…the ‘seller’ being CG, the ‘buyer’ being MA, the business ticks over and the share price keeps going up and the gullible still get fleeced on a Saturday
What’s not to like
Jim,
The ‘buyer’ can’t be Ashley hence my patsy comment above.
Couldn’t get the link to work mcfc but the blog title shows a bit of naivety as Mike Ashley hasn’t ‘given’ RIFC another £1m, has he?
blu says:
November 12, 2014 at 3:12 pm
=========================
The link is a bit flaky – sometimes works, sometimes doesn’t.
The article is more considered than the headline. It starts:
——————————————
Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has agreed to increase his interest-free loan to Glasgow Rangers.
The news comes from Rangers, who have announced on their website that Ashley’s holding company, MASH Holdings, has increased the credit facility it is providing by £1 million to £3 million to provide working capital.
Ashley currently holds 8.92% of Rangers voting rights and recently managed to add Derek Llambias to the club’s board.
———————————————-
I’m looking forward to Ally’s pre-match press conference. Will he be in “well, Mike and I will sit down and talk about the warchest” mood
or will he be in “I don’t talk about financial stuff, just football” mood. Or maybe there’ll be a new mood: “I’ve been told to keep my big stupid mouth shut” mood.
PS Ally, was that you million shares that got sold – or do you still have them all for your kids ?
Sorry – sorry – that was just crass and inappropriate – some might say almost journalistic in its vulgarity.
GoosyGoosy @12.02
Because he is under pressure from a source that he can`t threaten with his megabucks
————————————-
Have been in hospital lately ( hip replacement) and am struggling to catch up on the Mike Ashley turn of events. I can follow your post above with the exception of the sentence highlighted above. Would you be so good as to explain it’s meaning?
Many thanks.
upthehoops says:
November 12, 2014 at 6:52 am
It seems Mr Souness has aligned a compliant hack to address the nation that (his friend) Brian Kennedy would have been the right man for Ibrox…
====================================================================
Of course Souness is only making noises about ‘his beloved club’ today because he is selling a betting promotion to further line his pockets.
And this particular, compliant hack forgot to mention the most important aspect of Kennedy’s/Souness/Walter’s ‘bid’.
IIRC, they submitted the bid after the deadline.
…as you do when you are desperate to save your club falling into the wrong hands.
:slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
Interesting comment on the LSE RFC share site:
I am not sure how accurate the figures/dates are but if correct then there would be no need for any big pay-outs to terminate contracts.
That would make me revise my opinion of the need for admin and, indeed, the points penalty that step would entail can be avoided and assist Rangers’ promotion prospects.
Ashley might want to hang onto some of the 14 but obviously on much reduced terms.
Wrt Wallace and Macleod they would be worth punting or perhaps being traded internally on the distressed network.
And Peralta – well what can one say? He has had a surprising call-up for international duty IIRC so perhaps he’s doing a bit of shop-window modelling before the January Sales 😆 Mike will no doubt be hoping the Honduran plays a blinder and I’m sure Izaguirre will help-out his fellow weegie 🙄
Thanks, opening now.
Auldheid says:
November 12, 2014 at 2:21 pm
metanoia
===========================
Auldheid, thanks. Pronounced as in paranoia? I’ll be slipping that into polite conversation over the coming days.
Eco,
Hence my comment earlier (which isn’t to belittle your response btw) that the threat of admin with its football implications (coupled to Ashley’s indifference to the football implications), and Ashley being in control of that threat, is actually larger than the financial implications of admin itself.
Same with liquidation. Unless there’s an onerous contract kicking about that he wants shifting, either removed altogether, or shifting so that he is the beneficiary.
What’s that you say, a large shareholding changed hands, at an inflated price no less?
An event makes no sense but then what does. I’ll even be surprised if the share dilution motion is required, but then, no AGM, no motion! Literally.
ecobhoy says:
November 12, 2014 at 3:32 pm
While the number of T’Rangers players, including any one year deals, whose contracts are coming to an end is good news for the club, the bad news is that who is going to be kept on and who needs replacing and at what cost.
Surely the likes of McCulloch, Daly, Zaliukus, Miller and Boyd, in their 30’s, aren’t long term prospects, so there are five that will need replacing pretty soon.
