Of Assets and Liabilities
Much has been written on this blog, and previously on RangersTaxCase.com regarding the assets and liabilities of the former Rangers football club – however little has been done to look at the rest of the SPL and Scottish Football as a whole. Was it just Rangers making ridiculous ‘asset’ valuations or is there other clubs in real danger of following RFC to the grave?
Before we get started a quick explanation on the figures. They were all taken from the latest accounts as appearing on Duedil.com, so some are from 2010’s figures. I have also ‘tidied’ them up a little so that they are easily understandable, removing things such as minor stock holdings.
The big story in the Rangers case was how over valued their ‘assets’ were, and especially the freehold property. To remind you Rangers Balance sheet in 2010 was as below:
While on paper the net assets look very healthy, we all now know that the 130m of Fixed assets was in fact worth just 5.5m in the real world. If we change that 130m to the real life figure their balance sheet would have looked like this…
So, how do the rest of the SPL compare? This is a list of ‘fixed assets’ for each club as noted in their last accounts.
Predictably, Celtic lead the way, but a quick scout through the notes reveals the freehold properties are valued at 45m. Dundee prop up the table, but with no freehold properties to their name, this is not so surprising. One thing to note is the difference in value of the assets held by Aberdeen and Kilmarnock compared to clubs like Dundee Utd and St.Johnstone – this is important when we look at their balance sheets.
As you can see above, I have broken the balance sheet down into a few categories. We have the fixed assets we just discussed, followed by the cash in bank. Next is the debtors (money owed to the club within the next year) and then the creditors (money the club owes to others within the next year). A crude calculation gives us the Net Current assets or liabilities. A red number means that club owes more money in the next 12 months than they have in the bank, or are owed.
We then move on to long term creditors (money that is owed but not immediately – more than 1 year away) which will constitute loans from banks, or from shareholders. In the case of Hearts, who have the highest amount of long term debt in the SPL, 98% of this debt is owed to the parent company UAB, controlled by Romanov. This debt attracts a further 4.5% interest a year, while UAB also hold a floating charge over the clubs assets.
The final column gives us the Net assets or liabilities, taking into account the fixed assets of the company. As we saw earlier, Rangers had posted Net assets of 70m, only achieved by their ridiculous freehold property valuation. Are Hearts and Aberdeen doing the same? In the case of Hearts they include in their fixed assets 159,000 worth of ‘Memorabilia’… in addition to 15m of freehold property, while Aberdeen state in their accounts that the valuation of Pittodrie is a ‘rebuild’ value rather than a likely realistic sale price.
By declaring such high values on their balance sheets though, it produces a net asset figure, rather than a large liability that, in reality, is the case. Kilmarnock and Hibs to a lesser extent would also see their figures turn red with asset valuations downgraded.
What is heartening to see though, is two clubs with net current assets, in St.Johnstone and Motherwell. Saints were rescued from near bankruptcy in the 80’s by Geoff Brown and have lived within their means ever since. Motherwell likewise have been in financial trouble in recent times, but the club appears to have stabilized and is now living within their means on and off the park.
If another insolvency event hits an SPL club, the MSM will blame it on the demise of Rangers. What can be clearly seen here though is the damage was done years ago to clubs like Hearts, Dundee Utd and Aberdeen – it will be a battle to get back to the kind of financial position that clubs such as St.Johnstone currently enjoy. However, the message that Saints are currently sending out is that its possible to have a competitive team without breaking the bank, as long as others aren’t artificially inflating wage demands.
The accounts I used to get the above figures are downloadable here: I was unable to find for Inverness – if anyone can find please let me know and I can add them to the table. When time permits I will extend this to include SFL clubs as well.
Aberdeen | Celtic | Dundee Utd | Hearts | Hibs | Kilmarnock | Ross County | St.Mirren | St.Johnstone
stevensanph author
1,119 Comments so far
AgrajagPosted on12:03 am - Nov 5, 2012
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:24
Ah the Max Bialystock hypothesis again.
View Comment
DalriadanPosted on12:09 am - Nov 5, 2012
What Green said on Talksport Oct 25 re: crowd figures.
You can easily FF to 07.00 mins in, when Andy Gray asks him:
“Have you been massaging attendances?”
http://www.talksport.co.uk/radio/listen-again/episode/96358
View Comment
m8dreamerPosted on12:18 am - Nov 5, 2012
M8Dreamer
While Chuckie and his aquaintancies may be associated with dodgy financial dealings and possible money laundering at Ibrox, the financial dealings at Tynecastle amount to three alternative solutions.
1. Money laundering scam within Scotland
2. Money laundering scam within Lithuania
3. Money laundering scam within Scotland and Lithuania
It may be harder to prove in Lithuania, but I am sure that eventually the roof will fall in
and the full extent of the financial situations at Tynecastle will be discovered.
paulmac2Posted on12:20 am - Nov 5, 2012
Tommy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:18
Surely, for health and safety reasons, the police must have a record of the numbers in a football stadium. Recently someone lodged a FOI request to Strathclyde Police asking for the actual attendances of two home games at Ibrox in October. The police figures were 6,000 and 9,000 respectively below the published attendances for these two matches.
Last week Charles Green explained that the TRFC figures were correct and that the police had not taken account of the fans in the hospitality areas. The MSM seemed to accept this explanation all too readily.
