Where now for the Judicial Panel Protocol?

By

On AT’s twitter some guy, Willhelm, wonder where he got …

Comment on Where now for the Judicial Panel Protocol? by AllyJambo.

On AT’s twitter some guy, Willhelm, wonder where he got that name, has a link (sorry can’t copy it over) that he claims shows how all Celtic fans use the word ‘dalek’ – presumably he means to describe the Ibrox dead (as he doesn’t say otherwise in a discussion that started with the claim they do). It is a link to a youtube video, by a Celtic fan, in which 2 cartoon daleks portray 2 stupid Rangers fans talking outside Ibrox. Apart from the foul language there is nothing insulting in anyway to anyone. The references are all to games played in 2008 and is no more than micky-taking banter and no mention of the disaster is made. Sadly, AT doesn’t pick him up on this rather glaring misrepresentation.

AllyJambo Also Commented

Where now for the Judicial Panel Protocol?
Just had a quick glance over the AIM rules kindly supplied by Crazy Horse.

I have been wondering why the haste to float Greengers, if we discard the desperation for money angle that is? The undernoted ‘Special Conditions for Certain Applications’ just might explain that haste if my understanding of it is correct. For the next year the registration embargo gives them the perfect excuse not to spend any more money other than day to day transactions so they can be in and out before they have to placate the bears by buying new players. It might also explain why they were so desperate to delay the embargo when they already had players capable of winning the SPL3, as otherwise, from next July, the bears would have been screaming for new signings or asking where the share money had gone.

From AIM Rules:

Special conditions for certain applicants
Lock-ins for new businesses
7. Where an applicant’s main activity is a business which has not been independent and
earning revenue for at least two years, it must ensure that all related parties and
applicable employees as at the date of admission agree not to dispose of any interest in
its securities for one year from the admission of its securities.
This rule will not apply in the event of an intervening court order, the death of a party who
has been subject to this rule or in respect of an acceptance of a takeover offer for the AIM
company which is open to all shareholders.

My understanding of this means that, in the event of a successfull floatation, Green and his mates would not be able to dispose of their shares until, assuming an October launch, next October, which would leave them a couple of months to get out before the fans are looking for more players from their hard earned money. Probably a deadline (to get out) they would be keen to meet.


Where now for the Judicial Panel Protocol?
WOTTPI says:

September 7, 2012 at 10:26

Allyjambo Taxpayer says:
September 7, 2012 at 10:08

My understanding is that Stella signed before the window closed.

The issue is in relation to being non EU and therefore, in terms of UK employment law as opposed to footballing registration rules, he needs the International Work Permit.

I am positive that with a little googling you will find plenty examples of players signing then having to wait until international clearance is given.

Clutching at straws methinks but willing to be proved wrong.
___________________________________________________________

I’m sure this will be the ‘reasoning’ behind it but it will refer to the transfer window closing which is maybe fair enough. Rangers, however, have a registration embargo, that started, I believe, at one minute passed midnight on 1st September. A registration embargo is not the same as the closing of the transfer window, which is not a penalty, just a plain old rule. Rangers knew that they had this registration embargo and that anyone they wanted to sign would have to be registered before it kicked in. With this in mind they should only have been interested in players with no need for visas, or, started the registration process early (perhaps before they were sure they really wanted the player), or, accepted that if the visa didn’t come through in time they’d wasted their, and the player’s, time. This might have made things a bit difficult for Sevco, but then isn’t that what it was meant to do?
With this in mind, why did Green go ahead with signing Stella? Was this what the six hour time wasting meeting was about the night before the transfer deadline ended, and the embargo kicked in? Yet another deadline missed!
When is a registration embargo not a registration embargo? Perhaps the answer is; when anyone representing what used to be Rangers is about to launch a share issue to the people who think they still follow Rangers!


Where now for the Judicial Panel Protocol?
SSN reporting that Sevco have signed Australian striker Francesco Stella. He’s been on trial with them and, believe it or not (another new rule), they’ve got round the embargo because they applied for his registration before the embargo kicked in!