Rebuilding a squad isn’t cheap you know.
Once again it all comes down to how best to balance the books but keep the fans onside with regard to turning up and buying Mike’s gear.
What about Rafat Rizvi then ?
The only other individual who has serious wealth, [I believe/making an assumption here], is our old friend Rafat.
Like Ashley, he could – if he so chooses – influence the outcome at TRFC.
Agreed, he may not be able to directly affect the Ibrox saga, but I am sure he has innovative ways in which to acquire personal gain…
Is Rafat still involved then, and quietly sitting in the shadows ?
A lot of talk about T’Rangers players contracts and especially how long they have still to run
The main problem they have is not how long they have to run
Whether it be 1 year or 100 years
It is being able to pay them till they can get rid of the players or the contracts
wottpi says:
November 12, 2014 at 3:50 pm
ecobhoy says:
November 12, 2014 at 3:32 pm
While the number of T’Rangers players, including any one year deals, whose contracts are coming to an end is good news for the club, the bad news is that who is going to be kept on and who needs replacing and at what cost.
=====================================================================
I think the key word is ‘cost’ and if the LSE RFC comments are accurate then the contracts that are expiring next Spring could all be renewed if desired but the wages paid would be slashed. But could any of the players involved – other than 1 or 2 – do better elsewhere?
And on the general rebuilding front there is always the possibility of loans from the Ashley Empire or elsewhere so replacement cost can be controlled.
That of course takes us into the realm of on-field performance and how that will impact on attendance and retail purchases. I’m not sure anyone can really predict that with any accuracy at this stage.
But it might well be that enough Bears will be relieved if the club is saved and might actually just want to support and not have continual financial pressure and internal civil war. Who knows? Ashley will want his pound of flesh and why not?
But he will take care IMO not to kill the club – unlike the spivs – and Bears will either accept they have to go with the Ashley ‘model’ or walk away and either support another team; form their own Rangers; or take-up knitting. It’s really that simple.
And the big + point for Ashley is that he has demonstrated to The City that he has cleared the spivs out of the Ibrox Stables and isn’t getting soft when it comes to making money.
Of course – we still don’t know exactly what the spivs are going to do and they might have a few surprises up their sleeves. So it’s Watch This Space 😆
tcup 2012 says:
November 12, 2014 at 4:19 pm
A lot of talk about T’Rangers players contracts and especially how long they have still to run
The main problem they have is not how long they have to run Whether it be 1 year or 100 years. It is being able to pay them till they can get rid of the players or the contracts.
======================================================================
Ashley bought the club 1 month stay of execution for his £2 million and obviously has managed to do some due diligence and thought it worth giving them another £1 million to secure another month’s grace.
He’ll find out more about the financial state of play and find out whether those who might oppose his plan are prepared to back-down or not.
IMO if they don’t then the Ashley tap will be turned-off but if he gets his way then he can keep Rangers running with the loose change in his pocket and of course it will be well secured – of that I am quite sure.
Some of the best seats and views in the stadium, including your seat (Area GR1 , Row * , Seat **) from last season, are available now to purchase as a half season ticket for the remainder of this season and giving you first option in the future.*
Prices start from £125 for Adults and £25 for Juniors. You can also now pay for your season ticket by credit or debit card by visiting rangers.co.uk (click here) telephone 0871 702 1972 or visiting the Ticket Centre.
______________
comes out the same day the good guy Mikey gives the naming rights back 🙂
and they also have CC facilities now
As a wise man predicted before the msm revealed: For the first loan the security was the car park and a training facility.
What is the security of this loan, and also, what is the cost? Interest free loan it may be, that does not mean the same as a no cost loan.
andy says:
November 12, 2014 at 4:42 pm
Some of the best seats and views in the stadium, including your seat (Area GR1, Row * , Seat **) from last season, are available now to purchase as a half season ticket for the remainder of this season and giving you first option in the future.*
Prices start from £125 for Adults and £25 for Juniors. You can also now pay for your season ticket by credit or debit card by visiting rangers.co.uk (click here) telephone 0871 702 1972 or visiting the Ticket Centre.