I am still at a loss as to why Sir Charles would publish inflated crowds when the numbers can be quickly verified from police records. Could this be connected to RTC’s suspicions of money laundering?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is where the declaration of free tickets becomes an interesting factor…after all who would know how many free tickets where issued…
How much tax would be owed on say 5000 tickets at £15 each? but if they are suddenly free…
View Comment
john clarkePosted on12:23 am - Nov 5, 2012
ecobhoy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:39
‘.Lobby Dossers
I’m afraid you are wrong in this ..’
—-
And I’m very ready to accept the correction. And I can add that some of them were the back-court singers, that I can remember from the late 1940s.
I’m afraid I was off on a flight of fancy to have a go at CG.
View Comment
HirsutePursuitPosted on12:46 am - Nov 5, 2012
dedeideoprofundis says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:35
1 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:24
—-
Is it possible to use dirty money to buy shares? and surely he’d be losing an aweful lot by buying them back at a much lower price?
I’ll never be a cute hoor!
=========================
There are many legitimate offshore companies set up to make bona fide investments (often using nominee companies) in UK companies. Because of the less stringent regulatory regimes in the offshore companies’ countries of origin, the ultimate beneficial owners and their funding sources are often (but not always) impossible to trace by the UK authorities.
There is no reason to think that someone who owns or operates an offshore investment vehicle is doing anything other than exploiting the opportunity of operating in a more beneficial tax regime. However, it is easy to imagine circumstances where that offshore anonymity would provide an opportunity for less than scrupulous individuals to cloak a more nefarious intent.
———
He/she would not lose anything. In both transactions he/she is effectively buying from himself/herself and selling to himself/herself. All he/she is really doing is transferring “cleansed” cash to the UK by selling assets over-value and buying them back cheaply.
The only way this works though is if he/she knows the company has significant fixed assets; but is going to be trashed through over-optimistic revenue projections.
And, as I say, this is all purely hypothetical. I have no-one and no particular company in mind.
View Comment
BunionPosted on12:48 am - Nov 5, 2012
All this focus on crowd numbers.
Has anybody issued an FOI yet seeking confirmation as to whether Strathclyde Police, etc. have been paid for matchday attendances?
Strathclyde Police lost £51,000.00 of taxpayer’s money to oldco.
Scottish Ambulance Service lost £8,500.00 of taxpayer’s money to oldco.
G4S lost £295,000.00 to oldco.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
Has any confirmation been received that newco is paying it’s dues?
View Comment
HirsutePursuitPosted on1:07 am - Nov 5, 2012
paulmac2 says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 00:20
1 1 Rate This
Tommy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:18
Surely, for health and safety reasons, the police must have a record of the numbers in a football stadium. Recently someone lodged a FOI request to Strathclyde Police asking for the actual attendances of two home games at Ibrox in October. The police figures were 6,000 and 9,000 respectively below the published attendances for these two matches.
Last week Charles Green explained that the TRFC figures were correct and that the police had not taken account of the fans in the hospitality areas. The MSM seemed to accept this explanation all too readily.
————————————
I think the 2010 accounts showed that RFC had just less than 25,000 people in hospitality over the course of the entire season. This represented around 77% of the stadium’s capacity.
If we assume 25 home games that gives 1,000 on average.
If 1,000 is 77% of capacity, the maximum number of people in hospitality is approximately 1,300.
ExiledCeltPosted on1:11 am - Nov 5, 2012
On the attendances at Ibrox – one item of note is the upper deck where the debentures own the seats. They as far as the report from D&P in Aug have yet to be dealt with as a creditor and as such CG cannot be selling those seats until such time. In the alst D&P report, they had reported it was not dealt with. Yet I noted form one picture against Queens Park the upper deck was now being filled. So either a deal has been made with Debenture Holders and TRFC can now sell these seats or they have not and they are giving complimentary tickets to the Debentures meantime for those seats.
That could be the gap here – am sure CG would have announced a deal with them as a newfound dyed in the wool Bear – so can only assume the latter……..
View Comment
TSFMPosted on1:14 am - Nov 5, 2012
We’ve added a Donate button to the sidebar for three separate amounts. The reason for this is that anything less than £2 would attract up too much PayPal charges for the donation to be worthwhile.
Seems a bit odd, but we’re doing this as a trial for reasons outlined in the poll page. We’ve been persuaded by the arguments for donation. This way, sensibilities won’t be offended by the presence of ads and no-one is compelled to contribute. We will give an account of donations in a month with news on how effective this move has been.
BTW, someone disliked us enough to spam the poll in an effort not to do anything 🙁
Details on the poll page.
View Comment
HirsutePursuitPosted on1:26 am - Nov 5, 2012
exiledcelt says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 01:11
0 0 Rate This
On the attendances at Ibrox – one item of note is the upper deck where the debentures own the seats. They as far as the report from D&P in Aug have yet to be dealt with as a creditor and as such CG cannot be selling those seats until such time. In the alst D&P report, they had reported it was not dealt with. Yet I noted form one picture against Queens Park the upper deck was now being filled. So either a deal has been made with Debenture Holders and TRFC can now sell these seats or they have not and they are giving complimentary tickets to the Debentures meantime for those seats.
That could be the gap here – am sure CG would have announced a deal with them as a newfound dyed in the wool Bear – so can only assume the latter……..
===================
The D&P statement on Rangers’ debenture holders was a crock of $h1t.
