Comment on Naming the Rose by Not The Huddle Malcontent.
So, CE states that he had meetings with Doncaster and Topping in October and told them Admin was INEVITABLE. He also states they were supportive. He then goes on to say that the SPL and SFA handling of the situation post admin was a farce.
So, lets skip back to October and the meeting with the SPL
CW says they were supportive….in what way?
Did they offer to pull contractual payments forward to ease cash flow problems (as they did for Gretna)
What support did they offer? How was it a positive meeting? What promises were you given?
Also, given that you KNEW this in october, and that you were already NOT paying NIC/PAYE/VAT, then how come in January you didn’t try to sell Davis, Whittaker, McGregor, Bocanegra, Goian, Naismith and Jelavic (ok, you sold him)
Surely that would have brought in enough to keep you afloat until the end of the season
You seem to suggest the SPL offered to help (but don’t say how) but then you did nothing to help yourself……and now you are blaming the SPL?
Anyway, moving on from october, CW states the SFA/SPL handling of RFC post admin was a farce – I agree, but for different reasons – but you don’t tell us WHY you think it was a farce.
Did they renege on a promise to you regards payment of monies?
Did they apply any punishments other than the 10 points in the rule book?
What did they do that made it a farce (other than bend every rule to try and get you back into the SPL/SFL1)
Naming the Rose
Also, CW stated he met with Topping and Doncaster in oct 2011 to state admin was inevitable. Did he tell them then that he wasn’t paying his taxes?
If he DID, then why weren’t RFC PLC punished for this – looking at how Hearts have been handled for not paying wages on time.
If he DIDN’T – why not? why not explain the full depths of the shi’te the club were in? what were you hiding? Why?
Naming the Rose
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 23:11
0 0 Rate This
STV website in meltdown
about what? care to elaborate?
Naming the Rose
gie’s a gonk says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 22:24
2 0 Rate Up
Okay, could this be the plan re the share ‘issue’?
2. Capita/Rangers know not all of these are genuine but now they have a list they can match to their season ticket database.
3. From this they have calculated that there are currently around 8,000 genuine fans interested who have pleadged around £15m
8. The 8,000 genuine fans on the list now get letters sent to them inviting them to participate in a private, exclusive share placing.
9. No public IPO, no prospectus. Private share sales to an exclusive hand selected group of fans.
10. Most of the money needed is now raised without the need for an AIM listing (and associated costs), or the need to reveal who actually owns what, or any mechanism for the duped fans to even sell their shares in future unless the club offer to buy them back.
Is this plausible?
it is indeed, but then again, why limit sending out the begging letters to just those 8000?
why not send them out to every single fan that has bought something from the rangers online shop, held a season ticket at any point in time, bought a match day ticket at any point in time, was a bond holder or shareholder in RFC
I agree there is no real plan to float on the AIM, and this has been a publicity exercise – the real plan is still to contact every member of the rangers family and ask them to chip into a private sale
more worryingly is that so much effort has gone into promoting the idea of a public floatation that some bears wont realise they have been invited to buy into a private share floatation and they won’t realise their share certs are practically worthless
frankly, this is a fraud that the likes of watchdog should be investigating as thousands of innocent (though thick as mince) bears are gonna get stung
Why We Need to Change
This one AmFearLiathMòr?
Beadie v Aberdeen
(By outside the D, do you mean inside the penalty box?!! )
Why We Need to Change
I see the subject of Gate Sharing raised it’s head again in the last few days….great topic.
I seem to remember one of the Jambo boys doing a great analysis of this back in RTC days
I think we need to establish what we are hoping to achieve by going down a “gate sharing” route.
It’s easy to say we are spreading/equalising the income for clubs and levelling the playing field, but it’s not that straight forward
Some clubs like St J, Hibs, Celtic (and increasingly many others in the modern scottish game) are run responsibly and will pay off debts, balance the books, improve infrastructure whilst some other clubs are absolute basket cases and will blow it on buying any passing player who will prop them up for a few months (yes Sevco, you!!!)
So, guidance needs to be put in place
I suggest we want clubs to target the following criteria (for example only – i haven’t thought this through entirely)
1. Financial stability – adopting some form of FFP model where clubs must, on the whole, break even – something like break even over a 3 season period – allowing an overspend one year to be balanced out in subsequent years, strict controls on wage to turnover ratios, maybe even a wage cap based on turnover
2. Player development – clubs should be encouraged to develop their own youth players…ideally scottish players, but in reality it doesn’t matter, if they can scout, sign and develop a 14-17 year old Bulgarian who comes through into the 1st team, then fine. But, the pathway should be for youngsters coming through the ranks and into the 1st team rather than the previously flawed models of trying to buy players in (which is a much rarer event outwith Celtic these days) or paying over the jobs for journeymen players looking for a payday.
Following on from that though, for the benefit of the domestic game, i think clubs should also be rewarded for playing domestic reared players – i.e. keeping talent developed in scotland in scotland.
3. Finally, clubs should be rewarded based on their on field performance.
now that we have established some loose criteria for what we need clubs to do to be successful and therefore rewarded with real cash money, we need to find that money.
The subject of gate sharing is a hard one for fans to swallow, but it is undeniable that the scottish game was mush more competitive when gates were shared.
So, lets not start there, lets start with UEFA money!
Celtic get approx £20M for reaching the CL group stages. Alone, that far outstrips the income of many clubs, so why not “tax” it.