______________
comes out the same day the good guy Mikey gives the naming rights back 🙂 and they also have CC facilities now
=================================================
Ashley’s tanks are obviously on the move at warp factor speed. Is part of the new deal the handling/processing of CC payments through the SportsDirect Empire for a ‘small’ commission of course.
I expect PR to go into overdrive bigging-up the numbers of half-books sold and with only a few home games this side of the year might be difficult to form an independent view.
But this is a real test for the boycotters and whether they can hold firm or whether the revolt will fizzle out. What a helter skelter ride this has turned into?
For retailers such as Sports Direct, Christmas and the January sales are crucial trading periods. Mike might as well see it through to hoover up whatever cash Sevco fans care to spend on Sevco tat.
No sense in being a damn fool about it.
acciesbhoy says:
November 12, 2014 at 4:47 pm
As a wise man predicted before the msm revealed: For the first loan the security was the car park and a training facility.
What is the security of this loan, and also, what is the cost? Interest free loan it may be, that does not mean the same as a no cost loan.
================================================================
One thing for certain IMO is that there will be a ‘cost’ but it may take a little while for that to become obvious. Indeed if RIFC Plc was to be delisted from AIM in the not too distant future then it might never be known.
So with the introduction of debit/credit card facilities…and the cessation of potentially significant cash deposits…does this mean that Ashley is chasing away the spivs ? 🙄
The Ibrox cash junkie is now on a controlled withdrawal programme. I’m sure that Doctor Ashley will handle the ensuing cold turkey with great sensitivity, won’t he? Or could be of the “cruel to be kind” school of thought? Ally must be very worried- unless of course that was his parcel of penny shares that went for £260k today.
“Graeme Souness speaks out on his fury at the way Rangers have been run
========================================================================
…After the club went into administration Souness was linked to Charles Green’s consortium that failed to save the club from liquidation…
Following the rejection of South African based tyre-kicker Dave King Mr Kennedy appeared ready to save Sevco with the offer of a £3m loan…”
😯
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/rumour-mill-graeme-souness-mike-ashley-1-3601897
wottpi says:
November 12, 2014 at 2:16 pm
5 1 Rate This
futbol says:
November 12, 2014 at 2:02 pm
Not a bad idea as it puts him closer to the BBC at Salford so he can get his old Question of Sport job back.
————–
McCoist has aged 20 years physically since he was on that programme
His appearance now more suited to radio. Not to mention the fact that he is the driving force behind the BBC being banned from Rangers.
Jim Spence @bbcjimspence
Tribunal to decide compensation for Charlie Telfer to sit in January. Utd paid 60k + vat already and now offered 100k. Rangers want 200k.
Now that it appears TRFC need extra funds of approx £1M a month just to pay the wages can we expect the lamb munchers to finally grasp that dreams of Ashley throwing £20-30M at them are total fantasy? I despair whether lessons will ever be learned, but surely this time they realise self sufficiency is the only option.
Echobhoy
Loan secured against “a training ground” , in a discussion the other night the person was quite adamant it was against the old edminston house,can you update,thanks
Methinks “credit facilities” just ate 1/2 of 1 million loan.
To this day I don’t think Motherwell have one after their admin.
Stand to be corrected by more knowledgeable ‘well fans
smartie1947 says:
November 12, 2014 at 3:31 pm
GoosyGoosy at 12.02pm
Because he is under pressure from a source that he can`t threaten with his megabucks
i.e. The SPFL and SFA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Esteban says:
November 12, 2014 at 12:15 pm
GoosyGoosy at 12.02pm
“Standby for some more sporting integrity shredding by the SPFL and SFA. They now have an excuse to make concessions to Ashley.”
Why do they have an excuse they did not have before to make concessions to Ashley?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IMO
The SPFL and the SFA requested and got direct discussions with RIFC
They will have been painted a picture not too far from reality
i.e.
TRFC will not publish accounts or hold an AGM in Dec 2014 They are likely to go into Admin in Jan 2015. Even then their only hope is a CVA funded by Ashley to see them out until the ST round in April
But
Ashley is insisting on a number of concessions from the SPFL and SFA in return for his support
Most of these concessions wont be a problem since they only involve sneering at sporting integrity and breaking their own rules. In any event they don’t need approval at either SPFL or SFA AGMs .