The debenture holders were deemed unsecured creditors by D&P and have lost their cash in the same way as everyone else.
Perhaps they simply didn’t think they would need it for the first few games; but, it is entirely possible that it is the former debenture holders (who are logically the most likely group for future investment in Sevco) were being softened up for the IPO with the offer of free tickets to their old seats at the recent home matches.
View Comment
john clarkePosted on1:28 am - Nov 5, 2012
TSFM says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 01:14
‘We’ve added a Donate button ..’
—
Mine is on its way.
I just wish it could be more, for the fun, and generally educational and enlightening experiences I have so far had from the contributors of so many and varied posts.
View Comment
rabPosted on1:40 am - Nov 5, 2012
Are you quite sure none of these donations are going to Mr Custard, that would be embarrassing.
View Comment
ExiledCeltPosted on4:36 am - Nov 5, 2012
HirsutePursuit says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 01:26
exiledcelt says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 01:11
0 0 Rate This
On the attendances at Ibrox – one item of note is the upper deck where the debentures own the seats. They as far as the report from D&P in Aug have yet to be dealt with as a creditor and as such CG cannot be selling those seats until such time. In the alst D&P report, they had reported it was not dealt with. Yet I noted form one picture against Queens Park the upper deck was now being filled. So either a deal has been made with Debenture Holders and TRFC can now sell these seats or they have not and they are giving complimentary tickets to the Debentures meantime for those seats.
That could be the gap here – am sure CG would have announced a deal with them as a newfound dyed in the wool Bear – so can only assume the latter……..
===================
The D&P statement on Rangers’ debenture holders was a crock of $h1t.
The debenture holders were deemed unsecured creditors by D&P and have lost their cash in the same way as everyone else.
Perhaps they simply didn’t think they would need it for the first few games; but, it is entirely possible that it is the former debenture holders (who are logically the most likely group for future investment in Sevco) were being softened up for the IPO with the offer of free tickets to their old seats at the recent home matches.
***************
Undrstand they were unsecured creditors – however these are the very chaps CG needs to redupe (if there is such a word) having been duped by SDM that these seats belonged to them for life. Given that they are the only ones who would be able to say for certain that it was a brand new club (last season I had a seat, this season I have not), I am sure in order to maintain the now, is and forever nonsense, CG was willing to take a little hit on these and get them onboard. I am sure for a small fee they can kep their lifelong seats etc – this would be a mere 500 pound share purchase guaranteed before they can retake their seats. Since he cares not a jot about the longevity, he won’t care that they cannot and will not have anything next season either in all probablilty.
These Bears may well be the easiest to fleece – like my friend who has one, his father paid a lot of money for 4 debenture seats – and the best bit was that they could be guaranteed to seat all together with his brothers for the games ad infinitum. I am sure CG recognises this and has arranged a “transfer” to the new holding co fee. Which many will take up! Unfortunately I have not been in contact for years with my friend since I left Scotland, so don’t know if this is the case. But from my point of view it would make sense, as having people complain in the press about the loss of their debentures would be a bad PR thing at this juncture….and I have not seen any complaints! Nor has the MSM asked about it f course because they only repeat wha CG has said and he has not addressed it as per D&P reports!
Redupe. I think its a work we may hear a lot of going forward.
View Comment
doontheslopePosted on4:54 am - Nov 5, 2012
The headline to Hugh Keevins’ latest:
CELTIC TRUST’S PLAN TO SELL JERSEYS IS A DAFT ONE.
Congratulations to Hugh Keevins. He has obviously taken himself off to business college over the summer and studied football finances. In this piece, he is able to reveal his in depth knowledge on the subject of sponsorship deals, both at Barcelona and Celtic.
Is this the same Hugh Keevins who, when faced Live on air with some pretty basic questions about Rangers’ finances by Alex Thompson, bleated that he was a sports writer so didn’t know anything about these matters? (The same programme where he took a hissy fit over the merest suggestion that Campbell Ogilvie was conflicted, “Campbell Ogilvie is an honourable man!”)
Hugh, keep up the college work, son. Hope you will be doing the class on EBT’s and dual contracts soon.
View Comment
doontheslopePosted on6:13 am - Nov 5, 2012
CHARLES GREEN’S PLAN TO…………. IS A DAFT ONE.
See if you can fill in the gaps, Hugh.
View Comment
FIFAPosted on7:42 am - Nov 5, 2012
doontheslope
Surely you have misread Shug Keevins ,where the words “hypotheticaly speaking of course”
not in his comment,when I hear him say this my mind always translates this to “patheticaly speaking of course”
Oh Shug on the coldest of days your still a warmer
angus1983Posted on9:04 am - Nov 5, 2012
Forest Hills (@ForestHills1903) says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:00
angus1983 – maybe the descrepencies in attendance figures will be the difference between tickets sold – which is what Celtic quote (including all season ticket sales) and people that actually turn up (i.e. not the missing ST holders) – which is probably what the police care about and probably count?
——
That would make sense. However, between 6K and 10K not turning up for the game after purchasing a ticket does seem a bit excessive.
I’m genuinely interested as to how these two figures are arrived at – who would be in a position to explain it, I wonder?