Recent Comments by AllyJambo

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Big PinkJanuary 2, 2018 at 13:54 
AJI suspect the TDs are not from SFM folk (remember the ratings are available to all manner of trolls). It is a disgusting world-view if made in earnest. A shocking way to score a point if not.
_________________-

I didn’t, for a moment, suspect they were from anyone who posts here, even the more prolific troll posters are better than that, I am sure. 

For some time now I have had the feeling that there is someone, or some people, coming on here and just TDing a number of posts without bothering to read their content, either out of malice or as some sort of concerted effort on behalf of people with reason to dislike our message. It really is quite strange how, suddenly, a number of posts receive one, two or occasionally three thumbs down in very short order, and often posts like uth’s, that could offend no one, receive these petty TDs as a result. 

I can honestly say that I have never read anything from our regular, or occasional, posters that might suggest they would TD anything relating to that terrible day. I include, of course, all supporters of Celtic and RFC/TRFC who have, over the years, made their arguments on SFM. My experience of Celtic supporters talking of that day is one that leaves me certain in the knowledge that only the basest of their support (and we all have them) were not badly effected by the disaster and in full sympathy with the deceased, their families and the wider Rangers support. 

I can still remember that night, sitting in the Queens Arms in Edinburgh, watching the death count rising on the TV, waiting for one of our mates we knew was at the game, getting more and more nervous until he appeared. It had a lasting effect on me.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
upthehoopsJanuary 2, 2018 at 08:52 29 2
Rate This
On this day in 1971, the Ibrox disaster happened during a Rangers v Celtic game at Ibrox. 66 fans died in a crush. Some of us remember that day, some of us may even have been there, while some of us would not even be on this earth at the time. We are all football fans. Nobody should go to a football match and never return home. Rest in Peace.
_____________

Wow! I know we are not meant to put much store on the thumbs up or down, but two people have given thumbs down to this post! Who on earth could find fault with a post respecting the dead from the Ibrox disaster?

It kind of confirms my belief that there are people coming onto this site who don’t read the posts, but are assigned with the task of creating the appearance that there is some disagreement with posts that mostly criticise Rangers(IL) and TRFC and hit the TD button without thought.

Alternatively, of course, it could just be that others, like myself, have difficulty hitting the correct symbol on tablets or mobile phones, I certainly hope that is the case here.

Thanks to Upthehoops for reminding us of that sad day, something we should do every year as a mark of respect for those who died on Scottish football’s worst day.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
DarkbeforedawnJanuary 2, 2018 at 03:48 
Stevie BC, the issue with declaring himself bankrupt is it stops him holding any director role in a company in the UK and possibly South Africa. I can’t see him doing that “for the sake of the club”. I think like Murray before him he likes the limelight. He knows very well the best option for the club would be resign as any acting party in the club and still provide the soft loans. It would take all scrutiny away from the club and could leave the chairman role to someone more respected such as Alistair Johnston. That would stop the risk of the TOP ruling having such a huge impact on the club. It’s the selfless and obvious choice to make and he could still be seen as the saviour from abroad saving the club through loans, but he wouldn’t get the same exposure he so much craves. His defiance is what will lead to his downfall and his selfishness could lead lead to the downfall of the club.
_______________________

DBD, though I used your above post to highlight the impossibility of separating club from company, I have to agree, to some extent, with the thrust of the post. While I am not sure that by declaring himself bankrupt that King could escape the wrath of the TOP and CoS, he isn’t going to do anything for the benefit of your club if it doesn’t benefit him, or save him, at the same time.

That said, however, King’s ‘ownership’ of the NOAL Trust was established in court to the judge’s satisfaction, and I doubt that he would get away with making further loans to RIFC plc through it or any other hidden avenue, once declared bankrupt. Indeed, despite my limited knowledge of bankruptcy laws, I am certain that King (or anyone else) can’t just announce bankruptcy and clear themselves of all fiscal responsibilities, they have to prove they have no money to meet their debts, and as far as we know, King doesn’t have any – and if he had, the court would make sure the funds in his NOAL Trust would be used to meet them, as far as possible, with, I am sure, an investigation into what other (disguised)investments he holds. One thing’s for sure, he would not be allowed to ‘lend’ any money to RIFC/TRFC, and, if he does, indeed, have substantial debts, his creditors might well force the return of his existing RIFC loans to meet his debts.

