It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One

ByConcomitant

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One

This headline is a quote by George Washington, but it is also friendly advice to Keith Jackson of the Daily Record in response to his ‘exclusive’ today on the reasons Derek McInnes turned down Rangers.

May I begin by drawing people’s attention to two statements by the same organisation on what was essentially the same subject matter:

Aberdeen FC Statement 14th June 2017:

https://www.afc.co.uk/2017/06/14/club-statement-management-team/

“The club can confirm that early this afternoon Sunderland FC agreed to meet all the contractual obligations for both Derek McInnes and Tony Docherty and they have, reluctantly, been granted permission to speak with both of them about the vacant managerial position at Sunderland.

Aberdeen FC will be making no further comment at this moment in time.”

Aberdeen FC Statement 5th December 2017

https://www.afc.co.uk/2017/12/05/club-statement-18/

 

“Aberdeen Football Club has announced this evening that Rangers have contacted the Club asking for permission to speak to Derek McInnes and that permission has been refused.”

 

It is clear from the first statement there are contractual obligations that, when met, mean the club must allow their manager the option of dialogue with interested parties, however reluctant the club may be.

Although money is not mentioned, contractual obligations can only relate to the commitments on either side to terminate the agreement and these are usually financial. In the case of an interested suitor, it would be expected of them to pay this on behalf of the employee.

There is no mention of contractual obligations in the club statement on 5th December, from which one can only infer that Rangers either refused, or were in no position to meet, the financial commitments required. Aberdeen FC therefore exercised their right to refuse permission to speak to McInnes, a position they are perfectly entitled to maintain until such time as Rangers agree to meet all contractual obligations, just as Sunderland did.

The story for the press to pursue is obvious yet Keith Jackson wants to have us believe that the McInnes decision -and ultimately it was his decision – has nothing to do with money. Jackson even suggested that an offer of £1m up-front was on the table in a piece that was published on Wednesday:

In it, Jackson states;

“Dons chairman Stewart Milne made his hardball position clear last night after booting out an official approach from the Ibrox club – and turning down a cheque for £1 million in compensation.”

I’m not entirely sure what Mr Jackson means by an ‘official’ approach, I would have thought ‘formal’ to be more apposite but it’s a moot point in the grand scheme of things. Fact is, Jackson didn’t think long and hard enough about this statement because it contains not one, or two, but three glaring inaccuracies.

  1. Mr Milne did not ‘boot out’ any approach – official, formal or otherwise. If Rangers had met the necessary contractual obligations then Aberdeen FC could not have refused McInnes the opportunity to speak to Rangers – that would have been a breach of contract on the club’s part and McInnes could sue.
  2. Mr Milne is not ’playing hardball’. Playing hardball is about getting what you want. Mr Milne already has what he wants. He doesn’t need to play hardball – it is Rangers who, if they cannot afford the compensation or wish to alter the terms of the compensation, would need to attempt to play hardball. Jackson has this the wrong way around – a common failing when trying to justify a lie and pursue a biased narrative.
  3. I don’t dispute that Rangers offered to pay £1 million in compensation, but I do not believe for one millisecond that it would be paid in a single instalment either by cheque, cash or bank transfer because the audited accounts published last month prove that such a commitment would not be possible. A shortfall of £4m was required in soft loans to see out the current season, with monies required immediately, and a further £3.2m after June 18. Furthermore, these figures did not consider the additional cost of a change of management at the club/holding company/engine room subsidiary/call it what you will.

It’s rather telling that Mr Jackson makes no mention of this £1m cheque in his ‘exclusive’ today. Instead, he offers another inaccuracy. He says’;

“When Milne made it clear he was unwilling to grant the move his blessing – and that McInnes would have to rip up his contract to pursue a return to Ibrox – the ex-Rangers player was boxed into a corner.”

Mr Milne is in no position to grant a move, whether with his blessing or otherwise. There is a binding contract in place and only if contractual obligations are met then – as is glaringly obvious from the Aberdeen Club Statement of 14th June – Mr Milne would have to, albeit reluctantly, allow the manager to speak to the other club, just as he did in the case of Sunderland. He cannot box his manager into a corner. There is no decision for Mr Milne to make if the requisite compensation is agreed to be paid in full to terminate the manager’s contract with Aberdeen FC.

More plausibly, Rangers could box McInnes into a corner. The job is his if he wants it, but he will have to resign his position to take it because Rangers won’t meet the contractual obligations. Once again Jackson has it the wrong way around because he is lying and pursuing a biased narrative.

Any reasonably minded follower of Scottish football knows why McInnes is not going to Rangers. It’s all about the money – or the lack of it – and no amount of lying or high-level fantasy by award winning journalists will alter that prosaic fact.

About the author

Concomitant contributor

Despite over 30 years in exile I'm still as passionate about our national game as I ever was. It breaks my heart to see it being destroyed by those in power - the SFA, the SPFL, the Scottish media and in some cases the clubs.

779 Comments so far

Ex LudoPosted on12:25 am - Dec 12, 2017


Barry Scott you say? Does this mean that in the future TRFC will be sponsored by Cilit Bang? 

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on9:30 am - Dec 12, 2017


Fergus McCann on the national stadium debate. I thought some people may be interested in his thoughts.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/15715467.Hampden_Park__An_open_letter_by_former_Celtic_owner_Fergus_McCann/

Worth reading the whole thing and how he gets to his conclusions however it can be summed up quick succinctly.