I’m also interested in the TU:TD ratio when I mentioned the differences in CFC attendance figures! 🙂
View Comment
ExiledCeltPosted on9:09 am - Nov 5, 2012
Trying to upload picture of TRFC free ticket (may work)
408331_10152135423785858_594902469_n
My nephew who was at the game said lots of families had free tickets for the kids so you buy 1 adult then you can get up to 3 free for your kids – something of that nature
View Comment
stevensanphPosted on9:22 am - Nov 5, 2012
upload here and paste link
http://tinypic.com/
ExiledCeltPosted on9:49 am - Nov 5, 2012
Hi Steven – thanks – I get an error that the IP I am using is blocked on that site when I try to upload – will try again form home later when I finish work 🙂 Ah the joys of technology!
View Comment
neepheidPosted on9:51 am - Nov 5, 2012
angus1983 says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 09:04
3 3 Rate This
Forest Hills (@ForestHills1903) says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:00
angus1983 – maybe the descrepencies in attendance figures will be the difference between tickets sold – which is what Celtic quote (including all season ticket sales) and people that actually turn up (i.e. not the missing ST holders) – which is probably what the police care about and probably count?
——
That would make sense. However, between 6K and 10K not turning up for the game after purchasing a ticket does seem a bit excessive.
I’m genuinely interested as to how these two figures are arrived at – who would be in a position to explain it, I wonder?
============================================================
I’m interested too. It seems to me that the only accurate figure for match attendance comes from the automatic counters on the turnstiles. Giving a ticket away free, selling a matchday ticket, even a season ticket, none of these guarantee a bum on a seat that day. You only know the attendance by counting the people in the ground.
I have no idea how the police arrive at their figures, but I would be astonished if it came from any physical count made by the police themselves. I’ve just had a thought, though. Maybe the CCTV system could produce a pretty accurate figure?Although even that would miss those temporarily away from their seats at the time of the count it would be pretty accurate. Somebody out there must know where the police figure comes from.
View Comment
calumcrofterPosted on10:03 am - Nov 5, 2012
“I’m genuinely interested as to how these two figures are arrived at – who would be in a position to explain it, I wonder?”(Angus1983 at 09.04):
I am too. Maybe I am naive – certainly slow on a Monday morning – but to my mind ‘attendance figures’ are just that. A record of numbers present. It beggars belief that, mindful of the recent report on the Hillsborough disaster, clubs and the Police should have differing figures for attendees at football matches. In the event of a major incident (God forbid), should they not know about the thousands enjoying CG’s hospitality, for instance?
An air flight may be sold out but, if some passengers don’t turn up, it is surely the number of passengers actually travelling that the airline should record?
As I say, I may be naive, but I find the discussion on money laundering and figures massaging stimulating and suspect that somewhere in there lies a truth.
View Comment
tomtomPosted on10:10 am - Nov 5, 2012
I would imagine that the police figures are consistent with the number of people who actually go through the turnstiles. They may well also ask the club for any additional numbers in hospitality etc who have entered the ground through other means but by and large they will be the correct numbers.
As always in this saga Chuck is using figures in the way that suits him. Depending on how you look at it the attendance can be either the number of tickets issued, the number of tickets bought, the number of tickets actually used or, in Chuck’s world, a combination of all three dependent on what statistic you want to produce. As his aim is to project Rangers as the greatest supported team in the universe it follows that he will claim that the number of tickets issued is in fact the attendance. The only problem with that is if you issue 50,000 odd tickets and there are empty seats people will catch on to your little stats scam. Better to deduct a couple of thousand from that figure and then you can mask over a lot of sins.
No matter what figures he produces however it’s the amount of revenue that is being generated that is important. He might be able to fool the MSM but he won’t be able to disguise the amount of cash going into the bank. Unless he’s doing another Craig Whyte trick and holding back on the money due to the revenue then he isn’t going to last very long. Even then he’ll eventually run out of cash, in my guess around about February. The January sales window will give us an insight into the real situation. How many players will be “requesting moves to further their careers”?
View Comment
stmileyPosted on10:44 am - Nov 5, 2012
There was suggestion that the FOI request (RE: Sevco attendance) was faked, it is now on official police site –
View Comment
TheCollardGreen (@chrisshields10)Posted on11:22 am - Nov 5, 2012
Re discussion on free tickets, money laundering et al!
Hypothetically speaking could a football club inflate its costs or reduce its apparent revenues by manipulating its tickets sales? VAT works by offsetting the the input tax generated by purchases against the output tax generated by sales. It is only the end customer who pays the full weight of the tax. Currently in most instances 20% of sale price. VAT is also a live tax with payments rebate claims submitted quarterly. In certain circumstances this could initialy be implemented at the insistance of the VAT Office on a monthly basis. Circumstances could include a new company without credit facility working in high volumes of cash.
The VAT due is not calculated on the volume of items sold but on the revenue generated. So by supressing the this revenue the trader reduces his output tax VAT liability. At the same time inflating VAT rated costs increases the input tax rebate that can be offset.
The question is by how much can one “inflate” costs (stewards,police hospitality) and “reduce” revenues (giving out “free” tickets) before arousing suspicion. Slowly slowly catchy monkey is normal rule of thumb. Getting this balance wrong is what normally raises the suspicion of the authorities.
So hypotheticaly could “papering the house” as its known be used to defraud the revenue in this manner?
View Comment
Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on11:25 am - Nov 5, 2012
Chuckie not signing the Sky deal
can anyone explain this one to me?
