I have been receiving quite a bit of unflattering mail about the “agenda” being pursued on this blog. Depending on the correspondent, that is defined as either denying people their civil right to gloat, hiding the “truth” that people of the RC faith are welcomed and encouraged to come to Ibrox, or indulging in Chamberlain-style appeasement with the banning of the “H” word and other incontrovertible rights-to-insult.
The objection to moderation of any sort appears to be at the root of these diatribes. Our position here in terms of moderation is clear. There is no “agenda” other than a desire not to be chasing up posts containing the rantings and ravings of partisan types who “demand” their right to be heard no matter how objectionable it might be to those hear it. We are not here to service a conduit for conspiracy theories based in Masonic Lodges or the Vatican. There are plenty of places where people can indulge in that kind of stuff, but the moderators here are just not interested. The administration of the site takes around four hours per day. That’s a long time trawling through posts which often set out deliberately to insult, abuse or otherwise cause offence – mildly or otherwise.
Our view is that the blog will only have cross-club support if we stick to what we can substantiate by fact or reasonably infer from the way things proceed. Further, we feel that if we are to gain credibility as an alternative source of news and comment to the MSM, that we need to cut down on the fansite type comments. There is no dignity (a word often used here) in calling the Rangers manager or their fans names. We need to maintain higher standards of impartiality than football fansites, because we know that a united fan base can actually make a difference as RTC did when the SPL chairmen were gearing up for a parachute for the new Rangers. OT discussions are fine, and often amusing, but they shouldn’t become the main reason to come here.
The requirement to have a WordPress account before posting here is not in any way draconian. It is designed to make people accountable for what they post whilst still maintaining anonymity, and therefore being exempt from moderation. Those who don’t like it are not being compelled to carry out any instruction – they only need go to a place where they don’t feel so constrained.
If the main issue of this blog becomes how the blog is being administered – or how the moderation policy is affecting the human rights of posters, we may as well just pack up now.
There have never been any objections to the suggested posting rules on here. We assume that people who post are reasonably intelligent. Therefore it seems fair to assume that those who have ignored the suggested posting rules did so deliberately. If that doesn’t happen, moderation is just not required.
If what we are trying to do fails because of our posting framework, then we will be blamed. We are certain though, that we can have no credibility if we indulge ourselves in conspiracy theories and constant references to anachronistic organisations, the Scottish school system, and the leanings of referees.
There is real corruption in Scottish football. It is based not on religious rivalries but on greed and acquisitiveness. The only thing that matters is that we identify that corruption and help put an end to it.
Our job is to ask questions and not jump to our own conclusions about the answers. That will divide us as surely as the realisation of the depth of the corruption united us. To be totally united as fans, we need to have more Rangers fans on here. Therefore we need to create an atmosphere that they can be comfortable with. Is that the case right now? The anger for RFC’s mismanagement and abuse of the game in Scotland is real, but we need to look forward if we are truly committed to ensuring that what happened to Rangers can’t happen again.
We’re not gonna throw the toys out of the pram here. If anyone else would like to run the blog under those circumstances of zero moderation, we will be happy to hand over the domain. There is no “agenda” – we will be happy to hand the work over to others.
The initial posting which proposed the change to WordPress logins received over 130 TUs and only three TDs. Subsequently the post advising of the changes got around 100 TUs and 100 TDs. It seems that minds are not entirely made up.
To get some closure on this once and for all, we have added a poll below to end on Saturday at 1700 where you can decide whether you want to go along with our original plan in terms of login and moderation. We obviously recommend that you vote “Yes”
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 05:36
1 0 Rate This
DP – the finances of a football club are front loaded – the ST money comes at the beginning of the season – since he has had a very good ST campaign there will be very few additional walk ups for Ibrox going forward. Plus the away support will be inconsequential in the SFL3. His hopes for extra money if the IPO flops are pretty dire.
He is going to have a few other options …
(1) Sell some players in January – but there is no MacGregor or Naismith or Davis that would give him the millions – I think that is where his plan went awry – he did not realise they could walk away. His plan was to sell the big guns in July – that source of money has vanished much to his chagrin.
(2) A long cup run at home getting draws against SPL teams – many draws/replays – but these are all shared with the other clubs so not a major source – plus you have Swally who has a penchant for losing in cups.
(3) Friendlies against European or English teams – could be a few but this won’t keep them going for long.
(4) Tap existing investors – they already put up money on promises of a quick return – they are nto going to give more money easily.
(5) Find other investors – no one came in before – and if its a lot of money, they won’t let him run the show or get the money
(6) Sell Ibrox or Murray Park and lease it back – unless this is being done already
———–
Nice summary. I was actually wondering about your point 6 myself. Murray Park is kind of superfluous if the managerial tradition of talent development basically involves a checkbook.
DP – Goosy has got some evidence that Murray Park is superfluous in another way – it may have Flating Charge on it held by CW’s father for the company he has from BVI. So that one he may not be able to sell/lease back since it is already………
Another item that I missed out is to cut back
Instead of taking the team to Annan the night before, get a mini van and drive on the morning of the game. Would save a lot of money maybe!
And don’t waste time going to meetings in Geneva that have no meaning for you.
Cut cloth is not one of his options apparently
TSFM – I need a spell checker installed on Word Press lol
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 05:52
1 0 Rate This
Instead of impressing them with a realistic business plan and being open and transparent – its easier to tell them nonsens about European summits, Disney and Dallas Cowboys and then wear an orange top.
———————
It does smack of desperation. Either that or just plain daft. Yes, that RM thread was kind of juvenile. I don’t go near those forums but I did read the thread. Proves the point made here that he is, whether he realises it or not, appealing to those who wish to carry on the non-football stuff. You really do wonder what on earth brought Green to Glasgow.
Listen to Gordon Smith also saying what a great marketing ploy it was to sell “Dutch” tops for this final.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y27NJ7wzuUE&feature=g-hist
Morning all.
Catching up on about 2 days posts.just some thoughts:
1.WRT Lord Nimmos report,if club continues unbroken then surely any punishment(if found guilty) is easily applied.Have the SFA/SPL outflanked CG on this?.
2.Merchandising.
someone posted during the week that T’RFC players seemed to be wearing a mixture of shorts.Do T’RFC have a strip deal?.have they launched any new products recently?.
We do know that CG has stated that his new “joint venture”,Rangers Retail,will soon be up and running and all funds raised will now go there,instead of JJB Sports.The fact that Rangers Retail is a wholly owned subsidiary of sportsdirect.com seems to be being conveniently ignored.We’re now promised a mega deal(the biggest ever) with Adidas and merchandising raising £30-40m.I’d have thought Donnay,Londsdale or another Ashley brand would have been more likely.