In Summary

Scottish football, with its limited resources and competitive disadvantages, has to be managed efficiently, and the stadiums in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen – all getting better – can stage games profitably for the benefit of all the clubs – and their supporters. Yes, we can feel some nostalgia for the Hampden Park events of the past. But the mistakes of the 1990s must not continue. 

The future should belong to the supporters who buy the tickets, and the clubs they own and support.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on9:36 am - Dec 12, 2017


Cluster One
December 11, 2017 at 21:51
just wonder if Barry scott who was one of three benefactors who had contributed to the £6.5 million loan paid to Rangers in a bid to pay off Mike Ashley, also had a condition 

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

Or, if further loans are required (as we know they are) and Dave King is not the most reliable person in the World, then maybe a condition of those loans.

Or, Mr King is preparing the board for his departure. I would never suggest he would be a shadow director of course. Heaven forfend.

It really all depends who Mr Scott is representing. Is he King’s man, or other people on the board’s.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on11:49 am - Dec 12, 2017


‘Unsecured’! Well I’ve thought about it and can only think that I must have missed something in my 33 years in banking if there’s something about lending, unsecured, a few millions to a loss making company that indicates a sound mind, as opposed to indicating a loan made on purely emotional grounds. Of course, having an emotional attachment to a football club might also lead to normally sound businessmen believing a proven liar when he assures them he will be putting in £30m in short order to save what they have convinced themselves is the club they’ve alway supported and loved. I’m no psychologist, but I could imagine that one delusion might well lead to another.

Of course, the fact that those businessmen are no longer granting unsecured loans to cover continued losses might well be an indication that they have left their emotions at home with their ‘9 in a row videos’, and have at last got their senses back. Oh, wait a minute, maybe that actually means they aren’t as clever as they used to be.

This idea that lending on an unsecured basis to a loss making company is a sign of good sense is confusing me03

View Comment

bigboab1916Posted on1:48 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Barry Scott you say? Does this mean that in the future TRFC will be sponsored by Cilit Bang?
It really all depends who Mr Scott is representing. Is he King’s man, or other people on the board’s.

Will this be the first time this board has ever come clean
is King cleaning out as we speak
will the MSM be whiter than white on this story
Wll Marigold put the club in safe hands
Did AJ hear the Cilit Bang when he stated  CW had killed the club
No matter the outcome this club left a massive stain on scottish football

I need to go guys bye

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:12 pm - Dec 12, 2017


ALLYJAMBODECEMBER 12, 2017 at 11:49

I don’t think unsecured loans are a problem if people want to use their money in that way and are comfortable with the prospects of the money going down the toilet.

If they believe that is what it takes to keep their football club going until a longer terms solution can be found then so be it.

Plenty fans of distressed clubs have stumped up over the years knowing exactly where there money was going and what was at stake.

The problem for T’Rangers is no-one can see the end game or understand what the boards joint vision is.

Park clearly was looking at a realistic rebuilding effort ( 7 years was mentioned) when he came on board but King is just full of the same pish and wind Green was,  re overtaking Celtic and hoping to hear the Champions League music. 

There is nothing that has happened since the new board took over that shows any sign of anyone really knowing what they are doing in that regard or that those aims will be achieved any time soon.

Why King is even involved is a mystery as it is hard to see what he brings to the table and there doesn’t appear to be any logical or obvious strategy for getting out or transferring power a la Budge at Tynecastle or Les Hutchison at Motherwell.

Openess and Transparency eh!!

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:09 pm - Dec 12, 2017


HOMUNCULUS
DECEMBER 12, 2017 at 09:36

======================================
Or, if further loans are required (as we know they are) and Dave King is not the most reliable person in the World, then maybe a condition of those loans.
Or, Mr King is preparing the board for his departure. I would never suggest he would be a shadow director of course. Heaven forfend.
It really all depends who Mr Scott is representing. Is he King’s man, or other people on the board’s.
=============================

Yes, and Phil’s latest article suggesting that TRFC is literally running on fumes now.

And is this connected to the timing of the appointment of a new Director ?

[Haven’t seen anything, but I assume (?) Mr.Scott is NOT receiving any monies for taking the post ?]

Something’s going on though…  14

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on3:49 pm - Dec 12, 2017


If Phil is right about the “Invoice Financing” thing then that is little different from the Ticketus arrangement. The mechanics are not the same but the reason you want to do it and the end result are the same.

You have a future income stream (one is season tickets, the other is additional payments for sale of players registrations)

However you do not have sufficient money, or a line of credit to keep you going until you get that money.

So the solution, sell the future income to someone else. You get the money now, they get it when it is paid. Guess what, there is a charge for that.

If this is true then it is simply an indicator of not having enough money to keep going, not having decent financial backing, and having to get “wonga” style loans to keep trading.

Phil didn’t say whether they were even succesful in that. However great businessmen wouldn’t keep a company going if they thought it was going down the tubes, certainly not if it wasn’t secured. Well so I am told.

As Phil said, if Mr King is providing the required cash, as he promised, then why would the PLC have to do this. The King loans are interest and charge free, why would a well run business go for an expensive alternative.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:37 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Confucious once (didn’t) say (but should have) Only a lender can go from being a sucker to being a sucker. 