What was the new SKY deal announced in the summer? Thought it was 5 years at £12M a year and that the SPL had paid the SFL £1M PA for their TV rights – Sky did not want to deal with both governing bodies so the SPL had to bid for the rights and Sky bought them from SPL?
Also, would any one club be involved in signing a TV deal? thoguht the baords did that on behalf of their members
Also see there is much talk of Sevco signing the deal “under duress” and talk of this being illegal – what chances that Chuckie will challenge that and have the deal undone – or is it more likely this is just bear baiting rhetoric to drum up the siege mentality and get those share cheques posted ASAP from gullible bears eager to have a miserable christmas
View Comment
onceabhoyPosted on11:42 am - Nov 5, 2012
What Chuckie really meant was that he wouldnt be around to sign the Sky deal. This lot seem to be better organised than CW. I don’t think they will make the mistake of hanging around too long beyond the point of maximum profitability.
The first rumblings of tax problems regards individuals, hints about unsuitability for position in football, possibility of severe sanctions against licence holder following FTT findings and the soon to fail share offer……nah, not long now chaps. Double dip recession down Govan way methinks.
View Comment
AgrajagPosted on11:45 am - Nov 5, 2012
doontheslope says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 04:54
The headline to Hugh Keevins’ latest:
CELTIC TRUST’S PLAN TO SELL JERSEYS IS A DAFT ONE.
===========================
From the “article”
Barcelona can afford to have the Qatar Foundation on their shirts as a charitable gesture. Celtic have bills to pay.
The reality
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/dec/10/barcelona-shirt-sponsor-qatar-foundation
Barcelona have reached a five-year, €150m (£125m) deal with the Qatar Foundation for it to join Unicef as the Spanish champions’ shirt sponsor.
============================
So this charitable gesture, as Keevins describes it, raises them something like £25m per year. More than Rangers’ entire alleged turnover for the season.
FFS the man is an idiot, why would anyone take him even remotely seriously. Surely a “reporter” realises that they must get the basic crux of their argument right.
View Comment
abcottPosted on11:48 am - Nov 5, 2012
The answer to a lot of questions surrounding Green is brinkmanship. In a situation with nothing to lose, he can threaten to withdraw his club from the league, from TV deals etc and see what better offer is made. It is a show of strength and relies on cowards backing down. In many cases it has worked.
View Comment
AgrajagPosted on11:53 am - Nov 5, 2012
Re attendance.
There really are two figures.
The attendance figure issued by most if not all clubs takes Season Tickets (whether the person attends or not) plus “match day” sales (whether the person turns up or not) plus any others for example complementaries. I believe this is common practice.
The Police figure for attendance will be just that. The number of people in the stadium, or as close to that number as they can get. They really won’t be interested in whether those people paid or not, or whether people paid but didn’t actually turn up.
View Comment
Geordie BhoyPosted on11:55 am - Nov 5, 2012
How it should be done?
OpCapita buy Comet from the previous owners for £2 (sound familiar?), attempt to turn the business round but fail. Having positioned themselves as secured creditor, they still will walk away with a profit on the deal. They were also behind in the distressed take-over of MFI (and others). Mr. Green should really have taken lessons …
View Comment
AgrajagPosted on11:59 am - Nov 5, 2012
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 11:25
=============================
I think he is just playing to the crowds again. Both the SPL and the SFL have collective media arrangements, and as far as I know clubs do not have the option to opt out and go their own way. If you are in the league you are part of the collective bargaining process.
The SFL put their media rights up for sale and the SPL bought them. It is widely believed that Peter Lawwell was at the meetings with both the SFL and Sky.
Once the SPL had bought the SFL rights they packaged them together with their own and sold packages to Sky and ESPN.
I’m not really sure at which point Sky would be asking Charles Green, or any other CEO to sign things. Their deal is with the SPL as far as I am aware.
View Comment
angus1983Posted on12:15 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Seeing as Algae won a game at the weekend, it seems the Bears want him signed up on that 25 year contract again. Further comment not required. 🙂
Also, they are talking of their upcoming “55th” title … looks like they’re willing to accept winning any League as counting towards their mythical total.
View Comment
HirsutePursuitPosted on12:21 pm - Nov 5, 2012
neepheid says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 09:51
1 0 Rate This
angus1983 says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 09:04
3 3 Rate This
Forest Hills (@ForestHills1903) says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:00
angus1983 – maybe the descrepencies in attendance figures will be the difference between tickets sold – which is what Celtic quote (including all season ticket sales) and people that actually turn up (i.e. not the missing ST holders) – which is probably what the police care about and probably count?
——
That would make sense. However, between 6K and 10K not turning up for the game after purchasing a ticket does seem a bit excessive.
I’m genuinely interested as to how these two figures are arrived at – who would be in a position to explain it, I wonder?
============================================================
I’m interested too. It seems to me that the only accurate figure for match attendance comes from the automatic counters on the turnstiles. Giving a ticket away free, selling a matchday ticket, even a season ticket, none of these guarantee a bum on a seat that day. You only know the attendance by counting the people in the ground.
I have no idea how the police arrive at their figures, but I would be astonished if it came from any physical count made by the police themselves. I’ve just had a thought, though. Maybe the CCTV system could produce a pretty accurate figure?Although even that would miss those temporarily away from their seats at the time of the count it would be pretty accurate. Somebody out there must know where the police figure comes from.