This brings me to:
3.Promises.
This week alone we’ve had Adidas deals,meetings with high powered americans(Chuck Blazer),tie-ups with The Dallas Cowboys etc.
The problem with this is that sooner rather than later,our little Yorkshire Pudding is going to have to deliver on these,almost certainly before the IPO.
RFC fans are not noted for their patience.Another couple of bad results and history shows that they’ll quickly turn against CG(unless he’s bought that history also and changes it to suit his needs).
Business investors will not invest if all they see is a string of broken promises.We’ll see what the IPO brings because,IMO, an IPO is basically a promise.
Invest in me and I’ll do this for you.
Question is,will enough people trust CG to deliver on his promises?.
Morning, back of the Freedom of Information trail – looking to understand if the Scottish Government have attempted to lobby HMRC on the administration, liquidation of Rangers FC.
Its highly unlikely that HMRC would reveal details of the identities of the authors of the communications (should these exist) and the substance of any communications under FOI. Thus the best option (in my opinion) in terms of securing a response, is to understand the extent to which communications between the Scottish Government, elected MSPs, who are members of the SNP parliamentary group on the subject of RFC exist.
Details of the request enclosed – will keep you all posted on progress.
I seek details of all communication between the Scottish Government and HMRC since 01-Feb-2012 through 31-Aug-2012 on the subject of the administration, possible liquidation and the possibility that HMRC could consider a range of strategies that could assist Rangers FC to continue to operate. Specifically: the date of communication, mode/format of communication (e.g. telephone, letter) and whether the communication originated from the Scottish Government or elected members of the Scottish Parliament (MSP), who are members of the Scottish National Party (SNP)
For the avoidance of doubt I do not seek the identities of the originators of the communications, other than if they are a member of the Scottish Government or an elected SNP MSP. I also do not seek any information on the substance of the communications, if such communications exist.
I appreciate that there is a significant public interest in the administration and subsequent liquidation of Rangers FC and that many aspects of this event are of interest to the public. In the context of this information request I believe that there is a legitimate public interest in the release of the requested information as this would help determine if the Scottish Government or members of the SNP have attempted to lobby HMRC on the matters described herein. I understand that governmental assistance to a football club is contrary to the rules laid down by FIFA and that there is a public interest in establishing whether the Scottish Government have moved to try and secure such assistance.
I ask that the personal data provided herein is solely used for the purposes of managing this information request.
Duff &Phelps in the news again. Do they have any case studies of successful outcomes? http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19685319
HMRC to “sniff out” celebrities, soccer players and managers who dodge tax. They may have to “account for every penny” and could face fines of up to £100,000.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207197/Taxman-target-1m-home-owners-new-anti-affluence-crackdown-government-widens-net-tax-dodgers.html
torrejohnbhoy says:
September 23, 2012 at 08:14
3.Promises.
This week alone we’ve had Adidas deals,meetings with high powered americans(Chuck Blazer),tie-ups with The Dallas Cowboys etc.
The problem with this is that sooner rather than later,our little Yorkshire Pudding is going to have to deliver on these,almost certainly before the IPO.
RFC fans are not noted for their patience.Another couple of bad results and history shows that they’ll quickly turn against CG(unless he’s bought that history also and changes it to suit his needs).
Business investors will not invest if all they see is a string of broken promises.We’ll see what the IPO brings because,IMO, an IPO is basically a promise.
Invest in me and I’ll do this for you.
Question is,will enough people trust CG to deliver on his promises?.
******************
Torrejohnboy – I agree with you but don’t agree they will turn on him – my reason is that he has so far been called to task for any broken promises so far. His first was to rename Murray park……….
Since then we have had Euro 12 players being looked at for T’Rangers for signings, Ibrox being renamed for vast sums of money, investor details, globol merchanising etc
All promised
All to excite the Bears
Nothing delivered
No challenge from the Bears – why? Because he is stroking their ego while being photographed in orange RFC shirts, fighting the SFA/SPL/SFL that PL is supposedly controlling….
They will not turn against him soon – many also know he is their last hope…….and while he contineus to say the right things to them, he will be their hero – they think he has come to help them in “their Boyne”, as RM posters noted
He wil have excuses after excuses for not doing all of these and more – all them blaming everyone for ganging up on him and thus not enabling him to do anything. He will walk away and blame us…
doontheslope says:
September 23, 2012 at 00:03
2
1
Rate This
Apologies for last post, TSFM, about Harry Redknapp commenting on the ‘lack of integrity’ in the Chelsea game. Just pull it.
I actually think Ol’ Harry is the dog’s bollox. Apparently, so does the dog’s bank manager.
———————————————————————————————————————————-
Doontheslope…your post would raise a few eyebrows in this part of Englandshire.
Our Harry is certainly regarded as a great pundit round here but it is too widely known that he is far from “lily white”
But hey who can say in all honesty that they are lily white…certainly not me!
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 08:44
torrejohnbhoy says:
September 23, 2012 at 08:14
3.Promises.
This week alone we’ve had Adidas deals,meetings with high powered americans(Chuck Blazer),tie-ups with The Dallas Cowboys etc.
The problem with this is that sooner rather than later,our little Yorkshire Pudding is going to have to deliver on these,almost certainly before the IPO.
RFC fans are not noted for their patience.Another couple of bad results and history shows that they’ll quickly turn against CG(unless he’s bought that history also and changes it to suit his needs).
Business investors will not invest if all they see is a string of broken promises.We’ll see what the IPO brings because,IMO, an IPO is basically a promise.
Invest in me and I’ll do this for you.
Question is,will enough people trust CG to deliver on his promises?.
******************
Torrejohnboy – I agree with you but don’t agree they will turn on him – my reason is that he has so far been called to task for any broken promises so far. His first was to rename Murray park……….
Since then we have had Euro 12 players being looked at for T’Rangers for signings, Ibrox being renamed for vast sums of money, investor details, globol merchanising etc
All promised
All to excite the Bears
Nothing delivered
No challenge from the Bears – why? Because he is stroking their ego while being photographed in orange RFC shirts, fighting the SFA/SPL/SFL that PL is supposedly controlling….
They will not turn against him soon – many also know he is their last hope…….and while he contineus to say the right things to them, he will be their hero – they think he has come to help them in “their Boyne”, as RM posters noted
He wil have excuses after excuses for not doing all of these and more – all them blaming everyone for ganging up on him and thus not enabling him to do anything. He will walk away and blame us…
——————————————————————————————————————–
You may well be right,EC.
I just feel that now we’re actually playing football,a few more bad results will see the usual clamour for new signings etc.I know there’s a transfer embargo but the RFC fans will expect that to be ignored.They are “Ra Peepil” and therefore entitled to do as they wish.