One thing’s for sure, the law will not allow someone to avoid the consequences of breaking the laws and regulations of the land by availing one’s self of the laws of bankruptcy! While a little tax cheating scrote like Barry Ferguson might get away with transferring his assets to his wife, just prior to receiving his tax bill, King and his money are already on the court’s radar and I doubt that even his Masonic connections would be enough to let him get away with further fraudulent behaviour.

Something I am sure of, and has to be considered before wondering if bankruptcy is a way out for both/either King or RIFC, and that is – you have to have debts that you demonstrably can’t meet before you can petition for bankruptcy. Unless King has very substantial debts, that outweigh, at least, the funds held in the NOAL Trust, then he has no grounds to declare himself bankrupt.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
DarkbeforedawnJanuary 2, 2018 at 03:48 
Stevie BC, the issue with declaring himself bankrupt is it stops him holding any director role in a company in the UK and possibly South Africa. I can’t see him doing that “for the sake of the club”. I think like Murray before him he likes the limelight. He knows very well the best option for the club would be resign as any acting party in the club and still provide the soft loans. It would take all scrutiny away from the club and could leave the chairman role to someone more respected such as Alistair Johnston. That would stop the risk of the TOP ruling having such a huge impact on the club. It’s the selfless and obvious choice to make and he could still be seen as the saviour from abroad saving the club through loans, but he wouldn’t get the same exposure he so much craves. His defiance is what will lead to his downfall and his selfishness could lead lead to the downfall of the club.
_________________

Hi, DBD, and a Happy New Year to you.

While your recent posts have been pretty good, showing a realistic approach to what’s happening at your club, might I ask how it could be that the chairman of RIFC’s selfishness, and I presume you include his dishonesty in that, could lead to your club’s downfall, if, as you’ve previously claimed, the club is separate from the company? Surely, in your belief structure, it would only be the company, TRFC Ltd, that would ‘fall down’, and the club would just sit around, responsible for none of the inherent financial chicanery of the ‘overspend our way to success’ ethos that permeates at Ibrox, until some new ‘football company’ is set up to carry the can again!

I know it’s a bit early in the year to reintroduce the OC/NC debate, but I am wondering if you’ve, perhaps, come to realise that the idea that a football club can, for some skewed reason, escape the consequences of it’s own greed, is pretty ludicrous?


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
ODDJOBJANUARY 1, 2018 at 13:42
Allyjambo,Thanks.I also suspect that the assignation of ” ra deeds” would provoke an angry response in some quarters
___________

And I suspect that the assignation of ‘ra deeds’, should it ever come to pass, might well be the last throw of the dice! What’s more, once any assets are used as security, it reduces the amount the current lenders are likely to get in the event of liquidation. It may well be that the directors, who are now refusing to give more loans, have, rather than reached the end of their free funds, decided that the lending has reached a level greater than, or close to, the total value of the group’s assets.

It’s one thing lending without security when in a position to ensure there is enough in the pot to, more or less, cover the amount of the loans, it’s an altogether different thing once someone else gets that security!

Whatever the accounts give as a value for the fixed and current assets, the directors will all have a very good idea of the realisable value of those assets (particularly the heritable asset value), and should total creditors begin to outstrip that value, they may well begin to wonder if it’s time to call in the administrators. Granting security over some of the heritable assets would only hasten the moment for unpleasant decisions.

If PMGB is correct in saying King is looking out for loans secured on the club’s heritable assets, then I am certain that the rest of the directors would carry out proper due diligence on the potential lenders before granting any security. Not that they have any dodgy characters in their midst, or anything, just that they are canny businessmen.


About the author