However
One concession would be very difficult for the SPFL & SFA Boards to approve
i.e.
An SPFL and SFA joint commitment to hold cup semi – finals at Ibrox and finals at Celtic Park for the next X years
This would be too controversial an issue for the SPFL and SFA as long as SD held the naming rights to Ibrox
So
SD must concede the naming rights to Ibrox as part of any deal
He must also agree that the SPFL and SFA may publicise their role in forcing this change if they deem it appropriate at some future date
GoosyGoosy says:
November 12, 2014 at 7:38 pm
…
===============================
GG, previously I had maliciously and falsely enquired if you were in fact Craig Whyte.
That was wrong.
Are you Stewart Regan, perchance…? 😆
Any Clyde fans on here wondering if their newly recruited “gaffer” is Jim Traynor with a “wee Bazza” false face?
Ssb caller asked when did rangers come out of administration. Jim stated it was a matter of opinion. Caller stated it was factual. The usual awkwardness descended in the studio. IMO the biggest farce concerning the Govan club lives as a basic result of not answering such basic calls. Shame on them all.
cavansam, theoldcourse.
Thank you both for your very kind offers,however, I would never join any club that would have someone like me as a member.
ecobhoy,
What would happen if Rangers delisted from the AIM. How would that affect shareholders, or the company as a whole?
Two options left
Taking the thing private and keep milking cash out of sight
Liquidation of RIFC but make sure TRFC can carry on – ducks in row now being organised
Both these options keep ratbags out of jail – so these options make spiv RATS sense IMO
Won’t do them any good mind you
Reckoning will come sooner or later,
As will pay back of funds pilfered from two Loyal seasons
mtp
MercDoc says: November 12, 2014 at 8:26 pm
———————
Delisting would probably be viewed as a good thing from the Spivs viewpoint as it would allow them to go about their business without most of the regulatory disclosure requirements.
For the small shareholders it would create difficulties in trading shares if they wished to do so. Private deals could always be agreed but that is more likely to be in the realm of the larger shareholders.
Some of the institutional investors may be required to sell their shares, if the conditions of their investment trust limit them to investing in listed companies.
Attracting investment may be more difficult for an unlisted company.
easyJambo says:
November 12, 2014 at 8:50 pm
Attracting investment may be more difficult for an unlisted company.
__
Au Contraire ej – will / could attract all the dodgy `investment` `funds` going!!
Lots of dodgy money available `out there`
& could be out of sight of bonnet lifters
remember how this fracas started
It`s their MO
mtp
easyJambo,
Many thanks!
yourhavingalaugh says:
November 12, 2014 at 7:10 pm
Echobhoy
Loan secured against “a training ground” , in a discussion the other night the person was quite adamant it was against the old edminston house,can you update,thanks
====================================================
Sorry – not with you. What loan are we talking about? And where does the ‘training ground’ reference appear?
The only loans secured on Auchenhowie IIRC are the historical, now expired, Kelvinside Academy ones (2) and the still current Sports Council charge. Recent Loans have been secured on the Abion Car Park and Edmiston House but I believe they are now discharged.
Just want to say congratulations to Glasgow Ladies who,due to 2 goals in the last 9 minutes have beaten Zurich 5-4 on aggregate and now progress to the quarter finals of the UWCL.
GoosyGoosy says:
November 12, 2014 at 7:38 pm
—
Thank you.
MercDoc says:
November 12, 2014 at 8:26 pm
ecobhoy,
What would happen if Rangers delisted from the AIM. How would that affect shareholders, or the company as a whole?
==================================================
Would all depend on the reasons it was delisting and the effect on shareholders varies depending on the percentage shareholdings held. The effect on the company as a whole would largely be determined by the reason behind the delisting.
I did a post on AIM and the rush to leave it especially by football clubs who originally flocked to it at: http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/has-green-got-the-right-aim-for-rangers-footballing-share-issues-guest-post-by-ecojon/
And I note in the piece a comment by, of all people, Deloittes viz:
There were 1099 companies listed on AIM at end of September 2014.
Decent news about Aberdeen I think? Yes?