They will also,IMO, expect another “billionaire” to step forward to take the club forward.It’s their way.
Generally,in my experience,any discussion with RFC fans,normally good company,ends up with the seige mentality.They are not interested.We’ve been punished enough,We’ll go to Div 3,not because we deserve it,but that way we can bankrupt you.WATP,No surrender.
Talk about anything else and everything’s fine.Try putting facts,never mind hearsay to them regarding RFC and generally,that’s where you end up.
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2012 at 04:29
Mr Spiers has been busy reading too …
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/sfl-division-three/newco-rangers-must-answer-oldco-charges-insists-commission-chief-1-2542646
———————————————————————————————————-
Glad we were able to point him in the right direction! 🙂
Now, about those other wee questions like who actually owns Ibrox/Murray Park and are their charges over them, how much McCoist has paid back of his EBT, just where are Ticketus in this new RFC world,…..etc.
Mr Spiers, you’ve started so how about finishing and rescuing some of your crediblity?
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 05:15
6
0
Rate This
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?s=afab68c58de4ba4ad028b8f289614fca&showtopic=238931&st=0
Yep – he is an idiot officially!
Anyone pandering to the Bears in an orange top (or tangerine as SDM said at the time) needs educated on what he is encouraging in the WoS cesspool……….
=========================================================================
EC…(…in the WoS cesspool…)…what a sadly accurate description of what we have (sadly) left behind.
My late father often made the comment, whilst travelling through Glasgow on a late bus…”…and we send missionaries to foreign countries…)
From the coverage of the Scottish MSM over the last six months, it would appear that certain parts have a vested interest in maintaining the “status quo”.
As I have already posted….I weep for my city and my country!
jmaclure says:
September 22, 2012 at 22:41
1 15 Rate This
weebrenda says:
September 22, 2012 at 22:24
Well here is some other figures to ponder
Up to and including the Rangers v Celtc match on 18/9/11 there
had been 567,173 people at 45 matches, an average of 12,604
So far this season 382,875 have attended 39 matches, an average of 9,817
I would say the alarm bells are ringing very loudly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You do realise that these stats mean nothing. All they prove is that this season, Ibrox attendences are being counted in the SFL3 figures. That’s not exactly news.
How do the stats stack up if you ignore Celtic and Rangers home games from last season and Celtic and Dundee home games from this season (counting the same number of corresponding matches in the season so far)?
‘..are there charges…’
Duh, too early in the morning obviously.
Newco was not admitted to membership of the SPL. Instead it became the operator of Rangers FC within the Third Division of the Scottish Football League (“the SFL”). It also became a member of the Scottish Football Association (“the SFA”), the governing body of the sport in Scotland. These events were reflected in an agreement among the SFA, the SPL, the SFL, Oldco and Newco which was concluded on 27 July 2012 and in this Commission’s proceedings is referred to as “the 5-Way Agreement”.
The SPL was incorporated in 1998. Its share capital consists of sixteen shares of £1 each, of which twelve have been issued. Oldco (Rangers Football Club PLC) was one of the founding members of the SPL, and remained a member until 3 August 2012 when the members of the SPL approved the registration of a transfer of its share in the SPL to The Dundee Football Club Limited. Each of the twelve members owns and operates an association football club which plays in the Scottish Premier League (“the League”). The club owned and operated by Oldco played in the League from 1998 until 2012 under the name of Rangers Football Club (“Rangers FC”).
This is taken from Paul McConville’s blog. Can anyone explain this to me?
EC,
I agree nothing has been delivered and like the Murray days,if they get some sort of success on the pitch,lots will be conveniently ignored.Another couple of bad results,though,then I think there will be more than a few angry bears.WRT Green,they’ll just expect another “billionaire to step forward,maybe even a Bomber Brown.they’re part of the “fabric of Scotland” after all.
Obviously I can’t forecast results but if Motherwell were to win on Wednesday night then the World Record quadruple(didn’t another Glasgow club win 5 trophies in a season) will become a possible double and we’re not out of September yet.
Re the IPO.
The facts are that nobody was interested in investing in Rangers when they were winning titles and getting to Europa Cup finals.
What has changed since that time?
Well the debt has gone (if we beeeive Ticketus are not sniffing around in the background) and some running costs cut – mostly player numbers and associated salaries. Therfore that makes it a better prospect financially.
What has not changed is that, so far, they still have a large fan base willing to part with (albeit a lower amount) cash for season tickets and additional pay on the day fans. Which also acts as a juicy worm for investors.
However with some dodgy results so far, an inexperienced manager and no guarentee of playing in the top flight at home or abroad anytime soo, who is really that interested in a lower league Scottish football team other than their own fans.
We have heard all the bumph about world wide branding before. Marketing budgets and sponsorship cash is tight these days and the big playersin those fields will want a decent return.
IMHO (like the taxcase before it) there are far too many uncertainties to make T’Rangers attractive to serious players.
The only people that will invest are the growling bears themselves minimum£500 a pop), a handful of investors looking at the whole thing as a bit of a punt and folk who will exploit Green’s desperation
Concallan,
Those are quotes from this document:
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/SPL%20Commission%20reasons%20for%20decision%20of%2012%20September%202012.doc
PS
I know I keep harping back to the Dragon’s Den but thebasic principles are the same.
How many times do we see a pitch telling the Dragons that they have orders and agreements in place with big stores and distributors only for it to disintegrate into a lot of if buts and maybe’s on closer examination. It then becomes a very quick ‘I’m Out’ from the Dragons.
Serious players will under take that knd of due diligence but will your average Sevcovian?
Will they be brave enough to look deep into the smoke and mirrors.
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:26
Danish.
I should have explained that it was from Paul’s blog on the commission. I’ts just that I am confused by Rangers being a member of the S.P.L. and also member of the S.F.L. at the sametime.
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 08:44
torrejohnboy – I agree with you but don’t agree they will turn on him – my reason is that he has so far been called to task for any broken promises so far. His first was to rename Murray park……
I doubt very much we will turn on Green, he is pressing all the right buttons just now. He has won over the support by his use of Bluster and hyperbole. I don’t believe Green expects anyone to believe him, it is just a way to raise moral and interest. These verbal communications are aimed purely at the supporters and to provide sound bites for the media. I know of no one in our support who takes them without a pinch of salt. These interviews are probably drafted to have a time to live of a day or two, he certainly will not be expecting to deliver on them or even be questioned on them, I doubt he would even remember them all.
The serious investors will expect a professional prospectus and for the IPO he will have to deal with reality. I am hoping this is what the Chairman Murray is working on in the background.