To be fair Ern I’m taking your word that the lenders were never of the former ‘leechy’ type (but then supposedly neither was SDM).  I’m not wholly convinced about your disregard for the risk of them being taken for the latter.  Or the risk of them reacting to being treated so.  Particularly given your entirely ‘lender-dependent’ strategy for growth that you shared with us previously.

But if you can keep them onside AND keep the cash inflow coming whilst ‘investing for growth’ then fair do’s. 

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on4:46 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Now there’s an interesting position.

I refuse to read something but will happily make comment on it’s lack of accuracy.

Zebra finance is totally irrelevant, that is simply people buying season tickets using credit. The arrangement is between the fan and Zebra, not the club and Zebra. The fan is basically just taking out a loan, the club is paid from the loan and the fan pays back the loan.

“Invoice financing” is nothing like that. So randomly suggesting that he is misdescribing one as the other doesn’t really work.

Advance sale of season tickets.

Advance sale of invoices relating to additional payment for players.

There’s not a lot of difference. It’s simply taking future income now, and paying a premium for the pleasure.

Maybe Ticketus didn’t happen either.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on4:55 pm - Dec 12, 2017


There really is a certain kind of genius in taking the position that shareholders in a PLC, and their associates, have lent £16m to that PLC in order for the PLC to lend that money to it’s loss making subsidiary and because they have not taken security against the PLC’s assets then everything must be fine.

Nothing to do with emotion, or getting caught in a snowball effect where you have to keep putting more money in or your original money just drifts away. Nothing to do with the fact that you have promised your customers not to take security against the assets becasue that is such an emotional subject that you might kill off a large proportion of your income if you do it.

Ignoring the fact that most of the lenders seem to have said “Enough” and one man (the convicted criminal) is left to promise that he will cover the shortfall this year and next. This allowing the accounts to be signed off and the going concern issue addressed. The SFA to ignore the distinct possibility of the club (the subsidiary which needs the money) failing to see the season out.

A simple straightforward, people keep paying the bills so everything must be OK. I need no more evidence than that.

It reminds one of the bloke falling from a 30th story window, as he falls he is heard to say “so far so good … so far so good … so far so good … so far …”

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on5:01 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Sorry, last thing before I pop off.

When was CFC’s “Golden Era” and how were the Co-operative bank involved in it.

If there was a “Golden Era” then surely one must look at winning the European Cup, along with a domestic treble, or winning nine league titles in a row, at least as candidates for a “Golden Era”.

Which period of time, post Celtic moving to the Co-op bank would be the actual “Golden Era”.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on5:20 pm - Dec 12, 2017


CFC’s Golden Era was lender-dependent,and they fully utilised a huge overdraft facility with the Co Op bank,and it was SECURED.

Firstly I’m no Celtic historian so Im not the best person to ask (certainly not on here 07). That said my considered opinion would be,

No.  It was profit dependent, a profit principally sourced from demonstrable savage cost cutting and a sound achievable underlying plan relating back to that profit motive (increasing ST numbers by improving facilities).  Was it successful?  No, not entirely.  You gleefully reported yourself the (relatively small) losses that were incurred en route.  Did that require them to fully utilise their overdraft?  Depends on your standpoint.  Did they have this overdraft on the strength of a sound plan built on austerity?  Yes.  Did the eventual extent of the use of that overdraft facility match the assumptions in the accompanying business plan? Presumably.   Did having it secured help to demonstrate their confidence?  Of course?  Would they have had it very long if they had treated it as a simple ‘loss depository’ on the back of some vague ‘hopefully group stages maybe possibly’ mission statement ?  Not a chance.  Would the Irish Bank calling the debt in as a result of them not meeting their business plan accept the excuse re their apparent inability to repay the overdrawn debt “But we haven’t met our business plan”?  See previous answer. 

Too big to fail has gone to your head I’m afraid.  Does it help in stopping unsecured (sorry, UNSECURED) lenders calling their debts in?  Regrettably yes.  Does it then act as a block to further investment?  You bet it does.  

View Comment

CrownStBhoy

CrownStBhoyPosted on5:39 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Homunculus/JC| and others.

Thank you for enabling me to maintain my sanity after all the midden sourced drivel from the troll 01

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on5:45 pm - Dec 12, 2017


The Three Not So Wise Bears

For the avoidance of doubt, at no time have I suggested that unsecured lending is indicative of someone being bonkers (I have said, though, that lending in that way is indicative of emotional lending, particularly when lending to a football club). On the other hand, to suggest that making an unsecured loan is something that indicates intelligent lending, is undoubtedly bonkers.

Furthermore, the lending in question was made with no expectation of getting the money back, therefor, security was probably considered unnecessary, while, at the same time, the multitude of bears would have gone bonkers (in the most vile of ways) if a standard security had been taken over Ibrox.

One more thing to consider when discussing these particular loans; with the smoke and mirrors that surround all things TRFC, there is a spinoff for the board in that it makes the most bonkers of bears think that all is well, because…why else would such wise businessmen (and they must be wise because they are all RRMs) lend millions unsecured?

It is, after all, Christmas, and it might be worth remembering that the Three Wise Men didn’t require security on the very valuable gifts they gave, entirely on faith, to the Baby Jesus. I would imagine they were quite happy with the return they got on their particular investment in faith, though!