Lets take 50% of all UEFA monies and through it into a “prie pot” (Europa monies will go into the prize pot too, i’m not suggesting just Celtic fund this)
Then, lets put a “tax” on transfers – say 10% of all transfer fees received goes into the prize pot.
Then onto the subject of “gate sharing” Instead of splitting the gate 50/50 with the opponent on the day, I suggest we start more modestly. in the 1st year, lets take 10% of the ticket income for the year (ST’s or walk up) and throw that into the prize pot as well. it can be ramped up to 50% over a number of seasons.
Into the prize pot goes all the other commercial income generated by the league – TV, sponsorship deals etc.
that then gives us a big pot of cash
That can then be divided up based on the earlier criteria – run a tight financial ship, bring through a lot of youngsters and play a lot of scottish players and do well in the league and you could get more than the team that wins the league but had huge debts, no youth players and full of foreigners.
Over a period of 10 years, this would hugely level the playing field in Scotland, we’d see much more competition, we should see more stability at clubs as they manage finances better and we should hopefully see a lot more youngsters come through – and reach the quality that is needed to improve the quality of the game overall.
Anyway, that is my thoughts on the subject (and i guess that is why my name was not mentioned in the list of posters that were missed!!)
Why We Need to Change
“He latest post suggests that 30,000 STs will bring in a modest £5.4M after deduction of VAT. That would mean an average £180 per ST.”
naw, 30k tickets at £225, less 20% VAT = 5.4M
I guess you have to factor in the number of concession tickets into that equation….that will severely hamper the ave ticket price.
Pretty sure from last accounts the ave st price was about £225 – so, i’d expect it to be 5% higher this year as they stated (4% after VAT!)
Why We Need to Change
Hola SFM community
1st off, I applaud and welcome moves by Big Pink to grow the blog/forum and it’s influence. You have to keep moving forward or die.
Having said that, i think you may be over reaching with such a broad remit.
Football is the worlds biggest sport and you will have a huge potential audience sticking to it.
it’s what all the current contributors know and love and talk about, and it would be easier to expand the forum to capture similar fans and fans concerns about the game by reaching out with a English FM, Welsh FM, Irish FM and Northern Irish FM.
From there, the topics of UEFA, FIFA and comps like WCs, Euro championships, qualifiers and even global rules changes can be discussed and moaned over….such as the controversial “tv evidence” debate and the more controversial “UEFA CL” money/allocation of places/seedings debates.
Then you could look to going truly international on football – sticking to the sport we all know and love
Or you could look to go into other UK & Ireland based sports – sticking to the “domestic” audience (i am expecting a few complaints from Irish for being lumped in with the UK there!)
Either way, once you had proven that you could 1st of all expand the remit from Scottish to UK/Irish football, you could then push to expand and repeat the process again.
Small, organic steps, learning as you go. I am sure this would bring in reasonable income through sponsorship/subscriptions/advertisement.
(buy hey, it’s your ball, your vision, i am just giving you my thoughts and you can take them on board or push on with your own plans)
Eventually, i think you could reach your aims of international/independent sports fair play watch dog/sounding board/rallying point for action.
As for going forward, I think your radio show should do a daily/weekly round up of “what the papers said”
Basically taking the main stories from the MSM and tearing it to shreds….invite the writers of the articles in to defend themselves, contact the clubs/players/agents/authorities involved and ask them for a comment on the article and on TSFM’s analysis of the puff piece and set up weekly polls asking fans of all clubs to give their feedback on the story/analysis to show how fans are displeased with the sports coverage we are getting.
you could also have (less frequent) analysis of punishments handed out by the authorities – and compare/contrast the punishments/circumstances handed out by the same and other governing bodies. This could be sent onto the national associations and uefa/fifa for their comment.
Also, if you really want to move forward, i honestly believe the format of the forum needs to change into a more traditional forum format with a thread for each topic/blog and comments related to the blog compartmentalised within it – it would allow a greater number of threads to be discussed simultaneously and interested parties to follow the blog/topic of their interest.
Lastly, apologies for being a random reader/contributor the past 16 months, the arrival of number 2 child has brought it’s own challenges on my free time and i find twitter makes it easier for me to keep up to date on the latest shenanigans, even if it does mean i miss out on the great detailed analysis/opinion this site carries on the subject matter.
Whatever way you go, good luck.
(EDIT to add – only 4 comments? WTF? I assume my history has been wiped due to inactivity at some point!! oh well.)
Did Stewart Regan Ken Then Wit We Ken Noo?
April 19, 2015 at 3:10 pm
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
April 19, 2015 at 11:24 am
Then, there would be the ability to see all 90 mins of every game on delayed transmission for something like £30 a month.
Sorry, but unless you were covering all of scottish sport not just football that would be utter s@#t value for money. Sky sports packages range from £20-30 per month giving you lots of channels with different sports. Setanta struggled at £10 per month and that included Dutch league football. How could you possibly justify £30 per month for delayed streaming twice a week for only scottish matches ?
Quick look at the sky website tells me the cost of sky sports will be £47 a month
Ok, maybe £30 a month is too steep for just the Scottish game – but for that price, there is no reason why they could not also buy rights for other countries games/sports too. Or even still, reduce it to say £20 a month.
As the only outlet to watch Scottish games, i’m sure it’ll be OK7
As for Setanta, i believe they were doing fine until they went toe to toe with Sky and started buying up EPL rights and games for England internationals. It was that overspend and the comparative lack of subscribers that done for them.