Not sure what to make of sevco’s latest spasm though…honestly, they ain’t half borrowed and blown some amount of dough!
In fact, in the two years and more since the SFA dog whistled about public disorder and suggested Armageddon the majority of our clubs seem to have done a decent job of staying alive, winning trophies and competing. And publishing ever healthier, audited accounts.
In fact, all except one seem to have cut their cloth and reduced their debt.
All except one. I reckon if we wanted a case study in irony then that’s it right there.
bailemeanach says:
November 12, 2014 at 7:49 pm
Any Clyde fans on here wondering if their newly recruited “gaffer” is Jim Traynor with a “wee Bazza” false face?
—————————————
Not sure. How bad a manager is Jim Traynor?
Flocculent Apoidea says:
November 12, 2014 at 10:02 pm
1
0
Rate This
bailemeanach says:
November 12, 2014 at 7:49 pm
Any Clyde fans on here wondering if their newly recruited “gaffer” is Jim Traynor with a “wee Bazza” false face?
—————————————
Not sure. How bad a manager is Jim Traynor?
___________________________________________________________
How bad a columnist is wee Bazza?
The Aberdeen debt reduction is interesting on a number of levels.
Firstly , the combination of fresh equity from a wealthy local fan and a debt for equity swap from existing shareholders , shows what’s possible when you have a board focused on what’s best for the club and not hamstrung by onerous contracts
Secondly , although the exact contribution by the Donald’s has not been disclosed, it may well have a knock on effect in valuations at other clubs. Particularly Hibs.
I am having to take a stab at numbers , based only on partial disclosure. However it seems probable that the Donald’s invested enough to clear the bank element of the debt . That was previously reported at just over £10 million. In conjunction Stewart Milne & Aberdeen asset appear to have converted close to £5 million of debt owed to them to increased equity ( although with limited voting rights )
Now the bank debt may have been discounted , in all probability it has been. The equity received for this investment appears possibly to be around 29%. With 20% going to the Donald’s and 9 % to the supporters trust.
The investment is very welcome , as is the debt for equity swap. It probably though makes any opportunity to pick up Hibs for next to nothing , more difficult .
Hopefully this investment , along with similar at Dundee Utd & Kilmarnock is not completely philanthropic and is a sign of confidence in Scottish football having a viable financial future.
What it also shows though is that by far the cheapest way to acquire a club is after an insolvency event. Much more has been invested to acquire a minority shareholding in Aberdeen than was required to own all of Rangers & Hearts.
There’s a warning there for fans of clubs , where those looking to buy were either not fans or where the club is beyond economic salvage without the insolvency
Did we get confirmation that the SFA are satisfied that Mike Ashley’s intervention is all in line with their previous amendment(?) of the rules? Or has that not happened yet. No hurry I suppose, it’s not like anything important could have happened at Sevco, like getting into debt or anything, while we wait. Maybe they’re just glad they didn’t have to deal with Mr Ritzvi and the answers to questions they didn’t want to hear. Just as well the MSM never got to grips with that eh! Jeez, once those guys get a sniff of a story…
Barcabhoy says:
November 12, 2014 at 10:17 pm
===============================
The key for me is that clubs like Dundee Utd, Kilmarnock and now Aberdeen are highly unlikely to ever again go into a level of debt they can’t afford. In each case there has been help from wealthy individuals who only have the club’s interest at heart. Likewise with the people now running Hearts post-administration, not to mention the continued sterling efforts of Hearts fans as well. It is well known that the people running Celtic keep a tight ship as well, but crucially they only have the club’s interest at heart. They all chased rainbows at one time but the pot of gold remained elusive, until they finally woke up and realised life is not a fairy tale. The only rainbow chasing left in Scottish football is a race between the media and the Rangers fans to see who can get to the pot of gold first. The trouble is the man who owns the pot of gold not only keeps it hidden, but only wants to make it bigger than ever before. It really is time the media and the Rangers fans stopped believing in fairly tales as well. However, they would do really well to remember the old adage of sometimes in life you should be careful what you wish for, because it might come true. They wished for a real billionaire to be in charge at Ibrox, and now they’ve got their wish!
UTH
Re Aberdeen not getting into debt again well I doubt it!