View Comment

bfbpuzzledPosted on6:34 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Homunculus
I have a brother who was mistaken for me recently, something to do with lugs and beards-someone thought I had given up my freelance theology activities to work for a living, I near took a bad turn.
If you need any square go assistance I am quite happy to provide my bear chewing a wasp face in support as required
The umlaut is much mangled by football commentators when reading German names  Hassler for Hessler comes to mind

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on7:09 pm - Dec 12, 2017


I’m pleased to see that the SFSA’s survey on the future of Hampden has got some traction with the media, particularly on BBC TV and Radio. It’s good to hear Sportsound actually canvassing the views of managers and ex players too.

It’s a pity that the media didn’t take on the earlier findings on the governance of the SFA / SPFL, with the same gusto.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on7:12 pm - Dec 12, 2017


BFBPUZZLED
DECEMBER 12, 2017 at 18:34
=======================================

That is uncommonly civil of you, however I suspect that the whole “square go” thing is as much a fantasy as the whole being in exile because of the credible threat to life thing. 

I am considering paying the £1.99 to get his take on the “Apollo Hoaxes” though. I’m dying to find out how the mirrors got onto the moon, you know the one we are bouncing the lasers off, allowing for incredibly accurate measurements. 

I take it your brother with the protruding lug is a hard working cove, hence your horror at being mistaken for him. 

View Comment

jimboPosted on7:25 pm - Dec 12, 2017


View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on7:32 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Regardless of which TRFC individual actually decides who to buy, or rather take on loan this January…

To try to rebuild the crumbling facade of a ‘big club’ – and especially after the ‘dizzy’ from Derek McInness – I fully expect a massive SMSM speculation spree about who could be arriving at Ibrox next month.

Anybody and everybody from an EPL established player, to a young, future star of La Liga – or some such nonsense.

It’s the same boll*x every transfer window anyway, but it might appear to take on an elevated Level of desperation this time at Ibrox.

And mega-moonbeams – obediently copied/pasted by the SMSM – might help shift some half-season tickets at Christmas?

View Comment

jimboPosted on7:41 pm - Dec 12, 2017


That weather out there tonight Brrrrr!!!  I don’t think you could entice me to run around Tynecastle tonight with three layers of clothing on me for footballers wages.  No siree.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on7:54 pm - Dec 12, 2017


STEVIEBCDECEMBER 12, 2017 at 19:32
1
0 Rate This
Regardless of which TRFC individual actually decides who to buy, or rather take on loan this January…21
I fully expect a massive SMSM speculation spree about who could be arriving at Ibrox next month.
Anybody and everybody from an EPL established player, to a young, future star of La Liga – or some such nonsense.
————
Bring back the Newcastle six16

View Comment

ChristyboyPosted on8:13 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Homunculus, Apollo Hoaxes. You’d get better sense from these guys. 
https://youtu.be/Ok6CoIwcJ-E

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:20 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Update for all us neutrals:
Ross County 1-0
Hearts 1-0

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:29 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Sub on for Hearts – Cochrane – now two 16 year olds in midfield for Hearts! 18

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:32 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Ross County 2-0 (Naismith)

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on8:35 pm - Dec 12, 2017


HOMUNCULUSDECEMBER 12, 2017 at 19:12
I am considering paying the £1.99 to get his take on the “Apollo Hoaxes” though. I’m dying to find out how the mirrors got onto the moon, you know the one we are bouncing the lasers off, allowing for incredibly accurate measurements. 
————–
Most watched TV

View Comment

jimboPosted on9:04 pm - Dec 12, 2017


For all we criticise the BBC it’s still good to listen to some live football reports on a cold Tuesday night in December from the comfort of your home.  God bless the homeless tonight.

View Comment

jimboPosted on9:16 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Sorry, missed that Killie goal there – Brophy – that’s the strikers 4th goal in 3 games apparently.

ps where’s that Killie fan who used to come on here? He was brilliant.

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on9:19 pm - Dec 12, 2017


Pardon my ignorance , but I thought the TRFC board comprised of Stewart Robertson , Andrew Dickson , James Blair and no others . These other chappies concerned with loans and shares belong to RIFC , which is the holding company which owns the club which fields the team . It was not always thus .

View Comment

jimboPosted on10:03 pm - Dec 12, 2017


It always looked to me like Hearts were going to go on to score that extra goal and I was impressed by them. The future looks bright with those three young guys in midfield.”

It’s the way to go, invest in the young guys coming through.  Like Celtic too.

Kenny Miller? And all the other OAPs.  Really?

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on10:07 pm - Dec 12, 2017


BYLINE
 
Trust in print journalism: it’s low and that matters.
 
Brian Cathcart London11 Dec. 2017
 
https://www.byline.com/column/68/article/1976
 
 
“A battery of data show trust at pitiful levels. Journalists need to wake up before it’s too late”

0101

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:15 pm - Dec 12, 2017


CLUSTER ONE
DECEMBER 12, 2017 at 20:35
============================

The Berlin Wall is down … aye right. 