======================================================
The police have ultimate responsibility to oversee crowd control from the control room within the stadium. For safety reasons they need to know – in real time – how many people have entered the ground via the computerised turnstiles. They will also know (or at least they should) how many hospitality tickets (max circa 1,300 at Ibrox on a match day) have been issued.
The number of people the police think are in the ground should be (within a handful) the exact number in attendance . If Charles is saying that there are another 7,000 people in there that the police know nothing about, I’d imagine they may want a word with him about the terms of Ibrox’s safety certificate.
I’m pretty sure that there will be some flexibility in his language, and when Charlie is talking about “hospitality” tickets, he will be including every free standard ticket printed – whether it is actually used or not.
I’d imagine the breakdown for the “world record” :0 🙂 game with East Fife would be something like:
30,000 – Attendance via Season Tickets
7,000 – Attendance via match-day sales
1,000 – Attendance via hospitality
4,000 – Attendance via free tickets issued
PLUS
6,000 – No-show Season Ticket holders
1,000 – No-show free ticket holders
timtimPosted on12:24 pm - Nov 5, 2012
The record attendance for a Junior game is 77,650 between Petershill and Irvine Meadow
Just wondering what tier of Scottish football that falls under ?
I also believe that NO free tickets were given out either
Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on12:27 pm - Nov 5, 2012
timtim says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 12:24
0 0 Rate This
The record attendance for a Junior game is 77,650 between Petershill and Irvine Meadow
Just wondering what tier of Scottish football that falls under ?
I also believe that NO free tickets were given out either
———————————————————————————–
it’s NOT the 4th tier, so BEAT IT TIMMY!! (sorry, that should of course be TIMMYTIMMY 🙂 )
View Comment
readceltPosted on12:31 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Regardless of the latest money laundering hypothesis, what can be said with some degree of assurance is that The Rangers are and will be a financial basket case for some time.
Whether or not a share issue is successful, unsuccessful or used for nefarious laundering means, the club will limp along on one leg until such time as creditors or the tax man comes calling and finally kicks the remaining leg away.
The timeframe involved in the inevitable fall is anyone’s guess but what is likely is that the intervening time period will not soften the disposition of the large loony element of the support.
There is a lot going on and a lot yet to happen.
I certainly haven’t seen any societal shift since my last visit to Glasgow.
Change does not happen overnight.
There are cracks in the damn but it is a long way from bursting and washing the mental baggage carried by The Rangers and wider society away.
View Comment
timtimPosted on12:38 pm - Nov 5, 2012
lol!
then theres the 76,489 fans for the United States and China at the Sanford Stadium in Athens, Georgia – does that not count cause it was womens football ?
ordinaryfanPosted on12:48 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Could Sponsors such as Weather Seal have anything to do with laundering money?
Also I notice Cycling governing bodies are being sued by one of the sponsors because of their handling of the Armstrong affair. The sponsor, “Skins”, are saying it is nothing to do with money or publicity but they want change at the top of Cycling.
View Comment
paulsatimPosted on12:51 pm - Nov 5, 2012
RTC is a comedian/iene!!
John Beattie @BBCJohnBeattie
ON air, text me 80295 – Scottish brands you remember from when you were a kid but they’ve gone now?
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite
5m Rangers Tax-Case @rangerstaxcase
@BBCJohnBeattie Too easy. 😉
ExiledCeltPosted on1:06 pm - Nov 5, 2012
http://i47.tinypic.com/eve1yo.jpg
Thanks Steven – here is the pic of the free ticket
View Comment
ordinaryfanPosted on1:17 pm - Nov 5, 2012
exiledcelt: The next person to sit in that particular seat could be in for a bumpy ride! Paranoia and stupidity is a bad combination. Common sense would tell anyone that it won’t be the same person who was the owner of the Ticket shown in the picture. Common sense is unfortunately lacking amongst the Ibrox hateful.
View Comment
ExiledCeltPosted on1:31 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Ordinaryfan – am sure CG will also be checking to see who had that ticket to make sure no more freebies.
View Comment
paulsatimPosted on1:39 pm - Nov 5, 2012
More than one fan at it! Also this is from different stand……….
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A6eAyyoCMAAq0EV.jpg
View Comment
angus1983Posted on1:41 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Leggo’s latest blog states:
“I am neither an idiot, nor a fool.”
Can he be serious, I wonder?
🙂
View Comment
ordinaryfanPosted on1:43 pm - Nov 5, 2012
exiledcelt: I doubt he would know who received each one, he is dishing them out like there is no tomorrow, (which isn’t far from the truth), next he will be flying over Govan in a chopper dropping them like Propaganda Leaflets.
View Comment
barcabhoyPosted on1:48 pm - Nov 5, 2012
1.Wouldn’t you think that if HMRC were investigating you personally, then you may want to keep a low profile.
2.Wouldn’t you think that taking on a very high profile job like CEO of Rangers would be the worst way to keep in HMRC’s gun sights
Especially as HMRC may just be a tad annoyed that you seem to be about to personally benefit from the “asset sale” at less than 5% of what your claim that they were worth.
3.Given that HMRC have lost over £90 million out of a club ,which claims it is up an running again with no loss of History or assets, then wouldn’t you think it would be the ultimate in red rag waving to head up this business when you are under personal investigation.