Some questions though, do you not need accounts for one years trading for AIM? I am sure I have read on here that AIM requires that you must hold your shares for minimum one year?
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 05:36
That pretty much sums it up for me.
They started with certain assumptions. Including SPL football, one year out of Europe, TUPE players available for sale, Ally McCoist having a modicum of talent.
All of these went wrong. Now they have fewer options, and they are reducing all the time. They are out of the Ramsden’s Cup, fourth in the SFL3, drawn 3 away games, losing the “feel good factor”
The share issue is increasingly looking like the only option (pun intended) and is increasingly looking doomed to failure.
It’s still all other people’s fault as far as The Rangers’ support are concerned, still all lies and anti Rangers agenda.
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2012 at 05:16
If, in spite of the current media blitz highlighting the ‘injustices’ Rangers have suffered, the share thing flops – then what? His 20 investors will have to keep the ship afloat, I take it.
==========================
Or if it’s not a viable business model they can simply dispose of the assets for what they can get and shut the business down.
It really depends how much they want to keep it going.
davis58 says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:37
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 08:44
…
Some questions though, do you not need accounts for one years trading for AIM? I am sure I have read on here that AIM requires that you must hold your shares for minimum one year?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think what you are referring to is the requirement for investors in an AIM company to hold their shares for an year after the IPO. Someone posted a link to the AIM rules a week or so ago and I believe that was what was said.
Davis58/torrejohnboy – they will turn on Alastair long before they turn on CG – as always the manager is the one to go – never the cretins that thought he was good enough to do the job in the first place. If Motherwell won or Forres manage an upset, Alastair will be listening to the fans sing the same song as they did against Dundee in the 80s. Who would replace him? Maybe the cardigan will be back?
On IPO – yes he needs to show accounts but did nto see he could not do it for 1 year
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_public_offering
Interstingly he will have to spend a lot of money to do this and also disclose a lot of financial informaiton – I think this is why he is testing the market carefully first….
Disadvantages of an IPO
There are several disadvantages to completing an initial public offering:
Significant legal, accounting and marketing costs, many of which are ongoing
Requirement to disclose financial and business information
Meaningful time, effort and attention required of senior management
Risk that required funding will not be raised
Public dissemination of information which may be useful to competitors, suppliers and customers
wottpi says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:18
And more importantly the share issues tried before by SDM were all before the big Wall street crashes – nowadays no one is trying to get into the share market unless they know what they are doing.
The only ones really interested in buying shares are Bears to frame them – that won’t buy him enough dosh – he needs the city – but if they are not interested in Man Utd why would they care about an SFL3 team – would be better trying to float Aldershot::-)
Statistics prove only what the producer of the numbers wants us to see, something that always seems to be missed when discussing this subject is that fact that 40k supporters from the Ibrox club (see what I did there?) are still going to watch football in Scotland every 2nd week and well done to them for doing that. But don’t ignore the obvious, what are the average numbers for The Ramsdens Cup? The 3rd Division? Or the earlier rounds of The League Cup? Are they not important for the Scottish game at grass root level?
Yes the numbers are down overall but as many posters have already pointed out, why should Scottish Football be immune to the financial mess that we are living through just now. Businesses lose money, some downsize, some cease to operate, some even go bust and are not in a position to pay credtors. All other clubs in the SPL are currently downsizing to prevent these scenarios and the reason the “crazy” decision done in the name of sporting integrity was taken was because one club refused to make those changes some years ago, instead they chose to seek practices that may be deemed as cheating.
Well you know the old song “oh I’d rather be a crazy than a cheat…”
———————————————————————————————————–
jmclure
“You can quote sporting integrity all you want, but realism will have to come to the fore sometime, no sport in the world can afford to alienate 50,000 customers.”
———————————————————————————————————–
Well I can think of at least 4 multi-billion Euro customers who are seeking nuclear technology, for some strange reason, the rest of the world are alienating these customers.
What excuse could you possibly give for that? Apparently something about looking after the future…. Bampots!
But you are correct as far as sporting customers go, football cannot in its current form afford to alienate 50k supporters so I say, let’s change the form.
concallen says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:34
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:26
Danish.
I should have explained that it was from Paul’s blog on the commission. I’ts just that I am confused by Rangers being a member of the S.P.L. and also member of the S.F.L. at the sametime.
————
No problem, I find it confusing too, but I’m not used to reading that form of language. The quotes are points [7] and [4] of the document. Read in context (a few times) they begin to make sense. However, I’m not sure if the sense I’m making of it is nonsense. It appears to state that the club that played in the SPL from 1998 until 2012 is now operating in Div 3. It seems to be making a distiction between the football club and the company running it. I cannot fathom whether he is stating that a club can live on as a kind of spiritual entity when other physical (company) structures collapse. I suppose that could mean that the original Airdrieonians still exist, somewhere. That might cheer the otherwise glum Jim Traynor up. Hopefully, someone versed in legal terminology will simply it.
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:59
Disadvantages of an IPO
There are several disadvantages to completing an initial public offering:
Significant legal, accounting and marketing costs, many of which are ongoing
Requirement to disclose financial and business information
Meaningful time, effort and attention required of senior management
Risk that required funding will not be raised
Public dissemination of information which may be useful to competitors, suppliers and customers, as well as those internet bampots on TSFM
That’s better – will update WIKI accordingly later lol 🙂
davis58 says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:37
==========================================================================
Think I read the same.
Did I also read that you need one years financial projections,or something like that,I’m not sure?.
I don’t know the law wrt IPOs but I assume CG would have to give a true picture of where he sees T’RFC going over the next year or so.to not do so would surely be breaking some law or other.
I wouldn’t think he could fill his prospectus with promises of deals with the likes of Adidas,The Dallas Cowboys etc if said deals did not exist.
Have any of these companies announces they’re in talks with CG as yet?.
If I recall correctly,CG is only asking for prospective investors to register an interest in the share issue during October.The actual share issue will be some time after this.
Is there a timescale,legally for this?.
i’d suggest sometime before Xmas.Smashing wee prezzie for the weans.Shares in Rangers Football Club 2012,or the holding company thereof.
Will T’RFC need proper banking facilities to process applications or can they use the infamous “Continuous Credit/Debit Card Scheme”?.
How will all this sit with AIM?.
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:03
Re the buying a share to frame notion, I read somewhere that the minimum initial investment would be £500, and then multiples of that. I can’t remember where I read it and can’t confirm it’s accuracy. However it does seem to make sense. It would surely be financially prohibitive to sell in quantities much lower.