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:51 pm - Dec 12, 2017


easyJamboDecember 12, 2017 at 19:09

I’m pleased to see that the SFSA’s survey on the future of Hampden has got some traction with the media, particularly on BBC TV and Radio. It’s good to hear Sportsound actually canvassing the views of managers and ex players too.
It’s a pity that the media didn’t take on the earlier findings on the governance of the SFA / SPFL, with the same gusto.
===============
Yes on both points but the latest keeps the SFSA profile up and more supporters will become aware of their existence and might even check out their whole purpose.
There  is more to come in raising the profile stakes.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on2:53 am - Dec 13, 2017


WOODSTEIN
DECEMBER 12, 2017 

 Trust in print journalism: it’s low and that matters…
======

Actually I would suggest that ‘print journalism’ simply doesn’t matter now – as evidenced by their plunging circulations. 

I would also suggest that rather ignorant print media buyers – myself included – are much more informed today and choose to discount the veracity of the mainstream media.

In my humble opinion, that is progress.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:19 am - Dec 13, 2017


Just for clarification: I acknowledge that Woodstein was simply quoting;
“Trust in print journalism: it’s low and that matters…”

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:11 am - Dec 13, 2017


Saw this on Twitter re Sportsound. Very apt. 

“Welcome to Sportsound with me Kenny McIntyre. Tonight, we look back on Kilmarnock’s Champions League triumph, Partick announce the signing of Lionel Messi and Aberdeen move to Norway. But first, let’s look at Rangers Under 14s 3-2 win over Alloa.”

View Comment

fan of footballPosted on7:32 am - Dec 13, 2017


I think the comment made on the nightshift ,is a indicative of why so many people do not trust print journalism.
Incredible comment
I have not bought a paper in years and to be honest I don’t think anything they do will change that

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on8:27 am - Dec 13, 2017


JJ having another go this morning. Also promising an expose of the moon landings. He clearly has never watched the Big Bang Theory whose scientists clearly demonstrated that humans had been on the moon by firing a laser from the roof of their building and reflecting it back from a man made object left up there. QED.

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on8:47 am - Dec 13, 2017


The Three Unwise Bears Lend Money, Unsecured, To Keep The Lights On At Ibrox – is that an indication that all is well at RIFC/TRFC?

There is, undoubtedly, a big difference between lending money with the intention of converting it to shares, and not expecting anything for it, for the end result will be that the lender has shares in the company lent to, regardless of their actual value. The important thing here, though, is that, regardless of what the future held, there was no intention to call the loans in, ever, and the belief existed that the term of the initial loans (the point at which it was decided not to take security) was going to be quite short as they anticipated the shares to be available within a matter of months!

The reality in this case, of course, is that, had it been possible for them to buy shares at the time they made the loans, they would have bought the shares instead of making the loans, a situation where no security is required or possible to grant. This is an entirely different situation from making a loan when it’s repayment is paramount, where wise men would insist on some sort of security.

As things stand, though, the 3bears would be unsecured creditors in the event of administration and/or liquidation, so they are in a better position, financially, than they would have been had they been able to buy the shares at the time of lending. But this was never a factor in their actions, merely a small advantage to them, for the time being, over buying shares instead of making loans.

The bottom line is that these loans were not made in the belief that all was well, financially, at the club, they were made because they were necessary to keep the club afloat until such time as Dave King was in a position to come up with his promised £30m.

The fact is that these loans were loans of last resort, and the club was dead without them, makes the whole idea that the 3bears made these unsecured loans in the belief that RIFC/TRFC couldn’t fail, absolutely bonkers. 

Taking security over Ibrox, is, of course, always possible, and if the 3bears hadn’t coughed up then some other lender might have been found prepared/demanding to take the stadium as security. All well and good, I suppose, but, and correct me if I’m wrong here, didn’t Dave King promise, as part of his very aggressive take-over, that he would never allow Ibrox to be used as security? Wasn’t that a quite important factor in his rabble rousing march to the top of the Marble Staircase?

To clarify something, for the benefit of the hard of thinking, that I said in my previous post; I never said, or inferred, that the unsecured lending was made as a deliberate ploy ‘to fool the fans into a false sense of security’, what I said was that there was a ‘spin off* for the board…’. You know? An unintended benefit. Really!

*Spin Off – Something, such as a product, that is derived from something larger and more or less unrelated; a byproduct.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:48 am - Dec 13, 2017


Ex Ludo
December 13, 2017 at 08:27
===============================

Fortunately they set the laser on stun, so they didn’t blow the moon up.

View Comment

bfbpuzzledPosted on11:13 am - Dec 13, 2017


Homunculus
The reference to a protruding lug is quite telling and suggests detailed knowledge. Perhaps you could complete the following litany Pat Jim Oweny…
The conversion of loans to equity wheeze is eternally puzzling. The underlying asset values are hard to pin down and many of the values attached might be described by an unkind person as specious. Looking at discounting future profits to get a value would not give positive value on any realistic assumptions.
To convert loans to bits of worthless paper seems to be the modern equivalent of Weimar Republic hyperinflation and money in barrows.
I cannot understand it 
The idea of leaving Hampden behind seems to be gaining traction the plain fact is that Murrayfield is better Stadium. Hopefuly using Murrayfield with its long history of unsegregated crowds and good humour might remove some of the more ludicrous behaviour of certain football fans.  It really is a breath of fresh air compared to some of the super partisan grounds.