I can’t see how we fund new stadium and training facilities that the chairman sees us having.
Unless one of the other Aberdeen multimillionaires is thinking of splashing out 😀
‘Rangers’ fans want to know what shareholder Mike Ashley has been given in return for handing back the naming rights to Ibrox, as it was revealed the Newcastle and Sports Direct owner has loaned the club a further £1m. (Daily Record)
A cut of the proceeds of any future Sale – does indeed bring in!
…say 50% ? Less Flak for MA or SD but more money after the gullible have been softened up to accept that selling the naming rights would be the best (and only) way to secure a reasonable amount of money.
Sell for £10m and 50% to SD = £5 m straight away, the debts can get squared off with a wee bit to spare, then it’s season ticket time after promotion has been bought, so there will be an increase in ST sales and cheap tat replica shirt sales increase too
Everyone a winner !?
Fit and Proper Sporting Advantage
Are The Rangers gaining sporting adbantage from Mike Ashley’s influence over the operation of RIFC plc and TRFC ltd in contempt of his agrrement with the SFA?
Is the SFA fit and proper to make agreements on behalf of Scottish football given their proven record of weakness in the face of contemoptuous owners of and investors in its member clubs?
Bill1903
To a point yes, but now we have the ability to sell Pittodrie and use that money to fund (at least partially) a new home. Up until now much of that would have had to go to repay debt before any funds could have been released for the new build.
It also allows the club to turn down offers for our players. In recent times I believe bank pressure has forced us to accept lower offers for players than we might have believed reasonable. Fraser Fyvie, young Fraser (to Bournemouth, I forget his first name… isn’t ageing fun!) etc etc. Now if someone comes in for Jack for instance we can hold out for that bit more. Suddenly we are a club that can expect to make money out of bringing up players again, not just grab whatever cash is waved in front of us.
That is the only way Scottish teams will progress, and that is pretty much the way I’d like the Scottish league to progress. There is nothing swells the pride like watching a young team develop, as part of the crowd that watched the development through McLeod, McNeill and then Fergie I’ve been lucky enough to witness to that to what is now a frankly an almost unbelievable extent. Those days will never return (without a major collapse in the fake Sky driven, dull, repetitive UEFA nonsense), but that in a small scale within Scotland, with a few euro jaunts for a bit of spice will do me just fine 🙂
12-Nov-14 15:09:11 25.50 Sell 4shares @25.00. 25.01 £1.02
4 (yes FOUR) shares sold (traded) yesterday
Surely that is a joke !!!!!!?????
A little light relief for those interested…from last night’s SSB…seems Jim Delahunt was all of a sudden alone in the studio with only the tumbleweed for company….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRUjLF_iqFY#t=111
peterjung @ 9.39am
Usually quite like Mr Delahunt on SSB but he let himself down badly last night with this stoater 😉 and lost all credibility as a ‘sports journalist’ as you say the other 2 ‘pundits’ must have stepped out of the studio for that particular call :irony: terrified of the truth…… Well done caller Gavin tho 😉
An interesting little snippet from the DR piece about Ashley,
“Ashley has also handed back part of the inner bowl advertising inside the stadium. He now owns 75 per cent while the club take the rest.”
So how much did he recoup of his original investment from this little “onerous contract” and how much will it earn him in the future?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-fans-question-mike-ashleys-4618690
peterjung says:
November 13, 2014 at 9:39 am
10 0 Rate This
A little light relief for those interested…from last night’s SSB…seems Jim Delahunt was all of a sudden alone in the studio with only the tumbleweed for company….
———–
Fine call that. The liquidation concept is the contemporary jobby on a stick.
Very interesting little 4-minute discussion on the Sportsound podcast, too (between the 10 and 14 minute mark). It was about the DU compensation for CT, and remarkably, it was Chick Young who mentioned that ‘You can’t have it both ways’ — new club for certain things (debts, I suppose) and old club for compensation.