People might be able to do that later, but they probably won’t be buying shares at their market value, they will be buying a souvenir package, which will cost them more like £60, little if anything will go to the PLC.
concallen says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:17
As I understand it what Nimmo’s document is saying, in line with known SFA thinking and quoted rules, is that the ‘Club’ is a separate entity from the ‘owner and operator’. Not a separate legal entity but a separate entity none the less.
This allows the transfer of the ‘Club’ from one owner to another i.e. the ‘Club’ could be purchased by Newco/Sevco.
This then allows the history to be ported over with the ‘Club’ but also brings exposure to any sanction(s) that may arise from previous actions of the ‘Club’. This seems only fair.
It is noted by Nimmo that the new ‘owner and operator’ are not to be held responsible for any such sanction(s) but additionally it is noted that the ‘owner and operator’ may be affected by any such sanction(s) on the ‘Club’ it now owns, hence the encouragement to Newco/Sevco to attend and participate in the Tribunal to effectively protect their interests.
By becoming a member of the SFA Newco/Sevco have obviously accepted that these are the rules of the game. Whether this was fully appreciated at the time is unclear as the scale of sanctions can extend to expulsion from the league, a sanction that was considered by the earlier Tribunal for what many would adjudge to be much lesser transgressions…..
Morning all. Just a thought but if t’rangers are found guilty by the SPL commision, then surely the SFA are obliged to investigate the rest of Murray’ tenure( 1988-2001).
reidy134 says:
September 22, 2012 at 23:44
Jmaclure
I’m interested to see your research and proven analysis that the reason for reduced crowds are wholly down to the demise of Sevco (that were once were RFC) and not due to the recession or the fact that most households are earning less to pay more for their day to day bills. The arrogance of that post is astounding.
————————————————————————————————————————–
It’s more to do with lack of competition and boredom, don’t you think?
Celtic are the only club who can string 8 or 9 wins together, the others will fall by the wayside, it is a foregone conclusion.The SPL winners can be carved on the trophy now for the next 3 years.
Who is willing to pay top dollar to go to the theatre to watch a play when you already know whodunnit?
redlichtie says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:17
——————————————————————————————————————–
Maybe jumping the gun here.
If RFC are found guilty of playing illegally registered players over a period of 12/13 years,both in domestic and european competitions,what sanction other than suspension/expulsion would be suitable?.
Also,will UEFA/FIFA become involved after the Independent Commision rules.If RFC are found guilty I assume a lot of clubs in europe will not be too happy and will report the matter to UEFA.Can UEFA just sit back if this comes to pass?.
If I am understanding Lord Nimmo’s statement correctly, and Newco can be held accountable for sins of Oldco; should this not prick up the ears of Oldco’s creditors? Is this accountability purely on football matters pertaining to rules of SPL/SFA?
On another tangent:
If Charles Green has done a “deal” with Adidas, then how does that square with the current deal with Umbro (and for that matter, Mike Ashley)?
Nike purchased Umbro in 2007, and may now be looking to offload the ailing co to SportsDirect (whom previously held a 30% stake before sale to Nike).
Therefore, I don’t believe that Nike or SportsDirect would let “Rangers” leave their current deal so freely if they are one of football’s giants and to main competitor in Adidas.
jmaclure says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:21
Jmaclure
I’m interested to see your research and proven analysis that the reason for reduced crowds are wholly down to the demise of Sevco (that were once were RFC) and not due to the recession or the fact that most households are earning less to pay more for their day to day bills. The arrogance of that post is astounding.
————————————————————————————————————————–
It’s more to do with lack of competition and boredom, don’t you think?
=============================
Your statistics are at best questionable, given that you have not factored in the obvious difference between Rangers’ attendances from last year and Dundee’s from this. Or the fact that there may be a drop in SPL attendances, but them being maintained overall (throughout the leagues)
However you are clearly ignoring this and suggesting reasons to explain why the drop occurred.
The drop in SPL attendances is primarily due to the fact that Dundee have a much lower level of support, particularly at home. The average attendance in SFL 3 however will be through the roof compared to last year.
In addition, the lack of Rangers’ SPL home attendances will have no effect on the income of the other clubs, as Rangers keep all of that anyway. So to suggest that a drop of average attendances directly relates to a drop in income for the other clubs is a specious argument.
torrejohnboy Seftember 23 2012 at 10:17 If they are found guilty UEFA may well get involved but any financial compensation to other clubs would be far too complicated to implement. However as a consequence of this I feel that t’rangers may well find themselves expelled from UEFA competitions for a period equal to the time they were fielding improperly registered players.
Agrajag says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:31
So to suggest that a drop of average attendances directly relates to a drop in income for the other clubs is a specious argument.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Apart from Celtic at the moment every £1 is a prisoner in the SPL for the other 11 clubs. Any drop in attendance hurts.
But if you are not convinced lets see when the next club goes under.
No ‘exclusives’ from guidi then? 🙂
Agrajag says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:17
exiledcelt says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:03
Re the buying a share to frame notion, I read somewhere that the minimum initial investment would be £500, and then multiples of that. I can’t remember where I read it and can’t confirm it’s accuracy. However it does seem to make sense. It would surely be financially prohibitive to sell in quantities much lower.
People might be able to do that later, but they probably won’t be buying shares at their market value, they will be buying a souvenir package, which will cost them more like £60, little if anything will go to the PLC.
*******
will wait to see the minimum – but even if you had all 35,000 season tickets all buy minimum at 600, that would be 21 million. Throw in a few more overseas folks (hence his wee campaign abroad) and he could be up there to get enough to cover Ticketus/Octopus and a wee bit for his work.However we all know many of the 35,000 ST holders are kids who won’t be buying shares and many of the adults bought STs due to the price and cannot afford 600 quid more………..
Plus his promise that no one (other than himself and/or Ticketus) can have more than 10 to 15% means he wants small onvestors money with no say in anything…..
He will win business man of the year/century if he pulls this off – I will also tip my hat to him 🙂
jmaclure says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:42
Agrajag says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:31
So to suggest that a drop of average attendances directly relates to a drop in income for the other clubs is a specious argument.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Apart from Celtic at the moment every £1 is a prisoner in the SPL for the other 11 clubs. Any drop in attendance hurts.
But if you are not convinced lets see when the next club goes under.
============================
I’m afraid that’s just more specious arguments.
Every pound was a prisoner before, and there were clubs on the brink of administration before Rangers were ejected from Scottish football.
Yes a drop in attendances is going to hurt. However only if those drops actually effect the clubs financially. If you want to put forward a reasoned argument it can only be based on each clubs average home attendance. The average attendances for the league are meaningless, as they include the difference between Rangers’ home attendances and Dundee’s.
Hence your misleading “statistic”. Average home attendances are down by 3,000 per game means nothing, however it is a good “headline figure” as it suggests that the predicted Armageddon has arrived.