View Comment

Ex LudoPosted on12:14 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Humonculus,
Nobody would want to blow up the moon. That would just be silly.19

View Comment

bfbpuzzledPosted on2:37 pm - Dec 13, 2017


And if someone blew up the moon there would be no more moonbeams 

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on3:32 pm - Dec 13, 2017


StevieBC
December 13, 2017 at 03:19
Just for clarification: I acknowledge that Woodstein was simply quoting; “Trust in print journalism: it’s low and that matters…”  04 

I do forget quotation marks now and again, must be my age. 🙂

The quote is from Brian Cathcart:-

https://www.byline.com/journalist/briancathcart/biography

View Comment

jimboPosted on3:41 pm - Dec 13, 2017


BBC Radio Scotland have did it again.  Hibs v TRFC is being broadcast live on SKY TV so which match is Radio Scotland covering live tonight?  Yes, the same game.  Even although there are 3 other games being played tonight in the Premiership.  Honestly they haven’t got a clue. 01

No wonder people try to get streams.

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on5:08 pm - Dec 13, 2017


JIMBODECEMBER 13, 2017 at 15:41
You’ve got to have some sympathy for all the TRFC-facing journos and faded sportsmen- multi-tasking would be beyond them and they need the fix . Us diddy clubs are stealing their oxygen.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:01 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Any news on today’s court case?

View Comment

jimboPosted on6:02 pm - Dec 13, 2017


I appreciate that as a Celtic fan we get our fair share of broadcasts compared to other clubs and that wasn’t really my point earlier.  I think Partick Thistle v Motherwell and St. J. V Aberdeen are going to be good games to listen in to as well.

It’s a pity R Clyde don’t do live coverage within their listening area.  They could have covered one of Celtic or PT home games.

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:13 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Before i pop out. I have been trying to look/find something and i know i have it somewhere, I may even find it  in my copy of Downfall (if i can lay my hands on it).
Anyone remember how much rangers had left in the bank when they went into administration?
memory say’s £4mill or even £250,000.
thanks for any replies04

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:53 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Cluster One December 13, 2017 at 18:13
Before i pop out. I have been trying to look/find something and i know i have it somewhere, I may even find it  in my copy of Downfall (if i can lay my hands on it). Anyone remember how much rangers had left in the bank when they went into administration? memory say’s £4mill or even £250,000. thanks for any replies
====================
£3,373,170  ……………………. if you believe D&P’s figures.

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on7:56 pm - Dec 13, 2017


020202

View Comment

jimboPosted on8:44 pm - Dec 13, 2017


12 goals in the first half tonight, good old Scottish football 04

Wish I could see one of the games05

(I got offered a ticket for tonight at CP but it’s far too cold for my age group)

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on9:07 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Jeez oh.

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on9:49 pm - Dec 13, 2017


We are sh=te.
01

View Comment

jimboPosted on10:04 pm - Dec 13, 2017


No your not!

View Comment

shug

shugPosted on10:10 pm - Dec 13, 2017


Def are can’t beat a team that got pumped by dundee and hamilton and we should have had a barrowload before that lot scored.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:15 pm - Dec 13, 2017


shug December 13, 2017 at 22:10
==================
It’s how decisions even themselves out over the season.  Celtic benefit from a couple of questionable penalty decisions, so Rangers have to be allowed to benefit from a penalty decision.

’twas always thus. 

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:25 am - Dec 14, 2017


There is an interesting section on the first part of E Tims diary about the msm launching an attack on internet Bampots.
http://etims.net/?p=12305#comment-901149
To which I responded using a post first made on SFM.
If ever I write a book I think the title might be
We Are The People of The Lie. 

If you do delve into that publication it sort of explains a lot. Anyhoo here is my response:
Auldheid December 13, 2017 at 4:20 pm · Reply →
A very interesting lead item and this
Expand that, and we have a nationwide -perhaps even worldwide-issue
reminds me of a post on SFM in 2015. The context was Jackie McNamara’s manager situation at Dundee Utd and Jim Spence truthful reporting of it. It goes on to touch on the new world that is emerging BECAUSE of social media..
” April 4, 2015 at 3:15 pm (Edit)
The thing about Jim Spence I feel is that if he were not in the mainstream media he would be on here posting or blogging. He cares about his club but is balanced, he cares about the game and loves both.
He was talking on Sportsound there about Dundee United being caught on the back foot on the matter of the make up of the managers contract in respect of player sales. The conversation turned to transparency and for football to catch up in realising it has to become more transparent in its dealing with supporters.
What football has not realised is that transparency is already here but in a form that makes us slow to realise it. The medium is social media and the ability to share but contained by Slow Glass.
Slow Glass from a short story by Bob Shaw slows down the light passing through it.http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_of_Other_Days In the story and others you have Slow Glass of different thickness in terms of the time it takes for the light to emerge.
You have Glass a day thick/long to Glass ten years and more thick/long.
Thus the Utd story was captured by Slow Glass about 3 or 4 weeks thick. Maybe more or less as I don’t know the detail but you get the drift.
The Rangers story will emerge in full over 10 years thick glass.
The LNS story will take at least another year before the truth will emerge that shows it to have been a sham. Res12 if measured from the Celtic AGM in 2013 will take two years for the truth to emerge. (edit – make that 5)
The thickness/slowness of the glass depends to a large extent on main stream journalist removing the dust of PR that slows the light, but light is inexorable. It can do nothing but shine.
The sooner authority and not just football realise that transparency is already here emerging via Slow Glass the thinner the Glass will become.
No more waiting years for the truth to emerge, which might just make folk act truthfully and honestly in the first place.
It will be an interesting future as social media replaces mainstream as music downloads replaced CDs ( that replaced tapes that replaced records that replaced cylinders)
In the meantime let’s keep our football Glass polished and hasten the emergence of light in our own landscape.”