The answers are obvious which raises the question as to why on earth Green took on this gig.
on another note, not related to the current management
Money laundering ……….now that would create a severe environment including blast, thermal pulse, neutrons, x- and gamma-rays, radiation, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and ionization of the upper atmosphere.
I’m sure there’s a shorter description but it escapes me for the moment !
View Comment
tomtomPosted on1:52 pm - Nov 5, 2012
barcabhoy says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 13:48
Money laundering ……….now that would create a severe environment including blast, thermal pulse, neutrons, x- and gamma-rays, radiation, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and ionization of the upper atmosphere.
I’m sure there’s a shorter description but it escapes me for the moment !
—————————————————
That’s just me after a few pints of Guinness and a Chicken Bhoona 😀
View Comment
Humble PiePosted on2:02 pm - Nov 5, 2012
paulsatim says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 13:39
That ticket appears to have a surname printed on it and doesn’t say ‘complimentary’ above the price. This would suggest that it belongs to a season ticket holder, so it may not actually have been free….maybe!
View Comment
paulsatimPosted on2:09 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Humble Pie says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 14:02
Well spotted HP!
View Comment
scottyjimboPosted on2:24 pm - Nov 5, 2012
barcabhoy says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 13:48
Nice to see you back posting Barca.
Possible answer to your questions? When someone is investigating you for possible major “naughties”, and is getting closer to the evidence, what do you do? You become outspoken , larger than life, pointing to lesser evils. You distract, or try to distract, away from the important details in the hope your investigators will do similarly. To me, the more he blusters, the closer we are getting to the truth.
View Comment
angus1983Posted on2:25 pm - Nov 5, 2012
OT
Quick note to JC:
Two Tom Holland books arrived on my desk this morning – “Rubicon” and “Millennium”. Both look very interesting and good reads.
Thank you for the recommendation!
View Comment
timtimPosted on2:28 pm - Nov 5, 2012
On the Dave King angle
If he is proven to still have an involvement would that create problems re the Phoenix company
rules ?
and welcome back Barcabhoy
oldagefanclub (@oldagefanclub)Posted on2:33 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Humble Pie says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 14:02
ICT game was not covered by season tickets, so no matter how you look at it, this ticket was a freebie.
View Comment
paulmac2Posted on2:41 pm - Nov 5, 2012
angus1983 says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 13:41
Leggo’s latest blog states:
“I am neither an idiot, nor a fool.”
Can he be serious, I wonder?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is it a competition or a puzzle?
My go..
A clown?
View Comment
angus1983Posted on2:43 pm - Nov 5, 2012
TRFC – new World Record for number of consecutive home ties in randomly drawn Cup competitions!
View Comment
wottpiPosted on2:47 pm - Nov 5, 2012
readcelt says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 12:31
Funny I was going to post something similar before lunch but got drawn away mid type.
I am sure in this period of limbo while we wait for the FTTT and LNS we will all have fun with the various conspiracy theories hoping the next ‘nuclear’ revelation ends up being true.
However we have been teased before.
Similarly, I recall Goosy has had a good number of complicated ones regarding the floating charge which frankly just made my head swim.
While like RTC , TSFM continues to be an education in all manner of things, the fact remains that businesses tend to fail for pretty simple reasons.
IMHO the bottom line is are T’Rangers capable of of running a football club on a sustainable financial model?
Regardless of what the true numbers are and who is paying what for a ticket, it is mostly likely the case that they are still getting more revenue through season tickets and pay as you go than every other cluib bar Celtic. Therefore T’Rangers, having dumped the old debt, should as Mr Charles says be in a pretty good position.
However as has been previously discussed, the running costs of running a club the size of T’Rangers, regardless of what division they are playing in is substantial.
Therefore the main question is still
– Are they managing to balance the books and are any of the development/grandious plans realistic and affordable?
If yes then there is no problem and Scottish Football can sleep safe in it’s bed and allow T’Rangers to fight their way back to the top.
If not then the follow up questions are numerous but don’t necessarily have to be linked to the more obscure elements of financial (mis)management.
It is more a case of
– The recent mention of no ‘external debt’ would imply ‘internal debt’, therefore what form is this and how will it be paid off or serviced and over what period?
– Who owns and controls the assets?
– Why is a share issue required at this time?
– What is the priorities for where any monies raised will be spent?
– How long will any monies raised via a share offer last?
– Will any of the proposed development actually bring in any real additional cash to the club?
– With all the named investors, what is the form of their investment (e.g are they in the form of loans), what return are they expecting and when?
– P.S. Will all this talk of targeting free agents are you keeping an eye on the number of over 21’s you are allowed in your squad? 🙂
There are a lot more questions that could be asked and will probably not be answered before we get to
-Are you laundering money?
All that being said, happy to go with the flow and look forward to some entertaining and educational posts.
View Comment
timtimPosted on2:50 pm - Nov 5, 2012
TRFC- new World Record for number of village idiots per square metre
View Comment
Henry ClarsonPosted on3:40 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Money laundering ……….now that would create a severe environment including blast, thermal pulse, neutrons, x- and gamma-rays, radiation, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and ionization of the upper atmosphere.
I’m sure there’s a shorter description but it escapes me for the moment !
My tingling spider-sense tells me that money-laundering is a central part of the Ibrox corruption but I still can’t put my finger on the precise mechanics of the process.