Agrajag says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:31
jmaclure says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:21
Jmaclure
I’m interested to see your research and proven analysis that the reason for reduced crowds are wholly down to the demise of Sevco (that were once were RFC) and not due to the recession or the fact that most households are earning less to pay more for their day to day bills. The arrogance of that post is astounding.
————————————————————————————————————————–
It’s more to do with lack of competition and boredom, don’t you think?
=============================
Your statistics are at best questionable, given that you have not factored in the obvious difference between Rangers’ attendances from last year and Dundee’s from this. Or the fact that there may be a drop in SPL attendances, but them being maintained overall (throughout the leagues)
However you are clearly ignoring this and suggesting reasons to explain why the drop occurred.
The drop in SPL attendances is primarily due to the fact that Dundee have a much lower level of support, particularly at home. The average attendance in SFL 3 however will be through the roof compared to last year.
In addition, the lack of Rangers’ SPL home attendances will have no effect on the income of the other clubs, as Rangers keep all of that anyway. So to suggest that a drop of average attendances directly relates to a drop in income for the other clubs is a specious argument.
————————————————————————————————————————
Can I also suggest that yesterdays attendance at Celtic Park was reduced,not only because of the holiday weekend but also due to the fact that,by and large,the kids who hold the £50 season ticket could not attend,unless they paid an extra £79 to upgrade their ticket.
To those who don’t know what I mean,here’s an explanation.
CFC normally sell a concession at a full price,to include RFC games,this season cost £129 or a ST without RFC games at £50.
This season,as RFC are not in the league,CFC made the stupid decision to ask the £50 ST holders to cough up an extra £79 or they would be denied entry to the 2 new games.In effect,the kids were asked to pay an extra £79 to watch Dundee twice.£39.50 a game.Unsurprisingly,most said no thanks.I’d assume a few parents who would normally take the kids along,decided not to bother.these kids will all be back at the next home league game.
torrejohnbhoy
Well said! A mere TU would not suffice.
Gents – ignore jmclure – he is not worth debating with – he only answers what he wants to and is not worth the effort. He comes on here to deflect us to SPL doom and gloom.
Every pound is a prisoner for Charlie too – and he has less chance of making it to Easter than anyone else in Scottish football since his outgoings far oustretch his incomings…..
As for the bet on the first club to go under, I know what team I would offer odds on to
He’s a number
Assume Rangers home attendances of 45,000
Assume Dundee home attendances of 5,000
That’s a difference of 40,000
Divide that by 6 (games per week) and that’s 6,666 drop per game
However that’s just home games so half it, that’s 3,333 drop per game.
ttm1961 says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:39
torrejohnboy Seftember 23 2012 at 10:17 If they are found guilty UEFA may well get involved but any financial compensation to other clubs would be far too complicated to implement. However as a consequence of this I feel that t’rangers may well find themselves expelled from UEFA competitions for a period equal to the time they were fielding improperly registered players.
———————————————————————————————————————-
That may perhaps deal with the UEFA side of things though I am unsure of any precedents that indicate this level of punishment.
For the SFA/SPL however this can has perhaps been kicked down the road as far as it will go.
A finding by Nimmo’s Tribunal that Rangers have in fact been making undeclared payments to players for many years will doubtless lead to recommendations for punishment.
Stripping of titles is almost a foregone conclusion.
Much more serious for Newco/Sevco is the potential for expulsion. The earlier Tribunal came very close to this very sanction for lesser transgressions.
In the circumstances I’m struggling to see how Nimmo’s Tribunal could recommend anything else if the evidence against Rangers stands up to scrutiny.
A possibly fair outcome from Nimmo might be recommendations that there was :
(a) stripping of relevant titles and trophies
(b) expulsion from the league
(c) a prohibition on re-application for a period of three years
This would also have the merit from the SFA’s point of view of being recommended by an independent Tribunal and at the same time meet likely pressure from UEFA to be seen to be taking this matter seriously. Exclusion from European football would be a direct by-product of such SFA punishments.
ttm1961 says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:39
torrejohnboy Seftember 23 2012 at 10:17 If they are found guilty UEFA may well get involved but any financial compensation to other clubs would be far too complicated to implement. However as a consequence of this I feel that t’rangers may well find themselves expelled from UEFA competitions for a period equal to the time they were fielding improperly registered players.
——————————————————————————————————————–
I concur.
A long ban from European football seems the obvious route.
Surely any potential large investor in Newco would have to factor this possibility into his calculations before deciding whether to invest.
Question,
Does CG have to reveal all the possible bad news,eg,possible expulsion,euro bans etc in his prospectus?.
Just asking cause if I was interested then read that,the prospectus would soon be in the bin.
Brenda – will take Guidi days to put together a few sentences – bu the time it comes out it is old news – that is why they all claim to aways be the first to know everything. They just are a tad late in getting it into print 🙂
redlichtie says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:17
1 0 Rate This
concallen says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:17
————–
It is noted by Nimmo that the new ‘owner and operator’ are not to be held responsible for any such sanction(s) but additionally it is noted that the ‘owner and operator’ may be affected by any such sanction(s) on the ‘Club’ it now owns, hence the encouragement to Newco/Sevco to attend and participate in the Tribunal to effectively protect their interests.
By becoming a member of the SFA Newco/Sevco have obviously accepted that these are the rules of the game. Whether this was fully appreciated at the time is unclear as the scale of sanctions can extend to expulsion from the league, a sanction that was considered by the earlier Tribunal for what many would adjudge to be much lesser transgressions…..
—————–
Thanks redlichtie. Nicely put.
I suppose that Newco not being responsible for any sanctions means that if there were to be any financial penalties these would fall on the operators of oldco. Whyte or Murray – or both?
I wonder what punishments are available if the case goes against ‘Rangers FC’?
In theory, you could have backdated punishments or a current suspension imposed? Or it could be a slap on the wrist and a stern warning for being extremely naughty. M. Schumacher was retrospectively disqualified from the 1997 F1 championship and lost all his points, but he raced the season after. In cycling there are disqualifications and ongoing bans, with whole teams being kicked out on occasion. Considering that some (more lowly football teams) have been dealt draconian justice for a mere administrative bagatelle, you can only wonder where this is going.
If the club were to be suspended that could even lead to a big ‘For Sale’ sign on those assets Charles picked up for ‘a steal’. Where there’s muck there’s brass.