The enemy of the truth is the lie and anyone interested in The People of the Lie might want to consider reading a book of that name by M Scott Peck who wrote a trilogy on human behaviour starting with The Road Less travelled.
Here is a link to People of the Lie – you might even recognise the traits of those People as you read the reviews posted and the quotes.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4451.People_of_the_Lie
I think it tells us what we are up against, not just in football, not just in Scotland but world wide. a different Armageddon from the one Regan thought might happen and which he thought he was preventing,,  by lying.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:32 am - Dec 14, 2017


With regard to TRFC result and pen not given this sparked off an exchange on Twitter

Auldheid‏ @Auldheid · 2h2 hours ago

When your financial survival depends on winning games and you are in a league where clubs think they cannot survive without The Rangers, then the conditions for honest mistakes have returned. Back to 2010/11 in spite of all efforts to stop it. Res12 only chance left.
https://twitter.com/Auldheid/status/941061260426309633  if you want to follow it.
Back to 2010/11 ?
TRFC, fuelled by £20M debt, have knocked their other rivals off the perch. Why supporters of other rival clubs do not ask questions of their clubs about domestic financial doping I don’t understand.

If Phil’s latest is right and 3 heavy earners have to be jettisoned because they cannot be afforded, remember your clubs lost points to a club using them.
If ever there was a need for domestic fair play it is now.

View Comment

bobcobbPosted on8:29 am - Dec 14, 2017


For the love of God…why are you allowing this individual to destroy this site? I’m all for open, informed and honest debate but at the moment SFM is providing none of this owing to the mods indulging a troll. Differing opinions when genuine and informed are to be welcomed, but when it’s a clear attempt to stifle, distract and misinform?
It’s beyond a joke now.

View Comment

billyj1Posted on9:02 am - Dec 14, 2017


Well said bob cobb.
This person is totally destroying the site.

View Comment

LUGOSI

LUGOSIPosted on9:55 am - Dec 14, 2017


Pardon my language but sometimes only the ‘C’ word is apt.
Spoutpish is a Concomitant.
He’s read through something called ‘Insolvency Law’, don’t you know?
He sees nothing incongruous about posting his view on sending someone to the moon to howl at the flat earth. He did so at quarter past midnight.
A troll, no matter how thick and briefly amusing, is not just for Christmas. It’s not just for any time of year.
Will no-one rid us of this turbulent Concomitant?

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on10:25 am - Dec 14, 2017


The Scotsman’s coverage of TRFC’s latest court case (just how many is that?) below.

Apart from the mis-use of the word ‘Rangers’, not a bad effort, just sticking to the released facts of the case. TRFC will have to dig out a few more invoices to cover the costs of this one. I wonder if the auditors were made aware of this contingent liability when considering the going concern matter?

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/rangers-face-court-fight-over-unpaid-bill-to-charles-green-linked-firm-1-4639143

Rangers could face a court battle over a disputed unpaid bill, according to reports. Rangers vow to fight Singapore firm’s debt claim Rangers could face a potential court battle over the claim.

John Devlin Singapore-based firm Orlit Enterprises raised an action in 2013 at Glasgow Sheriff Court, claiming they were owed payments totalling £400,000. Rangers brushed off the matter at the time, and are said to have felt it was ‘insignificant’. However, the firm – which was hired to find Far East investors to help fund Charles Green’s buyout of Rangers in 2012 – drew up a new writ in August, resulting in a preliminary hearing in Glasgow earlier this week.• 

The firm was hired to find Far East investors to help fund Charles Green’s buyout of Rangers. In a 2013 statement, Rangers did concede that they owed Orlit money, but claimed the requested amount was incorrect.The statement read: “Rangers have agreed a figure to settle this issue and it is a figure which is significantly less than the initial demand.” Orlit Enterprises is run by Chan Fook Meng, a one-time business associate of former Rangers chief executive Green.

Green was non-executive chairman at another of Chan’s companies, Nova Enterprises, which also had ties to ex-Rangers finance chief Brian Stockbridge, who formerly worked as an advisor to the firm.

View Comment

erniePosted on10:31 am - Dec 14, 2017


“This person is totally destroying the site.”  That’s the general idea.  It’s concomitant with being a troll.  That’s why trolls troll specific sites that question their agenda, usually the big lie; whether it’s politics or fitba.  Editing would only put SFM on a par with the MSM.
My only response has been ignore him/her/them (it?).  I would request that those fine gentlemen on here who feel obliged to counter the troll should desist.  You are great at arguing but a troll needs only a response to keep trolling.  p.s. did I mention it’s a troll?

View Comment

jimboPosted on11:21 am - Dec 14, 2017


In an article from today’s Herald, Queens Park differ from Fergus McCann’s open letter:

“We would, however, confirm that the club provided over £10m in finance towards the rebuild of the ground as opposed to ‘none of this being paid for by its owner’.

Quite a few comments in reply mention their surprise that an amateur club could afford £10m.  I wonder about that too.  Does anyone know anything about this?