There are some interesting articles on this Arsenal fans’ forum about money-laundering in football. . . http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/18851
There are schemes which I can imagine would be relatively easy to get away with. The most obvious of these would be general merchandise and especially replica kits. The mark up on a football strip must be close to one thousand per cent. I can see how recording cash sales for thousands of these articles every year could easily clean up dirty money well into the six-figure realm. But I still don’t understand how millions of pounds of dirty money can be “placed” into the finances of a football club without it attracting the attention of the rozzers.
However, I do understand that the banks – who are supposed to assist the authorities by watching out for tell-tale signs of money-laundering – in practice do quite the reverse and actively assist the crooks in their illegal enterprises. After all, it’s becoming more and more clear to the wider public that banks themselves are indistinguishable from criminal institutions.
Meanwhile Gavin Masterton, major shareholder, board member and long-serving chairman of Dunfermline Athletic, has contributed nothing to the public debate, as far as I can see. Yet he ran the Bank of Scotland and allowed Sir Minty inexplicable levels of credit right up to the point where Murray’s companies were responsible for about one tenth of the toxic liabilities which destroyed the bank. How does he manage to stay out of the spotlight?
Irresponsible practices and downright criminal behaviour at the Bank Of Scotland will surprise nobody who follows the estimable Ian Fraser’s blog. http://www.ianfraser.org/re-examining-hbos/ Mr. Fraser reports on the Thames Valley Police’s investigation into “corruption and large-scale fraud in connection with HBOS” and describes some of the events in the report as “the most egregious financial scandal I’ve come across in 20 years as a business and financial journalist.”
That tells us a great deal about the moral climate in the Bank of Scotland at that time and although Gavin Masterton is not involved in that particular part of “Operation Hornet”, it appears to me that his relationship with David Murray needs to be scrutinised in detail. When you add ino the fact that every SPL club – other than Celtic – banked with the BoS during most of the Minty years, there is ample opportunity for the bank to exert influence events on the field in order to boost the fortunes of their favourite customer.
I also note that football has become increasingly attractive to a number of people who have had or are still having problems with the authorities over money-laundering allegations. In this respect, I keep waiting for the name of Dave King to move up towards the top of the bill. This dude seems to be untouchable so far. The South African Revenue Service has brought more than 300 charges against him which include tax evasion and money-laundering. He reportedly invested £20 million of “his own money” in Rangers over a decade ago. No questions asked? He alone seems to have had a foot in every camp during the collapse of the club, retaining his position on Whyte’s board long after every other director had abandoned the ship or been thrown overboard.
I can’t make sense of all of this myself but something smells very badly wrong. It’s almost as if Green’s “look at me” histrionics are designed to divert attention away from the real action and while he hogs the attention and headlines, the mysterious Mr King only ever seems to appear on the stage at the time of his own choosing and in circumstances which he selects. The relatively low profile of a former Rangers director who is up to his neck in money-laundering allegations seems to me to be a red flag in itself.
I don’t know how to join all the dots between Masterton, King and Rangers but I can’t yet believe that the issue of money-laundering isn’t lurking somewhere in the finished picture.
View Comment
Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on4:04 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Humble Pie says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 14:02
9 0 Rate This
paulsatim says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 13:39
That ticket appears to have a surname printed on it and doesn’t say ‘complimentary’ above the price. This would suggest that it belongs to a season ticket holder, so it may not actually have been free….maybe!
—————————-
Maybe the named person was a debenture holder and they hadn’t renewed a season ticket due to being shafted – and this was a sweetner?
maybe they were just season ticket holders who hadn’t renewed and this was a sweetner to get them back on side (or more importantly – INSIDE)
either way, it was a cup game that wasn’t included in ST sales – so someone was getting in for free.
View Comment
Lord WobblyPosted on4:35 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Henry Clarson says:
Monday, November 5, 2012 at 15:40
‘He (Dave King) reportedly invested £20 million of “his own
money” in Rangers over a decade ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not to mention (I quote from your good self):
According to the Club’s 2009 annual report, he also held more
than three million shares in the related company Murray
Sports Limited, ‘as an authorised representative of
Metlika Trading Ltd’, a company in the British Virgin Islands.
In one of the many twists in King’s battle with SARS, it would
appear that his mother Agnes now owns the shares in Murray
Sports Ltd, thought to be worth some £1.5m. UK
newspapers Dave King, Rangers football club, and the South
African Revenue Service reported late last year that the shares
had been transferred in what SARS saw as a bid to avoid tax.
http://henryclarson.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/dave-king-9/
View Comment
Henry ClarsonPosted on5:29 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Agrajag says: Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:10
https://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/of-assets-and-liabilities/comment-page-15/#comment-21481
Similar problem as with the money laundering scenario, do you also manipulate the computerised ticketing system. How many people need to be in on that for it to work?
One.
The person who writes the software.
goosyPosted on6:16 pm - Nov 5, 2012
Great Piece Stuart
You summarise in a nutshell the importance of social media in separating fact from fiction
angus1983Posted on6:26 pm - Nov 11, 2012
Scotland on Sunday “Question of the Week” today …
Is Scottish Football missing Rangers in the SPL?
Response: Yes 19%, No 81%.
View Comment
stevensanphPosted on3:25 am - Sep 11, 2013
[…] More importantly to me is the Net current assets (I did an article of this figure last year on TSFM – read here) figure which effectively shows how much liquid funds you have on hand. When this gets negative […]
View CommentYou must be logged in to post a comment.
About the author