There are few countries in the civilised world where a respected law firm and high court judge would be accused of plotting the downfall of an already failed football club. Unfortunately we have the misfortune of living in one. That the msm and various media pundits help fuel these accusations is entirely deplorable, even if it is predictable. We can only be glad that we are in an age where none of us are dependent on “journalists” for information. Had these events all taken place a few years ago then outcomes would be entirely different and simply swept under the carpet. However, in this technological age, even if sanctions that are imposed after all investigations are complete, prove unsatisfactory to any of us, we will know that the truth is out there. For me sentencing is a little less important than verdict, the suffering that will be endured by supporters of newco for as long as they attempt to establish themselves in domestic football will be longlasting and something they will never be allowed to forget. CG, [Edit- Ally] and whoever who comes after them, will never remove the story of the last few years and they will be embarassed by it whenever we remind them, which will be often.
Would suspension/expulsion be immediate?.
I would think so.you’d be devaluing Div 3 if you allowed a team just to finish the season,knowing it won’t be playing the following year.Just remove their results and that’s it.Not ideal but simply the best option(pun intended).
Did Turnbill Hutton not say in one of his interviews that Div 3 was the best place to put RFC(IA) because any future fallout would be easier to deal with?.
Final thought from me before I head off into the night over here in BKK to go watch Man Utd v Liverpool down the pub….
There was some debate on here about what deals lawyers woudl do before trials – in USA they are big on the deals so as not to waste the courts time. If someone pleads not guilty and makes the victim have to have the ordeal of testifying, sentences are increased.
Charlie should have taken any deal – I would have went nuts he got it, but from his perspective he should have taken it.
His problem was he needs to make tons of money quickly for soem strange reason – if he had not “bought the history” he could have started afresh/anew with a smaller base, same stadium and different players.
He has now left himself open to expulsion which was what Bill Millar wanted assurances wouldl not happen. Seems CG has no assurances but I think we all agree that won’t happen (unfortunately) – but with this uncertain future, how can he do an IPO?
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:59
redlichtie says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:17
1 0 Rate This
concallen says:
September 23, 2012 at 09:17
Thanks redlichtie. Nicely put.
I suppose that Newco not being responsible for any sanctions means that if there were to be any financial penalties these would fall on the operators of oldco. Whyte or Murray – or both?
I wonder what punishments are available if the case goes against ‘Rangers FC’?
In theory, you could have backdated punishments or a current suspension imposed? Or it could be a slap on the wrist and a stern warning for being extremely naughty. M. Schumacher was retrospectively disqualified from the 1997 F1 championship and lost all his points, but he raced the season after. In cycling there are disqualifications and ongoing bans, with whole teams being kicked out on occasion. Considering that some (more lowly football teams) have been dealt draconian justice for a mere administrative bagatelle, you can only wonder where this is going.
If the club were to be suspended that could even lead to a big ‘For Sale’ sign on those assets Charles picked up for ‘a steal’. Where there’s muck there’s brass.
—————————————————————————————————–
Nimmo took great pains to state that the ‘Club’ was indeed liable for any punishment relating to any wrongdoing prior to the takeover by Newco/Sevco.
Paraphrasing Nimmo, if such punishment affects Newco/Sevco as new owners of the ‘Club’ then that is effectively unfortunate but acceptable collateral damage….rules is rules!
That’s not a light at the end of the tunnel for Newco/Sevco but an oncoming train.
Brenda says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:45
No ‘exclusives’ from guidi then?
———————————————————————————————————————–
Didn’t see any from Stunney this morning either.
did he remember to TUPE over to WordPress?.
Maybe he’s having a well earned break.those Sunday Supplements do your back in 😆 .
John maclure: Celtic haven’t strung 8 or 9 wins together yet, in fact they have been performing under par or against teams outperforming depending on your viewpoint. And more power to those teams’ elbows (nb not a mcculloch reference).
So “Rangers” with an unbroken history are apparently still playing football, some good results at home, poor away but I feel that will rectify itself as the players get more used to the surroundings and style of play in their new division. There are 5/10/20 millionaires (still unnamed) who are backing the club.
What history has shown us is that Rangers fans are not prepared to put their hands in their pockets and financially back their team – I don’t mean season tix or even debenture because ultimately they are buying something there, but actually buying shares (again) in any great numbers. The disastrous rights offering which raised only £1.5m at a time where Rangers were mighty indeed, when markets were.more buoyant than today and Rangers were sitting at the top table seems to indicate to me that this share issue will not go as swimmingly as some predict.
The idea of.any institutional investor putting money into rangers is laughable. If they have an unbroken track record in anything its losing money. I echo the comments that the disclosure of finances, required for a listing, will be the final straw.for any.investor who is.looking for more than a.framed memento.
So I am looking forward to the findings of the independent commission, the.BTC and now the IPO. Its going to bee a busy couple of.months on here,.which will also a) keep the site on track and b) gives us the chance to earn the credibility that RTC got over the many months it ran.
🙂
Brenda says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:53
torrejohnbhoy
Well said! A mere TU would not suffice.
———————————————————————————————————————-
Thanks very much.
What did I say?. 🙂
Sunday paper’s very quiet today I am a little surprised, with the MSM in this country though I’ve become used to that. The discredited Sun on Sunday appear’s to continue it’s long march to hell with it’s pro view of The Ranger’s. No surprise there though as it desperately seeks a new generation of reader’s willing to forgive there Hillsborough coverage. Thinking back to Mr Guidi and his I know a secret but I’m not telling with childish like laughter, who care’s It’s all coming out anyways and he’s scared along with many other’s. The Scottish press are about to be shown up and and I suspect many of there sphincter’s are already twitching.
One of the guys on KDS has worked out CGs Cowboys deal
” Dallas was deid and they brought it back to life…..
I can see the parrallels.
Brought back to the channel with the smallest audience. Set in the same location as the original, features some of the original players but nobody seriously thinks it’s the original.
Expected to only have a short lifespan”
torrejohnbhoy @ 11:20
For putting jmaclure in his place for talking tosh, I tried last night 🙂
Brenda says:
September 23, 2012 at 11:47
torrejohnbhoy @ 11:20
For putting jmaclure in his place for talking tosh, I tried last night
—————————————————————————————————————- Cheers brenda,
Just pointing out a fact,that’s all.
oldcobrokemyheartbycheating says:
September 23, 2012 at 11:33
============================
I’m afraid Mr Guidi has been caught out lying and making things up often enough to now be totally discredited.
Laughingly suggesting that he is “in the know” about something and has a story to break is just getting old. Anyone can come away with nebulous hints, it means nothing.
He is a joke, a decent journalist does not resort to such nonsense. If he had something big to report he would report it.
One more go, and then I give up! ‘Benelong’ and the koala? FFS!
Failed!
De-testing
jmaclure says:
September 22, 2012 at 21:46
What is there to be excited about now in the SPL?