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on11:55 am - Dec 14, 2017


JIMBO
seen this from david low
David Low @Heavidor20m
This story contains serious inaccuracies and the SMSM should challenge Queen’s Park’s claims.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on1:02 pm - Dec 14, 2017


On responding to our troll all I’ll say is if I see dog shite on a pavement where someone can step on it and have the means to move it out of the way, then that is what I would do.
I would much prefer though if the incontinent dog were put out of our misery.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:06 pm - Dec 14, 2017


TRFCL’s annual report was published by Companies House today.  There is not much that differs from the RIFC accounts, but there are a couple of snippets in the post balance sheet events.

Management Team
On 26th October 2017, Pedro Caixinha and his management team left the club with the associated payroll costs included within the cash flow projections being accelerated for a certain period on termination of these contracts. As the manager’s duties are currently being performed by Graeme Murty on an interim basis, no additional costs are payable until any such time that a new manager may be appointed.
 
Capital contributions
On 22 November 2017, the Company received additional capital contributions of £0.3m from its parent company.

The above reads to me that the delay in appointing a new manager will help mitigate the costs of sacking Pedro.

The November capital contribution at £300k is probably a bit less than many would expect.  (£4m forecast requirement over the full financial year).

There is no mention of this week’s action by Orlit Enterprises in the post balance sheet events.

One thing that I missed out on when reading the RIFC accounts (and repeated by TRFC) is under “Critical Sensitivities”, i.e. the reliance on participation in the Europa League Group stages, rather than just qualifying for Europe per se.

It states:
Sensitivity – Domestic and European football performance 
Critical value resulting in impairment charge – Failure to participate in Europa League group stages aminimum of two times during the forecast period.

So not only does the club need to qualify for Europe, it needs to negotiate two or three qualifying rounds and a play-off round in at least two seasons out of five.

“Progres” on that front hasn’t been great in the first of those seasons. 

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on1:44 pm - Dec 14, 2017


How to deal with trolls . Trip trap .

View Comment

DarkbeforedawnPosted on2:30 pm - Dec 14, 2017


With regards Ernest, surely the problem is because both sides have polar opposite views and no one is willing to meet in the middle? Why not agree to disagree and move on instead of trying to each force your viewpoint as if gospel? Regards the single biggest debates on here with him seem to be NC/OC and whether Rangers gained a financial advantage. 
On the first, most on this site would class Rangers as a new club while a few such as Ernest and myself would class it as the same. I can’t see it from your viewpoint as I’ve said many times before I still go and watch a team in blue called Rangers every week, and the adverts, news, water cooler chat and a lot of the cast have not changed one bit. So for us it’s no different regardless of the legal ins and outs, a football club is more than a registered number. But I wouldn’t waste time arguing with you as I know you would disagree. 
On the second point I agree we had an advantage by using the scheme BUT at that time anyone else could have used it although they too would have been hit when the tightening of tax avoidance loopholes came into play. Was it morally wrong? Yes. Should they be stripped titles? No. Morals don’t really have much place in football (look at Qatar, look at FIFA, look at all the teams in England buying outwith their means). Again that’s my opinion on the matter and I won’t berate anyone for disagreeing with me. 
If everyone would stop trying to disagree with Ernest and agree to disagree there wouldn’t be this same repetitive drivel every single day. Just my tuppence worth

View Comment

bigboab1916Posted on2:57 pm - Dec 14, 2017


DarkbeforedawnDecember 14, 2017 at 14:30I still go and watch a team in blue called Rangers every week, and the adverts, news, water cooler chat and a lot of the cast have not changed one bit. So for us it’s no different regardless of the legal ins and outs, a football club is more than a registered number. But I wouldn’t waste time arguing with you as I know you would disagree. 

Would you be interested in the new ABBA collection, includes all the new songs written by the new ABBA, 2 guys and 2 gals, 2012 2017, £2.00 and they are yours

View Comment

Bogs DolloxPosted on3:16 pm - Dec 14, 2017


On the second point I agree we had an advantage by using the scheme BUT at that time anyone else could have used it although they too would have been hit when the tightening of tax avoidance loopholes came into play. Was it morally wrong? Yes.
=================$$$$$$$$$$===========
It didn’ take changes to the tax legislation to make the way Rangers operated the scheme illegal. Issuing side letters made the payments contractual and subject to tax.

View Comment

incredibleadamspark

incredibleadamsparkPosted on3:18 pm - Dec 14, 2017


DARKBEFOREDAWN, that’s a good post. What I would say is that this Rangers are the same but different. They are a result of the old one being liquidated. An emotional connection is obvious but surely there can be no claim to any titles previously won by the old club? 

As for the EBTs was it not the incorrect use of them that was the problem? It’s the side letters, not regestering payments with the SFA, not supplying information and lying to authorities that is the issue.

An emotional response is understandable and when all is said and done it’s only a football club. I sat in the rear of the Govan stand for years with my family. For me this is the second version of the club and I don’t think that’s a big deal. They still play at Ibrox, play in blue strips….

View Comment

TrisidiumPosted on3:31 pm - Dec 14, 2017


On the Troll, and I think by now we can safely say that is what he is, I have to admit defeat. I really would prefer for people not to respond, but if that fails over the weekend, I will create a new thread just for EB.
Then those who feel a cathartic need to respond can do so whilst the rest of us can ignore it at our leisure 😊

View Comment

Comments are closed.