If that compensation is argued to be back-dated to 2005, then the slice affecting 2005-2012 would probably go to the liquidators, so it seems a pretty pointless exercise. Funny thing was that Chick pushed the point and Kenny M. suggested moving along quickly before Jim Spence got into trouble by discussing it any further — presumably for something Chick Young said 🙂
Et tu, Chick?
jimlarkin says:
November 13, 2014 at 9:22 am
12-Nov-14 15:09:11 25.50 Sell 4shares @25.00. 25.01 £1.02
4 (yes FOUR) shares sold (traded) yesterday
Surely that is a joke !!!!!!?????
—————-
Paul Murray walking away
Can Mr Delahunt and/ or Radio Clyde expect a call from Lord Hodge, who gave HIS opinion at the Court of Session?
Danish Pastry says:
November 13, 2014 at 10:31 am
The problem is that the sordid little 5 Way Agreement has allowed things to develop so ‘you can have it both ways’.
Given that Chick raised the issue perhaps he could put his investigative hat on and find out why this confusing and destablizing set of affairs was allowed to happen when all other clubs that have gone into liquidation were shown the door by the footballing authorities.
Well, what can one say,other than that the entire board of the SFA would fit right into FIFA? (Though, they would need some serious CPD time, as they are obviously rank amateurs at this 21st Century Football Administration lark)
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/nov/13/fifa-report-alleged-corruption-qatar-2022-world-cup
There truly is no hope for football, within Scotland, or without 👿
Copied this comment from another site as I thought it fitted quite well with the discussion re what kind of sugar daddy Ashley will be.
” one thing is for certain the only information they will get from the board room is what the board room agrees the supporters need to hear.”
I would only add that the difference is that previously it went without saying that the news always had to be 100% favourable whereas I wonder if that average will slip somewhat. Notice he states “need” to hear, not “want” and the consensus seems to be that Ashley is just the man for the job.
Smugas says:
November 13, 2014 at 12:21 pm
On that note, Phil has a new blog up
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/sevcos-flexible-friend/
Phil is again hinting at an Administration event, greased by a league reconstruction. Frankly, I don’t believe we have yet fully plumbed the depths to which the boards of the SFA & SPFL are prepared to sink, to re-impose the Ancien Régime.
Maximilien de Robespierre where art thou? 😉
We are having our expectations managed regarding the outcome of the SFA’s attempt to seek clarity regarding Ashley’s involvement in Sevco whilst remaining Newcastle’s owner.
The expectations refer to ‘no influence whatsoever’. The burden of proof is the most marginal influence one could contemplate while the reality is that he is calling all the shots. Campbell does not need to seek clarification as the position is absolutely obvious to anyone. Our esteemed media however have stated numerous times that this will not be a barrier but do not attempt even an incoherent explanation as to why the SFA cannot say ‘Sorry Mike, that’s not allowed unless you sell your stake in Newcastle’. ‘Because’ is about the best we get. And When Campbell inevitably decrees that there is no issue here (with or without some completely contrived explanation) there will not be the rumpus there should be because, deliberately or otherwise, we have been told this is what to expect.
We had a very similar scenario with Dave King’s ‘fit and proper person’ status. Again, there really was no need for any debate; a more unfit and improper person was hard to imagine. But King intimated that he had been given a nod and a wink from the SFA that if ‘restoring Rangers to their rightful place’ (sic) required him to hold a directorship, then the SFA would not step in his way. Again, this was all about managing expectations about an outcome that should have never been in the slightest doubt.
Before I even read Phils piece I will say this. They can do whatever reconstruction they truly believe is in the best interests of the game in general with normal voting majority powers applying.
But any change HAS to have one seasons notice, so that all clubs start and finish knowing what they are playing for. They owe all fans that at least.
If not, it has to be fully explained why the urgency, and if it is a sop to mismanaged clubs then fine, they should say so instead of dressing it up as something else, and fall on their swords accordingly.
And if ND thinks he’s going to roll out a sponsorship deal on the back of “look at what you could win” I’d quite like the file on that one over the last three years opened up to scrutiny as well. I wonder how many Emails he actually sent saying “I don’t suppose you want to sponsor this p!sh do you?” My guess is not even that many, just in case someone took him up on the offer!
Simples.
Bryce Curdy says:
November 13, 2014 at 12:45 pm
Edit
Sumgs says:
Correct, and while the Emperor and his court stride about pantless, all the media will do, is tell us about the wonderfully modern transparent strides, the court are wearing!