___________________________________________________________________________
Cheats and Cheating no longer prosper. Biggest victory of all.
just want to see if this goes through
torrejohnbhoy says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:50
This season,as RFC are not in the league,CFC made the stupid decision to ask the £50 ST holders to cough up an extra £79 or they would be denied entry to the 2 new games.In effect,the kids were asked to pay an extra £79 to watch Dundee twice.£39.50 a game.Unsurprisingly,most said no thanks.I’d assume a few parents who would normally take the kids along,decided not to bother.these kids will all be back at the next home league game.
__________________________________________________________________________
Not quite the full story, TJB. Celtic advertised widely the closing date for the renewal of Season Books. It was on SSB each evening for about 4 weeks.
If the £50 season ticket was renewed by the advertised date then the price stood as before ie £50.
Those who complain about this – don’t now say that some were harshly dealt with.
redlichtie says:
September 23, 2012 at 10:57
Yes .rules is rules!
However he did state that the club was separate from the owner/company.and could be bought and sold. Now we seem to have an even bigger mess where the SPL claim rangers are the same club, the SFL always have so if we go to appeal to the SFA, are they not conflicted?
Indeed how do we reconcile the fact that Rangers if they are the same club, legally speaking as suggested by Lord Nimmo and 2 QCs, where in the Scottish and lSFL League cups in the first rounds. Do Brechin, East Fife and Falkirk have right of appeal?
As someone posted yesterday it is an absolute shambolic mess, the governing bodies cannot even agree amongst themselves. Shambolic.
Just testing…
.. oh, just to make this more interesting (maybe not) than a test. That stuff about Rangers only making mistakes in the paperwork, wasn’t it making small mistakes in paperwork that got several clubs thrown out of the Scottish Cup? And Rangers seem to have made the same mistakes 70+ times. The question is whether a mistake is an “honest” mistake or a “deliberate” mistake.
Of course they know that kind of argument would never stand up in court and is just a way of massaging the bears’ – a dangerous occupation if you think about it. After all what will the bears think about all these lies the MSM has fostered if the new Rangers hits an iceberg and goes down with all hands?
davis58 says:
September 23, 2012 at 12:32
……………….Shambolic.
—————————————————-
The ironic thing is that CG and Rangers fans would almost certainly agree with the ‘Club’ entity interpretation as it gives the footballing continuity they crave.
Unfortunately at the bottom of that piece of baggage is a nasty little beast called the Nimmo Tribunal.
The simple and straightforward way is for the Nimmo Tribunal to make its findings and recommendations known, hopefully/probably along the lines I mentioned earlier and the SFA/SPL then pointing to the rules whilst mumbling ‘it ain’t me, guv’.
As Turnbull Hutton remarked, placing Newco/Sevco in the Third Division minimised the impact of future damage as things took their likely course.
He and others are not stupid and foresaw this situation arising.
Newco/Sevco signed up to the rules.
I thought it worth having a short look at one of Lord Nimmo Smith’s assumptions in relation to the commission he is chairing. There are several points that could be questioned; but none more so than the following:
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/SPL%20Commission%20reasons%20for%20decision%20of%2012%20September%202012.pdf
Now, it should be noted that Lord Nimmo Smith is referring to a “Club” [note the capitalisation], that has a very specific meaning and is defined within the SPL’s articles and Rules.
SPL Article 2 says:
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/ARTICLES%20OF%20ASSOCIATION%20AS%20AT%2030%20MAY%202012.pdf
The SPL Rules Definitions & Interpretation (section I – part 1) says:
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/RULES%20EFFECTIVE%2016%20JULY%202012%20(CLEAN).pdf
The commission, in its notes of reasons [section 37], makes the comment: “It should be noted that this definition of “Club” is wider than that in the Articles, as it includes its owner and operator.”
The Articles say that a “Club” is the “undertaking of an association football club”.
The Rules say that a “Club” is “…an association football club…” and “…includes the owner and operator of such club.”
So, taken together, a “Club” – for the purposes of the SPL – could correctly be summarised as having the following components:
1. It is an association football club.
2. It includes the business (or “undertaking”) of that association football club.
3. It includes the “owner & operator” of that association football club.
So it is clear then that a “Club” has more components than an “association football club”; but, what then is an association football club?. I searched through the commission’s document for that definition; but failed to find it.
I then looked at the SFA Handbook, where a “club” is described as: “a football club playing Association Football in accordance with the provisions set out in Article 6” – which is not particularly useful .
But then I looked at the Club Licensing definition: “the process by which clubs in membership of the Scottish FA, an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association satisfy the Club Licensing Procedures and secure and maintain a Club Licence”
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2012-13/SFA_HANDBOOK_53-136_Articles_of_Association.pdf
Under The National Club Licence guidelines we can find:
– again frustratingly vague!
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ClubLicensing/PartTwo-NationalClubLicensing/3.%20The%20Club%20and%20the%20Licence%20Award%20(2)b.pdf
However, finally, under the EUFA Club Licensing section we find:
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ClubLicensing/PartThree-UEFAClubLicensing/03%20The%20Club%20as%20Licence%20Applicant%20and%20Licence%20(2).pdf
This is confirmed in the EUFA handbook:
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/01/85/85/25/1858525_DOWNLOAD.pdf
So, going back to the SPL commission, we now know that had they looked hard enough, they could have found an authoritative description for “an association football club”. That is, for the avoidance of doubt; “…the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member).”
Which means that an SPL “Club” has the following characteristics – as defined by the Articles and Rules – read in conjunction with the SFA & EUFA definitions:
1. It is the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member).
2. It includes the business (or “undertaking”) of that legal entity.
3. It includes the “owner & operator” of that legal entity.
Therefore, in my humble opinion, the Commission’s satisfaction that a Club has no:
“legal personality, separate from and additional to the legal personality of its owner and operator. “ is simply wrong.
Much of their work is predicated on something that, I think, is flawed.
As I have been saying for months, “Rangers FC” is a brand previously owned by The Rangers Football Club plc (now called RFC2012 plc). This brand is now owned by The Rangers Football Club Ltd (previously called Sevco Scotland Ltd).
The Rangers Football Club plc is the former association football club (the legal entity) currently in administration and soon to be in liquidated. This club was formed in 1872/73 and incorporated in 1899.
The Rangers Football Club Ltd is a new association football club, which is a member of the SFL and which was founded and incorporated in 2012. This club purchased the assets of The Rangers Football Club plc. It did not buy the club (the company/legal entity), so has no liability for the former club’s misdeeds.
Rules ? Rules ? Sevco may have signed up to the rules BUT rules are changed at will and sometimes ignored when it suits regarding this organisation ? Club/Company/brand/Entity ??