Don’t get me started on Bazza. The 3-0 result against Montrose was reasonable, but given that Montrose are consistently the worst away team I’ve had the misfortune to see at Broadwood in recent seasons, then it doesn’t surprise me that much.
I just wish he would realise how disrespectul it looks to constantly be in the papers, talking about all things Ibrox. They don’t constantly go to Derek McInnes, asking him for quotes about Rangers, or Stuart McCall when he was in charge at Motherwell, or even Alan Jonhston at Killie, so why Bazza? Is it because he’s at the diddiest of teams, and therefore doesn’t really take the job seriously? It would certainly explain why we’ve been so appalling this season, and I resent paying good money to go and see a team that the manager would appear to think is something to occupy his time between Rangers quotes.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-fans-question-mike-ashleys-4618690
A new marketing deal, welcomed by the board as a “visible demonstration of the Sports Direct support and long-term commitment to Rangers”, has also seen Ashley give up the Ibrox naming rights, which he purchased for the paltry price of £1.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Despite giving back the naming rights, he still has security over two of the club’s major assets – the Albion car park and Edmiston House – and owns 49 per cent of the club’s retail operations.
Last night supporters demanded to know the end game. Ashley has also handed back part of the inner bowl advertising inside the stadium. He now owns 75 per cent while the club take the rest.
Union of Fans spokesman Chris Graham said: “On the surface its great Ashley has dropped naming rights to Ibrox but what has he been given in return?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Dearie Me
When will the Bears waken up?
A Spiv buys naming rights for £1 from other Spivs running TRFC
Two years later
The same Spiv “gives up” these naming rights
Why do the Bears think these naming rights have reverted to TRFC?
That’s not what it says
And it`s not what it means
Same goes for inner bowl advertising rights
Ashley keeps 75% while TRFC get25%
If you measure the perimeter of the inner bowl
25% will just about cover the area behind both goals
And when the ball is in this area
The last thing people are looking at is the billboards
Dearie Me
Genuine question – I understand that Hampden was being changed for the Commonwealth Games last summer and so could not be used for last seasons cup semi finals and final – but now the Games are over, why are internationals and cup semi finals/finals not being played at Hampden? Is it still being changed back – and how long is this supposed to take – if someone could help me on this would be much appreciated.
Where have you been for the last couple of years? 😉
Do you not remember the last league re-organisation a year or two back? They came up with the change half way through the season and implemented it at the end of that same season.’For the greater good’ and all that? Remember? They pay scant regard to their own regulations, so I wouldn’t expect it to be any different this time around. There was meant to be a requirement for no re-organisation for at least 3 years, but we know that’ll be treated as ‘at our discretion’ if it comes to the crunch.
Yes and what I’m saying is I want to see figures to back up their ‘crunch’ and not just take their word for it, not that I ever did.
FIFA report now shouted down as a sham by the original investigator.
Saying it contains “contains numerous materially incomplete and erroneous representations of the facts and conclusions”
Sounds familiar…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30037729
Without getting t0o political the Nats/Yes came up with the following figures based on what the Irish national broadcaster RTEseemed to have in their accounts for “Acquired programmes – overseas”: 25,179,000 Euros, or £20.7 million at current exchange rates.
That give people in Ireland access to all BBC programming.
Therefore
SCOTTISH LICENCE FEE INCOME: £300m
BUDGET OF BBC SCOTLAND IN 2016/17: £86m
COST OF BUYING BBC CHANNELS: £21m
MONEY REMAINING: £193m
Re the advertising inner bowl comments from Chris Graham….
——–
Last night supporters demanded to know the end game. Ashley has also handed back part of the inner bowl advertising inside the stadium. He now owns 75 per cent while the club take the rest.
Union of Fans spokesman Chris Graham said: “On the surface its great Ashley has dropped naming rights to Ibrox but what has he been given in return?
————
On TV you generally see action at both goal ends and the main area of the pitch as filmed from the main, red brick stand. ( Bill Struth stand?) Advertising on this stand is invisible from the TV cameras.
Anyone like to bet which three quarters are owned by MA and which one by TRFC? Rocket science degrees not required for this one methinks.